Australian IPA

[fcmcg]

Isn't sticklebract grown in un-zud?

Choice bro...
Wiki is wrong...bro...
Your right bro...maybe you should get into the hop business , seeing you know your shut , eh bro h34r:

 

[bradsbrew]

Are you defining a beer style or creating a set of brewing rules?

More the definition of the style. Which in hand would have "a set of brewing rules" to meet that style much like how you would change malt, hops and mashing schedule to brew an AIPA or IPA.

 

[GalBrew]

More the definition of the style. Which in hand would have "a set of brewing rules" to meet that style much like how you would change malt, hops and mashing schedule to brew an AIPA or IPA.

On that thought, should an Australian IPA not be an extension of an Australian Pale Ale (which has a style guideline), much like an American IPA, has its roots in an APA?

 

[timmi9191]

Must use aus hops, must use aus malts, must use cooper yeast.. Sounds more like rules than defining a style..

Does it matter how the brewer achieved the end result as long it fits the defined style??

 

[bradsbrew]

On that thought, should an Australian IPA not be an extension of an Australian Pale Ale (which has a style guideline), much like an American IPA, has its roots in an APA?

I guess you then need to go back to the origins og the India Pale Ale (IPA) that was given the higher alc and hops to blahdiddityblahbla....

I cant see how that could work when the aussie pale ale traditionally has no late hops. I would like to think that the Aussie IPA could be the extension of the pale ale by adding the extra late hops?

 

[manticle]

Fair enough point timmi. While many bjcp and aabc guidelines suggest 'x hop is out of style' none of them to my knowledge say 'must use y ingredient'.

Bohemian pilsner doesn't have to, for example, use a czech yeast - just have characteristics commonly associated with said yeast.

Aussie pale ale is so far in its infancy in comps and I think the guidelines need a shit ton of work. I think it even suggests coopers should not be the benchmark (at least they did when they were first written)but until we start playing around a lot more with the newer au hops, that really defines the style historically.


Are aussie apas and ipas just another apa/aipa with AU ingredients? Not necessarily a bad place to start because obviously the style can eveolve. Or are we trying to revive brewing history, pre- the CUB homogenisation of AU beer?

 

[bradsbrew]

Must use aus hops, must use aus malts, must use cooper yeast.. Sounds more like rules than defining a style.. Does it matter how the brewer achieved the end result as long it fits the defined style??

So if I mash at mild temps, use some german hops and a Belgian yeast you would accept that as a an AIPA?

 

[bradsbrew]

Fair enough point timmi. While many bjcp and aabc guidelines suggest 'x hop is out of style' none of them to my knowledge say 'must use y ingredient'.

Bohemian pilsner doesn't have to, for example, use a czech yeast - just have characteristics commonly associated with said yeast.

I don't think they use the word "must", but pretty sure they suggest/recommend

 

[GalBrew]

I would like to think that the Aussie IPA could be the extension of the pale ale by adding the extra late hops?

That was my thoughts, having some sort of link to the Oz pale and taking it further would be great.

 

[MartinOC]

I agree with Galbrew that Aust. IPA would/could/should be a natural extension of Aust. Pale ale.

I'd question the use of Chocolate malt - can't see it as traditional, other than as a mistake by early colonial maltsters screwing-up & passing-it off to unsuspecting brewers as "new". Also, it detracts from the "Pale" aspect of IPA.

Hops - pretty much anything could be employed, but I can't see the historical relevance of fruity/citrus (ie. Cascade), as they're not types natural to, or developed in Aus.

Yeast - Coopers-style is the obvious choice ( Traditional, temperature-tolerant, fruity on it's own with no need for hop contribution, good attenuator, potentially a bit phenolic etc..etc..).

0.02c

 

[manticle]

@bradsbrew: They do recommend/suggest typical ingredients to get to the final product, but the beer is meant to be judged by how well it meets the descriptors rather than what actually got it there.

So - if it's entered as a bo-pils but it tastes like chinook, then it will bomb. If it's a bo pils that tastes like saaz, it will do well even if chinook was used somewhere in the process.

A small distinction but important and I think what Timmi was getting at

 

[manticle]

So if I mash at mild temps, use some german hops and a Belgian yeast you would accept that as a an AIPA?

If it tastes like one, yes. As a judge you are not privy to the recipe.

If you can make german hops and belgian yeast taste like an aipa then you deserve to do well in an aipa category.

 

[bradsbrew]

I'd question the use of Chocolate malt - can't see it as traditional, other than as a mistake by early colonial maltsters screwing-up & passing-it off to unsuspecting brewers as "new". Also, it detracts from the "Pale" aspect of IPA.

