Are People Still Using the Baker's Yeast Method?

[schematix]

A big part of tasting is educating your palette. If you don’t know what oxidation tastes like, how do you know if you’re tasting it?

Very common around here for people to say they can’t taste oxidation so they aren’t worried about it. More likely they are tasting it and just don’t know what the specific flavor elements that oxidation effects. Doesn’t make it not real though.

 

[lump42]

A big part of tasting is educating your palette. If you don’t know what oxidation tastes like, how do you know if you’re tasting it?

Very common around here for people to say they can’t taste oxidation so they aren’t worried about it. More likely they are tasting it and just don’t know what the specific flavor elements that oxidation effects. Doesn’t make it not real though.

It's important for both those that subscribe to LODO and those that don't to remember that just because it may make a perceivable difference doesn't mean that the LODO flavors are preferred. Some may prefer the slight oxidized malt characters.

It's unfortunate that some feel to go out of their way to attack a different method, especially in a sub forum dedicated to that topic. It's not like people are going into electric brewing forum and proclaiming the evils of electrical heating or that propane is better.

 

[brewbama]

A big part of tasting is educating your palette. If you don’t know what oxidation tastes like, how do you know if you’re tasting it?

Very common around here for people to say they can’t taste oxidation so they aren’t worried about it. More likely they are tasting it and just don’t know what the specific flavor elements that oxidation effects. Doesn’t make it not real though.

While oxidation is real (no doubt), if a brewer doesn’t taste it or doesn’t care about it, why would it matter to him/her? Those who can taste it, and don’t like it, should do something about it. c'est la vie.

 

[MSK_Chess]

I have pet fermentation vessels. I guess one of those orange caps would work. Would need racking cane, clamps, tubing, fittings for co2. I suppose I could underlet through the ball valve? I have co2 but my kegs are in storage . Modify kegs. kettles, etc. Thought you needed a seal-able kettle to add co2 instead of air when draining to the fermentation vessel. The small things would add up quickly.

PET is quite impermeable to oxygen I believe. Someone conducted a study and cited it but I cannot find it. Yes that's what I use an orange cap on a glass FV (I prefer glass to anything else) a tube, an acrylic 4mm straw that acts like the liquid out tube in a keg (my fermentation fridge isn't tall enough for kegs) and a stainless steel carbonation cap. Total cost without the glass FV about £12, like $18? If you purge the keg before from the fermentation, you don't need to push it through with Co2, it works in a perfect cycle, as the beer enters your keg with gravity it pushes the Co2 from the purged keg into the head space of the FV in a perfect cycle.

 

[kh54s10]

It's unfathomable to claim no degradation of a highly hopped beer that had no cold side O2 management.
Those who do must be the cohort who judge exbeeriments...

Cheers!

Directed to my reply? Didn't say none....

 

[day_trippr]

Not directed, inspired.
I see the "I don't do anything about cold-side O2 and my beer is never oxidized" sentiment used all the time.
It's a credibility destroyer...

Cheers!

 

[schematix]

While oxidation is real (no doubt), if a brewer doesn’t taste it or doesn’t care about it, why would it matter to him/her? Those who can taste it, and don’t like it, should do something about it. c'est la vie.

Well while you and I may agree oxidation is real, there are a ton of people out there who are outright deniers of it. Many of whom are Very loud, obnoxious, intrusive about it even.

I’ve always said low oxygen makes a very noticeable *difference* in the product. Maybe not everyone is as sensitive to it, but many of us are very in tune with it.

I don’t claim it’s universally *better* because there is such a thing as personal taste preference. Also some people may not perceive the additional time and equipment, however minimal it is, to be worth it to them.

 

[hopjuice_71]

Not directed, inspired.
I see the "I don't do anything about cold-side O2 and my beer is never oxidized" sentiment used all the time.
It's a credibility destroyer...

Cheers!

To be fair, I'm not sure I really get the sentiment expressed as this. I get a "I do it this way [insert method with no cold-side O2 management] and I still make good beer" sentiment. I know what you mean though.

Just to give a counterpoint to this (and to my own preferences!) one person's "degradation" may be another person's normal, yet pleasurable, evolution of a highly hopped beer. I prefer to have my last pour from a keg be the same as the first pour. However, prior to adopting LODO on the cold-side, I had batches of highly hopped beer that changed over time. In fact, the "oops" batch I mentioned in my earlier post that was accidentally oxidized on the cold-side experienced degradation over time relative to its sister half that was packaged correctly. The "oops" half, though, changed quite pleasantly, evolving from having a noticeable dankness through a different variety of fruity and/or citrus qualities that came and went. I was disappointed because this was the indicator of my personal failure in technique. But to everyone else who drank the beer on several different occasions, they very much enjoyed it and weren't bothered in the slightest by the "degradation". I admit, It didn't last long enough to become a completely lifeless beer, as it probably would have, but it was still enjoyable. So, I actually feel that people can make good, tasty beer, just different beer, without any LODO methods.

