Balanced, hybrid-ish NE IPA?

I'd agree, but different yeast act differently in solutions with high polyphenol (and mineral) content.

 

Here's the rub with that theory. Isomerization doesn't just happen at boiling. Testing these beers for actual (not estimated or calculated) IBUs would be neat, though.

 

Aware of that, but certainly more isomerization occurs in the boil not only because of temp, but also time. Lack of thorough isomerization/early kettle additions seem to be the one common thread in NEIPAs.

 

So with this in mind, your theory would be . . . ?

Keeping in mind that beers with low measured IBUs and using similar or the same yeast strains haven't been cloudy.

Sorry if that came off as a "challenge". I'm honestly curious what people think about this subject.

 

Low hop amounts will always result in relatively low isomerization; however, low isomerization is not necessarily a result of low hopping rates. Maybe the problem is the IBU definition??

 

I am still awaiting data to substantiate these claims.

 

As I'm waiting on yours. Scientific papers would be preferable.

 

I quoted a source. I have seen nothing from you except the same old unsubstantiated claims.

 

There are no direct scientific papers on this subject. Only ones with peripheral research, mostly done in the wine industry on how polyphenols affect yeast flocculation. There are no absolutes on this subject, as of yet, so calm yourself. It is just fine to have discussions on this subject without those absolutes.

 

I was more referring to the "yeast in suspension" comment made. I was talking to a guy on Reddit that has done microscope reviews of popular NE breweries (Hill/Trillium/Treehouse/Alchemist) and they have incredibly low yeast counts in the finished beer. JC from Trillium tweeted it's not yeast in suspension. One of their quality checks is to make sure yeast is not present. Now, I haven't done a yeast by yeast test but I've used a few different and it seems more important the hop amount than it does yeast strain.

 

I'd certainly agree with you here that the amount of hops (polyphenols) is important, but I'd say the yeast strain used is equally so.

The more anecdotal evidence that I hear about there being very little yeast in suspension with (at least some of) these beers and that "protein-polyphenol complexes" are causing the haze makes me wish there were some studies available on the subject. Anecdotal evidence is great, but most of these brewers aren't microbiologists, so I'm not sure how accurate the evidence actually is. Someone REALLY needs to do some comparative studies including mass spec. and liquid chromatography readings of the beers in question.

 

Interesting conjecture.

 

Where do people get these crazy low whirlpool temps? Do you think the commercial breweries are doing this? Forgive me if I'm wrong but they'd have to have a heat exchanger installed between kettle and whirlpool and another one installed between whirlpool and FV right?? You can't cool 7,10,30 barrels of beer to 180 in a timely manner between kettle and whirlpool with some sort of heat exchanger and I havent heard of that happening I don't think. I have a family friend who is head brewer at a large brewery in the NW and he said the lowest he's ever measured the temp in their whirlpool is 193*, and they're boil temp is like 206* I think.

 

It has been widely agreed and proven on a microscope that the haze in well made NEIPA is polyphenol content and not yeast in suspension by people like the guys at brülosophy, @OldSock and stan heironymous.

 

Homebrewers can certainly do things differently than can commercial brewers. The low hop stand temperatures have to do with volatilization of hop oils and isomerization of alpha acids.

 

This seems to be the widely accepted explanation. However, widely accepted doesn't mean correct (see OldSock's previous stance on Lactobacillus sp. being able to completely ferment wort). Looking more for the mechanism than the end product. Any insight on that?

 

Personally, I think it's more homebrewers trying to copy something that really isn't necessary on our scale. I've talked to many people who "get" the same results simply doing a FO addition, cooling, and doing a brew day dry hop. Saves a lot of time and get the same results. I've been itching to try it myself.

 

I'd be interested in seeing a comparison done, but I'd have to think that the difference would be that the beer with the FO addition instead of the <180F addition would be noticeably more bitter if all other variables remained constant, as the amount of alpha acids that were isomerized would be higher.

 

I brew all my NE IPA's with a very west coast bittering profile... Typically 70-100+ IBU. I can't stand the overly sweet, under-attenuated variants a lot of places are coming out. My favorite NE IPA's, easily, come from Trillium which tend to have a bit more punch. Incredibly juicy, yet still have that firm bittering to make them far more drinkable. As bitter as they may be on paper, they really come off perfect in the final product.

For example, two of my big NE DIPA's are 100+ IBU with large charges of bittering hops (2-3oz of high AA%). Including 30min and then of course late additions as well. My session and standard NE-IPA's follow the same relative bittering rates. They don't come out that bitter, given the yeast esters and hopping rates used. They come out perfect, IMO.

I have also done NE IPA's without oats and other flaked grains and they come out just fine. I have also used a ton of oats/wheat as well, it doesn't matter. With the right hopping and yeast selection, you will get a very turbid final product. It really isn't a necessity to have... But more-so, go for a flavor profile (or lack of).

I find NE IPA's actually very easy to brew... The easiest thing I brew, honestly. People make them far more complicated than they need to be, IMO. Again, it comes down to going heavy handed on the hopping additions (in particular the dry hop) with the right yeast strain and a "simple" grist and you will be fine. I would even suggest going against the grain on water profile as well, not using the well-believed "high chloride to sulfate" ratio as well, but that just comes down to taste... I find high sulfates used for NE IPA's to be ideal as well, in my testing at least.

 

I tried whirlpooling/hopstand, both low and high temp. I never did any side-by-side comparisons with the same wort, but from memory, I couldn't tell any difference between either one or a simple FO addition. Maybe that's because I bitter my NE IPAs like @invertalon above. Maybe @EvenMoreJesus has it right, and you'd see less bitterness from hopstand/whirlpool vs FO. I personally don't care to minimize bitterness, so I've all but abandoned the technique in my process. Still a nice tool to have, though.

I've never done a brew day dry hop. I always do a traditional, one time dry hop and get great results.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes. I think this style gets way too much credit. Incredibly easy to brew, and all of the complex techniques thrown around this forum are completely unnecessary if you ask me.