[hopfenundmalz]

I was wondering if anyone here knows the percentage of Pro Breweries in the US that are LODO? Also, what breweries in particular that use these techniques?

By volume of market share over 70% of beer sold in the US is likely LODO.

EDIT:  Is it safe to say breweries using a BrauKon system are LODO?  If so, dozens of breweries.

Great observation. Krones as well. That means Hill Farmstead, Troegs, Uinta, Victory, allagash, etc.

sooooo. 6 microbreweries might be LODO?

Those are a few I can think of off the top of my head. Mainly BrauKon users. I'd have to search and see whose using Krones.

We are just having a discussion.

So why are BrauKon equipped breweries LODO?

Sierra Nevada has the columns to deaerate the water for the brewery, and a tank on the order of 1000 bbls to store it. They use it throughout the brewery, including for wet milling under N2, then the slurry goes to the mash kettle, filling from the bottom (under N2?). They have a GEA Huppmann brewhouse.

I toured the largest brewery in MI last Wed. They wet mill and have a modern 200 bbl. GEA Huppmann brewhouse. They just use Deareated water to push beer, not to supply the wet mill.

I am just pointing out that the water treatment is up stream, and next time I am in a brewery with the column strippers, I will see if I can see A manufactures tag. It is probably optional as to if you have DA water or not.

The MI brewery has a new Krones bottling line, and a fairly new KHS canning line.

I certainly respect Sierra Nevada, but if that's what LoDO tastes like, I'm not blown away.

Sierra Nevada does do some pretty good German styles. They did win a Gold at WBC 2010 for a Pilsner, which had a delicate malt flavor, balanced with the hops. That one would hit the target for LODO.

[klickitat jim]

It's crossed my mind that maybe Marshall pre "wiki leaks" which ever results he feels will forward his obvious agenda to overthrow the home brewing powers that be.



Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[brulosopher]

As for LoDO, well, we absolutely have plans to test it out. Not to disprove it, but to simply test it out. Admittedly, it's odd to me the decision was made to publish the paper, and recently the "infamous" experiments that were nothing more than anecdote, without solid sensory analysis backing the claims, but I'll reserve judgement.

Define solid sensory analysis? We actually modeled that post after your format.

I'd hate to see you NOT reserve judgment.

Also, if you need any advice or guidance on the methods prior to your experiment hit us up. We'd love to help you make it a successful one.

By "solid sensory analysis" I was referring to pretty much any blind evaluation by the non-faithful. That "infamous" experiment Bryan put out there last week may have been modeled after what we do, but with all due respect, it missed the mark. By a long shot. 100% preference for the LoDO beer? That's either a statistical anomaly or... well...

Thanks for the offer! I'm in chats with some cool folks who advocate for low O2 brewing methods, I truly hope we're able to get it right.

Interesting. I recall a smattering of non initiated tasters, average craft beer drinkers and a few more advanced but non low oxygen Brewers. Faithful?

No offense to you but I find it hard to believe that your tasters are free of influence from the Brulosophy organization.

I'm not sure anyone is ever truly free from influence. The difference between Brülosophy and the low O2 group you seem to represent is that we aren't espousing a particular method as being the best way. At least consciously, we've no vested interest in the outcome of xBmts, including LoDO-- if people are capable of distinguishing a LoDO brewed Helles from a normal DO Helles, awesome, we'll report it just as we do anything else. Same if the results are non-significant.

No offense taken!

[Big Monk]

As for LoDO, well, we absolutely have plans to test it out. Not to disprove it, but to simply test it out. Admittedly, it's odd to me the decision was made to publish the paper, and recently the "infamous" experiments that were nothing more than anecdote, without solid sensory analysis backing the claims, but I'll reserve judgement.

Define solid sensory analysis? We actually modeled that post after your format.

I'd hate to see you NOT reserve judgment.

Also, if you need any advice or guidance on the methods prior to your experiment hit us up. We'd love to help you make it a successful one.

