OP
OP
Personally, Conan or 1272 or even 1056. Lots of people really like London III though. I am not the biggest fan of it.
New England IPA "Northeast" style IPA
- Thread starter Braufessor
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
Personally, Conan or 1272 or even 1056. Lots of people really like London III though. I am not the biggest fan of it.
stickyfinger
Well-Known Member
Seems to me that the "best" yeast for this style is very subjective. Some like one strain for its fruitiness, others like a strain for its roundness, etc. Experimentation is in order.
OP
OP
Well.... I have done a variety of things.
* In general, my most common method was to dry hop in primary, put bucket on counter 2 days before transfer, fill clean dry hopping keg (filter screens on dip tube) with star san, push it out with CO2, pop top, Add dry hops, transfer via tubing to bottom of keg with lid setting on opening. After a couple days, jump to Purged serving keg with CO2 pressure. Purge head space with CO2 after each transfer. Not O2 proof by any means, but never had any real problem doing it either.
*However, last couple batches I did I deviated from this and it seemed to work very well. I did both dry hops in primary. Moved fermenter to counter a couple days before transfer. Filled keg with star san, pushed out with CO2. Left lid on. For transfer I took the "guts" out of the liquid-in post and out of the liquid disconnect. Had a length of tubing with the liquid disconnect on one end (minus the guts) and nothing on other end. Free end of tubing onto fermenter spigot. Hook to liquid post. Open keg vent and then transfer beer via gravity into keg. After transfer, quickly remove post, put guts back in, put on keg, purge head space with CO2.
**This second method seemed to work very well, and I may continue with it if it works out well and I can eliminate the step of a dry hop keg.
***I have never had a lot of luck transferring via gravity down the liquid post with all parts in place..... It just goes REALLY slow and takes forever. Removing the "guts' from the post and disconnect allows the beer to flow and fill in 5 minutes.
***My beer tends to drop reasonably clean in the fermenter... not a ton of yeast gunk, trub, or hop material gets transferred. You do not want to fill your serving keg with a bunch of hop gunk that is going to plug up your posts when serving.
OP
OP
UPDATE:
Sampled my last two batches. Both were basically the updated recipe in #1418. I was playing around with some "LoDO" techniques. First.... I was not able to apply all the LoDO techniques, so I am not saying that is something to do or not do.... I did not carbonate naturally in the keg. However, I did use the mashing techniques, low boil, Metabidulfite, etc. I also, did all dry hopping in primary with no dry hop keg. Figured, less transferring was better as far as oxygen.
In the end, I did one with the metabisulfite, mashing techniques, low boil, etc..... The only "difference" I noted between the two was that the LoDO beer seems distinctly drier..... in the end, I think there was probably a significant water profile difference between the two due to the sulfate in the Metabisulfite..... I did not fully/precisely account for that in water profile. Both beers were very good though, even with the moderate difference in mouthfeel/perception.
*So, like I said, I really have no concrete stance on LoDO based on this beer. (I do have 2 lagers going where I followed much more of the procedure and I am still waiting on that).
EDIT: (Info below, is unrelated to the above, but relating to the question of - "All dry hops in primary vs. use of dry hop keg for second dry hop?")
However.... the one thing that I did do differently than I have before is I did the dry hopping in 2 stages in primary, no dry hop keg, relatively closed transfer to serving keg (See post before this one with a bit more detail on that). I can definitely say "flavor-wise" this process was as good or better than the second stage dry hop keg with two transfers. Definitely easier. The beer did seem to transfer cloudier (as opposed to hazy) than my normal method. I suspect some of that will drop out with a few days in the keg/cold. So, flavor wise...... definitely can recommend all dry hop in primary and no dry-hopping keg with a transfer to serving keg. I will say - my process allows for relatively clean transfer of beer out of primary. If you are transferring a ton of gunk and hop debris...... that dry hopping keg with filter on dip tube might still be a good way to go.
Sampled my last two batches. Both were basically the updated recipe in #1418. I was playing around with some "LoDO" techniques. First.... I was not able to apply all the LoDO techniques, so I am not saying that is something to do or not do.... I did not carbonate naturally in the keg. However, I did use the mashing techniques, low boil, Metabidulfite, etc. I also, did all dry hopping in primary with no dry hop keg. Figured, less transferring was better as far as oxygen.
In the end, I did one with the metabisulfite, mashing techniques, low boil, etc..... The only "difference" I noted between the two was that the LoDO beer seems distinctly drier..... in the end, I think there was probably a significant water profile difference between the two due to the sulfate in the Metabisulfite..... I did not fully/precisely account for that in water profile. Both beers were very good though, even with the moderate difference in mouthfeel/perception.
*So, like I said, I really have no concrete stance on LoDO based on this beer. (I do have 2 lagers going where I followed much more of the procedure and I am still waiting on that).
EDIT: (Info below, is unrelated to the above, but relating to the question of - "All dry hops in primary vs. use of dry hop keg for second dry hop?")
However.... the one thing that I did do differently than I have before is I did the dry hopping in 2 stages in primary, no dry hop keg, relatively closed transfer to serving keg (See post before this one with a bit more detail on that). I can definitely say "flavor-wise" this process was as good or better than the second stage dry hop keg with two transfers. Definitely easier. The beer did seem to transfer cloudier (as opposed to hazy) than my normal method. I suspect some of that will drop out with a few days in the keg/cold. So, flavor wise...... definitely can recommend all dry hop in primary and no dry-hopping keg with a transfer to serving keg. I will say - my process allows for relatively clean transfer of beer out of primary. If you are transferring a ton of gunk and hop debris...... that dry hopping keg with filter on dip tube might still be a good way to go.
Hey @Braufessor
Do you have any reasoning for letting the ferm temp rise freely over the first few days from 62 to 66-68? I do something similar and I like my results but I was asked why not just keep the ferm temp constant during this period. I didn't have a good answer so I was wondering if you had some reasoning for it.
Do you have any reasoning for letting the ferm temp rise freely over the first few days from 62 to 66-68? I do something similar and I like my results but I was asked why not just keep the ferm temp constant during this period. I didn't have a good answer so I was wondering if you had some reasoning for it.
OP
OP
Basically, you just don't want the temp to drop.... that can cause yeast to stall out, drop out, etc.
I do not use a fermentation chamber (for ales....it is usually full of lagers). So, I control my temps by doing the following:
*Chill below ambient temp. of my basement (60-65 depending on time of year)
*Yeast in early stages is always good for 4-6 degrees of free rise.... So, I don't want to start at 68 and have the yeast take me to 74.
*Therefore, I will usually chill to that 62 range.
*Fermentation activity takes me into my desired range of 65-68 or so.
*I then move my fermenter upstairs to finish at about 68-70 degrees ambient temp when it seems like it is going to stop generating fermentation heat.
Basically..... any strategy that keeps the fermentation going and does not cause the yeast to drop out. Definitely more than one way to make that happen.
*I think that it is especially important for Conan yeast.... it seems like it is a bit more finicky than say 1056 or 1272 or something like that. English yeasts seem particularly uncooperative to temp drops in my experience.
![Craft A Brew - Safale S-04 Dry Yeast - Fermentis - English Ale Dry Yeast - For English and American Ales and Hard Apple Ciders - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [1 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41fVGNh6JfL._SL500_.jpg)
stickyfinger
Well-Known Member
I have had some nightmare transfers when trying to rack warm beer as well. I started chilling my wort down for at least 12 hours a few months ago, and it does wonders to pack down the particles that will clog the QDs. You can then rack to the keg with the "guts" all in place.
I usually get my autosiphon going so that there is beer in my line but still some air in the end of the line. I then put on my liquid QD onto the transfer hose and push in the end of it with my finger to get all of the air to be flushed out until beer starts coming out. I then sanitize the QD and connect it onto the beer out post. I have only had problems once doing that, and I think it was due to the QD and the beer post not matching up well. Sometimes the "universal" poppets don't work as well with certain posts. I though it had been clogged with particles, but it was something with the post that was wrong. Anyway, I highly recommend chilling before transfer.
That was my rationale for doing it as well. I figure if you ramp up the temp periodically, you keep the yeast from having the chance to quit too soon. I start in the low 60s and bump it up 2 degrees every day until I get to 70. Then I take it off temp control but it usually stays around 70.
If you force carbed the beer you would have un-done any good you had done with a LoDO mash and introduced so much O2 that hop oxidation is well on its way. The published process explicitly states this isn't acceptable. LoDO and forced carbonation are not at all compatible unless you're using lab grade CO2, which is prohibitively expensive and not generally available to home brewers.
Did you achieve the odorless mash from the LoDO batch? Did you taste the wort?
OP
OP
.... Yes, I know this - that is why I explicitly stated (twice) that I did NOT follow all of the procedures for this beer, and I was NOT judging the success of the procedures, because I did not follow them to the level recommended. I did notice taste/perception contribution from the Meta though.... neither a pro nor a con in my opinion.
Coming out of the fermenter, however, there was zero difference (that I could perceive) in the two beers beyond the "dryness" perception of the LoDO beer. These beers have a ton of hops in them though.... so I think that probably masks the perception of a lot of other things in either beer.
