EMj

The stuff works great in aero gardens as well as any hydroponic system. It's a concentrate just like the Dutch Gold line. Use it without supplements. These have been designed as stand alone nutes. Very strong. On the same token conisseur is expensive but how much is the botanicare line including supplements? About the same. Just use the conny without supps and see if it works for you. they have the money back deal so that you will have buying confidence. Try it you'll be surprised!
EMj

__________________
Everything posted was written by an imposter, who I suspect is my dog. I started to suspect this when he began wearing a cape and running with the possums.

http://www.gardenscure.com/420/hydro...lo-60-run.html

https://www.gardenscure.com/420/visu...s-threads.html

ILLEGAL-SEED

chemicals are not present in organics. you can easily flush organic liquid ferts like any chemical fert. chemical ferts need a longer flush period, wich means less nutes during flower. bat shit makes things taste good, not like bat shit.

__________________
went from, having a little... to having a lot...went from, buying weed, to growing pot

EMj

Hey there just thought I'de clear the air about organic and synthetic nutes. The difference between organic and synthetic, also called chemical, fertilizers is the origin. Organic fertilizers come from plants, or from previously living animals, or their escrements. For example, manure, blood meal, bone meal, etc are also considered organic fertilizers. Organic fertilizers have in common that they can not be taken up by plants directly. First the complex organic molecules must be broken down by soil microbes before the fertilizer nutrients can be taken up by plant roots.
Chemical fertilizers are so-called because they - often - dissolve into their chemical elements (such as nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, etc) as soon as they come in contact with water. They typically do not need microbes to break down the bonds between the molecules before they can be taken up by the plant roots. Most chemical fertilizer compounds are salts. Examples are potassium nitrate, calcium phosphate, ammonium sulfate, etc. Plants can only take up very basic elements in simple form (small molecules). Examples are nitrogen (as ammonium NH4+ or Nitrate NO3-). The nitrogen in large complex molecules must first be released by microbes in the soil to be available to plants, whereas water will typically release nitrogen in chemical fertilizers. So basically same shit different origin. You MUST flush if you want smooth smoke with that killer MJ taste. Good Luck,
Peace
EMj

__________________
Everything posted was written by an imposter, who I suspect is my dog. I started to suspect this when he began wearing a cape and running with the possums.

http://www.gardenscure.com/420/hydro...lo-60-run.html

https://www.gardenscure.com/420/visu...s-threads.html

ZoomBoom

From what I recall from the Advanced Nutrients Forums (before shutdown), this stuff is a high PK fert. I remember a grower saying that he used Connoisseur and the Fox Farms tri-pak additives with similar results.

The thing separating AN from other nutrients is they claim their ratios are superior and are tested for use on cannabis and so command the highest price.

__________________

"...there was nothing in the dark that wasn't there when the lights were on." - Rod Serling

penguin

"Organic " is a pretty slippery term. In chemistry it mostly means compounds that contain carbon, but there are some simple carbon compounds that are not considered organic.

In agriculture, it's even more slippery. Most organic fertilizers are derived from living (or once-living) organisms, but not all. Most fertilizers that are approved for organic use do have the plant-essential elements bound up in carbon compounds, but not all (e.g., potassium sulfate, sul-po-mag). Pretty much it comes down to a list of what's approved by an organic certification body. What they are after is materials and methods that promote healthy ecologies, sustainability, promoting the use of "naturally" derived materials and avoiding the use of "synthetic" materials. The exact same material from a natural source can be approved, while the same material from a synthetic source is prohibited (e.g., urea).

It is true that the essential elements are taken up by the plants in the same ionic (not salt) forms, regardless of source. It is also true that fertilizers where the essential elements are bound up in carbon compounds require microbial activity to break down the compounds and release the essential elements so that they become available to the plant, so these are slow-release. This prevents the essential elements from being leached, so flushing is much less effective for these kinds of fertilizers than for synthetic ferts that supply essential elements in forms that are readily available to the plant. However, in media with high cation exchange capacity, synthetically derived cations (K, Ca, Mg, etc.) will not leach either.

We are mostly looking to leach out N, available to the plants as NO3- (nitrate) and NH4+ (ammonium), and often supplied as organic or synthetic urea. Urea is water soluble, and is nuetral but polar. So media with high CEC tends to retain N in ammonium and urea forms.