By "solid sensory analysis" I was referring to pretty much any blind evaluation by the non-faithful. That "infamous" experiment Bryan put out there last week may have been modeled after what we do, but with all due respect, it missed the mark. By a long shot. 100% preference for the LoDO beer? That's either a statistical anomaly or... well...

Thanks for the offer! I'm in chats with some cool folks who advocate for low O2 brewing methods, I truly hope we're able to get it right.

Interesting. I recall a smattering of non initiated tasters, average craft beer drinkers and a few more advanced but non low oxygen Brewers. Faithful?

No offense to you but I find it hard to believe that your tasters are free of influence from the Brulosophy organization.

I'm not sure anyone is ever truly free from influence. The difference between Brülosophy and the low O2 group you seem to represent is that we aren't espousing a particular method as being the best way. At least consciously, we've no vested interest in the outcome of xBmts, including LoDO-- if people are capable of distinguishing a LoDO brewed Helles from a normal DO Helles, awesome, we'll report it just as we do anything else. Same if the results are non-significant.

No offense taken!

It is certainly a way of brewing. Whether anyone thinks it's a better way is purely up to them. It certainly represents a very different way of brewing that is backed by more than 70 years of established brewing science.

Our ad free website should be testament to the fact the we have ZERO vested interest in the methods described there. We think they are worthwhile. That's why we offered a step by step breakdown, purpose built software and plethora of brewing references completely free of charge with content crafted in our free time as professional engineers. The sole purpose for opening up what was a private discussion on advanced brewing topics was the fact that it was TOO good for everyone not to know. We ask nothing. We have no agenda. We do not benefit monetarily either. We have NO sponsors.

I quote you the definition of vested interest to snap you back to reality:



You may not have a vested interest in exBeeriment outcomes but most certainly have a vested interest in exBeeriments. If that doesn't call what you do into question then I don't know what does.

We however have nothing to gain but more people brewing the best beer humanly possible in the confines of their own home.

[klickitat jim]

Ok I'll try to be serious for a moment.

Caveat: I applaud the passion behind those touting this low oxygen movement. I appreciate the labor they have put into it.

I love brewing. I'm always interested in new or revamped old methods, if they stand a good chance of significantly improving my beer AND my brewing experience. For example, when I was getting infected beers, getting rid of the infection seemed to me to be a valuable thing. It didn't take much work and significantly improved my beer.

LODO, "FOR ME" appears to propose extra effort and expense in exchange for not enough improvement "FOR ME".

That doesn't equate to mean I hate the LODO people, or that I find their empirical hard brewing science to be invalid, or anything else negative or demeaning.

Perhaps if I needed my beer to be shelf stable more than a couple months, or if maximizing "IT" was a thing for me, or if I found diving into scientific proof more interesting, I might try it.

With all of that said, and hopefully not taken too far out of context... a ways back in read something that seemed to indicate that unless you are backing up your home brew results with accepted scientific data, you're not really an advanced brewer. If that's true, maybe I misinterpreted, but if that's true, I guess I am destined to be just a beginning home brewer because I do not personally find data research very fun.

I've never had anyone detect the science in my beers, but I suppose it's possible that's because I don't use very much.

Just my opinion

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[klickitat jim]

As for LoDO, well, we absolutely have plans to test it out. Not to disprove it, but to simply test it out. Admittedly, it's odd to me the decision was made to publish the paper, and recently the "infamous" experiments that were nothing more than anecdote, without solid sensory analysis backing the claims, but I'll reserve judgement.

Define solid sensory analysis? We actually modeled that post after your format.

I'd hate to see you NOT reserve judgment.

Also, if you need any advice or guidance on the methods prior to your experiment hit us up. We'd love to help you make it a successful one.

By "solid sensory analysis" I was referring to pretty much any blind evaluation by the non-faithful. That "infamous" experiment Bryan put out there last week may have been modeled after what we do, but with all due respect, it missed the mark. By a long shot. 100% preference for the LoDO beer? That's either a statistical anomaly or... well...

