My initial thought for a difference in the two is yeast. For any type of Pale Ale I would tend to use a british yeast strain which will produce more esters. A session IPA I would use a cleaner American yeast strain like y1056 or White Labs 001.
As they've already said, it's about the balance. Comparing BU:GU ratios is a good place to start. My personal line for "session" anything is <4%, and I don't really consider anything in the 4-5% to be a Session IPA. But that's my personal opinion, and I'm well aware that the common line for "session" beer is <5%.
My Session IPA in the fermenter right now is 3.6%, 45 IBUs, but the BU:GU is 1.23, and it comes across as quite bitter. It's also late hopped to crap.
I haven't seen many (any?) commercial examples under 4%
I don't think I have either. Hah. Not unless you count Greene King IPA, which is a Bitter, not an IPA.
My take on the difference:
A session IPA should still be all about the hop -- very hop forward, modest to strong hop aroma, slightly balancing malt character, dominant hop finish. BU/GU ratio at least 1.0, preferably higher.
An American Pale Ale is a balanced ale featuring a modest malt flavor up front and finishing with a moderate to strong hop finish. BU/GU ratio somewhere in the 0.7 to 0.9 range.
here is a pretty good chart for BU/GU ratiosI really like the idea of using BU:GU.
How do you distinguish the two?
Ummmm. Marketing..
Does session ipa really belong?
No.
What if you never brew to style?
Also, who the flocc decided what a "session" beer should be? I like my session beers around 5.5-7%.
Ummmm. Marketing..
Does session ipa really belong?
No.
Just because every dog you breed is a mix doesn't mean there are no pure breeds. You don't have to brew to style, but if it tastes like an IPA and you call it a tripel, you're misusing the word 'tripel'. Nobody can stop you, but it's a little silly to insist on using words in a way that no one else does. Similarly, the linguistic convention around 'session beer' is that it's a below 5% beer (usually below 4.5%), and no one can tell you that's the right strength for your sessions, but you're sort of confusing people (and potentially getting them very drunk) if you tell them you have a nice session IPA on tap and it's 6.5%.
I hear what you're saying, but to me "session IPA" is a contradiction of terms. same as a "session barleywine" or a "dunkel pilsner". I think they (brewers) wanted to make a beer that was still highly hopped but that they could cut down on the grain bill. Which is fine. But to sell me an IPA that isn't an IPA? That's just marketing.
Session IPA is less a contradiction in terms than Black IPA. Historically Pale Ale and India Pale Ale were all but indistinguishable and could span a wide array of strengths, and for a point in time many IPAs had OG's in the 1.030s, ie session beers.
So, no, it's not a contradiction. Just migration of the style over time and opening up for interpretation.
Yeah, don't get me started about "Black IPA"!
It did not make too much sense to me either, but I like them.
While "Black IPA" is inherently oxymoronic, it goes get across what to expect. I never took to Cascadian Dark Ale, but that's probably best for the style.
But point is, Black IPA is a contradiction. Session IPA is not.
Enter your email address to join: