My newbie LODO experiences so far....

[mongoose33]

Been trying to adopt as many LODO techniques as I can, and I have had enough success that I think there's something here. Maybe something really good.

I brewed an Amber on December 3rd. I did two LODO techniques--pre-boiling the strike water, and using a mash cap. I do BIAB and doughed-in the normal way, adding the grist to the top of the water and stirring. I had a half campden-tablet in the strike water, and beyond that, no other LODO techniques were used.

I am sitting here, 20 days later, drinking one of the best Ambers I've ever had. I had one, and sat here looking at the empty glass.....now I have a mostly-full glass. But it's going down fast.

One question many of us have about LODO is whether we have to do everything recommended to have a positive result. I can't speak about all times and places, but this is a really good Amber. It was really good at just over 2 weeks, too, which is surprising. I would say that there was some positive effect of the LODO approach here, and it's a rich and flavorful beer. I'll post the recipe at the end here.

***********************

But here's where it gets interesting...er. Two weeks later, 12/17, I brewed a Pils. I did a few other things that should help:

I preboiled the strike water in my kettle, then drained it as it was boiling into a pre-heated igloo cube cooler. From there, I used a Stainless Steel chiller to drop the temp to what ended up being 158 degrees. I was aiming for 160, and in retrospect, I probably should have pulled the chiller at 165 degrees, gently stirred, then checked temp. This resulted in a lower mash temp than I was aiming for, 148-149, instead of the 151 target. Live and learn.

I did underletting of the grain, and I probably added the water too fast, but even so, I had not a single dough ball come out of that grain. I know that this has been indicated before, but I didn't really believe it. In my case, it was certainly true. I crushed the grain in a 3-roller mill at .035 gap. The water made it to the top of the grain fairly fast; I used my spoon to gently poke down in the grain bed as the remaining water entered the kettle. Very relaxed wetting of the grain.

Just prior to underletting, I ran down to the basement and crushed the grain. The less time between crushing and doughing-in, the less time for oxidation to occur. I crushed the grain into a bucket lined with my BIAB Wilserbag, it took less than 2 minutes. I took it up to the garage, took the bag and put it in the now-empty kettle, and began to underlet the grain.



I hoisted that cooler to a platform (see pic) and from there drained into the mash tun to underlet the grain. Hoisted it up on a platform and from there drained into the mash tun. That worked pretty well. I wasn't sure of the rate at which I should have underlet the grain (I was aiming for maybe 7 or 8 minutes). What I should have done, in retrospect, is measured ahead of time to get a sense of how fast I needed the water to flow. Still, it wasn't too bad. I might go a little slower next time.



I used a stainless steel kettle lid as a mash cap; if there's an area I think I might improve it might be here. I stir at 15 and 30 minutes, and I need to find a way to reduce any oxygen exposure while doing that.



I was also very shocked by the malt aromas; not only was the aroma toward the end of the mash amazing, it was during the boil as well. Smelled like...malted milk balls a little bit.

I should also note my water additions; I use mostly RO water with a gallon of unsoftened tap water which is very hard. I added 6 grams of CaCL2, 5 grams of MgSO4, 1.5 Campden tablets crushed, 1.5 grams of Brewtan-B, and 3 ml of Lactic acid. The pH at 15 minutes was 5.31, which was fine.

I also chilled with the stainless steel chiller; it made me really appreciate my Jaded Hydra. I added 1 gram of Brewtan-B to the boil, though I probably didn't have to. Next time, I'm going to use my Hydra to chill, and adding the BtB this time will allow some level of comparison.

*********

I have never tasted wort as sweet and flavorful as that which started in the boil kettle. Shockingly different. This is with a terribly simple grain bill--10 pounds of pilsen malt and that's it.

I've been fermenting for the last six days and it is now done; I'm using the same recipe and fermentation schedule as the last time I brewed this, though that was non-LODO. I'm using an accelerated fermentation schedule, first half at 50 degrees, second half slowly raised to 66 degrees.