Thanks for the offer! I'm in chats with some cool folks who advocate for low O2 brewing methods, I truly hope we're able to get it right.

Interesting. I recall a smattering of non initiated tasters, average craft beer drinkers and a few more advanced but non low oxygen Brewers. Faithful?

No offense to you but I find it hard to believe that your tasters are free of influence from the Brulosophy organization.

I'm not sure anyone is ever truly free from influence. The difference between Brülosophy and the low O2 group you seem to represent is that we aren't espousing a particular method as being the best way. At least consciously, we've no vested interest in the outcome of xBmts, including LoDO-- if people are capable of distinguishing a LoDO brewed Helles from a normal DO Helles, awesome, we'll report it just as we do anything else. Same if the results are non-significant.

No offense taken!

It is certainly a way of brewing. Whether anyone thinks it's a better way is purely up to them. It certainly represents a very different way of brewing that is backed by more than 70 years of established brewing science.

Our ad free website should be testament to the fact the we have ZERO vested interest in the methods described there. We think they are worthwhile. That's why we offered a step by step breakdown, purpose built software and plethora of brewing references completely free of charge with content crafted in our free time as professional engineers. The sole purpose for opening up what was a private discussion on advanced brewing topics was the fact that it was TOO good for everyone not to know. We ask nothing. We have no agenda. We do not benefit monetarily either. We have NO sponsors.

I quote you the definition of vested interest to snap you back to reality:



You may not have a vested interest in exBeeriment outcomes but most certainly have a vested interest in exBeeriments. If that doesn't call what you do into question then I don't know what does.

We however have nothing to gain but more people brewing the best beer humanly possible in the confines of their own home.

Having read a few xBeerments, and hearing him on podcasts, my take is different. It sounds like you're saying that his vested interest calls him into question. Interesting view point, because my view point is that his mission is to question authority. I think in this particular situation, the LODO people are the authority he is questioning. But it seems you view him as the authority to be questioned.

Frankly, I don't see the LODO people as being entirely void of vested interest. You may not be "selling" anything but you are seeking something. Namely recognition and acceptance, which is evidenced res ipsa loquitur.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[brulosopher]

As for LoDO, well, we absolutely have plans to test it out. Not to disprove it, but to simply test it out. Admittedly, it's odd to me the decision was made to publish the paper, and recently the "infamous" experiments that were nothing more than anecdote, without solid sensory analysis backing the claims, but I'll reserve judgement.

Define solid sensory analysis? We actually modeled that post after your format.

I'd hate to see you NOT reserve judgment.

Also, if you need any advice or guidance on the methods prior to your experiment hit us up. We'd love to help you make it a successful one.

By "solid sensory analysis" I was referring to pretty much any blind evaluation by the non-faithful. That "infamous" experiment Bryan put out there last week may have been modeled after what we do, but with all due respect, it missed the mark. By a long shot. 100% preference for the LoDO beer? That's either a statistical anomaly or... well...

Thanks for the offer! I'm in chats with some cool folks who advocate for low O2 brewing methods, I truly hope we're able to get it right.

Interesting. I recall a smattering of non initiated tasters, average craft beer drinkers and a few more advanced but non low oxygen Brewers. Faithful?

No offense to you but I find it hard to believe that your tasters are free of influence from the Brulosophy organization.

I'm not sure anyone is ever truly free from influence. The difference between Brülosophy and the low O2 group you seem to represent is that we aren't espousing a particular method as being the best way. At least consciously, we've no vested interest in the outcome of xBmts, including LoDO-- if people are capable of distinguishing a LoDO brewed Helles from a normal DO Helles, awesome, we'll report it just as we do anything else. Same if the results are non-significant.

No offense taken!

It is certainly a way of brewing. Whether anyone thinks it's a better way is purely up to them. It certainly represents a very different way of brewing that is backed by more than 70 years of established brewing science.

