Why Hydro Kicks Dirt's Ass ?

ImAgIaNtInDaGrOwWoRlD

Active Member
Soil all the way for me. Cant beat the taste. Hydro may give bigger yields but it wont have that little something extra in the taste department.
I smoke for the taste. Not just for the high. I dont care what strain it is. If its grown right organically then its good ass smoke. If its done right organically outside then nothing can touch the taste.
 

MajorCoco

Well-Known Member
it is not necessary to bubble a reservoir usually, and will freak out an organic one. Air actually only enters the water as dissolved 02 when the surface is broken, not by the bubbles in the water. Return flow form a flood and drain will dissolve much more 02 than a large bubbler in four hours.
That isn't correct. While I don't do hydro, I do do physics. (and I think Sodastream might argue with you too, given their entire business model was based on the principle of bubbling gas through water to make it carbonated)
The amount of gas that gets dissolved into water depends primarily on the surface area of water which is in contact with air (ignoring temperature). This is why bubblers work. The bubbles massively increase the amount of water surface which is in contact with air. Bubblers are bad for organics mainly because they introduce too much DO, and encourage too much bacterial growth, which feeds on the non-mineral stuff like sugar and vegetation which is mixed in with most organic nutrient sources. This overpopulation leads to creation of lots of nasty by-products, which causes the sludgy foam that people usually see.

I'm not denying that you can introduce plenty of oxygen to your water by using fountains etc, or that this might be the best solution in your grow set-up (I've seen Heathcliff's amazing pseudo-DWC grow, and he didn't need a bubbler because his water cascaded down the pipes) but advising people that bubblers are not an effective way of getting O2 into water in a reservoir just isn't right I'm afraid.
 

forgetiwashere

Well-Known Member
hydro boy all the way. nothing comes close. i normally grow rdwc but im growing coco right now drain to waste and it is much slower for the same result. soil is a pain.
and i can tell you now if your hydro tastes shit your doing it wrong (or whoever grew it was).

i guarantee you i could put my cmh grown hydro next to some nice organic outdoor and while im sure you could tell the difference i doubt you could tell me which is better.
the main reason "hydro" generally tastes bad etc is because of the way it is grown. you see so many people running over the top e.c values and pumping all sorts of pgr's etc into there weed.

i grow low e.c with very few additives and under a cmh light which adds more flavour and smell imo and my buds are beautiful to smoke

600ppm all the way through flower.





yum!!
 

pharmacoping

Active Member
That isn't correct. While I don't do hydro, I do do physics. (and I think Sodastream might argue with you too, given their entire business model was based on the principle of bubbling gas through water to make it carbonated)
The amount of gas that gets dissolved into water depends primarily on the surface area of water which is in contact with air (ignoring temperature). This is why bubblers work. The bubbles massively increase the amount of water surface which is in contact with air. Bubblers are bad for organics mainly because they introduce too much DO, and encourage too much bacterial growth, which feeds on the non-mineral stuff like sugar and vegetation which is mixed in with most organic nutrient sources. This overpopulation leads to creation of lots of nasty by-products, which causes the sludgy foam that people usually see.

I'm not denying that you can introduce plenty of oxygen to your water by using fountains etc, or that this might be the best solution in your grow set-up (I've seen Heathcliff's amazing pseudo-DWC grow, and he didn't need a bubbler because his water cascaded down the pipes) but advising people that bubblers are not an effective way of getting O2 into water in a reservoir just isn't right I'm afraid.
other than the fact that the :gas: was co2, not oxygen, with different principals, ....

we just agreed, and with that knowledge, you can see that the bubble add the o2 to the water...when it breaks the surface, and a fountain breaks more surface area than a bubble, and a bucket full of rocks/roots, with water cascading through it, as well as the cappilary action, or vacuum created by the water draining from the rock filled bucket, we both see the the oxygen enriched water. My point was to express the detriment of bubbling organic reservoirs.

I have constant 02 monitoring and have derived this information first hand. I also have read of it, and the four hour test. I bubble also, for the extra 02, and because I love the sound of that little hot pump !
 

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
That isn't correct. While I don't do hydro, I do do physics. (and I think Sodastream might argue with you too, given their entire business model was based on the principle of bubbling gas through water to make it carbonated)
The amount of gas that gets dissolved into water depends primarily on the surface area of water which is in contact with air (ignoring temperature). This is why bubblers work. The bubbles massively increase the amount of water surface which is in contact with air. Bubblers are bad for organics mainly because they introduce too much DO, and encourage too much bacterial growth, which feeds on the non-mineral stuff like sugar and vegetation which is mixed in with most organic nutrient sources. This overpopulation leads to creation of lots of nasty by-products, which causes the sludgy foam that people usually see.

