New England IPA "Northeast" style IPA

[Braufessor]

I overcarbed it a bit so my stout tap knocks some of the CO2 out to make it have less of a carbonic bite/tingle. TH = Tired Hands.



It's interesting to test the difference between stout faucet and normal faucet. I use the stout tap attachment on my intertap faucets so I can swap at will. Definitely super creamy with the stout tap!

I did a british bitter version of this beer with EKG hops. To be honest, not super pleased with it. I used some older hops and it just seemed to come off a bit weird. But, I am planning on serving some through my beer engine.... same type of thing. gives the beer a really smooth, creamy, rich flavor/experience. I think these beers could be quite good served with these kinds of methods.

 

[stickyfinger]

I asked Bryan Rabe (he has done a lot of the exploration on LODO brewing) what I could do immediately, that would give me the biggest bang for my buck so-to-speak. This is what he sent me.... and this is what I did(will do).:

I don't know if you have seen the site, but its www.lowoxygenbrewing.com, its details everything pretty good, but the simple version is this..

Pre-boil all brewing water, then once you start chilling to strike (sub 200F) add some crushed camden tabs, if you have any ascorbic acid, cut it 50/50. If you are a sparger the dosage will be a littler different, than if you don't.

Try and dough in gently, stir, but don't whip in air. Underlet, all transfers( or be as gentle as possible). Fashion some foil as a make shift mash/lauter/sparge cap.

Boil softly, target more of a simmer, with no more than 10% boil off and 1srm pickup.

Ferment cold 45-47F, NO RAMP, pitch roughly 2x more yeast as you normally would. transfer to keg with roughly 4 points remaining, if you have a spunding valve use it, if not you can adjust carbonation when you serve.

It's really as basic as preboil and dose camden, cover mash, boil soft, and naturally carb. Everything else is icing on the cake!
Any questions let me know!

Bryan

I used crushed campden tablets (4 in 5 gallons of mash, 1 in 5 gallons of sparge). The website above ( www.lowoxygenbrewing.com ) is really good, really clear. He is interviewed on Fermentation Nation Podcast about LODO brewing - pretty good, and interesting - http://fermentationnation.net/2016/11/episode-43-low-oxygen-brewing-with-bryan-rabe/

Great info! Thanks. Very excited to see what your results are.

 

[stickyfinger]

Another observation.... not that it currently means anything - but, the boil was quite different. Right from the beginning 5 minutes, and all the way through to the end - it looked like egg-drop soup. This is not what my boils normally look like. I had to scrape globs of gelatinous goo out of the bottom of my kettle at the end. What does that mean for beer? Who knows - maybe nothing. But, it was an odd difference. I attached a short clip of the boil.

I wonder if you were getting the oxidation and coagulation in the kettle that you usually do earlier in the process in the mash. Maybe you were putting off the oxidation, protein cross-linking, etc. that happens in the mash until you got into the kettle. I am assuming some of the maltiness that is missing from non-LODO beers is maybe precipitating out into the mash for the rest of us. Just some ideas, all based on ---t.

 

[EndOfLine]

I did a british bitter version of this beer with EKG hops. To be honest, not super pleased with it. I used some older hops and it just seemed to come off a bit weird. But, I am planning on serving some through my beer engine.... same type of thing. gives the beer a really smooth, creamy, rich flavor/experience. I think these beers could be quite good served with these kinds of methods.

Dang. Sorry your "NE" Esb didn't turn out as well as you hoped... were your hops "cheesey?"

 

[Braufessor]

Dang. Sorry your "NE" Esb didn't turn out as well as you hoped... were your hops "cheesey?"

no, not cheesy... came off more sweet/flowery.... it isn't bad by any stretch. Actually, someone who spent some time overseas tried it and the first words out of his mouth were "this reminds me of London." So, what the hell do I know

There is just something about it that I don't quite love. I used less chinook.... I think a bit more of that would have helped give it some assertive bitterness to offset the flowery EKG.

I am going to try it again though for sure - it is on the verge of being a great beer instead of just a good one I think.

