Advanced Nutrients has released a commercial line called 8th Generation. The name invites two wrong readings: that it is a new version of pH Perfect, or that it is a fresh label on chemistry already in the bottles you know. The manufacturer says it is neither. This article separates what changed from what did not and sets the seven products against the older products in the same roles. It checks the five proprietary ingredients against the independent literature and treats the launch performance figures as what they are: targets with no data attached. It is written for a licensed operation deciding whether to move a real crop onto this line. Sources are listed at the end of each section.
1. Disclosure
This account belongs to AZ Growshop. We are an authorised Advanced Nutrients distributor in Thailand, and this article covers a line we sell, as well as the older products it overlaps with. Available in Thailand through AZ Growshop; check current stock and registration with the distributor.
We use one distinction throughout: a Department of Agriculture (DOA) registration permits legal sale; it is not a published composition. Our products are registered, with numbers available on request. But where the manufacturer publishes no analysis, a registration does not fill the gap.
2. What the name does not mean
It is not “pH Perfect, version 8.” pH Perfect is the retail base-nutrient technology covered in the Advanced Nutrients guide (topic 1127). Nothing in the 8th Generation material presents itself as the successor to pH Perfect. The manufacturer’s switching guide describes the new line as built “from the ground up for commercial cannabis cultivation” without stating that any earlier line is discontinued.
By the manufacturer’s account, it is not a relabelling. The technology page says “The 8th Generation is not a reformulation” but “a new platform”. That is the company’s framing, not an independent assessment.
Sources: How to Switch Nutrients Without Wrecking Your Crop · About the Advanced Nutrients' 8th-Generation Technology
3. What it replaces, and what two parts cost
The technology page names one transition: “from the 3-Part Cultivator Series to the 2-Part CS2 system”. The CS2 page calls CS2 the 8th generation of the Cultivator Series. Cultivator Series is a commercial water-soluble powder programme in three parts (Base, Grow and Bloom) mixed through stock tanks. US retailer listings sell it in 25 lb sacks. We found no manufacturer page that states the pack size, so treat the sack size as unverified. 8th Generation replaces the three-part commercial powder programme for large operators. It does not replace the retail line. If you are growing a handful of plants, the retail pH Perfect line covered in the Advanced Nutrients guide (topic 1127) remains the line built for you, and it has not been discontinued.
Why the base is split at all. In a concentrated stock, calcium precipitates with phosphate as calcium phosphate and with sulphate as gypsum, and that sludge never reaches a plant. For this reason, most multi-part concentrates that carry calcium keep it apart from phosphate and sulphate until both are diluted in the final tank. The split itself is chemistry. How many parts sit on the phosphate side is a design choice.
| Programme | Nitrogen part | Phosphorus–potassium part(s) |
|---|---|---|
| Cultivator Series (retailer listings) | Base 14-0-0, calcium about 17% | Grow 2-9-24 · Bloom 3-13-26 (one retailer lists 3-13-36) |
| CS2 (manufacturer page) | Prime 13-0-0 | Push 0-11-24 |
The CS2 page publishes NPK only. It states no calcium, magnesium or sulphur figures.
What you keep. In both programmes you shift nitrogen against phosphorus and potassium by changing the ratio between the two sides. The manufacturer markets this as “Hit the Shift”.
What you lose. You lose the second phosphorus–potassium part. With Grow and Bloom you could change the P:K balance between veg and flower. Push fixes that balance, so you cannot raise potassium without raising phosphorus in proportion. On the retailer figures, nitrogen and calcium already shared one part in the Cultivator Series, so in neither programme can you cut nitrogen late in bloom without cutting calcium too. OVR is built for that gap. The manufacturer says this zero-nitrogen, 6%-calcium product replaces the base’s calcium source in the final two weeks.
Is two parts worse? It is simpler: one tank and one weighing step fewer, which is worth money to a facility running a fixed recipe across many rooms. It is a loss for anyone who steers P:K crop to crop. No published trial compares CS2 with the Cultivator Series on yield, quality or cost. Until someone runs that comparison, the defensible claim for CS2 is that it is simpler, not that it is better.
