What's the secret to brewing a REALLY clean tasting IPA?

[schematix]

Indeed. Lagunitas IPA finishes at 1.020ish and that's definitely not a sweet beer. There's certainly a difference between under attenuation and finishing gravity.

NO!

Lagunitas website says its an OG of 1.059 and 6.2%. That gives it an FG of ~1.012.

 

[Dgallo]

NO!

Lagunitas website says its an OG of 1.059 and 6.2%. That gives it an FG of ~1.012.

Everyone needs to get past the fact that fg is not an indicator of hop brightness, process and quality is. It also isn’t the reason this was a dumper

 

[schematix]

Everyone needs to get past the fact that fg is not an indicator of hop brightness, process and quality is. It also isn’t the reason this was a dumper

Lots of reasons for dumpers. A high FG is one of them.

 

[dwhite60]

One thing that helped my IPAs and hoppy Pale Ales was reducing/eliminating my use of Crystal malts and moving to lighter Crystal. In years past, 10% Crystal 60 was common for me. My current "base" American IPA has 4% Crystal 20 (plus some Carapils and Wheat). For the last hoppy Pale Ale I brewed I moved to zero Crystal and instead used 19% Munich to give some color/flavor. That beer might have been a bit "too light" for my preferences in a Pale Ale, but I think it will work well for a beer where you want the hops to shine.

I've read a little about this lately. Crystal is made partly through an oxygen reaction. The reaction doesn't stop either. It slows when moisture is removed from the equation but doesn't stop. Throw it in a mash though and it starts back working. Lower amounts of lighter crystals do seem to provide less of the effect.

CascadesBrewer's comment seems to agree with this idea.

All the Best,
D. White

 

[Callacave]

Lots of reasons for dumpers. A high FG is one of them.

Who says that's a high FG?

 

[schematix]

Who says that's a high FG?

If you’re looking for an authoritative source, BJCP.

There are a few styles with higher FG, but those are generally also big malty beers. IPA is not that.

1.020 is way too high.

 

[505-Brewer]

Diacetyl is a great way to ruin an ipa. Too many rushed beers w diacetyl. We dont really perceive the precursor so unless youve done a forced test or waited a long time (not common for many ipa makers) it shows up in the glass yuck. That is certainly a dumper.

 

[Callacave]

If you’re looking for an authoritative source, BJCP.

There are a few styles with higher FG, but those are generally also big malty beers. IPA is not that.

1.020 is way too high.

BJCP isn't authoritative. They're guidelines if you want to try to stay to style, and win competitions, but styles continually change. If we stuck with BJCP there would never be any progress. BJCP actually had to follow the changing trends, and finally change to what brewers were really doing.

I wouldn't want my hoppy beers to finish at 1.020 either, but it doesn't mean it's a dumper.

Try Hill's Everett. His Porter. It finishes at 1.030, but you'd never know it. It's not overly sweet, and has a wonderful roast and chocolate undertones.

We're getting off the beaten path, so I'll end it here, but my original point is a FG doesn't have to be below 1.010 in a hoppy ale to be good, and have the hops pop like you initially said. I actually prefer mine to be above that with some body, and the hops can still shine.

I'm sure you make some fine beers. Keep doing you. Nothing wrong with that. We all have different tastes and preferences.

 

[couchsending]

Like I said, I disagree. I get incredible mouthfeel with a 15P->1.8P IPA. Much better when I made dextrin heavy beer that would finish at 4P. It was just heavy and cloying.

Then your water profile/carbonation is wrong. I would say 80-90% of the best commercial IPAs in the world finish north of 1.010 and plenty close to 1.014/1.015. And that’s both soft/hazy and clear/bitter WC.

You definitely don’t need low finishing gravity to get hops to pop.

PH is incredibly important all the way through from mash to sparge, start of boil, end of boil, before dry hopping.

Gotta keep O2 exposure to the absolute minimum after fermentation is complete. Hops flavor and aroma are the first thing to go when the beer is exposed to even minute amounts of oxygen. Unless you’re kegging and have a conical that can withstand at least a little head pressure, that’s hard to do.

 

[schematix]

Then your water profile/carbonation is wrong. I would say 80-90% of the best commercial IPAs in the world finish north of 1.010 and plenty close to 1.014/1.015. And that’s both soft/hazy and clear/bitter WC.

