Northeast Pales/IPA/DIPA

I have had over a dozen of Hill Farmstead beers and not a single one of his beers have been murky. They have not been crystal clear either but they are not at all like the murky beers from Trillium or some of the beers from Tired Hands.

If you want to create a murky beer (a beer that looks like a milkshake) go for it.

To think that a beer has to have the appearance like a milk shake to have a nice "juicy" hop aroma/flavor and a silky mouthfeel is simply not the case.

Brew the beers you like and brew them the way you like.

Cheers!

 

Ya know, @hoptualBrew didn't just say murky. He said hazy/murky. Would you agree that the HF beers you had were hazy? And if so, where would you personally draw the line between hazy and murky?

 

To each their own. But when I had this beer in march the beer made me think of orange juice. The beer tasted very juicy and had an incredible mouthfeel. That beer clear probably would have looked like a Pilsner and wouldn't have given me the preconceived notion of fruit juice.

 

I would describe a beer that looks like a milk shake/orange juice as being murky.

A beer that is not crystal clear but is not totally clear is hazy for me.

Hill Farmstead makes hazy beer.

Trillium makes murky beer.

I am personally not a fan of murky beers but too each their own.

Cheers!

 

Jack, is it psychological for you? Trillium makes some of the best hoppy beers that I've ever tasted.

 

Alright, I'm gonna bite too. @JackHorzempa isn't the only one on here that finds the appearance of a milkshake beer unappetizing. We as consumers have been trained to expect clear beer, in some cases flawlessly clear. Any beer with an amount of haze typically comes with a disclaimer (wit, hefe) about the appearance being cloudy. But these beers are typically hazy to cloudy, but not murky. Being from the PNW we have an issue with murky beers since McMennamins made crappy beer with tons of suspended matter and then tried to make consumers believe that is the way that "Craft Beer" was supposed to be: full flavored and full bodied.

I have had Heady on one occasion, and I think I enjoyed the 1oz pour I had in passing, but don't really know. I am completely open to having my mind changed on how good these beers are, and it seems that lots of BAs are really enjoying them. If I had a way to get them and drink them, I would. It would probably take some getting used to for the appearance though. Not saying at all that these can't be well made, and wonderful beers. Just that I have been inundated with only clear, some hop haze in super hoppy beers, hazy or cloudy in Saison, Hefe, Wit, and anything beyond is not made right.

 

The ‘short answer’ is yes, it is psychological.

The ‘longer answer’:

I have never had beer from Trillium but I have a lot of beer from Tired Hands; mostly at the Tired Hand Brewpub (Café) but lately I have been drinking Tired Hands at beer bars. During my numerous trips to the Tired Hands Brewpub I have noticed that their hoppy beers would sometimes be hazy and on occasion they have been murky. My guess is that the difference between hazy and murky at Tried Hands is time differentiation on when the beer was put on tap; a beer just tapped (or made just ready for serving) would have a murky appearance while a beer that was more ‘mature’ would just be hazy. Frankly I have never noticed any differentiation in the flavor of the beer whether it be hazy or murky, it is just an appearance issue.

There is an old saying in the food service industry: we eat with our eyes. A fancy dish at a 4 star restaurant that tastes good but does not look good will result in a less than stellar eating experience. In my opinion the same is true for beer. When I am presented with a beer that has the appearance of a milk shake it simply is not as pleasant a drinking experience. I have absolutely no issues with a beer that is hazy; I do not need beer to be crystal clear. I simply do not want to drink a beer that looks like an Orange Julius.

The reason I have been active in this thread is because I see no reason why a beer needs to have a murky appearance in order for the beer to have good drinking qualities. The majority of the Tired Hands Hop Hands beers that I have had at the Tired Hands brewpub were more on the hazy side of the appearance spectrum but I have had more than one that had the appearance of being murky.

I have already commented that all of the Hill Farmstead beers that I have had (and there have been a lot of them) were hazy in appearance but nowhere near murky.

I am still unsure how Trillium exactly achieves these aspects since they brew with flocculent yeast and for the most part do not use unmalted grains.

It appears that some homebrewers are looking to exactly emulate the murky nature of beers such as Trillium. IMO there is absolutely no need to emulate a murky appearance to result in a beer that has qualities of a “juicy” hop aroma/flavor and a silky mouthfeel.

Cheers.

P.S. For those of you unfamiliar with an Orange Julius:

 

A friend of mine that was over recently asked him if I had served him a beer or a glass of grapefruit juice. He ended up really enjoying the beer and he isn't much more than a bud light drinker so I was happy.

 

I have no doubt that Trillium produces tasty beers.

The few murky Tired Hands Hop Hands beers I drank had very good flavor profiles as well; they just were not appealing to my eyes. In other words I preferred drinking the hazy Hop Hands beers way more.

A case of different strokes for different folks?

Cheers!

 

the beer in question was one I brewed, he would have LOVED a Trillium beer haha

 

Well it sounds like you had a twofer:

• Produced a tasty homebrewed beer
• Were able to emulate the appearance of a Trillium beer

Cheers to you sir!

Edit: I scrolled back to page 1 and re-looked at the photograph of your beer.

