Hops Good Beer

[betarhoalphadelta]

IMHO, IPAs have become the "it" beer for the drinking public. As strange as it is, many people in my social circles who didn't drink craft beer 3-4 years ago have jumped into the IPA world despite the fact that they don't know that much about beer, and they look at beers like a nice helles bock as if it's the same thing as BMC.

What happens when a huge market appears with customers that aren't nearly as experienced enough with beer to really discern a "good" IPA from a "bad" IPA? Every brewery brews an IPA, and a bunch of them aren't very good.

Brewing an outstanding IPA is not as simple as just throwing more hops at it. But in a market full of people who haven't built the palate to tell the difference, "more" hops tends to sell better whether the beer is actually great or not. But adding a lot more hops requires a lot of work to make the beer drinkable. I've tasted way too many IPA's that lack body and lack the level of malt needed to balance the hops, and this is coming from someone that prefers almost all of my beers (IPAs especially) on the dry side. Pliny the Elder would be a good example of one that avoids this problem -- it's extremely hoppy, but it has enough malt to stand up to all those hops, and all without seeming malty at all to the palate.


Then you add into this the previous poster who brought up freshness, which is *critical* in an IPA, and you have a situation where the same beer will taste vastly different in week 1 vs. week 12. I know I have a homebrew IIPA on tap right now that I brewed originally for my Oktoberfest party. I went 3 weeks grain-to-glass on a 9.5% IIPA that is hopped at rates between that of Ruination and 10th Anniversary Ruination. To stand up to all those hops, it *HAD* to have a lot of malt. And the first month, it was actually a really "balanced" beer. The huge hopping rate wasn't overdone, and even with the amount of malt in the recipe, it wasn't overly malty. I still have that beer on tap (which happens when you brew 10 gallons of 9.5% IIPA!). Now the hops have faded and while it's still bitter, the hop aroma has waned to the point where the beer is too malty of an IIPA for my tastes. Again, Pliny the Elder is a critical commercial example -- it's extremely hoppy but with a perfect level of malt backbone. But everyone says you need to drink it *fresh*, or the hops will fade and it will be *too* malty.

So I understand your premise, that more hops doesn't necessarily equal better beer. And I think your concern is that more hops, even if the beer isn't better, often translates into more commercial success for a beer. I think that's true. But much like a beer with too much hops and no sense of balance, I think you stated your argument with too much bitterness at what you see and not enough reasoned argument to back it up.

 

[hoppyhoppyhippo]

have you ever had a beer without hops? I have and the ones I've had are not good IMO.

So by that logic hops = good beer.

Now you can argue highly hopped doesn't equal good beer. But I would still argue that :fro:

 

[gjb2107]

I do think there is a tendency to throw more hops at a beer regardless of its quality because it sells better, but I blame uneducated consumers not brewers. It has become trendy to drink highly hopped beers and many people drinking them don't understand much about beer or balance, they simply want to be seen with a bottle of SuperHop Hoppy McHop Beer to look cool. I think the OP made the mistake of posting this commentary here at HBT, where there aren't many of those people. I think just about all of us here can recognize a bad beer when we drink one regardless of the amount of hops, but this isn't true of the whole population (particularly here in Miami where everyone just wants to be flashy). As a result it comes off as quite insulting in this setting.

 

[bovineblitz]

I do think there is a tendency to throw more hops at a beer regardless of its quality because it sells better, but I blame uneducated consumers not brewers. It has become trendy to drink highly hopped beers and many people drinking them don't understand much about beer or balance, they simply want to be seen with a bottle of SuperHop Hoppy McHop Beer to look cool. I think the OP made the mistake of posting this commentary here at HBT, where there aren't many of those people. I think just about all of us here can recognize a bad beer when we drink one regardless of the amount of hops, but this isn't true of the whole population (particularly here in Miami where everyone just wants to be flashy). As a result it comes off as quite insulting in this setting.