You definitely don’t need low finishing gravity to get hops to pop.

PH is incredibly important all the way through from mash to sparge, start of boil, end of boil, before dry hopping.

Gotta keep O2 exposure to the absolute minimum after fermentation is complete. Hops flavor and aroma are the first thing to go when the beer is exposed to even minute amounts of oxygen. Unless you’re kegging and have a conical that can withstand at least a little head pressure, that’s hard to do.

There's no "your" here. Not sure what you're arguing. There's a HUGE difference between 1.008, 1.012, 1.015 and 1.020. 1.020 is undrinkable in virtually all beer styles. Blech.

I'd put my HB IPA toe to toe with the best IPAs in the world. I was an IPA addict before they were trendy and i've spent a LOT of time figuring them out. I've made a lot of them that weren't great to test different methods (e.g. 100% whirlpool hops). It's definitely a sum of the parts but certain things help more than others. If you want something world class, by which i mean better than just about anything you'll get at your local craft brewery or buy on store shelves, you need to pay attention to the details. You can make hoppy beer easily, but to have it be something with the right mouthfeel, flavor, bitterness, carbonation and overall balance takes some attention to detail.
-100% RO water with mineral adjustment
-Simple grain bills with bland base malts
-Meticulous oxygen exclusion hot and cold side
-pH monitoring/adjustment in the mash, boil, and knock out
-Step mashing for maximum extract, attenuation and clarity
-Use of clarifiers and stabilizers
-Layered application of the freshest possible hops in various forms.... isomerized oils, non-isomerized oils, hop hash, pellets
-High yeast pitching rates
-Oxygenation of wort with pure O2
-Fermentation temperature control
-Spunding

 

[couchsending]

There's no "your" here. Not sure what you're arguing. There's a HUGE difference between 1.008, 1.012, 1.015 and 1.020. 1.020 is undrinkable in virtually all beer styles. Blech.

Of course there’s a difference. There isn’t enough malt to support the hops at 1.008 IMHO. 1.012-1.015 for me is the sweet spot and yes they can be different but you could also make 1.012 taste much sweeter than 1.015 with different water profiles.

Certain beer styles need to be over 1.020 in order to be drinkable... the highest regarded stouts and porters in the world (even the non adjuncted ones) are all over 1.020 and most over 1.030 FG.

 

[schematix]

Certain beer styles need to be over 1.020 in order to be drinkable... the highest regarded stouts and porters in the world (even the non adjuncted ones) are all over 1.020 and most over 1.030 FG.

The topic of this thread is IPA, not mega imperial stouts and porters. Not even in the same ballpark.

 

[couchsending]

The topic of this thread is IPA, not mega imperial stouts and porters. Not even in the same ballpark.

Then you shouldn’t have made such a blanket statement.

 

[schematix]

Then you shouldn’t have made such a blanket statement.

I didn't. My comments were all made within the context of IPAs and even qualified when i mentioned other styles.

 

[505-Brewer]

Virtually all beer styles ........

 

[schematix]

Virtually all beer styles ........

Right.... which means all but a few. Those few being the mega imperial stout/porter vanilla bourbon barrel whatever. And again, this is an IPA thread.

 

[Dgallo]

Right.... which means all but a few. Those few bring the mega imperial stout/porter vanilla bourbon barrel whatever. And again, this is an IPA thread.

You are relentless aren’t you lol

 

[schematix]

You are relentless aren’t you lol

Making factually inaccurate statements in response to my posts usually elicits a reply.

 

[Dgallo]

Making factually inaccurate statements in response to my posts usually elicits a reply.

As I would reply, all your post have been opinions....

You want it to finish dry.... if you're above 1.008 the hops aren't going to pop.

Under attenuated malt isn’t a good flavor.

- finishing higher due to purposefully mashing for having unfermentable sugars wouldn’t be an under attenuated beer.

1.020 is way too high.

 

[Dustin_J]

There are a couple of highly regarded brewers in the various forums who experience peach-like flavors from US-05 in the 55-60* F range.

I'm of the opinion that peach flavors with US-05 is something that some people can taste but others are 'blind' to it.

I went looking for peach with US-05 last winter with some one gallon test batches (basement ambient temperature gets to 55* F). I ended up making good beer - but no peach flavors. And, honestly, if I'm 'blind' to peach flavors from US-05, I'm OK with that.

