Author: Jake Huolihan

Homebrewing feels like an exercise in time management for me. Having a supportive wife allows me to brew perhaps more often than I suspect others might get to, but still, the process takes time, generally between 4-5 hours on my setup, making it difficult to play around with newer styles while stock of my go-tos. One such style that’s been causing quite a stir lately is Northeaster/New England-style Pale Ale (NEPA), known for its hazy appearance and “juicy” character. I tried a couple commercial versions of this style prior to the start of the so-called haze craze and, while tasty, wasn’t impressed enough to give them much thought.

But that was then. My interest in NEPA piqued as the apparent throwdown between the coasts that bookend this country intensified and people I respect began taking a stance. I knew I’d have to brew a batch for myself in order to formulate my own opinion on this budding and contentious style, but I wasn’t interested in dedicating an entire brew day to something I might not enjoy. So, in the spirit of exBEERimentation, I decided to go the Short & Shoddy route.

With zero experience brewing NEPA, I took recipe inspiration from folks I view as being experts on the style, namely bloggers Michael Tonsmeier of The Mad Fermentationist and Ed Coffey of Ales Of The Riverwards.

Short & Shoddy NEPA

Recipe Details Batch Size Boil Time IBU SRM Est. OG Est. FG ABV 5.5 gal 60 min 105.6 IBUs 3.5 SRM 1.042 1.009 4.4 % Actuals 1.042 1.008 4.4 % Fermentables Name Amount % Pale Malt, 2 row (Gambrinus) 9 lbs 78.26 Oats, Flaked 2 lbs 17.39 Cara-Pils/Dextrine 8 oz 4.35 Hops Name Amount Time Use Form Alpha % Nugget 28 g 30 min Boil Pellet 12.8 Centennial 28 g 5 min Boil Pellet 9.8 Citra 28 g 5 min Boil Pellet 12.5 Jarrylo 28 g 5 min Boil Pellet 15.9 Mosaic 28 g 5 min Boil Pellet 12.2 Centennial 28 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 9.8 Citra 28 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 12.5 Jarrylo 28 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 15.9 Mosaic 28 g 15 min Aroma Pellet 12.2 Centennial 28 g 5 days Dry Hop Pellet 9.8 Citra 28 g 5 days Dry Hop Pellet 12.5 Jarrylo 28 g 5 days Dry Hop Pellet 15.9 Mosaic 28 g 5 days Dry Hop Pellet 12.2 Motueka (Keg Hop) 60 g 0 min Dry Hop Pellet 7 Yeast Name Lab Attenuation Temperature Thames Valley Ale (1275) Wyeast Labs 77% 62°F - 72°F

***In the above recipe, the term “Aroma” refers to the Hop Stand***

Besides the grist consisting of a fairly large portion of protein-rich flaked oats, a water profile high in chloride is noted as contributing to the silky mouthfeel this styles is known for, and there’s some speculation it may also effect the hazy appearance. Starting with RO water, I added the amounts of calcium chloride (CaCl) and gypsum suggested by Bru’n Water to achieve a 2:1 chloride to sulfate ratio (200 ppm Cl, 100 ppm SO4).

The night before brewing, I readied my equipment and collected the full volume of brewing water, as I would be using the no sparge method for this batch. The following morning, my brew day began by heating the strike water then mashing in, the temperature settling a hair below my target of 152°F/67°C, at which point I set the timer for a brief 30 minutes.

In what seemed like no time, the timer was beeping so I performed a quick vorlauf and collected the full volume of sweet wort in my kettle.

I noticed the wort was extremely hazy, not full of grain bits, just not anywhere near as clear as I’m used to seeing. With my burner’s heat on high, a rolling boil was quickly reached and I again set my timer for a mere 30 minutes.

NEPA is generally expected to be less bitter than its left coast counterparts, though given the abbreviated boil length, I was forced to use quite a bit of hops in order to achieve the appropriate IBU.

As soon as the boil was complete, I quickly chilled the wort to 150°F/66°C, tossed in a hefty charge of hops for a 15 minute hop stand, then completed chilling the wort to my target fermentation temperature of 68°F/20°C before filling a carboy and placing it in my temperature controlled chamber. A hydrometer measurement revealed the wort was at 1.045 OG, putting my brewhouse efficiency for his batch at 62%, 6-8% lower than I typically get.

Confession– I dose nearly every batch I make with pure O2, it’s become a thoughtless brew day task for me, and so it went with this batch. Certainly not the shoddiest of methods, even if it had little noticeable impact on the finished beer. Meh. I pitched the swollen pack of yeast I’d smacked a few hours earlier.

Fermentation appeared to have taken off as expected by the following day.

