Am I reading that correctly - you are in Orange County, CA, right? If so and you're using county water then your water quality looks great to me. If I'm looking at the right report (see here) then you have pH ~8 with ~16 ppm of Mg and ~48 ppm of Ca and total alkalinity of ~120 (180 as CaCO3 equiv). Your alkalinity is on the high side but the rest of the report looks great (for plants, I wouldn't drink it). 1 tsp of FP in 1 gallon of water will give you ~6 ppm of Mg and ~25 ppm of Ca. I mention this because your water has a good ratio of Ca:Mg and it already has both in higher levels than you'd get with typical usage of the liquid fertilizer most people around here talk about. To answer your question directly: no. The mixes are not neutral. The gritty mix will be closer to 7 than the 5-1-1 (which will be more acidic) but *it doesn't matter.* The pH of your mix initially has very little to do with the pH levels your mix will maintain over time. In containers the soil pH will be determined mostly by the pH and alkalinity of the water you use and by the type of fertilizer you use and its ratio of ammonium to nitrate (*and* the rate at which the plant is taking up both of those nutrients which can vary depending on temperature, cultivar, etc). You should basically assume that the initial pH of the mix itself is of no consequence when it comes to determining the pH of your soil over the long term. You do need to pay attention to the initial pH but only because if you transplant something into the mix you want the roots to function reasonably well from the get-go. All this means is that you need to raise the pH of the bark or peat slightly so they are more friendly to transplants - the directions for doing that are built into the 5-1-1. I grow citrus trees in both mixes. Either will work for you and there are pluses and minuses to both. In terms of pH and nutrient availability you will find that the 5-1-1 is slightly more forgiving than the gritty mix. At your pH and alkalinity if you grow citrus trees in containers you will almost certainly develop Mn and Zn deficiency even if you use something like FP (which, again: you do not need to do based on your water quality). You could avoid this by acidulating your water or by using foliar applications of Manganase Sulfate and Zinc Sulfate (1.5 g per gallon and 1 g per gallon respectively - they can be mixed and applied to new growth on plants showing deficiencies). Just looking again at your water report you also have adequate/luxury levels of B, S, Cl, Na, & Cu. Nickel will be in your soil via the bark and or peat and you likely don't need to add any. All your water may be missing is: Mo, Zn, Mn, & Fe. Were I you I would use a straight 5-1-3 fertilizer and then manage the micros as needed myself. You will find it much cheaper than the usual suggestion. You could also go with Jack's Professional 25-5-15 High Performance and you wouldn't have to manage your micros as often (you will still get Zn and Mn deficiency at your pH unless you acidulate or use a serious acid reaction fertilizer - but then you will blow your NPK ratios). The cheapest and easiest option would be to use the Jack's (or another 5-1-3 with Mo and Fe) and then use the foliar sprays 1-3 times a year. If you acidulate your water I wouldn't use sulfuric - you have a ton of S in there already. Maybe citric or vinegar (don't use phosphoric, nitric is dangerous). This will be moderately expensive and moderately time consuming even with a chemical injector. Do yourself a favor and avoid the expense of Foliage Pro with your water. You will be correcting micro issues in any case and you have better Ca/Mg/S than the fertilizer can offer you anyway.

Mike: Fantsastic looking plants! I am so glad you decided to go with the 5.1.1 mix:-). You have come a long way with your plants..Just wonderful. Let us know when would love to use a mix that last's a lot longer than that, and we will get hooked on the gritty mix..:-)Nice lights too. Jodik and Al: I appreciate your vote of confidence in me..That means alot expecially coming from the very ones that helped me every step of the way and especially the one that introduced this concept and mix to me in the first place, Al:0) By the way, Sissy say's "right back at you".. Thank you! Josh: Thank you for your input while I was sick. Your right, and I figure if anyone is really interested in what coir has done for my plants, let alone see pictures, all they would have to do is plug my name into the search field and they can see my journet from begining till recent. Coir stinks, and that's that.;-) Plant48: Thanks for the congrats..It is not the first time my good friends and teacher have commented on my plants. Just do search of my threads. Eggplant and Christine: Thank you much.Your can look like this if you just hang around this forum for a while..Thank you Christine. Posting pictures is easy..If you have photbucket, just upload and we will tell you from there if you do so. Hi mrlike2u, how are you? Sorry I missed you this weekend..Maybe next time.;-) Xuan: Just BEAUTIFUL as always! I love every picture you show us just as much as I love everyone"s!! You pictures always make me feel warm and cozy..lol. Thank you! You are so lucky not to have to face this dreaded cold winter.. I use to like it when I snow boarded..Not anymore.. Have a happy one everybody..I would love to see more pics by the way.. Mike..:-)))

