New England IPA "Northeast" style IPA

[SRJHops]

My apologies if this was already mentioned but has anyone heard about Tom Shellhammer's research on dry hopping?

https://patspints.com/2019/01/16/the-surprising-science-of-dry-hopping-lessons-from-tom-shellhammer/

Tl;DR: 8 g/L (1.1 oz/gal) is essentially the saturation point for hop oil/aroma extraction from dry hops

Very interesting indeed. So my plan to dry hop 9 ounces for my 6-gallon batch would appear to be about 2 ounces too many, though beervoid's point is well taken -- is the absorption rate different for different hops?

But I can get on board for a 1.1 ounce per gallon -- it does sound about right.

NOW, has there been HOT side research? I would guess the absorption rate is a lot higher, like how it doesn't work very well to steep tea bags in cold water... So I wonder if I am also "wasting" money on the hot side?

Of course, to make things more complicated/interesting, the hot side absorption must vary by temperature, right? (The number of variables in beer making is part of what makes it so fun/challenging!)

I'm at 18 ounces total in my NEIPA recipe right now: 50% hot side and 50% cold; so 3 ounces at knockout and 6 in whirlpool, then 9 ounces in dry hop. (This time out I'm going to dry hop 4 ounces on Day 2, and 5 ounces 3 days prior to bottling.)

 

[Dgallo]

One point to note.

If dry hopping using bags to contain hops to prevent clogging then the amounts are different. Extraction is not as efficient in bags. So adjustments should be made to taste.

That is certainly true. I don’t use bags for that exact reason. Soft crashing without oxygen contact will drop yeast and the majority of hop material within 18 hours of hitting temp. I rather implement this step than buy More hops

 

[leesmith]

That is certainly true. I don’t use bags for that exact reason. Soft crashing without oxygen contact will drop yeast and the majority of hop material within 18 hours of hitting temp. I rather implement this step than buy More hops

Yeah...I use kegs and have tried the filter over the dip tube with crashing under pressure. It works but not always so for me bags seem to be the only sure fire way to avoid clogs. My buddy welded tabs on the inside of the keg lid to tie off to to ensure the bag doesn’t fall into the bottom.

I found, for whatever reason, some hops don’t want to drop out as easily as others. Had a pound of Amarillo that would float for days. I don’t know why.

 

[Dgallo]

Yeah...I use kegs and have tried the filter over the dip tube. It works but not .

You ferment in your keg or just Dryhop so you can do it under pressure?

 

[stickyfinger]

I've also settled in on close to 1oz/gal for dry hop. it seems you start to avoid possible strong tannin/astringency issues at least with some batches of hops if you keep it below 1 oz/gal. lately, i decided i'd try to just go for cryo hops when possible and try to keep the 1 oz/gal dry hop but get more flavor. seems like it would work. haven't used cryo that much.

 

[leesmith]

You ferment in your keg or just Dryhop so you can do it under pressure?

I used to just dry hop (transfer from SS brewtech bucket or carboy) in them but have started fermenting in them now.

I find them easier to break down and clean....and cheeper. Also, easier to keep things low O2.

 

[Dgallo]

I've also settled in on close to 1oz/gal for dry hop. it seems you start to avoid possible strong tannin/astringency issues at least with some batches of hops if you keep it below 1 oz/gal. lately, i decided i'd try to just go for cryo hops when possible and try to keep the 1 oz/gal dry hop but get more flavor. seems like it would work. haven't used cryo that much.

I use cryo often. Found them much more effective Whirlpool than dryhop. John Kimmich mentioned the same claiming he gets much more brightness and complexity using it WP vs. DH

 

[leesmith]

That is certainly true. I don’t use bags for that exact reason. Soft crashing without oxygen contact will drop yeast and the majority of hop material within 18 hours of hitting temp. I rather implement this step than buy More hops

Just saw this in the comments of that blog post:

“
Pat Woodward
January 21, 2019 at 9:36 am


I’m afraid not. Here is the exact protocol used for the dry hopping, taken directly from reference [3]. Maybe this will help you figure out how to do the extrapolation to T-90 pellets.

To achieve the 200, 386, 800 and 1600 g hop/hL unhopped beer treatment rates, the whole cone hops were ground into a hop grist which was divided by mass into two mesh bags (EcoBag, Ossining, NY, USA). These bags were stored inside high barrier pouches flushed with nitrogen until dry-hopping. For each dry-hop treatment, the two kegs filled with 40 L beer were temporarily de-pressurised and opened under a stream of low pressure carbon dioxide. Simultaneously, the high-barrier pouch bag was opened and the mesh bag containing ground hop grist was added to the beer.

Here they are grinding up the whole cone hops which I assume is similar to what is done when you make pellets. So my take is that the mass of whole cone and pellet hops would be similar. I could be wrong about that though.”

So the bag thing is out the window....
Tried to look at the EcoBag website but couldn’t find anything that seemed good for ground up hops.
Anyways...

Here’s the actual research paper:

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...rofiles-of-beer.pdf?origin=publication_detail

 

[Dgallo]

Just saw this in the comments of that blog post:

“
Pat Woodward
January 21, 2019 at 9:36 am


I’m afraid not. Here is the exact protocol used for the dry hopping, taken directly from reference [3]. Maybe this will help you figure out how to do the extrapolation to T-90 pellets.


Here’s the actual research paper:

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...rofiles-of-beer.pdf?origin=publication_detail

There is a couple of things I didn’t like about the experiment, the huge one was filtering the beers. Seems counter productive if you’re doing a loose vs. bag dry hop experiment to then filter the beers. One of the major reason to do a loose dryhop is to allow more lupilin gland rich material to stay in suspension, so by filtering it you are now removing that which is the same thing a bag is doing in the first place.

One thing I did like and correct me if I interpreted this wrong is that increased ozes per gallon or in this case grams per liter in the dryhop did not increase desirable hop flavor and aroma.

 

[leesmith]

There is a couple of things I didn’t like about the experiment, the huge one was filtering the beers. Seems counter productive if you’re doing a loose vs. bag dry hop experiment to then filter the beers. One of the major reason to do a loose dryhop is to allow more lupilin gland rich material to stay in suspension, so by filtering it you are now removing that which is the same thing a bag is doing in the first place.

One thing I did like and correct me if I interpreted this wrong is that increased ozes per gallon or in this case grams per liter in the dryhop did not increase desirable hop flavor and aroma.

They were only testing the effects of increased dry hop dosage in the beer. So no part of the experiment was to test loose vs. bagged dry hop. But their method of dry hopping was to put a measured dose of hops in a mesh bag and then put the bag into the kegged beer; different kegs recieving increasing amounts of dry hops.

So if their dry hopping method was bagged and we agree bags could inhibit extraction, then if they did another experiment testing loose hop amounts would the dosage rates be even lower for a desired effect?

What type of bag were they using; mesh size and volume size? This would play a role in extraction rates.

 

[Dgallo]

I totally misunderstood their “static” dryhoping. That’s what I get for skim reading until the findings lol. Prolly did some assuming since you quoted the post where we were talking about bag vs non. My bad brother. However, those findings make a lot of sense.

 

[leesmith]

I totally misunderstood their “static” dryhoping. That’s what I get for skim reading until the findings lol. Prolly did some assuming since you quoted the post where we were talking about bag vs non. My bad brother. However, those findings make a lot of sense.

No problem.
I just emailed Shellhammer to see what specific types of mesh bags they used.

I’ll report back if he responds.

 

[marchuk96]

Very interesting indeed. So my plan to dry hop 9 ounces for my 6-gallon batch would appear to be about 2 ounces too many, though beervoid's point is well taken -- is the absorption rate different for different hops?

But I can get on board for a 1.1 ounce per gallon -- it does sound about right.

NOW, has there been HOT side research? I would guess the absorption rate is a lot higher, like how it doesn't work very well to steep tea bags in cold water... So I wonder if I am also "wasting" money on the hot side?

Of course, to make things more complicated/interesting, the hot side absorption must vary by temperature, right? (The number of variables in beer making is part of what makes it so fun/challenging!)

I'm at 18 ounces total in my NEIPA recipe right now: 50% hot side and 50% cold; so 3 ounces at knockout and 6 in whirlpool, then 9 ounces in dry hop. (This time out I'm going to dry hop 4 ounces on Day 2, and 5 ounces 3 days prior to bottling.)

I'd say you can def trim that number down drastically and produce as good and most likely better quality beer...not to mention save a bit of money..I use to rock that range myself but now target 12oz in my ipa's...i found that for me 4 oz in boil works great and late...like 7 mins left and 5 mins left...I'm a firm believer in having some boil hops...hop stand is usually about 3-4 oz covered and for an hour minimally...dry hop is usually 4-5 oz in two stages...a charge at day 5 and then a second on day 7 then keg on day 9...Although I have seen and sampled equally as good results with only a 2 oz dry hop from a close fellow homebrewer...(ahhem...shout out to dgallo)...and dont forget to make a great choice in yeast as this will also play a major role in aroma and flavor to your finished beer...if you havent yet i would suggest trying some of imperial organics yeast and ferment on the warm end...great ester production and a killer nose to enhance the delicious hops you put in...since using this yeast I know not only myself but other people have produced there best ipas...and def NO HOP BAGS!! Raw dawg everything!!!

 

[SRJHops]

I'd say you can def trim that number down drastically and produce as good and most likely better quality beer...not to mention save a bit of money..I use to rock that range myself but now target 12oz in my ipa's...i found that for me 4 oz in boil works great and late...like 7 mins left and 5 mins left...I'm a firm believer in having some boil hops...hop stand is usually about 3-4 oz covered and for an hour minimally...dry hop is usually 4-5 oz in two stages...a charge at day 5 and then a second on day 7 then keg on day 9...Although I have seen and sampled equally as good results with only a 2 oz dry hop from a close fellow homebrewer...(ahhem...shout out to dgallo)...and dont forget to make a great choice in yeast as this will also play a major role in aroma and flavor to your finished beer...if you havent yet i would suggest trying some of imperial organics yeast and ferment on the warm end...great ester production and a killer nose to enhance the delicious hops you put in...since using this yeast I know not only myself but other people have produced there best ipas...and def NO HOP BAGS!! Raw dawg everything!!!

Appreciate the advice. So that's 12 oz in a 5-gallon batch, right? So maybe 14 for my 6-gallon?

I was actually going to post a question or two about NO HOP BAGS, so thanks for mentioning it. I haven't been using them, but first, I am having trouble with them clogging the boil kettle dip tube. The other day I had to dump the whole 6 gallons into the carboy by hand, which worked but was dicey: I almost dropped the whole kettle, some wort splashed on the floor, and of course it put most of the hops/trub into the carboy. (On the plus side, it really helped aerate the wort!)

I use an immersion chiller, and with all the hops I doubt trying to whirlpool the trub into a cone would even work. I've read that screens/filters clog easily with pellets (wonder of Cryo would work better - probably!), so I don't think that's the answer.