 

[Braufessor]

I wonder if you were getting the oxidation and coagulation in the kettle that you usually do earlier in the process in the mash. Maybe you were putting off the oxidation, protein cross-linking, etc. that happens in the mash until you got into the kettle. I am assuming some of the maltiness that is missing from non-LODO beers is maybe precipitating out into the mash for the rest of us. Just some ideas, all based on ---t.

Yeah, I kind of thought it could be something like that too maybe. Somehow reactions that were not happening in the mash were happening in the kettle or something. We'll see I guess.

 

[schematix]

My LODO IPA is nearing 3 months old and its still 100% as good as the the first pull. Never had a hop forward beer maintain its hoppy deliciousness like this before. Also flavor is super clean and hasn't taken on the resiny medicinal flavor of aged hops.

1. LODO mash per the paper/website (pre-boiled water + Na MBS)
2. Dry-hop during the waning phase of fermentation at 1.020. (FG was about 1.016)
3. Closed loop transfer to serving keg a few days later at FG.
4. Added priming sugar to continue fermentation and carbonate.

 

[grassfeeder]

My LODO IPA is nearing 3 months old and its still 100% as good as the the first pull. Never had a hop forward beer maintain its hoppy deliciousness like this before. Also flavor is super clean and hasn't taken on the resiny medicinal flavor of aged hops.

1. LODO mash per the paper/website (pre-boiled water + Na MBS)
2. Dry-hop during the waning phase of fermentation at 1.020. (FG was about 1.016)
3. Closed loop transfer to serving keg a few days later at FG.
4. Added priming sugar to continue fermentation and carbonate.

And with that said I've brewed basically the same, kegged it per closed gravity feed, drank it for a week - left for Asia for 3 weeks, came home and poured same exact pints. Im sure there is something to the LODO, but I also think its beyond a very vast majority of us and only measured in numbers to make some believe it.

 

[schematix]

I'm not sure why the LoDO process needs to be something to be believed. It's not a religion. This is the scientific method in a nutshell. A detailed process was developed and published. Many have independently verified it. Those who failed admittedly didn't follow the entire process. It's a weak link scenario.

It's totally naive to discredit the method based solely on the desire not to put in the extra effort, or not have the equipment. The simple fact is that if the process it followed, there is something different to the brew. Now whether or not you want that "IT" or care to put that effort in, is a different issue.

It's over the head of newbie brewers, or those without a scientific/math knack, but honestly, how many home brewers actually make exceptional beer (i'm not saying people are making bad beer)? Just because its not easy to execute doesn't make it false.

 

[eagle23]

I have looked the best i could, but what exactly is a Northeast IPA? I have searched this thread as well as the rest of the site, and cant find anything actually about what the style is or how it is different than a regular American IPA.

 

[Braufessor]

I have looked the best i could, but what exactly is a Northeast IPA? I have searched this thread as well as the rest of the site, and cant find anything actually about what the style is or how it is different than a regular American IPA.

I agree 100% - I think it is just an american IPA too. And, I think many of the people who brew this beer, or beers similar to it think it is simply an American IPA also.

"Northeast or New England" IPA is basically something that I believe was kind of forced onto these beers because a lot of people who see the IPA as a purely west coast variant criticize some of the characteristics that come out of the beer - obviously the hazy aspect as well as the rounded (muddled I think is the term usually used by critics) hop flavors as opposed to assertive bitterness.

Essentially, the "American IPA" is Stone, Pliny, Ballast Point, etc...... Many of the IPA's originating in the NE part of the USA did not get to be accepted into that club because they were not "up to par".... I think "Northeast" and "Midwest" IPA kind of started more as a slight...... "Oh, I see - this is your attempt at making an IPA. Well, nice try, but it is not how it is done correctly because it is not a clone of these other great beers."

ironically, the beers are enjoyed immensely by millions of people and in the case of "Northeast" or "New England"..... it has kind of become a bit of a badge of honor to those that enjoy this variant of an IPA, as opposed to an insult.

