How much hops/dry hops to generally make a pale ale be considered a India Pale Ale?

[Cappeter]

Opinions on IPA vs Pale ale w/r to
Hops

 

[MaxStout]

A good place to start would be to compare the 2015 BJCP descriptions of an American IPA (21A), vs. American Pale Ale (18B).

 

[McMullan]

An American PA is closer to an English IPA than an English IPA is to an American IPA. Regardless, it really depends on the hops and the way you use them. Some of my PAs have more hops than some of my IPAs, where I incorporate contact time with wort. It's a mine field! Or was it a hop field?

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

A good place to start would be to compare the 2015 BJCP descriptions of an American IPA (21A), vs. American Pale Ale (18B).

Brewers Association also has a beer style guideline that may be of interest.

https://www.brewersassociation.org/edu/brewers-association-beer-style-guidelines/

 

[CascadesBrewer]

You won't get a clear answer. I have heard some people say that Pale Ales should not be dry hopped, but I dry hop most of my Pale Ales. I have made some beers with a good amount of hops that I call a Pale Ale, but mostly because they are in the 5% ABV range. I have a beer fermenting now that got 8.6 oz of homegrown hops into the kettle. It will not be dry hopped, but I will call it an IPA because it should be in the 6.5% to 7% ABV range. Zombie Dust is sold as a Pale Ale, but at 6.2% and heavily hopped, it would clearly be an IPA in my book. Some say IBUs determine the style, but plenty of IPAs are made these days with 40 or less IBUs.

I guess in my view, ABV is the biggest factor.

 

[Cappeter]

Abv - that does make a lot of sense - high Abv with moderate amount of hops - IPA - back in the original IPA days - 19th century- how much hops
Adj was added for the trip to India?

 

[Cappeter]

After going to many microbrewerys - higher ABV’s generally called IPA’s

 

[MaxStout]

You won't get a clear answer. I have heard some people say that Pale Ales should not be dry hopped, but I dry hop most of my Pale Ales. I have made some beers with a good amount of hops that I call a Pale Ale, but mostly because they are in the 5% ABV range. I have a beer fermenting now that got 8.6 oz of homegrown hops into the kettle. It will not be dry hopped, but I will call it an IPA because it should be in the 6.5% to 7% ABV range. Zombie Dust is sold as a Pale Ale, but at 6.2% and heavily hopped, it would clearly be an IPA in my book. Some say IBUs determine the style, but plenty of IPAs are made these days with 40 or less IBUs.

I guess in my view, ABV is the biggest factor.

A Venn diagram of IPAs vs APAs have a good bit of overlap. And then there are these "session IPAs" that seem suspiciously like dry-hopped APAs to me.

The lines are blurred. Style labels only matter if you're entering it in a comp. If you brew it and you like it, that's all that matters.

 

[eric19312]

The lines are blurred. Style labels only matter if you're entering it in a comp. If you brew it and you like it, that's all that matters.

Agreed... @Cappeter 's reason for asking the question might help. I'd say if you are looking to have both on hand you probably want to emphasize differences when these two beers are tasted side by side and so might make a smaller APA with more complex malt character complementing the hops while the comparison would be a bigger IPA with lots of bright late hops over a very clean malt background.

On other hand, If you are brewing for competition, you have to think about how the beer will come across in a flight of other similar beers and you may end up brewing an APA that would easily fit into the stats and description of the IPA category.

 

[superiorsat]

When everyone comes to a consensus make sure to post so we know for sure what to call what. I brew what I consider to be an Imperial Pale Ale that is at 10% ABV if that helps factor into the decision making. I literally might change my description from IPA to Pale Ale after tasting if the hops don't come through enough for it to be considered an IPA ( IMO ) and that is why I have a delicious Imperial Pale Ale on my roster.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

19th century- how much hops
Adj was added for the trip to India?

The blog "Shut up about Barclay Perkins" is an interesting read on the history of British beers.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

A Venn diagram of IPAs vs APAs have a good bit of overlap. And then there are these "session IPAs" that seem suspiciously like dry-hopped APAs to me.

The lines are blurred. Style labels only matter if you're entering it in a comp. If you brew it and you like it, that's all that matters.

Does anyone know of a freely available list of recipes that target the "mid-point" (or "mid-points") of common styles?

If such a list does exist, it would be a good way learn more about styles "by example and sampling".

For those willing spend a few dollars on a book, Simple Homebrewing (chapter 7: Simple Recipe Design) has a number of recipe templates for various styles.

