Hydroponic vs soil grown?

[SteveP]

Is there a noticeable difference in the taste of hydroponic grown tomatoes vs. soil grown? What about nutritional comparisons?

[Cole_Robbie]

It depends on your soil, I think. Hydro or container can be very, very good. I have some hydro Cherokee Purple on my kitchen counter right now that are quite tasty, they came from a fellow market vendor. Tasmanian Chocolate has been the best container plant I have grown, flavor-wise.

But the very best tomatoes I have eaten have come from soil, especially in dry weather. When the weather is just right, and the rain stops a few weeks before harvest, Big Beef is as tasty as any red heirloom I have grown.

[SteveP]

Thanks Cole. The reason I asked is I belong to another forum (audio and music) and there is a reasonably active gardening and food section. A guy just posted that we were doing it all wrong if we aren't growing hydroponically. His attitude seemed a little uppity, but audio has its share of those types. It made me wonder if their was a taste benefit to either method, but it makes sense that both can have great results.

[Nematode]

Don't listen to "audio know it all".
Both ways can produce exceptional tomatoes.

FYI I grow hydro. It is interesting to be able to change the nutrients on the fly, overwatering or weak nutrient produces watery fruit, addition of salt, or running higher nutrient concentration results some of the "dry effect" Cole indicated. Production really takes a hit though.

[Worth1]

I have heard this so called "It's Hydro" mentioned about another plant like it was supposed to be some sort of big deal.
These statements are for the most part made by people that dont have a clue.
Worth

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by Nematode

Don't listen to "audio know it all".
Both ways can produce exceptional tomatoes.

FYI I grow hydro. It is interesting to be able to change the nutrients on the fly, overwatering or weak nutrient produces watery fruit, addition of salt, or running higher nutrient concentration results some of the "dry effect" Cole indicated. Production really takes a hit though.

Thanks Nematode. I take it there is quite a bit of math involved in getting things dialed in optimally? What are the reasons a person would decide hydro was the preferred method over soil?

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by Worth1

I have heard this so called "It's Hydro" mentioned about another plant like it was supposed to be some sort of big deal.
These statements are for the most part made by people that dont have a clue.
Worth

Worth, I take it you are talking about people growing herbs?

[zipcode]

In theory the best should be soil grown. Hydro only has a certain number of micronutrients. And hydro has come a long way in the last years. More than 10 years ago the formulations were not good enough, there was a big difference. More micronutrients added, better balancing, etc.
You can grow 'hydro style' in soil too. In a wet year just add lots more fertilizer to reduce water uptake and increase flavor, works with organic fertilizer too.

[Nematode]

Thankfully the math has been done by Daniel Fernandez in his free porgram hydrobuddy.
I have a limited space that is underneath the drip line of an enormous oak tree. Container garden is a must.
I like to tinker.
Soil fertility is a mystery to me, I just feed the plants what they need.
Hydro tends to produce well and I have a limited space.
Hate weeding with a passion. No weeding in the hydro garden.

[RayR]

I guess it depends on what kind of hydroponic system somebody is referring too. Are we talking a pure water culture like DWC or something else. Technically passive wicking systems like an Earthbox or Earthtainer are hydroponic methods.

[Shrinkrap]

Originally Posted by RayR

I guess it depends on what kind of hydroponic system somebody is referring too. Are we talking a pure water culture like DWC or something else. Technically passive wicking systems like an Earthbox or Earthtainer are hydroponic methods.

Can you say more about that? Is it because the soil is mearly supporting the plants at some point, and the roots are in water? Is that on a predicable timeline?

I have several "sub irrigation planters" and I have been increasingly aware of the amount of time the roots spend in the water. I have some garlic that I stashed in a rather shallow one last fall, noticed most of the roots were in the reservoir, moved out some of the cloves into pots, but the ones that stayed in the self watering planter are doing quite a bit better.

Any thoughts about the info on this link?

http://albopepper.com/sips.php://

Especially this part;

"The water reservoir is placed directly below the soil container, merging it into a self-contained system. You water the reservoir (sub-irrigation) then the soil or a piece of fabric "wicks" up the water (self-watering) as needed. An air pocket separates the soil and water, allowing the roots to receive oxygen. It might seem complex, but trust me, this is easy gardening! "

I'd like to understand the "air pocket" part better. Is there a volume of air that is required?

[Worth1]

Originally Posted by Shrinkrap

Can you say more about that? Is it because the soil is mearly supporting the plants at some point, and the roots are in water? Is that on a predicable timeline?

I have several "sub irrigation planters" and I have been increasingly aware of the amount of time the roots spend in the water. I have some garlic that I stashed in a rather shallow one last fall, moved out some of the cloves intompots, but the ones that stayed in the self watering planter are doing quite a bit better.

Any thoughts about the info on this link?

http://albopepper.com/sips.php://

Especially this part;

"The water reservoir is placed directly below the soil container, merging it into a self-contained system. You water the reservoir (sub-irrigation) then the soil or a piece of fabric "wicks" up the water (self-watering) as needed. An air pocket separates the soil and water, allowing the roots to receive oxygen. It might seem complex, but trust me, this is easy gardening! "

I'd like to understand the "air pocket" part better. Is there a volume of air that is required?

If my no drain holes sight tube tub experiment works out I will have proven that all of the air pocket wick basket stuff is unnecessary.
Why I think so is because Indians from long ago planted in dry river beds with a high water table.
Also the famous so called floating gardens the Aztec had.

[AKmark]

I grow in Pro mix, and when the plants are healthy, and the watering is tight, I am very happy with the taste. I also have built quite the customer base too, so we are doing something right, it's not my imagination thankfully. LOL

I have also produced great tasting tomatoes in soil.

Soil is easier, and more forgiving, container growing has a steeper learning curve.

[SteveP]

Thanks everyone for your replies. I have no doubt hydroponicly grown crops taste great when done correctly.

AKmark, I would imagine fresh homegrown tomatoes are like gold in Alaska and cherished by those that are fortunate to get them.

[zipcode]

Originally Posted by RayR

I guess it depends on what kind of hydroponic system somebody is referring too. Are we talking a pure water culture like DWC or something else. Technically passive wicking systems like an Earthbox or Earthtainer are hydroponic methods.

I think that generally, at least nowadays, hydroponic means growing soilless with complete liquid fertilizer, which more or less means chemical, not organic. One can grow with classic manure fertilizer in an earthtainer, since peat based and so on is good enough for microorganism growth, I don't think that could be considered hydro.