Brewer’s Style Intent vs. Perceived Style

I'd say enter it as the brewery stated. If it's wrong it's on them.

 

People are stubborn. Once the brewer makes up his/her mind, they're not going to change it. They might justify the choice or change the guidance rules, but they won't change the style. It's on you to shed light on it and share with others.

 

You also must consider that brewers don't necessarily look to BA or maybe even the BJCP to obtain an exact style. In the particular example, some might not even care to recognize NE IPA as a separate style.

This site is meant to be informative, so I'd argue to use your best judgement in describing the beer (via style and definitely as you do in your review) to give others on this site as accurate picture as you can. If the brewer obviously has beers marked NE and others that aren't - I'd go with the brewer's stated style. If they seem to only use a broader category, I might style it to my own assessment, and note it in my review.

The community can always correct any of us in the future with a suggested edit, if appropriate. Cheers!

 

Some of the most recent example of stated v perceived style for me have been the opposite: a brewer attempting a NE IPA that is really a hazy WC IPA.

I tend to review them to the brewer's intent, while stating kind of as a throw-away line something like, "but it is a very good West Coast IPA...".

 

It is well to remember that the whole concept of styles is a relatively recent "add on" to the beer scene. In the past they were just names used by brewers (often arbitrary as evidenced by the Bass brewer who once described a beer as a Pale Ale a Bitter and an IPA in the same conversation as of course they were different names for the same thing).
Organisations such as BJCP and BA have to pick up the pieces and try to make sense but on the bottom line styles are not cast in stone.

 

I go with brewers intent. It's just easier that way and I don't have to waste any of the limited precious ___'s I have to give.

 

When I first got into craft, one of the first imports I had was Brouwerij Van Honsebrouck Kasteel Barista Chocolate Quad Belgian Ale. I later set a goal to try all styles and one day noted my style count had dropped by one. After some checking I found this beer had changed styles from Belgian Strong Dark Ale to Belgian Quad. Interesting that when it was added, the person adding it chose to ignore Quad in the name. Chances are that if you list it differently than labeled by the brewer, someone will eventually submit a correction.

 

Sometimes what the brewer puts on the package is how the're trying to market it, as opposed to how the beer is conceived. I recently ran across this very thing with a local place that made a Doppelsticke (high gravity Altbier) but put "German style barleywine" on the can; obviously they are figuring that their customers will understand barleywine better than Doppelsticke, and they may be right. The thing is, it's not really that strong (7.5%) and is actually a really good Altbier at its core. Go figure...

I do find it best rate with style and context in mind, but for me those elements are in the glass and I can deduce what the brewer is going for from there.

 

I’m skeptical of consumers accurately listing a beer as a certain style if they perceive it to be different than what the brewer says it is. The best example I have right now is barleywine... I brewed a traditional English barleywine with 100% Maris Otter and another one with 90% Maris Otter and 10% Crystal malt. Both of them utilized 5 hour boils. I read every review on all my beers and with those ones, I saw a lot of comments saying “Lighter than a traditional barleywine” and “Good, but it’s not a barleywine.” People’s perception has switched to thinking that barleywines are supposed to be super sweet, dark brown, sometimes almost black beers with many of the same qualities as imperial stouts. The hazy IPA trend has resulted in people thinking that hazy IPA’s should be murky or muddy clarity rather than hazy too. I also had people say that my Pilsener (recipe developed under the guidance of German master brewers while I was in school) is hoppier than a traditional Pils and didn’t taste authentically German even though they’d admitted they’d never been to Germany and tried many Pilseners. That whole thing is annoying to me

 

Well, you're essentially talking highly inexperienced novices there. If it's any consolation, when I see reviews like that I completely disregard anything they have to say .

 

The adherence to the parameters of defined "styles" introduces a certain rigidity of thinking I do understand it, but I'll never quibble over the vagaries of exact definition. Not everyone tastes the same things in a given beer. If I like the beer I think I may know what the brewer's intent was..Maybe....

 

Go with what the brewer says. Yes, they may choose nomenclature for marketing purposes, but I’m not going to assume I know more than the brewer.

 

On this note, I do enjoy it when a brewery takes the time on the menu, website, and/or even can to describe what they were attempting or how they brewed the beer. It is helpful if the style is included mainly for categorization on sites like these, but much more can be gleaned with a decent description than a couple words (go figure, I'm advocating for more words ). Kudos to brewers who take a little effort to be informative and/or transparent in this regard.

 

I can understand what OP is saying. Just like that American Blond Ale I just had that seemed more like a Belgian pale ale to me. However, I didn't send in any request to change it. Kinda agree with others on here, it's up to the brewery if they care enough. To be honest, most Vermont brewers don't care about online ratings.

 

Yeah. I love evaluating a beer against those merits / goalposts. But, we're also constantly moving them around where it concerns new world styles, and re-adaption of old world into new world that the guidelines are fairly useless because they aren't even up to date.

 

Probably the classic beer that has been the focus of this style-naming debate would be Zombie Dust. I'll guess that 100% of the BA membership who have experienced this beer would say it is an IPA, probably because the hops clearly shine in this beer. The brewery has always called it a Pale Ale, so I/we have always lived with that designation. It's the brewer's choice.

 

I fall back on the style as determined by the brewer and team. It's not my place to label a beer's style. It's my place to review the sensory experiences of a beer and how well a beer fit within the style classification - not whether or not a brewer and team correctly labeled a beer.

Interpretation by casual to semi-professional consumers opens up lots of room for variability that can't really be compared palate to palate, and day-to-day. Thus, I stick with the original intent by the professional.