On this note, I have found this to be one of the most civil threads on what has historically been a very polarizing topic. I have, in the past, avoided all discussion of it. The people here seem to have adopted the attitude that LODO, however deep you opt to go, is just another approach to twiddle the flavour dials (or increase shelf-life..which in my house rarely matters ).

Cheers

 

[Bilsch]

It's important for both those that subscribe to LODO and those that don't to remember that just because it may make a perceivable difference doesn't mean that the LODO flavors are preferred. Some may prefer the slight oxidized malt characters.

That's gotta be the case or about 31 of the 33 craft brewers in my town would be out of business.

 

[kh54s10]

Not directed, inspired.
I see the "I don't do anything about cold-side O2 and my beer is never oxidized" sentiment used all the time.
It's a credibility destroyer...

Cheers!

Well while you and I may agree oxidation is real, there are a ton of people out there who are outright deniers of it. Many of whom are Very loud, obnoxious, intrusive about it even.

I’ve always said low oxygen makes a very noticeable *difference* in the product. Maybe not everyone is as sensitive to it, but many of us are very in tune with it.

I don’t claim it’s universally *better* because there is such a thing as personal taste preference. Also some people may not perceive the additional time and equipment, however minimal it is, to be worth it to them.

Here are 2 examples of the LODO crowd putting across the feeling of looking down on me because LODO is not that important to me at this this time. I might even say snobbery!

 

[Bilsch]

It's unfortunate but this seems to be where lodo threads always end up.

 

[day_trippr]

With respect, that's a chicken **** response to a real paradigm...

Cheers! (and I didn't write "poopy" )

 

[lump42]

It's unfortunate but this seems to be where lodo threads always end up.

What's that back there? An honest question about an unorthodox technique. I believe something about using baker's yeast to scavenge oxygen. Oh nevermind we're past useful discussions and teleported to drunken rambling and mindless mumblings.

 

[mongoose33]

A friend of mine has a palate to die for. Well, maybe not that, but it's able to perceive things my palate cannot.

I'm not as sensitive to some flavors as others are. My friend commented once on an Apricot beer, lamenting that they'd used Apricot extract instead of real Apricots. When I tasted the beer, I couldn't detect Apricot at all. Neither could another friend. But there it was, on the label.

There's a middle ground here where nobody should feel offended, and it's surprising to me that some people are so invested in their process--on both sides, btw--that they cannot seem to perceive that middle ground.

1. Oxidation is a thing. Science doesn't lie.

2. Not everybody can perceive the results of oxidation.

3. Some might perceive the results of oxidation and, due to personal preference, prefer that flavor.

4. LODO processes can enhance malt flavors. On the cold side, LODO can preserve hop flavor and aroma. Not all can perceive this, nor is it always something some might see as desirable.

5. If the results of oxidation--on either hot or cold side or both--are minor, how minor, and is it worth the hassle of LODO brewing? That depends on one's values and goals.

6. Some have tried the results of German brewers and indicated they didn't care for it. Fair enough.

7. There are those who have done LODO brewing, think enough of the results to continue to do it, and refine the process. This should bother no one.

 

[schematix]

^^^ how that's looking down on anyone doesn't make sense to me.

But some people take it that way....

 

[kh54s10]

mongoose33, Well said.

I jumped in on this when it was said that HBT is anti - LODO. That was too broad a statement for me. I am one who cannot perceive small amounts of oxidation, and have no desire to try LODO. I do not think that people who do it are nuts, nor do it think those who don't are either.

I guess there are too many that have to chime in on either side as one is nuts and the other is not......

 

[kh54s10]

schematix said: ↑
Well while you and I may agree oxidation is real, there are a ton of people out there who are outright deniers of it. Many of whom are Very loud, obnoxious, intrusive about it even.

I’ve always said low oxygen makes a very noticeable *difference* in the product. Maybe not everyone is as sensitive to it, but many of us are very in tune with it.

I don’t claim it’s universally *better* because there is such a thing as personal taste preference. Also some people may not perceive the additional time and equipment, however minimal it is, to be worth it to them.

