[denny]

Thanks for the reply. So can we agree on this, and in regards to your use of meta, that when you say you used it and it didn't work that you mean... When doing not other low oxygen brewing techniques, and just adding these antioxidants you perceived no change? Because with your statement above it sounds like you are telling folks you did the current day techniques and it was deemed they don't matter? WE can all agree and have the tests to prove that simply adding meta or AA to non degassed water and not using the other techniques will net zero gain. I just want that clear, cause there leaves a lot of room for interpretation when people read what you said about your trials. I mean this in the most professional way.

Thanks

I thought you could get incremental improvement by incrementally adding LODO procedures to your brew day. Is this not the case?

And this was the next point I was going to make.

[The Beerery]

Thanks for the reply. So can we agree on this, and in regards to your use of meta, that when you say you used it and it didn't work that you mean... When doing not other low oxygen brewing techniques, and just adding these antioxidants you perceived no change? Because with your statement above it sounds like you are telling folks you did the current day techniques and it was deemed they don't matter? WE can all agree and have the tests to prove that simply adding meta or AA to non degassed water and not using the other techniques will net zero gain. I just want that clear, cause there leaves a lot of room for interpretation when people read what you said about your trials. I mean this in the most professional way.

Thanks

I didn't say anything about how or when I did it.  That's projection on your part.  I apologize if I gave the wrong impression. That was not my intention.  And I don't say they didn't matter...I say they made no difference for me.  There's a difference.  When these processes were mentioned many years ago, no one ever mentioned the ancillary processes.  So my testing was done with the chemicals alone.

No I fully understand, thats not projection I had to ask you twice. I just want the clear for the other readers.

[The Beerery]

Thanks for the reply. So can we agree on this, and in regards to your use of meta, that when you say you used it and it didn't work that you mean... When doing not other low oxygen brewing techniques, and just adding these antioxidants you perceived no change? Because with your statement above it sounds like you are telling folks you did the current day techniques and it was deemed they don't matter? WE can all agree and have the tests to prove that simply adding meta or AA to non degassed water and not using the other techniques will net zero gain. I just want that clear, cause there leaves a lot of room for interpretation when people read what you said about your trials. I mean this in the most professional way.

Thanks

I thought you could get incremental improvement by incrementally adding LODO procedures to your brew day. Is this not the case?

And this was the next point I was going to make.

I'm thinking you two are not reading that right... The whole foundation of low oxygen brewing is brewing with low oxygen. If you are not degassing water, or not adding meta, or not using low oxygen techniques... How could it be low oxygen??? 

[denny]

Thanks for the reply. So can we agree on this, and in regards to your use of meta, that when you say you used it and it didn't work that you mean... When doing not other low oxygen brewing techniques, and just adding these antioxidants you perceived no change? Because with your statement above it sounds like you are telling folks you did the current day techniques and it was deemed they don't matter? WE can all agree and have the tests to prove that simply adding meta or AA to non degassed water and not using the other techniques will net zero gain. I just want that clear, cause there leaves a lot of room for interpretation when people read what you said about your trials. I mean this in the most professional way.

Thanks

I thought you could get incremental improvement by incrementally adding LODO procedures to your brew day. Is this not the case?

And this was the next point I was going to make.

I'm thinking you two are not reading that right... The whole foundation of low oxygen brewing is brewing with low oxygen. If you are not degassing water, and not adding meta, and not using low oxygen techniques... How could it be low oxygen??? 

If you read through the various threads, many people have said that using any part of the process will yield improvement.  I tried using SMB, I tried using AA, both of which are part of the process.  I found no change in my beers.  So we seem to have conflicting thoughts from LODO proponents.

[natebrews]

But, that is like saying that pitching enough healthy yeast is meaningless because you didn't see any improvement, leaving out that you mashed your grains in room temperature water. 

I think we can all agree that enough healthy yeast is a good thing that improves beer, but if you insist on mashing with room temperature water and then complain that you don't get good results so the yeast thing must be in error seems like an incorrect conclusion based on the results that were observed.

 

[The Beerery]

Sorry, I'm not biting.  Thanks for the clarification on the other post. 
Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[denny]

Sorry, I'm not biting.  Thanks for the clarification on the other post. 
Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand, but I assure you I wasn't trolling.  It was an honest question.  Maybe someone who said that implementing parts of the process will help can answer me.

[denny]

But, that is like saying that pitching enough healthy yeast is meaningless because you didn't see any improvement, leaving out that you mashed your grains in room temperature water. 

