Northeast Pales/IPA/DIPA

Believe that "not caring" and "don't mean a lot" aren't the same thing. I care a little.

 

Agree completely, there's probably more than one way. What ratios are you you liking these days? I'm around .3 chloride to sulfate.

 

what do you mean? .3ppm chloride to 1ppm sulfate?

 

i am doing about 120ppm chloride and 55 ppm sulfate so 2:1 (give or take)

 

No it just was not as good of a product. There were a number of Trillium beers that were released that were not as hazy as they were in the past. A lot of people said the level of hop aroma and flavor had fallen off. So many people complained that JC actually posted that they had been sourcing hops that had a lower oil content then previous crops. There may have been other factors but that is the one he directed everyone's attention to. Very quickly following releases were hazy again and juicy as ever.

Is hazy a requirement? Of course not but it is coincidently a common trait in ALL of these beers in New England the lemmings (me included) are going crazy over. If someone figures out how to nail all of the typical NE Style traits without the haze then they have done what no one else has been able to....in my opinion and knowledge.

 

I seem to never brew the same beer...ever, but I like anywhere from 100-200ppm chloride, and generally 50-90 ppm sulfate in these hazy hoppy beers that would be just AS good if they we're crystal clear...

 

IMO It has to be at least somewhat yeast driven. I am not volunteering(because im lazy) but why doesn't someone brew two identical recipes in "NE Style" pitch London 3 in one and American Ale into the other. It would be my hypothesis is that the the American would be be moderately hazy and London three would be gravy.

 

NOT IT!!!

 

Heres a nice blog post where London III was compared side-by-side to Conan...and London III made a notably more hazy brew than Conan:
https://whitepointerbrewery.wordpre...-part-2-conan-vs-london-ale-iii-side-by-side/

(He has also posted here on this site but I'm too lazy/buzzed at the moment to go searching for his username/post )

 

I have drank my fair share of highly regarded west coast style IPAs (and brewed plenty off at style for that matter) and only recently encountered some of these newer NEIPAs. I'm not sure what makes them different, maybe it is the turbidity, or the yeast, or the water profile, or a combo of all three. All I know is the accepted techniques required to make them results in a beer far different than most of the typical clear IPAs that I have drank in the past. And I'm not talking hop haze as a lot of hoppy beers have that, I'm talking the turbidity. I'm of the opinion that a clear or "hop hazy" ipa cannot match the juicy, creamy quality that we see in the current crop of NEIPAs. That doesn't mean I prefer one style of ipa to the other, I just feel they are different and using west coast techniques to brew a NEIPA will not give you the same results. Just my $.02.

 

It wasn't Chico, but it wasn't 1318 either, we use an American origin strain.

 

My 1056 beers get the same hop schedule and drop clear.

 

Thats me, thanks for reading and I hope some of the info there is helpful to people. The Conan version was almost as hazy as the 1318 initially, but not quite there. What surprised me was how the 1318 never really seemed to drop out while the Conan did to an extent. I really like both yeasts, but for something like Trillium or Treehouse I'd go with the 1318.

 

I wonder if that has to do with perception rather than an actual difference? Like people made an assumption before they even tried the beer after they saw the difference in appearance.

 

Similar issue with Toppling Goliath and their Citra crop last year at times, so not sure if it was perception.

 

I would tend to want to believe that theory, but JC said the hops tested as having half of the oil content that they used to get. There's no way that those beers came out the same.

 

And my only question with JC's explanation is whether ALL of the hop varietals they were receiving were down in oil content? I remember him mentioning Galaxy, but Galaxy is only used in a couple of their brews. (I actually love that their stuff is so straightforward -- basically Columbus (my favorite hop!) + another hop, maybe two. My guess is that there was more to it than oil content issues, but I'm also not a professional brewer with a wildly successful brewery like Trillium, so there's that

 

JC Tetreault has discussed this topic on a BA thread. There was indeed an issues with the Galaxy hop crop wrt oil content but he also acknowledged that there were scaling issues as well at the new brewery.

“A note on the haze...the haze will be back. One of our key hops came in from a new harvest year with significantly lower oil content (>4% to <2.5%). We've checked in and heard the same from some other brewers as well. We sent back the lower oil content lots (Galaxy) and just recieved replacement hops so you'll see (no pun intended) the usual Trillium beers again soon. We're very happy with the beers out of Canton (Scaled, 2nd batch of Launch Beer, and now Free Rise, more to come) and some of our core hops (Mosaic, Citra, Columbus, Nelson) but the geometry of our new tanks has us tweaking some of our staple recipes and process. Organic matter and scaling...that's it.”

http://www.beeradvocate.com/communi...pany-december-2015.359947/page-4#post-4328869

Cheers!”

@cmurphycode

 

Ah, thanks for this Jack -- I forgot JC's comments on scaling. Totally understandable issue to have (and one that, from recent pics, seems to have been resolved).

 

That would still link that style of beer to hops and not to the appearance of the beer driving the flavor. In other words, you could make the beer less cloudy and it should be the same. Unless I'm thinking about this wrong.