I use a small addition of choc in my SOB's and APA's. But wouldn't in an aussie pale ale. If I was brewing an aussie bitter ale I would.

 

[bradsbrew]

If it tastes like one, yes. As a judge you are not privy to the recipe.

If you can make german hops and belgian yeast taste like an aipa then you deserve to do well in an aipa category.

That is the exact thing I was getting at. There is to a certain point unwritten "rules" on how a certain style can be achieved.

 

[kevo]

Just reading through the BJCP outline of US IPA - it specifies that the hop character be derived from American hops.

Without intending to start an unending debate of what constitutes an Australian hop - I think this is an important aspect which seems to be absent from the description of an Australian IPA.

Maybe we're trying to create an Australian style American IPA?

edit - on closer inspection - derived from - is mentioned in aroma, not flavour description of AusIPA

 

[Charst]

Are aussie apas and ipas just another apa/aipa with AU ingredients? Not necessarily a bad place to start because obviously the style can evolve. Or are we trying to revive brewing history, pre- the CUB homogenisation of AU beer?

I think the fact we are looking to define our own IPA suggests copying in the first. English have one, Americans have one, We potentially want one.
Americans copied the English using local ingredients and made bigger versions of their own local pale ale style.
I think if an OZIPA was to evolve, assuming we need one at all, it would naturally follow suit, a bigger version of our own Pale ale.

Regarding providence the problem is with the American IPA explosion I'm not sure what Australian produced hops I could use that wouldn't find my OZIPA from an aroma perspective bang i the middle of the AIPA's. I've heard Kiwis talk about NZIPA but when i taste them i wouldn't know the difference to an american one. So although its a tight line to follow at the moment if I was to attempt to make an OZIPA id be thinking about making a bigger version of something that falls within the Australian Pale Ale.

The best things come organically and at the moment I haven't seen all that many home brewers brewing and pushing the envelope of Australian Pale ale to warrant defining a bigger Australian style

 

[manticle]

@bradsbrew:

Yeah but a person trying to make an aipa using those ingredients is either a genius or a fool. However there are many examples of style crossover that work well - styrian goldings in an aipa or an alt have worked for me - obviously in conjucntion with other, more appropriate/authentic ingredients. I won a state comp with an alt that used styrians for example. Not traditional, not historical, not German but enough of the right characters in the beer to do well.

There are other less blatantly opposed ingredients that may be quite acceptable than your example. Some UK beers have historically used US hops for example and I believe the style guidelines allows for that to a degree. Obviously if you had 50 IBU of late hopped chinook in a UK pale, it would be well out of style but it is the characters in the beer that define what is judged.

I agree the best way to get the characters is usually to use the right ingredients but as a homebrewer you can be creative in attempting to achieve that.

Guidelines should read something like " should display a fruity character from the yeast. Apple, pear and banana are common but should not be overly dominant. Hop character should be fruity and/or woody, with a smooth bitterness. Flavours of passionfruit, loquat, are considered appropriate. Beers that display high levels of flavours associated with US hops such as pine, onions, garlic or grapefruit should be shown the door".

Ingredients: may use australian malts, australian developed and grown hops such as galaxy, stella or Vic Secret, coopers yeast is common.

Blah blah - I think you get what I mean. It's just about the wording.

As for yeast - you could get some nice pear esters from using the duvel/1388 yeast which might work well.

 

[manticle]

Just reading through the BJCP outline of US IPA - it specifies that the hop character be derived from American hops.

Without intending to start an unending debate of what constitutes an Australian hop - I think this is an important aspect which seems to be absent from the description of an Australian IPA.

Maybe we're trying to create an Australian style American IPA?

You're right - it does. In my opinion it should be more carefully worded (as most of their guidelines are) and say hop character associated or typically associated with US hops, then provide the descriptors (as they do). As a judge you don't know the recipe and shouldn't assume. You judge the beer in front of you as presented and assess its characteristics in relation to the guidelines.

 

[kevo]

At this point, I don't really see the point of an AusIPA style - but am not opposed to seeing the style be developed.

If there is to be an historical aspect to the beer, I don't see it being so far removed from an English IPA.
If it's to be fruity/citrusy etc - then not unlike a USIPA with Australian hops.

As mentioned by others, is it a stronger/bigger version of an Aus Pale Ale. Is it simply a stronger Aus Pale Ale? Australian Strong Ale?

It really doens't seem clear to me what might ditinguish this style from the variations that already exist.

 

[Bobby Smith]

Just make a 1.065 60IBU version of Coopers PA.

With cluster.