I'll report back on how it turned out. Meanwhile, I have an empty Amber glass that is begging to be refilled.

 

[h22lude]

Sounds like everything is going well so far. I had the same thought about my first low oxygen beer. It was a pilsner. Easily the best lager I have made and one of the best beers I have made, if not the best.

One question many of us have about LODO is whether we have to do everything recommended to have a positive result.

No, you don't have to do everything to have a positive result BUT you do have to do everything to brew a low oxygen beer. There are some parts of your system that probably let in a lot of oxygen so you technically don't have a low oxygen beer. That doesn't mean those beers can't be better than the beers you brewed before and from your first batch it seems like they are much better than before. I like to call them lower oxygen beers. They have less oxygen ingress than the beers you use to brew but more than a true low oxygen beer. I brew lower oxygen beers right now and I find them to be leaps and bounds better than my traditional beers. I brewed a pilsner that kept getting better with age. I brewed Bryan's APA and even though I royally screwed up the hop schedule (switched the 20 min and 10 min additions) it was the best APA I have brewed. And my latest lower oxygen beer is a NEIPA with strawberries (take on Tired Hands Strawberry Milkshake IPA). Again, one of the best beers I have made. The only two things I really don't do is underlet and use BtB. BtB is on its way. Underletting may take some time for me to figure out with my system. But even if I don't underlet and don't make a true low oxygen beer, I'm very happy with the outcome of the low oxygen process so far and I think that is a great start.

 

[mongoose33]

I think the point I was trying to make was that you don't have to do everything "right" to see the benefits. That was a question many of us have had--if we can't get everything right, is it all for naught? In my admittedly limited experience, the answer is no.

I might even argue that I may be more "LODO" than you are, as I did underlet, and I did use BtB. I think I'm pretty good on limiting O2 on the cold side, it's the hot side that's more involved.

I'm getting another port put into my Spike kettle this Friday, and if I can get a pump, that will let me whirlpool before racking to fermenter.

And I've thought about trying to flood the 5-gallon bucket into which I'm crushing the grain with CO2, to reduce the oxidation that might occur there. Haven't quite figured that one out yet.

 

[h22lude]

I think the point I was trying to make was that you don't have to do everything "right" to see t.he benefits. That was a question many of us have had--if we can't get everything right, is it all for naught? In my admittedly limited experience, the answer is no.

I might even argue that I may be more "LODO" than you are, as I did underlet, and I did use BtB. I think I'm pretty good on limiting O2 on the cold side, it's the hot side that's more involved.

I'm getting another port put into my Spike kettle this Friday, and if I can get a pump, that will let me whirlpool before racking to fermenter.

And I've thought about trying to flood the 5-gallon bucket into which I'm crushing the grain with CO2, to reduce the oxidation that might occur there. Haven't quite figured that one out yet.

Yeah that was what I was saying. You aren't brewing a true low oxygen beer because you skipped some of the steps but you are still brewing a lower oxygen beer than you were before. And that beer (the amber one) came out better than any other beer you made. That shows even some low oxygen techniques can help better your beer.

I had the same experience. Right now I pre-boil, use a very tight mash cap, recirculate under the wort, use NaMeta, have almost 10% boil off, whirlpool, closed system transfer to a fully purged keg. I will be using BtB on my next batch. I don't underlet but I don't splash when mashing in and I do it pretty quickly to get the mash cap on. I also don't use CO2 when crushing. I'm not sure how much those last two will help but they are part of low oxygen brewing. Even missing some of the steps, I noticed a huge improvement over my beers. I'm going to try to get as close to full low oxygen as possible. My next big step is buying a stainless CFC to remove all copper from my system.

 

[mongoose33]

Yeah that was what I was saying. You aren't brewing a true low oxygen beer because you skipped some of the steps but you are still brewing a lower oxygen beer than you were before. And that beer (the amber one) came out better than any other beer you made. That shows even some low oxygen techniques can help better your beer.

I had the same experience. Right now I pre-boil, use a very tight mash cap, recirculate under the wort, use NaMeta, have almost 10% boil off, whirlpool, closed system transfer to a fully purged keg. I will be using BtB on my next batch. I don't underlet but I don't splash when mashing in and I do it pretty quickly to get the mash cap on. I also don't use CO2 when crushing. I'm not sure how much those last two will help but they are part of low oxygen brewing. Even missing some of the steps, I noticed a huge improvement over my beers. I'm going to try to get as close to full low oxygen as possible. My next big step is buying a stainless CFC to remove all copper from my system.

Supposedly BtB will mitigate the potential Fenton Reactions that a copper chiller can promote. I have a Jaded Hydra which is a miracle when it comes to chilling--4 minutes from boiling to 70 degrees. I would hate to give that up.

I've found the hard part is getting the doses right, that of Kmeta and BtB. There are recommendations all OVER the place on those. I went with 30ppm for the Kmeta, and a sort of WAG on the BtB. The 30ppm on the Kmeta turned out to be 1.5 tablets of Campden. BtB not so clear.

 

[h22lude]

Yeah that is one of the main reason I bought BtB. I didn't want to spend the $200 on the SS CFC just yet. I almost went Jaded but I really hate cleaning the IC coils. Stuff always gets stuck in between them when I was using mine. With the CFC, I just run the PBW through since I run my pump anyway. I go back and forth between SS CFC and Jaded IC. Next week I'll probably be back on the Jaded lol

Check this out for BtB dosage
http://www.********************/brewing-methods/brewtan-b-dosing/

 

[mongoose33]

I kind of wish Jaded made a SS chiller like the Hydra. Wouldn't work quite as well but it would be head-and-shoulders above all the others.

I'll have to think about a CFC in Stainless. But first I'll do some LODO w/ the Hydra. Hopefully BtB will resolve the issue.

 

[mongoose33]

Yeah that is one of the main reason I bought BtB. I didn't want to spend the $200 on the SS CFC just yet. I almost went Jaded but I really hate cleaning the IC coils. Stuff always gets stuck in between them when I was using mine. With the CFC, I just run the PBW through since I run my pump anyway. I go back and forth between SS CFC and Jaded IC. Next week I'll probably be back on the Jaded lol

Check this out for BtB dosage
http://www.********************/brewing-methods/brewtan-b-dosing/

Yeah, I've seen that before. What I find....not terribly informative....is the dosage:

.08 to .26 grams per gallon of strike water. I use 7.25 gallons, so the dosage is...

from .58 to 1.885 grams. Narrowed it right down. (Originally I used 1 gram in the mash, 1.33 in the boil.)

I just closed my eyes, called on the Force for guidance, and used 1.5 grams, with nothing other than a gut feeling to defend the choice.

 

[h22lude]

I kind of wish Jaded made a SS chiller like the Hydra. Wouldn't work quite as well but it would be head-and-shoulders above all the others.

I'll have to think about a CFC in Stainless. But first I'll do some LODO w/ the Hydra. Hopefully BtB will resolve the issue.

The reason I'm leaning more towards SS CFC is from my little reading on BtB it can add permanent haze is used in the boil. Not that it is a huge issue but with my new lower oxygen process I have had some clear beer and it does look nice.

Yeah, I've seen that before. What I find....not terribly informative....is the dosage:

.08 to .26 grams per gallon of strike water. I use 7.25 gallons, so the dosage is...

from .58 to 1.885 grams. Narrowed it right down. (Originally I used 1 gram in the mash, 1.33 in the boil.)

I just closed my eyes, called on the Force for guidance, and used 1.5 grams, with nothing other than a gut feeling to defend the choice.