My current plan for next time -- unless someone has better advice -- is to just turn the dip tube sideways so it's not pointed down and right next to the bottom of the kettle. Hopefully that will make it less likely to clog, and I can decide whether I want to dump the remaining hops/trub into the carboy or not.

Any other suggestions other than hop bags or spiders? I want to be able to whirlpool of course.

Second, for the 2nd dry hop charge a few days before bottling, I've been thinking about bagging them because I worry they won't settle and will end up in the bottles. I can't really cold crash -- maybe drop it down to 60 at best, or I suppose I could put the carboy in a water bath. So, should I bag them or let them float free? My last bottles had quite a bit of sediment, but they were pretty tasty, so maybe having some tasty hop particles floating around in the bottles isn't that big of a deal...

Thoughts/advice? Thanks for the help!

P.S. For your hour-long hop stand, do you just let the temp fall from 180 or are you keeping the burner on at all at various temps?

 

[marchuk96]

Appreciate the advice. So that's 12 oz in a 5-gallon batch, right? So maybe 14 for my 6-gallon?

I was actually going to post a question or two about NO HOP BAGS, so thanks for mentioning it. I haven't been using them, but first, I am having trouble with them clogging the boil kettle dip tube. The other day I had to dump the whole 6 gallons into the carboy by hand, which worked but was dicey: I almost dropped the whole kettle, some wort splashed on the floor, and of course it put most of the hops/trub into the carboy. (On the plus side, it really helped aerate the wort!)

I use an immersion chiller, and with all the hops I doubt trying to whirlpool the trub into a cone would even work. I've read that screens/filters clog easily with pellets (wonder of Cryo would work better - probably!), so I don't think that's the answer.

My current plan for next time -- unless someone has better advice -- is to just turn the dip tube sideways so it's not pointed down and right next to the bottom of the kettle. Hopefully that will make it less likely to clog, and I can decide whether I want to dump the remaining hops/trub into the carboy or not.

Any other suggestions other than hop bags or spiders? I want to be able to whirlpool of course.

Second, for the 2nd dry hop charge a few days before bottling, I've been thinking about bagging them because I worry they won't settle and will end up in the bottles. I can't really cold crash -- maybe drop it down to 60 at best, or I suppose I could put the carboy in a water bath. So, should I bag them or let them float free? My last bottles had quite a bit of sediment, but they were pretty tasty, so maybe having some tasty hop particles floating around in the bottles isn't that big of a deal...

Thoughts/advice? Thanks for the help!

P.S. For your hour-long hop stand, do you just let the temp fall from 180 or are you keeping the burner on at all at various temps?

I mean you could certainly go to 14 oz if u wanted...just don't see much return...but that is totally your call...and yes mine are actually 5.5 gallons...I usually shoot for that for the sole purpose of loss to material...I really don't worry about trub and hop material going in to my fermentor...I havent seen any ill effects whether there's a lot or a little..so i stopped worrying about it...I would also reccomend looking into kegging...it will change everything you do for the positive...one of the biggest advances in my home brewing was going to kegs...its a cost up front but will pay for itself over time and immediately pay for itself in time saved when you can drink your beer 10 minutes after you keg it...think about where you are 10 minutes into bottling...no where near close to being finished...I truly believe kegging helped produce a better beer...not to say bottling produces bad beer...i just find kegged beers way better...and my hopstand is usually cooled to anywhere from 155-165...then covered and just left alone in kettle...maybe an occasional stir but that's it...no additional heat needed...in this range you still get great extraction but also pick up little to no ibus...180 you may be grabbing some extra ibus into your beer that weren't planned...and again no bags used anywhere during the process..

 

[SRJHops]

I mean you could certainly go to 14 oz if u wanted...just don't see much return...but that is totally your call...and yes mine are actually 5.5 gallons...I usually shoot for that for the sole purpose of loss to material...I really don't worry about trub and hop material going in to my fermentor...I havent seen any ill effects whether there's a lot or a little..so i stopped worrying about it...I would also reccomend looking into kegging...it will change everything you do for the positive...one of the biggest advances in my home brewing was going to kegs...its a cost up front but will pay for itself over time and immediately pay for itself in time saved when you can drink your beer 10 minutes after you keg it...think about where you are 10 minutes into bottling...no where near close to being finished...I truly believe kegging helped produce a better beer...not to say bottling produces bad beer...i just find kegged beers way better...and my hopstand is usually cooled to anywhere from 155-165...then covered and just left alone in kettle...maybe an occasional stir but that's it...no additional heat needed...in this range you still get great extraction but also pick up little to no ibus...180 you may be grabbing some extra ibus into your beer that weren't planned...and again no bags used anywhere during the process..

Thanks. I appreciate the advice. I'm not exactly a newbie, but I switched to all-grain a year ago and I'm still dialing everything in -- especially my NEIPA recipe. I'm on batch #7. The good news is that every batch keeps getting better (especially after I started cold side LODO techniques).

I've been dumping the hopstand hops in at 180/175 and just letting the temp fall for 30 mins into the 140's, then chill down to 80, etc. I used to try to hit different temps and add in hops, but that just seemed like a lot of work for no real return.

So many things/techniques to try! I will soon try some other yeasts and move beyond Safale-04.

I have not been adding any hops to the boil and have been happy with the level of bitterness for the style, but I might try adding some at 5 or 10 mins, especially if I dial down the total hops.

