The difference between Pale Ale and IPA

I was lucky and a friend gave me a relatively fresh can of ZD that I drank last night. I’m not sure if it’s because I haven’t had it in a while (well over a year) I hadn’t had a beer in a week, or influence of this thread but the taste leaned more towards how I would describe an APA than I remembered. The citra hops are allowed to shine and compliment, not overpower, the malt base.

 

Not sure why they don’t distribute to Michigan. I wonder if they know how much closer they are to Michigan than Massachusetts and Connecticut.

 

I would say 7% is very wrong as it would render the vast majority of IPAs brewed from the beginning of time APAs.

 

Yes! 100%. The session IPA is the biggest fraud ever concocted in beer. That's like calling Guinness a "session imperial stout". Grinds my gears so hard. A session IPA is nothing more than a dry pale ale.

 

IMO, the difference is in the starting gravity and IBU. Pale ales are around 1.052- 1.055 and anything above is an IPA. 1.055 down to 1.008 is about 6%. 1.065 down to 1.008 is about 7.5% ABV. IBU of IPA are probably above 70?

 

ABV is the difference.

 

Brits may think otherwise. The abv range of their IPAs tend to align in strength with the range that pale ales do on this side of the pond.

 

I think one of the Alstrom Bros, and I’m sure many others have, said it best. One brewers amber is another brewers pale is another brewers IPA is another brewers x2IPA. This debate is rooted in the almost the same semantics as Porter vs stout.

 

I disagree with this. I like style guidelines to be followed. It allows me to know what I’m about to buy. Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.

 

Meh. Take it up with the brewers who you think mislabeled the style of beer they brewed.

 

No.
Stouts are Ales.
Over here, Stouts are Ales.

Here's the thing with words and the English language. The English don't own English, not anymore anyway. We Americans are perfectly capable of stewarding the English language all by ourselves. We even have history books and scholars of our own you know.
Marquis my good man, we have been through this before, so take a seat while I explain, again.

If 330,000,000 people call a stout an ale well, you see where this goes. We say a stout is an ale. And that's the end of it man. At least for Americans. Argue all you want but this language is living. We don't speak like Shakespeare. Nor do the English and they may as well stop fooling themselves. Stout has been an Ale all my life. Yes, it has! Sorry to disagree but no apology is forthcoming.

Put away history. Stop with what a sign on your local says. Nobody cares what Martyn Cornell has to say (his scholarly teaching not withstanding). And that is all there is to it. Living in a world where beer language stopped evolving during Queen Victoria's reign is just not happening.

Ales are top fermented. Lagers are bottom fermented. Prove us Yanks wrong.
But it's still true, and nothing you say is going to change this. And here our common language separates us, as Churchill observed. Correct American English with history, usage and your observations all you want but please understand, our language is decidedly not British.
Sorry to break this news to you but that is just how it is. Words have meaning.

Stouts are top fermenting.
Stouts are Ales.
End of story.

But still,
Cheers

 

What about obergariges lagerbier?
And what about bottom fermented Baltic Porters?

 

Joining your last two comments, lets think of terminology as an instrument to reveal or highlights specifics. Colloquial language of will be different to one practised among experts or that used to elucidate a culture. And neither possesses the taxonomic coherence that people want to bless them with. The insistance of a stout being an ale says as much about a culture values they exist within as the separation of two as different concepts. Both project a future of different possibilities. The point is to recognise the inherent concepts and practises in the usage of words, their limitations and the way the work (and structure understanding).

The common usage of Lager in the anglo-saxon cultures to describe Lager Beer (Pilsner Beer, ..) creates the same confusion since it's taken as synonym for a (false) binary of two 'kinds' of yeasts (the outdated fixed categorization of top- and bottom-fermenting).

I'd happily claim that you can't brew a Kellerbier with US grown Pils malt and modern US hops, but you can brew a Kellerbier in south Germany with top-fermenting yeast. Kellerbier is a type of southern (commonly cold-fermented) German Lagerbier directly linked to the local practise of agriculture, malting, sharing of knowledge, brewing technology and societal factors (cost, legal, drinking culture). It might be better described by its constraints but that doesn't make for great tasting notes.

Slow is smooth and smooth is fast.

 

While you herd those cats, I'll be over here drinking a beer.

 

Yeah, but what type of beer!?!

Cheers!

 

You have me here.

But I am only conceding obergariges lagerbier.

Cheers.

 

The type I had earlier...

 

While there is definitely some overlap, by definition(2015's Beer Judge Certification Program) APA is 30-50 IBU and 4.5-6.2 ABV, while American IPA should be 40-70 IBU and 5.5-7.5 ABV. So, Zombie Dust lives at the upper end of the APA range/low end of the American IPA range @ 50 IBU and 6.2 ABV. I guess it's the brewer's choice as what to label it.

 

The BJCP guidelines are to enable judges in beer competitions to compare like with like. They never claimed to be definitive. They contain many inaccuracies and errors.

 

The difference is very slight, mostly the India part. Depends on the brewer too, I’ve had beers label as PAs that we’re stunningly bitter, I’ve had IPAs that were a hair over 6%. Brewers discretion as to what to label it, I’d say most lean towards adding India for marketing purposes.