slkinsey

On the other hand, that $50 cookbook will still be usable in 10 years. Whether the app will be is a serious question. Actually, I would venture to guess that the app will still be in the market in 10 years unless the CIA closes. If they have their students use tablets and their textbook apps, they will continue to update/refresh the app constantly. The update might not be free, but I would guess it would be cheaper to buy than a new brand book. It is quite common for applications written ten years ago to not work properly on modern hardware under modern system software. Apple does tend to be better about this than most, but it's worth pointing out that there is no Macintosh application more than ten years old that will run on a modern-day Macintosh. So it doesn't strike me as going out on a limb to suggest that the CIA's app is unlikely to run on modern hardware in 2021. Rather, it seems closer to a statement of fact. You are correct that it seems likely the CIA will continue to update the app and hopefully will eventually port the app to other devices and systems. Whether they charge for these updates, and how much, is a serious question, however. Again: if you buy the paper book, you pay for it one time and it's technology that will never be obsolete.

It's always hard to say about these things. I remember for a while everyone was complaining about the "new Campari" and hoarding bottles of the "old Campari." Now we don't hear people complaining so much. On the other hand, sometimes formulations and products do change, of course. Whether or not Tuaca at the source was changed when it was transferred from Livorno to Kentucky... Well, making it in an entirely different facility can't have helped things stay the same, that's for sure. On the other hand, it doesn't necessarily mean that things have really changed -- or indeed that there wasn't some degree of change even while the product was still being made in Livorno. It's always difficult when one is comparing old bottles that have sat on shelves (or perhaps partially empty in a kitchen cabinet) for who-knows-how long against a freshly opened bottle. Could be that what you're tasting is the effects of oxidation and age, and maybe the newly opened bottle is actually a better product. And if the guys in Kentucky are getting the product from the factory into the hands of consumers faster than the Livornese had been, then it's possible that there will be some enduring differences merely due to age and nothing else. Or... yanno... not. Could be that the new product is inferior. But it's worthwhile considering that if you are testing "new whatever" against a bottle of "old whatever" with the predetermined notion that the "old whatever" as you are tasting it represents the gold standard, it is impossible for the "new whatever" to match up. In times like this I like to think of a video I saw of Ed Hamilton and someone else (I forget who) testing the new Lemon Hart 151 against the old Lemon Hart 151. They did observe that the new wasn't quite the same as the old. But they said two interesting things: First, they said that it wasn't exactly apparent that the new stuff was any worse than the old stuff, or that it didn't still have all the markers you'd look for in Lemon Hart 151. And second, they said that even the old Lemon Hart 151 had batch-to-batch differences that were greater than the differences they were finding between the new and old stuff. If it might help put your mind at ease, have someone make you two "Hot Apple Pies" with the new and old stuff and see if you can tell the difference. If not, or even if you can but they both seem good, it's probably not worth worrying about it (not that you are necessarily worrying about it).

On the other hand, that $50 cookbook will still be usable in 10 years. Whether the app will be is a serious question.

Just picked up two bottles at Astor. Will report back (not that I really have any frame of reference).

It depends, I think, on whether or not the liquid is chilled prior to introduction to the ice.

FWIW, I have never had any trouble traveling with my circulator in my carry-on baggage. I would never think of packing it in checked baggage.

I would think that the same concerns with respect to venison (mushy and gamy with long SV cooking) would apply to moose as well.

Wood: Repeatedly soaking and drying wood isn't good for the wood. Knives: Dishwasher detergent contains abrasives. These will dull the edges. Nonstick pans: Nonstick coatings are delicate and depend upon smoothness for much of their nonstick properties. The abrasives in dishwasher detergent rough up nonstick coatings and reduce their nonstick properties.

Reading the paper... it's interesting and they're taking a first look at specific effects. But it's by no means revolutionary thinking to suggest that many other sensory, perceptual and cognitive elements can effect our perception of flavors. Or, rather, that many other sensory, perceptual and cognitive elements can effect our perception of just about anything. To make a famous example, it's been widely known for some time that even wine experts can be tricked into mistaking a white wine for a red wine simply by coloring the white wine red. What's interesting to me is not that higher levels of distraction were positively associated with lower abilities to discriminate alcoholic strength. Distraction always has an inhibiting effect on these kinds of skills. As the authors point out in the discussion, perceiving alcoholic strength is a much more complex task compared to sweetness or bitterness. Rather, it's interesting to me that exposure to music seemed to have the effect of increasing the perception of sweetness. However, it's not clear that this particular finding has much applicability to a real bar scene, as the group which listened to music and performed another distracting task (similar to holding a conversation in a bar with loud music) did not show increased perception of sweetness.

