IPA Ignorance

I provided links to each letter in my post, they're taken from Carlsberg group's website where they have a number of transcribed letters from Carl and JC. The letters really give a good insight into the relationship between the two and the push by JC for Carl to take up ale and porter brewing, and the travels undertaken by both. You can refine the search by author and recipient to just Carl and JC for a better overview of the timeline and the back and forth between them.

Would around a pound of dry hops per barrel be a typical amount for a pale ale/india pale ale at the time? From what I've read so far this seems to be one thing which distinguishes the IPAs of the 19th century with today's IPAs, they used alot of hops (say 3kg or more per HL beer), but much of the hops were used in the boil rather than as dry hops, whereas today the emphasis is on the dry hopping amounts (aided by the use of high alpha hops/hop extracts in the boil).

 

I have Homebrewed some of you recipes, and I am a believer.

 

Well I think there is a lot of offense taken by the way the post was worded. "Ignorance" being one of the indicators that you are going to start off the thread with flames. That said go out and buy the damned beer before you chastise people who have bought the beer and reviewed it.

 

Neshaminy calls that thing an english DIPA and it uses english hops, but man I really don't think that thing is close to what "style" it claims it is. It's got american IPA written all over it. Also, an old American IPA really shouldn't be considered an english IPA just because it's more delicate hop flavors have faded..

 

As it pertains to this point I thought I would provide some excerpts from the book Handbuch für den Amerikanische brauer und mälzer from 1896-1897(discussing American brewing practises):

Page 530:
"For light ales such as Present Use Ale, Lively Ale, Still Ale and such they use per barrel circa 1.25-1½ lbs of hops, for heavy ales such as Stock Ale, Pale Ale about 2½ lbs per barrel beer. For Californian "Steam beer" somewhat more hops are used than for lager beer - circa 1-1.33 lbs."

Page 553:
"Typically they also add some hops to the barrel, particularly for India Pale Ale, for which around ½ to one pound of hops is used."

Page 553:
"Stock ale" and especially "East India Pale Ale", which is brewed very strong - 17 degrees Balling and above -, after fermentation, remains in barrels for 6 to 12 months and recieves, as was noted above, additional hops in the barrels."

 

Patrik,

For your consideration in 1878 the British military issued specifications for the IPAs they would purchase.

· “Hops had to be used at 29 pounds per quarter minimum (about 4-5 lbs. per barrel), plus 11 pounds new hops in the dry hop in barrels.”

The above information is from Mitch Steele’s IPA book; page 78.

Cheers!

Jack

 

Patrik (@Crusader) you might also be interested in:

“Michael Combrune in the 1760's (a brewer) wrote that hops should be used at 1 lb per quarter for every month beer was to keep. If the beer was kept for 18 months, it would be 6 lbs per barrel.”

In Mitch Steele’s IPA book he mentioned: “IPA was aged in wood casks at least nine months before it was shipped to India…”

If you assume a ship passage of 6 months this would ‘translate’ to about 15 months of aging before consumption.

Cheers!

http://www.mbaa.com/districts/NewEngland/Events/Documents/2012_01_20HistoricExtremeBeers.pdf

 

29 lbs per quarter is a very high hopping rate, even for IPA. It looks very high for a minimum. Highest I can find doing a quick searh is 1839 Reid IPA again, at just over 28. But that came to 6.5 lbs per barrel, even though it was a weedy 1056º OG. To hop at 29 lbs per quarter and come to 5 lbs per barrel, assuming a very conservative yield of 80 lbs per quarter, the beer would need to be about 1040º. Apologies for the nerdiness. Have to watch some TV with Dolores now.

 

To be fair, if you wanted a true English original IPA, you would have to have experience a secondary fermentation in barrels that were most likely infected with Brett...

This is not my own theory, but one posited from Mitch Steele

 

Yup, the presence of Brett in the wood of the barrels would result in a beer that is extremely attenuated (dry).

Cheers!

 

Hmm, would a beer like Orval be more representative of such a beer?

Ignoring the use of Belgian ingredients and speaking strictly to the overall flavor profile (dry, bitter, Brett characteristics...etc.).

 

IMO the answer is no.

There are a variety of Brett strains and each strain will result in varying flavors profiles based upon the specific Brett strain and the beer that the Brett is acting upon.

First, maybe a little history may be useful/interesting here. The word Brettanomyces means "British fungus" and was first identified at the Carlsberg brewery in a British ale. Below is something I posted previously on this topic:

“While yeast as a living organism was not discovered until 1857 by Louis Pasteur, brewers and bakers were aware of yeast as a needed ingredient. British brewers were cognizant that ‘something’ was adding tartness to their stock ales and porters in the 1700’s. Another recognition of ‘something’ was that the IPAs of the early 1800’s would come out being exceptionally dry (very low final gravities) when they were aged in wooden barrels for extended periods of time. They did not know the specifics of the science (i.e., Brett living in the wooden barrels conducting a secondary fermentation within the barrel) at that time but the effects were certainly recognized.”

