New England IPA

Isn't this counter intuitive to your argument? If you can't call it an IPA, maybe it should have it's own classification...

Okay, I can respect that on a consumer level. But on a homebrew competition level a beer like that murky glass of OJ would be dinged for its looks. While BJCP has made ammendments for white red black blue green and fuschia IPA's, whats the harm in making one more for, if not new England or NE ipa, these types of soft mouthfeel low bitter high aroma and flavor type beers?

 

Is this a joke I'm not understanding...

 

Yes

 

Okay, re: water, does anyone have quotes/primary sources indicating to what extent some of these NE brewers fiddle with their water profile? You see a lot of, "Oh man, Hill Farmstead has that great well water they use," but if Shaun Hill is adjusting it with chlorides/sulfates/etc., does the water source even matter anymore? And this doesn't even touch on the larger issue of this bizarre assumption that all of these NE breweries, though they may be hundreds of miles apart, apparently all have a water profile that lends to "soft" mouthfeel? Count me skeptical.

 

from the Mad Fermentationist "When I posted my tips on brewing better hoppy beers a few months ago, Shaun Hill (of Hill Farmstead) chimed in on the blog's Facebook page to suggest that, in addition to sulfate, he thinks using chloride is key to treating the water he uses for hoppy beers. He wouldn’t give me his specific target, but I decided to try increasing the chloride in my water." http://www.themadfermentationist.com/2012/03/india-amber-ale-recipe.html

As far as that is concerned, anyone can add brewing salts in specific ratios/thresholds and get the same water as anyone else. The source doesn't really matter unless they are using it straight without modification.

 

Most don't submit beers, but when they do.

 

And they don't look like this. There are great IPAs from all over. No question. But the immensely opaque, unfiltered, unpasteurized, supper hoppy but non-bitter IPAs I get from Trillium, Hill Farmstead and others are really not similar to what I've had from the west coast or midwest. I do not think they need a new style, but anybody who thinks the stuff below is anything like Pliny the Elder or many other "west coast" IPAs hasn't had them.

 

Correct, that article was a a lot of educated guesses based on my clone attempts and ~13 years (at that time) brewing experience along with some advice from the brewers themselves. With that said, what Vinnie did was like a giant Christmas present given to homebrewers and what Stone has openly done in the past...Deschutes is another that is extremely open...and finally Modern Times, but it's not quite the norm and nor should it really be. Disclosing recipe is one thing disclosing techniques is whole nother thing.

For those brewers that don't disclose much, can you blame them? You start by saying that you do understand, but then says it annoys you. Are you a homebrewer? If so, then you should understand more so. That is a huge part of the fun in it!! (at least for me...the challenge)

These beers represent years of testing and tweaking and fine tuning to master a craft...and you want them to just hand over all their secrets? That's a level that even as a homebrewer, I don't expect nor do I practically feel comfortable getting from them. JC from Trillium has been very generous dishing out advice to homebrewers....see the September '15 issue of BYO. But at a certain point as a homebrewer...you need to take responsibility for mastering the craft. Why should a homebrewer be able to brew a Heady Topper clone on their third batch of homebrew when it took John Kimmich probably close to decade to get it where it is today. It rubs me the wrong how so many people just "expect" brewers to hand over their trade secrets, just because Vinnie did so. At a certain point, you the homebrewer need to try some experimenting on your own.

 

Why? Because that is how the craft advances! How do you think the styles evolved to get where they are today? Why do we continually see better beer across the board? Because brewers in general share the information for the advancement of the art of brewing. Sure you will have those that hold their "secrets" close but those secrets are usually such a simple thing that once its found out, likely by the experimentation of homebrewers like us, they become regular everyday additions to recipes or styles.

 

As a point of further discussion, there is a clone recipe for Trillium Fort Point Pale Ale in the Sept. issue of BYO.

Cheers!

 

Vinnie has said you will make a beer like PTE, but it won't be the same as you don't have the same equipment and process (Ken Grossman has also said almost the same thing about SN's beers). If you don' think equipment has an influence, ask any brewerynthat expands how long it was befor they got the beer tasting the same, and that is under the same roof with the same ingredients, water, and Brewers.

 

I'm not quite going to go along with what you're saying, there is some hint of agreement here. While sharing part of their process or recipe that they found maybe everybody should be doing is one thing...like John Kimmich openly sharing about his yeast or his opening sharing that one big reason for his success is that he doesn't filter and wants the yeast in the beer to gobble up O2 during transfers...that to me is them helping every body. Giving their dry hop secrets or combo or special whirlpool technique or whatever the case maybe to get a slight edge over their competition, whether hoppy or barrel aged or whatever beer it is...well that is their for the keeping imho.

While true, a homebrewer will probably almost never get an "exact' clone, you still need to respect at a certain level that this is their livelihood and end of the day need to keep sales up. If you want to talk about closed books, techniques & recipes...try talking to most European brewers.

And a great story on cloning the original Michelob

 

Like I prefaced, I was doing some arbitrary bitching, fully acknowledging the impracticality/naivete/etc of requesting that breweries share their trade secrets with each other. I don't at all blame them for not wanting to do so, and clearly stuff like Vinnie/Stone/Deschutes is the exception to the rule. But I'm pretty thankful for those exceptions.

What I was really trying to get at is that I think there's this bizarre mythos surrounding certain NE breweries and their hoppy beer (be it Heady, HF, Trillium, whoever). Such mythos doesn't exist with West Coast-style IPAs, because those dudes have been willing to more openly discuss how they do what they do. I get that, as @stonermouse noted elsewhere, there's absolutely zero competitive benefit by giving out all your trade secrets. And, once more, my plea is only half-serious -- I don't really want, nor think it reasonable, for everyone to release a step-by-step guide to brewing Heady/Abner/whatever. I'd just love to see the information about these brews filled in a little more, to help reduce that bizarre mythos.

I also work in an industry where open data sharing is almost a requirement, so I'm probably biased in that direction

 

“I'd just love to see the information about these brews filled in a little more, to help reduce that bizarre mythos.”

Based upon numerous posts in BA (both this forum and the homebrewing forum) it is my guess that this “bizarre mythos” is selling a lot of beer (and creating a lot of ‘excitement’ in the homebrewing community).

If I were Jean-Claude Tetreault, I would do exactly as he is doing. ‘Fueling’ this “bizarre mythos” has got to be commercially beneficial for him.

Maybe Jean-Claude Tetreault is taking something from the Donald Trump playbook!?!

Cheers!

 

Sorry to burst your homer bubble, but the East Kings sub-sub-style is far superior to anything coming out of Queens...

 

You're right, a category for too dark IPA's that are photographed and then altered with a filter to look really red is something that needs to happen! LOL!

 

Looks like you said that prior to anything being divulged about filters soooo.....

 

Right. That's the point. You're arguing for a category to be made for a beer that doesn't actually exist as the photo depicts it since it's my comments about a photoshopped pic that you're basing things on.

 

People that define NE IPAs by the look - haziness are kinda crazy. It's nothing special, just means it hasn't been filtered or centrifuged. Its just yeast.

 

You've got me there my man as I know nothing about homebrew competitions or BJCP judging. I just like good IPAs, no matter where they come from.