So..... Yeah, I whole-heartedly agree this is just an IPA. People that see "American IPA" in a much narrower window that is epitomized by Stone/Ballast Point/Pliny etc..... see this beer as a flawed attempt to make a "real" IPA. The flaws they see are: Haze/Cloudy, "Muddled" (smooth and round) hop flavor as opposed to bitterness, fuller pallet as opposed to "clean and crisp"..... Perhaps, to a lesser degree, the reliance on tropical hops like Citra/Galaxy/Mosaic etc. as opposed to some of the more classic varieties like Chinook, centennial etc....

To me, it is merely a variation or interpretation among other variations of an American IPA.

 

[Braufessor]

And with that said I've brewed basically the same, kegged it per closed gravity feed, drank it for a week - left for Asia for 3 weeks, came home and poured same exact pints. Im sure there is something to the LODO, but I also think its beyond a very vast majority of us and only measured in numbers to make some believe it.

I am not willing to say there is or is not something worth pursuing yet in regard with a LoDO process as I just tried it and will need to see the actual results.

However, I will say this - the basic process I employed and the process Schematix listed really is not beyond most people. It actually took almost no time/effort/expense at all for me to implement. Actually, I think with a tweak or two in the way I hop, letting the beer finish out its fermentation in a keg as opposed to transferring to a dry hop keg and then to a serving keg.... it could save time or be a wash in the end.

Right now, I think my #1 concern about the process is using the sulfite as an oxygen scavenger and how that might translate in flavor to the finished beer.

 

[user 141939]

I'm not sure why the LoDO process needs to be something to be believed. It's not a religion. This is the scientific method in a nutshell. A detailed process was developed and published. Many have independently verified it. Those who failed admittedly didn't follow the entire process. It's a weak link scenario.

I have not tried LoDO yet, but. I have read the paper and various threads and seen the negative reactions and have been a bit surprised by them.

Why all of the sudden is nothing worth trying unless you do triangle tests, or because someone else has not "proven" that it works enough to your liking? For me home brewing is experimenting and trying things and if the beer tastes better to me then that is enough. I cook a lot and find the two fairly synonymous, I don't do side by sides and triangle tests whenever I cook something differently. A great brewer (or chef) has to rely to some degree on his/her own palette. I would guess great brewers make great beer not because every thing they did to arrive at there current process passed a triangle test. I'm not saying that there isn't a degree that this type of thing occurs, because I am aware of sensory panels, etc. I'm just saying that there is also the less tangible aspect of formulating a process that can't be parsed out necessarily, but nonetheless separates a good beer from a great beer.

So take brulosophy for example. Almost every variable he tries to test does not pass the triangle test. In the many of the conclusions he says something like "results are interesting but I don't plan on changing my procedures". So why don't I just start boiling my wort with the lid on, not controlling fermentation temp, not making starters, etc, etc, since none of them passed a triangle test. Of course I'm not going to do that. Braufessor a few reply's back was talking about how difficult it is to distinguish similar beers due to pallet fatigue. So when you change one variable, you are basically ending up with similar beers. But it's not one variable that makes a great beer great. It's ALL the variables put together. It's why I'm not going to start doing all of the "bad" practices that one could justify reading through the brulosophy experiments. It's why, to me, even if someone did do a triangle test with LoDO and it didn't pass, it just wouldn't mean that much to me. Because I can't help but think if you pile up on top of each other all the good variables or all the bad variables that you are going to have a different beer. In the end I am trying to make good beer that I enjoy and others enjoy. Not beer that can be "proven" to be different than some other beer made with a different process. For this reason I see nothing wrong with just trying the LoDO a few times and deciding for myself if I like the results.

I think some of the push back for LoDO maybe comes from laziness? If it's something you are not willing to put the effort into trying than maybe just justify to yourself that it's not worth trying. Perhaps if it was something easier and time saving like putting olive oil in your wort than more people would be excited about it.

The reply to your first post from grassfeeder is also sort of comparing apples to oranges as well. Since you described a beer not changing for 3 months, while grassfeeder described one not changing for 3 Weeks. Big difference in time there especially for a hoppy beer.