I'm not denying that you can introduce plenty of oxygen to your water by using fountains etc, or that this might be the best solution in your grow set-up (I've seen Heathcliff's amazing pseudo-DWC grow, and he didn't need a bubbler because his water cascaded down the pipes) but advising people that bubblers are not an effective way of getting O2 into water in a reservoir just isn't right I'm afraid.
NFT is the simple more productive answer .. a good balance of nutrients and oxygen can be achieved
since the lower roots in an nft system sit in a very shallow stream of nutrient solution, the upper roots sit in air
very little motion is needed to oxygenate the nutrient solution, bubbles are not needed to produce very large fast growing healthy plants

i really wonder why so many folk bother with DWC
having roots sitting constantly in deep water is not a good idea imo, all the energy that is required to bubble up the water
to compensate for this seems silly, just don't put them in deep water in the first place, that is just common sense lol

peace :)
 

pharmacoping

Active Member
NFT=difficult for many, especially those who don't realize it's hydroponics also.
DWC= very simple, even for those who dont realize, it's hydroponics too.
 

MajorCoco

Well-Known Member
other than the fact that the :gas: was co2, not oxygen, with different principals, ....

we just agreed, and with that knowledge, you can see that the bubble add the o2 to the water...when it breaks the surface, and a fountain breaks more surface area than a bubble, and a bucket full of rocks/roots, with water cascading through it, as well as the cappilary action, or vacuum created by the water draining from the rock filled bucket, we both see the the oxygen enriched water. My point was to express the detriment of bubbling organic reservoirs.

I have constant 02 monitoring and have derived this information first hand. I also have read of it, and the four hour test. I bubble also, for the extra 02, and because I love the sound of that little hot pump !
Hmmm, ok. I'm not arguing, since we both agree that there are lots of easy ways to get O2 into water...but...I'll add this in case you are interested in the detail...like I apparently am ;)

Most gas is actually dissolved when the bubble is first created, near the airstone, rather than when it gets to the surface. Technically, from the water's point of view it makes no difference if the "air/water" interface is at the top, or at the bottom of the container, so you are of course correct that it is when the surface is broken that most transfer happens, just that the surface can be anywhere we want it to be, unlike with a fountain.
There isn't much good scientific documentation on the subject, but here is one paper:http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1063&context=usarmyresearch
It's a bit dry, but the key quote is:
"The result indicated that about one-third of the oxygen absorption in this tank test was due to surface exchange and two-thirds was absorbed from the bubble plume."

As I said though. I'm not trying to start something here...just reporting what I've read.


Sorry. My friends have all stopped arguing with me in the pub ever since they invented google... :(
 

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
NFT=difficult for many, especially those who don't realize it's hydroponics also.
DWC= very simple, even for those who dont realize, it's hydroponics too.
it's funny m8, NFT can grow very large plants, fast with minimal cost and knowledge
no ceramic air stones needed , no float valves no return lines
just 1 single submersible pump , a slope some suitable pvc trays and a bit of knowledge can grow hundreds of plants with minimal cost using the NFT method

check this ghetto style outdoor NFT these guys built from scraps, minimal set up cost for very large productive systems, that really only require 1 pump and nothing else

[video=youtube;DzOiRY2iGmQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzOiRY2iGmQ[/video]
 

jayfury

Active Member
when you hand water/feed your coco, it's coco, and when you put an automatic waterer/feeder dripping into it, it becomes hydro, using coco as a substrate, like sand, pebbles, bark, wood chips, clay rocks, etc. hydroponic is growing soiless plants, and coco is not soil. I would venture to say that eye balling your feed/water worked out better than constantly trying to adjust your reservoir ph? hydro grows me 6 foot trees that rival outside harvest weights in my state. there are other variables suffering in your hydro grow most likely. automation didnt do it.

All my plants are over 6 ft tall, and I dont need to eyeball anything, I have a perfect system... I measure, mix, and feed... and I dunno about rivaling an outdoor grow.... The most I ever got off of one plant under one 1000 with CO2, AC, and using Advanced Nutes was 23 Oz dried.... Thats only @ a lb and a half.... Ive seen guys get 3-5 lbs dried from outdoor grows....
 

jayfury

Active Member
Coco huh? Interesting...how many plants under that 1000w? Do you have any pics? I dont know much about coco to be honest, but id like to

I do it one of 2 ways.... Im either putting 1 plant under a 1000, or 2 plants under a 1000... Either way Im getting the same @ 20 oz per 1000 watts... If its 2 plants, its usually @ 10 each.... Here are a few pics....
 

