I am only posting MY EXPERIENCE with hydro and soil. I love hydro but soil has a better taste to me. I am not here to do a freakin pepsi test. If thats what u want to do then join a pepsi forum and swallow away. I STICK TO ME STORY.....
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
do you really loose flavor in hydro ???
- Thread starter acidlexxx
- Start date
I am only posting MY EXPERIENCE with hydro and soil. I love hydro but soil has a better taste to me. I am not here to do a freakin pepsi test. If thats what u want to do then join a pepsi forum and swallow away. I STICK TO ME STORY.....
No it doesn't get lost.. it gets tainted by people overfeeding hydro nutes.
It's still in there.
It's still in there.
CaptainTrips
Active member
Then doing a blind test should be no problem... and you should have no problem blindly identifying with 100% accuracy which bud was hydro, and which bud was grown in soil. Of coarse every time labels disappear this tends to not happen at all...
R
RNDZL
or perhaps they are fooled by my improper use of big plants
but if you want to sword fight im taking out mine, you best back it up and take out yours
BTW, those are hand watered in an uncontrolled unaugmented environment in the least efficient lighting and substrate that the grow game has to offer, and its no where near my best work and effort but the 9 week Columbian sativa bag seed that I saved in the late 90's that creeps up after 15 and gets your heart pumping, it does the trick
I guess it means absolutely shit that ive been there and done that, time and again on my own terms, spreading the seed and living the dream regardless of the man, well before the internet was a tool for me to use as shortcut to doing it on ones own
PS notice the natural and controlled defoliation that open bud sites without the need of cutting a leaf
notice the flower forcing in promix cutting the maturation period without the need to use a hydroponic to assure a meter and even nutrient water and oxygen mixture
notice the amount of budsites relative bud structure and surface area that can support the greatest amount of resin for that amount of biomass without having spaces and gaps in the colas
keep in mind too 98% of the plants I show have the lowers dusted for seed so the energy isnt all there to make buds
I can post dro grows too
i know the real deal about hydro vs soil organic.inorganic cause ive been using those techniques successfully for 20 years
not saying im anything special but i sure as shit have a resume to post
lets see yours
i have value to contribute and if anyone wants to contest it lets get it our here and now and be done with it
Either man up or shut up
R
RNDZL
A short snippet on the measurement of flavor in smoke by the tobacco industry
I think you can make some reasonable deductions based on the article, such as if monitoring flavor so it can be gaged to measure the results of manipulation that manipulation on some level exists
Real-time measurement of flavour release and persistence from cigarette smoke using APCI-MS.
The real-time measurement of cigarette smoke was carried out using APCI-MS to understand the effects of tobacco types and smoker interactions on the flavour release and persistence of cigarette smoke in the nose. Five tobacco types and one blend were made into cigarettes which were smoked by up to four volunteers following a standard smoking protocol and also by using a single port smoking machine (ISO smoking method). During smoking, five ions were monitored in the nosespace using APCI-MS in SIM mode.
The different temporal release (puff by puff) profiles obtained between machine and human smoking from the six cigarettes used in this study can be explained according to the properties of tobacco types (composition, filling values, burn rate), smoking behaviour (puff volume, puff duration, puff interval), breathing patterns (depth, flow, duration, breath-hold), physiology aspects and the properties of smoke aerosol and its behaviour during respiration.
The short-term persistence (or aftertaste) of cigarette smoke was also monitored in between each puff separated by a 1 minute interval. The smoke aerosol monitored in the nosespace during smoking showed different decay rates on a puff by puff and compounds (ions) basis. The trend showed that the decay rates increased in function of the puff number.
It is possible to monitor flavour release and persistence from complex matrices such as cigarette smoke in real-time using APCI-MS. This method may be useful to develop cigarettes generating optimum flavour release in the nose during smoking and flavour persistence post-smoking. The limits of the method reside in the use of SIM mode allowing the measurement of few ions at a time in order to maintain a high sensitivity. Many parameters influence the flavour release and persistence of tobacco smoke in the nose. Therefore, in order to remove the release variations from different smoking behaviours and breathing patterns, the use of a Smoking Behaviour Analyser and partial body plethysmograph attached to a spirometer is recommended in future studies using APCI-MS.
