soli vs hydro

[Suby]

Soil.
Idiot proof with a good recipe, grow organic and recycle your soil.
No airstones, pumps, no fussing with ph (organic mix), good for the environment.
I have a seperate veg room so faster veg times are useless and I support personal grows so yield doesn't mean shit to me, my cab can grow more than I can toke.

But yeah let's beat this dead horse yet again...

S

 

[GhostToker]

It depends what you're comfortable with. Im pretty sure most people will agree hydro will grow bigger buds faster, its just a fact, but soil offers soo many advantages IMO, including stealth, portability, and simplicity. Ive vegged some plants in hydro and then transplanted them to soil for flowering, that worked out very nicely.

 

[kennycar]

6 of one and half dozen of the other lol ..... grow on !

 

[lilo]

Organic Soil

Organic Soil

Hello friends, I'd like to speak out from my own limited exprience, somewhat contribute to the community.

I've done some dfferent styles of hydroponics and soil. Started growing my own over 10 years ago, perpetual around 5 years. Smoked for a total of more then 15 years and not a dry day for many of them. I am a medical smoker, although I have to say I mostly vaporize. Chernobil has put a very serious mark on me and some members of my family with thyroid disfunctions.

I started in soil, totaly organic and tryed lots of different ways including some hydroponic styles on my way, experimented alot and I have to say my findings had always been pretty consistent. Hydrponics is power consuming and i always felt too dependant on all those little pieces of equipment that had to make it work. Simplysity is the key for me in every aspect of my life - and my soul is peaceful. I've seen good growth from hydro but that's just some little time of questionable profit. I know there's other organic ways then soil - bio buckets and so on but I never tried organic hydro and I doubt ever will as I long since found where i stand.

I've smoked organic and chemical marijuana, in shops and from personal contacts but to put it simple - it never hit me like my own organicly grown soil herb. Never. I remember my first grow, it was a pure afghan and all of my friends remember it up to this day as a turning point. Yes it was that much better: it hit you stronger, richer taste and overall gave much more pronounced and better quality experience. Some of thm turned into real marijuana connoisseurs and true organic believers since then. And this never chnanged.

During these years I have found that any chemicaly grown marijuana lacks in its very core. It hits you and it seems to have some smell and all but it is souless in a way there's always something vital missing and the quality of soicializing wiith is empty. A lot is missing no matter if you can describe it or not. I find tomatoes being a very good analogy in taste, smell and even potency to marijuana. You'll never taste or smell a better tomatoe then caw manure fertilized, grown in havier rich soil and given enough time to fight thru its natural way.

To me, if better ment quality, no doubt it would be organicly grown in soil, best hitting, best tasting and best smelling herb you'll ever know. I know some will say it clogs your throat faster then well flushed hydro but hapiness is not in quantity of tokes and their clearness but in their quality of balance and smooth richness of palette.

I repeat, I kid you not, organicly grwn herb is mre potent. This is my experience and I stand by it.

If you didn't give it all there is in real soil you never had a first hand real quality experience.

 

[Deft]

Soil.

Plants are made to grow in soil and so are the myco and bacterial friends they make that help them. You can do cool stuff in hydro and its fast but what if your air pump dies or somthing? You get home and the plants are dead! Soil gives you a nice buffer to work with, its more forgiving and you dont need expensive meters and nutes... all you need is some compost based soil and just add water.

 

[chosen]

Either way gets it done and you can't tell the difference. People who say one of the other usually aren't good at both. I've done both. I've done both with chemicals and organics. Hydro can be organic just like soil. Or you can be hydro organic. If you are growing a sizeable amount, try getting rid of 100 pots full of soil after harvest versus just topping 100 plants out of net pots. Or lugging enough soil to fill than many pots.
Yet, in soil I can move the plants all around without problems.
It's up to you. Pick one and try it. If I were growing 1-2 plants soil. If I were growing over 30, I'd prefer hydro.

 

[Guest]

I am an engineer and I study everything to fucking death. I get a lot of crap from my people for that. I love to grow things, tomatoes, pot you name it. Hydro is good for one grower and soil the other. Although I love to study things to death Soil is more forgiving, and for any of you that like to go on vacation Soil is a must. It is known that organic soil grown erb taste better and is more natural, if that matters at all. I just know after much research I decided on indoor soil and that is why I am in this forum.

 

[Huey_Wunder]

I voted for hydro - I have grown both, but find the growth quicker in hydro. IMHO.

But the number of people who posted stuff like "it's idiot proof" should be careful - someone is likely to invent a better idiot.

lol

hw

 

[i love herb]

Ill have to vote dunno


organic soil grower, hydro is on my things to do list

 

[Guest]

i vote stupid ass poll..genetics is where its at..peace...wait thats not one of my choices lol

 

[NorthernKronic]

Soil because of taste alone.. organic soil i should have said. but again i have not run hydro so do not know. Im sure organic hydro would be great, gonna have to give it a try.

-N.Kron

 

[Deft]

Small scale (less than 10), pots of soil is great!