My plan was to go right in the middle lol but yeah it is a big swing. I do believe the manufacturer recommends .26g/gal.

 

[Big Monk]

Yeah, I've seen that before. What I find....not terribly informative....is the dosage:

.08 to .26 grams per gallon of strike water. I use 7.25 gallons, so the dosage is...

from .58 to 1.885 grams. Narrowed it right down. (Originally I used 1 gram in the mash, 1.33 in the boil.)

I just closed my eyes, called on the Force for guidance, and used 1.5 grams, with nothing other than a gut feeling to defend the choice.

It’s really not much of a mystery: Ajinomoto recommends 2-6 g/hL and Wyeast recommends 6.83 g/hL in the mash and 4.27 g/hL.

The dosage range encompasses both. No reason not to use the numbers from the Wyeast specification.

 

[mongoose33]

It’s really not much of a mystery: Ajinomoto recommends 2-6 g/hL and Wyeast recommends 6.83 g/hL in the mash and 4.27 g/hL.

The dosage range encompasses both. No reason not to use the numbers from the Wyeast specification.

Oh, I understand that completely. The issue I have is that there is a fairly wide range of recommendations, which suggests quite strongly that while BtB does appear to have a positive impact, there's no good theory as to exactly why or how much.

It might have made more sense to me if the recommendations were tied, somehow, to the amount of grain in the mash, or perhaps the type of grain (more of or less of roasted or toasted malts?).

In other words, if the low end recommendation is ok, then why add a higher amount? What's the reasoning for it? And if going higher is desirable, then what's the story on the lower recommendation, which would then appear to be not enough?

I know that this area of brewing is still new and people are trying to figure it out, and this is one area where more work is clearly needed.

 

[Big Monk]

Oh, I understand that completely. The issue I have is that there is a fairly wide range of recommendations, which suggests quite strongly that while BtB does appear to have a positive impact, there's no good theory as to exactly why or how much.

It might have made more sense to me if the recommendations were tied, somehow, to the amount of grain in the mash, or perhaps the type of grain (more of or less of roasted or toasted malts?).

In other words, if the low end recommendation is ok, then why add a higher amount? What's the reasoning for it? And if going higher is desirable, then what's the story on the lower recommendation, which would then appear to be not enough?

I know that this area of brewing is still new and people are trying to figure it out, and this is one area where more work is clearly needed.

If it helps, we use the high end of the range.

 

[mongoose33]

If it helps, we use the high end of the range.

Why? And why not the low end? And when you say "the high end" do you mean the top or just near the top of the range?

And why does it take so long for these kinds of things to come out?

************

I taught a buddy to brew. What I did with him was to say "Hey, do it this way, and you'll be able to brew good beer. Then you can make your own mind up about what to do and what to change."

I sure didn't give him a bunch of ranges like "your mash temp can be between 149 and 158" or "your pH can be between 5.2 and 5.6." Or that his strike water should be somewhere in the upper 160-degree ranges.

I gave up everything I do, and he brewed a really good beer. Probably a testament to his ability to understand and follow directions--he's a damned good learner--and also partly to my ability to teach (I do that for a living).

But I've got to tell you, Scotty--as I've pursued this LODO thing, getting straight answers out of people has been like pulling teeth. It seems like nobody wants to give a recommendation as to what THEY do. Is it secret? Are people afraid they'll give up some fundamental idea that they're hoarding to themselves? Do they think that newcomers to the LODO approach need a certain amount of hazing and initiation and putting their time in before they can be shown the way?

************

Morrey and I bounce ideas off each other all the time.....when I switched to BIAB, I asked him about narrowing the gap for a finer crush. He said he used .020. I used it as well, and it was perfect. When I bought my Monster Mill 3 mill, which Morrey also now has, I consulted him on the gap for that one. He suggested .035, which seemed very high to me given the previous success of .020 with my Barley Crusher. But I used it and it worked perfectly (longer time for conversion but the numbers came out the same).