1. British American Tobacco, Group R&D Centre, Regents Park Road, Southampton SO15 8TL, UK.
2. Division of Food Sciences, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Loughborough, UK.
CORESTA
I think you can make some reasonable deductions based on the article, such as if monitoring flavor so it can be gaged to measure the results of manipulation that manipulation on some level exists
Real-time measurement of flavour release and persistence from cigarette smoke using APCI-MS.
The real-time measurement of cigarette smoke was carried out using APCI-MS to understand the effects of tobacco types and smoker interactions on the flavour release and persistence of cigarette smoke in the nose. Five tobacco types and one blend were made into cigarettes which were smoked by up to four volunteers following a standard smoking protocol and also by using a single port smoking machine (ISO smoking method). During smoking, five ions were monitored in the nosespace using APCI-MS in SIM mode.
The different temporal release (puff by puff) profiles obtained between machine and human smoking from the six cigarettes used in this study can be explained according to the properties of tobacco types (composition, filling values, burn rate), smoking behaviour (puff volume, puff duration, puff interval), breathing patterns (depth, flow, duration, breath-hold), physiology aspects and the properties of smoke aerosol and its behaviour during respiration.
The short-term persistence (or aftertaste) of cigarette smoke was also monitored in between each puff separated by a 1 minute interval. The smoke aerosol monitored in the nosespace during smoking showed different decay rates on a puff by puff and compounds (ions) basis. The trend showed that the decay rates increased in function of the puff number.
It is possible to monitor flavour release and persistence from complex matrices such as cigarette smoke in real-time using APCI-MS. This method may be useful to develop cigarettes generating optimum flavour release in the nose during smoking and flavour persistence post-smoking. The limits of the method reside in the use of SIM mode allowing the measurement of few ions at a time in order to maintain a high sensitivity. Many parameters influence the flavour release and persistence of tobacco smoke in the nose. Therefore, in order to remove the release variations from different smoking behaviours and breathing patterns, the use of a Smoking Behaviour Analyser and partial body plethysmograph attached to a spirometer is recommended in future studies using APCI-MS.
1. British American Tobacco, Group R&D Centre, Regents Park Road, Southampton SO15 8TL, UK.
2. Division of Food Sciences, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Loughborough, UK.
CORESTA
R
RNDZL
I think perhaps the taste differences are more negligible for some than others due to human biology
I do not want to argue a loss of the power of smell in hydro, because based on the fact it is a more effective way to optimize plant health, it should in essence assure healthy secondary metabolites in plants
this does not mean that there is no influence on the matrix of smells by grow method
the most powerful experiential testimony I can share is that I have grown the same cut as a friend several times over, same nutes, same medium, same method
EVERY TIME
different tasting pot, not worlds different, but noticeably different to us (yes we could differentiate)
now he had city water and I did not and back then I treated water as if it were for aquarium life neutralizing metals and removing chlorine.
I do not want to argue a loss of the power of smell in hydro, because based on the fact it is a more effective way to optimize plant health, it should in essence assure healthy secondary metabolites in plants
this does not mean that there is no influence on the matrix of smells by grow method
the most powerful experiential testimony I can share is that I have grown the same cut as a friend several times over, same nutes, same medium, same method
EVERY TIME
different tasting pot, not worlds different, but noticeably different to us (yes we could differentiate)
now he had city water and I did not and back then I treated water as if it were for aquarium life neutralizing metals and removing chlorine.
This thread has undergone considerable clean up to remove posts by individuals trolling one another instead of participating in the discussion at hand.
Most of the removed posts were nothing more than member to member trolling and abusive in nature and some were just member replies to same.
Please accept my apologies if yours was one of the deleted, but it was required to maintain civil continuity of this discussion. Please don't ask me why,
complain about it, or even post about the clean up in this thread, as it's NOT part of this threads topic and WILL be removed with possible negative consequences.
tia
ps... very interesting reading
Most of the removed posts were nothing more than member to member trolling and abusive in nature and some were just member replies to same.