My wife and I make a house sparkling apple cider with US-05, and I've definitely noticed that once I get down to 61-62 F it throws a subtle white peach character. I haven't tried to go much lower, but we actually target this temp to get that peach ester. It's been very reliable that if we stay below 62 we get it, if we go above we don't, at least at a level we can perceive it at.

 

[Miraculix]

My wife and I make a house sparkling apple cider with US-05, and I've definitely noticed that once I get down to 61-62 F it throws a subtle white peach character. I haven't tried to go much lower, but we actually target this temp to get that peach ester. It's been very reliable that if we stay below 62 we get it, if we go above we don't, at least at a level we can perceive it at.

Interesting! Everybody seems to not like it in beer. Good to hear that this can be used to enhance a cider in a good way

 

[fendersrule]

Well, just bottled my Mac and Jacks. It was in the fermenter for 4 weeks including 1 week of pellet dry-hop. I wasn't pleased with the taste and the smell. It wasn't as bad as my last "dumper" (the IPA), but it reminded me very much of it. The forum said I should have just bottled it anyways and age it out. I mean, the mac and jacks was drinkable...barely, but I am concerned. Not sure if that's the taste of being "green", or if it's indeed yeast by-products. I can't describe the taste, it was almost kinda fruity with a shot of pure alcohol. The smell gave it away immediately. Did not taste like Mac and Jacks at all. I brewed this beer perfectly. Perfect fermentation levels. Perfect sanitation (infact, I bleached everything before starting this time since it has been awhile). Perfect temp control. Wyeast 1098 "smack pack". I followed the direction of the smack pack exactly. It wasn't "fully" expanded by the time it said it would be, but it definitely grew some size before I pitched. Anyways, we'll see how that turns out.....a bit let down by this, because that god damn smell/taste is something that so far has never "left" some of my beers completely as of recent....and IPAs should NOT have that "taste", nor ambers, nor anything for that matter. I don't know if it's called "ester" or "fussel". Maybe it's too young?

I also bottled my bee-cave porter tonight and it tasted fantastic, right from the hydro tube. No doubt this will come out a winner. Slightly buzzed right now....had to drink about 8oz of it.

Unless I'm completely wrong...and it's happened before, but during bottling, drinking the hydro-tube should leave you with some good-tasting beer or cider. Yes, it will be flat. Yes, it will be young. Yes, it will not have "aged" and won't taste "blended". But am I correct that it shouldn't have any off-smells or off-tastes?

Maybe I should R.H.A.H.B.

 

[schematix]

Don't leave it in the fermenter so long. Geez. Also 1 smack pack, while it "will work", is generally not recognized as best practice. Make a starter next time or use 2 packs of dry yeast. Significant off flavors come from under pitching. Try it next time and see if it improves.

I made a 1.060 IPA Friday (yeast pitched 53 hours ago) and it's going to keg tomorrow night. I just dry hopped it 10 minutes ago and it should be at or near final gravity tomorrow. Ales happen really fast!

 

[fendersrule]

I was traveling. I would have done it 5-6 days sooner.

Followed recipe. Called for smack pack.

 

[schematix]

I was traveling. I would have done it 5-6 days sooner.

Followed recipe. Called for smack pack.

Understood... but not all recipes are perfect. I bet with a starter a lot of your mystery flavors will go away. Experience speaking.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I brewed this beer perfectly. Perfect fermentation levels. Perfect sanitation (infact, I bleached everything before starting this time since it has been awhile). Perfect temp control.

My suggestion is to step back and identify what you are not doing "perfectly". Maybe you followed what you thought were good practices, but there is clearly something you are not doing perfect. Maybe that is recipe, water, process, sanitation, yeast choice, fermentation, oxidation, etc. I like to think that I brew decent beers and I have had many homebrewed IPAs as good or better than commercial IPAs. It can be done.

What style of IPA are you shooting for? Are there some commercial examples that you want to replicate? (I don't know what Mac & Jack's makes...didn't they used to be on Mercer Island 20 some years ago?) I would do some side by side tasting of a quality IPA and work to identify the flaws/differences. If you can reach out to some knowledgeable brewers or beer drinkers for feedback, even better.

