First Ipa Attempt

[Dazza_devil]

the text explains how important both the OG and FG (attenuation) are in designing balanced bitterness/sweetness into a beer.

I'll give it a thorough read when I'm sober but as far as I can see OG can be made up of a different contributions, some fermentable some not and others to differing degrees, regardless of attenuation.
The equation seems very limiting to me and there are other factors that can balance with/contibute to the bitterness from hops.
Still and always learning here so don't get me wrong, I'm not questioning your logic or the use of the equation just didn't want to overlook other influencing factors.

edit - forgot an l

 

[Sammus]

OP: I've made that English IPA from BCS, and I reckon it's a ripper, follow any recipe in that book to a tee and you won't be disappointed.

I agree with the commonly held belief that humans can not differentiate bittering above 100 IBUs. Have had a couple of homebrewed IPA's of 90 and 100 IBU's that were so well balanced that they were still very drinkable.

I'm not so sure it's just "a commonly held belief" - I was under the impression it's closer to some kind of chemical law. ie it's only possible to extract a certain amount of alpha acid by boiling hops. That's why they call them 'theoretical IBUs' after a certain point Speaking of which, have you tried the Mikkeller 1000? Pretty far from 1000IBU I think

 

[bum]

Even Lagunitas' Hop Stoopid (where 102 IBU is proudly proclaimed at the top of the label) seems kinda subdued. Apparent bitterness is much different to actual bitterness well before the thousands of points.

As for Stone Ruination mentioned above, every claim that beer's label makes is wildly over the top. Stone remind me a great deal of a certain brewery from New Zealand that has risen to prominence of late - they talk the talk but they do not walk the walk. The only thing about that beer that might be remotely challenging for any drinker of IPAs is the grassiness. Stone's barleywine is the only beer of theirs that is big and complex. None of the others of their stable deliver what they promise - not to say they are all duds but they aren't really doing anything they claim to be.

As for that New Zealand brewery, they do make good beers but they need to turn down the hyperbole to somewhere below 11. Around 6 or 7 would probably be about right.

 

[Screwtop]

I'll give it a thorough read when I'm sober but as far as I can see OG can be made up of a different contributions, some fermentable some not and others to differing degrees, regardless of attenuation.

Cheers Boagsy, hope you're feeling a little better this morning :lol:

Attenuation depends upon wort composition as well as the capabilities and tolerances of the yeast of choice and wort composition, that is where the brewers experience applies, being able to predict attenuation based upon grist bill, mash profile, yeast strain and fermentation management. A brewer needs to be confident in his brewing system and processes to be able to reliably produce the results he is looking for.

OT: Sorry

Screwy

 

[jbowers]

The point is in the text, the formula is simply a tool to assist the brewer. Every beer needs tweaking to balance it to suit the beer produced by each individual brewers system and processes, the text explains how important both the OG and FG (attenuation) are in designing balanced bitterness/sweetness into a beer.




Yes, plus a few even more bittter, 400 IBU was the highest from memory, I agree with the commonly held belief that humans can not differentiate bittering above 100 IBUs. Have had a couple of homebrewed IPA's of 90 and 100 IBU's that were so well balanced that they were still very drinkable.

The reason I asked about that beer in particular was because it stands out as a beer that I don't really think is 'balanced', but I still liked anyway.