New England IPA "Northeast" style IPA

[stickyfinger]

wlp095 will produce a hazy beer. the hops are more important than yeast anyway

 

[mintyice]

wlp095 will produce a hazy beer. the hops are more important than yeast anyway

and yeast is more important than chloride/sulfate ratios

Don't underestimate yeast choice though. This style didn't fully click for me until I switched from 1217 to 1318, but that's just my preference as I try to emulate TH's IPAs.

 

[stickyfinger]

and yeast is more important than chloride/sulfate ratios

Don't underestimate yeast choice though. This style didn't fully click for me until I switched from 1217 to 1318, but that's just my preference as I try to emulate TH's IPAs.

I'm by no means an expert on yeast choice in this style. A few things I know: WLP095 will produce an excellent, round flavor in this style with plenty of haze. It slowly drops clear, but the enormous hopping makes the beer very hazy for at least 6 weeks. US-05 produces too dry, crisp and punchy of a flavor in this style for my taste. I've also had problems with it producing diacetyl after dry hopping and kegging and will not use it again.

I have my first double batch going with Giga Yeast Vermont IPA. If I don't prefer it to the WLP095, I'll just stick with that, as it is easier to get and is at likely better in quality (or at least as good) since it comes from White Labs. Not getting much fruitiness so far from the GY in the fermentation space aromas.

 

[hopbrad]

I'm by no means an expert on yeast choice in this style. A few things I know: WLP095 will produce an excellent, round flavor in this style with plenty of haze. It slowly drops clear, but the enormous hopping makes the beer very hazy for at least 6 weeks. US-05 produces too dry, crisp and punchy of a flavor in this style for my taste. I've also had problems with it producing diacetyl after dry hopping and kegging and will not use it again.

I have my first double batch going with Giga Yeast Vermont IPA. If I don't prefer it to the WLP095, I'll just stick with that, as it is easier to get and is at likely better in quality (or at least as good) since it comes from White Labs. Not getting much fruitiness so far from the GY in the fermentation space aromas.

Conan gets more fruity each generation. I liked generation 2-4 the best. If you want fruity, then make sure to harvest it. better attenuation too.

 

[grassfeeder]

check out some of the yeasts from Imperial. A24 Dryhop is going in mine tomorrow. Last batch had Barbarian (Conan) and had great results. I've also used WLP007 as well - never not had a great hazy beer and I've never had a beer drop out either.

 

[Braufessor]

Personally, I think yeast has very little to do with "haze"..... I have been using 1056 lately and it is just as hazy as conan.... and 1272, and 007, and every other yeast I have used to be honest. Still waiting to try a yeast in these beers that does not leave it hazy.

In my opinion, if yeast is making your beer "hazy" it isn't "hazy" - it is murky.

That said, I have not used 095 - so can't comment on that specifically. I think that low pH is the more likely explanation of your beer being clearer. I think there is something to the low pH and clear beer.

Likewise - it is not Sulfate:Chloride ratio either. The picture I put up a few posts ago is a beer with 140 sulfate: 70 Chloride and it was brewed with 1056 yeast.

Hazy comes predominately from interaction of lots of hops late/post boil/low temp hopping plus hopping in primary. I just have seen no evidence that it really has anything specifically to do with yeast, sulfate/chloride or (with Brulosophy's latest experiment) flaked grains.

There are really only 2 potential contributors left in my opinion:
* The late/dry hopping interactions
* Slightly higher than normal pH (5.4 ish boil, 4.5-4.6 post fermentation)

 

[stickyfinger]

Conan gets more fruity each generation. I liked generation 2-4 the best. If you want fruity, then make sure to harvest it. better attenuation too.

I'll keep re-using it. Does growing it up in a starter count as a generation though? I harvest yeast from my starters as opposed to the fermentor.

 

[stickyfinger]

Personally, I think yeast has very little to do with "haze"..... I have been using 1056 lately and it is just as hazy as conan.... and 1272, and 007, and every other yeast I have used to be honest. Still waiting to try a yeast in these beers that does not leave it hazy.

In my opinion, if yeast is making your beer "hazy" it isn't "hazy" - it is murky.

That said, I have not used 095 - so can't comment on that specifically. I think that low pH is the more likely explanation of your beer being clearer. I think there is something to the low pH and clear beer.

Likewise - it is not Sulfate:Chloride ratio either. The picture I put up a few posts ago is a beer with 140 sulfate: 70 Chloride and it was brewed with 1056 yeast.