**** looking cool, SuperHop Hoppy McHop is delicious.

 

[lowtones84]

A brewery in my home town definitely uses hops to hide off flavors. They also have a couple of big, chocolatey stouts that do the same. I'm pretty sure they use some amount of city water, because you can taste the result of chlorine in the water. And I'm guessing they also ferment too hot, because it tastes like a vague estery mess. Same flaws with all of their beers. But when about 6 out of 12 beers they brew are some form of IPA all with IBU's 98-100 (mostly 100) and use a ton of late hops, it's much more difficult to detect. It's the only style they can do moderately well. There are some people in town that agree with me but they end up doing pretty good business.

I'm not agreeing with everything the OP says, but you really can sell a lot of sub-par beer by front loading it with hops. And sure, that is playing the market, giving people what they want I guess, but it's still a shame. I love me some good IPA's, IIPA's, whatever. Of course there are bad beers of any style, but in some cases (brewery in question above) people throw back beers that taste like they were brewed in an unsanitized bathtub because hops are the "in" taste at the moment. And I'm definitely not saying all IPA's are this by -any- means.

 

[gjb2107]

**** looking cool, SuperHop Hoppy McHop is delicious.

I don't disagree, but there is a large chunk of people that would buy a bottle of beer that was awful if you told them it was hoppy because it equates to being fashionable. Perhaps this isn't true everywhere, but the last two places I've lived (NYC and Miami) it certainly is.

 

[pjj2ba]

I would also like to add that bitterness ≠ hoppiness. I know too many people who think that because you throw 5 oz of bittering hops into something it is a super hoppy beer while it only has two or three oz in the late kettle and dry hop. That's not hoppiness, that's bitterness.

One has to be careful. When I hear someone say they are a hop head, my immediate assumption is they like hop flavor and aroma. I really though have no idea if they like bitter beers or not. I know folks who love hop aroma and flavor, but not so much bitterness.

I agree with others that I don't think brewers say to themselves, ew, this beer is a bit off, let's throw a bunch of hops at it. They may enjoy a beer that others (even perhaps most folks) find out of balance. Yet another possibility is that they don't even notice anything is being covered up.

I taste way more wine than beer (drink more beer though) and have developed my palate for wine flavors pretty well and can pick out subtle little details. I'm not there yet with beer. It really helps to refine your tasting skills when you can sit down and compare a dozen beers of similar style. This way you can really notice the differences. Having a beer this night, and then a different one the next helps a person learn, but not like evaluating a bunch in one setting (within reason of course)

 

[NervousDad]

Hops do not always = bitter. You can add tons of hop flavor into a beer without boosting the IBUs. I used to HATE hops now I find them to be the most interesting thing about the beer I drink. I love experimenting with the many different combinations.

opps: horseballs already made this point

 

[HermeticHealer]

??????? Hinterland is a gastropub. Their beers are meant to be paired with the spectacular food they serve there. Have you tried the recommended pairings?

EDIT: For the non-Wisconsin folks, Hinterland is a restaurant with two locations - one in Green Bay and one in Milwaukee. They specialize in fresh, local ingredients and lots of game. The menu changes frequently based on what is in season. Everything is expertly prepared and presented. Last time I was there, elk tenderloin and quinoa happened to be available and it was incredible. This ain't some corner bar.

Funny, I didn't find any elk tenderloin in the beer cooler when I purchased a 4-pack of their abominable Amber Ale, so to answer your question: No, I didn't pair my liquor store purchase with their expertly prepared food. If you're going to distribute bottled beer to a liquor store, shouldn't its quality stand alone without food?

RE-EDIT: For the non-Wisconsin folks, Hinterland is a brewery in Green Bay, with a gastro-pub location in Milwaukee.

 

[PhelanKA7]

IPA's aren't suppose to be balanced. And how is "balanced" equal to good? Malt forward beers aren't balanced either.

Horse hockey. You can balance IPAs and malt forward beers alike. Just because your BU:GU is over/under .5 doesn't mean you can't strike a balance between hop and malt flavors. Never think about "balance" as ratio between numbers in your favorite brewing calculator. Balance is different to different people and is best measured by the drinker.

