Although my thinking was, while AG is more complicated, it may be a more forgiving process, so more people seem to think that its a better method.
Just the opposite, there are too many variable in involved in brewing al grain. Mash PH, water chemistry, how you sparge, mash thickness...yadd yadda yadda....each of those and other variable are going to determine how the wort turns out. SO the more variable the more path to screwing up...
Like I said in the blog I posted above....All Grain Brewing is not the instant holy mecca, that many people assume it is...your beer will not automatically be better just becasue you put a braid in a cooler....
Extract kits on the other hand are almost fool proof...the water chemistry comes with the extract...making your own recipes (for either ag but more to the point extract) is a little more difficult...but can be picked up with a little experience...it's just like cooking...look at enough recipes, and play with the software and you will understand the variable that go into it...
ANd then the rest is up to you...you can be impatient, not use temp control or your hydrometer, cut corners on your sanitization and whether or not it is all grain or extract is irrevelant...how you approach the beer is....that will determing whether or not the beer will turn out.
As to wanting to leave...and thinking there is misinformation...there is very little misinformation here...I mean I'm not posting mis-information, and neither are my friends. and believe me if any of us feel that there is bad info being posted on here...we jump in and call people on it...The really bad advice is corrected almost immediatly.
What you do have here is mostly just
differences of opinion becasue there is really many ways to skin a cat. Ask 10 brewers a question and you wil get 12 different answers...and at least half it not more will be conjecture with little basis in fact...but the rest of the group will police that...And often that difference of opinion is really just a clash between old ways of thinking and believing, and new ideas...Or the tearing down of brewing myths...like HSA, autolysis, etc...that were a hold over from the bad old days of brewing before 1978 and have carried through.
Places like this is where you find the most state of the art information/wisdom about brewing, because of the sheer number of us trying new things, hearing new things, and even breaking new ground and contributing to the body of info on the hobby...Look at some of that inventions that came out of here, and then ended up later in BYO articles by our members...
One thing to remember is that Papazian, as wonderful as it is, was written 30 years ago...and a lot of "science" or "common wisdom" that he as an author tapped into has evolved....all authors face this issue with their work.
Charlie Papazian said it But he might not necessarily say it now....see the difference?
His basic info is timeless....how to brew beer, figure out recipes, etc...but some of the info is just a reflection of the "opinions," or prevailing wisdom of the times, and may not even reflect his current beliefs...There's a podcast with Papazian from a year or so ago, where he talks about just having started using rice hulls in his mash ton...so if he doesn't update the book again, or write a new one, unless you've heard the podcast or read it on here, you won't KNOW about it...It's the same with Palmer even he has learned stuff since he wrote how to brew...
ohn Palmer basically admits that what he wrote about IBU's in How to brew, was essentially "wrong" or at least outdated in light of new science...
But even Palmer's book is a few years old.....
March 20, 2008 - What Is an IBU . . . Really?
John Palmer, author of How to Brew, shares information from a conference that challenged his concept of what defines an International Bitterness Unit (IBU).
http://media.libsyn.com/media/basicbrewing/bbr03-20-08ibu.mp3
I cite that podcast as an example of how the knowlegebase shifts so fast in this hobby because of places like this or podcasts...A book is a snapshot of the author's body of knowlege and the "common wisdom" at the time the author wrote the book, which may mean 3 years before it was even published. Papazian's book is 30+ years old. The basic knowlege is good, but brewing science and experience has progressed to where some things an author believes or says at that time may no-longer be valid...even to the author.
Most of the time when someone "revises" a book they don't necessarilly "re-write" the entire thing...and unless they annotated the changes, often all a "revised" edition has to make it up to date is a new introduction, and maybe the addition or removal of some things. But Rarely is a revision in a book a serious comb through of the entire book.
If an author plans to devote months to an extensive revision, they more than likely would just write a new book anyway.
And it's usually done for money or simply to get it back into the marketplace after a long lag..Sometimes a revised edition is simply a new cover or a different shaped book (like a trade paperback.) With a new intro and conclusion tagged on...
So there's really no way to know too much how updated the book was..I mean my copy is the 2002 edition iirc, and the photos are still pretty much have the look of bygone times.
It is podcasts and forums like this where you will find a lot more state of the art, or current views, and even scientific information...I mean if Jamil, John Palmer or Papazian even farts on a podcast, one of us beergeeks are going to start a thread on it within 10 minutes.
So I wouldn't leave...I you wanna make great beer...and hang out with a great bunch of folks, this is the place to do it.
