Yea unfortunately until a wort is made low oxygen, then put though these tests it means nothing to us. We don’t adhere to the same variables. Once I see low oxygen beers produced and tested in the same ways, I will start to pay attention.
Also the time in which these beers are consumed, are way to short. Test those same beers in 3 months, 6 months and 9 months. You know they actually do have a REAL test for this… the ITT test. Once could have simply sent a beer to the lab, which is what I have done.
lab results are nice, but sensory tests are what matter to me. I don’t care what the lab says if the beer tastes good.
Then Low Oxygen brewing is perfect for you!
when the evidence is in, I will gladly convert 
May not be the sensory “test” you are looking for but the mini-mash procedure may be something you’d be interested in.
You will have one sample of Low Oxygen wort and one sample of normal wort to compare side by side.
The ITT test, tests if the beer is going to taste good…
We can learn something from most experiments, including this one. Here is what I noticed in the Brülosophy experiment:
1. Results- last paragraph: “both beers were one dimensional and boring, though notably clean with no detectable off-flavors”. I think that it is part of a reasonable experimental design that your control beer is a very good to excellent beer, and the recipe, when well brewed and with good ingredients, should be able to lead to a very good pale ale. If the author’s comment is correct, then the control beer was no an adequate media to test a hypothesis. Suggestion for the future: enter the beer in a competition or have 2 BJCP judges score the beer to validate the testing media; I suggest a score of 35 or higher for the control beer.
2. Paragraph just before results: “beers were … remarkably similar in color”. I think a similar color suggests that the oxidation has already taken place (the author mentions this possibility in the discussion).
Both these points support what we already know about oxidation in the cold side.
Next steps I would personally suggest would be to:
- Ensure the quality of the control beer
- Use spunding or keg conditioned beer as your control
- Compare with sanitizer/ CO2 emptied keg, with normal-air keg and with splashing (start with splashing which should provide the biggest difference).
You make a very valid point. Indeed, the main flaw of the Brülosophy experiments is that they cannot prove that the control beer tastes good.
tasting the beer tests if it is going to taste good.
tried it. Wasn’t impressed.
I reckon the multitudes of tasters, that vary in range from novice to well trained enjoying much of his beer shows us he makes good beer. I know this concept does not register to some here, since its either LODO brewing or amateur hobbyist in your opinions.
I’m glad you guys have found a nice way to brew beer that works for you, its when you discount everyone else that rubs people the wrong way.
The triangle test is designed to taste which one of the three liquids you are tasting is different.
Brülosophy does not perform a sensory evaluation designed to validate the quality of the beer. So, they do not publish whether the beer tastes as it should.
from what I gather, they also ask the tasters if they actually liked the beer though.
The rules of science apply to everyone. Whether multitude of testers like or dislike the beer that someone makes is immaterial to this discussion. One should review data based on its merits or demerits and nothing else. I am telling you as a scientist what the problem with this experiment is. If you have a scientific counterargument, do make it please.
In this particular experiment, the brewer himself states his beer was one-dimensional and boring. And no, they do not ask that question, and they should not be asking it because the tasters are blinded so they do not know which one is the control beer. There was no sensory panel or evaluation of the quality of the beer in this experiment or in the ones I have read. In fact, in one of the recent experiments, a Berliner Weisse, the brewer himself stated the beer was not very good, and that he would have scored it as a 28 (BJCP).
nope, not a scientist, and neither are the people tasting his beer I presume. We’re just plain old beer drinkers, what would we know.
Interesting. What method did you use? The established method given by Original GBF member Roachbrau is shown below:
used c20 and not carahell, since I didn’t have that on hand.
Don’t suppose it’s for everyone. It’s been said from the beginning - if you like the way you’re brewing now, no need to change. I can understand how you feel about people feeling it’s superior. For many beer styles? Maybe not “superior”. For German lagers? Prooooobably superior. Because that’s how they’re brewed nowadays and if you want that certain flavor profile, that’s how you get it.
I recall reading posts in the various LODO threads that high DO in wort can oxidize the flavor compounds we are trying to protect in a matter of minutes. Can that happen at various fermentation temps? Ales at 66-68F. Lagers at 46-52F.