New England IPA "Northeast" style IPA

[ttuato]

Did you rouse or shake after dry hopping?
Was the beer as pungent as your other beers?

Was it faster drinkable then others?
What was the grainbill?

How did the sample taste after being exposed to o2 for a while?

No rousing.

Pungency - on par with usual. 1.5-1.75oz/gal dryhop

93% 2 row
5% flaked wheat
2% honey malt

Faster drinkable? Not sure what you are asking. It is 6.2% -still fresh in keg.

Taste / smell - I could tell it had oxidized but did not seem as bad as I would have expected after six days. The crazy part to me is the color it is still the same as fresh beer. In past versions with extended hop exposure the beer would have been discolored after one day of sitting in glass. This is day six.

 

[beervoid]

No rousing.

Pungency - on par with usual. 1.5-1.75oz/gal dryhop

93% 2 row
5% flaked wheat
2% honey malt

Faster drinkable? Not sure what you are asking. It is 6.2% -still fresh in keg.

Taste / smell - I could tell it had oxidized but did not seem as bad as I would have expected after six days. The crazy part to me is the color it is still the same as fresh beer. In past versions with extended hop exposure the beer would have been discolored after one day of sitting in glass. This is day six.

Yes thats remarkable indeed.

With drinkable I mean how long after kegging was it not green anymore?
I would be expect the beer to be clearer more drinkable faster as there where less polyphenols..

 

[leesmith]

Taste / smell - I could tell it had oxidized but did not seem as bad as I would have expected after six days. The crazy part to me is the color it is still the same as fresh beer. In past versions with extended hop exposure the beer would have been discolored after one day of sitting in glass. This is day six.

So you have done this same experiment with “extended” dry hopped beers?

Also, do you use Irish moss or whirlfloc and transfer clear wort to the fermenter?

 

[Dgallo]

I don’t notice too many ppl fining their IPAs anymore. I don’t think it makes a difference aesthetically after Dryhopping. Also since proteins have a positive attraction to oils, not using whirlfloc or Irish moss is actually benefiting overall hop flavor and aroma.

 

[beervoid]

I don’t notice too many ppl fining their IPAs anymore. I don’t think it makes a difference aesthetically after Dryhopping. Also since proteins have a positive attraction to oils, not using whirlfloc or Irish moss is actually benefiting overall hop flavor and aroma.

Isn't irish moss usefull to get unwanted stuff out of the fermenter, I doubt it would get any proteins out. I didn't taste a difference flavor or aroma, body wise... I did get the benefit of faster clearer beer, NEIPA without whirlfloc stay murky longer in my experience.
Tried finding any research or experiences about whirlfloc and if it really strips the beer of wanted things in a NEIPA but couldn't find much data.
Have you experienced better NEIPA without whirlfloc?

 

[Dgallo]

Isn't irish moss usefull to get unwanted stuff out of the fermenter, I doubt it would get any proteins out. I didn't taste a difference flavor or aroma, body wise... I did get the benefit of faster clearer beer, NEIPA without whirlfloc stay murky longer in my experience.
Tried finding any research or experiences about whirlfloc and if it really strips the beer of wanted things in a NEIPA.
Have you experienced better NEIPA without whirlfloc?

The only purpose for Irish moss is to improve clarity by attaching to proteins and makes them drop out of suspension. It only works on proteins, which is why it should not be used on NE IPA because proteins are the main contributor to haze. I’m not saying Irish moss is bad, it’s great for beers styles where clarity is a must. For IPAs I think it’s pointless to use it because it does not drop out hop particulates or polyphenols, so it will not clear the haze produce from that, also because proteins attract hop oils, having proteins in the fermenter will benefit the extraction of the hop oils from Dryhopping

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Isn't irish moss usefull to get unwanted stuff out of the fermenter, I doubt it would get any proteins out.

No - the whole point of Irish moss (and related products) is that it's a big lump of negative charge at wort pH's that attracts positively-charged protein that sticks to the moss in the kettle and drops out of the beer. The only reason you add it is to drop out protein.

Cold-side finings (isinglass, gelatine) are made from (big, insoluble) proteins so have a positive charge, so they attract all the negatively-charged crap in the fermenter.

If you've dropped out both the positively-charged crap and the negatively-charged crap in the two phases, you should have clear beer!

 

[ttuato]

So you have done this same experiment with “extended” dry hopped beers?

Also, do you use Irish moss or whirlfloc and transfer clear wort to the fermenter?

Yes - extended beers but not “head to head trial”. Browning after one day. Taste is very oxidized

No - fining agents on NEIPa

 

[leesmith]

Brewed December 1st.
Picture taken January 12th (still this hazy as of yesterday).
Whirlfloc at 5 min.

4 day dry hop. Crashed and carbonated for a week after and then taken off hops.

Please stop saying not to use finings in this style. It’s OK to.
I get clear wort in the fermenter.
Basic 2-row, white wheat, c20 malt bill.

I’ll try the experiment with the next hoppy beer to see if a sample turns brown quickly. I’m LODO on the cold side if that matters.