You can read the original paper here.

Underground irrigation. Urban farming.

Diluting 50% bitters to 25% doesn't vaguely resemble diluting 75% bitters to 37.5%?

It is quite incredible that someone, who admittedly still hasn't carried out anything vaguely resembling what is being discussed, can be so sure of something even though there are numerous quotes from yourselves that contradict what you've been saying and agree with the original point I've been making throughout. Really? Just repeated the experiment making a tequila Old Fashioned with 5 ml of Bittermen's Xocatl Mole bitters in one sample versus 10 ml of diluted-down (5 mi of bitters plus 5 ml of water) Bittermen's Xocatl Mole bitters in the other sample. They were indistinguishable.

Unless the 37.5% bitters tastes different than the 75% bitters for reasons caused by but not directly related to the dilution. Precipitation of select flavorful and aromatic molecules would be the way this might happen. Other reactions are unlikely. I and several others have suggested this possibility a number of times, and Adam has stuck to his guns that abv is the deciding variable. To wit: The same product at two differing abvs taste differently, it's that simple! There have been ample opportunities for someone interested in having an honest and open discussion to say that they do see louching at dilution, or to observe that additional sediment that has to be filtered off appears while the bitters is resting post-dilution. Everyone on the other side of the question would then have understood that some irreversible change in the chemical composition had taken place as a result of the dilution. I have even said that I think it is likely that something like this may happen. But I assume louching or additional sedimentation would be easy for a busy bitters maker to observe, and we have to assume that if Adam were being forthright in his engagement in this discussion this is an observation he would have mentioned. I assume that he has been forthright and has not deliberately withheld such observation, and so we have to note that quite the opposite has been the case thus far in the discussion. Rather than bringing forward the possibility of certain molecules precipitating out of solution at dilution, he has suggested (as above) that only the abv is important.

No one has disputed that these two concentrations of very flavorful liquid taste different at those concentrations. But you are effectively asserting that equal concentrations of the same original very flavorful liquid taste different depending on whether the original very flavorful liquid was diluted in one step or two steps. The fact that you are either unwilling or unable to speak to the scientific underpinnings of the question doesn't lend credence to your position. It's disingenuous for you to suggest that the only way someone can test your claims is to "really be bothered" to make their own high proof bitters, especially if you can't "really be bothered" to send over a small amount of your own high proof bitters which is already prepared. 50 ml of 75% abv bitters would be more than enough for testing purposes, and it can't be any more expensive or time-consuming for me to make a batch of high proof bitters than it would be for you to drop a little bottle into an envelope. Generally speaking, the burden of proof lies with the person making extraordinary claims that go against accepted scientific principles. And in this case, that person would be you. As I posted above, as a result of this discussion I unscientifically tested the effect of proof using some highly concentrated ~50% abv commercial bitters as the base (for the record: Bittermen's Xocatl Mole at 53% and Dutch's Colonial Cocktail Bitters at 52%). I took some of each and diluted them with an equal measure of water. The ~25% abv bitters tasted different from the ~50% bitters out of the bottle, as we would expect. But cocktails made using a single dose of the ~50% bitters tasted identical to those made using a double dose of the ~25% bitters. This is precisely what we would expect, given the fact that the tested cocktails had effectively identical chemical compositions. Why you don't understand or won't accept this is a mystery to me. Have you ever studied chemistry? If you believe that there's something magically different about 75% compared to 37.5%, then maybe that makes my informal testing irrelevant. If that's the case, then it's incumbent upon you to demonstrate this. If you want to clear the controversy entirely, then as someone who presumably has plenty of 75% bitters lying around, you should send some 75% bitters over. I'll even split the shipping cost with you. We will dilute the bitters here with distilled water, and I'll arrange to get together with suitably reputable testers (e.g., well known bartenders and writers, etc.) to conduct a series of double blind triangle tests to determine whether or not it is possible to distinguish between cocktails made with one dose of 75% bitters and cocktails made with two doses of the same bitters diluted to 37.5% in the bottle with distilled water. If you're willing to put your reputation where your mouth is, shoot me a message and we'll set it up. But before you go to that trouble, have a conversation with a chemist. Surely you must know someone over there with a university degree in chemistry.