I did get the mash /wort contributions pre fermentation..... "grainy" type flavors to the wort, no/less odor of mash, etc.
If I go the route of using LoDo techniques on beers down the road, it is easier to apply it to lagers than IPA's. Basically, I would need to rethink the way I am hopping my IPA's if I am going to also transfer them to a keg before they are done fermenting. Not sure the best approach of that yet.
I have sampled my lagers a bit..... For those I did follow the recommended process (within the context/ability of my equipment). I did transfer from fermenter to purged keg before fermentation finished to allow carbonation in serving vessel. The lagers are really only about 4 weeks or less since brew day at this point and still need some time, still need to drop clear, etc. However, in my initial sampling there is a decidedly "grainy" quality to the beer. Absolutely different than a comparable(identical) finished helles I have on tap where I did not follow any of the LoDO techniques. That said.....
1.) The beer still has some yeast in it, and it just needs a bit more time.
2.) I am not sure I like the "grainy" flavor .... but, again, it is not a finished beer and I don't want to pass judgement on it yet.
Not really looking for another LoDO argument here so i'll say my piece and this is it.
These types of posts are very misleading, disclaimer or not. You mentioned all the LoDO things you did, but then also say you didn't do at least one of the key steps. Then you state observations about the differences (or lack therefore).
If you don't
1. pre-boil mash water AND
2. use SMB in the mash AND
3. tighten-up O2 ingress AND
4. boil lightly AND
5. carbonate naturally in your serving vessel
Then you will see little to no difference. It's a weak link process. If you don't do all the steps it's not LoDO. Simple as that.
Glad to hear your Helles is turning out well though.
stickyfinger
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure you will see no difference in your beer implementing these steps independently. All may or may not help your beer independently.
OP
OP
I said there was no perceivable difference out of the fermenter (other than the dryness of the LoDo that I am attributing to possible sulfate difference).... what does that have to do with method of carbonation? When I did the lagers, I got perceptible differences at every stage.... mash, boil, post boil, out of fermenter, and now in the keg. With this beer, there just was no real difference out of the fermenter. That is all I said. Shouldn't there have been a difference out of the fermenter? Based on my lagers, I expected one.
Secondarily, in my post, I said that there was no difference between putting all the hops in the primary and my normal method of using a dry hop keg. I posted that because there are a hundred+ posts on here asking "can I put all the dry hops in the primary instead of using a dry hopping keg stage."
So, based on what I just did, I was simply telling people (the most frequently asked question on this thread possibly) that putting all the hops in the primary seems to be a great way to go if you can avoid transferring a bunch of yeast/trub/hops to the serving keg out of the fermenter.
I am totally open minded on the LoDO stuff and I really don't think there was anything misleading in what I posted.
TheHopfather
Well-Known Member
@Braufessor if you don't make a post praising LoDo and the resultant beer you get replies saying you're doing it wrong. It happens across multiple threads, don't sweat it. I thought your disclaimer wasn't misleading at all.
I wouldn't mind giving LoDo a shot, just haven't figured out the best way to implement it using my Grainfather.
I wouldn't mind giving LoDo a shot, just haven't figured out the best way to implement it using my Grainfather.
To be fair it's not just me - many others call it out too. LoDO has nothing to do with praise. If you do LoDO, follow all the steps, get the intended results, and don't prefer the beer, then i'm fine with that. We all have our own preferences.
But there is a long history of people who say they did LoDO, admit to skipping key steps for a variety of reasons, don't notice a difference, and then conclude its heresy. This post read just like those.
Honestly not sure why this is such a divisive issue. We're all just trying to make better beer...
TheHopfather
Well-Known Member
It is divisive because people do not want to believe that they have been making beer the "wrong" way. They do not want to find out that they need to spend money on equipment and spend additional time/effort to brew it the "correct" way. That is pretty much it.
Personally I don't care either way. LoDo sounds intriguing and I would like to give it a shot myself before deciding one way is better than the other. However it does get a bit tiresome to see thread after thread pointing out that someone didn't do LoDo properly so they didn't really brew a LoDo beer. By now I think that most people understand that it is all the steps or nothing.
If we're really being fair here Braufessor did mention, twice, that his "LoDo" version NE IPA's weren't actually LoDo. I'm sure that is good enough for most.
Mordhaus
Well-Known Member
For anyone following, I use this method as well and without any super scientific argumentative info to support my claims, I'm happy with the results. No cut gas dip tubes on my kegs, just regular old length.