Hazy comes predominately from interaction of lots of hops late/post boil/low temp hopping plus hopping in primary. I just have seen no evidence that it really has anything specifically to do with yeast, sulfate/chloride or (with Brulosophy's latest experiment) flaked grains.

There are really only 2 potential contributors left in my opinion:
* The late/dry hopping interactions
* Slightly higher than normal pH (5.4 ish boil, 4.5-4.6 post fermentation)

This makes a lot of sense to me. When I first keg, the beers are somewhat murky due to the yeast and somehop particles even. Over time, you can see the beers clearing ever so slightly so that you can maybe just see through the glass if you look carefully. That must be the yeast cloudiness slowly dissipating as it drops out and the remaining hop-induced-haze remaining.

I hadn't looked at pH too much. Have you compared higher and lower pHs in these beers, or did you just settle on a higher pH and make every beer that way?

 

[Braufessor]

This makes a lot of sense to me. When I first keg, the beers are somewhat murky due to the yeast and somehop particles even. Over time, you can see the beers clearing ever so slightly so that you can maybe just see through the glass if you look carefully. That must be the yeast cloudiness slowly dissipating as it drops out and the remaining hop-induced-haze remaining.

I hadn't looked at pH too much. Have you compared higher and lower pHs in these beers, or did you just settle on a higher pH and make every beer that way?

I have been targeting 5.4 ish simply because that is a number I see recommended often from professional brewers in regard to hoppy beers. Also see information from beers from time to time as well about higher finishing pH's in these beers.

One of the very first things I noticed when I started brewing NE IPA's and targeting 5.4 instead of 5.25-5.3 is that my kettle wort did not drop clear at the end of the boil. These beers are hazy at flame out for me. They are hazy after chilling, they are hazy in the hydrometer - that obviously has nothing to do with yeast or dry hopping. There are only three possible variables that are really at play at this point (before the beer ever even hits the fermenter):
1.) Flaked grains (which Brulosophy's recent experiment seems to discount)
2.) Lots of late hops at sub 170 temps
3.) Higher finishing pH

Other beers that I brew, even with similar grain bills, targeting 5.25-5.3 type pH..... The wort post boil, during chilling drops clear..... really clear. You can read a newspaper through the wort I put in the hydrometer in a "normal" beer. These beers do not do that - they stay very hazy in hydrometer and they do not drop clear - even if I let the sample sit there for a day or two. So, in my experience, it seems like something is already going on at this point in the process that is producing haziness as a byproduct of the process.

Right now, I have several experimental batches going. Maybe for my next batches I will brew two and acidify one to 5.2 and leave the other at my normal 5.4-5.45 range and see if that makes a difference.

I also wonder about the potential for different hops???? Do the hops we focus on (Citra, Simcoe, Columbus, Galaxy, Mosaic......) have oil compositions that play into the production of these polyphenols more than say your traditional IPA hops (Chinook, Cascade, Centennial, etc.)????

At the end of the day though, I think it is important to come back to the fact that the "goal" of these beers is NOT to make them hazy. The goal is that they taste great..... and, for whatever reason - it seems that haziness is an attribute that comes along with the flavors we are chasing. I am mainly just curious as to why that is exactly.

 

[MFerBrew]

I've made this recipe twice now and it has quickly become a favorite.

Question...I just scored some cheap hops. Azacca, Centennial, Summit and Cascade. Do you think any combination of these would work well as a hop substitute? I figured I love the base beer so much, might as well experiment with these bulk hops.

 

[jjw5015]

I've made this recipe twice now and it has quickly become a favorite.

Question...I just scored some cheap hops. Azacca, Centennial, Summit and Cascade. Do you think any combination of these would work well as a hop substitute? I figured I love the base beer so much, might as well experiment with these bulk hops.

I use azacca in mine along with citra and mosaic and it works very well. I'm not convinced the other ones will, maybe centennial.

 

[hopbrad]

I'll keep re-using it. Does growing it up in a starter count as a generation though? I harvest yeast from my starters as opposed to the fermentor.

I would think it sorta counts, probably depends how large it is, the gravity and how stressed the yeast get. but im not a yeast expert. I think your way is the best option for always having healthy yeast on hand.
Its tough harvesting from this beer with all the hops and dry hops mixing in.

Brewing a session beer and harvesting it is a great idea too, i believe that is the advice from the OP.

 

[jjw5015]

I would think it sorta counts, probably depends how large it is, the gravity and how stressed the yeast get. but im not a yeast expert. I think your way is the best option for always having healthy yeast on hand.
Its tough harvesting from this beer with all the hops and dry hops mixing in.

Brewing a session beer and harvesting it is a great idea too, i believe that is the advice from the OP.

I've been wondering the same thing. I make a double starter, pitch half and save the other half for the next starter. I view this as having an infinite amount of re-uses, since it's made into a new starter each time. I have no science behind that opinion, just seems different that pitching on yeast cake, yeast washing, etc. They have a re-use limit.

 

[stickyfinger]

I have been targeting 5.4 ish simply because that is a number I see recommended often from professional brewers in regard to hoppy beers. Also see information from beers from time to time as well about higher finishing pH's in these beers.

I assume you are referring to the room temperature reading of the wort prior to fermentation or prior to boiling? I'd like to see if you can get a clearer wort that has the same hoppiness with a lower pH. Have you tried going over 5.4 to see if it hoppier/hazier still?

Yeah, I only really care about flavor. It does seem when my beers get too clear they lose a lot of their hop intensity though. When they stay cloudy or hazy, they usually taste better for longer.

 

[WI_Wino]

I've made this recipe twice now and it has quickly become a favorite.

Question...I just scored some cheap hops. Azacca, Centennial, Summit and Cascade. Do you think any combination of these would work well as a hop substitute? I figured I love the base beer so much, might as well experiment with these bulk hops.

I've used summit successfully when late hopping in beers. Turned out great, i've never gotten the onion/garlic from them. Just tangerine/citrus.

 

[stickyfinger]

I've been wondering the same thing. I make a double starter, pitch half and save the other half for the next starter. I view this as having an infinite amount of re-uses, since it's made into a new starter each time. I have no science behind that opinion, just seems different that pitching on yeast cake, yeast washing, etc. They have a re-use limit.

So far, harvesting from starters has been a very stable method for me. I always have fairly fresh yeast ready to go. No fuss with hops and trub and such. The only pain is that I have to grow up my starters 100B cells more than my pitching rate each time. It's usually not a big deal, especially with a step up if the yeast is a little old. I also started using continuous aeration with the stirplate and get super fast fermentation of the starter with tons of yeast.

 

[g-star]

There are only three possible variables that are really at play at this point (before the beer ever even hits the fermenter):
1.) Flaked grains (which Brulosophy's recent experiment seems to discount)
2.) Lots of late hops at sub 170 temps
3.) Higher finishing pH

Keep in mind the Brulosophy experiment is one data point and only included flaked oats. Your own recipe calls for flaked barley and flaked wheat, which both may contribute different types or amounts of proteins which stay in suspension and contribute to haze

I don't agree that a 0.10 - 0.15 difference in mash pH is going to make that dramatic of a difference in beer clarity. It does not make much sense from a chemistry perspective - these complex acid/base and related protein precipitation equilibria are almost certainly not centered around that fine of a point.

Agree that the heavy late/dry hopping of high oil varieties is a big contributor - all those oils and terpenes of limited water solubility are not being boiled off and are left behind. Combine that with elevated protein levels (from flaked grains) and powdery yeast strains and you have yourself a hazy beer.

But most of all I agree that haze should be a by-product and not a goal of the style.

 

[murphyslaw]

I have a hard time attributing it to the amount of hops. Ive been tinkering with west coast style ipa that has 5-6 oz in a 160* hop stand and 5 oz in the fermenter and they come out crystal clear.

 

[Braufessor]

Keep in mind the Brulosophy experiment is one data point and only included flaked oats. Your own recipe calls for flaked barley and flaked wheat, which both may contribute different types or amounts of proteins which stay in suspension and contribute to haze

I don't agree that a 0.10 - 0.15 difference in mash pH is going to make that dramatic of a difference in beer clarity. It does not make much sense from a chemistry perspective - these complex acid/base and related protein precipitation equilibria are almost certainly not centered around that fine of a point.

Agree that the heavy late/dry hopping of high oil varieties is a big contributor - all those oils and terpenes of limited water solubility are not being boiled off and are left behind. Combine that with elevated protein levels (from flaked grains) and powdery yeast strains and you have yourself a hazy beer.

But most of all I agree that haze should be a by-product and not a goal of the style.

Yeah - i agree...... I don't necessarily have any reason to think that a small difference in pH would result in the haziness. However, it is something I have noticed (nothing more than my own anecdotal evidence.) But, it has me curious simply because it seems there are so few variables left that explain it.

