Fermaid "K", or Fermaid "O" - for high abv sugar wash.

[Right Lightning]

After I did a couple of ferments using the "idiot-proof" turbo yeast, I was ready to move on. My current 25l batch (#3), started out on 6kg sugar & 30g of fermax, with 60g of red star dady pitched into it, followed by 30min aeration. Twenty 4hrs later, another 2kg of sugar & 15g of fermax went in. Today (48hrs later), the final 15g fermax will go in, at the point when I notice that activity is JUST beginning to decline. Would it be good, or NOT good, to also aerate at that time? Also, do my quantities of dady and fermax seem about "right"?

Back to topic, I have read that fermaid K contains about 15% more DAP than fermax. So at first I figured that when I run out of my stock of fermax, next time I would go with fermaid K. But then I got thrown for a loop when I read about fermaid O, which does not contain any DAP. Supposedly the claim is that DAP stresses yeast in a manor that causes it to produce ethyl acetate (acetone), which obviously is something I want to keep to an absolute minimum. I understand that DAP is the ingredient that is supposed to supply the yeast with most of the nitrogen that it requires. But the makers of fermaid O claim that it provides all of the nitrogen that is needed, without using any DAP.

If those claims are true, does that mean that fermaid O would be the best of the 3, to use for sugar-only washes?

[acfixer69]

Since you are not looking for anything that tastes good or smooth why not just stay with the turbo

AC

[Right Lightning]

Man, I hope you can bare with me here, as receiving an answer in the form of another question does tend to distract my thought processes. But in fairness, I'll make an attempt to get your question answered, if that's what needs to come first. I seemed to always be getting into "trouble" up until my last post, and couldn't for the life of me, figure out what the "problem" was. I felt as if I was painting myself tighter and tighter into a corner, and could not find the "escape hatch". But thanks to having my friend Jeff review the last thread that I got into trouble on, and give me HIS assessment on what's causing the problem, let's just say that the shine goggles fell right off of my face! Now I will only submit un-shined posts. At least until I receive the feeling that things are starting to"flow" better, anyways.

Although it sounds like I will probably have a difficult time convincing you (and probably others also), I actually do have an interest in ending up with a product that is as close to fully neutral as can be, for sugar wash. It just isn't one of the biggest concerns that is going through my head - at THIS point in time. I'm finding that there is almost an unlimited amount of variables that need to be taken into consideration, when it comes to fermentation. But I am only able to get a handle on things if I can deal with just a few of them, at the same time.

If that answer wasn't good enough, here are some more simplistic [but 100% true] ones:

1. The turbo blends run a considerably higher price tag than what is acceptable to me.

2. The turbo blends don't seem to list exactly how much of what they are composed of, which again is not really acceptable to me. For someone's first batch, I absolutely recommend it, to avoid pitfalls such as a hung ferment. But now that I consider myself past that, I want to able to have control over exactly how much of everything that goes into the wash. And that can only happen by KNOWING exactly what you are putting into it. To me at this time, that's where turbo doesn't make the cut.

I realize that each of the nutrient formulations has it's own amounts of various ingredients in it, disallowing "complete" control. But for me, they represent the logical next step, that I wouldn't feel comfortable skipping over.

The question seems to be pretty simple at first: Of the 3 mentioned, which produces the best results on (heavy) sugar washes? And by results, what I mean is which one (& how much, also) gets the highest percentage of the sugar converted, while getting the lowest percentage of it converted into non-ethonolic substances. I would prefer if the fermentation is completed within 7 days.

Or is it more complicated than that? What I am thinking, is would one of them be preferable at the start phase (when growing the colony up), and a different one preferable for the finishing out phase (when the ethanol level is highest)?

[bellybuster]

I think you keep running up against friction here is because everything you're talking about has already been tried and proven to be a poor way to go about creating a good neutral or even a good drink at all. Some of the guys here have been perfecting neutrals for 30 or more years in a logical manner. The wheel has already been invented, you just need to take advantage of it.
If you want to make a great true neutral you must start with a neutral wash. That doesn't mean adding a whole lot of stuff, it also doesn't mean fermenting a high as possible ABV. You will never, ever get a great neutral by going high ABV.
Have you even tried any of the simple washes in the tried and true section? I have and I can tell you with certainty that they will create a true neutral if distilled and fermented properly. Devoid of smell or flavour.

The question seems to be pretty simple at first: Of the 3 mentioned, which produces the best results on (heavy) sugar washes? And by results, what I mean is which one (& how much, also) gets the highest percentage of the sugar converted, while getting the lowest percentage of it converted into non-ethonolic substances. I would prefer if the fermentation is completed within 7 days.

this right here shows that you haven't grasped the concept quite yet.

[bellybuster]

what exactly are you using for a still??

[rad14701]

Think Quality, not Quantity... You can't have both in this hobby...