Author: Phil Rusher
Brewers today have many choices when it comes to ingredients, not just in terms of type, but the form in which things come. In earlier times, whole hop cones were picked from the bine, dried, then used in the brewing process. While there was little argument whole cone hops imparted the desired characteristics, they tended to take up quite a bit of space and absorb a decent amount of liquid, leading to decreased yield. Pellet hops were developed to address these concerns, allowing brewers to not only store larger quantities, but use more in their beer without sacrificing as much of the finished product.
The general process for pelletizing hops involves taking the dried whole cones, pulverizing them into a powder, then forcing them through a die to the desired pellet size. This sounds simple, but the process is actually quite involved, as factors such as heat need to be considered throughout. Given all that goes into turning hops into convenient little pellets, there are some who contend the less processed whole cones lead to a higher quality hop character, whereas others feel they can be used interchangeably.
As someone who started brewing when pellet hops were the norm, that’s what I’ve used exclusively over the years, and since I tend to enjoy the beers I make, I’m admittedly skeptical of claims whole cones are any better. Curious to learn more, I picked up some whole cone and pellets of the same variety and year to test it out.
| PURPOSE |
To evaluate the differences between beers made with either whole cone or pellet hops of the same variety and crop year.
| METHODS |
Interested in testing the impact hops processed in different ways have when used in both the boil and dry hop, I went with a simple single-hop American IPA for this xBmt.
Function Over Form
Recipe Details
| Batch Size | Boil Time | IBU | SRM | Est. OG | Est. FG | ABV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.5 gal | 60 min | 54.2 IBUs | 8.0 SRM | 1.065 | 1.012 | 7.1 % |
| Actuals | 1.065 | 1.013 | 6.9 % | |||
Fermentables
| Name | Amount | % |
|---|---|---|
| Lamonta American-style Pale Malt (Mecca Grade) | 7 lbs | 50 |
| Vanora Vienna-style Malt (Mecca Grade) | 7 lbs | 50 |
Hops
| Name | Amount | Time | Use | Form | Alpha % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mosaic | 25 g | 60 min | Boil | Pellet | 12.6 |
| Mosaic | 20 g | 30 min | Boil | Pellet | 12.6 |
| Mosaic | 40 g | 1 min | Boil | Pellet | 12.6 |
| Mosaic | 100 g | 5 days | Dry Hop | Pellet | 12.6 |
Yeast
| Name | Lab | Attenuation | Temperature |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loki (A43) | Imperial Ogranic Yeast | 80% | 65°F - 100°F |
Notes
| Water Profile: Ca 73 | Mg 0 | Na 30 | SO4 150 | Cl 55 |
Download
| Download this recipe's BeerXML file |
I started things off by collecting the proper volume of RO water a couple days ahead of time.
I also threw together a starter of Imperial Yeast A43 Loki.
To start off my brew day, I adjusted the water to my desired profile and began heating up before milling identical sets of grain for each batch.
With the water adequately heated, I stirred in the grains and set each Grainfather to maintain the same 152°F/67°C mash temperature.
While waiting on the mash, I weighed out the kettle hop additions for each batch. Seeing as the alpha acid content between the whole cone and pellet hops were so similar, each batch received the same amount of hops.
Following the 60 minute mash rest, I removed the grains, sparged, then set the controller to heat the wort. Both batches were boiled for 60 minutes with hops added at the same points listed in the recipe, after which each wort was quickly chilled.
The difference in the amount of hop material left in each batch was quite drastic.
Refractometer readings showed both worts achieved the same OG.
Equal volumes of wort were racked to identical Brew Buckets that I placed in the same chamber controlled to 73°F/23°C before splitting the yeast starter between the batches.
After 2 days of fermentation, I returned to add the dry hop charges to each beer.
Unsurprisingly, the whole cone hops took up much more space than the pellets in my stainless dry hop filters.
After 8 additional days, I took hydrometer measurements showing the beer hopped with whole cones finished 0.001 SG point lower than the beer hopped with pellets.