I think we can all agree that enough healthy yeast is a good thing that improves beer, but if you insist on mashing with room temperature water and then complain that you don't get good results so the yeast thing must be in error seems like an incorrect conclusion based on the results that were observed.

You should listen to Aaron Hyde from Briess talk about non enzymatic mashing using cold water.

[natebrews]

Clearly I picked a bad example.  How about you don't sanitize anything, is that something we can agree on?

[denny]

Clearly I picked a bad example.  How about you don't sanitize anything, is that something we can agree on?

I know a couple people who almost never sanitize and make great beer.  They haven't convinced me to try that!

[Big Monk]

Sorry, I'm not biting.  Thanks for the clarification on the other post. 
Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand, but I assure you I wasn't trolling.  It was an honest question.  Maybe someone who said that implementing parts of the process will help can answer me.

When we say "step wise" we mean hot side is essential. De-oxygenating water, antioxidants, careful transfers and stirring, capping (if you can), etc.

People used to have a conception that if you breathed in the wrong direction of the mash everything was messed up. We have people seeing results who still have copper chillers. Who don't cap the mash. Who still sparge. People choose to not spund.

The point is that if you implement the hot side stuff, everything else can be a refinement towards preserving the flavors longer. You might start with a beer that loses the hallmark flavors in a week. Then you make a refinement on the cold side and net a month. Then 3 months. Then 6 months.

That's what we mean by incremental. The hot side stuff is some of the easiest to implement into the routine.

[natebrews]

I don't find the 'nothing matters, it all makes great beer to someone' mantra to be particularly helpful.  I don't mean that to be jerky, I just think that this should be a quest for best practices.  If nothing matters, then there are no best practices and these discussions are really quite pointless.

[HoosierBrew]

  Maybe someone who said that implementing parts of the process will help can answer me.

I can only speak for me, Denny. I think there is some room for incremental improvement - if you preboil. I was putting campden in my mash a few years back and not seeing any improvement either but I wasn't preboiling , so just using small amounts of the antioxidants was kind of like putting a bandaid on a deep cut IMO. Some guys spund, some guys are now priming in the fermenter or keg, and reporting good results. But preboiling, using the trifecta mix and a mash cap alone will yield positive results IMO. It gets better from there with spunding or fermenter priming then kegging IMO. Other guys might feel differently. 

[bayareabrewer]

Sorry, I'm not biting.  Thanks for the clarification on the other post. 
Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand, but I assure you I wasn't trolling.  It was an honest question.  Maybe someone who said that implementing parts of the process will help can answer me.

When we say "step wise" we mean hot side is essential. De-oxygenating water, antioxidants, careful transfers and stirring, capping (if you can), etc.

People used to have a conception that if you breathed in the wrong direction of the mash everything was messed up. We have people seeing results who still have copper chillers. Who don't cap the mash. Who still sparge. People choose to not spund.

The point is that if you implement the hot side stuff, everything else can be a refinement towards preserving the flavors longer. You might start with a beer that loses the hallmark flavors in a week. Then you make a refinement on the cold side and net a month. Then 3 months. Then 6 months.

That's what we mean by incremental. The hot side stuff is some of the easiest to implement into the routine.

cool, so when you say incremental improvement with incremental implementation you mean that except for when you don't or when people don't see results. It's all becoming very clear now.....

[Big Monk]

Sorry, I'm not biting.  Thanks for the clarification on the other post. 
Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand, but I assure you I wasn't trolling.  It was an honest question.  Maybe someone who said that implementing parts of the process will help can answer me.

When we say "step wise" we mean hot side is essential. De-oxygenating water, antioxidants, careful transfers and stirring, capping (if you can), etc.

People used to have a conception that if you breathed in the wrong direction of the mash everything was messed up. We have people seeing results who still have copper chillers. Who don't cap the mash. Who still sparge. People choose to not spund.

The point is that if you implement the hot side stuff, everything else can be a refinement towards preserving the flavors longer. You might start with a beer that loses the hallmark flavors in a week. Then you make a refinement on the cold side and net a month. Then 3 months. Then 6 months.

That's what we mean by incremental. The hot side stuff is some of the easiest to implement into the routine.

cool, so when you say incremental improvement with incremental implementation you mean that except for when you don't or when people don't see results. It's all becoming very clear now.....

Sorry man. Jon just posted above how he implemented in stages and is having great success. Many more have said the same thing in this very thread among others.

I don't want to bicker with you. I'd rather talk Brewing, but it seems you and I, and you and many others are at an impasse. This doesn't have to be a zero sum discussion.