I'm looking to brew a proper IPA, to be matured for 8 months+ . Trouble is, I can't find a recipe?
Does OG 1060, 100IBU sound about right?
IPA recipe?
-
Aleman
- It's definitely Lock In Time
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:56 am
- Location: Mashing In Blackpool, Lancashire, UK
Sounds Ok to me
Grist mostly palemalt with a bit of (home roasted) pale amber thrown in (If using Brupaks Diastatic Amber mix if 50/50 with Pale malt and use that, its not the same as home roasted pale amber, but should be close enough)
Heres an example from the Durden park book for 5 Gallons OG 1.063
14lb 6oz of Pale Malt
9oz Goldings
Grist mostly palemalt with a bit of (home roasted) pale amber thrown in (If using Brupaks Diastatic Amber mix if 50/50 with Pale malt and use that, its not the same as home roasted pale amber, but should be close enough)
Heres an example from the Durden park book for 5 Gallons OG 1.063
14lb 6oz of Pale Malt
9oz Goldings
-
Aleman
- It's definitely Lock In Time
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:56 am
- Location: Mashing In Blackpool, Lancashire, UK
Irrelevant and pointless. In 1873 the brewers had no idea of Alpha acids ad Extraction rates etc, they just used hops . . . 1873 certainly goldings was around, and generally specified the farmer that grew them in the ledger. It probably meant that they could never brew the same beer twice, but it would be similar. If I manage to get any hops this year from my bines then I will brew a beer using 'hops' for bitterness . . . Yes the predicted IBU may be high . . . Thats what aging is forjohnmac wrote:Cheers Aleman. I think that recipe gives 120 IBU's
(5% AA)
On another note, I suspect that we are guilty of using these IBU formula way wy outside the range of IBU they have been designed' for . . .plus there is the limited solubility of alpha acid which no formula takes account of. . . The only real way to tell is to have it measured.
thanks again-
mysterio
Someone correct me if i'm wrong here, but I think a lot of dry-hopping with Goldings would be appropriate for an historical IPA.Would it be normal to add all hops at 60 min with no flavour or aroma additions?
What do you mean by this Aleman? I've found the Tinseth formula a fairly accurate guideline in predicting how bitter my beers are going to be with a given BU/GU ratio, like you say though, theres no way to know for sure the 'real' IBUs without lab measurements.I suspect that we are guilty of using these IBU formula way wy outside the range of IBU they have been designed' for
-
Aleman
- It's definitely Lock In Time
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:56 am
- Location: Mashing In Blackpool, Lancashire, UK
These recipes have come direct from the brewing ledgers, and the ledgers show no mention of any dry hopping . . . . Also a pale ale brewed for the India trade would take 3 months at sea, how much dry hop character would eb present after that time?mysterio wrote:Someone correct me if i'm wrong here, but I think a lot of dry-hopping with Goldings would be appropriate for an historical IPA.Would it be normal to add all hops at 60 min with no flavour or aroma additions?
Basically that when we talk about using massive amount of hops in a beer there is no relation between the predicted IBU and the Actual! I recall a big debate on HBD when someone brewed a massive APA with predicted IBU of 300+ . . . when the IBU's were measured they were around 90 . . . . The human palate also get swamped by 'bitterness' quite quickly and at above 80 (~ish, human taste thresholds vary) you can 't taste the difference between an 80IBU beer and a 100IBU beer.mysterio wrote:What do you mean by this Aleman? I've found the Tinseth formula a fairly accurate guideline in predicting how bitter my beers are going to be with a given BU/GU ratio, like you say though, theres no way to know for sure the 'real' IBUs without lab measurements.Aleman wrote:I suspect that we are guilty of using these IBU formula way wy outside the range of IBU they have been designed' for
What causes it? Dunno really, I suspect that we are looking at a variety of factors, including a limited solubility of alpha acids, a decreasing rate of return on efficency, and the fact that the formulas are designed and tested for 'normal' beers. Tinseths work was done on a beer of 1.050 for example, and curve fitted for that, with fudge factors, I too think it is pretty good at predicting bitterness, but I know that in my setup I need to use 10% more hops than it suggests as my kettle utilisation is different. If I could do a single hopped beer at 1.050, and take samples at 5 minute intervals for a 3 hour boil , and get them analysed for IBU I am sure that I could tweak Glens formula to provide me a more accurate number . . . bnut for big beers or big hopped beers I still think the number would be wrong.
-
KyNGBrewer
You might want to check out brewing an American version of the IPA. Seems in the recent history the American version is getting more praise. That said I love any bitter as I'm a hop head. My last bitter was 61.5 and the smell is great. I made all three additions and can say the smell is terrific. I love the English stuff and have made it my favorite style to try and make right now.
-
steve_flack
-
oblivious
Interesting, i recently got a copy of "old British beer and how to brew them" and its seems to concur with you statement. The old brewery's where buying malt/hops from all over the world. They made do with what they could get (kent v's old American hops) and brew approximatively similar beer.Aleman wrote:[ It probably meant that they could never brew the same beer twice, but it would be similar.
-
Jrevillug
:?:
