Ice clean extraction journal (MHRB)

[SnozzleBerry]

If you follow the tek step-by-step you will always wind up with bright white-semi clear shards from the get go.

If you don't have the equipment, you can't follow the pictorial step-by-step.

If you replace the equipment with commonly-sourced counterparts, you have a standard STB.

Plus, as we've seen with existing methods, functional methodology doesn't (can't) entirely eliminate human "error"...although non-white DMT is not necessarily an error (see: DMT polymorphism, people who prefer non-white DMT, etc.).

You don't need anything special to extract (intelligence or equipment wise). As Uncle Knucles says, "If you can bake a cake, you can bake a noodle."

 

[DesykaLamgeenie]

It would seem more fitting to me to have made your thread in the form of an extraction journal - journaling your process, rather than an instructional tek.

You may not realize it, but the only things you're doing that aren't included in some tried and true teks are the distilled water wash and the activated charcoal wash. This is because these things aren't necessary for high quality results. The charcoal wash has already been covered in other places and the solvent was still yellow after the distilled water wash, so while I don't know the chemistry behind doing that, it doesn't seem to be a useful addition.

It may seem crazy for your post to be picked apart like this - but teks aren't just to be written up at the whim of any and everyone who has an awesome extraction using well-known techniques, and/or perhaps with a couple of their own personal additions. There's been a growing number of relatively new members stepping into the teacher/instructor position and posting teks/instructionals that don't really bring much, if anything, to the table - and end up muddying the waters.

A tek is, as I see it, a firmly established thing, and once a certain method has been made into a tek, new teks doing basically the same thing shouldn't arise and be established alongside the old. Can you imagine if everybody posted their extraction processes, all very similar, and called them all new teks? That would be a mess for new members to navigate.

It's fine if you didn't realize this - but that takes us to the issue of people stepping into the teacher/instructor position too quickly - someone in a position to post instructions should have a solid enough foundation here to know what's suitable for a new tek and what isn't. That may sound harsh, but it's necessary to keep up the quality of information and ease of access/navigation of said information.


On the other hand, journaling your process for others to watch and potentially learn from, however, would be welcomed with open arms.

 

[1ce]

It would seem more fitting to me to have made your thread in the form of an extraction journal - journaling your process, rather than an instructional tek.

You may not realize it, but the only things you're doing that aren't included in some tried and true teks are the distilled water wash and the activated charcoal wash. This is because these things aren't necessary for high quality results. The charcoal wash has already been covered in other places and the solvent was still yellow after the distilled water wash, so while I don't know the chemistry behind doing that, it doesn't seem to be a useful addition.

It may seem crazy for your post to be picked apart like this - but teks aren't just to be written up at the whim of any and everyone who has an awesome extraction using well-known techniques, and/or perhaps with a couple of their own personal additions. There's been a growing number of relatively new members stepping into the teacher/instructor position and posting teks/instructionals that don't really bring much, if anything, to the table - and end up muddying the waters.

A tek is, as I see it, a firmly established thing, and once a certain method has been made into a tek, new teks doing basically the same thing shouldn't arise and be established alongside the old. Can you imagine if everybody posted their extraction processes, all very similar, and called them all new teks? That would be a mess for new members to navigate.

It's fine if you didn't realize this - but that takes us to the issue of people stepping into the teacher/instructor position too quickly - someone in a position to post instructions should have a solid enough foundation here to know what's suitable for a new tek and what isn't. That may sound harsh, but it's necessary to keep up the quality of information and ease of access/navigation of said information.


On the other hand, journaling your process for others to watch and potentially learn from, however, would be welcomed with open arms.

That's certainly food for thought. I didn't look at it rhis way, thank-you for sharing

Snozz.. what about my equipment holds people back? Sofar the only thing I do that can't be substituted is vacume evaporating my solvents. Sure you can use a fan, I simply choose not to flood the place with fumes.

 

[anrchy]

Snozz.. what about my equipment holds people back? Sofar the only thing I do that can't be substituted is vacume evaporating my solvents. Sure you can use a fan, I simply choose not to flood the place with fumes.

All of the vessels you use most people do not have, and you give no detailed explanation as to what household items can substitute each one. Someone who is chemistry ignorant and has not attempted a single extraction may be confused as to what they can use/what to do. TEK's are generally designed for those that are ignorant about chemistry. That is why most teks read more like technical baking instructions using items that most people already own.

I do not completely agree with others about your tek being no different. If that is the case then most of the teks are the same and we should only have 2 or 3 teks as the process is pretty much identical. Whats the difference between Noman's tek, dream weavers tek, and lazymans tek? In fact Jorkest's D-Limonene tek is identical to all of those except theres the added step (FASW) and the conversion of DMT fumerate to freebase using sodium carbonate.