Please accept my apologies if yours was one of the deleted, but it was required to maintain civil continuity of this discussion. Please don't ask me why,
complain about it, or even post about the clean up in this thread, as it's NOT part of this threads topic and WILL be removed with possible negative consequences.
tia
ps... very interesting reading
Last edited:
R
RNDZL
funny how serendipitous information can be
this is a user report on GH Floranectar
it was on the front page staring me in the eye
Now I do have some suspicions as to what is actually influencing tastes, although I have not used their sweet
In my grows I have noticed that the bloom boosters or synthetic carb sources that influence taste and promote a balanced micro environment for optimized resin production have some common ingredients
the one that come to mind most often: Amino Acids, Humic.Fulvic and other acids such as citric. I am leaning to acidic properties (or perhaps it has to be specific acids) in the rhizoshere influencing the spectrum of nutrient uptake
its a guess, a basic epiphany I had when I read Lolagals report
I haven't tried to research that observation for validity
kinda funny that if its correct that in essence have to dose the rhizosphere of the plant to make the resin trip us harder :0
this is a user report on GH Floranectar
it was on the front page staring me in the eye
Now I do have some suspicions as to what is actually influencing tastes, although I have not used their sweet
In my grows I have noticed that the bloom boosters or synthetic carb sources that influence taste and promote a balanced micro environment for optimized resin production have some common ingredients
the one that come to mind most often: Amino Acids, Humic.Fulvic and other acids such as citric. I am leaning to acidic properties (or perhaps it has to be specific acids) in the rhizoshere influencing the spectrum of nutrient uptake
its a guess, a basic epiphany I had when I read Lolagals report
I haven't tried to research that observation for validity
kinda funny that if its correct that in essence have to dose the rhizosphere of the plant to make the resin trip us harder :0
VERY NICE PLANT MAN, YOU GET AROUND 10 OZ FROM THIS PLANT?
thefalsediviner
Member
RNDZL- when we introduce or withhold componds to or from the rhizosphere of the plant are we manipulating the genetically predisposed cannabiniods or are we adding new compounds?
Part of my problem with the whole idea of flavor manipulation is the changing or addition to the compounds that we subject to fire and inhale. One thing we can learn from the cigarette industry is that flavor or otherwise enhanced cigarettes are far more dangerous than a plain cured tobacco cigarette.
Another issue I'm having is that these studies that note changes in terpenes, and terpenoids, don't mention if there were any new compounds present or if other preexisting compounds were significantly altered, saturation levels or otherwise. Which, leaves the door open to the possibility that a new compound may have been present. In addition, the levels of compounds other than terpenes, and terpenoids may have changed.
TFD
Part of my problem with the whole idea of flavor manipulation is the changing or addition to the compounds that we subject to fire and inhale. One thing we can learn from the cigarette industry is that flavor or otherwise enhanced cigarettes are far more dangerous than a plain cured tobacco cigarette.
Another issue I'm having is that these studies that note changes in terpenes, and terpenoids, don't mention if there were any new compounds present or if other preexisting compounds were significantly altered, saturation levels or otherwise. Which, leaves the door open to the possibility that a new compound may have been present. In addition, the levels of compounds other than terpenes, and terpenoids may have changed.
TFD
R
RNDZL
excellent question. I will try to answer in an economy of words.
I think that in the comparison of growing techniques the real variables we are ignoring are what is being fed to the plant.
It seems that the indoor MJ horticulture trent has been to eliminate only but the bare essential and regulate all the environmental factors.
Compared to a organic garden that has all the soil web components, my interpretation is that the plants are given a wider spectrum of nutrition. NOW, for primary metabolites, this offers the plant the same as what it is being fed in a hydro system using macro.micro nutes
BUT the secondary metabolites, which are environmentally influenced as well, are not fully understood. I believe that also some rhizosphere interactions may have interactive cause and effect
BUT please let me point out, that the possibility to manipulate terpenoids, isn't manipulating them past genetic predisposition
its merely using the environment conditions that do influence the balance of secondary metabolites, which in a garden fed simple macro.micro nutes may be different than a garden given additional rhizoshpere compatible components, such as humics, bacterial, and other components of the soil web.
