NEIPA dont’s

[SanPancho]

Pectin

I originally used Green Apple puree for a Milkshake IPA on a recipe last year and introduced it to my NEIPA recipe soon after. It contributes to a more pillowy mouth feel.

Is this based on your opinion or something referenced by a brewer/researcher/etc?

 

[Sbe2]

Not to start a typing war, but are hazy people being just as snobby as the clear beer folks were when this style was first coming in to its own. If it tastes great and has a soft mouthfeel (which I think most of us chase), then who gives an eff what it looks like.

Sorry just had to vent.

 

[beervoid]

Agreed. I think the Ballast Point study is a bit of a guidline though. They did study quite a few base malts and the variances weren’t that huge. Maybe they’d change drastically season to season but I’m not sure. That study didn’t say they were all from one harvest year necessarily.

Well I remember reading chloride can be from 200 up to 300ppm thats pretty big!
Taking averages from their research even though I start with 100% RO water I put 100ppm chloride and 50ppm sulfate in my mineral calculations as a base next to some basic amounts of magnesium sodium etc as well.
It would be nice if more people would analyze their wort and finished beer profiles to be able to make a good avarage.
I was also wondering why maltsters dont supply this kind of information.

 

[beervoid]

Not to start a typing war, but are hazy people being just as snobby as the clear beer folks were when this style was first coming in to its own. If it tastes great and has a soft mouthfeel (which I think most of us chase), then who gives an eff what it looks like.

Sorry just had to vent.

I think people get lost in where the haze comes from and trying to analyse it to death where its pretty "clear" where clarity comes from in a proper done west coast IPA

 

[kevink]

Is this based on your opinion or something referenced by a brewer/researcher/etc?

Jean Broillet from Tired Hands has stated that he puts apple puree in his Milkshakes. He has said it during an interview and on Instagram. I don't think he said it's for a pillowy mouthfeel, though.

 

[beervoid]

Jean Broillet from Tired Hands has stated that he puts apple puree in his Milkshakes. He has said it during an interview and on Instagram. I don't think he said it's for a pillowy mouthfeel, though.

I also recall they have since backed out of this as it is an unnecessary step and the same effect can be achieved without.

 

[kevink]

I also recall they have since backed out of this as it is an unnecessary step and the same effect can be achieved without.

I wondered if he still did this. What's your source of that information?

 

[BASSBBQANDBEER]

Is this based on your opinion or something referenced by a brewer/researcher/etc?

Both.

Jean Broillet IV of Tired Hands mentioned on a podcast (can't remember which one) using green apple puree in a milkshake IPA so I tried experimented with it when I made a few. Soon after, I started experimenting with it with my NEIPA recipes and have found that it contributes to a hazier and softer beer. I don't use it with every recipe, just the one's I make during the winter.

 

[plazola86]

Latest IPA - 9% ABV

Did: Flaked oats, white wheat
Didn’t: Used common yeast = Hornindal Kviek
Didn’t: No Munich, crystal or cara anything for color or head retention.

 

[beervoid]

I wondered if he still did this. What's your source of that information?

I dont remember it was probably from that blog of the fellow that lives near Tired Hands.
Ive seen a recipe from omnipollo as well which tired hands brew alot together with and they dont put pectin.

 

[beervoid]

View attachment 602335

Latest IPA - 9% ABV

Did: Flaked oats, white wheat
Didn’t: Used common yeast = Hornindal Kviek
Didn’t: No Munich, crystal or cara anything for color or head retention.

How was the body mouthfeel?
Did you mash higher?
Kveiks attenuate quiet well so im wondering.
Did you use a commercial hornindal?
I got one on the way here.
So far tried commercial voss and hothead.
Voss was a bit to chalky for my taste.

 

[plazola86]

How was the body mouthfeel?
Did you mash higher?
Kveiks attenuate quiet well so im wondering.
Did you use a commercial hornindal?
I got one on the way here.
So far tried commercial voss and hothead.
Voss was a bit to chalky for my taste.

