In the world of responses to Pilsner, the Belgians really nailed it with their Belgian Strong Goldens and Tripels. But what makes them different? Drew breaks down the styles with sample recipes and tries to answer the tasty conundrum that is the BSG/Tripel split
I enjoyed listening to it the other day. Timely, as I’ll be kegging a Tripel this weekend.
I always thought of BSG as being just pils malt and sugar and Tripel as having a bit more leeway, which seems to be the exact opposite of Drew’s analysis.
I made a Tripel a little while ago for my 300th batch (thanks for the suggestion Denny). I bottle conditioned it along with an American Barleywine. Wow, I forgot how much I hate bottling and I don’t think I want to do that again for another year. Anyway, I’m about ready to taste my first one tonight 87% Barke Pils 13%, cane sugar, Hersbruker hops 35 IBU, WY 3787. Thanks for interesting episode.
The yeast is the showcase, but I wouldn’t say that every stong, pale, Belgian beer fermented with 3787 is a Tripel while every one fermented with 1388 is a BSG.
Once you get outside of the two flagship reference beers (Duvel and Westmalle Tripel), I think it gets pretty murky: for example, Fin du Monde (which the BJCP classifies as a Tripel) and Delirium Tremens (which they classify as a BSG).
Tripel to me is a wider range of options while BSG is basically a Duvel clone. After listening to this podcast though, I realize that may not be correct. Seems like there’s room for discussion though - good stuff
I’m not convinced there is any real difference between the two styles. They’re about as different as porter vs. stout, or APA vs. Session IPA, or triple-hopped Miller Lite vs. non-triple-hopped Miller Lite.