IPA versus Pale Ale.

brianthebard

I've had India Pale Ale's before, and last night I had coopers pale ale-what's the difference? I've seen ads in magazines IPA's that never went to India, so I don't think it has to have been to the subcontinent...anyone able to clue me in?

Also, while we're at it I thought stout and porter were the same thing. I had heard a story about guinness being given to porters in dublin and the second name coming from that but a conversation yesterday evening seemed to explode that myth. thoughts?

the beer revolu

IPA were brewed for British troops in India.
To survive the journey, they had to be stronger in alcohol and more hopped.
So, an IPA should have those characteristics.

ASAIK Porter was the original black beer.
Then came Stout Porter which was stronger in alcohol and had a bigger body.
Today, I reckon, the words are used interchangeably.

brianthebard

I sees....I did think there was a difference in taste between the IPA and PA, but you'd expect that with decent brands anyways. Cheers.

BeerNut

the beer revolu wrote: »

IPA were brewed for British troops in India.

Nah, that's a myth. The original pale ales sent to India were for the rich merchants. They were based on the stock ales produced in English country houses. By the early 19th century, several big English brewers were exporting pale ale to India, but they were sold to the general public, not just the military. The term "India Pale Ale" is of later vintage again, and has more to do with the domestic trade in England. "Pale Ale as Brewed For India" was another term used -- people returned from the colonies looking for the beer they used to have over there.

the beer revolu wrote: »

To survive the journey, they had to be stronger in alcohol and more hopped.
So, an IPA should have those characteristics.

Total myth. Porter was successfully exported to India and the Caribbean for years before pale ale was, and it's not exactly heavily-hopped. IPA was also generally one of the weakest beers in any brewery's portfolio. It was stronger than beer commonly would be today, but before the brewing revolution caused by World War I, pretty much all beers were. There are no definitive characteristics an IPA "should have". Only what you think it should have. Low ABV, lightly hopped IPAs have been on the market for over 90 years now.

Pete Brown's book Hops & Glory is a great history of IPA, and there's lots of good stuff on the blogs of Ron Pattinson and Martyn Cornell.

the beer revolu wrote: »

Then came Stout Porter which was stronger in alcohol and had a bigger body.
Today, I reckon, the words are used interchangeably.

Yeah, historically, stout is a type of strong porter. Guinness stopped making plain porter in about 1970. There's a good analysis of the issue here.

OP, when it comes down to it, the difference between a Pale Ale and an India Pale Ale today is a matter of marketing: it's however the brewery have decided to label their product.

the beer revolu

BeerNut wrote: »

Nah, that's a myth. The original pale ales sent to India were for the rich merchants. They were based on the stock ales produced in English country houses. By the early 19th century, several big English brewers were exporting pale ale to India, but they were sold to the general public, not just the military. The term "India Pale Ale" is of later vintage again, and has more to do with the domestic trade in England. "Pale Ale as Brewed For India" was another term used -- people returned from the colonies looking for the beer they used to have over there.

Total myth. Porter was successfully exported to India and the Caribbean for years before pale ale was, and it's not exactly heavily-hopped. IPA was also generally one of the weakest beers in any brewery's portfolio. It was stronger than beer commonly would be today, but before the brewing revolution caused by World War I, pretty much all beers were. There are no definitive characteristics an IPA "should have". Only what you think it should have. Low ABV, lightly hopped IPAs have been on the market for over 90 years now.

Pete Brown's book Hops & Glory is a great history of IPA, and there's lots of good stuff on the blogs of Ron Pattinson and Martyn Cornell.

Yeah, historically, stout is a type of strong porter. Guinness stopped making plain porter in about 1970. There's a good analysis of the issue here.

OP, when it comes down to it, the difference between a Pale Ale and an India Pale Ale today is a matter of marketing: it's however the brewery have decided to label their product.

:o:o

the beer revolu

BTW how does a myth differ from a total myth?
Are there degrees of mythology?:rolleyes:

BeerNut

Of course. Some myths have a kernal of truth to them, others are totally made up, So I'm sure the military in India (both before and after it became part of the Empire in 1858) did drink the ale that was exported, it's hard to justify a claim that "they were brewed for the British troops".

