Session IPAs. I don't get it

Its much harder to produce a flavorful low ABV beer than it is to go "full strength". Maintaining a balance is harder at lower ABV as either IBUs or your malt profile can easily get out of sync.

Not sure what fewer has to diminish-meant due to many beers i know of being A single malt and Single Hop beers (SMaSH). You cannot get much fewer than 1 malt,1 hop, Water, Oxygen and Yeast and still call it beer these days.

 

Less weight.

 

But yet the majority (all of the ones I tasted) Session IPAs do indeed taste like hop water.

I appreciate the efforts you personally are taking here to create a 'better' Session IPA. I would encourage you to share your findings with other commercial brewers. Maybe they could learn something from you and in turn produce a 'better' product.

Cheers!

 

Yeah less weight does not mean fewer ingredients.

 

Whether I say less weight or fewer pounds of grain I don't think parsing words will make for any real difference.

Two questions posed by the OP are do we dislike session beer and do we have any problem with the price which I interpreted as asking are we willing to pay the same for a product produced with less (ingredients, pounds, whatever) and my take is they're ok and yes.

 

Late to the party here, but I agree with you .

 

The only one I've had that I've liked was SingleCut's "Billy 18 Watt", if only it weren't $7 for a bottle of it...

 

I've yet to have one that can stack up to SNPA.

 

said it before and i'll say it again......when SNPA in the cooler is 6 months old and the Founder's All Day is only a month old....I'm buying the Founder's

 

Not a fan of the style but I've had a few I enjoy such as Firestone Walker's Easy Jack and Alpine Brewing's Hoppy Birthday. I really don't seek out session IPAs.

 

Billy 18 Watt is my favorite too.

I also like Stone Go to IPA.

 

Agreed. Definitely not hop water. Hopefully this gets released in cans one day.

 

I get the general concept of "less = less cost", but I don't see it that way. Especially when it comes to "this beer has less alcohol, so it should cost less."

If I go to a nice restaurant and order a filet mignon or an upscale pizza place that may charge $11 or a personal pizza, is that any different? I can order three large cheese pizzas at Dominos for the same price, which is far more food and calories.

If I order an espresso, it's FAR less volume and less caffeine than a large coffee at any cafe. And the espresso may cost the same amount (or more).

Sometimes you pay the same or extra for a quality product, and for a specific flavor/taste. Heck, if I can find a quality English mild on cask somewhere, I'll absolutely pay the same amount as that 7% IPA on draft. Find the former, in excellent condition and well brewed, is a diamond in the ruff compared to the latter.

I can understand the "less ingredients" argument (I don't agree with it) more than the "less alcohol" argument though. Isn't a Bud/Miller/Coors "ice" beer at ~5.5-6% the same as the regular beers at 5%, and the light beers at 4.2%?

Have you ever had the chance to try Nightshift's Whirlpool? This beer is definitely not thin, in fact I don't think there's any discernible difference in the body of this 4.5% "session IPA" (labeled as an American Pale Ale) compared to their regular IPAs.

I know you've had Hill Farmstead on occasion, have you ever tried Walden? This is a 4% "session IPA" in my opinion (listed as a Blonde Ale) that fits the bill as well.

A few others that aren't thin (to my palate, at least compared to your Founders All Day's of the world) are Baby Genius from Bissell Brothers and Rising Tide's Maine Island Trail Ale.

Out of all of those, and the one you probably have the best shot of seeing, I would say Whirlpool has the most body.

 

Another reason this concept doesn't make sense is there are scenarios one may want a beer, but minimize their alcohol intake. For example if I go out somewhere and have to drive home a 4%-5% beer has greater value to me than a 8%-10% beer. Even drinking at home I regularly pass on high ABV beers because I like drinking beer, not being drunk.

 

And sometimes, if I drink soda, I want the soda and not the calories. So I pick a Diet Coke.

But boy was I pissed when I found out my 12 pack of Diet Coke was the same price as the regular Coca-Cola.

When I'm at home I'll do the same. For the main reason that I like to have multiple beers. I'll often wait a while to drink that Bourbon County when I realize that I can have four Notch Pils instead. Let's face it, many of these high octane beers don't TASTE high octane, like scotch does for example. So I'm likely to drink it just as quickly as I would a 4% beer. And if I'm sitting on the couch on a Friday night watching TV for a few hours, or even out at the bar with friends...well, I want more than ONE drink.

 

I have not had either of these beers (or others you have mentioned).

Cheers!

 

Exactly.

Furthermore, we participate in a hobby that undeniably has some overlap with alcoholism, so it would behoove us all not to reject lower ABV beers due to a misplaced notion of value related to raw materials.

 

I think watery beer for more money is a session, the bean counters in the office decided would be the next big thing.

Kraft beer is where "session" beer is headed...like those orange singles cheese slices...what is that stuff?