In the future I will also likely try making a more bitter/regular IPA with more boil kettle hops. (Lupulin Brewing recently made a hazy beer called "Make IPA's Piney Again" - that's kind of what I've been thinking about, using Cascade, Chinook, Simcoe...)

Right now I'm not super interested in kegging, but maybe someday. What I like best is giving away bombers of beer, as well as cracking one open after work.

My NEIPA's tend to taste better after a few weeks, and I'd have to think that would be true with kegging too, right? With so much hops it seems like they need time to blend in and settle down a bit...

 

[leesmith]

Use whirlfloc or Irish moss in the boil.

I’d take the dip tube out.

If you have a pump...then get a whirlpool kit. If not, use a spoon to whirlpool the wort during flame out (yes this works).

Do your desired hopstand duration and then chill while whirlpooling.

Once chilled to pitching temp...either turn the pump off or stop stirring...you don’t NEED to whirlpool for hop extraction just a hop stand works with a small amount of agitation every now and then. So if stirring, just get the wort spinning good....and then stop once cooled.

Leave it alone for 45 min or so while you clean up other stuff.

Then drain slowly to fermentation vessel. Dial up your recipe volume to account for any losses.

Bags are hard to use in a carboy but you can. The only way to get good extraction with bags is to use more hops and agitate the beer every so often. Problem with carboys it’s hard to avoid O2 intake.

I use kegs with a tab silver soldered to the inside of the lid to tie my bags off to. Then I can add gas while gently shaking the keg to agitate the hops in the bag.

Free ball is the best for extraction. I’ve used filters over the racking cane in the past while pushing beer out of a carboy. But at one point you will clog one and that’s a pain.

I’ve tried filters over the dip tube while fermenting in a keg...have clogged those too.

Conicals with a cooling system seem to be the best way to avoid clogging while transferring. But even those can too, from what I’ve heard. Cold crashing doesn’t always work to avoid clogging but helps a lot.

My two cents. Find what works for you.

 

[SRJHops]

Use whirlfloc or Irish moss in the boil.

I’d take the dip tube out.

If you have a pump...then get a whirlpool kit. If not, use a spoon to whirlpool the wort during flame out (yes this works).

Do your desired hopstand duration and then chill while whirlpooling.

Once chilled to pitching temp...either turn the pump off or stop stirring...you don’t NEED to whirlpool for hop extraction just a hop stand works with a small amount of agitation every now and then. So if stirring, just get the wort spinning good....and then stop once cooled.

Leave it alone for 45 min or so while you clean up other stuff.

Then drain slowly to fermentation vessel. Dial up your recipe volume to account for any losses.

View attachment 608878

Bags are hard to use in a carboy but you can. The only way to get good extraction with bags is to use more hops and agitate the beer every so often. Problem with carboys it’s hard to avoid O2 intake.

I use kegs with a tab silver soldered to the inside of the lid to tie my bags off to. Then I can add gas while gently shaking the keg to agitate the hops in the bag.

Free ball is the best for extraction. I’ve used filters over the racking cane in the past while pushing beer out of a carboy. But at one point you will clog one and that’s a pain.

I’ve tried filters over the dip tube while fermenting in a keg...have clogged those too.

Conicals with a cooling system seem to be the best way to avoid clogging while transferring. But even those can too, from what I’ve heard. Cold crashing doesn’t always work to avoid clogging but helps a lot.

My two cents. Find what works for you.

Thanks -- you are totally right -- why even keep the dip tube in place? It comes out easily...

Whirlfloc is for settling out the proteins in the carboy, correct? Or does it do something else too? I have some Irish Moss, but I was thinking it wasn't needed for this hazy beer style.

I have the Big Mouth carboys, so no trouble with bags. Maybe I will just have to try both ways -- bagged and commando -- and see if I can tell the difference, etc. I do have a small can of gas that I will use to purge the headspace after the late dry hop.

Thanks again for the tips!

 

[Dgallo]

Is it just me or does it erk anyone else when the term LODO comes up. I don’t even feel it should be something that’s has to be mentioned. It’s simply a proper brewing practice. You’re supposed to minimize your oxygen contact. I believed this to be common knowledge

 

[Soulshine2]

Latest batch

View attachment 327818

is that a fooseball table??? Momma says Fooseball is da debble !!

 

[Soulshine2]

Is it just me or does it erk anyone else when the term LODO comes up. I don’t even feel it should be something that’s has to be mentioned. It’s simply a proper brewing practice. You’re supposed to minimize your oxygen contact. I believed this to be common knowledge

yes and no...I mean yeah nobody wants a beer that has oxidized . But the yeast love oxygen to do their thing. Carbon likes to team up with it or beer would be flat. Its got its merits in the right time in the sequence of procedure.
Moderation , my friend, moderation.
I happen to love oxygen, I dont think I could live without it.

 

[leesmith]

Thanks -- you are totally right -- why even keep the dip tube in place? It comes out easily...

Whirlfloc is for settling out the proteins in the carboy, correct? Or does it do something else too? I have some Irish Moss, but I was thinking it wasn't needed for this hazy beer style.

I have the Big Mouth carboys, so no trouble with bags. Maybe I will just have to try both ways -- bagged and commando -- and see if I can tell the difference, etc. I do have a small can of gas that I will use to purge the headspace after the late dry hop.

Thanks again for the tips!

Your welcome.

I just like to tell people to use whirlfloc or Irish moss for this style cause it gets under peoples skin.

But seriously, it will settle out proteins and some other stuff that I know nothing about. I’ve used and not used it in this style. I prefer to. I like clear wort into the fermenter. It’s not detrimental to this style.