I'm just musing here & not being snippy, but I think that the 5:1:1 mix performs significantly better than peat based soils, and remains structurally sound much longer (4-5 times longer, based on all other cultural conditions being equal). The gritty mix is even better, providing greater aeration and lasting indefinitely. I'm not saying that to promote what others refer to as 'Al's Soils', only to illustrate that soils that are highly aerated and structurally stable are much preferred to peat/coir/compost-based soils for the results oriented crowd. I'm able to say this based on the hundreds of people at GW and other sites that are using these soils and some fertilizer recommendations with a degree of success that has them saying they left soils like MG or other peat-based soils and will never look back. There is a crowd that wants to make things easier (these soils are much more forgiving and easier to grow in) and appreciates the idea that their plants are growing at closer to their genetic potential. Then, there is the group that feels that what they are using is 'good enough'. I have no quarrel with how folks establish their priorities, but what I usually hear, and what I'm hearing above is 'it's too much bother'. I never try to coax anyone to use "my" soils. I only point out the considerable benefits of higher aeration and greater durability and let others decide. I respect your decisions, but at the same time I can point to the fact that what's easier for the grower and what's better for the plant are often mutually exclusive. In this case, there is an inverse relationship between effort and results, but it's not as great as it seems. Yes, there is some effort involved in finding the ingredients and making the soil, but part of that effort is negated in the fact that healthier roots make healthier plants and healthy plants are less susceptible to insects and disease, and are more productive or prolific. Include the fact that root rot and soluble salts accumulation (especially for houseplants) is something you would have to work at to achieve, and you've got a pretty good case for abandoning the heavy soils. In the end, it always almost always distills to an individual decision. Is the perceived gain worth the perceived effort. Some answer with a resounding yes, and others are not so sure or unwilling to go through the trouble. I respect any one's decision because my part in trying to help folks ends with trying to provide the best science I can so they can make up their own minds. However, if the soils didn't work considerably better than conventional soils, I'd have been handed my head long ago. ;o) Take care. Al

Yes you can, and in the short run 5-1-1 in may actually perfom better than the Gritty mix. But it will wear out quicker (break down) than the gritty mix. I tend to think of annuals going in the 5-1-1 mix, and perinnials in gritty mix. If you are going to be up-potting in a couple of years go with what you have. Either are a better choice than most anything you can find in most garden centers. Gritty mix makes future repots a dream, tip the pot over and you have bare roots.. Grading the pine bark is not fun, I hate it! A major concept of the gritty mix is based on particle size, larger particles have less surface area (by volume) and thus less water retention. 1/4 to 1/8 inch seems to be the optimal size, although due the screening process of pine bark and the thin strips I will let most 1/2 and under get in the mix (under 1/8 is not good either). If you are looking for Turface MVP check a local irrigation supply house, the stuff was designed for baseball diamonds so look in that direction. The dust is not good for the mix (particle size) The gran-i-grit is intended for chickens to help them digest grains. There are many other products other than gran-i-grit that will perform just as well. Look to a local farm supply house for the rock. Rock dust is not good for the mix (particle size) Gypsum is available at the big box home improvements stores. Gritty does dry out quicker than potting soil so you do need to water a bit more often. It is extremely difficult to overwater with gritty mix, that includes mother nature overwatering. Root rot is probably the number one killer of potted plants. After water, air is the most important thing you can give roots (most plants), more important than fertilizer. Gritty mix excels at this without drying out the root system. Gritty mix is heavy stuff, an advantage of heavy is the pot is less likely to tip from heavy winds. Al is a smart guy, it is such a simple concept.