New Calculator to try

[Hoggy]

Are you saying this happens when replacing one ingredient from within the recipe window for an established recipe?

No, that would fall under normal daily "altering". I'm specifically referring to using the "Edit->Find and replace ingredients" functionality (ETA: Ingredient Editor is fine). I haven't pinned down exactly how many need to be done or whatnot, but that's where I remember frequent crashing happening when I was using that feature extensively when first starting out with JC. I also remember it happening after doing a one or two-off of using that feature and then returning to normal activities - which is what reminded me that I should save-exit-restart after using it, before returning to normal activities. As I say, I don't use that feature often anymore, so my memory is quite fuzzy except for the relatively recent time of needing it for a one/two-off.

I have so many recipes in my 'to be mixed' categories at this point I am probably good for the rest of my life without ever having to create a new recipe or even mix the same recipe twice.

Since my ship is coming in pretty soon, I'm readying some orders currently totaling several thousands of dollars of flavorings ( ) - likely for when the respective sites next offer a site-wide 15-20% off. So I probably WILL never want to mix the same recipe twice. I don't do that often as-is, but likely more so after the new flavor shipments come in. I already have so many exploratories going right now, that I'm down to 4ml testers for most initial experiments - thinking about 2 or 3 next. I just wish I knew where to find good quality half-ml glass syringes for finer gradations - smallest I have are 1ml ones. I do already have 1/2 in and 1 inch SS dispensing tips in 24 and 27 gauge, to reduce the amount in the tips. At such small quantities, the amounts stored within my normal 1-1/2 inch 18-gauge tips become too disproportionate.

Though I'm certainly not at all looking forward to having to transfer all those to 1/4/16 ounce amber glass bottles with polycone caps that I'll be ordering for them. <sigh> Such is the life of a flavor junkie.

Who said vaping is cheaper than smoking? Ehh.. At least those flavorings will last many many years (perhaps decades??), since they'll be properly stored. At $7 per pack of cancer-stinkies, I think I calculated it would be ~$2500 or so a year.

ETA: And by "modify-existing", I'm referring to "tools->Modify existing recipe" - a massively powerful tool for exploratories.

 

[Scouser]

Just used the Ingredient Editor to edit 60+ specific gravity values (thanks Walt for updating the RF site) with no issues on my Win 10 machine.

Oh! which gravity values are you referring to? I have several documents full of them for the top 4 flavour manufacturers. PM me if you want copies.

 

[Fozzy71]

Oh! which gravity values are you referring to? I have several documents full of them for the top 4 flavour manufacturers. PM me if you want copies.

Real Flavors is all I use and they finally got the SG and MSDS info on their site for all of their flavors. Some of their flavors are dramatically different than the 1.02 I had been using (found that on ELR for one flavor before they updated their site and I just used for all of the RF SC stuff until I could get proper data). I got the SG info for the few non-RF flavors I still have some of from ELR.

 

[Scouser]

Real Flavors is all I use and they finally got the SG and MSDS info on their site for all of their flavors. Some of their flavors are dramatically different than the 1.02 I had been using (found that on ELR for one flavor before they updated their site and I just used for all of the RF SC stuff until I could get proper data). I got the SG info for the few non-RF flavors I still have some of from ELR.

Thanks for the heads up. However, I cant see on their site where they list they concentrate gavity weight. Can you post the direct link. Cheers

 

[Fozzy71]

Thanks for the heads up. However, I cant see on their site where they list they concentrate gavity weight. Can you post the direct link. Cheers

Click on any of the SC flavors like this one and scroll down.

Technical Data
•••••
Color: Dark Brown
Specific Gravity @ 25°C: 1.0875
SDS (MSDS) Link: Click Here


Testing Results
•••••
Diacetyl (butane-2,3-dione): 0ppm
Acetylpropionyl (2,3-pentanedione): 5ppm
Acetoin (3-hydroxybutanone): 0ppm

 

[Scouser]

Thanks for that. The only RF I have is Baklava. And the weight is defined at 1.036.....the calculator default. Haha

 

[newphreak]

Why bother when most recipes online are using 1ml=1gram whatever the weight really is? Unless you're only creating your own recipes things will be "dramatically" wrong

 

[Scouser]

Why bother when most recipes online are using 1ml=1gram whatever the weight really is? Unless you're only creating your own recipes things will be "dramatically" wrong

Well as it happens I do create my own recipes. But I don't get what your saying. There is "very" good reason to make use of correct gravity weight....the very reason why HotRod gave us the ability to use it. I so love this software.