I didn't have to try three or four gaps hoping one would work well.

When we share ideas (how are you doing a starter? how are you using hop shots for bittering?), we tell the other guy exactly what we're doing and why. We don't give ranges, we don't do anything but give up the specific details.

Why is it so hard in the LODO world to get straight answers? Is it that people don't really know? Or something else?

 

[MSK_Chess]

Oxygen is so bad, has unpaired electrons, its a thief that steals electrons from other elements and doesn't care about the consequences. It must be purged!

 

[Big Monk]

Why? And why not the low end? And when you say "the high end" do you mean the top or just near the top of the range?

And why does it take so long for these kinds of things to come out?

************

I taught a buddy to brew. What I did with him was to say "Hey, do it this way, and you'll be able to brew good beer. Then you can make your own mind up about what to do and what to change."

I sure didn't give him a bunch of ranges like "your mash temp can be between 149 and 158" or "your pH can be between 5.2 and 5.6." Or that his strike water should be somewhere in the upper 160-degree ranges.

I gave up everything I do, and he brewed a really good beer. Probably a testament to his ability to understand and follow directions--he's a damned good learner--and also partly to my ability to teach (I do that for a living).


************

Morrey and I bounce ideas off each other all the time.....when I switched to BIAB, I asked him about narrowing the gap for a finer crush. He said he used .020. I used it as well, and it was perfect. When I bought my Monster Mill 3 mill, which Morrey also now has, I consulted him on the gap for that one. He suggested .035, which seemed very high to me given the previous success of .020 with my Barley Crusher. But I used it and it worked perfectly (longer time for conversion but the numbers came out the same).

I didn't have to try three or four gaps hoping one would work well.

When we share ideas (how are you doing a starter? how are you using hop shots for bittering?), we tell the other guy exactly what we're doing and why. We don't give ranges, we don't do anything but give up the specific details.

Why is it so hard in the LODO world to get straight answers? Is it that people don't really know? Or something else?

0.26 g/gal. It’s a tannin based compound so it binds lipids, proteins, and trace metals in the mash. I don’t see any reason not to use 0.26 g/gal in the mash.

I’d start with the same in the boil and if you start to have clarity issues going into the fermenter then back it off.

Everyone is different. We don’t give “cookie cutter”, “one size fits all” answers because doing so is foolish and can’t possibly take into account different brewers and equipment. We give pretty detailed straight answers on a lot of things though.

We have very detailed posts about many things on our site.

Specific references to points you don’t feel you’ve gotten straight answers on helps as well.

But I've got to tell you, Scotty--as I've pursued this LODO thing, getting straight answers out of people has been like pulling teeth. It seems like nobody wants to give a recommendation as to what THEY do. Is it secret? Are people afraid they'll give up some fundamental idea that they're hoarding to themselves? Do they think that newcomers to the LODO approach need a certain amount of hazing and initiation and putting their time in before they can be shown the way?

No secrets. No hoarding. We have let it all hang out. No hazing either. All the information and references are on our site. Maybe take a look there?

This is a hobby and we have full time jobs. Our website was made specifically to give more detailed answers than were possible on forums. Our brewing references page is also loaded with academic and technical resources. If we seem cagey or vague it’s because we don’t have the time to go into crazy detail.

If we were monetized in some way like other Homebrewing entities and had financial gains from this, we could afford to spend significant amounts of time answering every question that came our way with substantial detail. I apologize but this just isn’t the case.

 

[mongoose33]

0.26 g/gal. It’s a tannin based compound so it binds lipids, proteins, and trace metals in the mash. I don’t see any reason not to use 0.26 g/gal in the mash.

I’d start with the same in the boil and if you start to have clarity issues going into the fermenter then back it off.

Everyone is different. We don’t give “cookie cutter”, “one size fits all” answers because doing so is foolish and can’t possibly take into account different brewers and equipment. We give pretty detailed straight answers on a lot of things though.