I left the beers alone for another day before confirming no change in FG, at which point I proceeded with transferring the beers to CO2 purged kegs.
The filled kegs were placed in my cool keezer and burst carbonated. After a couple weeks of cold conditioning, both were ready to serve.
| RESULTS |
A total of 21 people of varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Each participant was served 2 samples of the beer made with whole cone hops and 1 sample of the beer made with pellet hops in different colored opaque cups then asked to identify the unique sample. In all, 12 tasters (p<0.05) would have had to identify the unique sample in order to reach statistical significance, which is exactly the number who did (p=0.021), indicating participants in this xBmt were able to reliably distinguish a beer made with whole cones from one made with hop pellets.
The 12 participants who made the accurate selection on the triangle test were instructed to complete a brief preference survey comparing only the beers that were different. A total of 3 tasters reported preferring the whole cone hop beer, another 3 said they liked the pellet hop beer more, and 6 had no preference despite noticing a difference.
My Impressions: Out of the 6 triangle tests I attempted, I chose the odd-beer-out every single time, which blew my mind because I was wholly expecting these beers to turn out identical. Both beers had the typical tropical fruit flavors I associate with Mosaic hops, but they seemed more prominent in the beer hopped with whole cones.
| DISCUSSION |
Hops are an essential component of beer, and with the popularity of the various types of IPA that exist these days, making sure to get the highest quality hop character is of utmost importance. A decision every brewer has to make is whether to go with whole cone or pellet hops, and the fact tasters in this xBmt were able to tell apart beers made with either type suggests it may very well have an impact.
One unavoidable caveat to this xBmt is that, despite the hops being of the same variety and crop year, as well as from the same source, there’s no way to be certain they came from the same farm or processor. As such, it’s impossible to say with confidence that the differences perceived by tasters in this xBmt were due only to the form the hops were in, as it could be a function of something like growing conditions, processing, etc. Regardless, these aren’t the types of factors most brewers have much control over, and given preference ratings were split down the middle, I’d suggest each brewer try it out for themselves to determine what works best.
This being my first time using whole cone hops, I can say it wasn’t a bad experience at all. While I enjoyed both beers, I did have a slight preference for the one made with whole cones because it was a bit brighter in terms of hop character. That said, brewing the beers for this xBmt reminded me of just how convenient pellet hops are, as they take up much less space in the kettle and, in my opinion, are markedly easier to store and use. I think I have a very slight personal preference for working with pelletized hops, but I will certainly not shy away from using whole cone hops moving forward.
If you have any thoughts about this xBmt, please do not hesitate to share in the comments section below!
Support Brülosophy In Style!
All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!
Follow Brülosophy on:
FACEBOOK | TWITTER | INSTAGRAM
If you enjoy this stuff and feel compelled to support Brulosophy.com, please check out the Support page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!
17 thoughts on “exBEERiment | Whole Cone vs. Pellet Hops In An American IPA”
I wonder, knowing there’s no way to know from an experiment like this, is if the utilization rate is naturally higher with whole cone simply because the cone is more “open” to the liquid versus needing to soak through with pellets for a more complete extraction.
Towards this experiment, lower yield was mentioned as a thing with whole cone. Did you notice less yield on the homebrew-scale?
I think that we absolutely could have tested for utilization, we just didn’t measure IBUs in the lab. It would be an interesting thing to do, though.
I suspect that any differences in utilization would be very, very slight but it makes sense to me that pellets being pulverized may actually have more surface area in contact with the wort and therefore a bit higher utilization.
There was a very slight difference in volume between the whole cones and pellet beers. I didn’t take pictures of the inside of the FVs after kegging, but the difference was so small it didn’t matter at all because both of the kegs were filled completely. You can take a look at the post boil pictures and compare the wort level using the GF hop/trub filter as a scale. In my humble opinion, any losses associated with whole cone hops are negligible at this scale.
