Hop burn NE style

I'm here to tell ya that polyphenol haze and yeast insuspension are very different things. The great examples of the style are not hazy from the yeast.

 

For sure. I know that when I turn one of these beers around in 14 days, there is still loads of yeast in suspension. Maybe after 3 or 4 weeks there is less, but that’s usually right around when the keg is about to kick

I have one finishing up in primary right now that I have dry hopped once. I just might fine with gelatin before the keg dry hop and see what that does.

 

How exactly do you know that it is yeast that is in suspension? Have you looked at your 14 day old beer under a microscope?

Please report back your findings.

Cheers!

 

I’m Just making this assumption because just about any beer I brew, especially with a low floc yeast, does not drop clear after a week in primary and a week on gas, if no finings are used.

I’ll try and snap some pics if I go this route.

 

The yeast strains most associated with the so called 'NE' style IPA (e.g., Wyeast 1318) are described as having high flocculation by the yeast vendors.

Cheers!

 

Not that I want to make this thread into a haze thread, but this statement makes me want to play Devil's Advocate and ask you "How are they very different?"

FTFY

If there are any definitive scientific studies, please link them here. I'm certainly not aware of any, so I'd be very interested in reading them if you have them.

 

I’m just trying to be less flatulent around my loved ones

 

JC has reported that his beers contain less than a billion cells per bbl soooo....... yeah.
Also, yeast is a micro organism, polyphenols are not.

 

Although interesting, that is but one data point and an anecdotal one at that. More empirical evidence is needed, especially that of controlled scientific experiments with pre-determined parameters. Who is JC, btw?

Can you expand upon this? I'm unsure of your point.

 

JC from Trillium. Not anecdotal as they use science instead of magic.

 

Unless they've published a paper about it in a scientific journal that is peer-reviewed, their report is, indeed, anecdotal, no matter how much science they used to arrive at their conclusions.

 

Can you snap a photo and post it @Alteredstate ?

 

My apologizes in advance for asking but what exactly do you think a photograph would explain as regards a beer flavor question?

Cheers!

 

Ok, I have been trolling, but to say a cell count needs to be peer reviewed in order to be legit is silly.

 

Yeah, but as a beer drinker who knows what he likes, I wouldn't listen to an academic on what constitutes a great beer anymore than JC.

 

@JackHorzempa, just curious, not trying to solve anything just like talkin about beers, lookin at em is helpful eh

 

Never said it wasn't legit. Just said it was anecdotal evidence. You know, simply one person's experience.

 

So why do you put so much stock into scientific methods of brewing? You can't taste science. You and I both know that yeast laden beers look, feel, and taste different than beers that derive their haze from extreme hopping rates. I'm not sure what your end game is here.

 

If you don't think that you can taste science, you should look into the percentage of excellent brewers that have received a proper brewing education in comparison to those that haven't. There's a reason those people brew consistently great beer. It's because they understand the science of it.

Although there are certainly different reasons for haze, to say that you can predictably taste the difference between all of them certainly has never been established.

My end game is know why things happen.