Big Monk
Trappist Please! 🍷
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2015
- Messages
- 2,192
- Reaction score
- 1,152
There was a prickly exchange earlier today between @Vale71 and myself.
I wanted to take a moment to address some points he made in order to maybe open a dialogue between myself and Him, but also others. I have a nagging suspicion that we may still be being subjected to harsh and undue criticism based on some folks opinions and experiences from past interactions.
I’m not posting this as a gotcha or to try and shame or belittle @Vale71. Quite the opposite in fact. My hope is that if I amicably address the points below, that maybe a fruitful dialogue may result.
Here were the points he laid out earlier:
1.) I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone in an admin position (myself and Die Beerery included) at our site and forum, or any of the contributing members from our forum who also post here regularly, ever say this. We are all usually pretty good about prefacing with the fact that all MACRO German breweries use low oxygen techniques, albeit not the exact ones we use because they have more sophisticated mechanical and physical means of doing so.
2.) Just to clarify, I think many have stepped away from the good/bad dichotomy. We certainly feel if you are trying to achieve the much lauded flavor of the German macro and large scale lager brewers, i.e. Weihenstephan, Ayinger, Auginstiner, Andechs, Paulaner, Hofbräu, etc., that these methods will help you nail the flavor. And frankly, what most homebrewers are striving for WRT German lager, is just that subset of beers. People are often looking for the missing piece to get them there and low oxygen techniques, we feel, are the ones to do it. With that said, if you feel you are making excellent lagers, or any other beer for that matter, then that’s fine as well. Only the individual brewer can judge whether they are where they want to be or not.
3.) I don’t think this is true at all and I’m not sure where this is coming from. Taste is subjective and if people like what they brew then there’s nothing wrong with their beer.
4.) I don’t think this is a fair assessment. We use specially tailored “hacks” to force a sort of equilibrium between our breweries and large macro breweries. Same effect but different techniques. I do not think there is anything disingenuous about that. Macro breweries don’t use sulfites, mash caps and preboil/YOS and we don’t have wet mills, stripping columns and large vessels with square/cube law on our side. Different logistics, vessels, equipment, etc. but same outcome.
5.) I get what you are trying to convey here but I don’t agree. I think we feel the overall quality and flavor stability is superior evidenced by longer lasting fresh grain flavors, hop aroma and flavor, less boil stress and oxidative reaction color pickup, etc. I’m not sure your assessment captures, even remotely, anything close to the true spirit of what we are trying to help people with.
1.) I’ll grant you that “Mom and Pop” regional breweries are all over the world are probably not working with state of the art, low oxygen brewhouses but I think you’d be surprised by how much what you described in this point, coupled with large vessels with the advantage of the square/cube law, helps with oxygen exclusion and overall improvements in flavor stability.
2.) It strikes me that you are simultaneously arguing for and against the preservation of fresh grain flavors, i.e. the distinct flavor of fresh German macro lager. If cold side oxidation prevention is the more important factor (and I think everyone can agree on its importance) in long term flavor preservation and shelf stability, then why would they bother with the hot side? I think the answer is more than stability.
3.) I think we can agree here, although not WRT to your nonsense comment. If you don’t have a handle of cold side practices and fermentation, then you should definitely not be worried about oxygen exclusion on the hot side.
4.) This is a straw man on multiple fronts. First, it is true many have had issues implementing some of the techniques. What you haven’t described is that along with the attempts came changes in process, equipment, etc. that threw some people multiple curveballs that they were unable to handle all at once. We have, for some time now, encouraged people not to become discouraged with results as they gear up and adapt to new processes. Frankly, this isn’t unlike going from extract to all grain. There are new concerns, new things to master, etc. Some, who decided to deviate from generally accepted practice, had mixed results. Some, who followed the process as described, also had mixed results. In the former case, many took that as an indictment of what we were proposing and suggesting and walked away. The latter case, many of whom still post here, at the AHA Forum, and our personal forum, stuck with it and treated those mixed results as growing pains. They stuck with it and have flourished. As far as your chemicals comment, we understand, very fully indeed, the mechanism by which they scavenge oxygen and reduce pH in the mash.
I hope none of this comes off as standoffish, defensive, etc. My goal is pleasant discourse, not a street fight.
I wanted to take a moment to address some points he made in order to maybe open a dialogue between myself and Him, but also others. I have a nagging suspicion that we may still be being subjected to harsh and undue criticism based on some folks opinions and experiences from past interactions.
I’m not posting this as a gotcha or to try and shame or belittle @Vale71. Quite the opposite in fact. My hope is that if I amicably address the points below, that maybe a fruitful dialogue may result.
Here were the points he laid out earlier:
Here is the list of lies that you're pandering in this and other threads:
1. All German breweries use LODO techniques.
2. Only through LODO can you make excellent German style beers.
3. If you don't use LODO your beer will invariably be of inferior quality because only LODO ensures a flawless product
4. Our techniques are effective in preventing hot-side oxidation as demonstrated by large commercial breweries using entirely different and for us unattainable techniques to mitigate hot-side oxygen ingress.
