I don't quite get this "session IPA" phase going on. Ultimately these all seem to fit in the pale ale nook. I'm guessing it doesn't have the catchy name many have come to love and wouldn't bother with just some pale ale? What's the point?
I'm not sure it is technically a pale ale or an IPA. Too hoppy for a pale, not enough alcohol for an IPA. Going by style guidelines, of course.
So the choice of a reasonable description would have been "hoppy pale ale" or " session IPA." Not that different from "black IPA" (or CDA, or IBA, or whatever the hell people call them) before it was an official style (I think it's official anyway).
I guess you just call a beer that doesn't fit any style <descriptor-stepping-out-of-style> + <closest-style> and call it a day. For example, strawberry blonde is a blonde that's not a blonde because of the strawberry.
I'd expect an APA to be maltier and less hops.
I'd expect a session IPA to be a sub -5% hop delivery medium... no malt character and tons of flavorful and aromatic hops.
Session IPAs aren't the problem. APAs are the problem. Nobody brews proper ones anymore.
That's my $0.02
I've not seen one of these session IPAs over 45 IBUs, which would indeed make it a pale ale.
Not completely true. According to BJCP style guidelines, minimum IBU for an AIPA (Cat. 16A) is 40 IBU. APA tops out at 50 IBU, so while you could make the case for an APA, it's still within the guideline for an AIPA. Brewers Association guidelines has a specific category for Session IPA, and it states IBU between 40-55.
With all of that said, I've yet to taste a good session IPA--homebrew OR commercial. Heavy hop additions with very little to-no malt supporting said hops is the definition of an unbalanced and poorly conceived beer. This is a fad clearly marketed to palateless homers who care about nothing else other than stats on a bottle.
Agree with Weezy. Very few are making nice APA's these days, perhaps because the masses think they're too boring as a good one is well balanced and drinkable. APA just isn't flashy enough for most consumers (pearls vs. rhinestones and glitter). But that doesn't mean I don't like a good session IPA as well.I'd expect an APA to be maltier and less hops.
I'd expect a session IPA to be a sub -5% hop delivery medium... no malt character and tons of flavorful and aromatic hops.
Session IPAs aren't the problem. APAs are the problem. Nobody brews proper ones anymore.
That's my $0.02
While I agree that there are subtle differences between a session IPA and an APA, I couldn't disagree more. I haven't had many commercial session IPAs I have been impressed with, but a friend in my homebrew club nailed it, and passed on his recipe and "secrets" to me, which I have been able to build on.With all of that said, I've yet to taste a good session IPA--homebrew OR commercial. Heavy hop additions with very little to-no malt supporting said hops is the definition of an unbalanced and poorly conceived beer. This is a fad clearly marketed to palateless homers who care about nothing else other than stats on a bottle.
Sierra Nevada made one of our first APAs and it is rather hoppy.
While I agree that there are subtle differences between a session IPA and an APA, I couldn't disagree more. I haven't had many commercial session IPAs I have been impressed with, but a friend in my homebrew club nailed it, and passed on his recipe and "secrets" to me, which I have been able to build on.
Because of the low ABV, the bitterness of a session IPA can't be too high, but the hop flavor and aroma from heavy late additions can be exceptional. The trick is in obtaining body and mouthfeel at low gravity, while providing a good base for those hops. I view a good session IPA as an in-your-face hop burst of flavor and aroma with just enough bitterness to balance the lower malt content. I guarantee you this fad will keep growing as brewers figure out how to obtain that balance.
I think people's palates are just wrecked from the high abv, high hopped, and high flavor beers .
Wrecked or enlightened and inspired? Do you mean wrecked as in other beers we used to like suck now? I was chuckling a little at this. Picture someone saying, "no not that beer, it has too much hops and flavor." I dont mean any offense and sure eating saltines and drinking water would create a cleaner palate.
More hops, more brew to consume before you fall down. It's a flavor/buzz trade-off.
So the marketing geniuses come around and convince them to create a beer they can make cheaper, they will market it in the way craft beers are marketed, under the radar and make it popular. Everyone will go nuts and buy it at premium prices but it cost lots less to brew.
How are session IPAs cheaper though? The difference between 5% and 7% is nothing in the scheme of things, and a good session IPA still has lots of late hops which is the expensive part of the ingredient list.
I don't see session beers as some conspiracy to save money, just another style that some people might like. Our drink driving limits changed a while back and I find session IPAs a good choice compared with a pint of 8% DIPA. That's just common sense.
So the marketing geniuses come around and convince them to create a beer they can make cheaper, they will market it in the way craft beers are marketed, under the radar and make it popular. Everyone will go nuts and buy it at premium prices but it cost lots less to brew.
How are session IPAs cheaper though? The difference between 5% and 7% is nothing in the scheme of things, and a good session IPA still has lots of late hops which is the expensive part of the ingredient list.
I don't see session beers as some conspiracy to save money, just another style that some people might like. Our drink driving limits changed a while back and I find session IPAs a good choice compared with a pint of 8% DIPA. That's just common sense.
I agree 100% with Sadu. My session IPA is one of the most expensive beers I homebrew with a lot of expensive late hops, and the labor with all the late whirlpool hops and dryhopping would add expense if I were brewing commercially. So I don't think it's novelty or a conspiracy to save money that commercial breweries charge as much for a session IPA as many other higher ABV beers. And, BTW, if Pilsners are lagered a long time, that drives cost up, which might be why they charge more for it. Time is cost, that they have to somehow amortize. Most people probably get that concept with sours and barrel-aged beers, but a brewery has to weigh amortizing production costs with public perception of value.Maybe he means Session IPA's are less expensive to make. I've noticed most breweries price these Session IPAs at the same price as some of their regular or higher strength beers just for the novelty.
And, BTW, if Pilsners are lagered a long time, that drives cost up, which might be why they charge more for it. Time is cost, that they have to somehow amortize.
Enter your email address to join: