There's no such thing as a session IPA.

[signpost]

Hops need a good strong malt backbone for balance or the beer ranges from "eh" to gross. Sessions have so little maltiness to them that these session IPAs are all just not for me.

Maybe IPAs just arent for you then? Because they most certainly are NOT supposed to have a strong malt backbone. You are describing an american strong ale like Arrogant Bastard

IMO, the idea of "balance" in an IPA needs to be considered through the lens of IPA as a style. An IPA is not balanced. If it was, it wouldn't be an IPA, itd be an american strong ale, or overhopped amber ale, or something. If an IPA has enough malt presence to create a sweet finish like you'd have in a "balanced' Irish Red, then you made it wrong. When a well made IPA is said to be "balanced" it just means that its got just enough support from the malt & yeast so the hop character is not too abrasive and you get a pleasing finish. The beer itself is still a very unbalanced beer in terms of hops/yeast/malt

When I think of an IPA with a strong malt backbone, I think of Bell's Two Hearted Ale. I think messiah was referring to this same kind of maltiness. Not cloying sweetness and heavy malt flavor, but rather enough malt to not feel like the hops are stripping the taste buds off your tongue. Not every IPA is a super dry West Coast style IPA.

I think the same can be done with a session IPA, although most just don't. Most session beers are overly dry, as if the brewery just took the second runnings from their IPA or IIPA and made it into it's own beer. Again, I'll refer back to Bell's. Their Oatsmobile is a great example of a session beer with good body, present hops, and a balanced flavor. Of course, they don't call it a session IPA, they go with the session pale ale designation.

 

[ThatVideoKid]

As far as I've ever heard double and imperial mean the same thing in regard to the strength of an IPA.

Yeah double comes from the fact that it's IIPA, hence Double-I PA. Some people think they're different though. And I'm sure there are a few breweries that have both double and imperial ipas.

 

[kristiismean]

Yeah double comes from the fact that it's IIPA, hence Double-I PA. Some people think they're different though. And I'm sure there are a few breweries that have both double and imperial ipas.

I think the definitions are different. But the end result is the same. Like a dipa is 2+2 while an imperial is 1+3

 

[Snubnoze707]

I think you two jabrobi's are reading too far into this. Double and Imperial just mean strong.

And I thought bashing Session IPA was so 2 years ago? Shouldn't we all be slamming the style of Juicy NE IPA right now? Is a New England IPA and North East IPA different!?

 

[messiah]

Maybe IPAs just arent for you then? Because they most certainly are NOT supposed to have a strong malt backbone. You are describing an american strong ale like Arrogant Bastard

IMO, the idea of "balance" in an IPA needs to be considered through the lens of IPA as a style. An IPA is not balanced. If it was, it wouldn't be an IPA, itd be an american strong ale, or overhopped amber ale, or something. If an IPA has enough malt presence to create a sweet finish like you'd have in a "balanced' Irish Red, then you made it wrong. When a well made IPA is said to be "balanced" it just means that its got just enough support from the malt & yeast so the hop character is not too abrasive and you get a pleasing finish. The beer itself is still a very unbalanced beer in terms of hops/yeast/malt

From 2015 BJCP guidelines
Flavor: Hop flavor is medium to very high, and should reflect
an American or New World hop character, such as citrus,
floral, pine, resinous, spicy, tropical fruit, stone fruit, berry,
melon, etc. Medium-high to very high hop bitterness. Malt
flavor should be low to medium-low, and is generally clean and
grainy-malty although some light caramel or toasty flavors are
acceptable. Low yeast-derived fruitiness is acceptable but not
required. Dry to medium-dry finish; residual sweetness should
be low to none. The bitterness and hop flavor may linger into
the aftertaste but should not be harsh. A very light, clean
alcohol flavor may be noted in stronger versions. May be
slightly sulfury, but most examples do not exhibit this
character.

IPAs are for me just as much as pretty much any other style. Variety is the spice of life. I drink a good deal of IPAs, and I like a good one better than most imperials. I just brewed my most aggressively hopped IPA yet. My efficiency was low and my attenuation was high, making it one of the drier ones I have brewed. Still, at 6.9% you can be on the dry side and still have something there to compliment the hops.

Strong was a bad choice of words on my part, but I need some sort of a malt backbone to compliment the hops. Complimentary tastes is where the balance is here. I agree with the BJCP guidelines that the malt flavor should be low. This is why I said backbone and not malt forward. All those hops in an IPA will really subdue any malty sweetness, and the malt will tone down the harshness of all those hops. You do not need to taste something for it to effect the overall taste or the taste of other ingredients.