 

[mattdee1]

I tried brewing many, many IPAs and hoppy pale ales and was always disappointed with the results, so I just stopped brewing them altogether. I do full RO with Bru N Water, measure mash pH, fermentation temperature control, get freshest ingredients possible, etc.

The only big thing I could see that I wasn't addressing was oxygen exposure. I was just doing lazy open transfers to kegs (and, previously, bottling buckets).

I tried closed transfers to properly purged kegs, and boom! This is what was missing. It was almost night-and-day better.

I realize that to harp on oxygen in this thread is somewhat like beating a dead horse at this point, but for me it was the missing piece of the puzzle.

When you read how to do closed transfers it seems kind of confusing, so it's easy to block it out and just pretend it doesn't matter. It does, though.

 

[fendersrule]

Good post. Maybe a closed transfer could be a think I should look into.

 

[schematix]

Good post. Maybe a closed transfer could be a think I should look into.

I spent years making underwhelming IPAs, scratching my head and confused why i couldn't make anything good despite following all the sage advice around the internet and LHBS. Turned out the reason was simple - oxidation.

The solution is actually not that difficult, it's just not conventional in home brewing circles until recently - rack the beer the moment its done (or just before it's done), using a closed transfer, into a purged container, and then spund it. Don't let it sit on the yeast for a month. Don't make off flavors for it to "clean up".

I've had IPAs 5+ months old that were still as bright and vibrantly hoppy as the first glass i poured at 8 days from grain. It's more about process. Before this the beers were dead in a couple weeks.

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

Basic question: What's the secret to making the hops shine through 100% and absolutely zero yeast or yeast byproduct taste? Fermentation temps? Certain strain of yeast at a specific temp?

I'll discuss it a little farther down, but there are certain water profiles for very hoppy beers that accentuate hops.

I really would like to know, if you do use US-05, do you a) rehydrate, and b) what temp do you ferment it for a very clean IPA. I know it is NOT 72-74 in my experience (created a dumper). I have a hunch that 60F will create a dumper as well (or because I did the cool + warm + cool cycle).

I use US-05 probably more often than any other yeast. Here is my fermentation schedule for most beers:

1. I don't pitch yeast until the wort temp is typically reduced to 2-3 degrees BELOW my target fermentation temp. I believe that many of the fermentation off flavors are caused by yeast stress during the reproduction phase, and high temps at that point cause a lot of stress.
2. I tend to over-pitch. I brew 11 gallon batches, and pitch 3-4 packs US-05. 3 for lower-gravity ales, 4 for anything else. I personally don't usually rehydrate.
3. Generally I set my fermentation temp to around 64 on my temp controller. It depends on the beer, as I'll often range anywhere between 62 and 68, but that 64-65 is pretty much a go-to for IPA.
4. As the fermentation starts to taper off after 4-5 days, I increase the temp controller to 72 to allow the yeast to clean up.
5. After I'm sure the fermentation is complete, I cold crash the beer down to ~35 degrees or as cold as my fridge will get it. I leave it there a few days if it meets my brew schedule, or >1 week if I'm not ready to start the next batch yet.

I'm 100% sure that US-05 is not your problem. It's one of the most versatile and well-used yeast across the homebrewing community, so I don't think that's the issue.

I do think that you might see some value from cold crashing. If you're sitting with a lot of yeast/etc in suspension, it can certainly affect how "clean" you perceive the beer to be, and that's not just looks. A cold crash shouldn't pull out enough yeast to stop it from bottle conditioning, but if you're concerned about that you could add a little more yeast at bottling. But cold crashing will help clean it up.

I also bottled my bee-cave porter tonight and it tasted fantastic, right from the hydro tube. No doubt this will come out a winner. Slightly buzzed right now....had to drink about 8oz of it.

I was wondering on this. Do you find that your dark beers just tend to come out better than your lighter beers?

Background--I brewed for about 9 years before getting into water modification. All I used was campden for chloramine, but no other filtration or treatment. My beers were good, but I felt they could be better. Generally what pushed me the most was that my dark beers tended to taste a lot more like I expected them to, but my lighter-colored beers were just not quite "there". It was hard to describe, but they just weren't quite commercial-quality yet. They were more "good homebrew" than great beer.