End Rant.

 

[Braufessor]

So when you change one variable, you are basically ending up with similar beers. But it's not one variable that makes a great beer great. It's ALL the variables put together. It's why I'm not going to start doing all of the "bad" practices that one could justify reading through the brulosophy experiments. It's why, to me, even if someone did do a triangle test with LoDO and it didn't pass, it just wouldn't mean that much to me. Because I can't help but think if you pile up on top of each other all the good variables or all the bad variables that you are going to have a different beer. In the end I am trying to make good beer that I enjoy and others enjoy. Not beer that can be "proven" to be different than some other beer made with a different process. For this reason I see nothing wrong with just trying the LoDO a few times and deciding for myself if I like the results.

Well stated. I agree with this 100%. I am all in favor of breaking out individual variable for experimentation and to learn more. However, in the end, it is the overall process and interactions of variables that really make the great beer.

I think beer is pretty forgiving in general, and a single variable may not have a catastrophic impact on any beer.

Regardless of what I, or anyone else, find in regard to my LODO attempts - oxygen is bad for beer. That is a fact and there is zero debate on it. So, if we can find ways to minimize oxygen impact at various stages it is something that will add to that tool box of things that make our beer better.

In the end, 10 incremental variables that are not distinguishable on their own can add up to something that makes for a better beer overall.

In regard to the 3 beers I brewed with the different water profile - the odd thing is this - in a "triangle" test, those beers are not distinguishable or are minimally distinguishable. However, of all the people who have drank all of them and then given me an opinion (solicited or unsolicited) about which one they liked best..... almost every one of them said the 120:120 profile. I would include myself in that group. Not sure why, because I readily admit I can't tell the difference between them consistently. However, every time I pour a pint of that particular one, I just think - "Yep - this is great. Full, Smooth, bursting with flavor."

 

[EndOfLine]

no, not cheesy... came off more sweet/flowery.... it isn't bad by any stretch. Actually, someone who spent some time overseas tried it and the first words out of his mouth were "this reminds me of London." So, what the hell do I know

There is just something about it that I don't quite love. I used less chinook.... I think a bit more of that would have helped give it some assertive bitterness to offset the flowery EKG.

I am going to try it again though for sure - it is on the verge of being a great beer instead of just a good one I think.

I have done Two smash ipas with MO and EKG. Both were very floral and a bit sweet, almost orange marmalade . I think EKG flows too well with malt, and does not express enough flavor by it self to contrast malt flavors. I think this is why it is used so much with malt forward beers. I also think it blends very well with other strong hops, I am current on a quest to figure out what blends, EKG + hop "X" work well. A month ago I was talking about about the pairing with chinook and thought it was outstanding. However I used quite a bit more chinook then you did I think. Boiled, flame out and dry hop.

 

[EndOfLine]

In regards to LODO:

I want to put Homebrewers into two groups,

1. Some home brewers want to do every process as professionally as possible. If it takes an extra 4 hours to get a 25% better product, they will do it. Take decoction, or 1 hour long fly sparging for example.
This group is brewers will no doubt take on lodo even if it means boiling all brewing water, and a bit more attention to detail, even if it does require more time.

However, there is another group of brewers that want to make the best product as fast as possible. How many Corners can one cut and still make a decent product? I will admit that if I can cut my home brew day down to 3 hours by cutting a few corners I'll do it. For example, no sparge brewering, 30-40 min mashes and boils. Etc. so for me boiling my water and cooling it before brewing is out of the question, it adds what? An hour of time? However if it does indeed make a huge difference in flavor I will try it. An easy reduction in oxygen pick up tho is to stop the splattering of cooled wort into my fermentor. I have been doing this to get 02 in the wort for yeast.... however, if by doing a gentle transfer makes a better product, that is an easy fix.

Sadly, my group of lazy home brewers gets a bad name by making a lot of bad beer. No water treatment, 5.9-6.2 mash and sparse phs.... no temp control at all...