I think it’s the other way around – pellets are utilized better mostly because the lupulin glands are broken up in pellets and they stay intact with whole cones, so it’s harder to extract what’s inside them.
Like others mentioned pellets have a higher utilization. One other issue I have had with whole cone hops is that what you are using for flavor etc. is the yellow lupulin glands and they can get knocked loos from the cones. If you buy a 1lb bag you will have a bunch of yellow dust at the end that came out of the cones. Don’t know how much of a loss in general that is but there is some. Personally I really don’t like using whole cones, especially in a hoppy beer because of the PITA. It make some sense to me though that lightly processed cones might have a “fresher”/ “brighter” flavor than heavily processed pellets do. That might push me into using them in say a NEIPA.
The lupulin loss during pelletizing is most likely far worse than the little that sits in the bottom of your bag
I would think the pellets are more “ open” given that they’ve been pulverized & pelletized and the lupulin May be more available.
My understanding is that pellets are a blend of hops from lots of different fields/farms, whereas cones are likely all from the same batch. So pellets give you consistency of flavour and bittering, whereas whole cones are a bit hit and miss – sometimes more flavour/bittering than pellets, at other times less so.
Yeah for sure, that’s one of the things we talked about in the article too. I think that whole cone hops are also a blend, but I’m not certain. Agriculture is interesting stuff!
Hey Ben,
Quite certain that pellets are not a blend. Too much work for them to do that, and no reason. Their process on hop pellet production is easily confirmed. And remember, the larger pro brewers can go in and choose hop lots. If pellets were homogenized that would not be possible.
And if you have details on your hop order, you may be able to call the supplier for more details. Hop Union / Chief has lot lookup online that provides considerable info. I really like that, but it’s almost necessary since they put so little info on their packaging. And I have been able to call other companies (YCH) and have them provide more info (which farmer the hops came from).
I agree if the beer had been tested for IBU, etc., it would have shown additional important info and been very helpful.
So – good experiment, thanks for doing it, but a little more info would help greatly with knowing what it all means.
Pelletizing is always done by the lot, which is a single farm/source. Bales are homogenized thoroughly and then pelletized.
Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. utilizes only whole cone hops for the reasons your tasters favored the whole cone over the pellet. I have brewed a handful of batches with whole cone and while I like them, I tend to not like using the bags or spiders needed to tame them when it comes to boils.
I’d argue that they (and others) use cones for brand consistency more than for flavor preferences. But for our experiment, it was an even split between cones/pellets preference.
Early days of home brewing suggested that whole hops was preferred for trub etc removal after the boil. Could you please comment on this and did you see any evidence that would be consistent?
Interesting experiment with a rather surprising result! I always dismissed proponents of whole cones as romantics (and my own tendencies towards romanticism draw me towards whole cones, although I find pellets much easier to use).
Of course, the pellets and the cones may have come from different producers, which may explain the difference, but I recall a past xbmt comparing Centennial hops from different producers (homebrew vs what Bell uses for Two Hearted, I think?), which did not return significant results. Hm hm hm. Just the kind of stuff you hope to get from these xbmts!
I prefer pellets for their ease of use and storability (not only do they take up less freezer space, but the real reason I prefer them is they supposedly store better – meaning they stay fresher longer). This one has me really rethinking my strategy though – haven’t brewed with whole cones in years (outside of my annual fresh hop beer) – I need to give whole cones more love it seems
Interesting that there was significance and that the preferences were split. I’m curious, on your method of dry hopping. Do you just drop the SS drop hop filters right into your Ss Brewtech Brew Buckets and if so was there any issue with them messing with the pick-up tube? I have one and struggle with dry hopping in it.
Yep, I just gently drop the cylinders right in the FV toward the end of fermentation. Haven’t had any issues yet! The only advice I can give you is to try and make sure to place the filter in such a way that it doesn’t come into contact with the dip tube, but if it does come in contact, you should be able to rotate the arm from the outside because those guys at Ss Brewtech are wicked smaht and designed it well.