No. It's not. They both have their own flavour profile. Which takes me to my last point on this subject... You have had plenty of opportunities in this discussion to assert that the dilution to bottle proof causes a chemical reaction such as louching, filterable precipitation, etc. that permanently changes the chemistry of the bitters. And several other people have suggested that this might be the case. Since you have not made such a claim, your entire argument is predicated on the supposition that the dilution to bottle proof changes the flavor profile in a permanent and characteristic way that endures through further massive dilutions into other liquids simply by virtue of having been diluted in the bottle. I hope you understand that flavor and aroma perceptions are created through the sensation of certain molecules at certain concentrations. And I hope you understand that if, for example, 83 parts per million of quinine produces a certain taste sensation, it doesn't matter how the quinine molecules got to have a concentration of 83 parts per million. A simple water and quinine solution that started out at 83 ppm will taste exactly the same as one that started out at 166 ppm and was diluted down to 83 ppm. The reason they taste the same is because the chemistry is the same. When we make a bitters infusion we have created a solution containing water and ethanol and the various flavorful and aromatic molecules that resulted from the infusion. In this context, the water and ethanol are effectively flavorless/odorless and what we care about are the flavorful and aromatic molecules. If there is no chemical reaction or other effect of dilution such as louching, precipitation, etc., then the ratio of these flavorful and aromatic molecules will not change with respect to each other no matter how much the solution may be diluted. For example, if the original solution has 100 mg/l of Molecule A and 50 mg/l of Molecule B (a 2:1 ratio) and is then diluted by 100%, the new solution will have 50 mg/l of Molecule A and 25 mg/l of Molecule B (also a 2:1 ratio). We can dilute this solution as much as we want, and the ratio of Molecules A and B will always be 2:1 unless something causes one of them to drop out of solution. If we were to do a chemical analysis of your 75% bitters to look at the aromatic and flavorful molecules, we could see that it has, say, 100 mg/l of Molecule A and 50 mg/l of Molecule B and 20 mg/l of Molecule C and so on. When we make a 100% dilution, so long as this reduction in abv doesn't cause any of the aromatic and flavorful molecules to come out of solution, the 37.5% solution now has 50 mg/l of Molecule A and 25 mg/l of Molecule B and 10 mg/l of Molecule C and so on. So, let's say that one dash = 1 milliliter. 1 ml of the 75% solution will contain 0.1 mg of Molecule A and 0.05 mg of Molecule B and 0.02 mg of Molecule C and so on. 1 ml of the 37.5% solution will contain half as many of each flavorful and aromatic molecule: 0.05 mg of Molecule A and 0.025 mg of Molecule B and 0.010 mg of Molecule C and so on. This is not fundamentally different from the dilution of ethanol with water (except that when we dilute ethanol we tend to express the amount of ethanol in terms of volume rather than mass). So now we're putting dashes of these solutions into a cocktail. If we use one milliliter of the 75% solution, we are dosing the drink with 0.1 mg of Molecule A and 0.05 mg of Molecule B and 0.02 mg of Molecule C and so on. If we use two milliliters of the 37.5% solution, we are also dosing the drink with 0.1 mg of Molecule A and 0.05 mg of Molecule B and 0.02 mg of Molecule C and so on, because we used twice as much solution. This means that the same amount of aromatic and flavorful molecules will be present in both drinks, and the only chemical difference between the two cocktails will be that the one dosed with the 37.5% solution will contain an additional 1 ml of water. This is basic chemistry and mathematics. If you don't understand this or willfully persist in insisting that it isn't so, I don't think there is any basis for those who do understand these things to continue this conversation with you. All I can suggest is that you refer this question to a chemist. I should hasten to add that there are any number of possible explanations for your observations that would be entirely valid. For example, if you are not making your comparisons in a properly controlled way there is the huge issue of confirmation bias. On the chemistry side, as several of us have suggested, there could be chemical changes that result from the reduction in abv (most likely certain molecules precipitating out of solution). This seems like a fairly likely explanation. I haven't even said that what you claim to observe doesn't happen. I and others here have mostly taken exception with the reasons you have given to explain your observations, because those explanations simply don't hold up according to really very basic scientific principles.

Is there any vermouth about? You could make a Negroni.

I've had an immersion blender for over a decade, but rarely use it. I just don't see too many instances where it isn't far better to use the VitaPrep. Soups turn out infinitely smoother, for example. Things like crepe batter immediately come together and there is no need for resting. And of course you can easily crack a ton of eggs directly into the canister and blend away. For other tasks, things like an electric beater or a simple hand whisk seem easier and easier to clean. Mostly I find the immersion blender useful for very small amounts.

