NEIPA Grist Question

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.

elgee

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
353
Reaction score
45
Location
Stamford
Is the following going to be too much wheat in a NEIPA?

9 lbs pilsner malt
2 lbs white wheat
1 lb Flaked wheat
1 lb Flaked oats
12 oz Carapils
 
Looks good but get rid of the carapils, you definitely don't need it. Also might ditch the flaked wheat, but prob no big deal.
 
Its fine. Braufessor has a long NE IPA thread in which he uses 2 row, Maris Otter, flaked oats, flaked barley, flaked wheat and honey malts. I use his recipe and it is a great beer with a nice mouthfeel from the flaked grains.
 
I always use 15%~20% wheat of my grist and it come out pretty great. I think they give me the hazy look.
 
Too much? No.
Do you NEED that much?
No.

And I agree with dropping Carapils. It's overrated and won't add much. Use a real caramalt like CaraHell instead.
ANd something to give it a little malt backbone, like a pound or two of Vienna or something.
The problem with most of the NEIPAs out there these days (most of which are mediocre at best) is that the malt is almost an afterthought other than keeping it pale and adding adjuncts.
A grain bill that actually has some flavor will do wonders toward making a good NEIPA. Pils, Wheat, and Oats is about as bland and boring as it gets.
Just like 90% of the NEIPAs being produced today (homebrewed AND commercial).
There is more to a good NEIPA than just liquid hop juice.
 
Last edited:
I typically only drink treehouse beers these days, I think they use a pretty basic grain bill and their yeast is what really gives their beers a lot of flavor. I don’t know what that their hopping rates are though.
 
I typically only drink treehouse beers these days, I think they use a pretty basic grain bill and their yeast is what really gives their beers a lot of flavor. I don’t know what that their hopping rates are though.
Treehouse makes fantastic beers, and not just their NEIPAs (which I feel are among the VERY best). THeir German Pils is super-authentic, and their milk stout is stellar!
 
I had the milk stout this week, I can’t imagine they are not using some form of chocolate in there. Tastes too much like Hershey’s syrup to not have something added
 
I had the milk stout this week, I can’t imagine they are not using some form of chocolate in there. Tastes too much like Hershey’s syrup to not have something added
I don't think they do use chocolate in it, but even if they do, is that a problem?
It's a milk stout, so it uses lactose, which gives you that Hershey's (sweet milk) flavor. Add some chocolate malt, and voila...Hershey's chocolate.
 
I use 2-row , flaked wheat , flaked oats , white wheat and corn sugar . Think it was like 17-18 #'s total for 5 gallon batch
 
Too much? No.
Do you NEED that much?
No.

And I agree with dropping Carapils. It's overrated and won't add much. Use a real caramalt like CaraHell instead.
ANd something to give it a little malt backbone, like a pound or two of Vienna or something.
The problem with most of the NEIPAs out there these days (most of which are mediocre at best) is that the malt is almost an afterthought other than keeping it pale and adding adjuncts.
A grain bill that actually has some flavor will do wonders toward making a good NEIPA. Pils, Wheat, and Oats is about as bland and boring as it gets.
Just like 90% of the NEIPAs being produced today (homebrewed AND commercial).
There is more to a good NEIPA than just liquid hop juice.

Unless, of course, you happen to like liquid hop juice. That's be beauty of brewing...you can brew what you like and are not hamstrung into drinking someone else's view of the ultimate beer. "Balance" is a term I don't care for when it's used as in a judgmental way. The "proper balance" is in the eye of the drinker. 20 years ago, any NEIPA would have been scoffed at by judges as being woefully out of balance. Today, it's one of the most popular styles out there.

What makes a "good" NEIPA is a matter of personal preference.

Oh, and personally I don't like any caramel malt in my IPAs. Most add a roasty element that conflicts with nice hoppy notes of a NEIPA (again, IMO).
 
Unless, of course, you happen to like liquid hop juice. That's be beauty of brewing...you can brew what you like and are not hamstrung into drinking someone else's view of the ultimate beer. "Balance" is a term I don't care for when it's used as in a judgmental way. The "proper balance" is in the eye of the drinker. 20 years ago, any NEIPA would have been scoffed at by judges as being woefully out of balance. Today, it's one of the most popular styles out there.

What makes a "good" NEIPA is a matter of personal preference.

Oh, and personally I don't like any caramel malt in my IPAs. Most add a roasty element that conflicts with nice hoppy notes of a NEIPA (again, IMO).

