Educate me: IPL vs Pilsner

For better or worse.

 

Why aren't there any IIPA? (Italian IPA's?)

 

I completely disagree with everything in this post. When I see IPL on a label, I know exactly what to expect. IPLs do conform to standards of brewing process, flavor, etc. They are beers brewed with IPA like flavor profiles but with a lager brewing process. Basically bottom fermented IPAs. To me they are distinctly different from any other style of beer. You have to call it something. What do you think these beers should be called? What could be written on the label that isn't a "marketing gimmick"?

IPAs are a whole other conversation. IMO a lot of the really good AIPAs these days are really hoppy pale ales, but pales don't get street cred without india.

 

It's not a dumb thread. The OP didn't know the difference, so he asked.

I got the irony of your post and thought it was funny without explanation, as I'm sure most who read it did. There is no need to get insulting because your joke was misunderstood.

 

It wasn't long ago that American DIPA's were considered gimmicky. Still are by some.

 

I agree. The first time a drank a beer called an IPL I knew exactly what to expect. The only reason I see it as a "marketing gimmick" is there nothing lagerish about any of the ones I have tried.

 

It's not a distinct style, the term IPL gives you very little information beyond, its a lager (probably, but even that isn't certain), it'll probably be on the hoppy side, but how much so is anyone's guess. And it'll probably be under 8 SRM, but again, could be darker. Right now its a marketing term to take advantage of the fact that IPA is the fastest growing SKU only behind mix packs. Some of them are great, some are not, and I'm all about new experimentation, but until there is more definition, its a meaningless term, like triple hopped.

 

I'm not aware of any of those. There are, however, IPAs(Italian Pale Ale)!

 

If you absolutely *must* rate it, it would make sense to have some sort of a baseline, no?

If your baseline is intensity of flavor, then any Koelsch is going to rate extremely poorly (well, except, say, Imperial ones fermented with grilled pineapple or some such).

If your baseline is, say, a set of descriptive "style" guidelines (BA's description, the BJCP, the Koelsch Konvention), you will have a somewhat better sense of what to expect and, judging an individual example against a set of parameters, will be able to see what is and isn't a "good fit" in terms of quality and craftsmanship.

If you go to the source and drink a number of different versions in the settings in which they are traditionally produced, served, and consumed, then your baseline for comparison on things such as quality of craftsmanship (and much, much more still) will be that much more informed and, potentially, valuable, because you'll be drinking them under more or less ideal conditions with a set of locally/organically developed constraints including a public and/or historical consensus about which brewer or brewing family is/are the best at their craft, use(s) the highest quality ingredients, have dialed in and/or perfected the best/most beloved/most traditional processes, etc.

If you can't do these things, you might consider not rating a beer based on a scale like the one used on this (and other) site(s), as it won't really reflect much of value. As Garrett Oliver said, the beer culture needs more beer guides and fewer beer "experts."

Also, beer isn't -- and was never meant to be -- a competition.

 

I made an IPL from the same basic recipe as an IPA to show (myself) that they are different, and they are, but only by degrees. But everything I love about pale lager (Czech and German) is taken away by the new wave hop profile and sheer amount of them. IPA and IPL have a hell of a lot more in common than IPL and Pale Lager (what people here are calling Pilsner).

 

Are there any examples of an IPL that is not actually a lager?
Does IPA give very little information as well?

 

I agree with you. And I never said otherwise. The problem is very few people here rate beers based according to any such baseline, or rate to style. They simply rate how "good" the beer tastes. Most of the time, this translates to: a lot of flavor = a high score. Unfortunately, for those who prefer the cleaner, crisper, more subtle styles that are less popular, those scores wont be so high.

 

I'm not going to call any production breweries out for making 'fake' lagers with ale (or hybrid) yeast strains and low fermentation temperatures, but I know for a fact they exist. And sure, IPA used to mean something more defined than it does now, but its still a recognizable style, even if the title is misappropriated at times.

 

An IPL has to be a lager. Otherwise it's an IPA.

 

I agree with your translation. As usual, however, an awful lot is lost in translation -- especially when you conflate intensity of flavor with quality.

 

Yup. I got it.
I was asking Alexmc2 why HE believes some IPL's are not actually lagers.

He wont say why.

 

Sort of like the is Budweiser a "quality" beer threads that come around every so often. It does seem that many posters are unable to see quality in a beer they don't like.

 

This. Not sure what the complaint is here. Tried a "named" IPL the other day, Fathom from Ballast Point and really enjoyed it. The Lager fermentation process yields a crisper beer in my view, with a similar hop profile to an IPA and less weight, perhaps more drinkability. I immediately bought more. Hoponious Union is superb, whatever they call it.

As to why they do, it, I think it is because in the early craft beer revolution, lagers became a code word for Budweiser, Miller, Coors etc. They became a dirty word, except perhaps for some imported German beers. If it wasn't an ale it wasn't cool. I think these brewers are trying to re-educate their audience that lager doesn't mean "Bud". By calling it an IPL they attract IPA drinkers who learn that they can like lagers as well. Jack's Abby does a great job of this by not brewing any ales.

 

Everyone needs to remember a style is a snapshot it time they have always evolved and always will evolve.

In todays term something with an I usually evokes Imperial as to what type of beer they are boositng the shit out of alcohol wise would be up to taste. All places are bad at stating what a beer should be, even BA

 

Go read "shut up about barclay perkins" blog tons of good info on how style have evolved