Proposed Style Guidelines. Cascadian Dark Ale

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I think I am missing your point here (or, more likely, I wasn't clear before). As pointed out here before, almost all the American-grown hops you use in your beers come from the PNW. And, in the BJCP guidelines, American style beers (yea, like our pale ale) are hop-forward.
Click to expand...

Well, we should rename the entire American Ale category (category 10) to Cascadian Ale using that logic.
 
weirdboy said:
Well, we should rename the entire American Ale category (category 10) to Cascadian Ale using that logic.
Click to expand...

Well, right, American Dark Ale is more consistent with the current naming scheme in the guidelines. I still think the Cascadian thing is appropriate.

Because this this thread is clearly infected with haters, I'm checking out. C-ya.
 
Jipper said:
This is almost funny, but I'm sure they are for real. It's a flash in the pan trend that really has no place, IMO. Does everything we brew have to be forced into a style? An IPA with carafa II is not an IPA per guidelines. So if I brew a Pilsner with Cascade and Willamette, should I get to write my own style guidelines around it?
Click to expand...

Wow, I totally agree with JP. Now I feel dirty!

I wish the style guardians at the BJCP would limit themselves to the classic beer styles instead of trying to force every new development into some artificial constraints.
 
ArcaneXor said:
Wow, I totally agree with JP. Now I feel dirty!

I wish the style guardians at the BJCP would limit themselves to the classic beer styles instead of trying to force every new development into some artificial constraints.
Click to expand...

I don't see it this way at all. The BJCP exists to educate people about beer and brewing and to help them become better brewers through their comments. The BJCP does not introduce styles because they feel like it or whatever, but they say on their own website that they introduce new styles if a lot of entries into the specialty category are being made of that style. So, if they are there to judge beers to style, and a lot of people are brewing beers to a style that does not officially exist, why would they not help define this new style as a service to help those brewers?
 
slowbie said:
I don't see it this way at all. The BJCP exists to educate people about beer and brewing and to help them become better brewers through their comments. The BJCP does not introduce styles because they feel like it or whatever, but they say on their own website that they introduce new styles if a lot of entries into the specialty category are being made of that style. So, if they are there to judge beers to style, and a lot of people are brewing beers to a style that does not officially exist, why would they not help define this new style as a service to help those brewers?
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Although, I might say the last part a bit differently, stating that the popularity of emerging styles leads a beer to establish itself, and the BJCP only recognizes the style formally.

Like you say, the BJCP is not about creating new styles or telling people how to brew. I don't know how such silly misconceptions get perpetuated.
 
ArcaneXor said:
Wow, I totally agree with JP. Now I feel dirty!

I wish the style guardians at the BJCP would limit themselves to the classic beer styles instead of trying to force every new development into some artificial constraints.
Click to expand...

The BJCP is much more conservative about adding new styles than the Brewer's Association, for example. I can't think of a style in the guideline that hasn't existed for 15 years or more in homebrewing (obviously sometimes much longer in commercial brewing but sometimes virtually non-existent in commercial brewing).

As per previous mention the point is to produce style guidelines that are useful for homebrewing competitions and therefore what homebrewers are brewing and entering is going to have a huge influence on which styles are described.

However consider that the BA will add a style basically if they have enough people to fill out the category at the GABF. The BJCP only edits the style guidelines about every four years and only adds styles that have been brewed and entered frequently by homebrewers for a good amount of time.
 
slowbie said:
The BJCP exists to educate people about beer and brewing and to help them become better brewers through their comments.
Click to expand...

I don't intend to change the subject of the thread, but I just want to state that in my own, very biased opinion, they don't do that. I can brew the most excellent beer in the world, but the BJCP would consider it flawed because it's a "tweener" that doesn't quite fit what they have deemed to be an appropriate beer. Needless to say, some anonymous, subjective judge doesn't have the faintest idea of how to improve my beer because he doesn't know my process or intentions. Sure, he can check the checkbox for a "flaw" and then tell me to do a longer diacetyl rest to reduce butterscotch flavors, but I already knew that.

To me, there is a place for styles, and that is to celebrate traditional beers, especially those that are near-extinct commercially. But beyond those "classics", I take the Belgian stance and say that styles are an artificial and meaningless restriction. Treasure an innovative beer for what it is, and not for what it is not!

Now back to your regularly scheduled bickering...
 
ArcaneXor said:
I don't intend to change the subject of the thread, but I just want to state that in my own, very biased opinion, they don't do that. I can brew the most excellent beer in the world, but the BJCP would consider it flawed because it's a "tweener" that doesn't quite fit what they have deemed to be an appropriate beer.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true, but my response would be (to most of the posts in this thread)... so what?

My dog is a mutt. Half black lab and half german shepherd. I know that he doesn't fit in with the AKC registry. I don't plan on entering him in the Westminster dog show. I love him as he is. But I don't hate the AKC for it. (I hate them for other reasons!)

The BJCP only MATTERS if you want to enter comps or in some other way measure your beers according to their style guidelines. If you don't care and brew whatever you want then it shouldn't bother you.

Maybe someone needs to start doing some competitions that aren't based on style. Just vote for the tastiest beers. Then folks who don't want to conform to styles but still want to compete can do so.

*shrug* I just don't understand what the problem is. It's not like you HAVE to brew to their style guidelines. Brew whatcha want! :mug:
 
Well-said. My friends' disgusted faces are all the judging I'll ever need! Hmm...How does smoked yoghurt rye bitter fermented with freshly harvested Candida and enterobacter sound?
 
I'm in the same place on the CDA.