Really if its an issue then we should only have 3 Teks total regardless the chemicals used;

A/B TEK
STB TEK
DRYTEK (q21q21)

There is a remarkable difference between these that warrants an explanation per process. When it comes to chemicals used we should then have explanations of process with said chemicals. For example, non-polar solvents evap/freeze precip, D-limonene/Oils FASW and fumerate to freebaee conversion ect ect. There would only be ONE explanation per chemical as there are known ways to do this that work, and other ways that do nothing.

I also would argue that I do not believe heating during ANY phase of these instructionals DOES ANYTHING. I do not see a remarkable difference in yield when heating naphtha, I dont see a difference in yield when heating during the acid phase, I dont see a single difference when heating during the basification phase. IMO this info should be phased out, I think we are over complicating things with all this "lysing" the cells mumbo jumbo. If I am wrong where is there a multiple side by side comparison showing that it does indeed have an effect on yield?

 

[1ce]

It's suprising how little effect something can have on an overall yield.

When I started doing extractions I tried an acid wash which I'd salt out. Then when I do a gentle soxhlet with DMK. I'd reduce my solvent under a vacuum and precip.

Almost 3% yield! After recrystalizing I'd have about 2%. Eliminating all of these yield boosting techniques I still get about 2%.

3 pulls off ~65g bark I've got 1.2g of bright white fluff.

In still believe more could be done soxhleting with acetone though. I need another 500ml 2 neck round bottom flask though ='/

 

[anrchy]

You also have to take into consideration the bark. Ive had bark that only yields a little over 1% (mexican mimosa) . Latest extraction from different bark yielded 1.6% (brazilian)

 

[1ce]

It was from the same bag, although that isn't saying much.

 

[Spiritofspice]

Nice 1ce

I'll be using that activated charcole step from now on.

Your yields seem great I am wondering that adding the activated charcole to clear the pulls is what is responsible for your high yields.

Instead if dumping plant fats and the dmt that is soluble in them you are reclaiming them.
Sweet.

 

[1ce]

The carbon simply helps clean up the extraction a bit. I'll explain my reasonings for using it.

Pure DMT is clear. Extremely Solidly clean DMT is brilliantly white. Therefore if there is any color there must be impurities like fats/tanins.

The carbon helps remove some of these so that you can save yourself from doing a recrystalization and harming your yield.

Imho I prefer clean spice
And I have been humbled by yellow spice just the same

 

[expandaneum]

Color says nothing about purity, color changes can be made with only a few molecules in a the mix. Also you cant know if the impurities in the mix are white or transparent.

 

[1ce]

Color says nothing about purity, color changes can be made with only a few molecules in a the mix. Also you cant know if the impurities in the mix are white or transparent.

Sure it does! It says there is at least 1 impurity That's true about the colorless impurities though.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Color says nothing about purity, color changes can be made with only a few molecules in a the mix. Also you cant know if the impurities in the mix are white or transparent.

Sure it does! It says there is at least 1 impurity

Actually, it doesn't. This is what I referenced earlier re: polymorphic DMT.

You have quite a bit of reading to do before you start speaking so authoritatively. Sorry to be so blunt, but this is just getting frustrating (for me) at this point.

To help you get started:

Polymorphic properties of DMT
IMPORTANT: spice color purity fallacy AKA is your dmt ok to smoke ?

And regarding what anrchy said...yes most teks are the same...we really don't need the vast majority of teks that exist. If you understand the chemical concepts behind a tek, you don't need a "tek"...you just use the methodology that achieves those concepts and makes the most sense for your situation/materials. High yields are nothing new...many of us were hitting 2%+ 4+ years ago...and again, you have to remember that once you understand/utilize an effective extraction method, yield is limited by material.

However, because harm reduction is a huge component of what we do here, having a plethora of extraction teks that allow for people with less chemical understanding to safely carry out an effective extraction based on materials they have or can easily obtain makes sense. Are they redundant in many ways? Without a doubt. That said, at this point, unless someone really brings something new to the table, there's really nothing to be added to the extraction discussion.

Were it not an issue of harm reduction, I'd say scrap all the teks and make everyone read Entropymancer's Extraction Overview post. But hey, I'm just a curmudgeon who thinks people should really sink their teeth into this stuff.

 

[expandaneum]

You have quite a bit of reading to do before you start speaking so authoritatively. Sorry to be so blunt, but this is just getting frustrating (for me) at this point.

This^^^^^^^

ice, i really think you should do more research before posting ideas as if there true. I read you thoughts on using a cold finger and about distilling dmt. Both methods are useable for a chemist yet you say it doesn't work.

If you really want to ad something to this forum on chemistry level I suggest you first learn more and train your skills, then find a gab in the knowledge and fill it. For example find a feasible source and method for extracting 5 meo dmt. Then work your way back from your lab gear to a kitchen safe "tek".

take care

 

[Earthwalker]

All this equipment is unnessacey the most effective equipment anyone needs to perform a extraction TEK is a ph meter ...

