TOPIC:

"noby":six4bc2y wrote: Have a read of the article about a visit to the Hooker Brewery. The recipe is in there somewhere, or at least enough info to piece a recipe together.[/quote:six4bc2y]

So there is....thanks for that. I'll have a go at a 10 Gallon batch this weekend. I don't have any 1st Gold, so I'll use a blend of Goldings and a bit of Chinook for spice, as well as the Fuggles to bitter to 35 IBU. Saaz at end of boil is no probs - what does "Cascade in whirlpool" mean? Is the Cascade dry hopped into the fermenter or a late hop addition to the kettle as the wort cools before racking to the fermenter? Do you guys have Amarillo? It's a US hop like Cascade but adds an additional marmalade like flavour complexity that will complement a spicy bittering hop quite well - worth a try if you can get it. As Hendrixcat suggests, it is an unusual but nonetheless interesting hop schedule!

No mention of yeast - Wyeast 1056 is a good general purpose APA yeast, or is 1084 or 1028 more appropriate?

"Adeptus":six4bc2y wrote: Style doesn't matter. I keep thinking of the New Belgium brewing company, and the head brewer there saying he makes art for someones 10 minutes of pleasure, not styles If Aidan calls his beer an Irish Pale Ale, then that's fine (but it does have a hint of US IPA though ). It is Irish, it is Pale, and it as an Ale [/quote:six4bc2y]
Agreed - why constrain ourselves to styles - the Americans like the predictability of styles and they suggest it makes it supposedly easier to judge beers, but most Aussie brewers tend to ignore the rule book (must be something in our heritage!) and brew what we like to drink instead.

I'm not so much interested in following a defined style of IPA, but more importantly finding out what the locals believe is appropriate to use in a craftbrewed Irish Pale Ale. I'll put some in the club comp (we have several Australian National champion brewers - including the current one - here in the Canberra brewers club, so the competition's pretty intense) and see how it fares in the pale ale flight!

Cheers,
TL

The whirlpool is used to remove break material by centrifugal force before entering the fermenter. So adding at this stage retains hop aroma and flavour and the hops are easily removed again by the centrifugal action.

"Hendrixcat":1y8vom9t wrote: The whirlpool is used to remove break material by centrifugal force before entering the fermenter. So adding at this stage retains hop aroma and flavour and the hops are easily removed again by the centrifugal action.[/quote:1y8vom9t]

Cheers for that - I have a counterflow wort chiller in my setup[/url:1y8vom9t] and I regularly whirlpool for the same reason. I generally avoid adding hops then since I thought it wouldn't give the hops enough time in contact with the wort to provide all the hop aroma and flavour compounds. Some hops, including Cascade, are also accused adding undesireable grassiness in the final product if they're not added late in the boil or at least at flameout/end of boil. Perhaps it's to do with keying in the volatile hop oils during the boil?
Another reason why some brewers prefer to not hop after flameout and add hops to the secondary fermenter, as opposed to primary, is that the vigorous fermentation in primary pushes a lot of the aroma compounds out of the airlock, so we wait until we condition the beer and add aroma hops then. Another trick is to add hops to the keg, with a hop sock tied high enough to the top of the beer out tube in the keg to stop the hops from getting caught up in the bottom of the beer out diptube as the level in the keg drops.

Cheers,
TL

The hopheads on this forum are all too familar with dry hopping. It's pretty much standard procedure for most of our pale ales and IPAs. Dry hopping does add a distinct flavor to beer that differs from late hopping though. With dry hopping the aroma stems from the very volatile hydrocarbon elements that are driven off with stean in the kettle. I'm not sure which I prefer the most. I recently did an IPA with loads of late hops and I don't plan to dry hop, so it'll be intersting to see how it turns out.

We do both! Best of both worlds then <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt="" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D -->

Well, for our last two IPAs we had considerable hop additions every 5 mins from 20 mins to 0 mins. We then did some dry hopping in secondary. Worked out well, but I too am curious about how it would change if we didn't bother with the dry hopping. Will have to get a bottle from you HC <!-- s;) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt="" title="Wink" /><!-- s;) -->

&amp;quot;Trough Lolly&amp;quot;:3vphh4mk wrote: Some hops, including Cascade, are also accused adding undesireable grassiness in the final product if they're not added late in the boil or at least at flameout/end of boil. Perhaps it's to do with keying in the volatile hop oils during the boil?[/quote:3vphh4mk]
Funnily enough, I do get a grassiness off a Cascade based IPA we made a while back. It's not unpleasent though. Kind of hay-like, reminiscent of a hot summers day in the country (or so I like to think <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt="" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D -->).