As you mention, an IPA is off center already, and balance is having just enough malt to support the hops. Sessions just take it that much further off center. The sessions I have had are so out of balance compared to a regular IPA that the hops actually taste different because of it. Also, a highly hopped barleywine will take on a different malt character that tends to change and mature differently than it would in something like Double Old Thumper (I love that brew with a nice rich fatty winter meal).

Not cloying sweetness and heavy malt flavor, but rather enough malt to not feel like the hops are stripping the taste buds off your tongue.

He gets what I am talking about, and its a lingering taste and feeling that I just don't care for. I never made hop tea, but I am guessing I would not like it. At least not without a spoonful of sugar or two.

 

[Apple_Jacker]

Founder's All Day IPA is way too dry. Every time I drink it, I wish I had a Two Hearted ale in my glass.

In general, I think session IPAs or pale ales aren't any good, but Bell's Oatsmobile is really good. Has enough body from the oats to not feel like a diet beer. And the flavor is right on.

Although 2 Hearted is one of my favorite beers, an All Day IPA is a great floating-down-the-river-on-a-tube beer, especially during these Tennessee summers that I'm still not yet used to!

We just got Oatsmobile down here a few weeks ago, and I love it! I'm hoping someone develops a clone recipe on that one soon.

2 weeks ago, I took a 10 day trip up to Michigan for a wedding, but also to visit as many breweries as I could fit in. I went to Bell's twice and brought back some of their Hopsoulution. Try that if you haven't yet!

Back on topic - I have been thoroughly enjoying the session IPA trend. During my travels back up to Michigan, I made it a point to try as many as I could find....I just don't remember them all

 

[ThatVideoKid]

This is everything this thread is against [emoji106][emoji106]

View attachment ImageUploadedByHome Brew1467053341.801131.jpg

And boy is it good

 

[m00ps]

This is everything this thread is against [emoji106][emoji106]

View attachment 360065

And boy is it good

ISO
you, sir, can go to hell.

 

[KeyWestBrewing]

I'm going to start calling my pale ale an Imperial Session IPA

 

[ThatVideoKid]

ISO

you, sir, can go to hell.

TBH I don't actually like many of them. However this is straight hopwater and for some reason I love it. I think it's because most of them are lacking even in hops. This is just full tilt all hop flavor/aroma, no malt, no bitterness. Body actually isn't bad, but that's the rich NE IPA mouthfeel coming into play I think.

 

[b-boy]

This is everything this thread is against [emoji106][emoji106]

View attachment 360065

And boy is it good

3.3%? Does it qualify as beer if you can't catch a buzz off of it?

Hmm...harsh bitterness, no buzz, and a lot pf peeing. I'll pass.

 

[thunderwagn]

:d

 

[ThatVideoKid]

3.3%? Does it qualify as beer if you can't catch a buzz off of it?

Hmm...harsh bitterness, no buzz, and a lot pf peeing. I'll pass.

Nah not bitter at all [emoji106] its NESIPA

 

[Corrado]

Nah not bitter at all [emoji106] its NESIPA

Then how does it classify itself in any sort of IPA category? If you're going to add meaningless modifiers (e.g. "Session" to IPA), this sounds like a Hoppy Blonde (or Cream) Ale.

 

[ThatVideoKid]

Then how does it classify itself in any sort of IPA category? If you're going to add meaningless modifiers (e.g. "Session" to IPA), this sounds like a Hoppy Blonde (or Cream) Ale.

I guess that's really the point of this entire thread. Why is it a Red IPA, not a hoppy red? Why is it a Black IPA and not a hoppy stout/black ale?

If bitterness is the issue then do any of the NE IPAs qualify as IPAs?

And to the previous comment on 3.3% being too low, try visiting England.

 

[m00ps]

The IPA category is constantly being re-defined. The biggest overhaul in the 2016 BJCP guidelines was the IPA section, and it still can't keep up.

IMO, any beer that's entire focus is on hops and getting those flavors/aromas to your face is an IPA. The base beer beneath the hops can be 3%, 12%, belgian, lager, black, white, purple, it doesnt matter. Its liquid hops and its an IPA. Stop fretting about what it "technically" should be

 

[ThatVideoKid]

The IPA category is constantly being re-defined. The biggest overhaul in the 2016 BJCP guidelines was the IPA section, and it still can't keep up.

IMO, any beer that's entire focus is on hops and getting those flavors/aromas to your face is an IPA. The base beer beneath the hops can be 3%, 12%, belgian, lager, black, white, purple, it doesnt matter. Its liquid hops and its an IPA. Stop fretting about what it "technically" should be

I agree. Yeah it's not to the "old style" but it lets you know what you're drinking. Isn't that what matters?

 

[KeyWestBrewing]

That doesn't address what's pissing everyone off though which is the fact that IPA is trampling on other accepted styles. Mainly for the sake of marketing. All this is doing is taking away room for interpretation in other styles not expanding the definition of what an IPA is.