It’s the Omega strain. I like my IPAs crispy not sweet and cloying like so many NEIPAs I’ve tried. I always mash at 148, final gravity was 1.010. It came up super crushable especially for a 9% I’m starting to think mouth feel on these is all about water,ph, carbonation and not mash temp/residual sugar. The best Hazy IPAs to my pallet have been Treehouse, Trillium, Monkish, Electric, Pure Project. All these are crispy, crushable and not thick and sweet.

 

[beervoid]

It’s the Omega strain. I like my IPAs crispy not sweet and cloying like so many NEIPAs I’ve tried. I always mash at 148, final gravity was 1.010. It came up super crushable especially for a 9% I’m starting to think mouth feel on these is all about water,ph, carbonation and not mash temp/residual sugar. The best Hazy IPAs to my pallet have been Treehouse, Trillium, Monkish, Electric, Pure Project. All these are crispy, crushable and not thick and sweet.

High fg doesn't necessarily mean sweet though, I find it more connected to the body of the beer more then anything.
Tree House Julius has a fg of 1.015 if I remember correctly

 

[couchsending]

It’s the Omega strain. I like my IPAs crispy not sweet and cloying like so many NEIPAs I’ve tried. I always mash at 148, final gravity was 1.010. It came up super crushable especially for a 9% I’m starting to think mouth feel on these is all about water,ph, carbonation and not mash temp/residual sugar. The best Hazy IPAs to my pallet have been Treehouse, Trillium, Monkish, Electric, Pure Project. All these are crispy, crushable and not thick and sweet.

I’d suggest degassing some of those beers and checking their final gravities, you might be surprised.

Certain hop varieties can have a dramatic impact on mouthfeel. Especially when used in large quantities when dry hopping.

 

[plazola86]

I’d suggest degassing some of those beers and checking their final gravities, you might be surprised.

Certain hop varieties can have a dramatic impact on mouthfeel. Especially when used in large quantities when dry hopping.

That's what I mean. The hop oils will make the beer feel slicker, smoother not so much the final gravity. I don't really think I would be able to tell the difference on a 9% ABV beer that finished 1.010 and another that finished 1.015 with everything being the same. There has to be more the good breweries are doing than something as simple as final gravity to get the mouthfeel they have.

 

[plazola86]

Voss was a bit to chalky for my taste.

I think I know what your talking about. There is something a little off about mine too. Not bad in flavor but just doesn't sit right with everything else. I've been reading more on these and a lot of people mention to under pitch (that's what these yeast are used too) to get the desired flavors from them. I wonder if that flavor is from overpitching?

 

[SanPancho]

i just overpitched hornidal by mistake, it hasnt carbed yet but sample didnt seem off in any way. just less aroma/ester than i had hoped.

regarding the hop oils, im wondering if it would be good practice to do a double dry hop. figure out which varieties boost mouthfeel, let them sit for a week or so, then hit your big aroma hops for just a day or two. basically using each variety for a different purpose.

 

[couchsending]

That's what I mean. The hop oils will make the beer feel slicker, smoother not so much the final gravity. I don't really think I would be able to tell the difference on a 9% ABV beer that finished 1.010 and another that finished 1.015 with everything being the same. There has to be more the good breweries are doing than something as simple as final gravity to get the mouthfeel they have.

Sure it’s a combo of FG, Water chemistry, mashing schedule, grain bill, carbonation, etc.

I wasn’t really talking about hop oils causing a slickness per se. some hops will create a bigger more full mouthfeel than others. Namely Galaxy.

 

[beervoid]

I think I know what your talking about. There is something a little off about mine too. Not bad in flavor but just doesn't sit right with everything else. I've been reading more on these and a lot of people mention to under pitch (that's what these yeast are used too) to get the desired flavors from them. I wonder if that flavor is from overpitching?