The big point is to whirlpool, chill, and then wait. Then transfer slow...whirlfloc or no, you should be able to avoid clogging.

With a big mouth carboy you could eventually install a fitting into the lid to attach the gas (barbed fitting or a gas fitting) to and crack the lid and dump the hops in while running your gas to purge. Then lower the lid without tightening...purge with gas letting the lid burp a couple times and then turn it off while twisting the lid on.

 

[SRJHops]

Is it just me or does it erk anyone else when the term LODO comes up. I don’t even feel it should be something that’s has to be mentioned. It’s simply a proper brewing practice. You’re supposed to minimize your oxygen contact. I believed this to be common knowledge

Well... do remember there are newbies and former newbies on this site who have brewing books that say to transfer to secondary and also transfer to a bottling bucket. Those two things alone will oxidize a NEIPA unless done with LODO techniques the books don't cover.

I'm not a LODO loco, because worrying about hot side LODO doesn't make much sense to me. But once I started doing everything I could think of to minimize oxygen on the cold side, such as never opening the carboy after the early dry hop charge (with points left), and bottling right from the primary fermenter, my NEIPA's have improved significantly.

All of these LODO moves are NEW techniques to me, and I would guess to a lot of people trying to brew this challenging style.

 

[leesmith]

Is it just me or does it erk anyone else when the term LODO comes up. I don’t even feel it should be something that’s has to be mentioned. It’s simply a proper brewing practice. You’re supposed to minimize your oxygen contact. I believed this to be common knowledge

I don’t think it’s common as you think.
I know people who have been brewing longer than me (who consider themselves good at it) and some who even own homebrewshops don’t prescribe to low O2 brewing.

So I agree to a point. Some people like to use terms just like biotransformation.
How smart can you sound if you say I’m dry hopping early cause the taste is different or I purge all my vessels and lines to prevent oxidation....not as snappy sounding.

 

[Dgallo]

I guess it’s not common knowledge than. I must have just been fortunate to get good advice early.

The whole secondary idea was the greatest marketing scheme ever for beer kit companies. “Free up another fermenter so you can brew again and buy another one of our kits sooner.”

Doesn’t matter the style in my opinion. Should be limiting oxygen for all

 

[SRJHops]

I don’t think it’s common as you think.
I know people who have been brewing longer than me (who consider themselves good at it) and some who even own homebrewshops don’t prescribe to low O2 brewing.

So I agree to a point. Some people like to use terms just like biotransformation.
How smart can you sound if you say I’m dry hopping early cause the taste is different or I purge all my vessels and lines to prevent oxidation....not as snappy sounding.

Solid point about the brew shops. I don't buy kits anymore, but I do look at the recipes sometimes. For the NEIPA recipes I've seen for the kits: Most still say to transfer to secondary, and others say secondary is "Optional" if you have another carboy. All say to transfer to a bottling bucket, and none of them mention anything about oxidation... Is it that they don't prescribe to LODO, or (more likely) they don't want to frighten off the newbies!

 

[Dgallo]

Solid point about the brew shops. I don't buy kits anymore, but I do look at the recipes sometimes. For the NEIPA recipes I've seen for the kits: Most still say to transfer to secondary, and others say secondary is "Optional" if you have another carboy. All say to transfer to a bottling bucket, and none of them mention anything about oxidation... Is it that they don't prescribe to LODO, or (more likely) they don't want to frighten off the newbies!

Capitalism young Jedi, don’t over think it.

 

[LumberZach]

I love this thread. I've been brewing NEIPA's since 2015 after my first Tree House can. Since then I've brewed countless batches trying to perfect my "base". I've read so many threads, blogs, etc. on the subject and I'm still finding it difficult to elevate my NEIPA's. I've won two competitions, but I want to improve even more. I've messed with my water profiles countless times and really haven't noticed that drastic of a change. Chlorides anywhere from 100ppm to 200ppm, Sulfates from 50ppm to 175ppm. Mash ph's from 5.2 to 5.4.

I've recently really started to read into the people trying to clone Tree House's Julius and figuring out the yeast. I'm happy with the few grain bills I use as well as the yeast I use (1318). I'm more interested in what a few of them are doing with their water profiles. Calcium in the 20-50ppm range, Sodium in the 50-75ppm range, Sulfates in the 75-100ppm range, and Chlorides in the 100-200ppm range. I think a few are onto something as far as mouthfeel goes. The typical NEIPA profile has 100+ppm Calcium and Sulfates/Chlorides in the 75-200ppm range. With Calcium 100+ppm, that's some pretty hard water. Wouldn't you want soft water for a soft mouthfeel? I've used Bru'n Water to effectively cut my hardness in half if not more while keeping Sulfates at 75ppm and Chlorides at 150ppm. Just wondering if anyone has tried the low calcium approach to their water profile. I'll be giving it a shot once my most recent NEIPA kicks. Just thought I would stir the pot about water profiles since I think it's one of the major keys to brewing a great beer.

 

[leesmith]

Solid point about the brew shops. I don't buy kits anymore, but I do look at the recipes sometimes. For the NEIPA recipes I've seen for the kits: Most still say to transfer to secondary, and others say secondary is "Optional" if you have another carboy. All say to transfer to a bottling bucket, and none of them mention anything about oxidation... Is it that they don't prescribe to LODO, or (more likely) they don't want to frighten off the newbies!

I think it is a little bit of both...depending on where you go. I know one of my local brew shops really doesn't think it's an issue....and it still bothers me that they leave multiple packages of hops laying on a table all day with a rubber bands around them so they can measure out amounts for customers (to me being LODO is also storing ingredients properly so they don't oxidize).

Also....things like the practice of secondary came from the brewing industry. Hombrewers were trying to mimic brewers. So fermentor, bright tank, and then package equals 1st bucket, 2nd bucket, and package.

I love this thread. I've been brewing NEIPA's since 2015 after my first Tree House can. Since then I've brewed countless batches trying to perfect my "base". I've read so many threads, blogs, etc. on the subject and I'm still finding it difficult to elevate my NEIPA's. I've won two competitions, but I want to improve even more. I've messed with my water profiles countless times and really haven't noticed that drastic of a change. Chlorides anywhere from 100ppm to 200ppm, Sulfates from 50ppm to 175ppm. Mash ph's from 5.2 to 5.4.

I've recently really started to read into the people trying to clone Tree House's Julius and figuring out the yeast. I'm happy with the few grain bills I use as well as the yeast I use (1318). I'm more interested in what a few of them are doing with their water profiles. Calcium in the 20-50ppm range, Sodium in the 50-75ppm range, Sulfates in the 75-100ppm range, and Chlorides in the 100-200ppm range. I think a few are onto something as far as mouthfeel goes. The typical NEIPA profile has 100+ppm Calcium and Sulfates/Chlorides in the 75-200ppm range. With Calcium 100+ppm, that's some pretty hard water. Wouldn't you want soft water for a soft mouthfeel? I've used Bru'n Water to effectively cut my hardness in half if not more while keeping Sulfates at 75ppm and Chlorides at 150ppm. Just wondering if anyone has tried the low calcium approach to their water profile. I'll be giving it a shot once my most recent NEIPA kicks. Just thought I would stir the pot about water profiles since I think it's one of the major keys to brewing a great beer.

I'm into the lower ranges of additions to my RO water. I do believe is lends to a softness...the last Saison I made used equal amounts of Chloride to Sulfate and I bumped up the salt to 40ppm with the Calcium at 45ppm....it's very soft and full but it's not done yet. I carbed a hydrometer sample once the primary yeast finished and tonight have to give it some brett and condition longer. Previous to that brew, my all Galaxy pale ale got a bump in the salt from 10 to 25ppm and I kept the sulfate to chloride at 150/50. I'm still very interested in playing with Na and want to try the balanced Saison profile in a pale ale/IPA. I've done the higher chloride to sulfate ratio a few times and really didn't like it as much...but I'm willing to revisit it at some time. While I haven't played with higher salt additions over all...I'm willing to forgo that rout since that's not where I want my beers to land.

Please let us know what you find out.

 

[Hannabrew]

• Speidel - I have had it up to 27PSI before testing pressure. Yes it bulges and swells but it never leaked. I have the 20lb spring in the PRV at top. Norcal had similar results testing these. I ferment inside a converted minifridge so the bulge doesnt bother anything.
• It is the yeast harvester from Norcal. Put in hops, loosely attach to fermentor, purge w/ gas a few times, tighten hoses, open flow to allow beer into jar to mix with hops. Let hops rest / swell - then apply gas to push hops back into fermentor. This is basically a hop cannon / hop gun for homebrewers. If you want a video of the process PM me w/ email address and I will send to you.

@ttuato I'd love to see this in action. Can I PM you my email?

Is it just me or does it erk anyone else when the term LODO comes up. I don’t even feel it should be something that’s has to be mentioned. It’s simply a proper brewing practice. You’re supposed to minimize your oxygen contact. I believed this to be common knowledge

I think most people agree to minimize oxygen on the cold side but technically LoDo is minimizing O2 at ALL points in the brewing process, not just the cold side. I adhere to the full LoDo procedures for most styles but have found it unnecessary for this style. I still do most of my processes since they're already in place for my system (preboil, underletting, mash caps, etc) but do not use any antioxidants in the mash as the malt is certainly not the star here.

 

[ttuato]

@ttuato I'd love to see this in action. Can I PM you my email?



I think most people agree to minimize oxygen on the cold side but technically LoDo is minimizing O2 at ALL points in the brewing process, not just the cold side. I adhere to the full LoDo procedures for most styles but have found it unnecessary for this style. I still do most of my processes since they're already in place for my system (preboil, underletting, mash caps, etc) but do not use any antioxidants in the mash as the malt is certainly not the star here.

@Hannabrew - sure send me a PM and I will forward the videos & pics

 

[thehaze]

I love this thread. I've been brewing NEIPA's since 2015 after my first Tree House can. Since then I've brewed countless batches trying to perfect my "base". I've read so many threads, blogs, etc. on the subject and I'm still finding it difficult to elevate my NEIPA's. I've won two competitions, but I want to improve even more. I've messed with my water profiles countless times and really haven't noticed that drastic of a change. Chlorides anywhere from 100ppm to 200ppm, Sulfates from 50ppm to 175ppm. Mash ph's from 5.2 to 5.4.

I've recently really started to read into the people trying to clone Tree House's Julius and figuring out the yeast. I'm happy with the few grain bills I use as well as the yeast I use (1318). I'm more interested in what a few of them are doing with their water profiles. Calcium in the 20-50ppm range, Sodium in the 50-75ppm range, Sulfates in the 75-100ppm range, and Chlorides in the 100-200ppm range. I think a few are onto something as far as mouthfeel goes. The typical NEIPA profile has 100+ppm Calcium and Sulfates/Chlorides in the 75-200ppm range. With Calcium 100+ppm, that's some pretty hard water. Wouldn't you want soft water for a soft mouthfeel? I've used Bru'n Water to effectively cut my hardness in half if not more while keeping Sulfates at 75ppm and Chlorides at 150ppm. Just wondering if anyone has tried the low calcium approach to their water profile. I'll be giving it a shot once my most recent NEIPA kicks. Just thought I would stir the pot about water profiles since I think it's one of the major keys to brewing a great beer.