 

[newphreak]

Depends on the use, but I don't disagree that it's good to have the option. Im just saying if you're lazy and like me, picking recipes from alltheflavors and whatnot the original recipe was most likely created using 1ml=1gram. Hence the heads up for new mixers and what not. Doing it with the correct weights would in some cases skew the results in unwanted directions. But enough about that

 

[dc99]

I understand both sides of this. If your mixing small batches. As in 100ml or so I dont think its really all that necessary. On a 100ml bottle could you taste the difference in 1.00 and 1.02. Highly doubtful. If your mixing 1000ml, well that would be quite a bit. My only point is that every flavor would be off the exact same amount so could you really tell the difference? If my recipe calls for 1.2g and I get to 1.19 thats close enough. Being that technical just takes the fun out of it for me. Being that technical might be the fun part for some

 

[IDJoel]

On a 100ml bottle could you taste the difference in 1.00 and 1.02. Highly doubtful. If your mixing 1000ml, well that would be quite a bit.

Sorry; but I have to disagree with this statement. The batch size has nothing to do with the outcome. The whole reason we express recipes in percentages is because they can be applied to any volume and have uniform results.

A 2% variant of 1mL, 10mL, 100mL, 10,000mL, or even 10,000,000mL is still a 2% variant. So, if mixed properly, they should all taste the same.

My only point is that every flavor would be off the exact same amount so could you really tell the difference?

Again; I have to disagree with the statement. The difference is not uniform across the board. Some concentrates have specific gravities as low as 0.940; all the way to 1.238. That is nearly a 32% range of variation.

So, depending on the specific combination of flavor concentrates used; the possible discrepancy of using a generic 1.00-1.02 specific gravity, vs. actual specific gravity, can have a significant (and noticeable) difference.

This potential for variation is what led me to forgo using actual (more accurate) specific gravities. I, more often, tend to use other people's recipes (at least as a starting point), than create from scratch. As the majority seem to use a default of 1.00-1.02 specific gravity, and I am interested in understanding what the creator is intending to share (what s/he is tasting), it makes sense for me to use the same/similar default.

When sharing recipes; to me, it is more important getting same/similar results (to have a common understanding/language), than it is to be precise to the numbers (specific gravities). For a mixer that only makes their own creations, and has no interest in sharing those creations with others, this rationale is moot.

An argument for using accurate specific gravities; is when using recipes created by volume (milliliters). After all; specific gravity is determined by weighing a known volume (and then comparing that to an equivalent volume of water). So, using accurate specific gravities, will provide closer duplication of the original creation.

Unless a recipe creator discloses whether the recipe was created by measuring volume, or by weight (and whether accurate SGs, or some other default used), it really becomes a crapshoot.

One can also make the argument, that taste is entirely subjective, and recipes are "understood" to be in need of tweaking to personal taste; and therefore, it doesn't/shouldn't matter what is used for specific gravities, as it will have to be tweaked anyway. I can't really argue against that either.

Honestly, I believe, however one chooses to mix, likes what they mix, and can achieve repeatable results, is the correct choice for that individual. Everything else is secondary.

 

[dc99]

Sorry; but I have to disagree with this statement. The batch size has nothing to do with the outcome. The whole reason we express recipes in percentages is because they can be applied to any volume and have uniform results.
I agree. I should have finished the sentence withf flavoring but it shouldnt matter.
A 2% variant of 1mL, 10mL, 100mL, 10,000mL, or even 10,000,000mL is still a 2% variant. So, if mixed properly, they should all taste the same.

Again; I have to disagree with the statement. The difference is not uniform across the board. Some concentrates have specific gravities as low as 0.940; all the way to 1.238. That is nearly a 32% range of variation.
Again, I said it wrong. Didnt mean they would all be off by the exact same gravity. If that were true then it would be irrelevant. Simply meant they would all be off the same in any recipe. Not that they would all be off .02 or whatever number. Sometimes what I think and how I say it are not the same. Sorry
So, depending on the specific combination of flavor concentrates used; the possible discrepancy of using a generic 1.00-1.02 specific gravity, vs. actual specific gravity, can have a significant (and noticeable) difference.
I totally agree if you are mixing a recipe that was created by the real numbers and you use 1.00 but I think most do use 1.00.
This potential for variation is what led me to forgo using actual (more accurate) specific gravities. I, more often, tend to use other people's recipes (at least as a starting point), than create from scratch. As the majority seem to use a default of 1.00-1.02 specific gravity, and I am interested in understanding what the creator is intending to share (what s/he is tasting), it makes sense for me to use the same/similar default.