In the end, I am guessing that no "one" thing will explain the haziness - it is just a byproduct of several interactions.

 

[cheesebach]

As promised, here's a quick photo I just took of my first brew of this beer. It's been in the keg about keg at serving temp for right around 4 weeks now, but I haven't noticed much of a change in clarity since I first started drinking it about 3 weeks ago. It's definitely not clear, but to me, it's similar to the hop haze I've noticed in other heavily late/dry hopped beers I've brewed and not anywhere close to resembling the near juice-like appearance I've seen in this thread and in commercial examples of this style.

It does seem odd that a relatively small difference in mash pH (measured mine at 5.24) could contribute to such a significant difference in clarity, but it's interesting to note that hydrometer samples after the boil haven't cleared as usual for others. I'm fairly sure that my hydrometer sample was nearly the same level of clarity after I gave it a chance to settle. It seems like mash pH is the only thing that could account for the difference at this stage, since the water profile otherwise should be nearly identical to the base recipe in this thread.

 

[EndOfLine]

I have been targeting 5.4 ish simply because that is a number I see recommended often from professional brewers in regard to hoppy beers. Also see information from beers from time to time as well about higher finishing pH's in these beers.

One of the very first things I noticed when I started brewing NE IPA's and targeting 5.4 instead of 5.25-5.3 is that my kettle wort did not drop clear at the end of the boil. These beers are hazy at flame out for me. They are hazy after chilling, they are hazy in the hydrometer - that obviously has nothing to do with yeast or dry hopping. There are only three possible variables that are really at play at this point (before the beer ever even hits the fermenter):
1.) Flaked grains (which Brulosophy's recent experiment seems to discount)
2.) Lots of late hops at sub 170 temps
3.) Higher finishing pH

Other beers that I brew, even with similar grain bills, targeting 5.25-5.3 type pH..... The wort post boil, during chilling drops clear..... really clear. You can read a newspaper through the wort I put in the hydrometer in a "normal" beer. These beers do not do that - they stay very hazy in hydrometer and they do not drop clear - even if I let the sample sit there for a day or two. So, in my experience, it seems like something is already going on at this point in the process that is producing haziness as a byproduct of the process.

Right now, I have several experimental batches going. Maybe for my next batches I will brew two and acidify one to 5.2 and leave the other at my normal 5.4-5.45 range and see if that makes a difference.

I also wonder about the potential for different hops???? Do the hops we focus on (Citra, Simcoe, Columbus, Galaxy, Mosaic......) have oil compositions that play into the production of these polyphenols more than say your traditional IPA hops (Chinook, Cascade, Centennial, etc.)????

At the end of the day though, I think it is important to come back to the fact that the "goal" of these beers is NOT to make them hazy. The goal is that they taste great..... and, for whatever reason - it seems that haziness is an attribute that comes along with the flavors we are chasing. I am mainly just curious as to why that is exactly.

Great post mate. I agree with your conclusions. The haze must be from hop oil in solution. Once again, it all comes back to mash/boil ph. Once again it seems that controlling the water can change everything about a beer, including haziness.

For fun I did a beer expirement in regards to clarity:

I made a "professional" extract IPA. I have not done any extract beers since I became a water/ph nut.

I think that (dme extract) beer gets a bad rap because most beginner brewers use them. I had no idea that one gets the water profile from extract... so you would get double water ions if you used tap water.... I wondered how many off flavors came from that.... anyway I digress.

I used WL 002 English yeast. The IPA was as clear as a lager with no cold crash before dry hops lol. Like day 9, total clarity. Then I dry hopped and later cold crashed. Now I have a hazy IPA!

 

[cheesebach]

Thanks again for all of the input here. There seems to be quite a lot of interest right now in the homebrewing community about what makes these beers turn out the way they do, so it's fun to be able to contribute my own little data point even though my finished beer doesn't scream "NE IPA" when you see it.

The next time I brew this (hopefully before the end of the year), I'll keep the grain bill the same and probably target something around 5.55 in bru'n water to see if that gets me to the 5.4-5.45 mash pH I'm looking for. It sounds like I'll probably be able to tell if it worked before the wort even goes into the fermenter.

Regarding the post-fermentation pH that Braufessor mentioned (4.5-4.6), does anyone know whether the beer being carbonated would affect the pH if I were to measure it now? I've never really had a reason to pay attention to post-fermentation pH before this, so I haven't tried measuring it before.

