Consider:- Both use pale malts and sugar to achieve a light body, great strength, and high attenuation;
- Both downplay or eschew caramel malts to create a more candy-like sweet base;
- Both highlight hops, though of course, in tripels the balance point is in a far different place.
The goals are a little different, but not entirely. In terms of the kind of experience they're meant to produce--a reflective, special treat--they have something in common. I had a Westmalle Tripel on Friday to remind myself just how hoppy it is. Perhaps this is a personal thing, but if I had bottles of Pliny the Elder, Westmalle Tripel, a stout, a pale ale, a pilsner, and a lambic in the fridge, when I got in the mood for it, I would have a hard time deciding between the Pliny and Westmalle. They scratch the same itch.
Your thoughts?
Posts
4 comments:
Tripels are the hipsters of extreme beer. They were extreme before extreme was cool.
INteresting thoughts, what about the high abv US Belgian IPAs?
Ghost, yes, that's a further blending of styles. For me, the overlapping elements are sugar and hops more than Belgian yeast--though that's a factor. Westmalle ferments pretty cool, though, and their Tripel doesn't pop the esters the way some do.
I can dig it. I don't quite agree with the tripels being hoppy. But hey, maybe we are drinking different tripels. I like the Maredsous tripel, and chimay cing cents. I've only had one westmalle tripel and I can't remember how hoppy it was.
Good to see you blogging again. Cheers.
Post a Comment
NOTE: Blogspot has been eating some comments, and there doesn't seem to be anything I can do about it. IF your comment doesn't appear, it's not you, it's not me, it's the genuiuses at Google. Sorry--