Now, back to specific topic of Orval. I have homebrewed two batches of Orval clone. The critical thing here is:

· Primary fermentation with a Belgian Ale yeast strain which has the characteristic of having the POF (phenolic off-flavor) gene. The specific strain that is used to primary ferment Orval is referred as the Bastogne yeast strain by homebrewers and is available as WLP510 (see link below). WLP510 is a POF yeast strain.

· Secondary fermentation with a specific Brett strain: Brett Brux which is available as WY5112 and WLP650

The combination of the phenols produced by the Bastogne yeast strain followed up by the secondary of the specific Brett strain of Brett Brux results in flavors that are described as: barnyard, wet hay, horse blanket, etc. The Brett Brux ‘processes’ the phenols to produce compounds that have the aforementioned funky flavors.

Since for Orval the Brett Brux is added at bottling (secondary fermentation within the bottle: bottle conditioning) the flavors of barnyard take some time to develop; the rule of thumb is after 6+ months of warm conditioning time.

For further clarification, the British Ales would not have the same flavor profile as Orval since the British Ale yeast strains do not have the POF (phenolic off-flavor) gene. No phenols would be available for funky flavor compounds to be produced.

Cheers!

http://www.whitelabs.com/yeast/wlp510-bastogne-belgian-ale-yeast

 

Some more notes by JC Jacobsen from 1869:

"I have examined the sediment of Youngers India Pale Ale* with the microscope and have found that this sediment for the most part does not contain beer yeast, but rather vinegar-ferment of the exact kind, which Pasteur describes and depicts. Additionally there were some of the various ferments, which Pasteur has found in Vins tournés, Vins graisses, and Vins amers. On the other hand the sediment from Youngers strong ale contains almost solely true yeast cells, for the most part withered, and some ferments of Vins tournés. Bass's pale ale contains on the other hand solely pure beer yeast-cells and not a trace of other ferments of any kind. Since I do not know how old the Bass's pale ale (which I recieved) is at bottling I do not know, if there is something notable in that it shows itself entirely free from acid. I would therefor very much like to have a couple of bottles of Bass's India pale ale, which is supposed to be an entire year old and have been laid down over the summer, but as I understand it it is not sold at home in England and therefor you can most likely not get me reliable samples of this when you visit Burton.

*This Ale tastes not a little acidic."

Some notes from Carl Jacobsen from 1869:

"First I have to confirm that the beer really lies under open skies. I refer to the concurrent information of my guides in the seven breweries I visited, of which in many cases it was the brewmaster himself which showed me around. In the large breweries there are tens of thousands of these barrels laying around, I saw them placed in the railway cars, I saw them cover them up in some ways against the sun, I often drank beer from them."

"They prefer to keep the beer under roof, but it is too expensive and there is no doubt that there are immense quantities that are placed outside all summer."

"The Bass and Burton ale in general was brewed to 15% Balling - 14% Kaiser. Youngers is lighter to 13-14% Balling."

"When it is so that the somewhat higher fermentation temperature can act to keep the beer in greater heat, then this is an important basis for why the English beer keeps in higher temperatures. The fermentation for India pale ale starts here at 15C and goes to 22C (maximum). When one to this brings to mind the fable-like amounts of hops + (dry hops in the barrels) with which the beer is brewed, the matter no longer appears as increadible to me. In Burton they use for India pale ale over 20 pounds hops per quarter. The strong attenuation of the beer, by which it only keeps a small amount of fermentable matter and a greater amount of alcohol can also contribute to prevent a strong secondary fermentation. Not without importance it is perhaps that the barrels are covered inside by a solution of double sulphurous acid although this probably only protects against oxygenation through the wood's pores."

 

You'll have to argue with the Head Brewer at Neshaminy Creek. All English Malt, all English Hops, all English Yeast strains. Seems to me it's an English Dipa.

 

I mean technically speaking there is no such thing.. (as english DIPA)

 

Is the 9% thing throwing you? Certainly the original brew was purely English. It s not claiming to be original, or a retro, or a historically accurate brew, it's only claim is an English based IPA which it is.

 

They are already two separate categories: English IPA & American IPA. So what exactly is OP complaining about?

 

People used to laugh at me when I said Orval was the closest thing to a 19th-century IPA around. My guess is that is exactly what it was originally aiming for.

 

9% ABV is way stronger than any IPA brewed in Britain ever was.

 

But.... a 9% +, extremely hoppy beer would be comparable to which style? Is this an issue of adhering to a strict understanding/definition of what IPA meant?