 

[1ce]

You have quite a bit of reading to do before you start speaking so authoritatively. Sorry to be so blunt, but this is just getting frustrating (for me) at this point.

This^^^^^^^

ice, i really think you should do more research before posting ideas as if there true. I read you thoughts on using a cold finger and about distilling dmt. Both methods are useable for a chemist yet you say it doesn't work.

If you really want to ad something to this forum on chemistry level I suggest you first learn more and train your skills, then find a gab in the knowledge and fill it. For example find a feasible source and method for extracting 5 meo dmt. Then work your way back from your lab gear to a kitchen safe "tek".

take care

Why have you tried subliming DMT? I have. It condenses into an oil which falls right back off the finger and the process starts over.

I never said distillation doesn't work. I've been experimenting with it. I have results recorded in a journal I've been keeping so I can do a write up. Have you tried either? Alright, let me know when you have.

I have 5-meo sources for research. I plan on researching with it. If you actually read some posts prior to responding to a thread you would have probably noticed this.

I don't care if you have laboratory equipment or not. I don't own a single mason jar, bastor, milk jug, or beer bottle. So I will use the equipment I have exactly as I please TYVM.

Snozz, my final product ALWAYS comes out as clear crystals without much effort. I'll read through those though, could be an imteresting read.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Snozz, my final product ALWAYS comes out as clear crystals without much effort. I'll read through those though, could be an imteresting read.

This isn't about what you get or don't get in your final product. This really isn't even about you, other than the fact that you're the person who made the claim. This is about not making authoritative statements when you only have your experience to go off of...especially when the literature (and the experiences of others) presents additional data.

I have red/green color deficiency. There are certain shades of colors that all muddle together for me. I might even proclaim that "those two colors are the same!" in some cases. However, in doing so I would be conflating my experience with some sort of "absolute truth," which is simply unfounded. Someone else who does not have the same condition would clearly see two (or more) colors, making my proclamation at odds with the reality they are clearly observing.

Just because all of your DMT has been clear does not mean that pure DMT must be colorless. We don't even need to get into the minutiae of whether or not you've had your DMT analyzed or question purity claims based on eyeballing colors...we can simply point out that at least two polymorphs exist, one of which presents yellow crystals, thereby invalidating your earlier statement.

 

[1ce]

Snozz. Thank you for linking me to that article about polymorphism. It was a pretty neat read

While the article states that there are at least 2 polymorphs it ststed that the difference between colors MIGHT be related to polymorphism, rather than impurities.

You have no right to chastise me for stating my belief that colored portions of my crystals might be impurities.

Please check your sources prior to rebuking others for "authorative reporting based on experience".

Sincere regards, 1ce

Edit: I'd also like to say that, polymorphism very well could be linked to yellow crystals. If this happens I will absolutely share it. But here is wgat I do know to be congruent:

If I recrystalize a raw extraction without cleaning it up, I will have yeklow crystals. If I clean up my extraction, I have not yet come across any yellow crystals. Thus I can in full faith make a reasonable assumption that the yellow that was removed must have been traces of other organic compounds that shared a different solubility than DMT does.

Water solubility perhaps?

This may be some sort of polymorphic trick elves play on people extracting spice. Maybe not. My assumptions were gathered merely by cause and effect observations and unless some of my cleae crystal shards come out as yellow shards I'll be unlikely to change my mind.

Do we know what plant these yellow shards were extracted from? Laboratory synthesis?

 

[SnozzleBerry]

You have no right to chastise me for stating my belief that colored portions of my crystals might be impurities.

Please check your sources prior to rebuking others for "authorative reporting based on experience".

Come on now...we have your exact quote. Nowhere did you say it was "[your] belief that colored portions of [your] crystals might be impurities.

You said

Color says nothing about purity, color changes can be made with only a few molecules in a the mix. Also you cant know if the impurities in the mix are white or transparent.

Sure it does! It says there is at least 1 impurity

Now...if what you're saying is you'd like to change that earlier statement to one dealing with your belief that colored portions of your crystals might be impurities...by all means, feel free to present that as the development of your position. But that's not what you initially said.

I can only respond to the statements you make in the flat text of which this forum is comprised.

Feel free to chastise me all you'd like, but I stand by what I've said thus far in this thread.

 

[1ce]

I have no interest in chastising you! I feel that your actions were with good intent regardless as to weather or not I disagree with them. I was also generalizing extractions.

Let's imagine we were purifying table salt. Some of our salt was yellow following a sloppy clean up. Would it not be safe to assume that there are impurities in our salt? This is the logic I was using when I made thatstatement. In the future I'll discuss color variations following a clean extraction as only possible impurities that may actually be a DMT polymorph. This way we can at least humbly disagree with each other without spreading any possible misinformation.

Is this fair?