I'm 5 batches in with Voss, all where underpitched.. I put only 1 tbsp of yeast in 5 gallons.
They all had this weird chalky thing... it did drop out later..
Also I didn't like the fact it doesn't clear up good and I think it's related

 

[navethechimp]

Sure it’s a combo of FG, Water chemistry, mashing schedule, grain bill, carbonation, etc.

I wasn’t really talking about hop oils causing a slickness per se. some hops will create a bigger more full mouthfeel than others. Namely Galaxy.

If you don't mind me asking, what do you shoot for in an FG? Or, from your research, do you have a rough idea of where HF, Trillium, Treehouse, etc. usually end up?

I am confident that many of our west coast "hazy" interpretations out here finish way too high, perhaps just trying to contrast more up against the bright west coast IPAs usually also available. In fact, I dismissed the style entirely because the drinkability was so compromised. After visiting the region and having some of the true NEIPAs, I realized that there is no concern of drinkability. I've been hypothesizing about a lot of the same points you're making in this thread--I think a lot of these ideas around how to brew the style are BS. Anyway, bummer we don't all carry hydrometers around when traveling through rural Vermont to measure their FGs.

 

[navethechimp]

Judging by the beers from HF and TH I’ve had analyzed their Ca additions are not CaCl derived. Cl levels are higher yes but not by using CaCl.

...another interesting tidbit there.

High in other aesthetic ions but low in Ca? This is screaming at me as a very important insight, especially given the role that Ca plays in clarity at various stages.

Keeping Ca down but SO4 up is easy--Epsom. But what would be the equivalent for Cl without Ca?

Edit: Apologies if I missed any answers to the above questions elsewhere in the thread. Couldn't find what I was looking for!

 

[Coffeeturnal]

...another interesting tidbit there.

High in other aesthetic ions but low in Ca? This is screaming at me as a very important insight, especially given the role that Ca plays in clarity at various stages.

Keeping Ca down but SO4 up is easy--Epsom. But what would be the equivalent for Cl without Ca?

Edit: Apologies if I missed any answers to the above questions elsewhere in the thread. Couldn't find what I was looking for!

As long as you don't go too overboard, NaCl can assist in that.

 

[couchsending]

If you don't mind me asking, what do you shoot for in an FG? Or, from your research, do you have a rough idea of where HF, Trillium, Treehouse, etc. usually end up?

I am confident that many of our west coast "hazy" interpretations out here finish way too high, perhaps just trying to contrast more up against the bright west coast IPAs usually also available. In fact, I dismissed the style entirely because the drinkability was so compromised. After visiting the region and having some of the true NEIPAs, I realized that there is no concern of drinkability. I've been hypothesizing about a lot of the same points you're making in this thread--I think a lot of these ideas around how to brew the style are BS. Anyway, bummer we don't all carry hydrometers around when traveling through rural Vermont to measure their FGs.

The TH and HF beers I’ve degassed have all been in the 1.014-1.016 range, Trillium used to be a little lower but are trending higher with the new Ferm profile. The best ones are definitely light and soft and drinkable, not thick and sweet and smell/taste like rotting fruit like most everything else out there.

 

[couchsending]

...another interesting tidbit there.

High in other aesthetic ions but low in Ca? This is screaming at me as a very important insight, especially given the role that Ca plays in clarity at various stages.

Keeping Ca down but SO4 up is easy--Epsom. But what would be the equivalent for Cl without Ca?

Edit: Apologies if I missed any answers to the above questions elsewhere in the thread. Couldn't find what I was looking for!

KCL, MgCl, NaCl are all additional sources of Cl without the Ca. I have some kcl but haven’t really used it. Mostly just NaCl.

 

[thehaze]

I have used KCL in my latest IPA, which was not a NEIPA due to several reasons. But I added 2 gr KCL in the mash ( 25 liters ) and 1.2 gr KCL in the sparge ( 15 liters ). My Ca was at 55 ppm, with Mg at 10, Na at 35, chloride was 140 and sulfate was 70 ppm. I also added CaCl2, MgSO4, Gypsum and NaCl to reach the intended mash water profile. The beer was soft and this time, despite a large amount of whirlpool hops and dry hopping, it lacked the chalkiness/astringency, which I attributed to a combination of high Ca levels along with high Cl levels.

