Phaelon56 wrote:I agree about the likelihood of pressure profiling becoming a standard in high end commercial machines I think it's likely to become widely adopted only when it can be programmed in and repeated without manually adjusting the profile on the fly during the shot.

A temperature profile offers no visual clues, and so should be automated to reflect the best of past experience. But a pressure profile does offer a clue, the flow of the shot. So perhaps manual profiling based on the flow would allow for better shots than a preprogrammed profile.

This may be a question for the lever forums, where manual levers are like manual profiling and spring levers like automatic profiling. For occasional visitors like me, spring levers always work better; but I wonder if the really practiced folks there do better with a manual lever.

As a bit of pointless history, it should be remembered that all the profiling thought began about four years ago when Mark Prince was reviewing the Pavoni versus Elektra Microcasa a Leva. Mark not only preferred the Elektra, but found its shots tasted purer than those from motor pump machines. Greg and Andy surmised that the effect might be due to the declining pressure of the uncoiling spring.

In a home environment or moderate to slow paced commercial environment running manual pressure profile may be fine, even preferably. In commericial environment when hammered would be far more preferable to have already dialed in easily selectable profiles programmed for given bean(s)/blend(s)/beverage(s)s. Even just one same bean/blend could/would likely have different profiles for shots depending on target beverage. At least that's how I'd be using it. Hell could have two or three profiles for just one bean just for straight shots depending on how you/customer preferred shot accentuated. Which is why when I heard Strada only had four savable profiles thought way not enough. But then again, maybe could be enough. But then again if/when adding temp profiling I highly doubt I'd be close to satisfied with only four pressure and/or temp profiles whether four each or combined. Memory capabilities just ain't that expensive these days to be so limited, especially in a 4 more like 5 digit espresso machine!

Obviously programmed profiles not only highly beneficial but necessary for less experienced baristas, ie beneficial for better product consistency = better customer satisfaction.

another_jim wrote:A temperature profile offers no visual clues, and so should be automated to reflect the best of past experience. But a pressure profile does offer a clue, the flow of the shot. So perhaps manual profiling based on the flow would allow for better shots than a preprogrammed profile.

This may be a question for the lever forums, where manual levers are like manual profiling and spring levers like automatic profiling. For occasional visitors like me, spring levers always work better; but I wonder if the really practiced folks there do better with a manual lever.

As a bit of pointless history, it should be remembered that all the profiling thought began about four years ago when Mark Prince was reviewing the Pavoni versus Elektra Microcasa a Leva. Mark not only preferred the Elektra, but found its shots tasted purer than those from motor pump machines. Greg and Andy surmised that the effect might be due to the declining pressure of the uncoiling spring.

another_jim wrote:This may be a question for the lever forums, where manual levers are like manual profiling and spring levers like automatic profiling. For occasional visitors like me, spring levers always work better; but I wonder if the really practiced folks there do better with a manual lever.

As a bit of pointless history, it should be remembered that all the profiling thought began about four years ago when Mark Prince was reviewing the Pavoni versus Elektra Microcasa a Leva. Mark not only preferred the Elektra, but found its shots tasted purer than those from motor pump machines. Greg and Andy surmised that the effect might be due to the declining pressure of the uncoiling spring.

Having used a Cremina for a couple years and just really starting to get a real feel for it, it's interesting to feel the differences of resistance during the phases of the shot. This also changes depending on the pre-infusion approach. I just finished rebuilding a vintage MCAL and have only pulled a few shots on it so far but find the shots very different as Mark did. I wish the lever on the MCAL was connected to the piston rod to actually be able to assist the spring when desired and may be a future mod. for me. After I get a little more familiar with the MCAL I want to try to match a Cremina pull to the MCAL to see if it's possible but there may be group effect differences. Another thought has been to see if I could turn another MCAL into a manual machine.

farmroast wrote:Another thought has been to see if I could turn another MCAL into a manual machine.

See Can anyone venture a guess of what this is? for one approach.

Nice way to spend a Friday afternoon!! I like your comment about an homage to Synesso with the steam handle. It also seems like an homage to the Speedster with the reflective panel to see the group bottoms. Perhaps that is also present on several other machines, but I think it is a simple addition that makes too much sense for other manufacturers not to pick up on. I am experimenting with placing a small, thin, angled mirror on the tray of my Vivaldi. However, my machine is plumbed in, but not out and it is a pain to deal with every time I empty the drip tray.

Count me a convert.

I visited Abe last weekend and we went to RBC, where we had two shots, a Peruvian SO from 49th Parallel and a washed Yrg from Barismo. Both were amazingly well balanced, with all the nuances one would get brewed apparent in the shot, along with lots of power and creamy body. It was exactly the way I like espresso.

There were no do overs, no flubs, just the two A game shots. These shots would have been great even at the home of an HBer who had all day to get them out, or in top Barista competition. To get them at a working cafe was stunning.

So how is it done? The baristi all like coffee, and spend a long time dialing each new coffee in. They vary the preinfusion time along with the timing and amount they cut pressure at the end. The process is mostly trial and error, although they generally find that longer preinfusions and tail offs smooth out the flavors compared to a conventional shot.

I do not know how much of this success is due to the Slayer's pressure profiling or to RBC baristi just working intensively with each new coffee; but I think these machines may have pushed out the envelope of flavor clarity versus body and power. I've heard the Slayers have bugs, and I know they are expensive. But from what I tasted; I hope they are successful. As to RBC; they are in a business district which is completely empty on weekends; but they were full on Saturday with people who had walked a good distance to get there; so their success seems pretty assured.

another_jim wrote:I do not know how much of this success is due to the Slayer's pressure profiling or to RBC baristi just working intensively with each new coffee

I agree with you; at this point we don't really know and it's a very interesting area for research.

And speaking of "slaying" them with a pressure profile, James Hoffmann posted some relevant speculation on his blog today.

Jame's blog is a good summation of what is known and suspected. I think the key point was at the end. Do we expect pressure profiling to disclose some unexpected wonder, or do we want it to produce a better trade off of clarity, balance, power, and body?

If it's the latter, then moving between conventional and a lever style profiles depending on the coffee, like the RBC baristi do (if I understood them correctly), goes in the right direction.