This, I believe, is the heart of the misunderstandings here. When we make an infusion of herbs, spices, citrus, etc. to make a bitters, what we are creating is a solution consisting of ethanol, water and various aromatic and flavorful molecules. If we had the technology, we could determine the parts-per-million of every constituent molecule in the solution. Now, we understand that our solution of ethanol, water and various aromatic and flavorful molecules may taste differently depending on a variety of factors such as temperature, abv, presence of sugar, concentration of the various aromatic and flavorful molecules, and so on. We also understand, one hopes, that solutions with the same chemical composition taste exactly the same, regardless of how those solutions may have come to have their chemical compositions. Furthermore, those of us who know a little something about how sense organs and human perception work know that even solutions with highly similar chemical compositions will taste exactly the same so long as the differences fall within certain sensation thresholds. This understanding is largely what I have been speaking to. If we take a 75% abv solution of ethanol, water and various aromatic and flavorful molecules and dilute it by 100% with water, we have created a solution that contains half as many aromatic and flavorful molecules per unit volume as the original solution. It also contains half as much ethanol and two and a half times as much water per unit volume compared to the original solution. These differences will make the 37.5% bitters taste and smell different from the 75% bitters because the concentration of aromatic and flavorful molecules as well as the abv have changed. Now this could lead one to believe -- as Adam apparently does -- that the differences in flavor between the two bitters will carry through into any drink into which these bitters are dashed. But chemistry doesn't work that way. When we dash bitters into a cocktail, all we are doing is adding a dose of aromatic and flavorful molecules to the drink together with minor amounts of (effectively flavorless) water and ethanol. This lets us understand that if we add one dash of 75% bitters to the one cocktail and two dashes of 37.5% bitters to another cocktail, the amount of aromatic and flavorful molecules we are contributing to each cocktail is the same. (This also constitutes a massive dilution and reduction in the concentration of aromatic and flavorful molecules.) The only difference will be that the cocktail with the two dashes of 37.5% bitters will contribute five times more water to the drink. Could this make a difference? Well, maybe. It could affect the concentration or abv of the final cocktail. But in reality we are only adding minute quantities of water anyway. Once we introduce the variability of chilling via melting ice the likelihood that this small amount of additional water will meaningfully affect the concentration and abv of the final cocktail is vanishingly small, and the chemical composition of the two cocktails will be identical within reasonable threshold tolerances. One way of putting this into "chemistry talk" would be to say that the parts-per-million of the various aromatic and flavorful molecules will be effectively the same in both cocktails. This means that the two cocktails will taste virtually identical and will not be distinguishable in double-blind A/B/X testing. The reason to dilute a bitters to bottle proof is so that it contributes the desired number of aromatic and flavorful molecules when used in the doses typically and conveniently employed in making cocktails, i.e., by the dash -- although some makers of especially concentrated bitters have decided to employ eyedropper dosing rather than dash dosing. Too many aromatic and flavorful molecules per dose, and the bitters becomes very tricky to use. Too few aromatic and flavorful molecules and your bitters may be perceived as a poor value, and/or unduly burdensome to use, and/or bartenders may have a tendency to over-dose in compensation. If, on the other hand, the dilution to bottle proof causes a chemical reaction such as louching, precipitation, etc., then the game changes. And this strikes me as somewhat likely, although I haven't heard Adam say that he sees this in his bitters manufactory.

Good summary. I would say that I'm right with you with respect to your points and responses numbered 1 and 2 above. I'm not sure I agree with respect to your response to point number 3. I think it's pretty clear that aromatic constituents change based upon a large number of variables. In this case, concentration and abv are the primary ones we're concerned with. You can see the effect of concentration in a drink like Audrey's Dreamy Dorini Smoking Martini where a half ounce of highly concentrated Islay single malt is "stretched out" with two ounces of vodka (and water from the ice, of course). This keeps the alcoholic strength more or less the same, but radically decreases the concentration of the scotch molecules. There are many different flavors and aromas that are detectable in the cocktail compared to the malt. You can also see the effect of concentration by comparing, e.g., Wild Turkey 101 and Wild Turkey 80. The difference between these two spirits being that there is more water added to the Wild Turkey 80, so the concentration is reduced. These two spirits do not taste the same. Of course, the abv is also reduced, so there may be a double effect. It might be interesting to dilute a sample of Wild Turkey 101 by 20% with 100 proof vodka and then compare the three spirits. This would offer an opportunity to see how much of the difference between WT 101 and WT 80 results from a reduction in concentration and how much results from a reduction in abv. To evaluate the effect of abv in isolation would be a bit more complicated. One could take two samples of 75% bitters and do a 100% dilution of both samples, one with 75% ethanol and one with water. The two samples would then have the same concentration of flavor/aroma molecules but would have a different abv. This would be an interesting experiment to try. I suspect that there would be a noticeable difference between the two samples due to the greater volatility of ethanol compared to water, but I also expect that the difference would be no where near as great as differences attributable to concentration. If we were to compare those two 100% diluted samples (one at 75% abv and one at 37.5% abv) of bitters with a 75% sample of undiluted bitters, I would expect to see a relative degree of similarity between the two diluted samples and large differences between those samples and the undiluted sample. It's noteworthy that when most of us speak of reducing the abv, what we're really talking about is reducing the concentration and the abv. My suspicion is that the reduction in concentration may be the more important variable.

I have several of these from the MoMa store. Work like a charm.

Did I say that? That's another post you've made where I'm not sure you read what came before. And why the obsession with the water? Really, why? The amount of water (and alcohol) in the original extraction decides the abv, and thus affects the flavour of that bottling. So, 75% abv bitters taste differently to that which is 37.5%. That bottling will then affect the flavour in the finished drink. So let's say there's more cardamom and angelica prevalent at 75%abv, but at 37.5% it is more citrus forward, that'll affect the drink. The reason I say that is because that is exactly what you're saying. And you say it again above. I get that a bitters might taste more strongly of cardamom and angelica at 75% abv and more of citrus at 37.5% abv. We all understand this. What doesn't quite follow is that these taste differences will carry through once the respective bitters are further diluted, and to a far greater extent, when they are added to a cocktail in minute quantities. It doesn't follow because this dilution will also affect the taste of the bitters, just as much as the original dilution did. Since we agree that abv has an effect on flavor and agree that diluting a 75% abv bitters 100% with water to 37.5 % abv can have a profound effect on the expression of the flavors, then we must also agree that an 8,000% dilution of those bitters will have an even more profound effect. And this actually understates the extent to which bitters are diluted in a cocktail. At the very least, then, we understand that the dilution of the bitters that happens in the glass is many orders of magnitude greater than the dilution that happens for the bottle. And if making a 100% dilution for the bottle from 75% to 37.5 % abv shifts citrus to the fore and cardamom and angelica into the background, one would expect that an 8,000% dilution in the glass would have an even more profound effect and shift other flavors around. This is something you seem unwilling to address, and what you have written suggests you believe that the dilution that happens for the bottle is the only one that matters. You seem to be suggesting that once the bitters are diluted to have a certain flavor profile, these flavors transfer into the drink just as they were coming out of the bottle despite the fact that the drink itself further dilutes the bitters. But that doesn't make sense because as you yourself have said, dilution changes the flavors. I don't see any chemical basis to assert that the 75% abv expression of the bitters will have a predominant taste of cardamom and angelica in the cocktail whereas the 37.5% abv expression of the bitters will taste more citrus-forward in the cocktail simply because they taste that way straight from the bottle. And you seem to be asserting that they will. Plenty of things have certain flavors straight out of the bottle that change radically when diluted into other ingredients. Let's look at a real situation. Let's say you're making an Old Fashioned. You put either 0.25 ml of 75% bitters or 0.5 ml of 37.5% bitters into 100 ml of 40% abv bourbon, and you stir with ice to get 20% dilution (20 ml of added water). If we look only at the water added by the ice, we have effectively created an 8,000% to 8,100% dilution of the original extraction into water. On a chemical basis, this dilution in the glass is no different from the dilution that was done to bring the 75% abv bitters down to 37.5% abv. It's just 80 times greater, is all. Because this dilution is no different on a chemical basis, another way of looking at it would be to say that we have effectively created a "0.1874% abv bitters" by further diluting the 75% bitters with 20 ml of water, and a "0.1869% abv bitters" by further diluting the 37.5% bitters with 20 ml of water. That's a trifling difference of 0.0005% in abv, which suggests that there won't be any difference in the flavor of the two Old Fashioneds attributable to the bitters. And of course we haven't yet factored in the water that the bourbon maker put into the bourbon to dilute it down from barrel proof to 40% abv, which probably accounts for at least another 25 ml of the drink volume. Now... could there be factors that lead a 75% abv bitters to taste different from a 37.5% abv bitters in a way that carries through into the cocktail other than concentration? Sure. The most obvious would be if certain substances precipitate out and get filtered off when the bitters is reduced to 37.5% abv. This would create a permanent and enduring change in the flavor profile of the bitters. But thus far you seem to be arguing that a 75% abv bitters tastes different from a diluted-down 37.5% abv expression of the same bitters solely due to proof and concentration, and that these differences will carry through into the drink in some kind of characteristic way despite the massive dilution that happens in the glass. That just doesn't follow. It's like saying that because 100 proof Wild Turkey tastes different from 80 proof Wild Turkey coming out of the bottle, you can't make the two cocktails taste the same by putting more water into the 100 proof cocktail. We know this isn't true. Of course those will taste different. They will taste different because you used twice as much of the original extraction in the cocktail you dashed the 75% bitters into. But that's not what we're talking about. You say yourself that "two dashes of 37.5% abv bitters is not the same as one dash at 75% abv." As to whether they will taste different in the characteristic ways you suggest, the minor at-home testing I've done with the available bitters I have around the house since this thread started suggest that you're wrong about those characteristic flavor differences carrying through into the drink. One dash of 50% compared to two dashes of the same bitters diluted-down to 25% tasted identical to everyone who tasted the two drinks. I don't have any bitters of substantially higher proof at home.