Which factors effect which traits to which effect? I do not know
Which is better? so far i cant find any evidence that there is more than personal preference to taste that is a differential
another excellent point, an absolutely I agree no adulterated pot to enhance flavor
I am simply stating that the in the difference between gardens fed base nutrients and ones fed a full spectrum nutrients the plant has adapted to interact with are where the factors of "safe" if not more than "preferential" manipulation is possible
and is it manipulation or simply a greater understanding of plant health as titanically science reveals more of natures secrets?
agreed, they are simply ways to open our collective minds to perhaps apply the same concepts for the future observations of the same phenomenon in similar circumstance
The fact that you can succeed without a granular understanding of any facet of plant health is common in this industry
But I truthfully fear that legalization will level the playing field and much success will be undermined by the agricultural professionals
If we can simply bridge the differential in education, coupled with our experience before this happens
heads will cement their their rightful place in a world they helped create
R
RNDZL
is "manipulating" flavor simply easing the facilitation of optimal plant health by offering more facets of the soil web??
here is an interesting snippet on floralicious in response to altering flavor in plants
The commercial hydroponic product "Floralicious" promoted as "enhances flavor" & boosts "complex secondary aromatic compounds" is not available everywhere ( I worked in Asia 2 years).
It includes 2% humic acid, which has a cation exchange capacity (CEC) +/- 10 times greater than normally found; chelated multiple (++) charged trace mineral ions get more uptake with improved membrane permiability.
If you take the leachate (distinct from aerobic brewed worm casting "tea") from worm bins' drainage run off this has humic acid (as would the tea). The leachate pH can be 7+ ; make sure bin conditions have not gone anaerobic.
Alternately, if you have soft shale (or soft lignite/leonardite) you can bring up the pH to 6.5 - 8.0 (say 25% sodium bicarbonate, or less if use lye/sodium hdroxide) to soak it crushed for 2 days agitated in water (say 50%) to get humic acid into solution & then precipitate the unwanted elements.
In N. Thailand (Chiang Mai was sleepy in mid-1980s) you might only have decaying fresh water drift wood to chop up & work with; the guideline is if that old tree carbon's soak water stains yellow you've got humic acid. When working with hard water it will require more source substrate & soft water dissolves the humic acid more readily. (The carbonates affect the process & alkaline/hard water classification is not the same as a solution's pH reading.)
Always highly dilute humic acid, because an excess of the plant growth hormones it carries can diminish N,P,K uptake.
Another ingredient of the de-" licious" product is a soil organism to regulate root microbial population & keep the undesireables away; it is bacterial innoculation with Bacillus subtilis.
Bacillus subtilis encompases a wide choice of varieties. Apart from the beneficial human medical implications of different strains, it is commonly living in one form or another in the soil. The USDA maintains a culture bank of freeze dried strains in vials for the public & many universities around the world will be experimenting it. (Scientific supply companies sell cultures of it to secondary school classes for students to learn how to culture benign bacteria in a petri dish with soy broth nutrient.)
As for the other components:
hydrolysed protein is meals of blood (say 50%) , fish bone (say 50%) & poultry feather (say 20%) individually dissolved in enough citric acid ( say 50% each extraction) to lower the pH to free their nitrogen (not as nitrate); seaweed (washed) is the multiple trace minerals source; & mannitol (a long chain carbohydrate, such as those found in mushrooms) is a "sugar" for the bacterial growth that acts acidic to help balance the pH.
here is an interesting snippet on floralicious in response to altering flavor in plants
The commercial hydroponic product "Floralicious" promoted as "enhances flavor" & boosts "complex secondary aromatic compounds" is not available everywhere ( I worked in Asia 2 years).
It includes 2% humic acid, which has a cation exchange capacity (CEC) +/- 10 times greater than normally found; chelated multiple (++) charged trace mineral ions get more uptake with improved membrane permiability.
If you take the leachate (distinct from aerobic brewed worm casting "tea") from worm bins' drainage run off this has humic acid (as would the tea). The leachate pH can be 7+ ; make sure bin conditions have not gone anaerobic.
