Milkshake IPAs

Let’s see if this trend takes hold before codify it as a style.

 

I would still consider them an NEIPA or NEDIPA.

Cheers!

 

Not sure if a new style is needed yet for milkshakes, it does blur somewhat with the NEIPAs. Kinda like the blur between hazy IPA and NEIPA and we haven’t created a hazy IPA style. What about sour IPAs, or Brett IPAs? Should a Brett IPA be lumped in with other Brett beers? More so the sour IPAs are becoming a “thing” for sure, Im seeing a lot of them in stores and from locals and pretty unique flavor profile in relation to existing IPA styles. Brett IPAs are still fairly obscure but they are around.

 

Agreed

 

I would like to see NEDIPA become a style.

 

If Brut IPAs got their own category, I think Milkshake IPAs deserve their own.

I fully support a milkshake IPA category. The question will be, where do you draw the style guidelines. Does it require both lactose and fruit? And how much lactose? I've had a couple IPAs from Revision that utilized a little lactose, mostly for mouthfeel, but nothing significant. Not to mention Founders' new release, Moon Rambler.

 

Hopefully it will happen.

Cheers!

 

Exactly this.

Not only have Milkshake IPAs been around significantly longer, but they're far more distinguishable in actual flavor and aroma (and ingredients/process), and are far more pervasive in craft beer across the country, at least in the US.

I was actually surprised by Brut being added since so few breweries had made them, and each one I had tasted nothing like the last, and most weren't even "dry" as advertised, let alone noticeably unique from regular pale ales or IPAs. Not to mention that they pretty much fell off the map faster than they came on the scene.

 

Yeah, I almost used Brut IPA as an example of a style that came too soon. And to your point, I haven’t tried enough of these to know how tightly any of them fit within the guide.

 

I don’t think it came too soon. I just had another respectable Brut IPA just a month ago from a local brewer. They still need to be made. I think like most other beer styles there are always a niche market and people who like to change things up.

 

My 5 cents:

During the last few years, a trend/fad in Scandinavia has been beers with added artificial flavourings. The goal is to mimic other foods and drinks. They are often brewed with lactose and lactobacillus to create a sweet-sour base beer.

Some examples:

• Dugges Cola, a sour beer spiced to taste somewhat like a coke soft drink
• Morgondagens Bubblegum, a berliner wise that is supposed to taste like one of those pink fruity bubble gums.
• Dugges / Omnipollo - Anagram, an imperial stout flavoured to taste like a blueberry cheesecake.
• Omnipollo Bianca, a whole series of gose with lactose, fruits and flavourings.
• To Øl Blossom, American wheat ale with Cornflower, Hibiscus, Marigold, Rose flower, and hawthorns and raspberry leave.
• Omnipollo Hetvägg, an IPA brewed to mimic a cardamom-spices wheat bun filled with almond paste and whipped cream (well…).
• Morgondagens Hockeyfrilla, a berliner weisse that is supposed to taste lika an very sour candy-powder with flavours of green apples and raspberries.

Through the yeas, I have had some problems to push beers into the existing categories. Maybe there can be a better solution?

 

What about IPA- Others as a catch all? Think double new england could be added as its own category to help balance

 

Just want to say +1 for adding milkshake IPA as its own style. I see quite a lot of them these days and I think they're distinct enough to warrant separate categorization.

 

I guess it depends on what people really mean by "Milkshake IPA".

Omnipollo and Tired Hands were the first ones to call their beers Milkshakes and the beers in that series have fruit, lactose, and vanilla.

I think a catch-all "IPA-Other" makes more sense to catch all the IPAs that feature fruit, lactose, are kettle soured, or have other ingredients besides water, malted/unmalted grains, hops, and yeast.

 

Well, my solution would be to avoid that list at all costs. (Omnipollo Hetvägg sounds almost obscene.)
But seriously, there will be always outliers that defy categorization. Which means that beer styles will always be a little fuzzy around the edges. Given the subjective nature of taste (sensory or aesthetic), any attempt to precisely define a style is doomed to failure. I'm OK with trying to shoehorn a beer into an existing, broad style rather than sorting through a bunch of style descriptions. ("Wait - was that a wheat bun filled with almond paste, or was it more like a potato roll with cream cheese..."?) Woof.

 

I think the problem here is extensive style drift. A lot of people wouldn’t even recognize Heady Topper (or maybe even the ‘newer’ focal banger) as a NEIPA. A local brewery actually did an amazing rendition of Heady, but started adding oats and making it more ‘juicy’ because people said it wasn’t a hazy. It’s not a bad beer, but it’s nowhere near what it was.
The Haziness used to be a byproduct of some great beers, but now it seems to be a goal for some bizarre reason. There are still some nice ones, but they really need a better way of communicating their product to the consumer.
Maybe I’m becoming the old man yelling at a cloud, but I’d like to know what I’m in for. I’ve practically written off hazy’s because you never know what you’re going to get.

 

I also support a Milkshake IPA category. If a brewer takes the time to make a beer and slap "Milkshake IPA" at the end of the title, then clearly brewers think it's a style. Otherwise, they'd simply slap "IPA" at the end of the title.