According to many NEPA advocates, something special happens when dry hops are added during active fermentation through a process called biotransformation. For more on this, I highly recommend Scott Janish’s fantastic article, Examination of Studies: Hopping Methods and Concepts for Achieving Maximum Hop Aroma and Flavor. Suffice to say, certain yeasts seem to interact with hops in such a way to produce the highly sought after “juicy” character said to be quintessential to NEPA. With a thick kräusen still present, I added a large dry hop charge to the beer at 3 days post-pitch. It took another 2 days before fermentation appeared finished, which I confirmed by taking a hydrometer measurement showing the beer had dropped to 1.008 FG.

With no off-flavors noticeable in the hydrometer sample, I cold crashed the beer to near freezing where it stayed for just under a week due to my busy summer schedule. Skipping my typical gelatin fining step, I kegged the beer exactly 2 weeks after it was brewed, dangling a CO2 flushed bag of hops in the keg as I’ve read so many NEPA brewers do.

The beer was burst carbonated overnight then left to stabilize for a couple days before I served them to unsuspecting tasters. If anything, I think I at least nailed the appearance.

| IMPRESSIONS |

I have no way of knowing how close my beer comes to “classic” examples since I’ve little access to commercial or even homebrewed versions, so my evaluation of this beer really ought to be taken with a grain of salt.

This beer was really good!

Despite my anti-haze bias, I seriously enjoyed this beer. I went the short & shoddy route in an admitted attempt to prove to myself this newfangled “style” was gimicky garbage and didn’t really belong. I judged a book by its cover, presuming it would taste like the murky toilet water it appeared to be. But it didn’t. I loved it! At one point, I compared my NEPA to a few prominent West Coast IPAs from respected breweries and was easily able to tell them apart based on aroma alone, even in a blind triangle. I wouldn’t say I perceived the hop character to be necessarily more intense in my homebrewed NEPA, just different, and not in a way I would call “juicy,” but that could be a matter of not knowing what to look for. The commercial IPAs had more of a caramel character to my palate, while my NEPA came across as quite a bit drier. I didn’t personally pick up the silky mouthfeel so many claim is key to this style, which I figured could be a function of the lower OG and FG. I initially wondered if the strong hop presence hid any yeast character, as I didn’t perceive any of the esters I expected from the Thames Valley ale strain, then it struck me that maybe this had to do with the whole biotransformation thing. Regardless, the beer was so good and so easy to drink.

What Did Others Think?

I served this beer over the course of about a week to friends and neighbors in informal settings, which makes me reluctant to say any of the information gathered from them is at all definitive. I was curious if people who were unaware the beer was a NEPA would note any of the apparent nuances of the style. The terms “silky” and “juicy” were used by exactly zero tasters, which again could be a product of the fact those aren’t descriptors us non-NE’rs are all too familiar with. I made note of some of the comments tasters made:

Super hoppy

Fruity

Really fucking good

Lime

In terms of the short & shoddy aspect of this beer, not a single person described it in any way that would indicate poor brewing processes, suggesting to me the truncated methods used to make this NEPA had little if any negative impact on the finished beer.

| CONCLUSION |

This batch was neither as short nor as shoddy as previous batches we’ve written about, but the methods used were a pretty far cry from what I typically do, enough so to cause me some anxiety. Yet in the end, I made beer, and it was good, more so than I expected. I’d say these results add more support to the idea that certain process components accepted as required may not be as necessary as we were taught, at least on the homebrew scale using modern ingredients.

My short & shoddy brew came not without some downsides, namely the hit to my brewhouse efficiency, which has been a consistent observation across every short & shoddy batch so far. This is certainly something I’ll consider when planning similar batches in the future.

For me, the biggest takeaway from this experience had to do with water chemistry, a variable I’ve been increasingly interested in. Compared to the types of hoppy beers I’m used to drinking, which I perceive as more sharply bitter and mouth-coating, my NEPA was much less abrasive with a hop character that seemed to sit in my mouth without clinging to my tongue, like a pillow of fruitiness. Perhaps this is what’s meant by “soft bitterness” and “juicy” hop character? I’m not sure, but what I am sure of is that this beer shifted by perspective on NEPA, I’m now a fan and will definitely be brewing more in the future!

For more on NE-Style Pale Ale/IPA, read Dan Paris’ latest post at his InBounds Brewing blog!

If you have experience with NEPA or Short & Shoddy brewing, please share your thoughts in the comments section below!

Support Brülosophy In Style!

All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!

Follow Brülosophy on:

If you enjoy this stuff and feel compelled to support Brulosophy.com, please check out the Support Us page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!

Advertisements

Share this: Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Tumblr

Email



Like this: Like Loading...