For me however, being a nut about water and ph has made my corner cutting decent beer into great, sometimes medal winning beer. Plus, it adds no time at all.

This thread first opened my eyes to a closed transfer dry hop keg, then to close transfer to a serving keg.
It took more time and effort, to clean those kegs and to do two transfers.... but I have decided it was worth the gains in a crazy expensive hoppy beer.
So long story short, I don't doubt that zero 02 pick makes better beer, it makes a lot of sense really. But the question is, will it be worth it?

Anyway, looking forward to brufessors results.

 

[Braufessor]

In regards to LODO:

so for me boiling my water and cooling it before brewing is out of the question, it adds what? An hour of time?

Probably depends on set up, but adds 10-15 minutes for me is all. Plus, I just start my kettle sooner while I am getting things set up, measuring and crushing grain, getting water salts ready, etc..... So, it does not actually add any time to the overall day for me. Using an immersion chiller it literally takes 1-2 minutes to take water from 212 down to mash in temps.

An easy reduction in oxygen pick up tho is to stop the splattering of cooled wort into my fermentor. I have been doing this to get 02 in the wort for yeast.... however, if by doing a gentle transfer makes a better product, that is an easy fix.

This is the one place where I think you are basically ok..... Yeast is already in fermenter when you are adding wort from kettle.... so oxygen introduction at this point is ok because A.) The yeast NEED it and B.) The yeast is scavenging it right away.
If I am understanding things correctly, I think a misconception with LODO is that people you are fighting the accumulation of oxygen from the beginning of the process through the end. That is not what you are doing. What you are doing is eliminating the instantaneous impact of oxygen at different stages of the process. Oxygen impacts grain in the mash.... so, you try to eliminate oxygen in the mash - not because that oxygen is going to carry through your boil and into your finished product to hurt your beer a month from now - but because it will impact the grain immediately and detract from the flavor going forward. Likewise, you boil at a lower rate to reduce the interaction of wort and oxygen at the surface during the boil and the caramelization of grain from high heat.

 

[schematix]

My whole point is simply that there is a positive impact from LoDO at the cost of some extra time and effort - it is real and easily validated. If your only metric is to have as short, simple and easy a brew day as possible, LoDO isn't for you, and that's fine. But because one might be a lazy fucx, doesn't make the process invalid.

As someone else mentioned, it's another piece of the puzzle (although i'd argue it's a bigger chunk than many are crediting to it, yet). You can still make a crap beer with it if you ignore other good brewing practices. You can also make good beer without it.

 

[Braufessor]

Just finished up this beer using the same basic/introductory LODO procedures I used a couple days ago for my 2 lagers. Everything went pretty well. Less than 4 hours from flame on to clean up done.
A couple tweaks I am doing with this in regard to hops.... I did not do a long hop stand as I was chilling rapidly. So, I put in 3 ounce addition at 1 minute and I started chiller at zero minutes. Added the other 3 ounces about 1 minute later when temp had fallen below 180 - kept chilling. Probably 20-25 minutes from flame out to beer in fermenter.
I will likely attempt something a bit different with dry hop too in order to carbonate in the keg... not positive How I want to do that yet.

I did notice my pH was lower than normal.... 5.30 mash, but 5.19 post boil.... which surprised me. I am sure Campden tablets had something to do with that. Post boil pH surprised me though that it was that low.

Some pics ..... Got an even crazier break with this beer than I did with my lagers (flaked grains I assume). Huge globs of gelatinous protein goo left in kettle after chilling. But...... beer ended up hazy just like normal. Hydrometer on the right is the IPA I did today. The one on the left is one of lager samples from a couple days ago.

 

[user 141939]

Are you using copper immersion chiller for the LoDO? I though that was a no go? This was one of the things I thought I needed to change to try it (i.e. buy a stainless chiller), that and I need a bulkhead for my kettle so I can underlet mash and strike water, which I could use anyways.