 

[HermeticHealer]

I think freshness is everything with IPAs. I've had a lot of bad experiences with commercial beers. IPAs sit on the shelf for a while here in Ohio and I would say 60% of the beers I buy are skunked or oxidized or just old. I used to hate Stone IPA because every time I bought a 6 pack it was old. I had it fresh on tap a few times and my mind was blown. Similar thing with Founders Centennial IPA. I thought that beer was just...ok. Then I had a few pints at the brewery and holy crap was that good. Apparently I have a thing for centennial hops!

Anyways, there are lots of different styles of beer to suit the tastes of different people. No one's forcing anyone to love IPAs, but there are a ton of us who do. See you all at next month's "Am I the only one who hates hops?" thread.

Your response is exactly the reactionary type I expected. Instead of actually reading my post carefully, you assumed that this is just another "I hate hops" thread. I love hops. It's a beautiful thing. A carefully crafted, strong IPA/APA is next to godliness. I just think that the market has jumped on the hop craze and that's all you see on the shelves. It's crowding out other selections and I personally enjoy more choice.

 

[MidTNJasonF]

Horse hockey. You can balance IPAs and malt forward beers alike. Just because your BU:GU is over/under .5 doesn't mean you can't strike a balance between hop and malt flavors. Never think about "balance" as ratio between numbers in your favorite brewing calculator. Balance is different to different people and is best measured by the drinker.

Exactly, a Big IBU IPA without the proper malt backbone and mouth feel to support it is not balanced just as a an IIPA that finishes sweet and chewy with far to much malt and no hop aroma or flavor is not balanced. That goes for any style you can name. Balance is about the proper ratio of flavor compounds for the style not an exact ratio of 50/50.

 

[MotorcycleMatt]

Your response is exactly the reactionary type I expected. Instead of actually reading my post carefully, you assumed that this is just another "I hate hops" thread. I love hops. It's a beautiful thing. A carefully crafted, strong IPA/APA is next to godliness. I just think that the market has jumped on the hop craze and that's all you see on the shelves. It's crowding out other selections and I personally enjoy more choice.

Then shop somewhere else, the places i get beer from carry everything...

 

[HermeticHealer]

I know someone has already commented on this, but I also have to chime in, because this comment just jumped out at me:

Speaking of corn sugar additives as a "poor brewing practice" shows that you might not have the best grasp of brewing practices. There are many styles where sugar additives, corn or otherwise, have a long history and are in fact very much vital part of brewing. Things like the aforementioned IIPA style, Barleywine, and just about anything Belgian - they all call for pretty hefty grain bills PLUS sugars like corn sugar to help dry them a little and keep them from becoming too syrupy or cloying, and to help other flavor components in the beer - whether those are the yeast, the hops, or other malt components - to come to the forefront.

Make sure, before you start attacking "poor brewing practices," that you really understand what do and do not comprise said practices.

Well, professor, let me clarify it for you: Using corn sugar or HFCS as a substitute for good malt due to a cost-effective production measure is, in my opinion, a poor brewing practice.

 

[Pappers_]

Your response is exactly the reactionary type I expected. Instead of actually reading my post carefully, you assumed that this is just another "I hate hops" thread. I love hops. It's a beautiful thing. A carefully crafted, strong IPA/APA is next to godliness. I just think that the market has jumped on the hop craze and that's all you see on the shelves. It's crowding out other selections and I personally enjoy more choice.

I'll be less subtle than the other moderator who posted on this thread - this thread's level of dialogue is just one notch above the "I hate InBev" threads.

OP, the premise of your first post was not as you stated above. It was, in fact, that craft brewers are making bad beers and covering it up with excessive hopping, and unsophisticated beer drinkers are buying them. Don't carp on other members for reacting to what you know is a challenging thread.

Since:

1) this topic has been covered endlessly
2) the level dialogue in this thread is remarkably low
3) the topic will come up again undoubtably

I'm closing this thread.

 

[Pappers_]

Well, professor, let me clarify it for you: Using corn sugar or HFCS as a substitute for good malt due to a cost-effective production measure is, in my opinion, a poor brewing practice.

You didn't say that. You said using sugar is a bad practice. The other member told you why it isn't a bad practice. The appropriate response is "Thank you, that's a good point".