But not as often as would be helpful. There's a fundamental difference between "This is how to do it" and "This is how I do it." When I and others ask what dosage we should use, the answer has, until the above, been that range. It's not much of an answer, and I have to just wonder this:

Why wouldn't you say "Here's a recommended range, and here's what I do." Not difficult. But in so many cases, it leaves us with no answer other than....a range.

We have very detailed posts about many things on our site.

Yes, you do--and a lot of them aren't that helpful. Maybe that's because this topic is in its infancy w/r/t homebrewing, I don't know. But I do know that way too many times a question is asked and no answer is forthcoming, just obfuscation.

Specific references to points you don’t feel you’ve gotten straight answers on helps as well.

You have a great example above. I'm trying to figure out why this is the case, that we can't get straight answers. Here's another one: at least two of us asked if there would at least be partial improvement if we did at least some of the LODO stuff, and you'd have thought we were speaking inaudibly. I would have been happy with an "I don't know" or an "I'm not sure," or even an "I think if you get above a certain ppm of O2 at any point it's for naught, but I can't point you to a specific reference on that."

That would have been ok, not satisfying, but ok. You can't make people know something they don't, if they don't. Instead, what we got was nothing--and the whole point was, if we can't do it perfectly, is it all for naught?

There have been other instances too.

No secrets. No hoarding. We have let it all hang out. No hazing either. All the information and references are on our site. Maybe take a look there?

I use the same handle there as here, Scotty. I've started 4 threads in the "Basics" section on the Low Oxygen Brewing site. I've BEEN looking there.

This is a hobby and we have full time jobs. Our website was made specifically to give more detailed answers than were possible on forums. Our brewing references page is also loaded with academic and technical resources. If we seem cagey or vague it’s because we don’t have the time to go into crazy detail.

Yes, there's a lot there. No, it's not all that accessible. Thus the questions.

If we were monetized in some way like other Homebrewing entities and had financial gains from this, we could afford to spend significant amounts of time answering every question that came our way with substantial detail. I apologize but this just isn’t the case.

I am not asking you or anyone else to do that. But by the same token, it takes virtually no more time to answer a question than it does to avoid answering it in a reply.

I can't even imagine the number of posts I've made here on HBT answering someone's question, and saying "Here's what I do." They can choose to follow that path or not, up to them. Criminy, I reported on my BtB experience, and noted exactly how much I used. I didn't give a range.

When I know enough to feel comfortable offering an opinion or an answer, I do that. I pay to be here as a forum supporter, and nobody is paying me for the input I give.

If the LODO people--and you--really want to promote it and encourage others to try it, you're going to have to help people do this, and not make it so difficult they want to say the hell with it.

***************

I'm writing an article for the HBT editor on a Newbie's (to LODO) Experience with Low Oxygen Brewing. I'm going to tell people what I have experienced, what I think I've learned, how I do it, WHY I'm doing it that way, and they can choose to follow or not. But I won't be avoiding giving answers.

 

[Big Monk]

But not as often as would be helpful. There's a fundamental difference between "This is how to do it" and "This is how I do it." When I and others ask what dosage we should use, the answer has, until the above, been that range. It's not much of an answer, and I have to just wonder this:

Why wouldn't you say "Here's a recommended range, and here's what I do." Not difficult. But in so many cases, it leaves us with no answer other than....a range.



Yes, you do--and a lot of them aren't that helpful. Maybe that's because this topic is in its infancy w/r/t homebrewing, I don't know. But I do know that way too many times a question is asked and no answer is forthcoming, just obfuscation.



You have a great example above. I'm trying to figure out why this is the case, that we can't get straight answers. Here's another one: at least two of us asked if there would at least be partial improvement if we did at least some of the LODO stuff, and you'd have thought we were speaking inaudibly. I would have been happy with an "I don't know" or an "I'm not sure," or even an "I think if you get above a certain ppm of O2 at any point it's for naught, but I can't point you to a specific reference on that."