I find no small amount of irony in this desire to legitimize a beer intentionally brewed out of style by creating a new style for it.

And there are two reasons why I think Black IPA is a better name than Cascadian Dark Ale.

1. Not everyone has drank a Black IPA. But because "IPA" is a name that has history, someone would have an idea of what to expect if they drank one. The name "Cascadian Dark Ale" has very little history and therefore no meaning to anyone outside the region.

2. If I was trying to sell the beer, despite the conflicting terms "black" and "pale", I think "Black IPA" sounds more appealing than "Cascadian Dark Ale."
 
I read this whole thread. I get a medal for that, right? (or at least a cookie)

Being an east coaster, but not east enough to be cool, I had never heard of this til this thread, and it took me a few days to read it because I seriously thought somebody was just making stuff up.

I like the idea of 14D, not because I hate the PNW (which I do, sooo much!) but because it seems more useful, as a catchall for the styles of 'we took a beer and then shoveled a bunch of hops into it.'

Also, the other haters in this thread we need to address are the 23A bashers. I may have had a really bad spruce ale in the flight, but I stewarded 23A this year and there were some fantastic beers in there.
 
ChshreCat said:
Maybe someone needs to start doing some competitions that aren't based on style. Just vote for the tastiest beers. Then folks who don't want to conform to styles but still want to compete can do so.
Click to expand...

It's called Beer Advocate and, guess what, people only like Imperial Stouts. No need to repeat that experiment.
 
American-Style India Black Ale
American-style India black ale has medium high to high hop bitterness, flavor and aroma with medium-high alcohol content, balanced with a medium body. The style is further characterized by a moderate degree of caramel malt character and medium to strong dark roasted malt flavor and aroma. High astringency and high degree of burnt roast malt character should be absent. Fruity, floral and herbal character from hops of all origins may contribute to aroma and flavor.
Original Gravity (ºPlato) 1.056-1.075 (14-18.2 ºPlato) ●
Apparent Extract/Final Gravity (ºPlato) 1.012-1.018 (3-4.5 ºPlato) ●
Alcohol by Weight (Volume) 5-6% (6 -7.5%) ●
Bitterness (IBU) 50-70 ●
Color SRM (EBC) 25+ (50+ EBC)
Click to expand...
Doesn't look like the full-blown guideline but still looks a bit different than the beer described in the OP. I wanna make one.
 
So I got a new BYO issue this morning and what do I see on the cover? "Birth of a style: Cascadian Dark Ale" . Oh, I am sooo sorry for all of you party poopers and naysayers, I guess you gonna pick up all your toys now and go back to mama crying whoo, whoo :(
 
All I'm saying is that the CDA is gaining recognition, and the BYO article is just another prove of that. Yes, there will be some people unhappy because they "have brewed a dark hoppy ale long time ago" So what? I brew an "India Brown" an "Imperial Porter" for years now. But that doesn't make me an inventor of this style. I'm just happy there is a new style, I'm happy that it originated in the USA, and so should you. It is a different, new style. and a good one too.
For some reason, I just can't understand why, some people here are so seriously opposed to the style. They take it like it's a war or something. They take it too personal. It's just beer, people, get over it!
BTW, if this is the biggest problem in your life right now then you must be very happy people, congrats on that. ;)
PS. The article in BYO was written by Marc Martin. He was invited to participate in a symposium to discuss CDA. Eight beer writers and and 13 brewers took part of the discussion. It is a very interesting read, IMO, completed with proposed style specifications and a few recipes.
 
BYO will take just about any reasonably written submission. It's not like they have an editorial staff. BYO also accepts ads for marital aid products. If you want to make a grandiose social statement out of that too, feel free.

I think the only thing that is being invented is some revisionist history.

Frankly, no one really objects to the elements of the style, just the intentional regional branding of it.
 
I think it's the hubris of the proposed style's history.

I especially like the part about it being created early in the 21st Century. It's as though today is not still early in the 21st Century. Makes me chuckle every time I think about it.
 
What's the point of calling it American-Style if it uses hops from any region? I thought the whole point was to use American hops, and plenty of them!

And at least Cascadian Dark Ale has is a cooler-sounding name, even if it references one particular area of the country. Last time I checked, my backyard hops were not growing in the Pacific Northwest.

So why don't we just call it American Black Ale, or American Dark Ale, and specify American Hops.
 
I made this last month. here is the recipe.
2 row #6
rye #1
Dextrose #1 (late boil)
Carafa III #.50
Crystal 120 #.50
Chocolate #.25

Hop's
Magnum 1 oz @ 60
Citra .50 oz @ 10
Cascade .50 @ 10
Citra .50 @ 1
Cascade .50 @ 1
Citra .50 @ 5 day's in secondary
Cascade .50 @ 5 day's ---------

Fermented @ 68 F with Mangrove Jack's U.S west coast M44
 

Similar threads

Brooothru
How Should I Submit This Beer Under BJCP Style Guidelines?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Brooothru
Brooothru
Clint Yeastwood
Dry Hopping: Covering up Beer's Best Features?
Replies
5
Views
834
Clint Yeastwood
Clint Yeastwood
Gadjobrinus
N. England - late hopping guidance, IBU's?
Replies
24
Views
1K
day_trippr
day_trippr
H
No aroma after dry hopping
Replies
7
Views
2K
Panderson1
Panderson1
tracer bullet
Characterizing Crystal Malts - Caramel, Burnt Sugar, Raisins vs Lovibond?
Replies
7
Views
1K
tracer bullet
tracer bullet
SSBrew 300

Latest posts

Back
Top