JoeBlow5823
Well-Known Member
Part of the problem with that is i feel like the extra variables in hydro leads to a larger "spread" of quality. Minor mistakes in hydro can lead to shit bud. Minor mistakes in soil will likely not be noticed.
IS RDWC really better than soil? If so how?
- Thread starter Darknes01
- Start date
Nugg_Monkey
Member
Yeah that's possible and I can't argue that it doesn't.
However, blind bud testing should be a thing...I mean there are thousands of strains...I could watch the results of people smoking weed they've never tried for ages. There would be sooooo much data the community could learn from it.
Nugg_Monkey
Member
What the community lacks most is research on the effects. It could be like a census lol.
Nugg_Monkey
Member
Like check this out...only two vids that I can find on blind bud testing and they're both shit lol.
JoeBlow5823
Well-Known Member
Dude guessing strains smoking out of paper.........
And the sativa vs indica is just dumb. These people likely have no experience smoking weed on camera and are having all sorts of abnormal feelings.
Last edited:
Darknes01
Well-Known Member
Thank you all for chiming in. So what i gather is that hydro is overall faster but not necessarily better. So i guess if someone was to do this as a business , say 10,000 sqf of growing space , what should they go with , hydro or soil? since a bunch of places are making it legal to grow i would really love to know what direction they take.
fragileassassin
Well-Known Member
That would still depend on what you want to do. There are grows that size of both. Though when you get into that size space for hydro you probably be better off with the big float tables or some similar setup where they're all in 1 giant res.
JoeBlow5823
Well-Known Member
They typically go hydro whether its coco, float tables, drip systems, whatever works for them.
manfredo
Well-Known Member
Hydro may grow faster, but things can also go wrong in hydro faster too.
If you research commercial mj growers, a lot of them still grow in soil.
JoeBlow5823
Well-Known Member
Yes there are plenty of people on both sides of the fence. Soil grows do have a bigger up front cost that inevitably takes at least 5-6 months to recoup I feel like that is one of the major reasons honestly.
Darknes01
Well-Known Member
I would think that hydro would have a bigger upfront cost vs soil? what am i missing? soil is just pots and trays but hydro its buckets pipes pumps chillers and so on.
If you look at current culture systems, they sell everything from closet grower to commercial , I started with hydro and enjoy it.
ounevinsmoke
Well-Known Member
Nah, If you cook your compost properly=no bugs in house. Also Spidermites love hydro too. Soil kicks ass and the flavor when done organically (not that super soil bullshit they market for sales) is spectacular. I personally have compost recipes like people dialing in their hydro nutes. Separate compost piles when used giving different results. Taking time with my soil and watching it get better with age is also not boring. Less waste and forever increasing flavor gradually equates to what being a green thumb should be.
Nugg_Monkey
Member
It's funny that commercial cannabis growers use Current Culture to grow commercially. Pretty sure the only producers that use it only grow weed and that says a lot. They've only been around since 2006 and I think the success they found with that system was unwarranted, especially for them to take that design into the commercial realm. However, the upside is that no major commercial agriculture business has 'dirtied' their hands with weed yet. It's still ripe for the picking but as soon as they think the public would be okay with them touching it...it will be all over for the regular joe to crack the market.
JoeBlow5823
Well-Known Member
Coco is a form of hydro. You use it very similarly to dirt but its technically hydro and its crazy cheap. You end up paying just as much when you factor in the nutrients but you dont have to buy the nutrients all up front.
You don't "need" anything special for growing hydro vs soil. My three-part nutrients is all I need and can be used in soil and hydro alike.
JoeBlow5823
Well-Known Member
So thats 3 bottles of snake oil you are saying you "need". In soil the only thing I "need" is the soil and a dry top dress amendment and I only "need" to give it to them twice during the entire grow.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
so you need 2 things of snake oil to grow? one less than hydro.
Nugg_Monkey
Member
Soil growers can end up adding way more things to their grows than hydro growers...thousands of extra things from the microbes in the soil. So technically soil growers add way more unknown things to their plants than hydroponic growers do but like I said earlier people are adding mycorrhiza to hydroponic grows so soil will lose it's last advantage if that becomes a reality.
Nugg_Monkey
Member
Overall if it's about quality then genetics are what should be discussed...not grow medium. Hydro has an undeniable yield advantage more for the fact the it can be harvested year round...the only true soil grows that are raking it in are outdoor farmers that have plantations. When big Aggra come in you'll see more of what happens in the rest of the horticulture world happening in the cannabis growing world. Big greenhouse ops that use both the sun and artificial lighting to produce farm sized yields year round. Equipment that automates the entire process. Eventually it will be spat out like any other popular produce.