But the idea of IPA as extra strong and extra hoppy, designed to survive the sea voyage to India, is an invention of American home brewers.

mayordenis

I think the major difference you'll find between Pala Ale's isn't the difference between Pale Ale and IPA, but actually between IPA in europe and IPA in America.

BeerNut

Well, it's more about the respective traditions. European brewers outside the UK that make pale ales tend to make them in the US tradition. And even in the UK there's BrewDog, who have definite American sensibilities about how they do IPAs.

brianthebard

What do you characterise as the american or uk traditions, whats the differences?

mayordenis

BeerNut wrote: »

Well, it's more about the respective traditions. European brewers outside the UK that make pale ales tend to make them in the US tradition. And even in the UK there's BrewDog, who have definite American sensibilities about how they do IPAs.

well take Hommel it's very much out on it's own, as are some of the other Belgian IPA's, I'd go as far to say there's 3 blueprints for what IPA is, but I'm sure you know more about it than myself.
I think generally I find English ones to be in and around 3.2% to about 5% at tops, American IPA to be in around 4.5% to 5.5%, and then Belgian's that I've had up around the 7% mark, commonalities have been hoppyness all over, both aroma and bitterness and generally as the name suggests colouring..Pale.

Then there's things like Hardcore IPA by Brewdog and Houblon Triple IPA by Chouffre which are both somewhere around the 10% mark pack a massive punch but yet still keep that massive hoppy taste, that almost masks the alcohol.

I'm salivating, and I have 9 hours left in work.

BeerNut

brianthebard wrote: »

What do you characterise as the american or uk traditions, whats the differences?

Hop varieties is the main one: the US tradition uses high-alpha citric-tasting American varieties like Cascade, Amarillo and Centennial, whereas British IPA will use earthier English breeds like Fuggles and Goldings. UK-type IPAs are generally weaker too, only rarely creeping above 5% ABV, whereas an American-style one that's under 5.5% ABV would be considered laughable.

BeerNut

mayordenis wrote: »

well take Hommel it's very much out on it's own, as are some of the other Belgian IPA's, I'd go as far to say there's 3 blueprints for what IPA is, but I'm sure you know more about it than myself.

I've never seen Hommel classified as an IPA, but I take your point about Belgian-style IPAs. The likes of Houblon Chouffe and Hopus have been developed in the last two or three years, driven by American importers trying to feed a market of hopheads who also want Belgian beer.

mayordenis

I've always considered Hommel to be an IPA, it could be just me though.

oblivious

mayordenis wrote: »

I've always considered Hommel to be an IPA, it could be just me though.

probable more akin to the hoppy saisons

oblivious

the beer revolu wrote: »

BTW how does a myth differ from a total myth?
Are there degrees of mythology?:rolleyes:

yea the BJCP and beer town

mayordenis

well google seems to back me up a little bit, but hey what would I know?

BeerNut

mayordenis wrote: »

well google seems to back me up a little bit

Are any of your Google sources on Belgian beer actually Belgian?

mayordenis

BeerNut wrote: »

Are any of your Google sources on Belgian beer actually Belgian?

G'way you,
I was only throwing "hommel bier" into google to see if any classifications came up, they backed me up so I went with them.

BeerNut

mayordenis wrote: »

G'way you

Merry Christmas.

the beer revolu

I've always considered Hommel (and its new pretenders) to be Belgian Pale Ale. As Hooker is Irish Pale Ale.
They all owe something to IPA, though.

indiaguy

Is that Galway Hooker that you are referring to?
I drank a pint of that on The Porter House about 2 weeks ago as they had no Sierra Nevada.
Was not to my taste at all.
I located Goose Island IPA in Redmonds of Ranelagh,tasty beer,highly recommend it if you fancy a tasty American style IPA.
I developed my taste on Dogfish Head 60min IPA in NY.
A truly amazing beer.
I wish to try brew my own US style IPA in the coming months.
Great off licence there in Ranelagh.