I ferment in a Speidel and took an extra cap and added a gas post to it. I throw it on there before cold crashing. When it's time to keg, I perform the method above and also attach a length of tubing with a gas disconnect on each end from the gas post on the keg to the gas post on the Speidel. Sort of a "closed loop" transfer I guess. Again, no mind numbing data to prove any of this superior or necessary, but I thought it was a neat little contraption to put together and had fun doing it. If anything, the small amount of empty keg pressure helps push the beer out of the Speidel a bit.
I bitter with Chinook all the time.
I bought a pound of it close to a year ago and found the late additions to be spicy and too aggressive. The smell was awesome but the flavor was too much so I now use it for early additions in any IPA.
My hop schedule is 60/10/FO and DH
motosapiens
Well-Known Member
meh, people have been making beer for 1000's of years without worrying about that stuff. I understand that guys can't have barbie, so they buy gear for their hobbies, and that's cool.
I will be interested at some point in tasting the latest religious trends, but it's clear one can make perfectly good beer pretty easily using the tried and true methods.
but back to northeast ipa, i'm starting to pop open some bottles that are 2 weeks old, and while the beer definitely is a little less cloudy (more like a traditional dry hop haze) I don't notice any significant difference in flavor. In fact it tastes darn good. Personally, I think the orange-juice appearance of some commercial examples is off-putting, so i'm not at all sad about losing it but still having the beer be fruity, hop-forward and delicious.
Thanks for getting back on topic. These guys and there LoDo geesh, even if that is a trend scientifically proven or not do we really think that any of the breweries were trying to emulate with these beers do this process? And isn't what this thread about trying to emulate the NEIPA. Maybe it's another way of keeping o2 out of the beer to keep it fresh, ok I get that but again do we really thinks treehouse uses this method, i'd say no, and I'm guessing if Nate would actually give up his secrets their prob not as groundbreaking as we think and I feel Like we're as a forum pretty onto what these guys are doing i.e. Small bittering charge, huge whirlpool and dry hop additions and the water is prob up for debate as to whether it's higher chloride or sulfate or in the middle of both. So ok rant over. Back on topic. Sorry
motosapiens
Well-Known Member
i haven't tried any of the backeast versions, but the weldwerks neipa that was VERY highly rated in a recent 'beer and brewing' magazine was also featured in an article where the brewer published his recipe and explained what and why he was doing. in his case 150/50 chloride/sulfate.
As long as my beer tastes great, I don't feel much need to emulate exactly what a commercial brewery is doing. Like most homebrewers, I tend to prefer my beer over other peoples; maybe not every batch, but once I get my preferences dialed.
we should trade some IPA sometime - i don't live far from you at all.
TheHopfather
Well-Known Member
My second version of this recipe. Went with the original Citra, Mosaic and Galaxy hop combo and 1318 for yeast. @HOPME this one finished up at 1.015. I made a couple of mistakes during all of the transferring on this one and I believe I lost a bunch of aroma. I'm currently working out a system for a closed transfer from my spigot-less Fermonsters to a keg, once I've got that working I'd like to give this another shot. Very tasty beer, the wife called it her favorite IPA and she isn't a big IPA drinker, so the beer must be doing something right.
stickyfinger
Well-Known Member
My wife also usually abstains from my IPAs for the most part, except the Black IPA I made (as she likes dark beers) and one of my recent NE-IPA-ified recipes. She loves it. Must be the fruitiness and round flavor with little bitterness.
motosapiens
Well-Known Member
good plan. I would welcome some other experienced tastebuds. I am joining the snake river brewers club for the same reason, to trade tastes and learn more. Homebrewstuff had a NE IPA from almanac brewing on tap last week that was pretty tasty, but similar to my bottled beers, more of a hop haze than an orange-juice opacity.
hockeybrewer
Well-Known Member
I used 1318 for my NE IPA and my og went from 1.064 to fg 1.008 so it ended up over 7%. I also made a starter and drew off a small mason of it to reuse. I made a pale ale with it that started out at 1.049 and finished at 1.009 but I always ramp up to 68ish after the 3rd day.
motosapiens
Well-Known Member
so mrs moto and I just did our triangle test of high sulfate vs high chloride in our NEPA
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=597564&page=2
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=597564&page=2
Ok how did u get that beer to look like that, that's the look I've been trying to achieve. The last batch of 1318 I used dropped a lot more than the previous batch and now that I think about it it seems to be dropping more with every subsequent time I use it. My initial batch looked more like your pic, that hazy, milkshake look. I love the orangey color, did u use some sort of Munich or marris otter to give it that color.
motosapiens
Well-Known Member
imho, trying to duplicate the 'look' is doing it wrong. I just worry about the flavor. I suspect that the 'look' goes away fairly quickly, because my first NEPA looked like that, but we drank it all the day after I tapped the keg. The bottle versions don't look that cloudy, but that makes me happy.