 

[Dgallo]

View attachment 608357

Brewed December 1st.
Picture taken January 12th (still this hazy as of yesterday).
Whirlfloc at 5 min.

4 day dry hop. Crashed and carbonated for a week after and then taken off hops.

Please stop saying not to use finings in this style. It’s OK to.
I get clear wort in the fermenter.
Basic 2-row, white wheat, c20 malt bill.

I’ll try the experiment with the next hoppy beer to see if a sample turns brown quickly. I’m LODO on the cold side if that matters.

Sure its fine to put a whirlfloc tab in any beer, nothing wrong with it, the point is that It’s a waste of time for this style. Whirlfloc only drops out proteins. Proteins do not increase beer degrade in anyway. So for hazy beer styles you are wasting your 1/2 tab of whirlfloc since your looking for a hazy beer in the end anyway. Here’s a NE without one. As you can see not much difference so why waste it.

 

[Dgallo]

I just re read your post about time frame. Your beer has only been in a keg cold for a little less than a month. If you can remember and the beer lasts that long without kicking, PM me a picture 2 weeks from now. I’d like to see if it’s drops at all. I would think it would but again that’s just based on theory, not actual practice.

 

[leesmith]

So if you want to repitch your yeast you’d want all those proteins mixed in? Bad practice.

It’s not critical to this style to not use it and or use it...so it’s a moot point to stress NOT to.

It plays no role as a style guideline.

Many times I see advice given to NOT use it because you’ll get better haze. That’s not true.

 

[Dgallo]

I get your point here, it’s possible to make a hazy beer still using one. I’m not denying that I just don’t see the point if you want it hazy in the end.
Just a side note,

So if you want to repitch your yeast you’d want all those proteins mixed in? Bad practice.

if you want to repitch yeast, it’s certainly ok to have some protein in it, It’s not bad practice. Yeast need amino acids for optimum health. The Yeast will pull the amino acids from that protein. They will use what they need and then the rest will drop out.

 

[leesmith]

I get your point here, it’s possible to make a hazy beer still using one. I’m not denying that I just don’t see the point if you want it hazy in the end.
Just a side note,

If you want to repitch yeast, it’s certainly ok to have some protein in it, It’s not bad practice. Yeast need amino acids for optimum health. The Yeast will pull the amino acids from that protein. They will use what they need and then the rest will drop out.

There will probably be enough protein for the yeast regardless of using whirlfloc (I'm no scientist though). If not using it, by the 4th generation how much of that slurry is protein vs yeast; especially if not using a conical to drop out the trub during primary?

So far my my beers tend to stay hazy until they kick. Unfortunately, I don't keep them that long considering I only do 2.5 gallon batches. But yeah I’ve had them for a month and a half or longer though.
I do know couchsending uses finings (cold side too I think) and says his haze lasts.

 

[Dgallo]

There will probably be enough protein for the yeast regardless of using whirlfloc (I'm no scientist though). If not using it, by the 4th generation how much of that slurry is protein vs yeast; especially if not using a conical to drop out the trub during primary?.

I got you. I thought we’re talking about harvesting the yeast through a conical and then repitching not racking on to it. Your probably correct that if you plan on reusing the yeast cake from a flat FV, you probably want to top harvest the yeast or only transfer clear wort into them

 

[kaz4121]

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

 

[beervoid]

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

I've read some of his stuff, my one remark on it would be that alot of scientific research on dry hopping i've read is done mostly with Cascade and or other cheaper hops.
As every hop has different oil content I don't think you can conclude that the research on Cascade counts for every hop.
It's known that some pro's go over ridiculous amounts of dry hopping. 5+ BBL. I doubt they do that with Cascade though... some of them also have centrifuges which makes it more easyer to extract the goodness from large amounts me thinks as they can get all the unwanted stuff out which otherwise would absorb any extra oils from the added extra hops.

I would like to see some research with some of the popular pungent hops mosaic citra or galaxy and also dumping the hops before adding another dose (double dry hopping) and how that would translate to the current research

 

[Dgallo]

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 article. Kind of concludes what I’ve noticed through my own trial and error. I typically dry hop at around .8oz per gallon but no more than 1oz per gallon. I’ve found that my aroma/flavor intensity does not increase after this point, also I’ve found the aroma/flavor is cleaner (less muddled) and showcases a(n) greater specific hop verietal(s) profile.

For a while now I’ve been systematically reducing my total hop use for IPA/NEIPA. I’m a firm believer that more does not mean better. I’m down to 2-2.4 total oz per gallon and am producing my best beers yet.

 

[leesmith]

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

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.

 

[Sbe2]

I’m down to 2-2.4 total oz per gallon and am producing my best beers yet.

Same here. Seems to be a good sweet spot for me. I have been moving the amounts and time they go in, but I like to keep the total hop amount the same.

Although, I bought a pound of Cascade pellets from a work buddy of mine. He gave them to me in a ziplock so I decided to brew with them as quick as I could. I just added half a pound for a DH, the rest was in the kettle.

 

[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.