The difference between Pale Ale and IPA

The beer store here is kinda alphabetical, it’s only helpful to a guy knows what he might want. Separating the shelves by style seems to make more sense for newer beer buyers who might be overwhelmed.

 

@JackHorzempa
Lists like that and just a List, for me, show a lack of creativity. They don't push the conversation or an understanding. You still fall into the dark lager and "what is hoppy" trap, but if it ain't broke... Yet Saison and other under appreciated, usually regional specific, styles get lost in this framework, especially if there are more than 20 offerings.

I agree that most beers have a primary objective quality, but for example, the diversity of "Sour" price points (if that is the category title) does little to communicate what things actually are or that there is even a difference to the average consumer.

 

They're for all of those things and more. That's why we see competitions have style categories that differ from beer labels and from.any given historian or archive lists. I think there is also an important cultural component. It's not just a marketing gimmick that keeps the "IPA" moniker on modern beers that taste more like a mango lasee and are 9% abv. Those three letters are the tattered end of a thread of using huge masses of hop matter that goes back to a need to preserve a perishable liquid at a distant time and place.

I definitely agree that a lot of value could.be gained from creating a new, modern, uniform system of classification for beer. But I don't think there will ever successfully be a monolithic system because the reasons and goals of the various efforts to categorize are so diverse. Beer is deeply entrenched in a number of different cultures, and those peoples are not going to let go of their traditional classifications (even as they drift organically over time) just for the sake of "efficiency"

 

Agree.

Presumably beer styles exist to help the brewer make beer that the public will like well enough to purchase. So an off flavor is one the public is thought not to like/won't purchase. And style guidelines for all the features of the beer presumably are there to produce beer the public likes best, and to sell more beer.

For the consumer, style names exist so they can tell one beer from another, and explore with confidence. In this way also beer styles are there to help brewers sell beer. The better a customer can tell what to expect of a beer, the more beer that customer will buy.

And for competitions, both pro and amateur, beer styles exist so that brewers can improve their craft, so that they can bring successful competition results into their day to day brewing, which translates to more beer sold and more profit.

There is every reason to believe a system can and will be devised that does all these things much, much better than the system we have now. I guess I am optimistic since I see that it has happened in mycology where there is less profit incentive for such a thing.

 

THANK YOU! Greene King IPA was the beer I was trying to remember before but could only think of Alexander Keith. It's a great example of how time is a factor in beer styles.

Which leads me to...

Agreed 100%. Beer reflects history and culture as much as it the technical or science aspects of brewing. History and culture are messy, so like it or not if you want to understand beer classification you have to wade into at least some part of that mess. Assuming a strict beer taxonomy could even be hoisted upon the world (extremely unlikely), I believe it would sacrifice far more than saves. @cavedave's points about mycology have some parallels to beer, but it's not the best doesn't fit, because beer doesn't have the same firm footing in science (genetics) to base strict classification on, nor does it have a centralized group of worldwide respected experts to lead the change.

And for what it's worth, my degree and career are in a STEM field that relies upon many strict standards, so I have no personal resistance to classifying and organizing things when 1) it is needed and 2) if it can realistically be done. While I can entertain some arguments that formal beer style standards are needed (but it's still not a clear choice), I cannot envision a realistic way to standardize beer styles across the planet. Therefore, I prefer to keep muddling along and enjoying the lovely mess of beer styles we have.

 

I agree 100% here. Just too many 'special interest' groups/people here:

• Some people seem to insist that Country A and how beers were described in the 1800s is the correct way to detail various beer types.
• Some people seem to...
• etc.

Cheers!

 

I don't think contentment to muddle along is the answer. Otherwise, why bother to start a thread like this? Or all the other threads about the utter confusion caused by present style guidlelines? Using that philosophy, couldn't the answer to OP in this thread be, "Who cares? It's so confusing there's no way we can come up with an answer, so let's just muddle on, and go to questions that have answers."

