New Brewery and Adding Beers - Style Confusion?

Octophant?

Release the Kraken!! Meet Octophant our New England Sour IPA brewed with Mosaic and Sabro hops. This beer is ridiculously juicy that even our taste testers thought we added fruit to this beer but its all hops baby! A sour IPA Is the result of combining two styles of beer together, like fusing an Octopus with an Elephant!

Sour Meter: Sourest
ABV: 5%

 

Except for the Gose, I think all of these beers should be in a kettle/fruit sour category. Although the brewery's name should give people a hint that their beers are going to taste sour, I think the assigned style should reinforce that because the sour haters are more interested in knowing that info rather than it being an IPA or Stout or a NEIPA.

BUT, reading the description of the Octophant I have to wonder if there is so much hop character in that beer that it overpowers the sourness before they commit to buying/drinking one. But still... I think 'sour' is the main descriptor that a potential drinker of one of their beers needs to know above anything else. I say put them all into kettle sours.

 

Definitely looks like they are all kettle sours

 

Yeah I tend to see any beers that are intentionally soured with lactobacillus as sour beers first and foremost with their other attributes placing them in a subcategory.

It's an interesting approach to a brewery, and I suppose there are plenty of breweries who seem to do well with kettle sours, but it seems like somewhat of a tight corner to paint oneself into to only provide that option.

And love or hate the labeling, I find it really hard to imagine that brand translating to a line of specialty wild/spontaneous and barrel aged sour beers.

 

There is a brewery like that in Austin, called Blue Owl. They have been open for at least 10 years now, so I guess that is going well for them.

https://blueowlbrewing.com/beer/

I haven't had them in a little bit, they seemed to have disappeared from around me. Though they might have actually branched out and made non kettle soured beers. I can't vouch for some of the beers listed here, as I don't know if they are truly non "soured" or if they were added in the wrong style. Just a note, I know they have done things like "sour" Wee Heavy's for whatever that is worth. So don't know if they are continuing on that, or changing somethings up.

https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/35964/

All that, to say, I don't really know what the answer is either. I would mostly put them in some kind of Kettle Sour, or depending on the beer, Wild Ale category. Though that would probably have to be on a case by case basis.

Edit:
For this particularly brewery in question in the OP, sorry, not sorry...those labels suck

 

You might be highlighting a gap in the BA database. There's an issue if you are putting beers without fruit in a category named after beers with fruit. (I'm not saying that isn't the best placement for them currently.) Last I checked, butterscotch wasn't considered a fruit, but anything is possible.

To me, it feels like the concept of beers modeled after desserts and candies is unignorable as a product category... even if consumers and brewers don't have a name for the category (besides the too restrictive pastry stout term). One reason such a term doesn't exist is because there is no need for it with brewers and consumers. You don't need to say things like "pale ale" or "brown ale" if you can say "blueberry pie beer" and "chocolate donut beer." The style handshake is already there without needing a broader category term... but the lack of one is of no help to cataloguers and the BA database.

I never cared for the term "pastry stout," but category names tend to have a life of their own if they are successful, and they aren't easily influenced. It is what it is.

The brewer you are talking about has a process diagram for their beers focused on "kettle souring." They also have a section of their site dedicated to "wild" beers and it looks like they are approaching that from a more conservative angle. Ignoring that bit, almost every beer on their site is modeled after other sugary foods and drinks. The two exceptions are the Lichtenhainer (with apples ) - which might be as close as they get on that list to something resembling a beer style that's older than a few years... and the "sour IPA" - which I'm willing to bet either has added sugar (lactose) or high residual sugar from brewing.

I think we are long overdue for a "confection beer" category. If a beer is being marketed as an ice cream beer, a cherry pie beer, a bomb pop beer, a cannoli beer, a sour patch kid beer, a Snickers beer, etc... put it in the confection beer category. Isn't this how consumers actually see such beers for the most part? It's certainly how they are marketed, and there's more than enough cultural presence for these beers at this point. I saw a "Speculoos Cookie Butter Beer" at the store the other day. It's listed as an "American strong ale" on BA. That's a great example of how the beer world has transformed from Arrogant Bastard.

I know nobody will like the name I have for this type of beer. It'll die with this post. I think it's a thing though. I don't think it's much different from "chile beer," except that those are hard to come by now. I'll tag @Todd for the heck of it, but I certainly don't expect an addition.

 

Your logic is always so spot-on that I don't have a problem with the confection name. It makes sense. But your example of putting a "sour patch kid" beer in with the others is a problem for me. That example happens to be self-descriptive and anyone who hates sour beers and complains that they wouldn't have bought it if they'd known it was sour is an idiot. But if a brewer makes a sour beer and names it Jane (or any other non-descriptive name), I think having it in a sour category style would warn people that Jane is a sourpuss. So Confection - Sour as a sub style should also be used to include those beers.

 

Maybe you are right, but when talk about a new category on BA leads to people wanting more new categories, I often think it’s a turn off. I don’t think multiple versions of “confection beer” would be needed unless the amount of products in the market warranted it. Candy is candy. The single chile beer category here is good enough for both stouts and pale lagers. If a consumer is looking up a beer on BA before buying it and just looking at the BA style category without really looking at the beer notes, reviews, info on the can, can art, or beer name, then that’s on them. If a brewer doesn’t indicate that a beer is sour on their packaging, then that’s on them. BA just needs a good place for the beers.

With regards to the OP, the addition of a simple “kettle sour” category to complement the existing "fruited kettle sour" would probably be seen as having more synergy with the BA database than my confection beer notion. I just like the confection beer category because to me it reflects the identity of the beers. It's not like consumers are thinking "Wow, a new kettle sour!" they are likely thinking "Check out this Warheads beer!"