Name that flake

[cosmicfolklore]

budding yeast? So, absolutely everyone is wrong, even Greg Pease? I could take it being some different chemical excretion, but blooming yeast... I would require some verification before I could change my mind that drastically, especially after having heard from tobacco experts like Greg. Sure, sure, he could be wrong, but like I said... verification would help.

 

[jmatt]

Well - my son's a Ph.D candidate in human and molecular genetics at the Baylor College of Medicine and I specifically had him analyze Stonehaven under the microscope. I actually have a microscopy picture here somewhere of the budding yeast on the Stonehaven flake.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Maybe he should send the findings to Greg and some of the other big names in the industry. It could be a game changer.

 

[jackswilling]

We have gone from Sugar to Tobacco Oil to Yeast. Not sure I want "Budding Yeast" on my tobacco. Pretty sure I don't want to smoke it. Can we just go back to sugar and live in the dark ages?

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Yeh, I was sort of ok with minerals, ha ha!

 

[toobfreak]

Well, yeast may be the most visible /result/ but I still think nevertheless that some of the (oily) tars and resin in the leaf expressed to the surface, dry and crystallizes out leaving behind the constituents (minerals, and if high enough initial sugar content to begin with, some appreciable pH altering sugars), after that, perhaps part of the process involves a developing yeast in some areas which sees the stain as yummy food to grow on . . .

 

[aquadoc]

I am regretting this post. Or at least mentioning the bloom of whatever it is.... This flake on fire was a nice smooth smoke with a nice medium nicotine bottom but those use to nicotine may think it light in the shoes. And to me, it has a bitternut dark cocoa aftertaste... Creamy smooth. If you do not like burley, you might not like this smoke but the sweet tones that are there do balance the bitter. Very nice afternoon smoke with a cup of Kona medium roast. Thanks again, Ash!

 

[cosmicfolklore]

I am regretting this post.

Ha ha, 90% of the posts I make I feel the exact same way. Just relax, breath, and go with it. No one means you any harm. It's just conversation. But, yes, I know exactly how you feel. Just don't think of it as your post, but one in which you started the topic and now it belongs to the universe.
Thank you for starting the topic by the way. And, I'm sure the universe thanks you too. ::

 

[jmatt]

Whole lot of internet keyboard jockeys speculating/repeating what they heard on place or another. The budding yeast was specifically on the Stonehaven. It was not on other tobacco bloom he analyzed. My own hypothesis is that yeast specific to any one factory/location is among the reasons why you can't just copy the recipe from one manufacturer, make it in a different facility, and expect identical results. And to anyone afraid of "yeast," I presume you don't drink alcohol or eat bread or any other baked product, or basically - you don't eat anything.
But career to date, no one's paid me $0.01 for tobacco analysis, so I don't really care what other people believe. I do know I'm the only one here who's watched and seen the analysis done first-hand.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Whole lot of internet keyboard jockeys speculating/repeating what they heard on place or another

We hear this quit e abit. But, forgive us. We are not very likely to just take the word of just "anyone" on the internet without some proof. You're a lawyer, right? You should be able to see this through our eyes. Someone named Jmatt who uses a racecar avatar tells us that Greg Pease and the whole internets acceptance of "something" is wrong, because their son is an expert.
Not to belittle your son. I imagine that you are a very proud father, and a good one. But, we know, neither you nor your son, so... verification would help us. Pictures helps make the report seem more real. And, maybe a scan of something we don't understand, really helps. ::

 

[jmatt]

The last time I wrote a very detailed analysis here, the thread turned to shit and a moderator deleted my entire effort. Thank yourselves for not getting details from me. See above. For the $0.00 I'm getting paid, I could not care less what you or anyone else believes. And nope - I'm not posting my pictures here either. That's my intellectual property, not yours. And the picture in my avatar is me. I've done the quarter mile in 6.1 seconds at 225 mph. It's a great six figure hobby. You should try it.

 

[ashdigger]

I'm able to make a volcano with vinegar and baking soda.