So I went to RO water + minerals, and immediately saw a huge improvement. All of a sudden the malt flavor became much more clean and crisp, which created a much cleaner canvas for the hop flavors. It was a BIG difference.

If you're seeing that dark beers tend to come out good, but lighter beers are just muddled, a lot of that could be water.

Now, to test this out, you don't need to get too crazy. I'd consider rather than investing in an RO system, go buy some RO water from your grocery store for your next batch, and add minerals. And if that's too much, just go buy some of those 5 gal bottles of spring water and give that a shot--even though it's not an *ideal* water profile, it'll be closer than bad tap water.

If you do a batch this way and you find it makes an improvement, then you can get deeper into water profiles, into different sulfate:chloride ratios for hoppy beers [that's what is generally seen as making the hops "shine through"].

But I think water might be worth looking into here.

 

[fendersrule]

Great post.

My tap water is pretty decent. I can almost always adjust to get the profile I need. The only thing I've found that it's not quite right is for Hefes (would need to use other water for that), but for the pale ale/IPA profile I can usually knock it in pretty darn close....same goes with Ambers and Porters. I can share with you the numbers if you'd like to look. It's basically "pretty decent" tap water. But I understand what you're saying because there could be "other things" that don't get removed, even if it's adjusted.

But yes, I do notice that my dark beers shine pretty well. It's the lighter beers that have some sort of by-product that I've been noticing recently...maybe it was always there and I'm just getting pickier. Or maybe I've adjusted my fermentation processes in the wrong direction.

I've never read/heard anyone having off flavors from 3-4 weeks in the fermentor. I've heard that 6 weeks is the consensus of "pushing it". But did I read from many threads incorrectly on this? Obviously IPAs you want to keep them moving to maintain freshness, but I doubt an Amber or a Porter would have any issue with 3-6 weeks....?

I generally leave beers that are dry hopped in the fermenter longer, just because of the dry hop schedule. I typically don't dry hop until fermentation is nearly done...usually around the 10 day mark. Can I shorten this up?

What I will do now (and have been doing for a short time) is to ferment at 65 (just about any ale) for 3-4 days, then move it to a 68F location for the rest of the time. I did exactly this for my last two batches. The "Mac and Jacks" amber didn't taste very good from the hydro-tube. The Porter tasted outstanding.

Looking at my schedule, the Mac and Jacks was pitched on 9/8, and bottled on 9/29. I know for sure that isn't "too long"...that's about 3 weeks, including the dryhop schedule. The Porter was 2 weeks. I would have bottled the Mac and Jacks sooner, but I was traveling (infact, now I am engaged....to my brewery assistant.

The Porter used Nottingham (2 packs per Nottingham's calculator), and the Mac and Jacks used Wyeast 1098. First time using liquid yeast, but I followed the directions.

A packet of US-05 is much more potent than a packet of Nottingham if you look at the cell count---it's not even close. For a 5 gallon batch, it sounds like you would always pitch at the minimal 2 packets. That seems like a lot for a regular 6%'er. With US-05, I usually do:

1 packet: 6% and under
1.5 packet: 6.5%
2 packet: 7% or above.

From now on, I've been rehydrating. It just seems like a good practice to make sure the yeastie monsters are ready to rock as soon as they hit the wort with minimal death. I'm not sure if I "need" to go to the length to start doing starters though....unless it factually makes better beer. Interested on thoughts on this.

I've sprinked US-05 directly on the wort for the longest time. Nothing wrong with that--I've made some really good beers that way. I don't think my issue is how I'm applying the yeast--I've done it all ways and have made good beer all ways.

My carboys are glass. Always covered with a t-shirt until bottling day. I do the "open" bottle method, no splashing allowed. When I dry hop, I just drop the pellets right in.

Keep in mind that I'm very hard on myself too! I've only entered into a competition once, and that was with my 3rd and 4th batch. One batch (pale ale) went to the finals, and the other batch (IPA) scored "OK" but was not exciting nor convincing enough.

Anyhow, just trying to review my processes to continually improve.

One thing that may pay off is to re-taste the Mac and Jacks in 2 weeks. If something tastes a little foul like it did, I should bring it to the local club. Nothing beats a taste test, and from that I should easily be able to pinpoint an issue.