Here are 2 examples of the LODO crowd putting across the feeling of looking down on me because LODO is not that important to me at this this time. I might even say snobbery!

I must apologize to schematix. I misread his response and thought he was saying that it is universally better and that those who don't LODO are making an inferior product even if it meets the individuals criteria.

The other quoted, on the other hand.....

 

[hopjuice_71]

A friend of mine has a palate to die for. Well, maybe not that, but it's able to perceive things my palate cannot.

I'm not as sensitive to some flavors as others are. My friend commented once on an Apricot beer, lamenting that they'd used Apricot extract instead of real Apricots. When I tasted the beer, I couldn't detect Apricot at all. Neither could another friend. But there it was, on the label.

There's a middle ground here where nobody should feel offended, and it's surprising to me that some people are so invested in their process--on both sides, btw--that they cannot seem to perceive that middle ground.

1. Oxidation is a thing. Science doesn't lie.

2. Not everybody can perceive the results of oxidation.

3. Some might perceive the results of oxidation and, due to personal preference, prefer that flavor.

4. LODO processes can enhance malt flavors. On the cold side, LODO can preserve hop flavor and aroma. Not all can perceive this, nor is it always something some might see as desirable.

5. If the results of oxidation--on either hot or cold side or both--are minor, how minor, and is it worth the hassle of LODO brewing? That depends on one's values and goals.

6. Some have tried the results of German brewers and indicated they didn't care for it. Fair enough.

7. There are those who have done LODO brewing, think enough of the results to continue to do it, and refine the process. This should bother no one.

A very nice post - well said indeed.

 

[lump42]

A friend of mine has a palate to die for. Well, maybe not that, but it's able to perceive things my palate cannot.

I'm not as sensitive to some flavors as others are. My friend commented once on an Apricot beer, lamenting that they'd used Apricot extract instead of real Apricots. When I tasted the beer, I couldn't detect Apricot at all. Neither could another friend. But there it was, on the label.

There's a middle ground here where nobody should feel offended, and it's surprising to me that some people are so invested in their process--on both sides, btw--that they cannot seem to perceive that middle ground.

1. Oxidation is a thing. Science doesn't lie.

2. Not everybody can perceive the results of oxidation.

3. Some might perceive the results of oxidation and, due to personal preference, prefer that flavor.

4. LODO processes can enhance malt flavors. On the cold side, LODO can preserve hop flavor and aroma. Not all can perceive this, nor is it always something some might see as desirable.

5. If the results of oxidation--on either hot or cold side or both--are minor, how minor, and is it worth the hassle of LODO brewing? That depends on one's values and goals.

6. Some have tried the results of German brewers and indicated they didn't care for it. Fair enough.

7. There are those who have done LODO brewing, think enough of the results to continue to do it, and refine the process. This should bother no one.

I agree with most of this except #4. By claiming LODO can enhance (to improve) flavors, it indicates that it is better than others. LODO might help prevent the malt character compounds from becoming oxidized, but doesn't improve flavors. That would disregard an individuals preferences. Just trying to keep things objective.

Brew on

 

[mongoose33]

I agree with most of this except #4. By claiming LODO can enhance (to improve) flavors, it indicates that it is better than others. LODO might help prevent the malt character compounds from becoming oxidized, but doesn't improve flavors.

Well, maybe, maybe not. I have seen it do that, and while it may be a perceptual thing, the effect is there. Whether you think it "enhances" the flavors, well, I do agree, that's up to you to decide. As for me, I've seen it do that. Or tasted it do that.

 

[MSK_Chess]

I agree with most of this except #4. By claiming LODO can enhance (to improve) flavors, it indicates that it is better than others. LODO might help prevent the malt character compounds from becoming oxidized, but doesn't improve flavors. That would disregard an individuals preferences. Just trying to keep things objective.

Brew on

Actually its super interesting. The fascinating thing is that it has in my opinion a LODO approach has a profound effect on the taste perception of other styles of beers too, not just German styles. I brew mainly Pale Ales myself and I have found that as I applied the techniques my ales became lighter and crisper and took on an almost Pilsner like quality. I was dry hopping them too with 10-15g/g of hops, First Gold, EKG, Progress, Styrian Goldings, Fuggles etc and I certainly think them a vast improvement on the British style pale ales I used to brew and could never go back. Does it enhance flavour perception, I would honestly have to say yes, I think it does. But I do like crisp hoppy beers. The point i am trying to make is I doubt very much you could get the same kind of pale ales using conventional methodology.