Cheers.

 

[navethechimp]

Thanks for the input, thehaze and couchsending.

Perhaps it's a combination of lower FG and low calcium that can help maintain this drinkability that I have become accustomed to from all these killer west coast IPAs here at arms reach.

In the past I've avoided NaCl to keep salty flavors down, but I think I'm overestimating the extent to which that flavor becomes noticeably "salty" vs. general flavor enhancement. I just ordered some KCl to try out, so maybe I'll do some blend with that and NaCl to push the Cl and keep both the other ions within reasonable ranges.

 

[thehaze]

MgCl is also a good source for Cl, but I haven't had any luck finding it. Maybe I haven't looked in the right places, but anyway.

Regarding NaCl, I've used the exact same amounts in the same beer I mentioned above, with no ill-effect. Na levels were at 35 ppm and I did not detect any salty flavours. But I would not add more KCl or NaCl in the future. Higher Na levels work in dark beers, but I feel that lighter styles might not handle over 50 ppm as well.

 

[ccous]

Lighter styles handle higher amounts of Na as well. The taste threshold is actually much higher than 35 ppm.

 

[couchsending]

The taste threshold is supposedly 150ppm. Not sure if what malt contributes is included in that or not, I would assume so.

 

[ccous]

I’ve gone 130 to even 140 ppm Na from nacl and do not get noticeable saltiness but the flavors from the hops and malt certainly do pop. Able to keep calcium <40 which I think helps the feel. Wasn’t happy with Ca >100 like monkish recommends

 

[thehaze]

Regarding Ca, I sent an email to Cloudwater UK and they also recommended lower Ca levels in Cl heavy beers, which is why I pushed it down to around 50 ppm in my latest IPA. They add Cl using MgCl, KCl and CaCl2, and also said that slightly elevated levels of Mg and K helps body and / or mouthfeel. I can find the email, if anyone is interested in the exact wording.

 

[couchsending]

Ca levels in finished beer can depend on quite a few things. If you’re using your own water that has some bicarbonate you will lose Ca when the two interact with phosphates in the mash. If you’re building from RO you wont lose as much in the mash. Here’s a great thread on probrewer from a while ago with one post that sights quite a few brewing textbooks. It details the Ca levels throughout the brewing process, what the requirements for certain reactions, etc. The real nugget is about 3/4 of the way down by Ipscman.

https://discussions.probrewer.com/archive/index.php/t-15069.html

I believe if you’re using phosphoric acid as opposed to lactic you’ll also lose more Ca.

 

[Coffeeturnal]

Ca levels in finished beer can depend on quite a few things. If you’re using your own water that has some bicarbonate you will lose Ca when the two interact with phosphates in the mash. If you’re building from RO you wont lose as much in the mash. Here’s a great thread on probrewer from a while ago with one post that sights quite a few brewing textbooks. It details the Ca levels throughout the brewing process, what the requirements for certain reactions, etc. The real nugget is about 3/4 of the way down by Ipscman.

https://discussions.probrewer.com/archive/index.php/t-15069.html

I believe if you’re using phosphoric acid as opposed to lactic you’ll also lose more Ca.

How does this post inform your brewing? (Legitimate question, not trying to be contrarian)

The statements laid out in the post you linked to suggest seem to suggest that we ought to add fairly large amounts of calcium (depending on source water) due to it being necessary for certain reactions. However, other posts on this thread suggest that this style is best served by lower calcium levels.

Are you suggesting that we should follow the guidelines of the link for brewing neipas, or are you suggesting that we don't want those reactions to occur and that's why it's being suggested to lower the calcium levels?