 

[couchsending]

What I will do now (and have been doing for a short time) is to ferment at 65 (just about any ale) for 3-4 days, then move it to a 68F location for the rest of the time. I did exactly this for my last two batches. The "Mac and Jacks" amber didn't taste very good from the hydro-tube. The Porter tasted outstanding.

Looking at my schedule, the Mac and Jacks was pitched on 9/8, and bottled on 9/29. I know for sure that isn't "too long"...that's about 3 weeks, including the dryhop schedule. The Porter was 2 weeks. I would have bottled the Mac and Jacks sooner, but I was traveling (infact, now I am engaged....to my brewery assistant.

The Porter used Nottingham (2 packs per Nottingham's calculator), and the Mac and Jacks used Wyeast 1098. First time using liquid yeast, but I followed the directions.

So are you using ambient temperature to regulate fermentation? Fermentation creates a lot of heat. That 1098 ferment probably hit at least 73 at peak ferment if you’re just relying on ambient temp. 1098 needs to be kept at 66 or below regulated. It will produce a bunch of higher alcohols and unpleasant esters if fermented too warm.

 

[fendersrule]

No. I use my kettle filled with Ice in the bathtub.

 

[shoreman]

My advice would be yeast & dry hopping hopefully under co2 or in the serving keg.

Two yeasts have made huge improvements my Pale Ales & IPAs:

1. West Coast IPA by Wyeast - it is super clean, forgiving and really favors hops and specialty grains (so don't put specialty grains in your IPA, just go all Pale malt)

2. Omega DIPA (Conan strain from Alchemist) - if you want to do the whole biotransform thing with your hops, go with this yeast. The finishing beer will be cloudy or "juicy" as the kids say.

Dry hop in the keg. If you just bottle, its gonna be challenging to get a bright hop profile.

Go with a simple grain bill = 100% pale malt.

Also pick up Mitch Steel's IPA book, it's fantastic - https://amzn.to/2nznAtl

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

Great post.

1. My tap water is pretty decent. I can almost always adjust to get the profile I need. The only thing I've found that it's not quite right is for Hefes (would need to use other water for that), but for the pale ale/IPA profile I can usually knock it in pretty darn close....same goes with Ambers and Porters. I can share with you the numbers if you'd like to look. It's basically "pretty decent" tap water. But I understand what you're saying because there could be "other things" that don't get removed, even if it's adjusted.

But yes, I do notice that my dark beers shine pretty well. It's the lighter beers that have some sort of by-product that I've been noticing recently...maybe it was always there and I'm just getting pickier. Or maybe I've adjusted my fermentation processes in the wrong direction.

2. I've never read/heard anyone having off flavors from 3-4 weeks in the fermentor. I've heard that 6 weeks is the consensus of "pushing it". But did I read from many threads incorrectly on this? Obviously IPAs you want to keep them moving to maintain freshness, but I doubt an Amber or a Porter would have any issue with 3-6 weeks....?

3. I generally leave beers that are dry hopped in the fermenter longer, just because of the dry hop schedule. I typically don't dry hop until fermentation is nearly done...usually around the 10 day mark. Can I shorten this up?

4. Looking at my schedule, the Mac and Jacks was pitched on 9/8, and bottled on 9/29. I know for sure that isn't "too long"...that's about 3 weeks, including the dryhop schedule. The Porter was 2 weeks. I would have bottled the Mac and Jacks sooner, but I was traveling (infact, now I am engaged....to my brewery assistant.

5. The Porter used Nottingham (2 packs per Nottingham's calculator), and the Mac and Jacks used Wyeast 1098. First time using liquid yeast, but I followed the directions.

6. A packet of US-05 is much more potent than a packet of Nottingham if you look at the cell count---it's not even close. For a 5 gallon batch, it sounds like you would always pitch at the minimal 2 packets. That seems like a lot for a regular 6%'er.

7. From now on, I've been rehydrating. It just seems like a good practice to make sure the yeastie monsters are ready to rock as soon as they hit the wort with minimal death. I'm not sure if I "need" to go to the length to start doing starters though....unless it factually makes better beer. Interested on thoughts on this.

8. My carboys are glass. Always covered with a t-shirt until bottling day. I do the "open" bottle method, no splashing allowed. When I dry hop, I just drop the pellets right in.