Alternately, if you have soft shale (or soft lignite/leonardite) you can bring up the pH to 6.5 - 8.0 (say 25% sodium bicarbonate, or less if use lye/sodium hdroxide) to soak it crushed for 2 days agitated in water (say 50%) to get humic acid into solution & then precipitate the unwanted elements.
In N. Thailand (Chiang Mai was sleepy in mid-1980s) you might only have decaying fresh water drift wood to chop up & work with; the guideline is if that old tree carbon's soak water stains yellow you've got humic acid. When working with hard water it will require more source substrate & soft water dissolves the humic acid more readily. (The carbonates affect the process & alkaline/hard water classification is not the same as a solution's pH reading.)
Always highly dilute humic acid, because an excess of the plant growth hormones it carries can diminish N,P,K uptake.
Another ingredient of the de-" licious" product is a soil organism to regulate root microbial population & keep the undesireables away; it is bacterial innoculation with Bacillus subtilis.
Bacillus subtilis encompases a wide choice of varieties. Apart from the beneficial human medical implications of different strains, it is commonly living in one form or another in the soil. The USDA maintains a culture bank of freeze dried strains in vials for the public & many universities around the world will be experimenting it. (Scientific supply companies sell cultures of it to secondary school classes for students to learn how to culture benign bacteria in a petri dish with soy broth nutrient.)
As for the other components:
hydrolysed protein is meals of blood (say 50%) , fish bone (say 50%) & poultry feather (say 20%) individually dissolved in enough citric acid ( say 50% each extraction) to lower the pH to free their nitrogen (not as nitrate); seaweed (washed) is the multiple trace minerals source; & mannitol (a long chain carbohydrate, such as those found in mushrooms) is a "sugar" for the bacterial growth that acts acidic to help balance the pH.
thefalsediviner
Member
Ok, let me take a stab at some of this on, as a soil vs hydroponics thing.
I think that when we talk about biologically active soil we have the reality that the processes involved in maximizing that biology is accessible to relatively novice growers. I think that given a reasonable amount of care and a proper nutrient schedule you can achieve a great quality smoke. So for soil I think that the window of opportunity is wide open, but with a limited ceiling.
In hydroponics the rhizosphere is so sensitive to change that you have to be cautious with organic material. The other thing in hydro that is sensitive to change is the reservoir ph, ppms, organic matter, anaerobic pathogens you name it. The other factor that jacks the situation with hydro is that nutrients returning from the rhizosphere to the reservoir have changed therefor changing the conditions in the reservoir.
I think this can be solved by isolating the reservoir from the factors that degrade the nutrients solution. Thusly, providing the opportunity to bio-activate the reservoir in a consistent manner. Then you can deliver this to the rhizosphere in an infinitely controllable manner. Which leads me to believe that the ceiling on hydro innovations is a long ways away. That said, these innovations are not likely going to arrive in a bottle, it will arrive in a mechanical change akin to the addition of dissolved oxygen. Bottom line I think that the potential to produce tastier weed really lies in hydroponics.
TFD
I think that when we talk about biologically active soil we have the reality that the processes involved in maximizing that biology is accessible to relatively novice growers. I think that given a reasonable amount of care and a proper nutrient schedule you can achieve a great quality smoke. So for soil I think that the window of opportunity is wide open, but with a limited ceiling.
In hydroponics the rhizosphere is so sensitive to change that you have to be cautious with organic material. The other thing in hydro that is sensitive to change is the reservoir ph, ppms, organic matter, anaerobic pathogens you name it. The other factor that jacks the situation with hydro is that nutrients returning from the rhizosphere to the reservoir have changed therefor changing the conditions in the reservoir.
I think this can be solved by isolating the reservoir from the factors that degrade the nutrients solution. Thusly, providing the opportunity to bio-activate the reservoir in a consistent manner. Then you can deliver this to the rhizosphere in an infinitely controllable manner. Which leads me to believe that the ceiling on hydro innovations is a long ways away. That said, these innovations are not likely going to arrive in a bottle, it will arrive in a mechanical change akin to the addition of dissolved oxygen. Bottom line I think that the potential to produce tastier weed really lies in hydroponics.