 

In retrospect I could have used a better phrase than "muddle along" because these questions about styles do have answers. The problem is that the answers are more complicated than many people expect, or worse, more complicated than some people are willing to deal with. I don't have much sympathy for latter type of person (to be clear I'm not saying you are the latter type). Furthermore, and related your statement of "confusion caused by present style guidlelines," any attempt to set beer styles will only be valid at that time, humans will move along, culture and tastes will change, and eventually those neat little boxes will get all messy again. So assuming the Herculean task of establishing worldwide accepted beer guidelines is even possible [it's not ], I don't see the value in wiping out the history and culture aspect of beer styles for some people [lazy people?] to place beers in neat boxes for a brief moment in time.

 

I think the confusion is caused more by rapid emergence of a few new styles (or rather the sudden dramatic shift in some styles when new techniques were applied to them) and the globalization of "craft" segment thrusting multiple cultures internal classification system to the forefront.

The type of system you're describing seems like it will most appeal to competition judges and participants who want to compete on the ability to recreate some platonic ideal. When you add in the cultural and personal attachments of individual brewers or the complexities of marketing I think that mycology is a good example, the local common names still adorn the displays at the local markets. And I think beer brewers and marketers will still continue to use their local vernacular or that of their perceived target audience when it comes to labeling

 

I always thought,
If it's maltier it's an APA.
If it's hoppier it's an IPA.
Perhaps if we measured malt presence and IBUs we would have a more precise idea of the difference between the two?
There seems to be a huge overlap between the two, set by the brewers based on their particular markets based on hop haters and hop lovers.
All I know is this, It's great to be alive and I love beer of all kinds and all styles and I'm happy to be a part of the wonderful craft beer we get to experience in The USA.

 

You're right. With a typical higher abv in an IPA compared to a pale ale, there has to be more malt in the IPA, hopefully enough to provide a good malt/hops balance.

 

Yes.

This is a great point. There are many that describe Sierra Nevada Pale Ale as “balanced”. I think it’s far more balanced than an IPA, with a solid malt backbone. But it’s still a hop forward beer to me.

 

We've debated this for years and years, and I'm starting to think, all historical context aside, IPAs should just be considered strong pale ales. I kind of like how Troegs calls their Perpetual IPA an imperial pale ale instead of an India pale ale. Hoppiness or perceived level of hoppiness is an ambiguous concept nowadays. I mean, let's face it: Sierra Nevada Pale Ale seems more "hoppy" and bitter than a lot of the 0 IBU and milkshake IPAs these days. Then you have beers like Born Yesterday, Zombie Dust, and PsuedoSue that really are IPAs for all intents and purposes. But if you brew a hoppy ale in the 5-6% range, might as well just call it a pale ale.

 

Some folks call it a swing blade, I call it a kaiser blade. Mmmm

I'm OK with the ambiguity, always stick with the brewer's classification unless it is completely off base. Below is my shorthand style definitions, and a few of my go-to beers under each.


West Coast IPA = Hops dominate Malt, Dry, Bitter, Pine

• Russian River Pliny The Elder
• Beachwood Amalgamator
• Stone IPA

Midwest IPA = Hops + Sweet Malt Back, Pine and Citrus

• Bell's Two Hearted
• Founder's All Day IPA
• Phase Three Terrazzo

NEIPA = Balanced IPAs (Bitter / Sweet Balance), Tropical Fruit / Citrus *

• Old Nation M-43
• Toppling Goliath Scorpius Morchella
• Equilibrium mc2

American Pale Ale = Lower ABV (4-7%) version of West Coast IPAs

• Sierra Nevada Pale Ale
• 3 Floyds Zombie Dust
• AleSmith .394 Pale Ale

* Contrast vs. ultra sweet unbalanced offerings which I avoid and call sippy cup or juice box beers.

 

Did the East Coast IPA go extinct? I can remember the arguments about east vs west... My how times change, and the beer styles change along with them.

 

If a person were to drink mirror pond next to hopzilla I am pretty sure the most existential purist would agree there is a quantitative difference between the two beers in both malt and hops.

 

It sure would seem so as regards discussion on BA.

East Coast IPAs are still available for sale though, for example Victory Hop Devil.

Cheers!

 

Agreed...see also Harpoon IPA and Brooklyn East IPA. I was just using @ChicagoJ's oversight partly to highlight how tastes and in turn beer styles are constantly changing; and partly to...