9. One thing that may pay off is to re-taste the Mac and Jacks in 2 weeks. If something tastes a little foul like it did, I should bring it to the local club. Nothing beats a taste test, and from that I should easily be able to pinpoint an issue.

1. Per your description, I definitely recommend at least TRYING the water test. It's one thing that your tap water seems okay, it's another that you've never tried a truly clean water profile. Maybe it's nothing; maybe it's what you're searching for. Do you treat for chlorine/chloramine?

2. I don't think there's any issue with timing. 3-6 weeks even in primary isn't a problem. If you have good practices, turning beers within 7-10 days is feasible as well. If you're looking for clarity, I'd potentially cold crash and then go slightly longer in primary to allow it to clear before bottling though.

3. Most of the more recent literature suggests dry hop extraction is complete within 48-72 hours at 70F. I think you can shorten up the dry hop step.

4. Congrats on the engagement! No, I don't think your beers are going "too long". After the beer carbonates in the bottles, do you leave them in the fridge for 1-2 weeks before drinking? That will also help settle out yeast and any potential remaining sediment.

5. It could simply be that you're underpitching. Per my point below, *always* make a starter with liquid.

6. Yes, I might be accused of overpitching. That said, generally the accepted wisdom is that overpitching leads to "cleaner" beer (some might say too clean), while underpitching tends to lead to more esters/etc from the yeast being slightly more stressed during the reproductive phase. If you're trying for cleaner, I'd experiment with "overpitching".

7. I firmly believe in starters for liquid yeast. But then I'm also more of an "overpitcher" than under... But I go by the mantra that brewers make wort, and yeast make beer. If you want good beer, make sure you have happy yeast.

8. I also dry hop just pouring the pellets in. No issues there. Although as I said before, after dry hop is complete doing a step where you could crash might help both visual clarity and taste bud clarity, as sediment affects the flavor/mouthfeel of the beer.

9. Agree 100%. If you have a club, particularly if your club has some fairly experienced palates, certified BJCP judges, etc, you can probably get a MUCH more accurate response on what to do than you'll get from people on the internet who can't taste your beer.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

Keep in mind that I'm very hard on myself too! I've only entered into a competition once, and that was with my 3rd and 4th batch. One batch (pale ale) went to the finals, and the other batch (IPA) scored "OK" but was not exciting nor convincing enough.

That can make it hard. I taste some beers that the brewer thinks is good and I wonder if they open ferment in old car tires. One brewer's "dumper" can be another brewers "best beer ever!!!"

I don't recall seeing a recipe in here. I see Wyeast 1098 mentioned. Are you brewing heavily hopped NEIPA style beers? I keg most of my beers and fears of oxidation of that style pushed me to setup a cold crash and keg transfer process to avoid oxidation before I would try brewing one. My understanding is that bottle conditioning NEIPAs (and maybe just heavily hopped IPAs) is hard to pull off without oxidation.

 

[brewswithshoes]

Lots of good advice above, but i'd offer up to go with a yeast that works with you can control. I have temp control but have basically switched all my recent IPAs over to using Kveik strains. Simple to control (by not really controlling) and they indeed let the hops shine thru.

The second thing i'd offer and it's been said a little above is the Water & controlling the pH. to me that has made the biggest difference and added that "pop" to my IPAs.

Get a pH meter if you don't already have one, and try a batch using a kveik yeast and FRESH HOPS. You will see a "leaps & bounds" difference in your IPAs when you get the pH to the right range.

 

[Jag75]

Water profile , closed transfers are very helpful in all beers especially hoppy ones. Different yeast will change it up a bit as well. Temp control of course.

 

[Comfort_Zone]

NO!

Lagunitas website says its an OG of 1.059 and 6.2%. That gives it an FG of ~1.012.

No idea how I wasn't notified of this. Anyway, you are correct that these days Lagunitas IPA is now a 1.012 beer. However, for most of its history it finished at 4.5 °P (~1.018 SG). Source: Jeremy Marshall.

http://www.thebrewingnetwork.com/post1593/
He mentions at around 25:15 that it started at 14.82 °P and finished at 4.5 °P. More than likely they switched it up to save money.

 

[couchsending]

He mentions at around 25:15 that it started at 14.82 °P and finished at 4.5 °P. More than likely they switched it up to save money.

When you get bought for half a billion the number of accountants goes up dramatically.