Priming sugar added to secondary

I'm confused. What are we arguing about?

If it about so2 in beer. I know there is so2 in beer. HOWEVER when beer is allowed to completely ferment, and more so in the case of a beer using a diacetyl rest. All those glorious sulfur compounds are expelled out of the beer. AA alone is a super oxidizer. If you add AA alone it will start the chain reactions of staling compounds. Therefor all the commercial beer antioxidants utilize some form of sulfites with them, to stop the super oxidation and actually help.
http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/uncategorized/list-of-brewing-references/
scroll about 3/4ths of the way down to antioxidants here on my blog.

 

The sulfur is expelled...but not completely. Yes, the ascorbic acid must be added quickly or it won't help, but as Bamforth said in your link, "
The presence of SOD in barley and malt is probably sufficient to prevent hydroxyl development during germination and to minimize its occurrence during kilning and mashing."
and
"Ascorbic acid. This widely used scavenger of the superoxide radical (17) when added at 12 mg/L increased the resistance-tostaling value (RSV) of the lager from 219 to 318. (Ascorbic acid may also scavenge hydroxyl ion [2])."

Anyway...barley is not grapes and most of the staling reaction will occur in wine not beer.
Best to avoid needing the ascorbic acid in the first place. Cheers

 

Awesome resources/links page, man! Thanks for linking that.

 

That was a good read. Thanks, man! Good to have a refresher on these topics once in a while.

 

Sorry, but I can't agree with you here. There has never been a beer you (proverbial) have tasted in your life that hasn't been oxidized. Oxidation is not all sherry are cardboard, oxidation is ANY loss of brewery fresh flavor. Oxidation in the brewhouse (hot and cold side) is a wickedly expansive subject.
I'll start with a little known factoid as its always food for thought. The co2 you (proverbial) use to force carbonate your beer has enough o2 in it alone to stale the beer!

 

I will agree with the latter...as for the former, you must be trying to keep your beer on a shelf for years...It's all relative...nothing to worry about for even the most meticulous homebrewer...rdwahahb

 

No, it's not like that. All you have to do to test is naturally carb one beer and force carb the other and you will taste the immediate differences. It's cool you don't want to worry about it, I totally get it. However that doesn't make it untrue. The pro's shoot for a 9 month shelf life, and most of the time fail at that, and they use cutting edge technology and much purer co2 than the average homebrewer can get.

 

I would certainly agree with this sentiment, but the worrisome aspect of it for me is that there are a great deal of professional brewers using homebrewing techniques, but on a larger scale, and preaching to drink fresh (and local) beer. What does that say about the future of the brewing profession when a great deal of brewers don't properly understand these types of subjects?

 

I guess thats my biggest beef. I was a homebrewer for 15 years or so before I got some schooling, studied my ass off, read all the reference material and started learning and doing professional brewing so I totally get it, for real, I DO. Now conversely, I don't use hardly any "homebrewing" methods, but have adapted professional brewing methods into my homebrewed beers and the end result is fantastic and never been better.

My beef lies with pro's that were homebrewers, and are now saying the proven science doesn't matter. It's like reading webmd and then diagnosing people saying you know more than doctors.

 

Good analogy. The response that I hate is "I make good enough beer with how I'm doing it now." I figure that even if you don't have the money to upgrade your setup, you should at least recognize that your product could be better if you changed some things. It's just an openness to advancements, in my mind.

 

To further my beef, most of the time... It's never capital required, it's literally just process. i.e. purge your brite tank better or transfer to packaging better. It's exactly that, be open to advancements. I consult a lot around here and everywhere, and people think it is just this overwhelming thing to change something, when most of the time the hardest part is stubbornness. My tipping point is we have always done it this way.

 

Are you saying that the forced carb beer will be noticeably oxidized and not as good? If so, my experience/taste buds tell me different. Since we are on the subject of "my biggest beef", mine is the plethora of new commercial brewers on a home brewing forum that confuse new brewers in the hobby to think that there is some magic bullet to brewing good beer other than solid home brewing procedures and practices.
For the record, kegging with forced carbonation, imho, is probably the easiest way for a home brewer to increase the quality of their brew. Rant complete

 

Examples? Serious question.

 

Yes...names have been removed to protect the innocent
Over the years, there have been many. I can only think of a couple, currently...and even those sometimes provide good information...although not usually for home brewers. I'm sure there are some out there that don't like emoticons and multiple periods also
Cheers

 

This one is even better: "The way I do it <insert half-assed process here> is a best practice. I know this because I make great beer."

 

I know this is waaay off OP, but I align with GreenKrusty101 where some of the pro comments just aren't relevant to the scale of homebrewing. For me, personally, I do like to review the latest gadget or technique, but my focus has been to try and execute my current process as close to perfect as possible. If I can just execute my current process well on my brew days, which due to the constraints of beer consumption is hit or miss, (mostly hit!), I generally make good beer.