At present I am brewing a Citra/Mosiac lager, a kind of Lager/IPA hybrid and I think the LODO techniques will certainly lend itself very well to the idea I had in my mind.

 

[lump42]

Well, maybe, maybe not. I have seen it do that, and while it may be a perceptual thing, the effect is there. Whether you think it "enhances" the flavors, well, I do agree, that's up to you to decide. As for me, I've seen it do that. Or tasted it do that.

I wasn't saying that you don't perceive an improved flavor or that there wasn't an effect. Just the previous points were objective and that if one can perceive the change, they may not prefer it and then on #4 you switched to a subjective opinion.

 

[cyberbackpacker]

#4 is still objective... enhance does not necessarily have to just mean a subjective "improve" but a more specific and objective "increased or intensified" quality.

The subjective part is only whether one enjoys greater malt character, hop character, etc.

 

[day_trippr]

Excuse me while I whip this out

The weather here was a "feels like 100°F+" day hence I didn't want to do the pre-boil thing, so I gave the yeast thing a try. I used 1.5g per gallon of both bakers yeast and corn sugar for my 20 gallons of brewing liquor, plus a bit of cacl and mgso4, gave the kettle a good stir, lidded it and left it for two hours.

I don't have an O2 meter currently (returned the last one, unimpressed with its performance, and haven't decided on another yet) so I have no real idea how well it worked - but I have my suspicion that it didn't work well, as today the mash smelled like a classic non-LoDO mash smells, and that hasn't been happening since I started pre-boiling batches early this year.

I'm wondering if the time factor needs to scale along with the yeast/sugar vs volume. It isn't clear from the LoDO site - seems stuck on small scale experimental results.

So, anyone out there with a DO meter that has tried the yeast thing on that large a volume of water? Or even half that volume?

Cheers!

 

[Bilsch]

What do you mean by larger? When I did the initial testing the small test batches worked just the same as the larger 8 gallon ones. Two hours should have been more then enough and I'm pretty sure unless your yeast was dead, it removed the oxygen from your water.

 

[lump42]

#4 is still objective... enhance does not necessarily have to just mean a subjective "improve" but a more specific and objective "increased or intensified" quality.

The subjective part is only whether one enjoys greater malt character, hop character, etc.

It may have other definitions; however with no other context, it is left to the reader to figure out which way was meant. I was just trying to provide clarification since the other points were clearly objective and that point left it open to interpretation.

 

[Iseneye]

I'm restraining myself from a rant here but I have seen two "LODO doesn't make a difference" posters on this forum state in the last few days that one has been brewing all grain less than a year, and one doesn't do pH adjustments. I would suggest that posters like that are not in a position to comment on whether LODO makes a difference.

 

[lump42]

I'm restraining myself from a rant here but I have seen two "LODO doesn't make a difference" posters on this forum state in the last few days that one has been brewing all grain less than a year, and one doesn't do pH adjustments. I would suggest that posters like that are not in a position to comment on whether LODO makes a difference.

I would hardly think anyone here can discredit other's opinions passed on their choice of brewing practices.

 

[schematix]

I would hardly think anyone here can discredit other's opinions passed on their choice of brewing practices.

Let's review facts vs opinion

Opinion is: low oxygen makes better beer than traditionally espoused home brewing practices.
Fact is: low oxygen makes a different beer than traditionally espoused home brewing practices.

If one states that the process doesn't make a difference, then they are clear ignorant to the process.

adjective
adjective: ignorant

1. lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular.

 

[kh54s10]

I'm restraining myself from a rant here but I have seen two "LODO doesn't make a difference" posters on this forum state in the last few days that one has been brewing all grain less than a year, and one doesn't do pH adjustments. I would suggest that posters like that are not in a position to comment on whether LODO makes a difference.

I am the one who hasn't taken pH readings. I didn't say that LODO doesn't make a difference. My thought was "Is the difference worth the investment and hassle?" My average beer to me is better than most of the mid priced commercial beers. And that is without ever having taken a pH reading... YMMV

 

[lump42]

I am the one who hasn't taken pH readings. I didn't say that LODO doesn't make a difference. My thought was "Is the difference worth the investment and hassle?" My average beer to me is better than most of the mid priced commercial beers. And that is without ever having taken a pH reading... YMMV

I'm there with you. I've never bothered with any water chemistry other than neutralising chlorine/chloramine. Even kettle sours I run by taste not pH. My water is part of the terroir of my brewhouse.

I agree the potential results of LODO don't seem to be worth my efforts.