That would have been ok, not satisfying, but ok. You can't make people know something they don't, if they don't. Instead, what we got was nothing--and the whole point was, if we can't do it perfectly, is it all for naught?

There have been other instances too.



I use the same handle there as here, Scotty. I've started 4 threads in the "Basics" section on the Low Oxygen Brewing site. I've BEEN looking there.



Yes, there's a lot there. No, it's not all that accessible. Thus the questions.



I am not asking you or anyone else to do that. But by the same token, it takes virtually no more time to answer a question than it does to avoid answering it in a reply.

I can't even imagine the number of posts I've made here on HBT answering someone's question, and saying "Here's what I do." They can choose to follow that path or not, up to them. Criminy, I reported on my BtB experience, and noted exactly how much I used. I didn't give a range.

When I know enough to feel comfortable offering an opinion or an answer, I do that. I pay to be here as a forum supporter, and nobody is paying me for the input I give.

If the LODO people--and you--really want to promote it and encourage others to try it, you're going to have to help people do this, and not make it so difficult they want to say the hell with it.

***************

I'm writing an article for the HBT editor on a Newbie's (to LODO) Experience with Low Oxygen Brewing. I'm going to tell people what I have experienced, what I think I've learned, how I do it, WHY I'm doing it that way, and they can choose to follow or not. But I won't be avoiding giving answers.

This whole post is pretty interesting because I remember spending a lot of time answering your questions in previous posts and on our site only to have you basically ask for detailed instructions. Which is fine. This is new for a lot of people and sometimes it’s tough to backtrack to the basics and give answers. Work in progress on the communication I guess, but you also have to realize that DO intrusion isn’t cut and dry for every system. Thus the more vague range based answers on some things.

You must have at least seen that as I found out more about your system the answers got more in depth, right? It’s for that exact reason we can’t give “Do x,y,z...” answers to everything. We have people using cooler systems and single infusion all the way up to fully electric, temp controlled 3 vessel HERMS systems who step mash. We have people using aluminum foil as mash caps all the up to custom cut gasketed lids with recirc manifolds. Some use DO meters and some use Sulfite test strips. Some don’t.

So simply saying, “This I what I do...” doesn’t translate across systems. I’m a small batch brewer with a 2 vessel system. My stuff doesn’t translate to 95% of the other people’s systems I deal with.

Do what works for you and keep asking questions. We’ll try to give you the best answers we can. As I said before, we get a lot of questions across multiple forums. Not to mention the private conversations and PMs we get. If you feel you aren’t getting the level of detail you desire then I certainly can’t argue with you on that, but know it’s neither our inability to express ourselves in a knowledgeable way (which you implied), nor our purposeful desire to mislead or leave anyone hanging for some selfish reason (which you also implied).

Good luck on your article.

 

[mongoose33]

This whole post is pretty interesting because I remember spending a lot of time answering your questions in previous posts and on our site only to have you basically ask for detailed instructions. Which is fine. This is new for a lot of people and sometimes it’s tough to backtrack to the basics and give answers. Work in progress on the communication I guess, but you also have to realize that DO intrusion isn’t cut and dry for every system. Thus the more vague range based answers on some things.

And I appreciate the effort.

Maybe some of this is just frustration on my part--I'm a professional educator, and maybe it's unreasonable of me to expect what I can do from people whose gifts and experiences are in other areas. Some of it is anticipating the next question and just supplying it.

You must have at least seen that as I found out more about your system the answers got more in depth, right? It’s for that exact reason we can’t give “Do x,y,z...” answers to everything. We have people using cooler systems and single infusion all the way up to fully electric, temp controlled 3 vessel HERMS systems who step mash. We have people using aluminum foil as mash caps all the up to custom cut gasketed lids with recirc manifolds. Some use DO meters and some use Sulfite test strips. Some don’t.

Sure--people's experience, resources, and systems are all over the lot. But if there are basic tenets to LODO, they must be applicable in some fashion to all. And there's nothing wrong with saying "I have a two vessel system so YMMV, but here's what I do." I can choose to follow or not follow what you do.

I have fought my way to some level of understanding of LODO, and I've appreciated the help I've received. And I surely don't want to denigrate those who offer their time and knowledge to help others. But I'm not the only one who has struggled with this issue.

So simply saying, “This I what I do...” doesn’t translate across systems. I’m a small batch brewer with a 2 vessel system. My stuff doesn’t translate to 95% of the other people’s systems I deal with.

Well, we're going to have to disagree on that. It does, often, translate across systems, if one understands the underlying theory. I read somewhere (your site or HBT, can't recall for sure) about using aluminum foil as a mash cap. I had someone tell me to use a Stainless Steel lid as a mash cap. No reason why, just do it. OK, but how hard is it to say "Use SS because aluminum foil can cause reactions that create oxidation." Easy peasy--but that's not what comes out.

Scotty, I had read about Fenton Reactions and how "Copper, Brass and Aluminum can introduce potential for oxidation reactions". So eventually I figured out why I didn't want to use aluminum foil as a mash cap. My first attempt used a lid from a 5-gallon bucket, and rather than tell me why that was a poor idea, instead the advice was to simply use SS. My gosh! How hard is it to simply say "don't use a lid from a 5-gallon bucket because...."? It's not hard. Not at all. I'm guessing, one concern is trapping air under the lid and defeating the purpose of the mash cap, but I'm not sure on that.

Do what works for you and keep asking questions. We’ll try to give you the best answers we can. As I said before, we get a lot of questions across multiple forums. Not to mention the private conversations and PMs we get. If you feel you aren’t getting the level of detail you desire then I certainly can’t argue with you on that, but know it’s neither our inability to express ourselves in a knowledgeable way (which you implied), nor our purposeful desire to mislead or leave anyone hanging for some selfish reason (which you also implied).

Good luck on your article.

I will, and none of this is preventing me from pursuing LODO brewing at this point. I don't have access to anyone who does LODO, so I can't try their beer to see if I care. So the only way to test this is to do it myself, and that hasn't been that easy. I'm hoping my experiences will help others who might want to try it, in the form of an article, and posts online.

**********

That said, I brewed an Amber using partial LODO techniques--preboiled the strike water and cooled to strike temp, used a 5-gallon bucket lid as a mash cap, crushed the grain immediately before dough-in. I didn't underlet, just mixed in as usual.

That beer has been a stunning hit. Had the family over for Christmas Eve, and people who are wine drinkers were drinking it and providing my ultimate test and validation of a beer: they had refills. More than once. And that was a beer using only partial LODO techniques, and there are places I could easily improve.

I have a lager made using more LODO techniques (underlet the grain, used a stainless pot lid for a mash cap, added Campden and BtB, used a stainless chiller not a copper one). It's crashing right now. That wort before boiling was shockingly tasty and sweet.

**********

I'm committed to trying this. I'm a scientist by training, and the only way I know to give something an honest try is to give it an honest try. I bought a 3-roller mill, attached to a motor that produces 180rpm. I set it up so I can crush literally just 2 minutes before dough-in.

I'm getting another port added to my kettle so I can whirlpool easily. I'm getting a Riptide pump (Santa was good to me). I'm going to figure out a way to recirculate during the mash so I don't have to remove the mash cap and stir.

I asked for and received a spunding valve for Christmas, so I can finish fermentation in a keg.

So, Scotty, I'm essentially going all-in here. If it all doesn't work, I'll report that. If it does, I'll report that too. But in the end, it will be others drinking my beer who will let me know if I've accomplished something of note or not. Early returns suggest a positive answer to that.