 

[tschiraldi]

Well, we speak of fermentation, and as a wine maker (not a tobacco blender) I know enough to understand that in order for fermentation to take place, you need yeast, and the sugar to feed it. Any left over sugars simply act to sweeten it (wine, that is). Kinda' seems simple to me, if what we refer to as fermentation, relating to tobacco, is truly fermentation. No yeast, no sugar - no fermentation. Right?
Tim

 

[toobfreak]

Well good for you, jmatt. Wow. Does someone not have any sense of humor here or what?! I think some of what aquadoc says is probably correct, but I also think the major tobacco people like Greg who have looked at this for years are correct as well. And I don't doubt jmatt when he says that the one particular stain he looked at had some yeast growing on it. I think it likely that bloom has many different aspects to it depending on the tobacco and its composition. Not all bloom is powdery white.
But neither do I see yeast as a major unique flavoring agent of tobacco. Yeast grows on tobacco because it sees it as a food source. Various spots on the surface of aged stored tobacco have expressed compounds that might encourage minor yeast growth in some cases, but that is not to say that all bloom is yeast, but it would shock me if yeast did not occur.
But if yeast is occurring as bloom, then what has happened to the anti-fungal supposedly applied to many blends?
Also, for the record, it does not take a PhD to look through a microscope (or to even own a microscope!) and recognize yeast. Yeast is a fungi and pretty easy to recognize. So how has this fact eluded people like GLP for years? Nor does it make a logical argument that someone is right because they have a degree (many of us have degrees and many of the world's biggest problems are caused by people with degrees), or that they spend lots of money on their hobbies so they must be right. I spend a lot of money on my hobbies too.
Some facts would be nice here, but of course, it is easy to call people internet jockeys, claim to be totally right at the expense of all others in the hobby, have the proof, then go off in a huff saying that your feelings are hurt so you won't offer it to spite the group! I once caught a six-inch alien and wanted to turn him over to the Army but the Army didn't believe me! So I set him free.
Yeast is a fungus so if there were any significant biological activity in a stored tobacco from yeast, I think you would have significant outgassing of CO2. Some people claim swollen tins so maybe those are some cases of exceptional yeast growth? Something in there is fermenting. If that were the cases and if yeast were the cause of that and bloom then the next time someone cracks open a swollen tin, I'd like to hear them tell me it was full of bloom. It will be interesting to hear what aquadoc's analysis reveals.
As to the wine, Tim, yeast requires a sugar or some similar carbonaceous compound in an acidic environment. Does that rule out yeast bloom growing in non-virginia-based blends? Good question.

 

[cally454]

I'm an internet jockey and a lazy one at that, so I clicked on the first listing in google. It costs a thousand dollars a second to run one of those dragsters. No wonder you want to get paid

 

[yaddy306]

Tobacco plume analyzed and found to be a mixture of minerals and various organic coompounds, not sugar or budding yeast like some people seem to think.

 

[aquadoc]

Toob, nice summation. All I know at this point in time is that it was a pleasurable smoke and I have another, un-photographed, flake drying for an evening smoke. That is all. Have a great evening.

 

[jmatt]

Hey Yaddy - nice link to a completely inapplicable, posted here 50 times before, article.
1) Cigars are stored in an aerobic environment.

2) Pipe tobacco is stored in an aerobic environment that quickly becomes anaerobic

3) Cigars don't have toppings like most pipe tobacco does - at least real cigars don't

4) Stonehaven is topped with molasses (treacle), and unsurprisingly shows evidence of a very specific budding yeast specific to molasses - not to the tobacco.

5) For the above reasons, "bloom" on cigar leaf and "bloom" on aged tobacco in sealed containers are mostly different things.
P.S. "Sugar" means something different to chemists than it does to laypeople. What's not yeast on pipe tobacco bloom is, in fact, "sugars."
Thanks for playing.

 

[yaddy306]

Jmatt, maybe when you publish your "info" in a peer-reviewed journal, I'll give it some weight.
Point 2) above: people often find bloom on SG products upon delivery, and they were never in anaerobic conditions.

Point 5) you have no evidence to conclude.
p.s. Thanks for playing to you too.

 

[mortonbriar]

Bloomin' heck!
The interesting part about this conversation for me is the possibility that plume could be one of a number of things, maybe all looking fairly similiar by comparison at no magnification...
Aquadoc, no need to take personal responsibility for the way a thread goes, its a group effort! And also, regardless of the conflict of opinions, I (and no doubt plenty of others) find this aspect of the hobby fascinating, so thanks for starting it!
Isaac