When sharing recipes; to me, it is more important getting same/similar results (to have a common understanding/language), than it is to be precise to the numbers (specific gravities). For a mixer that only makes their own creations, and has no interest in sharing those creations with others, this rationale is moot.

An argument for using accurate specific gravities; is when using recipes created by volume (milliliters). After all; specific gravity is determined by weighing a known volume (and then comparing that to an equivalent volume of water). So, using accurate specific gravities, will provide closer duplication of the original creation.

Unless a recipe creator discloses whether the recipe was created by measuring volume, or by weight (and whether accurate SGs, or some other default used), it really becomes a crapshoot.

One can also make the argument, that taste is entirely subjective, and recipes are "understood" to be in need of tweaking to personal taste; and therefore, it doesn't/shouldn't matter what is used for specific gravities, as it will have to be tweaked anyway. I can't really argue against that either.

Honestly, I believe, however one chooses to mix, likes what they mix, and can achieve repeatable results, is the correct choice for that individual. Everything else is secondary.

I agree with you and didnt mean it create controversy. I think we most likely start the same way. Mix a recipe, test it and decide it needs 1% more strawberry. My 1% may be a tad off from yours but we get to the same place

 

[IDJoel]

I agree with you and didnt mean it create controversy.

No worries; and no controversy.

 

[Hoggy]

Yeah, no controversy.. He was just pointing out something that catches so many of us off-guard at first, including me and even Wayne Walker. It just 'seems' like there MUST be more deviation in a bigger batch versus a smaller batch at first thought - but in fact, batch size plays no role at all regarding that aspect.

Me.. I mix by volume mostly, because most of my flavors are in amber glass bottles with polycone caps anyways. So going by volume makes it easier to just use 1 syringe for a whole recipe. The only reason I've filled in as many SG's as I could find was because if the info was available and there is a slot for each ingredient, then why not just put it in the database.

I use to do a fair amount of mixing other peoples' recipes. But after one too many times of doing that, you begin to realize that 99% of posted recipes are just other people's experiments made public. So since I have time, I dropped doing that for the most part. And since most of my recipes ARE now experiments lately, I don't dare post them - so SG-weight-volume make no bearing on the matter. It's strictly for fun. I might use other peoples' recipes for inspiration, but there are always tweaks 99.9999% of the time.

 

[skineedog]

Maybe it's posted somewhere in this thread but, I'm too lazy to browse the entire 174 pages: Does anyone know if HotRod has abandoned the software? It would appear so as I've not seen a post from him in the last year or so nor received any software updates.

 

[skineedog]

Incorrect. I have it running under "Wine" on my Mac.

Hey, I'd love some pointers on doing this if you'd be so kind. I've toyed around with Wine on Linux before without much luck. What was the process like? I would imagine it's a bit simpler these days? I currently run the software with Parallels but this is the only Windows software I use. I'd be nice to ditch the VM... And regain 20gb of hard drove space.

 

[Fozzy71]

......HotRod has abandoned the software?

yep

 

[skineedog]

yep

Damn... That sux. Any chance he'll release the software for further development?.... I dunno what I'm going to due when I can no longer use it...

 

[Fozzy71]

Damn... That sux. Any chance he'll release the software for further development?.... I dunno what I'm going to due when I can no longer use it...

no one but @HotRod19579 can answer that. it still works for me for what I need so unless a windows update breaks it somehow there isn't much to worry about IMO. The company I have worked with for the past 9 years still has customers using version 1 of their software even though we are developing version 3 and stopped updating version 1 over 7 years ago.

 

[IDJoel]

yep

I think that may be a bit premature. According to others, who have been using this program from the early days; HR has taken at least one other sabbatical. Call me optimistic... but I will not give up hope until he says he is throwing in the hat. He has been at least logging in to ECF, every week or two, for the last couple of months. The most recent was 2/15/18.

I could see where the constant barrage of requests can get to a guy. I am hoping he just needed to step away for a while.

I dunno what I'm going to due when I can no longer use it...

I'm with @Fozzy71... why do you think you are not going to be able to use it? It has be rock-solid for me. And, though there are two or three things that could make it even better, I can't say that I find it particularly lacking in any way. I also don't know of any DIY calculator, paid or unpaid, that offers anything JC doesn't.

One answer would be to pay for software that does a similar (though inferior; in my mind) job. Or, if you really find value in HR's software, and appreciate what he has done to date; you can use the PayPal link in the Help tab, and show him financially. Forego that next atty, or mod, and send him the money instead. I don't know about you; but I use JC way more than 80% of my hardware purchases. And finding a couple of extra Jacksons in my wallet always gave me a little extra motivation.