5. As a result of implementing LODO our beers are of much better quality. Because we say so and we and only we can be the judge of that. Because if you don't practice LODO yourself then you don't know what you're talking about and only need to shut up.
1.) I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone in an admin position (myself and Die Beerery included) at our site and forum, or any of the contributing members from our forum who also post here regularly, ever say this. We are all usually pretty good about prefacing with the fact that all MACRO German breweries use low oxygen techniques, albeit not the exact ones we use because they have more sophisticated mechanical and physical means of doing so.
2.) Just to clarify, I think many have stepped away from the good/bad dichotomy. We certainly feel if you are trying to achieve the much lauded flavor of the German macro and large scale lager brewers, i.e. Weihenstephan, Ayinger, Auginstiner, Andechs, Paulaner, Hofbräu, etc., that these methods will help you nail the flavor. And frankly, what most homebrewers are striving for WRT German lager, is just that subset of beers. People are often looking for the missing piece to get them there and low oxygen techniques, we feel, are the ones to do it. With that said, if you feel you are making excellent lagers, or any other beer for that matter, then that’s fine as well. Only the individual brewer can judge whether they are where they want to be or not.
3.) I don’t think this is true at all and I’m not sure where this is coming from. Taste is subjective and if people like what they brew then there’s nothing wrong with their beer.
4.) I don’t think this is a fair assessment. We use specially tailored “hacks” to force a sort of equilibrium between our breweries and large macro breweries. Same effect but different techniques. I do not think there is anything disingenuous about that. Macro breweries don’t use sulfites, mash caps and preboil/YOS and we don’t have wet mills, stripping columns and large vessels with square/cube law on our side. Different logistics, vessels, equipment, etc. but same outcome.
5.) I get what you are trying to convey here but I don’t agree. I think we feel the overall quality and flavor stability is superior evidenced by longer lasting fresh grain flavors, hop aroma and flavor, less boil stress and oxidative reaction color pickup, etc. I’m not sure your assessment captures, even remotely, anything close to the true spirit of what we are trying to help people with.
Here is the reality that you try to hide with your blatant lies:
1. Most breweries, German or otherwise located, don't use LODO techniques. Granted, modern brewhouses have done away with open lauter grants and wort and mash is transferred through inlets and outlets located at the bottom of vessels in order to avoid unnecessary splashing but that's about the extent of it.
2. Very large commercial breweries use expensive hot-side oxygen ingress mitigation techniques in order to attain a very stable product since they have very long distribution chains, meaning it could take several months before their product is finally consumed. They don't do it because otherwise their beer would be ruined from the get go as this is not the case with hot-side oxidation but only with cold-side oxidation.
3. Most homebrewed beers are severely affected by cold-side oxidation and poor fermentation practices, which are responsible for 99% of defects and poor product quality in general. These are the issues that homebrewers need to be addressing instead of wasting their time with your LODO nonsense.
4. Many a homebrewer has wasted his/her time with your nonsense and walked away in disgust at the poor quality of the product. Of course you will claim that this is because they have done something wrong and not because many of your techniques (such as treating brewing liquor with chemicals whose effects you don't really fully understand) are simply flawed.
1.) I’ll grant you that “Mom and Pop” regional breweries are all over the world are probably not working with state of the art, low oxygen brewhouses but I think you’d be surprised by how much what you described in this point, coupled with large vessels with the advantage of the square/cube law, helps with oxygen exclusion and overall improvements in flavor stability.
2.) It strikes me that you are simultaneously arguing for and against the preservation of fresh grain flavors, i.e. the distinct flavor of fresh German macro lager. If cold side oxidation prevention is the more important factor (and I think everyone can agree on its importance) in long term flavor preservation and shelf stability, then why would they bother with the hot side? I think the answer is more than stability.
3.) I think we can agree here, although not WRT to your nonsense comment. If you don’t have a handle of cold side practices and fermentation, then you should definitely not be worried about oxygen exclusion on the hot side.
4.) This is a straw man on multiple fronts. First, it is true many have had issues implementing some of the techniques. What you haven’t described is that along with the attempts came changes in process, equipment, etc. that threw some people multiple curveballs that they were unable to handle all at once. We have, for some time now, encouraged people not to become discouraged with results as they gear up and adapt to new processes. Frankly, this isn’t unlike going from extract to all grain. There are new concerns, new things to master, etc. Some, who decided to deviate from generally accepted practice, had mixed results. Some, who followed the process as described, also had mixed results. In the former case, many took that as an indictment of what we were proposing and suggesting and walked away. The latter case, many of whom still post here, at the AHA Forum, and our personal forum, stuck with it and treated those mixed results as growing pains. They stuck with it and have flourished. As far as your chemicals comment, we understand, very fully indeed, the mechanism by which they scavenge oxygen and reduce pH in the mash.
I hope none of this comes off as standoffish, defensive, etc. My goal is pleasant discourse, not a street fight.
Last edited: