Balanced, hybrid-ish NE IPA?

Nope. I have 'hard copy' of the article.

Perhaps you could PM the author: telejunkie

 

I can't disagree with you more. 1318 flocc's like a beast and is considered THE yeast to use. Yeast has nothing to do with it. I'm betting HotHead can be just as hazy as any other yeast.

 

You're right Jack...I was having a brain fart when I typed that post!

 

I'll try. A lot of the interesting and applicable studies are either behind paywalls, written in Belgian, or are done with non-sacch yeasts. I'll keep looking, though.

 

More just conjecture, but in talking with John Kimmich & Shaun Hill as well as a lot of circumstantial evidence in the brewing world...a well brewed NE IPA does not and should not have a high yeast count...any more so than a regular unfiltered, well flocc'ed beer. The yeast that has made this style popular in general are highly flocc'ing yeast.

I originally thought the high hopping levels somehow precluded the yeast from flocc'ing but cell counts on these beers have repeatedly shown that it is not yeast causing the haze but rather just a run of mill protein/polyphenol haze. Also it has been shown in side by sides that Chico strain, which is a medium flocc'ing strain, will often clear this protein/polyphenol haze more readily than the high floccing yeasts.

Why? ....as Jack pointed, out, seems to suggest that the slower floccing of Chico promotes an interaction with the protein/polyphenol haze, allowing it to drop with the yeast during flocculation.

 

So, you would suggest that this appearance is only possible with strains of yeast that express high flocculation? Besides Chico, has this been tested with other strains?

 

If you really want a hybrid, balanced IPA, do some combination of the following things:

1. Drop the flaked/unmalted grains. They make beer look like a milkshake.
2. Up the IBUs to 50+.
3. Don't feel pressured to use a "NE IPA approved" yeast. Chico works fine.
4. Late and dry hop the crap out of it - 13+ oz total. Use a combination of "juicy" hops and old school IPA hops.
5. Adjust water to NE IPA profile.

I did basically that: 100% MO base, Belma, Mosaic, Comet, ~75 IBU, fermented with WLP060 (mostly Chico). It's been in the keg probably 6 weeks and it's nowhere near clear. MO give a nice creamy mouthfeel on its own.

What you've described is a NE IPA, through and through. Not that there's anything wrong with that... Just saying.

 

Personally I've done a more testing on the higher flocc'ing strains than the lower flocc'ing strains...but I do have San Diego super in my keezer. So basically I've got a solid haze to hold strong for longer aging periods using Anchor's ale strain (1272), Nottingham, White Labs Essex (022) and Whitbread Dry strain (1028)....obviously 1318 & Conan strains as well.
I did have great success back in the day fermenting Chico strain (usually either 1056 or US-05) when trying to build my Heady Topper clone recipe back in like 2012 before learning of the now famed Conan yeast...but my beers with Chico were always clearer than Heady, despite huge dosing of hops both in the whirlpool and dry hops. Not until I started switching to Nottingham and more flocculent strains did the haze really hold.

 

Correct. I target a 6 gallon batch due to absorption from the leaf hops. I aim for 5 gallons into the keg.

My basic hopping strategy (for a "hybrid" IPA) is 1-3 oz @60 to hit 50+ IBU, 4-6 oz at FO, 6 oz dry hop. Obviously, for a NE style, you'd drop the 60 min addition in favor of more late boil/FO/whirlpool additions. YMMV

 

Certainly surprised by this, as I use Munton's Dry Ale yeast in my NEIPAs which is a high flocculating strain as well.

Would simply like to hear or read something definitive regarding the "why" behind it. As of now, I'm operating under the assumptions provided to me by some microbiologists that I know.

 

Again...all I got are guesses (this is even if my original theory above is correct)....and i have two guesses. One is that surface charges on the yeast cells are creating the differences...cells that seem to flocc better seem less likely to grab the the protein/polyphenols out (like a hydrophobic vs. hydrophilic discrepancy).
Second guess is that the slower floccing yeast gives more time for the protein/polyphenols to group in with the flocc'ing yeast in order to drop.
Or option C...I'm just full of shit...

 

Do you know if anyone has done threshold experiments on these types of beers with these high flocculating yeast strains? Reason being is that not all beer made with them have clarity issues. Only beers with high polyphenol content from both hops and malt. Classically beers made with these yeast strains drop crystal clear without fining and they certainly have malt and hop derived polyphenols as well. Just not enough to trigger the haze to occur.

 

The most scientific experiments I'm aware of have placed this threshold at precisely one "shit ton" of hops.

 

Is that in metric or standard units?

 

Honestly, I've heard both stated. Maybe the studies haven't been that scientific after all?

 

In the FWIW category, I recently made a Rye IPA with Wyeast 1332 (NW Ale), which is a really strong flocculator. Eight ounces of finishing hops and four ounces in the dry hop. My IPA is still uber hazy even after almost 10 weeks in the keg. Cheers!

 

Are you saying that the choice of yeast has nothing to do with haze?

Although there are certainly differing schools of thought about this, yours is one that I've never heard. Care to expound upon your theory?

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say yeast has nothing to do with it, but I will say that heavy (late) hopping rates are 99% of it. I think that 1318 is probably good for the style more for it's esters (and maybe biotransformation ability?) and moderate attenuation than for it's high flocculation.

And don't even get me started on flaked grains. They make a beer murky, not hazy. I like a murky NE IPA with flaked grains as much as the next guy, but that is not the same thing as "hazy". As has been mentioned, you can make a hazy beer with Chico, for example. Hell, even Conan is a low flocculator, and some people claim that is the NEIPA yeast.

 

After reading all the threads and conjecture about the reasons for murkiness of NEIPAs, I wonder if it might have something to do with the low amounts of isomerized hops in most NEIPAs...there might be several reasons hops have been traditionally boiled for an hour.