Also, for Braufessor or any others who may have measured - does a 5.4 mash pH imply a similar pre-boil pH in your setup? I've gone from batch sparging to BIAB for my last few batches (including this one), so the ph in my mash tun/brew kettle at the end of the mash is the same thing as my pre-boil pH. I'm just curious whether those here who sparge are maybe getting a slightly higher pre-boil pH than the 5.4 number from the mash.

 

[stickyfinger]

i would guess that sparge method would impact preboil pH. BIAB is easy. mash pH is preboil pH. fly sparge is potentially most variable, but it might not be that hard to predict preboil pH with it

 

[day_trippr]

Holy haze, batman!

Holy haze indeed!

Ended at 1.009 and tastes like a tropical fruit smoothie!

There's a definite coherency to that - because it totally looks like a smoothie!

Cheers!

 

[Oldskewl]

I still think yeast plays some role in haziness. This is a Bells Two Hearted clone that I had to throw 1318 in because my Bells yeast didn't take off. Dry hop was only 1 oz Centennial from day 11 to day 16 in the primary. This has been in the Keg for about 4 weeks.

 

[Oldskewl]

Oh and target ph was 5.3 from brunwater. I do not have a meter.

 

[Braufessor]

Regarding the post-fermentation pH that Braufessor mentioned (4.5-4.6), does anyone know whether the beer being carbonated would affect the pH if I were to measure it now? I've never really had a reason to pay attention to post-fermentation pH before this, so I haven't tried measuring it before.

Also, for Braufessor or any others who may have measured - does a 5.4 mash pH imply a similar pre-boil pH in your setup? I've gone from batch sparging to BIAB for my last few batches (including this one), so the ph in my mash tun/brew kettle at the end of the mash is the same thing as my pre-boil pH. I'm just curious whether those here who sparge are maybe getting a slightly higher pre-boil pH than the 5.4 number from the mash.

Yes, CO2 makes a difference.... not a ton though I don't think. Maybe .1 or .2??? You can also let it sit/pour it back and forth to take the CO2 out of it and then take a reading.

Also, in general, your kettle pH will be higher than your mash pH unless you treat your sparge water to an excess to account for it. If I use 100% RO water and add the exact same minerals per gallon to both mash water and sparge water (with no acid additions) I find that my kettle pH goes up a bit. So, perhaps my mash pH is around 5.40 and my kettle pH ends up at 5.45 maybe.

 

[stickyfinger]

Yes, CO2 makes a difference.... not a ton though I don't think. Maybe .1 or .2??? You can also let it sit/pour it back and forth to take the CO2 out of it and then take a reading.



Also, in general, your kettle pH will be higher than your mash pH unless you treat your sparge water to an excess to account for it. If I use 100% RO water and add the exact same minerals per gallon to both mash water and sparge water (with no acid additions) I find that my kettle pH goes up a bit. So, perhaps my mash pH is around 5.40 and my kettle pH ends up at 5.45 maybe.

That is interesting. Do you fly sparge? I adjust my HLT to 5.45-5.55 before heating it up, so I'd guess my preboil pH is around the same range on all beers. Should I be adjusting my preboil pH down all the way to 5.2 for other beers that I ant to be clear? I assumed darker beers should be 5.6ish and other beers should be 5.4-5.5 for best flavor

 

[Braufessor]

That is interesting. Do you fly sparge? I adjust my HLT to 5.45-5.55 before heating it up, so I'd guess my preboil pH is around the same range on all beers. Should I be adjusting my preboil pH down all the way to 5.2 for other beers that I ant to be clear? I assumed darker beers should be 5.6ish and other beers should be 5.4-5.5 for best flavor

I do fly sparge - but, fast. My sparge takes about 15 minutes maybe.

I can't say that for sure in regard to clarity..... it is a hunch I have, but nothing more than that until I do some more looking. However, I do adjust kettle pH from time to time if it is not where I want it. Generally 1 or 2 ml of lactic acid will do the trick in moving the pH a bit if I need to.
Light lagers, blondes, etc.... I am usually looking for that 5.25-5.30 range pre boil.

IPA's I am usually shooting for 5.4-5.45

Dark beers I like 5.5-5.6

 

[jjw5015]

Latest batch

View attachment 1480560500615.jpg

 

[Tarpon87]

So I plan on brewing a version of this soon, trying to figure out what hops I should use. I will bitter with warrior, but for everything else I have a half pound each of citra, mosaic, azacca, and centennial.

Should I just use citra/mosaic
Should I just use Citra/mosaic/azacca
Should I use centennial in the whirlpool but not in the dry hop (Braufessor said he found it to be "drying" in the dry hop)
Some other combo
What are your guys opinions?