Sources: About the Advanced Nutrients' 8th-Generation Technology · Advanced Nutrients CS2™: Prime & Push | 8th-Generation · Advanced Nutrients OVR™ | Bud Hardener for Maximum Density · Advanced Nutrients Cultivator Series Base 14-0-0 Fertilizer (retailer, not manufacturer; check the bag label)
4. The seven products, and the older products in the same roles
All figures below come from Advanced Nutrients’ own product pages. “Not published” means the company does not publish that figure. We have not filled any gaps from retailers or forums.
| Product | Published analysis | Rate and timing | Older product in the same role |
|---|---|---|---|
| CS2™: Prime | 13-0-0 | stock tank, via protocol | Cultivator Series Base |
| CS2™: Push | 0-11-24 | stock tank, via protocol | Cultivator Series Grow / Bloom |
| RSA™ | soluble silicon 13% | 0.5 mL/gal ≈ 0.13 mL/L, once weekly, veg and bloom | — |
| SB1™ | not published | 2 mL/L, whole bloom | Bud Candy®: 0-0-0; 2 mL/L, grow weeks 1–4 and bloom weeks 1–7 |
| BGR™ | 0-1-3, with NanoCarb™ and Aminome™ | 2 mL/L from bloom week 2 (week 3 on longer cycles) | Big Bud®: 0-1-3 from monopotassium phosphate, potassium sulphate, whey protein hydrolysate; 2 mL/L, bloom weeks 2–5 |
| BFX™ | no NPK stated; white willow bark extract 1%, magnesium 0.5% from magnesium nitrate, non-ionic surfactant, SAReplex™ | 2 mL/L, once weekly | — |
| OVR™ | calcium 6%, zero nitrogen, Tetraplex Iron™; P and K not published | 2 mL/L, final two weeks before flush | Overdrive®: 1-5-4; 2 mL/L, bloom weeks 6–7 |
What the table settles:
- SB1, the line’s terpene product, has no guaranteed analysis on its product page.
- OVR against Overdrive is the one pair where the labels show a clear direction of change: nitrogen goes from 1 to zero, and 6% calcium is added. OVR’s phosphorus and potassium are not published, so you cannot manage late-bloom P and K to a number from published data.
- BGR and Big Bud declare the same 0-1-3, at the same rate, in almost the same window. That does not show they are the same product, and it does not show they differ. Big Bud publishes its salt sources and BGR does not, so the labels cannot settle the question.
Where the risk is: running both generations of a pair together. BGR plus Big Bud, or SB1 plus Bud Candy, is a double dose that neither label describes. For the phosphorus boosters, the cannabis trial in section 7 gives a specific reason for restraint. See also the Bloom Booster topic (topic 1338).
Sources: Advanced Nutrients Elite Series | 8th-Generation Products (individual product pages) · Big Bud® | Advanced Nutrients Award-Winning Bloom Booster · Overdrive® | Advanced Nutrients’ Bud Hardener/Finisher · Bud Candy® | Bud Sweetener by Advanced Nutrients
5. Mixing rules worth writing on the wall
The stock ratio and the eightfold trap. The CS2 page gives the stock ratio as 1 lb of soluble powder per gallon of water: 453.6 g ÷ 3,785 mL = about 0.12 g of powder per mL of concentrate. The feeding protocol comes as eight PDFs: imperial or metric, high or regular EC, and liquid concentrate or dry weight. If you read a millilitre figure from the liquid chart and weigh it out in grams, you deliver about 8× the intended feed (1 ÷ 0.12). Doing the reverse delivers about one-eighth. A stock tank mixed at 2 lb per gallon is twice as strong, so every millilitre figure delivers twice the feed. Label every tank with the mix, the ratio, the date and its validated EC. If you measure in litres, use the metric file.
Validate each stock batch. The manufacturer’s commercial stock-concentrate procedure checks a batch by mixing 10 mL of concentrate into 990 g of RO water and reading the EC against a target, with ±0.1 EC as the tolerance. We could not find this procedure posted publicly. The targets in it are for the three-part Grow/Base/Bloom programme. We found no published validation targets for CS2: Prime and Push, and we will not calculate substitutes. Ask the manufacturer’s commercial support for them. Until then, record the EC of your first carefully weighed batch and check later batches against it.
BFX and carbohydrates. The Bud Candy page itself says some growers have reported complications when combining it with Bud Factor X, and suggests skipping Bud Candy on BFX days. The manufacturer’s BFX technical document is supplied to commercial customers; we found no public copy. It describes the failure as a horse-hair-like biofilm, harmless to plants but a problem in drip lines, and gives four rules:
- In a batch tank, add BFX last, after mixing every other component for 2–5 minutes.