Those things are really only useful if you're starting from clear block ice. Otherwise, just use a spherical ice mold.

So you're not going to answer the questions, then? I don't have any 75% bitters. But I've done experiments diluting some 50% bitters I have and applying them to cocktails. They taste identical when used in amounts that contain identical amounts of the prima materia. I don't actually disagree with this entirely. I just don't agree with your reasoning for saying why it's so, and based on your arguments in this thread thus far it's not clear that you have a firm grasp of the basic underlying science. At least not one you're willing to share with anyone. Again, this might be helped by actually addressing the questions I posed. The reason cocktails made with 75% bitters will usually taste different from one made with 37.5% bitters is because they probably contain a different amount of the original extraction, depending on how formulated, and definitely contain a different amount of water. I just disagree with the reasons you are giving. The main reason the two cocktails might taste different is because they contain a different amount of the original extraction. In the context of a cocktail that is being diluted with lots of water through melting ice in a way that is likely to vary by a greater amount than any differences in the amount of water contained in the two bitters formulations, I don't believe the difference in the amount of water contributed in each dash is as important as any differences in the amount of the original extraction, but I suppose it's possible. What you seem to be arguing is that diluting the original extraction with water when you make your bitters changes its taste in some kind of fundamental and permanent way that carries through into an infinitely more massive dilution into a cocktail. I may not be a bitters maker, but I do know a little something about chemistry and sense perceptions, knowledge which tells me that this supposition cannot be true. What you want to do when making a bitters is to dilute it to a strength that gives the effect you want (i.e., that contains the amount of original extraction you want) in the amounts typically used in cocktail making, and doesn't have to be handled like plutonium. That makes sense.

Right. Dilution will make a difference. But that doesn't seem to be quite what you are arguing. You seem to be arguing that diluting to XXX times tastes different depending on whether you do this via a one-stage dilution or a two-stage dilution. Let me propose a scenario and if you can answer some questions about it, perhaps we can clear up some misunderstanding: - A herbal infusion -- let's say one of your own so it's something you're well familiar with -- is done into 75% abv alcohol. We will call this the "original extraction." - Bitters A is made simply by using the 75% original extraction at full strength. - Bitters B is made by making a 1X dilution of the original extraction to attain 37.5% abv. We now decide to make some bitters-and-water drinks... - Drink No. 1 is made with 100 ml of water and 0.25 ml ("one dash") of Bitters A. This results in a 400X dilution of the original extraction for a total drink volume of 100.25 ml. - Drink No. 2 is made with 100 ml of water and 0.5 ml ("two dashes") of Bitters B. This results in a 401X dilution of the original extraction for a total drink volume of 100.5 ml. - Drink No. 3 is made with 99.75 ml of water and 0.5 ml ("two dashes") of Bitters B. This results in a 400X dilution of the original extraction for a total drink volume of 100.25 ml Would you expect these drinks to taste similar or different? Most especially, would you expect there to be any significant taste difference between Drink No. 1 and Drink No. 3? Given that there is only a 0.0025% difference in dilution between Drinks No. 1 and 3 and Drink No. 2, would you expect this minute difference to result in a difference in taste? It is my understanding, and I believe the understanding of many who are responding to your posts in this thread, that you believe that Drink No. 1 and Drink No. 3 would taste different, despite the fact that they have the same dilution of the original extraction.