Attachments

pharmacoping

Active Member
awesome soiless set up ! thats almost 2 grams per watt of dried bud, which is the highest I've ever seen ! flowering schedule?
 

jayfury

Active Member
awesome soiless set up ! thats almost 2 grams per watt of dried bud, which is the highest I've ever seen ! flowering schedule?


20 Oz = (20 X's 28 Grams) = 560 Grams Dry.... Thats roughly .5 Gram per watt of dried bud... Its just about average from what Ive heard from other people... I dont think Im doing anything special... I WISH I got 2 grams per watt.... But that would be 2000 grams (which is 71 Oz Dried) or 4.5 lbs.... which is unheard of indoors under one thousand watts... lol... I know, your just a stoner like me... but u messed up severely on your math.. lol

Also, my flowering schedule is 8 weeks on everything.... Even if its a 9-10 week plant, I force it into an 8 week schedule... after 8 weeks, I flush for one week, then cut and dry....
 

ru4r34l

Well-Known Member
20 Oz = (20 X's 28 Grams) = 560 Grams Dry.... Thats roughly .5 Gram per watt of dried bud... Its just about average from what Ive heard from other people... I dont think Im doing anything special... I WISH I got 2 grams per watt.... But that would be 2000 grams (which is 71 Oz Dried) or 4.5 lbs.... which is unheard of indoors under one thousand watts... lol... I know, your just a stoner like me... but u messed up severely on your math.. lol

Also, my flowering schedule is 8 weeks on everything.... Even if its a 9-10 week plant, I force it into an 8 week schedule... after 8 weeks, I flush for one week, then cut and dry....
Good math but pushing everything to finish in 8 weeks seems like you are giving up the last two or so weeks of fina development.

I just harvested G13 Blueberry Gum at day 66 and it had amber tricomes and all but probably could have used another 10 days or so to finish.

regards,
 

Total Head

Well-Known Member
i'm extremely lazy. there, i said it.

i cannot be bothered with mixing nutes or checking ph and ppm and fucking with pumps and hoses and water levels and all that jazz. i mix up a hot hot organic soil and transplant into it when plants are about a foot tall. when they look dry, i give 'em some plain ol' water straight out of the tap. 9 weeks later i cut 'em down. the end.

i just so happen to get awesome pot this way. maybe hydro might yield more but i really don't give a fuck because it's just for me, and i can't see the point in going through all that bullshit for a few extra grams unless there's a profit to be had.

also pumps are loud. i hate that. between the fans and pumps and bubbling water a hydro grow sounds like an airport near a waterfall. i would also hate shitting a brick every time the power went out.

my way is also way cheaper. for 60 bucks i can get enough soil and amendments to grow about 20 plants from start to finish in 3 gallon pots.

i'm not saying my way is better, but it's sure as hell better for ME.
 

MixedMelodyMindBender

Active Member
75% of the Earth is covered in Water. In that water, a very vast and diverse plethora of plant species exist and have originated in water. IMO, hydroponic cultivation is NOT a form of manipulation. Its a form of evolution.

Science has proven that cannabis is a species that got its birth in a soil based environment. But science also tells us that this plant adepts and evolves unlike any other species of plant known to mankind.

Hydroponics is a very precise form of cultivation, whereas soil tends to be a very buffered form of cultivation. IMO, within that precision of hydroponics is where growers have proven hydro to be the better choice for cultivation in regards to cannabis.

With a exp. and precise grower I believe hydro will always oust soil grown cannabis in regards to potency and yield. I have however, yet to smoke any hydroponically grown cannabis that can hold a flame to properly grown organic soil cannabis. I know thats very subjective but thats the way it is with myself. Everyone is different and I can understand and respect why some people choice hydro grown over soil grown.

Lastly, IMO hydro tends to be the cannabis that is just never flushed enough/properly. With that, I would wager that more times than not, the reason why a hydro smoker feels higher is because of the tendency hydro grown plants have to retain leftover/builtup nuts/fertz/salts...which if smoked, I am sure gets you much higher than a properly/fully flushed soil grown cannabis .

