The American IPA Enigma

I like that... CPAs

 

Barry, if you have a 'certified' IBU palate I will send these beers your way for 'testing'.

Maybe someday you will obtain data from Tree House and a myriad of other breweries that are brewing these so called 'NE' style IPAs which will validate your claim of "typically >40 IBUs".

Cheers!

 

I believe according to Nate Julius is >100 theoretical IBUs. Didn't someone have it measured at 60ish actual? Isnt impossible to go over 80 something actual. Abner is 170 Theoretical...

IBUs are such a stupid way to classify something in my opinion, they're pretty much complete bullshit. A super dry beer, made with Chico, and water profile designed to accentuate bitterness will give you a much different perception compared to the same IBUs made with a softer/different yeast strain, much higher FG, and different water profile.

 

Perceived bitterness and measurable IBUs would really be different things. They can actually test for IBUs in finished beer regardless of malt profile. (That is my basic understanding)

 

I make my NE-IPA's with West-Coast IPA bitterness... Theoretically, as much as 300 IBU before with fantastic end results. With Conan/London Ale, the esters really hinder some of that bitterness "punch" and I have found it hard honestly to over-bitter for my tastes.

I would never, ever brew NE IPA with anything less than say 50-60 IBU. I absolutely hate the sweet variants of the style, far too imbalanced.

 

I brew beer to drink, not compete.

However,

Others love to enter contests, so, here's my idea.

1. Some alleged committee of experts decide where the IBU and ABV levels are which will be nearly impossible seeing everybody has a different opinion.

2. By some chance of sanity , there is an agreement, so all entries must be run thru a mass spec or other machine to measure these levels.

3. Then finally, the tasting which again is silly to me.

 

When I had a Greene King IPA in London, it was not as bitter as the Ordinary Bitters that I had had around town. Not very bitter at all.

 

IBUs can be tested in finished beer but the methodology used to complete the testing can provide markedly different measurements. Manual iso-octane extraction can detect aroma additions as bitterness, while the iso-alpha-acid extraction method does not. It's extremely difficult to discuss IBUs since we rarely know which laboratory method was used or if it's just theoretical units. If it is theoretical are we using the Rager or Tinseth scale? Then there's actual vs. perceived bitterness and all of the variables that go into that. Quite a rabbit hole...

At the homebrew scale I think it's important to pick a theoretical scale, use a method to estimate whirlpool/steep additions, and consistently apply that approach to all recipes. After brewing a batches you may find that "X IBUs" is intensely bitter or too mild. Understanding how your software and system processes hop additions will calibrate IBUs to your taste form an idea of what X IBUs is on your system. It can be very useful to compare homebrewed beers with theoretical IBUs to commercial beers with measured IBUs to form a baseline of what X IBUs can taste in X style.

 

Jeff, I too have had Greene King IPA (on cask) a number of times. From my perspective that beer is a Bitter Ale regardless of the labeling that the brewer uses for that beer.

Cheers!

 

Agreed, and not a very bitter Bitter.

 

That is (sort of) the problem. Beers that different from each other should not be considered the same style.

 

IPA is just, like, a social construct, maaannnn....

 

I think Gordon has more or less said that NEIPA will be a subcategory under Specialty IPA.

About 110 is the cosmic speed limit for IBUs, at least via normal brewing methods. I imagine someone will (or has) figure out a way to do it un-naturally.