True, beauty is in the eye of the beer-holder. I'm not talking about balance though - that is too subjective and not always desired. I'm talking about simple flavor. If all you want is "hops juice", you could just ferment some corn sugar, hop the heck out of it, and call it a day. Or just use a 100% pils or pale grain bill.

Even "hops-juice"- oriented brews should have some degree of beer-ness underneath all that hops. And that was my point about there being so many mediocre-at-best NEIPAs out there. Brewers think they can neglect the base beer and just hop the crap out of it and no one will notice. If you were making a heavily-seasoned dry-rubbed steak, you wouldn't say "I'm just going to use the cheapest, questionable cut of meat I can find because nobody will notice with all that seasoning". So why neglect the base beer under an NEIPA?

Of course, that IS the beauty of homebrewing - you can tell me I'm full of it and go ahead and use the beer equivalent of a rice cake as your grist, and if it comes out perfect to your taste, then it is a success for you. Just don't be surprised if not all the people you share it with agree.

I agree on the caramalts, with a caveat: Most people only use crystal 40 or above in APA and IPAs (usually 60). The SRM of CaraHell is only about 10. It does not exhibit a roasty element - it is more like a honey flavor.

That said, I don't use caramalts in my NEIPA either - I just threw that in because the OP was going to use Carapils, which isn't even a real caramalt, and is grossly overrated for the other qualities it is purported to offer.
 
True, beauty is in the eye of the beer-holder. I'm not talking about balance though - that is too subjective and not always desired. I'm talking about simple flavor. If all you want is "hops juice", you could just ferment some corn sugar, hop the heck out of it, and call it a day. Or just use a 100% pils or pale grain bill.

Even "hops-juice"- oriented brews should have some degree of beer-ness underneath all that hops. And that was my point about there being so many mediocre-at-best NEIPAs out there. Brewers think they can neglect the base beer and just hop the crap out of it and no one will notice. If you were making a heavily-seasoned dry-rubbed steak, you wouldn't say "I'm just going to use the cheapest, questionable cut of meat I can find because nobody will notice with all that seasoning". So why neglect the base beer under an NEIPA?

Of course, that IS the beauty of homebrewing - you can tell me I'm full of it and go ahead and use the beer equivalent of a rice cake as your grist, and if it comes out perfect to your taste, then it is a success for you. Just don't be surprised if not all the people you share it with agree.

I agree on the caramalts, with a caveat: Most people only use crystal 40 or above in APA and IPAs (usually 60). The SRM of CaraHell is only about 10. It does not exhibit a roasty element - it is more like a honey flavor.

That said, I don't use caramalts in my NEIPA either - I just threw that in because the OP was going to use Carapils, which isn't even a real caramalt, and is grossly overrated for the other qualities it is purported to offer.

Valid points. I've experimented a lot with NEIPAs and I've had many examples of the heavy hitters since I have a good friend who travels out east at least 4 times a year to get beer. I always end up with a nice selection of Treehouse, Trillium, Hill Farmstead, Foam, & Bissell Brothers when he returns. I've found I don't need to add much to a pale ale malt grain bill to get beers in the neighborhood of those. Initially I would blend pale ale with marris otter or golden promise, but with the intensity of hop flavors they generally get buried on the palate anyway. The one I brewed Saturday has 50/50 pale ale and pilsen malts as a base with a bit of carapils and a little white wheat.
 
Brewed one yesterday with 2-row, golden promise, flaked oats & honey malt. 2:1 chloride to sulfate. Fingers crossed

To the OP I'd swap the carapils for 1/2 lb of Honey Malt
 
IMG_2846.PNG
I've used a number a different grain bills for my NEIPAs..ultimately it comes down to your personal preference. I agree that using basic pale malts, wheat, and oats is very boring, but I've also come to realize that that is what I like...and I'm ok with that. All I want from my grains is to provide the color, mouthfeel, and body that I'm looking for, and then to get out of the way for the hops. I've experimented a lot and what I've pretty much settled on is this: (5 gallon batch, BIAB)

Pilsner Malt 10 pounds
Malted oats 3 pounds
White Wheat 3 pounds
Carapils .5 pounds
Acidulated 6 ounces

I shoot for a ph of about 5.15 which is why I have the acidulated, and I also add the appropriate amount of 10% phosphoric acid solution.

This generally comes out extremely light in color, very hazy, and very soft with a full mouthfeel. Obviously your water adjustments, mash temp, etc...will come into play. After experimenting with this as well I think I've settled on 135:135 chloride to sulfate ppm. I've done the 200:100 chloride to sulfate but felt like I was getting muted hop flavors and no real increase in mouthfeel from the elevated chloride. I also like to mash around 152. Some people will want to mash higher to increase body and perceived mouthfeel, but I prefer my neipas to finish around 1.010 while others prefer a little higher..1.014-1.018.

One thing I'll say is that after using both flaked oats and flaked Wheat several times, I definitely prefer malted oats and regular white Wheat. I felt like I was consistently getting a "slimy" or "wet" mouthfeel from the flaked oats, and don't get that from the malted oats. In terms of the flaked wheat, I just really didn't feel like it was giving me anything that regular wheat couldn't, and just settled on using plain old white wheat. I've liked the results and have no reason to switch back.

For whatever it's worth tired hands has openly stated they use malted oats, and other half uses both malted and flaked, but seem to be using the malted oats more these days. Also, the far majority of trillium grain bills use no oats at all..it's primarily Pilsner/2-row, Wheat, either flaked or non, some dextrin Malt, and a tiny bit of light crystal.

I've never used any honey Malt but am interested in trying it out. I've heard and read mixed reviews.

The only way you'll find out what YOU really like, is by trying out different grain bills.

I know some people think this looks "murky" and disgusting..but this is what I'm going for. It is not yeasty or thick at all. Just soft, smooth, full, and bursting with saturated hop flavor and aroma.
 
Last edited:
Valid points. I've experimented a lot with NEIPAs and I've had many examples of the heavy hitters since I have a good friend who travels out east at least 4 times a year to get beer. I always end up with a nice selection of Treehouse, Trillium, Hill Farmstead, Foam, & Bissell Brothers when he returns.
I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but I think Trillium is one of those breweries that is generally mediocre at best.
Their beers (and I've had probably a dozen of them) are generally forgettable, or at the very least, indistinguishable. It's almost as if they never make the same beer twice. You go there once and it's like "Here is X beer!" next ime "here is X beer with Mosaic" then "Here is X beer with ElDorado". Good luck finding exactly the same beer twice, which to me indicates they are just throwing stuff together on a whim. ONly one beer I've ever had there stood out from the crowd of all their other beers, and when I went back to get it again, guess what: it wasn't available - they had moved on.
And almost all of their beers I've had suffer from what I described earlier as a weak base beer and a tendency toward harsh, or sharp hops applications. All they seem to care about is variations on the hops theme to satisfy the fickle market.

Now that really is a separate discussion, about breweries who don't even bother to or can't make pilot batches because they have to churn out product to a consumer public who isn't looking for their next favorite beer to have as a regular thing, but is just looking constantly for what's new. So kudos to Trillium for catering to the ADHD "oh look - a new hop!" of the current beer market, but the downside is that not a lot of them seem to care about making or perfecting a representative recipe (call it a flagship if you will). They just want to crank out a ton of the latest trendy beer, which for now is anything hopped to high heaven or sour.

By contrast, you go to Treehouse, and you can still get Julius and Green, two of the oldest and best examples of the style, which have a solid malt backbone.

Anyway, I've clearly digressed - I simply don't care for Trillium, but only because their beers are not generally to MY taste. I guess my bggest gripe is that I try A LOT of new beers from all kinds of breweries, both local and national, and what I find is that out of every 10 beers I try, I'm lucky if I find one that stands out enough to bother having again. 1 in 20 maybe will I bother to actually seek out again. In most cases the beers aren't BAD, they're just wholly unremarkable.

Which brings me back to my whole point: When I brew, I don't want my beer to be only as good as those 9 out of 10 that are fine but unremarkable - I want mine to be a standout. So I will go the extra mile to carefully craft and tweak my recipes. I don't want to make "beer". I want to make "damned good" beer.

Rant off :)
 
Last edited:
Here is my "That's a $5 Shake" - a vanilla milkshake IPA variant of my standard NEIPA, which is based on my attempts to come close to Treehouse's Julius.
$5 shake.jpg
 
IMG_1879.JPG
I agree with pretty much everything above. I don't care one way or the other as I'm not a trillium or treehouse fanboy whatsoever, but it's a little unfair to say that trillium doesn't have any base beers that they produce. I'm pretty sure the whole street series (stillings, melcher, congress, etc...I'm too lazy to go their website and actually look) is produced pretty regularly, along with fort point, and a few others. I used to think trillium wasn't that good and had some pretty bad batches, but everything I've had from them lately has been delicious...for my tastes.

