It's time to be honest about styles

I am even more confused now as to what makes an ale, an ale? And what makes a lager, a lager?
My comment/reply to you earlier was not snide in any way, but honestly a request to educate me, as I provided the sources of my own misunderstanding

 

I've never seen a beer labeled as a kolsch that didn't at least resemble a kolsch pretty well.

 

Too many beer geeks are to neurotic about a beer being true a style with often imaginary guidelines. If the name or styles gives you a proper idea about what you are getting what is the issue?

 

Do you also wish that Breweries wouldn't call it an "Imperial IPA" or "Double IPA" because that too is a more modern American craft brewing invention and has as little to do with IPA or India as a so called "Black IPA". It's essentially the same argument. You start with a beer that very much is an IPA and then you change a little bit about it and call it some variation on IPA. It's still an IPA at heart and I personally like the use of IPA in the name since that tells me a lot more about the beer than "American-Style Black Ale" or whatever the Brewer's Association decides it should be called next week.

Let's say a Brewery next week decides to make an IPA, and then age it with cranberries... not sure why the would do this, but say they do. Can they call it a Cranberry IPA? I can't think of any name that would better describe the beer. So why then, when a brewery makes a beer that is in all other respects an IPA, except for the color, do we get all freaked out if they call it [insert color] IPA?

 

Also IPA translates to $$$$ for brewers so of course they'll call a pitch black stout that's dry hopped an IPA.

 

Styles/types are a contract between people that establish certain expectations. Could be between a seller and a consumer, a brewer and a judge, an apprentice and a manager, etc. For that contract to be useful and lasting, it needs to be rigid enough to be meaningful, and flexible enough to evolve. Sometimes the expectations set by the contract are intentionally or accidentally broken. It's a dialogue. It's incredibly useful. It's not the be all and end all.

 

You will not get a 100% unambiguous answer here since there are differing viewpoints based upon geography/culture (e.g., Great Britain, Germany) and time (beer history). A number of people think that an ale results from brewing with ale yeast and a lager results from brewing with lager yeast but other folks have differing opinions.

For example, in the past (and present) in Great Britain they refer to beers as being Ales and Stouts/Porters. In the US, many (most?) folks view a Stout and a Porter as being an Ale. A hefeweizen is brewed with an ale yeast but Germans do no call that beer an ale.

There are beers brewed in Germany with ale yeast that are then conditioned cold (lagered); Alt and Kolsch beers. Some people views these beers as being hybrid beers, some folks view these as ales (since they are brewed with ale yeast) and some may refer to them as lagers since they are lagered.

Cheers!

 

Im no beer expert but its pretty clear White IPA, Black IPA, and Red IPA, are made up styles and should be done away with.

 

Aren't all beer styles made up at some point in history? The fact is, there is beer out there that tastes like an IPA, but is dark in color. We can call it whatever we want. But does any name convey to the consumer what they should expect more so than "Black IPA?"

Again, I will point to "Imperial IPA." That style was made up in the 1990s, most agree by Vinnie of what is now Russian River Brewing. Why are we not calling for the elimination of all references to Imperial IPA?

 

Which beer styles aren't "made up"?

And if they aren't "made up" then how did they come to be? Naturally-occurring?

 

I think it's getting tough to discern between some of these pale ales and IPAs, that's for sure. But my biggest pet peeve when talking about beer styles is when (yes, this is a very specific complaint) breweries that make IPAs label them as "west coast" when they are simply just plain IPAs. Yes, BBC, I am directly looking at you and Rebel IPA as the most current example. Label you beer what it is, not what you think will sell!

 

i get sick of IPAs being labeled as pale ales for marketing and hype reasons. heres to looking at u ZD.

 

I've always had a problem with the name IPA to begin with. They tend to be more of a warm, honey/orange color. Why not India Orange Ale? </sarcasm> As previously said, it's because the grain bill is extreme majority pale malt.

Now as far as Sixpoint, I will say that it is was a little frustrating at first to go into the beer store and have to look up the beers on BA in order to determine what style it is before knowing whether or not I'd like to drink it. That being said, BA calls Sweet Action a Cream Ale...but when I picked it up and drank it, it didn't really taste like a cream ale. And really, that's because it's not - it's Sweet Action, it is it's own thing.