 

[hopjuice_71]

And this is a problem. Despite what you believe to be an absolute truth or, at the very least, most true to you, it is important to understand, and respect, that this may not be the case for everyone (yes, I'm Canadian). Sounds like bleeding heart tripe, but there is no way that anyone on this planet can have absolute certainty about their correctness about anything. For the record, I 100% adhere to the fact that LODO results in a different product - I have experienced it myself - I can seen why people like it, but I happen to not care for it (earlier post in this thread), so I can at least understand why others may not wish to go through the not completely trivial effort of pursuing it.

 

[schematix]

And this is a problem. Despite what you believe to be an absolute truth or, at the very least, most true to you, it is important to understand, and respect, that this may not be the case for everyone (yes, I'm Canadian). Sounds like bleeding heart tripe, but there is no way that anyone on this planet can have absolute certainty about their correctness about anything. For the record, I 100% adhere to the fact that LODO results in a different product - I have experienced it myself - I can seen why people like it, but I happen to not care for it (earlier post in this thread), so I can at least understand why others may not wish to go through the not completely trivial effort of pursuing it.

This isn't a philosophical debate about whether we can really be certain about anything.

It's about comments like this:

Lodo is superstition. Brew your beer the normal way as it has been done for thousands of years. Dont fall for the scientology lodo nonsense.

Pointless, snarky comments that are only meant to stir **** up. It doesn't add value to anything.

 

[lump42]

Why must people who are not even qualified, stick around make the topic go backwards? Why do people who have no interest in ever trying and or caring continue to look and talk about it?

This, I will never understand.

What makes you more qualified to way in on the topic than anyone else? Since when did a dissenting view make a topic go backwards? This assumes there is a direction that the topic needs to go. If every conversation was just to reaffirm someones theories and opinions than no real progress is made. If no one is critically looking over an idea how is it to improve?

Just because we don't see the cost:benefit doesn't mean we don't care...

This isn't a philosophical debate about whether we can really be certain about anything.

It's about comments like this:



Pointless, snarky comments that are only meant to stir poopy up. It doesn't add value to anything.

I agree that Jay's comment was not helpful and only helped shut any productive conversation down. It's no different than when any other brewing technique or process (batch sparge, BIAB, no sparge, water chemistry, etc.) was new and people looked down upon it. I have no issue with those that wish to pursue LODO brewing. I've never been an early adopter. If I ever take up LODO, it will likely be after it is widely accepted and more importantly the all the homebrew level kinks are worked out.

 

[schematix]

What makes you more qualified to way in on the topic than anyone else?

 

[corax]

Since when did a dissenting view make a topic go backwards?

It depends on the dissenting view, and how it is presented. If it is well-reasoned and novel, or it provides evidence in support of the dissent, then it is more than welcome, IMO.

But if it's just snarky BS, or resurrects views that have been debunked a thousand times before, then it's just useless noise.

 

[lump42]

It depends on the dissenting view, and how it is presented. If it is well-reasoned and novel, or it provides evidence in support of the dissent, then it is more than welcome, IMO.

But if it's just snarky BS, or resurrects views that have been debunked a thousand times before, then it's just useless noise.

Just as an consenting view can bring nothing or detract from a topic depending on how it is presented. If you push away dissenting views without any reasoning or objective evidence, it doesn't help any conversation either. Snarky BS on either side of a topic don't help, and are best ignored. Dismissing views because you feel they've been 'debunked' doesn't help move the topic in any meaningful way.

I have no problem with the idea of LODO. I agree Jay's comment calling it superstition is useless noise and frankly could be construed as an offensive religious remark against Scientology. But implying that those how don't prescribe to LODO are wrong because we don't see the value in the efforts is just as much a problem. I don't have much time to brew, so I don't see the any added effort and steps as a benefit to beer I already brew and enjoy.

 

[lump42]

That read harsher than I intended. In my past experience, those that openly tout their qualifications and claim to be experts rarely are. Excluding people from a conversation rarely helps it.

 

[schematix]

That read harsher than I intended. In my past experience, those that openly tout their qualifications and claim to be experts rarely are. Excluding people from a conversation rarely helps it.

You may wish to figure out who Die_Beerery is and correct your comment questioning his qualifications.

 

[corax]

But implying that those how don't prescribe to LODO are wrong because we don't see the value in the efforts is just as much a problem.

First, not seeing value in the effort is not a dissenting view. It's a perfectly good reason for not putting in the effort.

Second, I don't see many people here making that implication. In fact, I've seen quite a few bending over backwards to avoid even the appearance of such an implication.