Conversely I feel like treehouse has dropped off a little bit. A few years ago they were "THE" brewery but ever since they expanded I feel like ive had some sub par batches of Julius..which they should have completely nailed down at this point.

Like I said though, I really don't care at all. I think it's worth noting that there are so many breweries pumping out neipas these days, some obviously better than others, that it's difficult to find one that's really going to blow your mind. As consumers we've become spoiled with so many offerings that we almost get desensitized to the beer. The other night a friend and I drank some fresh other halfs, some burly oaks, a monkish, and a few equilibriums. All really good commercial examples of neipas, but because we've had so many of them and have become so used to them, we were just like "yup, really good." The point is that I'm not sure my mind can really be blown at this point.

The first beer I ever had that blew my mind and changed my perception of what beer could be was a fresh growler of very hazy from treehouse. I remember thinking to myself how amazing it was..but now I'd prob just think it's another good IPA...like so many others out there.

The main thing I agree with is that when I brew, I'm brewing for me, and I want to make beer that I think is incredible for my tastes.
 
Last edited:
I think my issue with NEIPAs is 1. The ridicules cost of the hops you need to buy, if you are doing a Citra, Mosaic or Galaxy beer, and 2. The yeast plays a big part. When I have treehouse or trillium, all I can taste is the overpowering yeast, which at times I really like. But, when they use that yeast, I can’t tell a Citra beer from a galaxy beer, etc. all their beers taste relatively the same to me, over yeasty and less about the hops they are using. Granted, I have no idea what yeast treehouse or trillium use, I’ve tried to emulate something close and it’s just not worth it anymore, I’ll just make something I like that tastes good and I can actually get the hops flavor.
 
I think my issue with NEIPAs is 1. The ridicules cost of the hops you need to buy, if you are doing a Citra, Mosaic or Galaxy beer, and 2. The yeast plays a big part. When I have treehouse or trillium, all I can taste is the overpowering yeast, which at times I really like. But, when they use that yeast, I can’t tell a Citra beer from a galaxy beer, etc. all their beers taste relatively the same to me, over yeasty and less about the hops they are using. Granted, I have no idea what yeast treehouse or trillium use, I’ve tried to emulate something close and it’s just not worth it anymore, I’ll just make something I like that tastes good and I can actually get the hops flavor.
I don't bother chasing the whole "but XYZ brewery uses this yeast or that yeast" because people act like you can't get a VERY close approximation of a given beer without using their exact yeast strain, which is bunk.
I generally use WLP 007 or Imperial's Juice.
 
I don't bother chasing the whole "but XYZ brewery uses this yeast or that yeast" because people act like you can't get a VERY close approximation of a given beer without using their exact yeast strain, which is bunk.
I generally use WLP 007 or Imperial's Juice.
Yeast is important but it's only one piece of the puzzle. I've used all the usual suspects and if used properly they can all make great beer. Been recently using the kviek hornindal and really like it.
 
I agree with pretty much everything above. I don't care one way or the other as I'm not a trillium or treehouse fanboy whatsoever, but it's a little unfair to say that trillium doesn't have any base beers that they produce. I'm pretty sure the whole street series (stillings, melcher, congress, etc...I'm too lazy to go their website and actually look) is produced pretty regularly, along with fort point, and a few others. I used to think trillium wasn't that good and had some pretty bad batches, but everything I've had from them lately has been delicious...for my tastes.

Conversely I feel like treehouse has dropped off a little bit. A few years ago they were "THE" brewery but ever since they expanded I feel like ive had some sub par batches of Julius..which they should have completely nailed down at this point.

I understand what you're saying about being unable to be blown away anymore, but I still find that while maybe being blown away is a bit strong, I still occasionally come across one that stands out above the din.

Yes, Trillium has their "flagship" Street series, but even those are different every time. It was their "Galaxy hopped" Fort Point that I really liked, but on subsequent trips was unable to get it because I feel like there isn't a standard Fort Point, only a different variation of it every time.
And I haven't been there in probably 2 years, because of disappointment, so maybe they have improved.

Regarding Treehouse, I do feel like they suffered a bit when scaling up to the new brewery in Charlton, but I think they are over that hump. Last time I was there I had Julius on draft and it was simply divine. And you simply MUST try their German Pils and Milk Stouts if you can get them (their names escape me).