- On a manifold, dose BFX second-to-last, before the pH adjuster.
- Switch the carbohydrate injector off on BFX days.
- If stringy material appears in a line, check the mixing order before you sanitise the system.
The same document says weekly application is “potentially more effective than daily”. It publishes no data for this, so follow it as label guidance only.
Two label notes on BFX. First, willow bark extract is not salicylic acid: its salicylates are mainly salicin and related glycosides. Second, 0.5% magnesium from magnesium nitrate implies roughly 0.6% nitrogen by stoichiometry, even though no NPK is stated. For general pH and EC practice, see topic 392.
Sources: Advanced Nutrients CS2™: Prime & Push | 8th-Generation · Advanced Nutrients 8th Gen Protocols | Commercial · Bud Candy® | Bud Sweetener by Advanced Nutrients · Advanced Nutrients BFX™ | Maximize Terpenes & Yields
6. The five named ingredients, against the literature
What is genuinely new in the platform is five proprietary names, not its NPK figures. None has a published quantity, molecule or assay.
| Name (in) | Manufacturer description | Independent evidence | Can the product be placed on that evidence? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tetraplex Iron™ (CS2, OVR) | iron chelate that keeps iron available across pH ranges | ordinary chelate chemistry: EDTA, DTPA and EDDHA hold iron over different pH ranges, EDDHA the widest | No: chelating agents not disclosed |
| NanoCarb™ (BGR, SB1) | nanosized carbohydrates absorbed directly into tissue | none in cannabis; field trials of applied sugars in other crops mostly showed no yield effect, and high doses harmed growth (approximate, industry summary) | No: no particle size or dose |
| Aminome™ (BGR) | complex of 20 amino acids | Malík et al. 2022, hydroponic cannabis: an amino-acid biostimulant raised limonene up to 81–123% and β-myrcene up to 139–167% depending on the nutrient cycle, and cut cannabinolic acid 44%; it also raised tissue nitrogen, and the authors call for more dosage work | No: composition and dose unpublished, and BGR also contains NanoCarb |
| SAReplex™ / willow bark (BFX) | activates systemic acquired resistance | Garrido et al. 2022, 99 plants, eight weekly foliar sprays: at 0.1 mM, methyl jasmonate raised flower CBDA 15.6%, and SA or methyl jasmonate raised leaf CBDA/THCA up to 57.3%; at 10 mM, SA and methyl jasmonate reduced biomass and flower cannabinoids | No: 1% bark extract (salicin, not SA), applied to roots, no salicylate figure |
| Phyto-Sacchara™ (SB1) | fermented-sugarcane flavour biostimulant | none located | No, and SB1 has no published analysis |
Every row ends “no”, and that is the finding. Two of the mechanisms have real cannabis trials with meaningful effect sizes. But no product in the line can be placed on the dose curves those trials describe. Do not budget for a potency or terpene gain from any of the five. If you want to test one, add it on its own, one crop at a time. For more on biostimulants, see topic 993.
Sources: About the Advanced Nutrients' 8th-Generation Technology · Malík M, Velechovský J, Praus L, Janatová A, Kahánková Z, Klouček P, Tlustoš P (2022). Amino Acid Supplementation as a Biostimulant in Medical Cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) Plant Nutrition. Front. Plant Sci. 13:868350. Frontiers | Amino Acid Supplementation as a Biostimulant in Medical Cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) Plant Nutrition · Garrido J, Rico S, Corral C, Sánchez C, Vidal N, Martínez-Quesada JJ, Ferreiro-Vera C (2022). Front. Plant Sci. 13:1082554. Frontiers | Exogenous application of stress-related signaling molecules affect growth and cannabinoid accumulation in medical cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) · Sugar trials (industry summary, not peer-reviewed): https://scienceinhydroponics.com/2025/12/exogenous-sugar-applications-a-deeper-look.html
7. The numbers the launch leads with
The technology page has a table of “performance targets” under optimised commercial protocols:
- yield per light of 4.0–4.5 lb, against an “industry standard” of 2.0–2.5 lb
- terpenes up to 6.0%, against 1.5–2.0%
- 6.0 harvests a year, against 5.5
The 2026 commercial report adds two more figures:
- a 4.9% extraction yield against a competitor’s 2.9%, described as roughly a 40% boost in profits
- an approximately 50% relative increase in cannabinoid and terpene content, attributed to certificate-of-analysis data
None of these figures carries a sample size, a trial design or a confidence interval. The report’s first-party survey of more than 100 US licensed producers is separate from these figures, and the survey’s method is not described either.