TFD
Last edited:
With that being said, do you believe the hydro has that ability now?
thefalsediviner
Member
Right now I think that it is easier for the majority of the growing population to get the quality taste results in soil. I think that the current hydro methods produce the same quality taste results for minority of growers with the added ability to yield more. Part of that ,I think, is it is initially harder for new hydro growers to not over do it with their nutrient solutions. Which often results in raising the level of volatility within there system. I blame the hype driven marketing climate for nutrients and additives.
The short answer is that the technology probably already exists but has yet to be applied in a manner that the masses can duplicate as novices.
TFD
The short answer is that the technology probably already exists but has yet to be applied in a manner that the masses can duplicate as novices.
TFD
First I agree that regardless of the method used, both methods are capable of producing Cannabis that the growers say are the best flavor. If you think it is best for you it is hard to argue with that.
I admit I favor bio-dynamic organic in the ground, and have for over 40 years.
I want to ask all the hydro growers have you ever tasted fruit or vegetables grown with hydro that you thought were better then the best soil grown? Does hydro also yield more then soil for vegetables and fruit? Why is it not the normal way to grow vegetables and fruit? If it tastes better, smells better, yields more and is faster, why are not all fruit and vegetables grown via hydro? Besides the carbon footprint.
-SamS
I admit I favor bio-dynamic organic in the ground, and have for over 40 years.
I want to ask all the hydro growers have you ever tasted fruit or vegetables grown with hydro that you thought were better then the best soil grown? Does hydro also yield more then soil for vegetables and fruit? Why is it not the normal way to grow vegetables and fruit? If it tastes better, smells better, yields more and is faster, why are not all fruit and vegetables grown via hydro? Besides the carbon footprint.
-SamS
superultramega
Member
A great deal of what you buy in the produce section of your grocery store is hydroponically grown. The farm grown vegetables are not the quality to be sold as fresh produce. They go into other prepared foods. Tomatoes and lettuce are prime examples of this.
I don't know where you are from but nearby the Salinas Valley nothing is grown Hydro, I see lettuce and tomatoes grown in the ground, also in the ground in greenhouses.
Here in the Netherlands tomatoes are mostly grown with rockwool, in greenhouses.
Of the 50,000 acres of hydro production worldwide only 1,200 are found in the USA, why do you think the amount is so low? If it is cheaper, faster, better, why not more commercial production? Are the farmers just stupid?
USDA says 309,607,601 acres of harvested cropland, the amount of hydro is so small as to be insignificant, why?
I can understand why some people unfamiliar with soil farming or for other reasons could prefer Hydro, but then why don't mainstream framers embrace Hydro if it so much better?
BTW, I don't buy any hydro veggies or fruit, I grow my own heirloom tomatoes in the earth, over 100 plants this year.
I want to see grains like rice, wheat, barley, millet, sorghum, oats, rye, even corn grown hydro, do you think it will be cheaper, better? I don't. What about trees that live for years?
Really I do think an experienced Hydro farmer can get great flavors, but I also think there is a strong temptation to make it grow faster, bigger, maybe at the expense of quality, if the emphasis is faster, bigger instead of searching for what is best.
-SamS
Here in the Netherlands tomatoes are mostly grown with rockwool, in greenhouses.
Of the 50,000 acres of hydro production worldwide only 1,200 are found in the USA, why do you think the amount is so low? If it is cheaper, faster, better, why not more commercial production? Are the farmers just stupid?
USDA says 309,607,601 acres of harvested cropland, the amount of hydro is so small as to be insignificant, why?
I can understand why some people unfamiliar with soil farming or for other reasons could prefer Hydro, but then why don't mainstream framers embrace Hydro if it so much better?
BTW, I don't buy any hydro veggies or fruit, I grow my own heirloom tomatoes in the earth, over 100 plants this year.
I want to see grains like rice, wheat, barley, millet, sorghum, oats, rye, even corn grown hydro, do you think it will be cheaper, better? I don't. What about trees that live for years?
Really I do think an experienced Hydro farmer can get great flavors, but I also think there is a strong temptation to make it grow faster, bigger, maybe at the expense of quality, if the emphasis is faster, bigger instead of searching for what is best.
-SamS
