So I got called out on the mat today...Somewhat confrontational in its expression which was not appreciated.
I had no intention of offending, and for that I am sorry. But called out on the mat? Certainly. Nothing wrong with a sportsman-like debate so try not to take it personal.
While it is a provable science to base utilization factors of hops in the boil it is impossible to "prove" the same when it comes to dry hopping.
In general, there are not many real "set" rules for dryhopping an IPA. It mostly depends on preference. And even today, a lot about dryhopping is not fully understood by many homebrewers. If we all understood it completely then there would be no reason to debate the issue. So saying that the release of beneficial hop compounds dies off in 5-7 days tops is ridiculous. However, giving a simple suggestion based on your personal experiences, that 5-7 days has worked best for you, is absolutely fine.
Palmer states that a couple weeks is the general time for dry hopping, however he also references using .5oz per 5 gallon batch. With this assumption, I would agree that for that small amount of hops extended time would be beneficial.
Again, it depends on the beer, and what you're striving for in terms of hop character. 0.50 oz. for 5 gallons might be fine for a malt dominant APA, but it will barely scratch the surface (for many a hophead) in a hop dominant IPA. Also, Palmer is one of the greats... there's no denying that. But some advice is subjective and not based on science. Such advice also has the possibility of being seen as outdated. Palmer wrote this book in 1999. That big, bold IPA aroma we all know and love has come a LONG way since then. You say more than necessary. I say continue with the trend, and in some cases choose to "overload". It is reasonable for some people to say, "I can't take a beer that is too bitter" but, I've never met someone that said, "I absolutely hate a good smelling beer".
To dry hop in primary or secondary or Pellet or Whole:
Pyle: " dry hopping early in the fermentation phase may result in hops on the bottom of the fermenter being covered with yeast, which results in inefficient extraction of aroma. Another consideration of timing dry hopping is with infection risk. Hops in contact with boiling wort are effectively sanitized. Addition of dry hops after primary fermentation allows them to contact a wort/beer with some alcohol and less sugar, which prevents infections from getting a foothold.". The pellet hops can be easily covered by yeast falling out of suspension, so they should be added after virtually all fermentation activity has ceased, and a good amount of the yeast has fallen.
Pyle sounds like a DoDo bird to me. There is some truth to dryhops being slightly less effective when coated with yeast cells, but you can avoid this by not agitating the carboy and racking/bottling at the time the dryhops drop out of suspension. I dryhop in the primary all the time and my friends, myself, and competition judges have all made similar comments... that they could smell my beer from 3 feet away. They all loved that by the way. What you must realize is that brewers do things differently. Some would experience more of these issues if they racked/bottled 5 days after primary fermentation and were not careful to avoid agitating the carboy. Others who wait 3-4 weeks and are very careful not to disturb the trub are safe.
Also, by the time you dryhop you have beer... not wort at insane risk of infection. Risk of infection is slim to none. The alcohol, combined with A LOT of yeast cells help to stave off bacterial intruders. Hops, by the way, are sort of antiseptic in a sense. They're not very succeptible to bacteria. I've been dryhopping for a long time and I've never infected a beer with the inordinate amount of dryhops I use... even in a 3 week time frame. My intention here is not to boast... just to dispel rumors that doing the OPPOSITE of what Pyle recommends is not wrong in the slightest, and will still work very, very well - if not better in most cases depending on your procedure.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that, for many, pellets are not well regarded for dry hopping because the pelletization process is known to be very rough on the volatile aromatic compounds which the brewer is attempting to capture. Others swear by them, claiming the pre-burst lupulin glands provide more aroma to the beer[/I]."
I utterly and whole-heartedly disagree with this entire statement. If anything, pellets are IDEAL for dryhopping American IPAs. Myrcene is the Green Giant of Hop Aroma. Whole hops can have as much as 70% more myrcene than pellets of the same variety, but that difference is flipped when the wort is hopped as only 5% of myrcene is extracted from whole hops compared to 17% from pellets. 17% is still a low number, so by using more hops over a longer time frame may maximize the benefits. On average, pellets have a higher oil content than leaf hops, and pellets also release their oils quicker than leaf hops. Pyle has no clue what he's talking about and it really sounds like subjective opinion to me. Lupulin gland burst is just a cool sounding way of supporting his opinion.
Further evidence that pellets are awesome for dryhopping... Russian River's Pliny the Younger and Elder both use pellet hops to dryhop. Elder gets 0.65 - 0.75 oz. dryhops per gallon of beer. Younger gets 1.00 oz. dryhops per gallon of beer. Their dryhop regimen is staggered, and occurs in 3 to 4 stages. Look it up... this information is all available to you.
There are a lot of other matters that you touched upon which I either already agreed with, or didn't find reason to retort. Just know that I'm not attacking you... I'm simply trying to let you and others know that this statement is false until proven true: "The release of beneficial dryhop compounds die off in 5-7 days".
Cheers!