The technology page also says “independent university research” confirms that cannabis has a phosphorus uptake ceiling, but it cites no study. Such work does exist. Westmoreland & Bugbee (Utah State, 2022) tested 25, 50 and 75 mg P/L on a high-CBD variety. They found no significant effect on flower yield or cannabinoid concentration, while the threefold increase in input phosphorus raised leachate phosphorus twelvefold. That is one trial on one variety, and it tested base-level phosphorus rather than a booster added to an adequate programme. It does not show that boosters do nothing. It is, however, the reason stacking two of them has the least support. Mentioning research without naming it is not citing it.
Our position: these figures are not evidence. If an independent trial of this platform is published, it deserves its own thread.
Sources: About the Advanced Nutrients' 8th-Generation Technology · 2026 State of Commercial Cannabis Cultivation Report · Westmoreland FM, Bugbee B (2022). Front. Plant Sci. 13:1015652. Frontiers | Sustainable Cannabis Nutrition: Elevated root-zone phosphorus significantly increases leachate P and does not improve yield or quality
8. If you are considering moving a crop onto this line
What you gain. The main gain is documented commercial procedures: a stock-concentrate method with a validation step, injector ordering, line cleanout, and a specified switching method. They are more complete than those of most lines sold to commercial growers, and specific enough to audit yourself against. You also get a simpler base.
What you give up:
- P:K steering at the base (section 3).
- Disclosure: SB1’s analysis, BGR’s salt sources and OVR’s P and K are not published (section 4).
- Your accumulated feed knowledge. The manufacturer itself says formulations differ in ion ratios, solubility and pH buffering, so numbers tuned over years do not transfer.
Where the risk is:
- The units (section 5).
- A BFX–carbohydrate biofilm misdiagnosed as contamination.
- Stacking both generations of a pair.
- Changing the base and the additives in the same crop, which gives a result you cannot attribute to either.
Order of operations:
- Prepare the irrigation system first. The switching guide specifies 200-mesh disk filters and a line cleanout before the switch.
- Change the base and hold the additive stack constant. Move feed EC in 10–20% increments rather than matching your old EC number: EC measures total salts, not which salts.
- Validate every stock tank by EC before use.
- Log feed EC, runoff EC and source-water EC daily. Watch for faster dry-backs, which the manufacturer says may indicate higher uptake.
- Add or substitute additives one at a time, one crop at a time. Do not introduce BFX during the base change.
- For any GACP or export file, keep the DOA registration reference and declared analysis of every input, and log the base change as a dated input change.
One thing we will not tell you: how much more you will harvest. No sourced figure exists for this line and no independent trial has been published. Anyone quoting you a yield increase for it, including us, would be quoting marketing.
This forum lacks measurements, and measurements are worth more than the whole launch package. If you run this line, or the Cultivator Series it replaces, post these from a Thai room:
- feed EC, runoff EC and source-water EC
- dry weight per square metre
- a lab result
If you have run BGR against Big Bud, or SB1 against Bud Candy, side by side (same genetics, same room, same base), post the dry weight and a terpene panel.
Source: How to Switch Nutrients Without Wrecking Your Crop
Related reading: the Advanced Nutrients guide (topic 1127) and the earlier Advanced Nutrients topic (topic 25); pH & EC (topic 392); Bloom Booster: does extra phosphorus help? (topic 1338); biostimulants (topic 993).
This article is technical horticultural information for readers operating legally in their jurisdiction. Nothing here is legal advice. In Thailand, cannabis flower is a controlled herb under the Notification of the Ministry of Public Health Re: Controlled Herbs (Cannabis) B.E. 2568. Flower may be dispensed only against a prescription on form PT 33 from an authorised practitioner. Online sale and advertising of flower are prohibited, and recreational use is not permitted. Cultivation and sale require licensing. The Cannabis Control Act is still a draft: the Cabinet approved it on 22 September 2026 and sent it to the House.