What any of that has to do with how well Advanced Nutrients Connoisseur works, I am not sure, but the original poster was looking for suggestions or rants.


penguin

__________________

Cultiv8or

I love how so many of the organics supporters use the word "chemical" like an epithet. "There's no chemicals in organics!" LMAO. Living organisms are nothing more than biochemical machines. Biochemical machines.

Every single cell in our bodies are jam-packed with chemicals all busily reacting with one another in the intricate dance we call life. The very thing that makes plants so special in the ecosystem is that they don't (and generally can't) feed on organic matter. They create it.

See we humans can't create organic matter. We have to consume it and incorporate it into our bodies. Plants, on the other hand, build the organic matter from individual building blocks - ions. They create life. We consume life.

Organic fertilizer requires additional living things to break down the "organic" plant food into real plant food - inorganic ions. Maintaining that living culture and avoiding the stereotypical clogs and harmful microbial colonies common with "organic hydroponics" is far from universally better than using nothing but the food plants need - inorganic ions.

You've got to admit, it's a hell of a lot easier to go to the market and buy rice (human food) than it is to grow it in the back yard. Growing it in the backyard is like the organic fertilizer - you're creating and maintaining the system by which the food is ultimately created. Buying it at the store is getting nothing but the food. Simpler. Cleaner.

One isn't inherently "better" than the other. Both have merits. If you're looking for the treehugger-est method, organics is probably it. Actually, creating your own compost and making tea from it is probably the greenest. If you're looking to simply give the plants what they need without making a lot of extra work for yourself in the process, the "chem salt" fertilizers are what you'd prefer.

Jai guru deva -
I disagree with you on the pricing of AN stuff. Sure, I'd like to pay less. Hell, I'd rather they just sent it to me for free. I'd also like a brand-new palatial mansion that costs $5 and a 2009 Ferrari for a buck. I'd like everything to be cheaper.

You don't need every single thing AN sells. Just get a good base nutrient and maybe a couple additives. Hell, unless you're an uber-grower you probably can't even get your plants to eat that much stuff. It takes an assload of light and CO2 to make a plant hungry enough to eat like that.

ILLEGAL-SEED

simple difference between organics and chemical, organic is natural, like our cannabis, chemical is unnatural, like pills. not saying one is better than the other, but i believe one is healthier than the other.

__________________
went from, having a little... to having a lot...went from, buying weed, to growing pot

ILLEGAL-SEED

same way cannabis is safer than pills, ones natural and ones chemical. its obvious nature is way safer. chemical ferts do not come from natural sources like organics would. chemicals come from labs, nature comes from, well nature. like i said, i have nothing against chemical ferts, but i just prefer organic, and i defend what i believe in. if i wanted chemicals in me, i would take tylenol pm everynight and not the indica of the month.

__________________
went from, having a little... to having a lot...went from, buying weed, to growing pot

Dr.Doak

I have not tried the Advanced Connoisseur yet myself. There is a joke around my hydro shop about calling it Advanced Con (as in getting ripped). But like anything else out there, you will never really know if it does better than anything else without a side-by-side comparison. Even a test like that may not be definitive. I say give it a shot and let us all know how it works for you. IMO people are hesitant to spend so much on nutes because anyone can have superb results with any base hydroponic nute on the market with no additives. Sometimes less is more.
On the topic of organics, some senior gardeners like Soma speak about the superb taste of their buds being a result of the quality of their soil. I dont know if its all in my head, or as a result of microbial activity, but when I boost my blooms with guano instead of a bloom fortifier I am much happier with the result.

However, my largest yields have been with "chemical nutes".

Cultiv8or

Weed isn't safer because it's natural. It's safer because the things you're comparing it too are (aside from you just being so enormously vague about that no one can really argue) are more dangerous. "Pills"? Yeah, that's not a HUGE group of items...

But the point is that just because you compare two things, decide one is safer than the other, it doesn't then logically follow that a specific difference between the two is the cause of the disparity in safety. Kittens are natural. Handguns are artificial. Therefore natural things are safer than artificial things. But wait, what if we're comparing contact lenses and tsunami?

Yes, marijuana is less likely to kill you than certain "pills". However, ricin, hemlock, and nightshade (just to name a few decidedly unsafe "natural" things) are decidedly more likely to kill you than pretty much any pill you might find.

Some things are more dangerous than others. The degree to which they're "natural" plays very little role in how dangerous they are. I'd rather be in a room with a handgun than a bear.

Cancer is natural. Ebola is 100% organic.

Each side of the coin has a purpose and a place.