I think threads like this are just another oz worth of proof that there are truly a zillion ways to skin the same cat and they all work for whom works them :)

Cheers World~
 

SlaveNoMore

Active Member
hydro boy all the way. nothing comes close. i normally grow rdwc but im growing coco right now drain to waste and it is much slower for the same result. soil is a pain.
and i can tell you now if your hydro tastes shit your doing it wrong (or whoever grew it was).

i guarantee you i could put my cmh grown hydro next to some nice organic outdoor and while im sure you could tell the difference i doubt you could tell me which is better.
the main reason "hydro" generally tastes bad etc is because of the way it is grown. you see so many people running over the top e.c values and pumping all sorts of pgr's etc into there weed.

i grow low e.c with very few additives and under a cmh light which adds more flavour and smell imo and my buds are beautiful to smoke

600ppm all the way through flower.





yum!!
Hi first post here,
After reading this gentleman's post I can't believe nobody caught on. He said 600ppm. This is one of the main keys in hydro that a lot of people don't realize. I see people run solutions at 1000, 1200, 1800 ppm which is just a huge waste of nutrients. This fellow knows his shit and I commend you sir!

Hydro vs. Soil. Depends on what you like. Hydro growers tend to be the ones that like to spend time with their grow and understand the fine nuances of growing. Each grow they fine tune and learn the plant and the various techniques at their disposal that better suit their goals. Hydro is a very "stylish" way of growing, by that I mean every hydro grower has their own way of doing things that better connects them to their passion. It moves from a craft to an art. Hydro guys like to "tinker" and get into the "zone" when they contemplate their next move whether it be to add something new, change ph, or whatever variable we like to mess with. It's just freaking fun.

This is not to say that soil growers aren't connected to their grow. A good soil grower will search high and low for the best ingredients available. They learn watering schedules and when deficiencies kick in and how to fix them and in the long run how to avoid them. Soil growers like to bring the outdoors indoors. Perhaps they feel it is more ethical to grow in a medium that the plant grows naturally in.

Either way it all depends on the grower and how they were indoctrinated into this endeavor. I have seen spectacular results either way.

I am dyed-in-the-wool hydro. In my opinion there is no better, cleaner, funner way to grow. Once a person gets over the mindset that you have to buy the most expensive solutions and additives and that there is a lot of hype out there then hydro is the most rewarding. I love instant gratification and hydro gives this to me. I can see the results of a change within 24-48 hours. I like learning the chemistry behind growing and if you take hydro seriously then it's imperative to know some chemistry. These are just some a few of the reasons I have chosen the hydro lifestyle.

However, my hats of to you guys that have your organic soil grows down to a science. I have never seen an organic hydro grow in my life though. I have seen people call hydro grows "organic" but they are not.

Organic vs. Inorganic. Sorry to break it to some of you but plants dont assimilate organic ions. Good organic growers understand this. Organic growers don't cultivate plants, they cultivate soil. The keep their "micro-beasties" happy which in turn keep their plants happy. In hydroponics we eliminate the micro-beasties and all that work is done in a lab.

The debate of taste and all that other nonsense is easily solved by what forgetiwashere said. Don't run so hot and learn how to flush properly. Treat flushing as if it were a feeding and no worries.

Really I could give two shits about how anyone grows as long as they are happy doing it. It is important though, to understand terminology if you want to debate the other side. Understand what hyro vs. soil means. And for Dog's sake learn what "organic" means.

Hydro 4 Life!
 
I agree with you mystic...while soil is a tad bit slower, it remains much more user friendly. Personally I believe its more natural, because cannabis originally was grown in the ground. Just because you CAN grow hydro, doesnt make it any better. If anything I think hydro is worse when comparing finished product to organic soil. Its very rare to find a hydro grower who takes the time to set his/her room up properly, dials in growing environment & conditions, and allows full developement followed by a full flush to ensure cleanliness of the ending product. So many times have I picked up some hydro, and I can still taste leftover chemicals. At the end of the day, I'll take soil; the slightly slower method, over hydro every time. Growing cannabis isnt a friggin race. Anyone who knows anything about puffin grade a will agree that organic soil tastes the best.
 
@marc88101 outdoor and soil is usually less expensive because the grower doesnt need to charge that much to make back his initial investment and some profit. think of all the electricity hydro requires in comparisson. now i thought this forum was talking about indoor organic soil vs indoor hydro..... expertly grown outdoor/greenhouse will be more potent and stankier than any hydro ever. you can use all the co2 and nutes you want, it still wont be as potent as properly grown outdoor/greenhouse organic cannabis. Lights used indoors get shit on by the natural sun
 

pharmacoping

Active Member
I personally run coco in airpots and LOVE it. But every pic or article I've ever read on professional/commercial grow ops in CA and CO are all using some form of hydro, aero or both. And yes, the CA dispensaries charge less for soil then they do for dro. I think I want to try rockwool slabs in dutch trays next. Just don't know if I want it to be a drip system or a flood/drain system. I may also consider a hempy style grow. Hempy growers seem to really love their systems and produce excellent results.
..

You're running an excellent combo of soiless medium, hand fed or automated, a fine example of hydroponics
 
Top