Comparing those two beers with MT's analysis, it appears that the AE potassium levels are significantly increased from both HT and MT (~500ppm more elevated in AE). This may give some credence to using KCl (previously mentioned) which will provide the chloride while not contributing any calcium, and boosting the K to more closely match AE. Taking into account MT's dosing with gypsum and CaCl2 (1:3 ratio, respectively), it would seem that if you swapped CaCl2 with KCl to reach the level of Chloride in MT's example (assume 175ppm target) then you would effectively reduce the contributed Ca by upto 75% in MT's final beer which puts the final beer much much lower in terms of calcium content (probably <50ppm). I also note that phosphorous is increased in AE above MT/HT which may indicate they adjust for pH using phosphoric acid. All that said, I'm not sure how much merit there is in trying to "match" a beer/brewery's water mineralization, but it's kind of fun to surmise about these things anyway. I also don't know how a reduction in calcium level in finished beer might affect mouthfeel. Fortunately, it seems like a pretty easy thing to test out on similar batches using water mineralization as your primary variable in play.