 

[Bramling Cross]

I certainly wouldn't consider dry hopping to be a defining characteristic that demarcates whether a beer is an IPA or PA.

Dry hopping is a technique whereas IPA and PA are styles. It's kinda like asking "What kind of engine is needed to generally have a car be considered a sports car?" Inline engines, V-engines, horizontally opposed engines, Wankel engines, there's all kinds of engines in cars that are generally accepted as being sports cars.

Writing from the US, and as a native of the West Coast that has spent 20 years on the East Coast, I agree with eric19312's assertion that the grist is more likely to be the defining characteristic. In my brewery, my US pale ales tend to be have more modest OGs and they emphasize a bit of medium C-malt (usually C40) and a bit more flavor from the base malt (typically pale malt rather than straight 2-row). The overall effect is to create a beer that is within the realm of "balanced," but unambiguously hop forward.

By contrast, my US IPAs tend to have a more generous OG (north of 1.060) and a much simpler, dryer, grist that leaves a clear pathway for the hops to take center stage. These beers tend to discard any notion of balance and are assertively hop forward.

As a technique, dry hopping can be used in either of those recipes.

Anyway, that's what I think and it only actually matters in my brewery. What you decide is, ultimately, the best answer for you.

 

[Cappeter]

The blog "Shut up about Barclay Perkins" is an interesting read on the history of British beers.

Thanks - will read - lam interested in “ beer history “

 

[Cappeter]

I certainly wouldn't consider dry hopping to be a defining characteristic that demarcates whether a beer is an IPA or PA.

Dry hopping is a technique whereas IPA and PA are styles. It's kinda like asking "What kind of engine is needed to generally have a car be considered a sports car?" Inline engines, V-engines, horizontally opposed engines, Wankel engines, there's all kinds of engines in cars that are generally accepted as being sports cars.

Writing from the US, and as a native of the West Coast that has spent 20 years on the East Coast, I agree with eric19312's assertion that the grist is more likely to be the defining characteristic. In my brewery, my US pale ales tend to be have more modest OGs and they emphasize a bit of medium C-malt (usually C40) and a bit more flavor from the base malt (typically pale malt rather than straight 2-row). The overall effect is to create a beer that is within the realm of "balanced," but unambiguously hop forward.

By contrast, my US IPAs tend to have a more generous OG (north of 1.060) and a much simpler, dryer, grist that leaves a clear pathway for the hops to take center stage. These beers tend to discard any notion of balance and are assertively hop forward.

As a technique, dry hopping can be used in either of those recipes.

Anyway, that's what I think and it only actually matters in my brewery. What you decide is, ultimately, the best answer for you.

Very good info-and it is information that helps me better understand the pale ale vs IPA - realizing there is no absolute definition of pale ale vs IPA- thanks for your detailed input

 

[bwible]

There is overlap between the styles. Pale ale is usually lower in alcohol, 5% range. IPA is usually higher, near 7% range. Bittering unit to gravity unit ratio is higher for IPA. .7 for pale ale, .85 for IPA.

Trying commercial examples helps. Sierra Nevada Pale Ale has long been held as one of the classic examples of the style. There are many other good ones.

IPA is further convoluted by NEIPA, which is everywhere now and is likely what you’ll get today if you just ask for IPA, especially at so called “hip and trendy” places. When you are looking for commercial examples of IPA you have to know if you want NEIPA or West Coast IPA. NEIPA is cloudy, most of them look like a glass of orange juice or like the sludge we pour out of the bottom of our fermenters. West Coast IPAs are clear beer. And many commercial IPAs are not labelled correctly. So its difficult to talk about IPA today. One of my favorites is Lagunitas IPA. I generally avoid any IPA that is sold in a can if I don’t want NEIPA. Best advice I can give.

 

[WesBrew]

Definitive answer: 5oz pale ale, 7oz ipa for a 5gal brew

 

[couchsending]

Create your own definition and go with it. Drink the best versions of the style commercially brewed around the US and take what you like about them and dislike and create your own guidelines for your beer and the beer you want to make.

At my brewery we can’t serve anything over 5% on draft so none of the standard definitions apply or really make sense.

We serve what we jokingly call a L IPA ( Pronounced Lie P A) which is a 5% beer designed to withstand over 4#/bbl of hops throughout the process. 2.5#/bbl in the DH. It’s feels/tastes/smell like it’s 6.5% but it’s only 5%. It’s not an IPA cause IPA starts at 6% hence the L. Our pale ales are usually 4.5-4.8%, drier, and have a lower overall hopping load. 2.5-3#/bbl of hops overall. 1.5ish in the DH.