The point I'm trying to make here (which is resonating with a few others here) is that, while styles can help a little in understanding what you're about to imbibe and whether or not you'd like to imbibe it, taking styles too literally is detrimental to the process. Loose characterizations are great, they help navigate the beer world, but treating beers like showdogs is pointless.
Does calling a beer a White IPA instead of a super-hoppy wit do anything for the way it tastes? Probably not. But does scolding the brewer for calling it a White IPA do anything to help promote craft? Probably not.

 

No, I do not wish so. The term "imperial" derives historically from Russian Imperial Stout, where "Imperial" referred to the Russian Imperial Court to/for which this stronger version of Stout was shipped. "Imperial", in this context, refers to stronger than the original, base style. In this context it works, as it refers to stronger X style.

Along this vein, I agree with brewers referring to their IPAs as "Fresh Hop", "Wet Hop", "Session", and other such adjective descriptors that further define what this India Pale Ale is.

The difference here is the adjective is being adopted for use to describe the beer, not the noun - the style itself -- being adopted to describe another beer that's altogether different.

As noted, BeerAdvocate doesn't call them Black IPAs either. The style name of the beer should come to tell a person a lot about the beer, period. Just as India Pale Ale has come to tell people to expect a pale (in Pale Ale terms) colored beer with hop-forward characteristics (and provide a hint as to the historical connection of the style), American Black Ale thus comes to tell people to expect a dark (in Porter/Stout terms) colored beer with hop-forward characterisitics (and provide a hint as to the historical connection to country of origin).

Note that not all American Black Ale-style beers have IPA-level hop characteristics. 21st Amendment Black in Black is one of many examples.

Keep in mind that what are now being called "Red IPAs" (for marketing and sales purposes, as others here have pointed out) were in many cases not originally called that and were not brewed as IPAs at all in the first place. Examples include Green Flash Hop Head Red, and brews from Odell and others as mentioned by other posters. These are American Red Ales (originated on the West Coast...hop-forward Red Ales), as opposed to American Amber Ales (East Coast interpretations inspired by success of the West Coast Red, but with a more balanced malt bill).

Worthty of noting here, too, that Stone's Sublimely Self Rightous Ale never had "Black IPA" on the label until this most recent label re-design.

Sure, they could call it a Cranberry IPA, just as Bell's calls their Stout infused with cherries "Cherry Stout". In the end, the style is Fruit Beer.

Here's another way of looking at it. When a person walks onto an automobile dealer's lot and says, "I want a car", and the dealer asks, "What would you like; we have sedans, coupes, crossovers, SUVs, SUTs, pickup trucks, vans, minivans, hybid electrics..." and the person answers, "A car, you know, I want a car, a black car", but the person really wants an SUV, one can see where it makes sense to have these categories -- styles names -- of automobiles that mean something and distinguish them from one another.

 

Hasn't this poor dead horse been beaten enough?

 

It didn't? It's my understanding that stouts evolved from porters which have always been ales (unless of course you're talking about Baltic Porters). I did find some info on this forum: http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/difference-between-stout-porter-ale-lager-110407/index2.html (scroll down to remilard's post) but it's not very specific so I'm still kind of confused. Were porters and stouts originally brewed with ale yeast or lager yeast?

 

Yes

 

Yes, for people who've been engaged with the site and the forums for more than a year. But as long as the Bros. allow new people to register for the site and don't require that they read through all old threads before being allowed to post questions and opinions there will be re-hashes of topics like this one.

 

I was at Noble Ale Works the other day and asked their head brewer why he calls Naughty Sauce a golden milk stout. He said something pretty interesting. He said it doesn't really make sense and that it mostly helps people order at the bar with some idea of what the are getting into and that it helps keep lines moving and beer in bellies. Pretty good point and I found myself worrying less and less about style names after that.

On the same note though I love it when people use the place it was brewed as part of the style. For example, Stone 15th anniversary Escondidan Imperial Black IPA, or Monkey Paw's Muriquoi Imperial San Diegain Pale Ale. What does escondidian consist of?!?!?!

 

It seems that it is easier to tell someone they are wrong on this site, rather than tell them what is actually right.
Part of that is due to misinformation, most of which is propogated by this site. The Beer Styles, and Beer 101 sections of this site are often contradicted by what many post here as the truth. I don't blame anyone who took the time (myself included) to read up on beer using this site as the source (written by the Bro's or their staff) only to be told it is not accurate.

Perhaps Marquis or Jesskidden can offer more accurate information on those pages so that when people read them, what they think is correct, is actually correct?