Our ad free website should be testament to the fact the we have ZERO vested interest in the methods described there. We think they are worthwhile. That's why we offered a step by step breakdown, purpose built software and plethora of brewing references completely free of charge with content crafted in our free time as professional engineers. The sole purpose for opening up what was a private discussion on advanced brewing topics was the fact that it was TOO good for everyone not to know. We ask nothing. We have no agenda. We do not benefit monetarily either. We have NO sponsors.

I quote you the definition of vested interest to snap you back to reality:



You may not have a vested interest in exBeeriment outcomes but most certainly have a vested interest in exBeeriments. If that doesn't call what you do into question then I don't know what does.

We however have nothing to gain but more people brewing the best beer humanly possible in the confines of their own home.

I'm not arguing with you about whether LoDO makes a difference, I seriously don't know and will remain neutral on it until evidence sways me either way.

I think what the low O2 group (or groups, as it were) has done is admirable and could potentially change the brewing landscape for those interested in the particular character you all talk about. Unfortunately, it seems that sentiment gets overshadowed by my interest is seeing some supportive data-- extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Sure, low O2 methods were discussed 70+ years ago, but that proves nothing, relying on that to inform current decisions is classic appeal to antiquity.

That doesn't mean I think anyone is wrong, I just like evidence. This "is against them" mentality is utter silliness.

I make no attempt to hide the fact that we generate revenue, a concept some apparently take personally. I don't know why, and frankly, I don't care. What we're doing costs a lot of money, the fact we're able to continue doing it speaks to the incredible support of this awesome community. You may not share our method of vestment, but the mere adamance with which you're defending your position suggests it's presence.

[bboy9000]

I agree with your second paragraph Jim.  I also relate to the third paragraph.  But even though it seems like a PITA now I'm going to try LODO to determine if it is worth the time "FOR ME." 

I think it will be like going all-grain for the first time which require planning and some extra time for the first few batches.  I will not spend money on extra equipment though.  Maybe on some minor stuff like extra gas and beverage line to do closed transfers post ferment,  but not on fancy brewing equipment as I love the fact I can use Denny's method for about $10 (getting Igloo cooler at flea mkt and plumbing hardware cheap).

As far as not tasting science in our beer I disagree.  We taste science whether we realize it or not.  Otherwise we'd be brewing like we did 6,000 years ago.

[brulosopher]

As for LoDO, well, we absolutely have plans to test it out. Not to disprove it, but to simply test it out. Admittedly, it's odd to me the decision was made to publish the paper, and recently the "infamous" experiments that were nothing more than anecdote, without solid sensory analysis backing the claims, but I'll reserve judgement.

Define solid sensory analysis? We actually modeled that post after your format.

I'd hate to see you NOT reserve judgment.

Also, if you need any advice or guidance on the methods prior to your experiment hit us up. We'd love to help you make it a successful one.

By "solid sensory analysis" I was referring to pretty much any blind evaluation by the non-faithful. That "infamous" experiment Bryan put out there last week may have been modeled after what we do, but with all due respect, it missed the mark. By a long shot. 100% preference for the LoDO beer? That's either a statistical anomaly or... well...

Thanks for the offer! I'm in chats with some cool folks who advocate for low O2 brewing methods, I truly hope we're able to get it right.

Interesting. I recall a smattering of non initiated tasters, average craft beer drinkers and a few more advanced but non low oxygen Brewers. Faithful?

No offense to you but I find it hard to believe that your tasters are free of influence from the Brulosophy organization.

I'm not sure anyone is ever truly free from influence. The difference between Brülosophy and the low O2 group you seem to represent is that we aren't espousing a particular method as being the best way. At least consciously, we've no vested interest in the outcome of xBmts, including LoDO-- if people are capable of distinguishing a LoDO brewed Helles from a normal DO Helles, awesome, we'll report it just as we do anything else. Same if the results are non-significant.

No offense taken!