I've noticed some chalkiness from elevated Ca and Cl levels ( I also got a confirmation about this from Cloudwater UK ). I use very soft water, but upping the SO4 to 50-75 ppm and Cl to 140-170 ppm adds lots of Ca. To make this short, my latest attempt at an IPA ( not a NE, although they shared common ground ) had the following mash water profile: Ca: 55 ppm / Mg: 10 ppm / Na: 35 ppm / SO4: 70 ppm / Cl: 140 ppm. I used CaCl2, Gypsum, Epsom, KCl and NaCl to get minerals in the quoted range. Mashed high at 154F, used only Lager and Pale Malts, big whirlpool at 155F, one dry hopping charge after fermentation. The beer came out hazy and much softer than all my previously attempts.

I've read - I think Martin B. said it - that high Na levels conflict with high SO4 levels ( most helpful in dark beers, where Na levels are increased through adding Baking soda to raise pH where/when needed ). I don't know what the general water knowledge says, but there must be a correlation between high Ca and Cl levels in the same beer. I perceive it as chalky. This chalkiness I talk about, I have experienced in commercial examples, both bad and well-executed. The levels of it were different in each beer, in some being low, not really experience-breaking, and others it was overwhelming the beer.

I brewed a simple Blonde Ale back in November, which I splitted in two: 1 remained the base beer and the other one, got 9 oz Lactose and a blend of dried and fresh apricots, peaches and mango. Malt: 50% Crisp Lager malt + 40% Crisp Best Ale malt + 10% Crisp Flaked Torrified Barley.

OG: 1.058 / FG: 1.014 / 5.8% ABV ( 75% AA ) / 25 IBUs / Imperial A38 Juice ( direct pitch - pouch was under 30 days from manufacturing ) / Mosaic + Motueka ( NO dry hopping, and only 1 hop addition at 30 minutes and a whirlpool at 158F for 20 minutes - around 5.5 oz hops ( 150 gr ).

Mash water---> Ca: 40 ppm / Mg: 5 ppm / Na: 20 ppm / SO4: 35 ppm / Cl: 70 ppm / Mash pH: 5.35

Both beers were really, really soft. No perceived bitterness and the hop aroma and flavour were there, especially the Mosaic.

I once asked here in the forum if soft, Pilsner-like water could be used to brew (NE)IPAs, and although definitely possible, a reply from Martin B. said that beers made with such low mineral levels are usually dull. My only experience so far has been positive, which is why I am willing to try again.

 

[LumberZach]

I've noticed some chalkiness from elevated Ca and Cl levels ( I also got a confirmation about this from Cloudwater UK ). I use very soft water, but upping the SO4 to 50-75 ppm and Cl to 140-170 ppm adds lots of Ca. To make this short, my latest attempt at an IPA ( not a NE, although they shared common ground ) had the following mash water profile: Ca: 55 ppm / Mg: 10 ppm / Na: 35 ppm / SO4: 70 ppm / Cl: 140 ppm. I used CaCl2, Gypsum, Epsom, KCl and NaCl to get minerals in the quoted range. Mashed high at 154F, used only Lager and Pale Malts, big whirlpool at 155F, one dry hopping charge after fermentation. The beer came out hazy and much softer than all my previously attempts.

I've read - I think Martin B. said it - that high Na levels conflict with high SO4 levels ( most helpful in dark beers, where Na levels are increased through adding Baking soda to raise pH where/when needed ). I don't know what the general water knowledge says, but there must be a correlation between high Ca and Cl levels in the same beer. I perceive it as chalky. This chalkiness I talk about, I have experienced in commercial examples, both bad and well-executed. The levels of it were different in each beer, in some being low, not really experience-breaking, and others it was overwhelming the beer.

I brewed a simple Blonde Ale back in November, which I splitted in two: 1 remained the base beer and the other one, got 9 oz Lactose and a blend of dried and fresh apricots, peaches and mango. Malt: 50% Crisp Lager malt + 40% Crisp Best Ale malt + 10% Crisp Flaked Torrified Barley.

OG: 1.058 / FG: 1.014 / 5.8% ABV ( 75% AA ) / 25 IBUs / Imperial A38 Juice ( direct pitch - pouch was under 30 days from manufacturing ) / Mosaic + Motueka ( NO dry hopping, and only 1 hop addition at 30 minutes and a whirlpool at 158F for 20 minutes - around 5.5 oz hops ( 150 gr ).

Mash water---> Ca: 40 ppm / Mg: 5 ppm / Na: 20 ppm / SO4: 35 ppm / Cl: 70 ppm / Mash pH: 5.35

Both beers were really, really soft. No perceived bitterness and the hop aroma and flavour were there, especially the Mosaic.

I once asked here in the forum if soft, Pilsner-like water could be used to brew (NE)IPAs, and although definitely possible, a reply from Martin B. said that beers made with such low mineral levels are usually dull. My only experience so far has been positive, which is why I am willing to try again.