Medium scale (10 to 30), Hydro seems very nice for a fast turn around and a good production setup inside.

Large scale (more than 30), Outdoor soil, what could be better? You dont even have to water or feed in many places.. You can plant fields of clones and just come back to harvest multi pound plants with no work other than off season site prep! Of course location and local conditions are key.

 

[vegasguy911]

I agree what is better is what works better for your situation....both have pros and cons to choosing them...like he said thats just my opinion

 

[PhillyPride]

If you were to give 10 different growers each 1 clone from the same mother; Results that I have encountered; yes the hydro sometimes looks and smells as good as soil but when it comes to taste, complexities of a hit, and overall smoke and stone Soil wins hands down, but Soiless Mix ie Pro Mix is to me the most desirable

 

[bonecarver_OG]

coco is the best for flavour - just try it and u know what im talking about

 

[seedless]

Soil is easier for beginners, less gadgets to mess with, puts up with us messing up more and is much cheaper. Oh and if you grow outside less equipment to buy too.

 

[Rosy Cheeks]

Hydroponics has been around for at least 3000 years. Did you ever hear about the Hanging Gardens of Babylon? That was hydroponics (if it functioned the way Herodotus described it).

Without knowing why, experienced garderners have since known that plants can be grown directly in water. This is what Wikipedia has to say about it:

Plant physiology researchers discovered in the 1800s that plants absorb essential mineral nutrients as inorganic ions in water. In natural conditions, soil acts as a mineral nutrient reservoir but the soil itself is not essential to plant growth. When the mineral nutrients in the soil dissolve in water, plant roots are able to absorb them. When the required mineral nutrients are introduced into a plant's water supply artificially, soil is no longer required for the plant to thrive. Almost any terrestrial plant will grow with hydroponics, but some will do better than others.

In the 1930's and the 40's, scientists started experimenting seriously with soillless growing. In the 60's, the Nutrient Film Technique (NFT, perhaps the smartest way of them all to grow a plant) concept was coined by Allen Cooper. Later, once efficient artificial lighting was developed, Deep Water Culture caught on as an easy way to set up a small indoor hydro grow.

The thing is, there is TONS AND TONS of research which has been done on the subject of soil vs hydroponics (for instance, NASA has done extensive research on hydroponic growing vs soil growing, concidering what would be the best way of growing in space, and most of that research is published) and we KNOW to a great extent the advantages and disadvantages of both ways of growing.

So I ask myself two questions; First; why start a thread about this when there are already plenty of them in the IC archive (which can be continued if the need is there):

http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=39283&highlight=soil+hydro

http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=21907&highlight=soil+hydro

http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=22712&highlight=soil+hydro

http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=9751&highlight=soil+hydro

Second, why not simply do a bit of reading before you start posting your opinions on the subject?

Now, it's not my intention to vote in your poll, or present an unfavourable opinion about one and a favourable opinion about the other, only present a few FACTS that we know are true, because science has established so:

Roots that have constant access (in sufficient amounts) to water, nutrients, air and space (to grow in) will grow optimally. It is therefore not so much a question about soil vs hydro, but the exact physical conditions in which the roots grow. A compact medium (soil) that does not breathe will grow poor plants. This is the main problem with soil, becuse even if the soil breathes well, then it absorbs well, and soil saturated with water also shuts out the oxygen. A medium that drains too fast or not enough will grow poor plants. Unless water is constantly provided, it will not provide enough water for a thirsty, fast growing plant like Cannabis. A medium with a low cation exchange capacity will grow poor plants (Plants obtain many of their nutrients from soil by an electrochemical process called cation exchange. This process is the key to understanding soil fertility. Cation exchange requires very small particles with a large surface area to hold electrically-charged ions). A medium-less (hydroponic) system that does not oxygenize the roots sufficiently will grow poor plants. A medium-less system that does not supply enough (uptakeable) nutrients will grow poor plants, etc.

All in all, you could say that it is easier to create a near-optimal grow environment for the roots in a hydroponic environment rather than in soil, which means that in general, hydroponic systems are more efficient in giving the roots what they want, in the right amounts.
Which is why in general, plants grow faster and yield better in hydroponics.

Another debate that often hooks into the soil vs hydro question is the efficiency/taste of mineral/salt-based (aka synthetic or chemical) nutrients vs organic nutrients, but since it has nothing really to do with the soil vs hydro debate (we're talking ways of feeding, not what we feed), no point in saying that soil "tastes better" than hydro. It's another issue.

 

[Guest]

Haha genetics definately has my vote too.A gem is a gem no matter how it's "processed" and the same goes for a turd lol

 

[-ww-]

well of course genetics is the most important part
but what .. if u have good genetics u dont care if u grow in soil or in hydro

that is the question


this is not good genetics vs shitty genetics thread

but soil vs hydro it is not the same if u grow same genetics in soil or hydro and i wanna know what people prefer and why

 

[Dr. Haze]

It comes down to availability, either way you need to spend plenty of time with the sensi, but with hydro you need to constantly monitor the works and the results will show. Soil is a lot easier.