BeerSwap 2007 - Sean's beer

Evan!, chillhayze, and olllllo, should get beer from me, UPS willing.

The one with the Hooch cap is an IPA Celebration style, the other is a bit of a kicked up version of the same.


IPA:
10 # 2- row
1 # carapils
4 oz 90 L
2 oz english chocolate

1 oz chinook at 60 min
2 oz cascade 1.5 @ 30 min, 0.5 at end

OG 1.047
FG 1.005

IPA v.2.0:
11 # 2 - row
1# carapils
4 oz 90 L
3 oz English chocolate

1 oz chinook in first wort.
1 oz chinook @ 60 min
4oz cascade 1@30min, 1@15min, 1@end, 1 in secondary

OG 1.048
FG 1.010

With all the extra hops, It really is not that different.

Pour: Standard pleasant hiss at uncapping. Poured into a goblet-style glass. Nice, tight head, but it didn't last. Dissipated quickly to random swaths of white on the surface (standard issue with most of my beers too).

Visual: Darker and browner than I expect from an IPA. This is undoubtedly due to the chocolate malt in the recipe. If I were guessing from looks alone, I'd call this a brown ale. No real noticeable copper/red hues. Clarity was average: not sparkling clear, but not terribly cloudy either.

Aroma: The hops are more floral than fruity, though there is a touch of red grapefruit lingering somewhere in there. The floral touch is really nice, and the balance on the nose lends a true air of professionalism to the beer from the start. What's missing most here, however, is malt aroma; however, some of that comes from my own personal affection for malty IPA's. There is also a very subtle ashy aroma - not smoke, but ash - which is out of place.

Palate: I started it out cold, then warmed it up with my hands, so that I could get the full experience. When it was cold, the palate was sparse (as is expected), and that ashy aroma from the nose carried through to the palate, unfortunately. However, as it warmed up, it opened up and displayed a more complex hop profile. Truly excellent---balanced and not overly cascadey. I began to realize that this beer is pretty much all about the hops, though, and tried to put my personal malt-head feelings on hold for awhile . Regardless, as far as the malt/body goes, it felt like this beer needs more malt and body mid-palate. Now that I see the 1.005 FG, I think am beginning to understand what happened: a tad too much attenuation. The level of bitterness is perfectly balanced, though. The hops were having a grand old time on the sides of my tongue. In the future, I would suggest a maltier base instead of adding chocolate. Try, perhaps, vienna and/or melanoidin and/or biscuit. Victory would also go a LONG way in this regard. But other than that little gap in the mid-palate body, and that strange (but fortunately very faint) ashy taste (I suspect the chocolate malt), the palate is spot-on for a lighter-styled IPA, and damned enjoyable!

Proximity to Traditional Styles: I don't really have much experience with a "celebration" IPA, so I'm not sure how to judge this. In terms of, simply, a lighter IPA, like I said above, it's spot-on save for the mid-palate gap (which can be attributed to the low FG). The hop bitterness is perfect, and the hop flavors and aromas are balanced and professional.

Overall: A flat-out enjoyable IPA in the lighter vein, and it really holds its alcohol well. Personally, I'm a fan of malty IPA's with more body, and so my personal subjective opinion is that I'd like to see a higher FG (maltodextrin?) and a more pronounced malt component. But objectively speaking, in terms of the lighter IPA style, it's fine brew. I'm really looking forward to the next one, because it looks like the same brew, pretty much, but with a higher FG.

Thanks, Sean. Much appreciated!

Thanks for the exellent critique. I appreciate the time you spent. Also that is a nice format you used.

I agree 100 % on the malt/body issue.

As for attenuation, this wort (V1) went right on the V.2.0 trub, so it was an explosive fermentation. I have made the V.1 before so it did not change, I just made it the next week, and dumped it in. While the V.2 got fresh yeast - perhaps a bit slower and nicer. As far as my understanding goes, that makes sense. Cause there is not much difference in the grains.

Thanks again

Pour: Pretty standard pfffft on uncapping. Poured nicely into the glass, and left a slight head that dissipated much like the other one, leaving swaths of foam. This is perpetually annoying when it comes to homebrew (all of mine included) because it obscures the clarity from the the top, but this is a universal problem, not a specific one.