I don't have a lot of experience here, so I'm curious what takeaway I should have from this (planning to brew a neipa soon)

 

[beervoid]

Ca levels in finished beer can depend on quite a few things. If you’re using your own water that has some bicarbonate you will lose Ca when the two interact with phosphates in the mash. If you’re building from RO you wont lose as much in the mash. Here’s a great thread on probrewer from a while ago with one post that sights quite a few brewing textbooks. It details the Ca levels throughout the brewing process, what the requirements for certain reactions, etc. The real nugget is about 3/4 of the way down by Ipscman.

https://discussions.probrewer.com/archive/index.php/t-15069.html

I believe if you’re using phosphoric acid as opposed to lactic you’ll also lose more Ca.

Loss by phosphoric acid is really minimal, forgot where I read this.

 

[beervoid]

Found it
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/...and-calcium-prcipatation.515216/#post-6679664

 

[plazola86]

All good info about the water profile for these. My last IPA was 200 ppm chloride to 100 sulfate (as close as I could get any way) using calcium chloride and gypsum in RO water. That put my calcium levels around 100 and it ended up having a chalky taste I thought was due to the yeast. Reading this I'm thinking it might be the high additions I'm making to my water plus all the minerals being added by the grain. My latest IPA I split those number in half to see if that makes a difference. Will report back.

 

[thehaze]

I've only noticed chalkiness when Ca and Cl levels were high. I do not taste any when brewing with high sulfate, low Cl and whatever Ca levels the recipe might end up with. ( for me Ca was always somewhere between 60 and 120 ppm in West Coast style beers, but bitterness, hop choice, how you use the hops can add some astringency, harshness, abrasive - Chinook like - flavours, but they usually calm down )

 

[Dgallo]

I’m in that ball park. ca: 90-110 CL: 180 & sulfate: 80-100 and I do not get the chalkiness. Slick and soft. My grains and mash temps also help that

 

[thehaze]

I think it could have something to do with the quality of hops and the way you handle dry hopping and then " packaging ". I know kegging does help quite a lot in this aspect. But I will definitely brew more and see how it goes.

 

[navethechimp]

The statements laid out in the post you linked to suggest seem to suggest that we ought to add fairly large amounts of calcium (depending on source water) due to it being necessary for certain reactions. However, other posts on this thread suggest that this style is best served by lower calcium levels.

Are you suggesting that we should follow the guidelines of the link for brewing neipas, or are you suggesting that we don't want those reactions to occur and that's why it's being suggested to lower the calcium levels?

My thoughts/questions exactly. Many of the calcium-related processes described by Ipscman on the probrewer forum are detailed in common brewing literature, and I would posit is a relevant factor behind the aesthetic characteristics of beers coming from English- and German-derived brewing traditions--bright, crisp, and efficient. Calcium is not an ingredient per se, but rather a catalyst (or requirement) to a handful of distinct processes.

NEIPA obviously turns this all on its head. In the homebrew world, such as the various podcasts (Brulosophy, Beersmith, Basic Brewing, etc) and popular authors (Strong, Mosher, Tonsmeire, Janish, etc) point to a whole array of explanations for what makes a NEIPA a NEIPA. None of it is convincing and I'm glad couchsending shat on all of it earlier in this thread. The Brulosophy guys have landed on a stance of "it's a mix of all these things together that make NEIPA". I'm not buying it.

I just built out a spreadsheet to incorporate KCl into my salt additions. It's awesome how much leverage it gives you among the other salts. I'll go for something extreme, just to see the effects: 20ppm Ca, 10ppm Mg, 25ppm Na, 150ppm Cl, 100ppm SO4, and 100ppm K.

In my mind, the importance of this whole exercise goes beyond NEIPA. It opens a door to so much new opportunity with any other experimental beer genre, and it doesn't even have to be so extreme like all this milkshake BS. Like haute fashion, nobody actually dresses like a Native American made out of teddy bear fabric on fire with machetes attached to the ankles, but I sure hope some artificial boundaries were broken along the way.