Austin Homebrew Supply Greenbelt v. WLP001 - The experiment begins...

bob1852 · May 17, 2011

KoedBrew said:
AZ what did the judges say?

NuclearRich said:
The people need to know, AZ!

see below!

NuclearRich · May 17, 2011

AZ_IPA said:
Other commentors in this post have given some good impressions of the differences...

Blind taste testers that are BJCP certified are much better judges than someone who knows which one was brewed with a different yeast. If they didn't really indicate any major differences, I have a hard time believing there is one.
Not to knock the yeast, I am sure it is great, but I don't order from AHS, and was thinking of doing so just for that yeast. No sense in that for me unless it makes a difference.

bob1852 · May 17, 2011

NuclearRich said:
Blind taste testers that are BJCP certified are much better judges than someone who knows which one was brewed with a different yeast. If they didn't really indicate any major differences, I have a hard time believing there is one.
Not to knock the yeast, I am sure it is great, but I don't order from AHS, and was thinking of doing so just for that yeast. No sense in that for me unless it makes a difference.

I'll post the scores and comments from the certified judge

Greenbelt: 32

Aroma: Floral hop boquet, some sweet malt, grassy. Some yeast esters as it warms/settles (9)

Appearance: Muddly light brown, thich white head with excellent retention (1)

Flavor: Sharp hop bitterness, malt sweetness behind with a touch of crystal/caramel (15)

Mouthfeel: Medium body, highly carbonated, lingering astringency (3)

Overall: Base recipe has decent IPA character with perhaps a touch too much crystal. There is a lingering harshness which escapes explanation, possibly some grain flavors? (7)

WLP001: 39

Aroma: Sweet, midly floral, light hops (8)

Appearance: Hazy amber, thick head, good retention (3)

Flavor: Grapefruit, light malt, a touch sour, hint of metallic, finishes with a nice balance (16)

Mouthfeel: Medium-light body, highly carbonated, a little creamy (4)

Overall: Nice clean IPA, hops are sharp, sugars balance reasonably well by are not very notable. Quite a citrus-fest (8)

So - In this case, this judge preferred the beer made with WLP001.....

Montanaandy · May 17, 2011

I brewed an IPA with Greenbelt shortly after it was released (I had an order with Austin and thought "why not"). I will have to review my notes to make certain, but my present recollection is that the results were good but not great and that I preferred 1056 or 1272 or definitely PacMan to Greenbelt. As another member mentioned, Greenbelt seemed to mute the hops somewhat and I always go heavy on the hops in my IPA/IIPA's.

bh10 · May 18, 2011

I kind of did the same experiment, but with Greenbelt vs. 1272. I brewed 7 gallons and split it, both have been on the yeast cake for about 1.5 weeks now. Ill make a thread in about a month, about the two and the results.