Visual: Pretty much just like the last one. Darker than I expect an IPA to be, and decidedly brown. Relatively clear, but not crystal.

Aroma: Wow. This one still has that subtle ash thing (pretty much confirming my suspicions regards the chocolate malt as the culprit), but it works much better in this context. Now that the body is there, the ashy aroma is much more integrated. Giggity! The nose is flat-out spectacular. Beautiful floral hop aromas mix with herbs and spices, and a bit of pine. This is what Sierra Nevada wants to be, before it gets hijacked by all those citrusy hop aromas.

Palate: Again, wow. This is everything I wanted the first one (v1.0) to be, and more. It's amazing what those 5 little gravity points can do! The body here is perfect...just dry enough, just sweet enough. The mouthfeel is silky and makes me think of vanilla cream pie. The herbs and spices from the nose follow through on the palate, and the complexity is just out of this world. The finish is lasting, and the hop bitterness continues on past that.

Proximity to Traditional Styles: Spot-on IPA, but more of a Brit style, methinks, due to the concentration on herby, spicy, floral hops, rather than the grapefruit-centric American style.

Overall: As I said above, wow. This is professional stuff right here...no complaints other than I expect the color to be more coppery-red (but who cares!?). Thanks alot for sharing, Sean.

Sean: I'm putting your beers on the Friday night docket!

Wow. I'm just reading Evan's notes and it's apparent to me that this is going to be a learning experience on both ends of the exchange. I didn't consider my n00bness in he review portion of this experience.

I put the beers out on the counter for 10 mins or so.

I just cracked the v1 and and snapped a picture or 2.

I got a weak pfft when I opened it, however I could see the tell tale smokiness of CO2 released, telling me that all was OK. Poured and got 2 inches of head.

Color was dark brown (pics later) but given the 'Celebration' moniker, I was fine with it.



I will start out by saying by wife had a sip and said, "It's good, I would drink it."

More disclosure here. It was 99 degrees here today and I'm hungry. So this getting paired with a kicked up tombstone pizza. It's hitting the spot. And yes, I said 99 on March 16.

The alluded to lighter body and lighter malt is fine in this context, but it is decidedly not what I would characterize as a Winter Seasonal IPA. Who cares. Right now it's right time and right place. There is italian sausage on the pizza and that is fitting in nicely with the bitterness of the hops. Maltiness is not on the bill for me, although I agree with Evan, normally that's in my wheel house.

By comparison with Evan!, I think I had more head retention than he reported but little to no lacing on the glass, which my be symtomatic of my glassware or perhaps something you can equate back to your recipe or process. I'll leave it to you to decide.

I hope that someday I can give you a more informed review, but perhaps this will balance well with Evan!s review.

In the end, SWMBOs opinion may rule the day. Though perhaps unintended, this is working out to be a fine desert IPA save the coloration. Dry and and pairing well spicy food.

Version2:

Compared to the first beer, this beer seemed ot be more carbed up than the last. Much more gas released at uncapping and a very robust head when poured. Lasting head but no lacing.

I really wished I would have poured and drank these consecutively. I couldn't tell if this was darker than the first. It seemed to be less clear, but not really of concern to me.

I'm not pairing this one with food tonight and temperatures are cooler. Much more intune with the spirit of the beer. My impressions are that this beer seems to be more balanced with a little more heft. It elicited a low toned and longish, "Whooo" from SWMBO. It definately stands alone and I'm really glad that I saved this for a later evening pour.

I am really surprise that the citrus nature of the cascades is not as prevalant as I would have expected as Evan! stated (and I concur) I'm not really missing them, perhaps pointing to a balance with the cocoa sweetness of the chocolate malt

I enjoyed both of your beers, Sean. I think that I prefer the second (V2) as brew to enjoy for its own sake, but there's no taking away the V1's appropriateness in the right setting.

For clarification, Sean, v1 was made after v2?

Will v2 be the new v1 then??

Thanks very much for the review, and the good words. I really liked V2. And yes, V2 was made on Thanksgiving day 06, and V1 went on the dregs one week later. However, V1 got bottled first, so it is 1.

I'll definately make the 2 again, with a bit less chocolate, and a bit more carapils. I can't leave anything alone.