 

I recently watched an episode of Chopped where they thew 4 Food Truck chefs up against each other. They made some killer recipes. They all sounded great. They would have been a joy to eat. But they all looked like crap. Every chef was hit hard in the judging for presentation. Their entire business was built on making great tasting food and sticking it in a paper or foil wrapper in a cardboard boat. Take what they made and put it on a real plate with garnish and sauce placement, contrasting colors, etc, and it becomes a much fuller experience.

I'm sure I would enjoy most of those beers. I would just have to get past the way they look first. Kind of like when Black IPAs first became big, or even a White Stout. I'm not saying at all that because they are murky that they can't taste good. I have had some awesome food truck food that looks like my 5 year old took a crack at making me dinner. Just saying that I would have to overcome my initial reaction of appearance.

 

Justin,

I personally had zero issues drinking Black IPAs but these murky beers really are not appealing to me.

On one visit to Tired Hands when it seemed like all of the beers on tap were murky I made a comment to my wife that I wish that I had brought a blindfold so that I could enjoy drinking those beers.

I have read and watched beer reviews where the reviewers would discuss the murky appearance of the beers they were reviewing emphasizing that these beers were so awesome since they were unfiltered. Every time I read/hear these explanations I want to yell out loud: unfiltered beers do not have to be murky like milk shakes!

I don’t doubt that there are some craft beer drinkers who view this murky appearance as being a positive trait but I have had too many excellent beers that are not murky to know that a murky appearance is not a requirement to produce high quality unfiltered beer.

Cheers!

Jack

 

Appearance should comes down to personal preference. I generally assume that a crystal clear IPA won't be as good as one that has some haze to it. Near-freezing cold crashing, filtering, time etc. all mute hop aromatics in exchange for clarity (a trade I'd rather not make). I don't mind hefeweizen level cloudiness in a hoppy beer. What I don't want are chunks or the real muddiness that comes from excessive yeast in suspension (both of which have negative impacts on flavor and mouthfeel).

My batch of Northeastern IPA a few dozen posts back was straddling that line. Eight weeks in the keg it has cleared up a bit, but still is pretty hazy. Flavor has fallen off considerably too. Still better than TG's Pseudosue bottled a few weeks later, so I'll call that a win!

 

Do you know how I know you don't live in Iowa?

 

The specific characteristics are the creamy body (and flavor) that a higher amount of Oats and Wheat lend to the malt backbone that is devoid of crystal malts. I dont' use crystal malts in any of my hoppy beers, neither do some of the breweries we are chatting about, I feel the beers end up too sweet for my tastes. But there needs to be something other than only base malt to balance the body of the beer and thats where the flaked grains come in. The caveat to that is youre going to have some hazy beer. The through in massive whirlpool hopping with 6oz\5 gallons of dry hops and there isnt really a way around the haze.

Mike brings up a good point here, there is a level of haziness thats acceptable in these beers and I recently brewed a beer that was a bit too murky for even me. In my case I forgot whirlfloc, if I had used it the haze level would have been fine. Normally some time in the keg things will clear up.

Filtering and cold crashing most certainly reduces hop flavor and aroma, its always seemed weird to me that folks would prefer a crystal clear beer even if it hurts the hop aroma\flavor. To me, flavor and aroma are more important than looks.

 

“The specific characteristics are the creamy body (and flavor) that a higher amount of Oats and Wheat lend to the malt backbone that is devoid of crystal malts.”

Fair enough. I have homebrewed a lot using Flaked Oats (up to 13% of the grain bill) and Flaked Oats do indeed provide a nice silky (creamy) mouthfeel. I have also brewed many Wits where 50% of the grain bill is Flaked Wheat. I don’t find that in Wits the high proportion of Flaked Wheat provides much in terms of a creamy mouthfeel.

Needless to say but my Wits do have a bit of haze which over a period of a few months settles out and my Wits are crystal clear then. I personally do not notice much difference in the flavor/qualities of my Wits when the haze dissipates.

For the beers where I have used up to 13% Flaked Oats there was not much in the way of haze and those beers were definitely not murky.

Having stated all of that I have not utilized Flaked Oats/Wheat in brewing hoppy beers.

As I have posted many times in this thread I personally have no issues with beer that have a hazy appearance.

When the beers cross the line from hazy to a milkshake consistency I find that unappealing.

I have had many Tired Hands hoppy beers that are hazy in appearance and for me they were enjoyable beers to drink. They do indeed have a silky mouthfeel and I enjoy the hop aroma/flavor of those beer.

I know I am beating a dead horse but there is no requirement for a beer to be murky to have the qualities of a silky (creamy) mouthfeel and a pleasant “juicy” hop aroma/flavor.

Cheers!

 

Just wondering what you (and others) are doing to get more of an orange hue to your beers if they are strictly low Lovibond malts like base, and Flaked Oats/Wheat?

 

The most brightly orange beers like Tree House Julius and Trillium Congress Street actually do use some crystal. The haziness also reduces the apparent srm and seems to make for a brighter orange.

 

Does anyone know what the "double dry hopped" specifically refers to in some of Trillium's so-named beers? Does that mean twice the amount? Or just done in two stages? Is this a common or uncommon practice? I mean, Firestone Walker's Double Jack says on the label it's triple dry hopped, but I'm not a brewer, so I don't have much context for what any of this means (other than having a general understanding of dry hopping).