IPA starts at 6% in my mind and goes to 7.7. 7.8% and up is Double IPA. The overall hopping load increases accordingly.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Opinions on IPA vs Pale ale w/r to Hops

An India Pale Ale should only use Goldings, but for a pale ale then Fuggles would also be acceptable.

Or at least, that would be the late-19th century view in Britain. But it gets complicated - in the 20th century the distinction essentially disappeared.

See, it kinda depends on history and geography - and now we have USians making India Pale Ales that never go to India, are black and made with lager yeasts. So the name is becoming pretty meaningless.

But if you want to go back to the beginning, in 1821 Andrew Ure was saying " It is well known that other things being equal, the liquor keeps in proportion to the quantity of hops. Fresh beer may have from a pound to a pound and a half to a barrel of 32 [imperial] gallons, June beer two pounds and a half, beer for the month of August three pounds and for a second summer three and an half. For India voyages, four pounds."

That 4lb/imperial barrel is the equivalent of 8.3 oz in 5 US gallons.

And a later edition of Ure explains that brewers are forced to go as high as a gravity of 1.055 for tax reasons (between 1830-1880) although they would rather brew weaker : "This impolitic interference with the operations of trade compels the manufacturer of bitter beer to employ wort of a much greater density than he otherwise would do; for beer made from wort of the specific gravity 1042 is not only better calculated to resist secondary fermentation and the other effects of a hot climate, but is also more pleasant and salubrious to the consumer."

So "classic" IPAs were typically 1.055-1.060, although high attenuation took them to 6-6.5% ABV. And by the standards of the time they were weaker than the average beer. And by the 1950s many IPAs were in the low 1.030s.

 

[Miraculix]

Roll some dices, that's your difference.

Meaning, there is none. It's all about the naming that is given to the beer. One can choose, the borders between both are non existent. I've seen sub 4% abv ipas in the UK and above this post are some pale ales mentioned that have more than 6% abv. Hopping rates also vary immensely.

It's really just what you decide to call it nowadays.

 

[Miraculix]

An India Pale Ale should only use Goldings, but for a pale ale then Fuggles would also be acceptable.

Or at least, that would be the late-19th century view in Britain. But it gets complicated - in the 20th century the distinction essentially disappeared.

See, it kinda depends on history and geography - and now we have USians making India Pale Ales that never go to India, are black and made with lager yeasts. So the name is becoming pretty meaningless.

But if you want to go back to the beginning, in 1821 Andrew Ure was saying " It is well known that other things being equal, the liquor keeps in proportion to the quantity of hops. Fresh beer may have from a pound to a pound and a half to a barrel of 32 [imperial] gallons, June beer two pounds and a half, beer for the month of August three pounds and for a second summer three and an half. For India voyages, four pounds."

That 4lb/imperial barrel is the equivalent of 8.3 oz in 5 US gallons.

And a later edition of Ure explains that brewers are forced to go as high as a gravity of 1.055 for tax reasons (between 1830-1880) although they would rather brew weaker : "This impolitic interference with the operations of trade compels the manufacturer of bitter beer to employ wort of a much greater density than he otherwise would do; for beer made from wort of the specific gravity 1042 is not only better calculated to resist secondary fermentation and the other effects of a hot climate, but is also more pleasant and salubrious to the consumer."

So "classic" IPAs were typically 1.055-1.060, although high attenuation took them to 6-6.5% ABV. And by the standards of the time they were weaker than the average beer. And by the 1950s many IPAs were in the low 1.030s.

That reminds me of still having to brew a classic IPA. I think Nottingham plus Brett would be ok? 1.055 og and 40-50 ibus bittering additions with Golding's? What do you think?

 

[Northern_Brewer]

That reminds me of still having to brew a classic IPA. I think Nottingham plus Brett would be ok? 1.055 og and 40-50 ibus bittering additions with Golding's? What do you think?

Works for me, better still with Chevalier - although whilst we're on the subject, Wyeast have just released 9097 Brett/Sacc Old Ale blend as a Q4 Private release. I'd probably go with Brett claussenii if you have the choice.

 

[Miraculix]

Works for me, better still with Chevalier - although whilst we're on the subject, Wyeast have just released 9097 Brett/Sacc Old Ale blend as a Q4 Private release. I'd probably go with Brett claussenii if you have the choice.