It is certainly a way of brewing. Whether anyone thinks it's a better way is purely up to them. It certainly represents a very different way of brewing that is backed by more than 70 years of established brewing science.

Our ad free website should be testament to the fact the we have ZERO vested interest in the methods described there. We think they are worthwhile. That's why we offered a step by step breakdown, purpose built software and plethora of brewing references completely free of charge with content crafted in our free time as professional engineers. The sole purpose for opening up what was a private discussion on advanced brewing topics was the fact that it was TOO good for everyone not to know. We ask nothing. We have no agenda. We do not benefit monetarily either. We have NO sponsors.

I quote you the definition of vested interest to snap you back to reality:



You may not have a vested interest in exBeeriment outcomes but most certainly have a vested interest in exBeeriments. If that doesn't call what you do into question then I don't know what does.

We however have nothing to gain but more people brewing the best beer humanly possible in the confines of their own home.

Having read a few xBeerments, and hearing him on podcasts, my take is different. It sounds like you're saying that his vested interest calls him into question. Interesting view point, because my view point is that his mission is to question authority. I think in this particular situation, the LODO people are the authority he is questioning. But it seems you view him as the authority to be questioned.

Frankly, I don't see the LODO people as being entirely void of vested interest. You may not be "selling" anything but you are seeking something. Namely recognition and acceptance, which is evidenced res ipsa loquitur.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Question everything, not just authority... especially extraordinary claims.

[klickitat jim]

You may not share our method of vestment, but the mere adamance with which you're defending your position suggests it's presence.

Same thought I had but I said it in Latin legal terminology just to sound smug

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[brulosopher]

You may not share our method of vestment, but the mere adamance with which you're defending your position suggests it's presence.

Same thought I had but I said it in Latin legal terminology just to sound smug

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Yours was cooler.

[bjanat]

I don't understand the question authority argument. Nobody is putting a gun to your head. It's a little extra effort, another tool in the tool box, which might make yet another improvement.

I've stagnated after three years of brewing, and I'm trying this to see if this the next hurdle. With all the mediocre homebrew I've tried I really believe oxygen in general is the big enemy and the biggest differce between us and the pros. Whether it matters on the hot side, this is as contriversial to me as claiming an apple or avocado changes after exposing it to air. I've smelled how much more subdued the aroma during the mash is, meaning it stays in.

I won a competition with a tripel a few months ago using these methods; 0.5 grams each of bread yeast and sugar into 40C strike water for 30 minutes, dough in, added boiling water to reach 62C. This had enough camden tablets to reach 30mg/l in a no sparge. Clean, drinkable, and retained the crackery pils malt flavor. Proof? No, but it's worthwhile exploring for me, because it's not hard at all.

And extraordinary claims? Come on, this is in line with science and top brewery practices. Why is simplicity so important? If you want simple, buy beer at the store.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bboy9000]

I'm not sure anyone is ever truly free from influence.

No one from GBF, Brulosophy, me or anyone is free from bias.  That is the limitation of experiments with people.  The reason I trust Bryan's experiments are from the pictures posted on GBF.  LODO does appear to affect clarity.

At least consciously, we've no vested interest in the outcome of xBmts

I like your site and experiments Marshall but don't you sell Brulosophy  t-shirts?  I don't mean this as a personal dig at you but by definition that is a vested interest.

EDIT:  Marshall I saw your post after that.  I was just pointing out you accused the LODO proponents of something you actually do.  Do I believe this affects your experiments?  Maybe subconsciously, but like Jim I've heard you many times on various podcasts and don't believe you are intentionally affecting experiments.

[klickitat jim]

Good grief!

Marshall sells t-shirts. He's a vested interest LODO denier. Call the brewing justice warriors.

I am beginning to remember why I walked away from this forum.

[bboy9000]

Good grief!

Marshall sells t-shirts. He's a vested interest LODO denier. Call the brewing justice warriors.

I am beginning to remember why I walked away from this forum.

Read my edit.