How to classify India Pale Lagers?

TBH no, I can't give you more than a couple of names. It just seems that I'm seeing more beers calling themselves IPL as I walk through the aisles.
I'll be restocking Saturday and pay attention to how many there really are.

 

All great points, and I completely agree.

I think we both agree that the style nomenclature will continue to need updating, and should evolve as the styles evolve.

 

Anyone who can get a hold of Russian River's Apical Dominance should . . . it's an IPL that's unlike anything I've ever tasted, a truly unique brew.

 

To your point...I don't believe there can be an Imperial Porter. That's a stout, my dude.

 

In some ways, that’s kind of like saying that a Baltic Porter is just a gimmick. It’s kind of just a porter/imperial porter fermented with lager yeast, so same difference when compared to IPA/IPL, no?

 

If NEIPA is a style, so should an IPL. The major components are different as is the technique, an Ale is different process than a Lager obviously. If anything a NEIPA is distinctly blurry as hell I don’t see it needs a separate category at all.

 

In many ways the Baltic Porter was a gimmick -- brewed to be an answer to Imperial Stout. But it was brewed in areas that didn't get Imperial Stout to satisfy those who wanted it. How many IPAs are available to you right now? Do you really need an IPL to satisfy your hop craving?

 

Only a SA offering.

I haven’t had a lot of either style because they’re just not here for the most part, but I find IPLs and Brut IPAs to effectively be twins.

 

Most of the "Imperial Porters" are just barrel aged or flavored porters, not even mis-named stouts.

 

Someone should have told London brewer, Reid & Co.!


( FYI - "Do." is an abbreviation of "ditto". Who knew?)

 

I'm also flummoxed by "brown stout", while we're at it...

 

Pretty common terminology in the US, pre-Pro right up through the 1950s (the Ballantine label's from the post-Repeal period).

 

Could you explain the difference between a brown stout and, say a brown ale, or a "regular" stout?

Genuinely curious!

 

As an aside, who actually wrote the descriptions?
This thread led me to read each style description and some of them (looking at you American Stout & American IPA) read like they ought to be on match.com

BTW I love that BA has an American Malt Liquor style and that Mickey's, Steel Reserve, Olde English, and Colt 45 combine for more 4,000 reviews, while the top 75 Brut IPA's barely crack 2,000.

 

Don't forget "Brown Stout Porter" ! (Below in a 1934 mention in an ad from what was originally called the Anthracite Brewing Co.).

US brewers in that era did not feel it necessary to follow the sort of strict "style" guidelines that the modern geekery has created. (They even fermented some ales and porters with their house lager yeast and some sold "Beer" fermented with top fermenting ale yeast . Still drives some folks crazy.) Legally, in the US, the recognized style categories of the Feds are pretty damn broad. (More info on my page Top and bottom fermenting yeast.)

From what I can tell, the "brown" in US Brown Stouts was more or less just a helpful descriptor (say, similar to a beer labeled "Light Lager" vs one with essentially the same recipe that was just called "Lager"). There were a few examples of light-colored, high ABV beers being called simply "Stout" (rather "Stout Beer" or "Stout Malt Liquor") but eventually the Feds made them change it (based on the legal definition in the link above) - thus Gluek's Stout, the best-known example, became Gluek Stite.

If a brewery offered a Brown Ale/Nut Brown Ale as well as a Stout and or Porter, I'd imagine the difference would be ABV and IBUs, as well as the use of, or a higher percentage of, medium or dark caramel malt and/or dark-roasted malts.

 

No parameters. No parameters necessary. It's advertising that hopefully helps brewers stay in business. **holds breath waiting for the advertising is bad crowd to roast me**

 

Technique/yeast species is a convenient bright-line for categorization, but it's also useless to consumers/reviewers if the taste in the glass is indistinguishable. It's usually a useful shorthand for classic styles, but as IPLs demonstrate it's not very helpful when it comes to some hybrid styles. Maybe the thing to do is just to recognize when there are similar beers made using other techniques and call the category "IPAs and IPLs."