Ill be using wyeast 1272, dry hopping in primary then kegging.
Thanks

 

[jjw5015]

I've made this 3 times now, each time with citra/mosaic/azacca 1:1:1 and it's fantastic. Probably would be fine without azacca as well.

 

[stickyfinger]

citra-mosaic is classic and delicious

 

[Braufessor]

Personally, I don't think you can go wrong with either
1.5 Citra:1.5 Mosaic
or 1:1:1 with citra/mosaic/azacca.

Those would be my first two choices with the hops you mention.

If I was going to use centennial....

I would go 1:1:1 with centennial/mosaic/Citra in whirlpools and then 1.5:1.5 Citra/Mosaic in both dry hops.

 

[droder1]

I have been targeting 5.4 ish simply because that is a number I see recommended often from professional brewers in regard to hoppy beers. Also see information from beers from time to time as well about higher finishing pH's in these beers.

One thing to point out, dry hopping can raise PH (http://scottjanish.com/increasing-bitterness-dry-hopping/). So that is potentially (likely in my opinion) a driver of the slightly higher PH post ferm. Bissell is on record stating 5.3 mash PH for Swish; and Kimmich is big on low PH (there was some confusion as to whether he was speaking about room temp or mash temp PH), but I think consensus was closer to 5.3.

But I do frequently see 5.4 as a target as well. So jury is out.

A side by side 5.3 to 5.4 would be very interesting. I generally shoot for 5.35 to split the difference as it seems so split.

 

[droder1]

I've noticed that a lot of the "classic" brewers use a lot of carapils and wheat malt in a lot beers. i think the wheat malt is maybe a red herring, but they were onto something with the carapils. the trick is to get the full mouthfeel without the caramely flavors (or too much) so i think the low lovibond caramel may be good. It may be possible to just add more and more carapils though too. lots of room for experimentation here. my beers always seem to taste so dry, so i'm not afraid to load in more crystal or carapils. a friend says i have coined a new beer, the DRY-PA. ha ha.

I've been addicted to these NE IPAs though since starting to brew them. I love them so much. It's mostly what I want to brew now, along with some rich dark beers and a few lagers!

And then brulosophy goes and casts doubt on carapils and body (at least Briess' - http://brulosophy.com/2016/11/28/de...ous-beer-characteristics-exbeeriment-results/). I use weyermann carafoam. I know there is a difference (http://thunderdogbrewery.com/2016/04/13/weyermann-carafoam-breiss-carapils/). Either way, the world as we know it, ever changing.

 

[schematix]

And then brulosophy goes and casts doubt on carapils and body (at least Briess' - http://brulosophy.com/2016/11/28/de...ous-beer-characteristics-exbeeriment-results/). I use weyermann carafoam. I know there is a difference (http://thunderdogbrewery.com/2016/04/13/weyermann-carafoam-breiss-carapils/). Either way, the world as we know it, ever changing.

No surprise to me in this test. He's basically made a lightly hopped pale ale. With the flavorful hops he used I wouldn't be able to taste a difference either.

My experience with German Lagers is that German CaraFoam and other german derived Caramel Pils type malts (CaraPils is a trademark of Briess in the US) significantly improve the head retention and body of that style, plus when done LoDO provide a candy like sweetness. These are light beers though. Light in all ways. The different is subtle but its there.

More importantly, I've found that the mash temp is by far the most critical aspect of head retention. I think i've stumbled upon the magic sequence of temperature steps to make beer with great head (3 for 3 now - different styles and lagers and ales). The beers i've had the worst head retention with were all single fusion in the 152-156 range. They always fall flat for me regardless of the grain bill.

 

[Braufessor]

More importantly, I've found that the mash temp is by far the most critical aspect of head retention. I think i've stumbled upon the magic sequence of temperature steps to make beer with great head (3 for 3 now - different styles and lagers and ales).

Well don't keep us in suspense man..... what are the steps?

 

[schematix]

Well don't keep us in suspense man..... what are the steps?

Sorry for the tease. More experimentation is required. I don't want to spread misinformation. Thick dense foam that never dissipates is a beautiful thing though.

 

[EndOfLine]

New "Ne" pale ale, been in the keg for 2 days now.
Been doing more experimenting with EKG and Chinook.
I am really digging the blend. The beer was 100% clear prior to Dryhopping (used WLP002)
Now I cant see my fingers on the other side.