I see it as still being a wash. Some European brewers perform LODO, others do not but still have that fresh grain field at night "it" aroma. (I'm looking at you, Pilsner Urquell...)
Add to that the fact that I don't like using more additives in my beers than I have to, and I have absolutely no interest in any of the methods currently being described.
Do you know which ones? I'd like to look into it, but haven't been able to find any info.
I should have stated "Some European brewers are said to use LODO." IIRC that one German textbook was a source for this statement, but I could be incorrect.
I'd rather be the guy making a great lager the traditional way, complete with HSA, than chasing after possible straws. I'm going to let things settle out before I worry about this any more.
Yes, but those traditional beers of 100+ years ago likely didn't taste like they taste today. There is merit to it...
@brewinhard, I don't know, the malt seems stale to me. It might be water, but I'm doubting that. It's just missing that fresh grain character that I'm after. I'm definitely going to give low DO brewing a shot to my fullest extent to see if I notice an improvement. The improvement is said to be so night and day that blind tastings aren't necessary. I don't know and don't care much about that. If I notice the beer is better than I've ever brewed it, then I see it as an improvement. And knowing what "it" tastes and smells like will only help me identify whether the process improvement was worth it.
And I've read some people not wanting to put "additives" into their beers. If you use irish moss, whirlflock, gelatin, etc. you're putting additives in your beer that aren't necessary. Tired of reading about that. Sulfites are used for wine, why not beer too?
I guess I'm not crazy about the idea, but if it works, it works.