One question I have about the process. I think I remember the paper saying oxidation effects happen VERY quickly in the mash. But yet it is still ok to oxygenate wort. Yes the yeast will consume it but it's not like that happens instantaneously. I suppose the answer might be the differences of temperature. Wort being colder so oxidation effects are slower. Perhaps it says that in the paper.

I need to check out that website too.

 

[Braufessor]

Are you using copper immersion chiller for the LoDO? I though that was a no go? This was one of the things I thought I needed to change to try it (i.e. buy a stainless chiller), that and I need a bulkhead for my kettle so I can underlet mash and strike water, which I could use anyways.

One question I have about the process. I think I remember the paper saying oxidation effects happen VERY quickly in the mash. But yet it is still ok to oxygenate wort. Yes the yeast will consume it but it's not like that happens instantaneously. I suppose the answer might be the differences of temperature. Wort being colder so oxidation effects are slower. Perhaps it says that in the paper.

I need to check out that website too.

Yeah - I am not quite ready to run out and buy a new wort chiller in the name of experimentation. I will try the things I can to start with and see how far down the rabbit hole I want to go based on the results I am getting.

The oxidative effects you get at various stages are minimized with various strategies. My understanding is that the effects happen fast at mash temps, slower as the wort cools. Plus, I think that is part of the strategy of using the metabisulfite.... it will not all react in the mash and is available throughout the process to scavenge oxygen that is introduced at different stages.

However, once the wort goes to the fermenter it NEEDS oxygen for the yeast. The yeast will then scavenge that oxygen relatively fast and in addition, the negatives of oxygen at this stage are also minimized by cooler temps.. I am no expert on any of this, just trying to follow directions at this point and check it out a bit for myself.

 

[Braufessor]

Merry xmas to me This was one damn fine box of beer that just got delivered. My step-son went above and beyond the call of duty in helping me with quality control samples! A little something to make comparisons to

 

[grassfeeder]

^ jesus christ already!

 

[grassfeeder]

Just took my FG reading of what I call Paper Umbrella w/ Imperial A38 Juice yeast. Getting kegged tomorrow.

 

[EndOfLine]

Holy crap!!! What a nice xmas present!!

 

[Braufessor]

Holy crap!!! What a nice xmas present!!

Yeah - this shipment was above and beyond the call of duty for sure. he lives in Boston and goes up to Vermont from time to time. I pack and send beer out his way and then he has the box and packing stuff to send some back when he picks some up. But, this was a nice surprise.

Might need to send him some "vacation" money for a trip to Tree House

 

[stickyfinger]

Yeah - this shipment was above and beyond the call of duty for sure. he lives in Boston and goes up to Vermont from time to time. I pack and send beer out his way and then he has the box and packing stuff to send some back when he picks some up. But, this was a nice surprise.

Might need to send him some "vacation" money for a trip to Tree House

that is definitely a phenomenal gift!

 

[Jmash]

Nice. Trillium has two breweries. One on the seaport downtown and one in the burbs 5 minutes from my house. Treehouse is over an hour away but I need to get out there.
Question on oxidation in the mash. I know it is recommended to cover the bed with saran wrap. I mash in a rectagular 50 qt. cooler. Would using a tall cylindrical igloo cooler be more beneficial by having less surface to be exposed to air?

 

[Braufessor]

Nice. Trillium has two breweries. One on the seaport downtown and one in the burbs 5 minutes from my house. Treehouse is over an hour away but I need to get out there.
Question on oxidation in the mash. I know it is recommended to cover the bed with saran wrap. I mash in a rectagular 50 qt. cooler. Would using a tall cylindrical igloo cooler be more beneficial by having less surface to be exposed to air?

Yes - going on the idea that oxygen affects the mashing grains negatively - less surface area exposed the better.

That said, I am still not taking a stand one way or another on the results of some of these procedures. I want to explore it and check it out for myself.... but, I am just going to try to be on the fence until I see how things turn out with these first 3 batches and then evaluate and go from there.

There has been a lot of good beer made in rectangular coolers......

 

[grassfeeder]

there has been a lot of good beer made in rectangular coolers......

fact!