Chevallier is a pain to get here in Germany atm. Since brexit, they want obviously import tax. Last time they charged me 49 euros for 60 quid worth of brewing supplies, majority was malt. It was obviously falsely calculated but I still never got my money back. German Zoll....

 

[Miraculix]

Works for me, better still with Chevalier - although whilst we're on the subject, Wyeast have just released 9097 Brett/Sacc Old Ale blend as a Q4 Private release. I'd probably go with Brett claussenii if you have the choice.

Anyway, I will try it again. The barley wine I made with the last delivery is exceptionally good now. Aged for over half a year now.

And I will also use the brett claussenii you suggested, thanks for that. I just googled it and it looks like what I had in mind. Any other suggestions yeast- and malt-wise?

 

[Northern_Brewer]

If you're buying then I'd be tempted to just try the 9097 since it's not normally available and it saves you the cost of buying two separate yeasts - I assume the Sacc isn't anything too weird.

Otherwise - yep, anything fairly mainstream British.

One thing to consider that certainly works with dark beers is to blend Bretted and "new" non-Bretted beer 1:2.

 

[davidabcd]

46.3475 IBU's and above is an IPA
46.3474 and below is just a stinking pale ale.
HOWEVER, the above numbers do not apply to noble hops.

Yeah, you should disregard my post.

 

[McMullan]

Chevallier is a pain to get here in Germany atm. Since brexit, they want obviously import tax. Last time they charged me 49 euros for 60 quid worth of brewing supplies, majority was malt. It was obviously falsely calculated but I still never got my money back. German Zoll....

I haven't tried mine yet, but this should avoid extortionate import and shipping. They'll do it by the kg, too, if you want to sample.

 

[McMullan]

An India Pale Ale should only use Goldings, but for a pale ale then Fuggles would also be acceptable.

Or at least, that would be the late-19th century view in Britain. But it gets complicated - in the 20th century the distinction essentially disappeared.

See, it kinda depends on history and geography - and now we have USians making India Pale Ales that never go to India, are black and made with lager yeasts. So the name is becoming pretty meaningless.

But if you want to go back to the beginning, in 1821 Andrew Ure was saying " It is well known that other things being equal, the liquor keeps in proportion to the quantity of hops. Fresh beer may have from a pound to a pound and a half to a barrel of 32 [imperial] gallons, June beer two pounds and a half, beer for the month of August three pounds and for a second summer three and an half. For India voyages, four pounds."

That 4lb/imperial barrel is the equivalent of 8.3 oz in 5 US gallons.

And a later edition of Ure explains that brewers are forced to go as high as a gravity of 1.055 for tax reasons (between 1830-1880) although they would rather brew weaker : "This impolitic interference with the operations of trade compels the manufacturer of bitter beer to employ wort of a much greater density than he otherwise would do; for beer made from wort of the specific gravity 1042 is not only better calculated to resist secondary fermentation and the other effects of a hot climate, but is also more pleasant and salubrious to the consumer."

So "classic" IPAs were typically 1.055-1.060, although high attenuation took them to 6-6.5% ABV. And by the standards of the time they were weaker than the average beer. And by the 1950s many IPAs were in the low 1.030s.

With 5kg of whole UK Goldings let's just say I 'went to f*cking town' following a claimed traditional IPA hopping rate. And let's just say that 'it's still bloody maturing' after 12 months. I'll give another 12 month, but my patients might be wearing a bit thin by then. Well, I'm not made of kegs!

 

[Miraculix]

I haven't tried mine yet, but this should avoid extortionate import and shipping. They'll do it by the kg, too, if you want to sample.

Sweet, thanks.

.... 3,9 Euros per Kg, that is expensive. Still cheaper than my maltmiller order from last time

Just to be clear, maltmiller could not do anything about it. They even were really helpfull when the parcel got stuck in transit, they are nice guys.

 

[Miraculix]

If you're buying then I'd be tempted to just try the 9097 since it's not normally available and it saves you the cost of buying two separate yeasts - I assume the Sacc isn't anything too weird.

Otherwise - yep, anything fairly mainstream British.

One thing to consider that certainly works with dark beers is to blend Bretted and "new" non-Bretted beer 1:2.

I do not like that they say that it produces sourness over time. I am not a fan of tart beer (unless it is a sour of course). That´s why I liked the description of the claussenii more. Also, it was originaly cultured from the type of beer i want to brew. But these beer must have had multiple bretts inside obviously.