Describing IPAs/DIPAs as balanced

People also tend to refer to beer as "balanced" versus other beers of the style. So someone saying Pliny is balanced might simply mean that it's not overly bitter to them like some other IPAs have been.

 

For me when I use the term "balanced" in describing an IPA/DIPA I'm talking about one that isn't just stupidly over-bitter to the point of being abrasive/astringent. I look for stuff like caramel malts etc. to bring that sweetness to balance out the powerful bitterness of massive amounts of hops. Of course the opposite is possible, where some DIPAs overuse malts and become sweet/syrupy messes.

 

The statement that "if you can taste hops or malt than it isn't balanced is pretty ignorant". As if 100 IBU and huge OG would somehow "balance" into tap water.

Balance could mean, holy shit this is really hoppy with a ton of bitterness, but it works because there is plenty of malt backbone. Balance is probably the MOST important quality of a good beer, regardless of the style. And balance can come from roastiness, alcohol, hops, spices, malts, minerals, et al.

 

Gotta disagree. Everyone knows the whole reason hops are in beer is because they needed lots of hops in order for the beer to make the journey to America.

 

Yes balance means in proportion. You know in an unbalanced ipa for example the fruits lose their individuality and become like a juicy fruit taste on top of a malt presence that isn't really there? If you have ever felt that the palate was muddled, that's lack of balance. If one character way overshadows the others, that's also lack of balance. Now overshadows is different from let's say a strong taste of one fruit dominating and then more subtle fruits in the background. If there was a weak malt in an ipa you would feel like you drank a kind of punch and not beer. For the most part in an ipa the malt should be the taxi cab that carries all that hoppy goodness over your palate and should not be too sweet or cloying either.

 

To me, balance means no flavor seems overdone in the beer for it's style.
So an IPA will have a lot of hops, but sometimes, like in Palate Wrecker, they are more focused on the bitterness than the hop flavor.
Pliney balances the entire beer around the hops, somehow it's not super bitter and everything fits well together.
Rogue's Maple Bacon Voodoo is not balanced, the artificial sweetness screams at you.
Oak Aged Yeti is very balanced, not overly sweet, nor overly dry.
Southern Tier Creme Brulee (spelling?) is not balanced, it's excessively sweet.

 

Well said!

 

Something can be precarious & still be balanced. Think of a mobile or a ballet dancer, close to teetering but still balanced.

 

to me "balanced" always has a "for the style" unstated. IMO it doesn't necessarily mean "equal" and it's not like an actual balance of A vs B as there are more than two things at play here. You can keep stacking more hops and more malt at balanced levels but eventually your creation becomes shaky. Sometimes I use the term harmonious instead. Sometimes when judging beers I write "balanced for the style" as I know the brewer could be confused.


in IIPA, I prefer a balance between palate-numbing and ass-kicking. But maybe that's just me.
PtE just happens to be balanced between awesomeness and tantrum-inducing unavailability.

 

You can balance extremes.
def. "a state of equilibrium or equipoise. an equal distribution of weight, amount, etc."
Just becuase something is 'bigger' doesn't mean it can't be balanced with other ingredients of equal effect. It's just not subtle.

 

This thread's OCD/Semantics rating is at about a 9.95 out of 10.

 

IBUs are IBUs regardless of the amount of burger. If you have a tuned palate you can taste them. They aren't as obvious as they are standing naked in weak sauce session IPA, but they are there.

 

Yes. "The meaning of 'balanced'" = semantics.

 

Also, using old-world examples of beer as the standard for balance posits that American styles will never achieve balance. American landrace varieties of hops typically contain higher alpha-acid levels, so IPAs and DIPAs are in a class of their own, no better and no worse than old-world beer styles (subject to opinion). Balance should not be used as a blanket term for all beers, but a descriptor of quality per style.

 

In my mind, its relative to the style. You get beers like Hoptimum thats an explosion of hops and bitterness and it's not balanced. (not saying thats a bad thing they didn't go for balance). Then you have Brooklyn East India Pale Ale and there's plenty of hops but also plenty of malts in there too. That's my opinion and what I mean when I call an IPA balanced.

 

An IPA with a ton of malt in conjunction with the hops isn't balanced - just really sweet and malty. The best IPAs can display hoppy flavors without relying on too much malt or bitterness.

A great example of a balanced IPA would be something like Lunch: tons of juicy hop flavors, minimal bitterness, and malt that's only 'perceptible enough'. A not great example of a balanced IPA would be, I don't know, Sam Adams Latitude 48: inoffensive and meh. The whole argument of balance goes both ways.

 

I have no problem with the term being applied to IPAs or DIPAs. Just as long as 'balanced' is applicable to the beer in question according to the style.