I will admit to being a fan of Treehouse, but that's because Julius and Green were my introduction to NEIPAs several years ago at a time when I was tired of IPAs in general. I think my preference for them is simply a function of that being the NEIPA flavor I "grew up" up. In other words, they set my benchmark and I think Trillium beers are very different in flavor and sensory profile (IMHO less smooth, sharper). But it's all about what each individual prefers (if they indeed have a preference).

I think Trillium's massive success is due more to their proximity to the Boston metro area than to their beer, per se, compared to someone like Treehouse out in the middle of nowhere an hour and a half from Boston.
 
Yeast is important but it's only one piece of the puzzle. I've used all the usual suspects and if used properly they can all make great beer. Been recently using the kviek hornindal and really like it.
I agree yeast is important, but I think to say you can't get a VERY close approximation/clone (close enough that you would be hard-pressed to tell a difference) of Zombie Dust or Julius or Heady without using their exact strains is a stretch if not a complete fantasy.

But, more importantly, I am no longer interested in cloning someone else's beer. Been there, done that. I am now interested in making my own inspired by my favorites, but all my own.
 
I agree yeast is important, but I think to say you can't get a VERY close approximation/clone (close enough that you would be hard-pressed to tell a difference) of Zombie Dust or Julius or Heady without using their exact strains is a stretch if not a complete fantasy.

But, more importantly, I am no longer interested in cloning someone else's beer. Been there, done that. I am now interested in making my own inspired by my favorites, but all my own.

I agree with this 1000%
 
Having read through the thread, I would agree with dropping the carapils and keeping the profile simple. Just because you have a simple grain bill does not mean you will have a bland neipa. This style is all about the hops and yeast, and if you're in the ballpark of a pound per 5 gallons, it probably doesn't matter too much what you add to the grain bill. The hops will overshadow the grist, for the most part. Unless of course you add something that conflicts with certain hops. In my opinion, I don't like honey malt with mosaic or galaxy hops, but it works great with Citra. A base of 2 row, wheat and oats is all you really need for a mosaic or galaxy neipa. And trust me, mine never lack flavor or complexity.

As for the Tree House comments - they were my first love. Julius, Green, Haze, Doppelganger, Alter Ego. All very good beers that at one point were all in my top 10. I shared a few with a college buddy of mine who home brewed. He said we could brew something like this (TH), and I didn't believe him. So, he got me into brewing and instead of bi-weekly trips to TH, I brew my own and visit TH maybe once every few months. In regards to their quality control, it's unfortunately very hit or miss now. They had missed the mark on Julius for a few months after opening in Charlton, but it seemed like everything was ironed out. But the last trip I made last week for JJJuliusss was a disappointment. It was the first time I ever got my hands on it and it was just blah. Regular Julius was a disappointment as well. I had 1 can that wasn't carbed and another that tasted overly ripe. Like almost rotten. Doppelganger was just ok. Haze was pretty good. Overall, I think they still produce great beer, but the hype train is still very alive. Until the end of Monson, I would argue against the TH haters, but lately, I honestly don't care to waste my breath. I'd rather brew my own :)
 
In have been noticing the same thing with TH. Been going since May of last year and never consistent. Their beer also has a lot of hop and yeast at the bottom of the cans and it’s rather bitter which ruins the smoothness if the beer.
 
In have been noticing the same thing with TH. Been going since May of last year and never consistent. Their beer also has a lot of hop and yeast at the bottom of the cans and it’s rather bitter which ruins the smoothness if the beer.
Hmm, I haven't had the bitterness issue, but there has always been a slight layer on the bottom of their cans, dating back to Monson. But I never get floaters like with Alchemist ie Heady Topper, Crusher and especially Focal Banger.
 
Depending on the beer, mostly with the IIPA, you will see it if you put the entire can. I try not to anymore. It’s not a huge deal but suggests to me that they are either rushing to get the beer in cans or not dropping everything out before packaging. It also may just be that they use a lot of hops and it’s just what happens with their system?
 
Depending on the beer, mostly with the IIPA, you will see it if you put the entire can. I try not to anymore. It’s not a huge deal but suggests to me that they are either rushing to get the beer in cans or not dropping everything out before packaging. It also may just be that they use a lot of hops and it’s just what happens with their system?
It's always a slurry layer, but it's been in every can I've gotten since day 1, over a few years ago. It's definitely not hop debris. I actually shake the can a little and put in every last drop lol. To each their own!
 
Back
Top