Well, then I’ll bow out of this. I apologize for what I thought was an attempt at humor. I’ll keep my opinions to myself, unlike everyone else here.
I think it was time for that one to end, yeah. This shouldn’t be a personal thing…I guess artists and scientists get that way about the craft they’re passionate about. Let’s keep this civilized.
I saw your humor, Denny, but it really doesn’t hit the right spots when so much negativity has been voiced on both sides regarding low oxygen to this point.
One last post I guess…I have no negativity toward any person. After reading about the process, I have no desire to try it. If anyone wants to try it, more power to them. I hold no animosity towards those who do…I’m too old to make something like this personal, and I’m surprised and a bit hurt that people take it like that. The only thing that sets me off is implications that those who eschew the process can’t taste or don’t like good beer, or that it the only way to make good beer. I hope that doesn’t come off as antagonistic, because I’m only trying to clarify what I see as misinterpretations of my opinions.
I understand, Denny. I think we’re all growing and maturing as this progresses, I know I am. Sometimes it takes a while to see one side or the other clearly, and you may have fallen smack dab in the middle, like I feel sometimes…
Everyone’s opinion on how little they desire to try a new method has been stated - clearly and often. The rest, I think, would enjoy continuing the conversation.
To me it comes down to diminishing returns. Though IMO not yet proven, for the sake of making a point let’s say that LODO does improve beer. By how much?
For example: I really enjoy a particular $8 bottle of wine. When I shop for wine a have the choice of a full range of prices from which to choose. But is a $16 bottle twice as good? No. Is a $400 bottle exponentially better? No. They might actually be better, but at what cost? Am I willing to pay double for an increase in quality of 5%? No.
For me, as is by now overly obvious, I see no compelling reason to add LODO to my process. That may change as more info comes out, but I am doubting it. I will watch from the sidelines.
You’re a hop guy, no? APA and the like? That may be worth it for you alone.
Last night I thought about this as I brewed. I think I’ve been lowerish oxygen brewing for a while. I heat my mash water before adding grain. That drops the O2 somewhat. I make an aluminum cap (with drain holes) for my mash/Sparge because my mash tun is a SS kettle with recirculation. I stir as needed but not excessively. I pump it to the BK without much splashing. I boil everything 60 min (thanks to Marshall’s DMS xBeerment). I chill rapidly and transfer to fermenter without much splashing. I pitch after oxygenation but immediately after. I purge my kegs before and after transfer. I don’t use SO2 but since last spring I’ve been using brewtan B in mash and boil in my light colored lagers.
I still have copper. I’ve heard several authorities, like Bamforth, say that it’s good to have some copper.
I pitch yeast that is in exponential growth phase.
I think there is room for improvement, it’s not like all of my beers are 50s. But most of them are as good or better than most of what I can find commercial around here.
I might try some SO2 someday. I recall Bamforth saying it could help with flavor stability and that most commercial breweries who don’t use it, don’t use it because they would have to label it as containing sulfide. If I recall correctly… it was a Brew Strong interview and been a long time since I’ve heard it.
In short, I don’t doubt that limiting, or even completely removing oxygen, starting with the grain in the sack, all the way through to pitching yeast, would have a positive impact. I mean, what’s the argument for the need for oxygen in the mash or boil? Is it the BEST way? Technically, I suppose it is. But couldn’t we argue that technically, the LODO method isn’t BEST either, since there still is “some” oxygen? If we want to get really pedantic about it the BEST way would be to brew in an oxygen free environment. But who wants to spend brew day in an SCBA? Not to mention we would need to go electric because propane needs oxygen to burn.
I agree with limiting oxygen where you can and to the level that is reasonable for YOUR equipment and budget.
I am, but not totally. My favorite beer on tap right now is an American Brown Ale. Tremendous depth of malt flavors, with an excellent though subdued hop finish. I alternate, but my two favorite styles are Stouts and IPAs. I have a nice IPA on tap now too, its flaw is not enough bitterness for the style, but does have excellent hop flavors and aromas.
But more to your point, I am still watching from the sidelines. I have not washed my hands of LODO.
Understood. You can’t ask for better position. Unsure without negativity.
Although, my current process is not as Low DO as it could be, I have noticed gradual improvements as I took steps to reduce DO. I brew a lot of IPAs. Lower DO seems to have produced brighter flavors at the time of tapping. The flavor and aroma is stronger 1-2 months later compared to when I didn’t do much to reduce DO. I recall many times when the higher DO beer was quite hoppy for a week and then it went down hill quickly. That doesn’t happen with the lower DO beer.
My typical IPA schedule is 14 days in the primary. 3-5 days dry hop. 14 days slow keg carbonation. Some people have drunk their entire batch before mine even gets tapped. Perhaps low DO would benefit them less?
Sometimes, I don’t try to reduce DO at all. The beer is still drinkable and enjoyable, but the first week after tapping I usually wish I put forth a little more effort.
I’ve noticed the exact same on the APA I just did lodo. I often end up adding extra hops to the keg as the aroma drops off in American styles, but in this beer, the aroma persisted NOTICEABLY longer. No extra hops needed for the keg. Can’t wait to brew my upcoming IPA in this style. Gotta say, as someone who’s tried it and sees definite results (to my palate), I just think it’s a shame that the info presented got buried under all the noise of insults and negativity. Try it or don’t - it’s literally that simple.
One thing I’m absolutely certain of is a low(er) DO approach to hoppy beer won’t make it worse in terms of hop flavor, aroma and longevity. The noticeable difference in hop longevity is what made me a believer.
Anytime someone has a brewing technique they claim is somehow “better” than what other people use to get results they clearly enjoy, there will be some naysayers. However, I don’t know how someone could reliably determine a different process is invalid without trying it a few times with an open mind. If someone thinks their beer can’t be improved, then I guess whatever technique they use is the “best” according to them.
I have no interest in arguing what brewing technique is the best. Arguing about subjective topics accomplishes nothing.
Low DO isn’t a new concept. I appreciate that someone made the effort to put it all on one website for homebrewers. There are a few more things I could do to reduce DO that I didn’t consider before visiting the website. Maybe I will do them. Maybe I won’t. I still appreciate the information.
I’ve tried the mini mash, and I didn’t notice a ground breaking, or even preferable difference. Am I right or wrong, who fucking cares? the important thing is we stop with the “this is the only way to make good beer” nonsense.
and when I say that, I am referring to comments such as
“I just want to point out that low oxygen brewing IS the best way to brew.”
Comments like this should mean nothing to someone who is 100% satisfied with the beer they make. It doesn’t matter what technique you use if you are 100% satisfied and don’t think your beer can be improved. If this applies to you, then sleep well knowing the low DO people work harder to make beer that isn’t as good as yours. 
Many homebrewers have a big problem with the word best. Try to accept what is best for one person is not best for another. One million homebrewers can claim they make better beer than me. 95% of them are wrong.
- a billionty and eleven
I look at it this way: I live in central NY. My in laws live in Albany. There are many ways to get to Albany from where I live but THE BEST way is the NYS Thruway. Hands down. Now that doesn’t make someone who takes a different route a bad person or a bad driver. It just means that if they want to improve their drive, the NYS Thruway would be the route to go.
to follow this metaphor, I took this route and didn’t notice much of a difference. In fact the roadway was less preferable than other routes.