The profile I came up with is as follows:
Calcium: 40ppm / Magnesium: 13ppm / Sodium: 49ppm / Sulfate: 51ppm / Chloride: 146ppm
Hardness (CaCO3): 154ppm

A 154ppm hardness is still considered "Hard", but my previous NEIPA water profile was at 348ppm and is considered "Very Hard". I'm really interested in going with this new water profile and will probably try it out with my next batch. I'll probably also try messing with the pre-boil, post boil, and post whirlpool ph's and see what everything does.

 

[marchuk96]

I

I love this thread. I've been brewing NEIPA's since 2015 after my first Tree House can. Since then I've brewed countless batches trying to perfect my "base". I've read so many threads, blogs, etc. on the subject and I'm still finding it difficult to elevate my NEIPA's. I've won two competitions, but I want to improve even more. I've messed with my water profiles countless times and really haven't noticed that drastic of a change. Chlorides anywhere from 100ppm to 200ppm, Sulfates from 50ppm to 175ppm. Mash ph's from 5.2 to 5.4.

I've recently really started to read into the people trying to clone Tree House's Julius and figuring out the yeast. I'm happy with the few grain bills I use as well as the yeast I use (1318). I'm more interested in what a few of them are doing with their water profiles. Calcium in the 20-50ppm range, Sodium in the 50-75ppm range, Sulfates in the 75-100ppm range, and Chlorides in the 100-200ppm range. I think a few are onto something as far as mouthfeel goes. The typical NEIPA profile has 100+ppm Calcium and Sulfates/Chlorides in the 75-200ppm range. With Calcium 100+ppm, that's some pretty hard water. Wouldn't you want soft water for a soft mouthfeel? I've used Bru'n Water to effectively cut my hardness in half if not more while keeping Sulfates at 75ppm and Chlorides at 150ppm. Just wondering if anyone has tried the low calcium approach to their water profile. I'll be giving it a shot once my most recent NEIPA kicks. Just thought I would stir the pot about water profiles since I think it's one of the major keys to brewing a great beer.

I've settled in on a 2/1 ratio for my neipas...for 5.5 gals i start with distilled water and with bru'n water set up my recipe with 1.0 starting point for calcium chloride and .5 for gypsum... and then usually a smidge of Epsom salt for some yeast health and that's it... throw in some flaked oats.. flaked wheat and some carapils...bam!!! soft neipa

 

[ryanm8]

I have found that you can use hop bags successfully, but you can't overload them. I used to throw all the hops in one bag and it didn't leave room for expansion. The hop flavor was lacking big time.

Then I started throwing them in loose, and while the flavor was much better, I could not get all the hop matter out and I noticed the "hop burn" that people talk about.

Now I have been using hop bags again, but limiting each bag to only half an ounce of hops. It's a bit tedious because it requires quite a lot of bags, but no hop matter in my beer any more, no hop burn, and all the flavor.

 

[leesmith]

......I've read - I think Martin B. said it - that high Na levels conflict with high SO4 levels ( most helpful in dark beers, where Na levels are increased through adding Baking soda to raise pH where/when needed ). I don't know what the general water knowledge says, but there must be a correlation between high Ca and Cl levels in the same beer. I perceive it as chalky. This chalkiness I talk about, I have experienced in commercial examples, both bad and well-executed. The levels of it were different in each beer, in some being low, not really experience-breaking, and others it was overwhelming the beer.....

In the water knowledge section of Bru-N-Water, Martin indicates both high levels of Chloride or Sodium can clash with high levels of Sulfate.

My guess would be that’s it’s the chloride both in the NaCl and the CaCl2 that creates this harshness.

 

[Dgallo]

I think most people agree to minimize oxygen on the cold side but technically LoDo is minimizing O2 at ALL points in the brewing process, not just the cold side. I adhere to the full LoDo procedures for most styles but have found it unnecessary for this style. I still do most of my processes since they're already in place for my system (preboil, underletting, mash caps, etc) but do not use any antioxidants in the mash as the malt is certainly not the star here.

Since you adhere to it maybe you can clear somethings up for me. I unstand the theorized argument that LODO preboil should hold on malt aromas and flavors, however I’m lost at a chemistry level. If oxygen should happen to dissolve into the beer preboil or the water itself has a higher disolved oxygen level, would it not escape the beer during boil. Disolved oxygen would not bond itself, so through the boils agitation it should release.

Another question is, are you truly seeing a vast difference in your malty styles since making the full LODO switch?

 

[Northern_Brewer]

If you're asking what I think you're asking, the argument is that boiling after the mash is too late, you've already cooked your grain with oxygen for an hour and by then the damage is done.

I nod to LODO with a preboil and Camden before the mash without going full LODO, I'm not sure about flavour but it certainly makes my final beer paler so there's obviously something going on.

 

[leesmith]

If you're asking what I think you're asking, the argument is that boiling after the mash is too late, you've already cooked your grain with oxygen for an hour and by then the damage is done.

I nod to LODO with a preboil and Camden before the mash without going full LODO, I'm not sure about flavour but it certainly makes my final beer paler so there's obviously something going on.

To add to the above...from my understanding the oxidative effects of O2 on the mash are very fast...hence the need to reduce O2 from the very beginning.

 

[marchuk96]

To add to the above...from my understanding the oxidative effects of O2 on the mash are very fast...hence the need to reduce O2 from the very beginning.

L.O.D.O... Y.O.L.O.!!
Don't think I'm sold on the whole idea...I'm a believer of post wort oxidation but before that...I'm skeptical...

http://brulosophy.com/2017/04/10/th...ow-oxygen-brewing-method-exbeeriment-results/

While yielding a difference...it seemed the majority found it undesirable