prima-coffee.com: coffee & espresso equipment and accessories

The Professional Barista's Handbook - Page 4

Postby HB on Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:18 am

Yes, but don't take my word for it, read the first chapter and decide for yourself.
Dan Kehn
User avatar
HB
 
Posts: 13168
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Location: Cary, NC

Postby JimWright on Wed Mar 19, 2008 6:30 pm

One more in the mail...
User avatar
JimWright
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Dec 31, 2006
Location: Foster City, CA

Postby pgreilich on Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:36 am

So what ground does it cover that has not already been done by other books?
pgreilich
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mar 12, 2008
Location: Carrollton, Texas

Postby JimWright on Mon Mar 24, 2008 12:05 pm

Scott, I read the book all the way through this weekend after picking it up from the PO on Friday, and kudos.

I don't make much drip at home, but your finding that 12 hours pre-grinding for it was preferred was really surprising to me. (All - see footnote p. 71.) In stark contrast to all of those consumer brewers that have a built in grinder which is activated at brew time, which became popular a few years ago, this would seem to suggest that you're actually better off grinding it yourself the night before!
User avatar
JimWright
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Dec 31, 2006
Location: Foster City, CA

Postby bigabeano on Mon Mar 24, 2008 1:23 pm

Jim: yes, it would seem that way. but i hope others will test it first to decide for themselves.

for Paul Greilich: well, there have been three kinds of books before mine:

1.the scientific (illy), which is interesting in a geeky way but provides little practical information that can be put into use by a barista.

2. the basic overview (davids, others), which is interesting for your aunt who kinda likes coffee, but not at all advanced enough to be educational for even a newbie home barista who occasionally reads the internet boards

3. the practical but highly speculative (schomer), which was an "aha" find for many baristi 10-12 years ago but upon closer inspection is full of misinformation and advice of limited use.

so what's different about my book?

i've tried, and hopefully succeeded, in presenting the science in layman's terms without losing any accuracy, and also provided practical advice about how to make use of the science (i.e. how fines migration affects your coffee positively and negatively, and how you can manipulate it)

i've also discussed in great detail milk steaming and pouring techniques, systems for efficiency in busy cafes, the relevant water chemistry facts for coffee/espresso/tea and how to choose the proper treatment system.

the book also has a few new ideas i've never seen in print or heard discussed (i.e. how the different shapes of single and double baskets affect extraction; you'll be surprised!).
if you go to my website and view the table of contents and sample page spreads, hopefully you'll be convinced the book is worth the investment.
thanks,
scott
bigabeano
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Apr 15, 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada

Postby Abe Carmeli on Mon Mar 24, 2008 1:50 pm

bigabeano wrote:Jim: yes, it would seem that way. but i hope others will test it first to decide for themselves.


Jim Schulman and I will be doing some tests along those lines when he visits New York in two weeks. We will post our results. The book goes well beyond espresso and steaming which is covered wonderfully in the book, including some new technique for pouring milk I've never seen before, (with an assistance of a spoon holding back the foam during a pour). The brew section is the most helpful & practical discussion on how to get the best brewed cup I've seen. I must admit I'm making better brew & F/P cup after reading that chapter.
Abe Carmeli
Abe Carmeli
Team HB
 
Posts: 856
Joined: May 08, 2005
Location: New York, NY

Postby perstare on Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:01 am

JimWright wrote: ......I don't make much drip at home, but your finding that 12 hours pre-grinding for it was preferred was really surprising to me. (All - see footnote p. 71.)


Curious, if this is the case that pre-grinding for drip 12 hours before brewing yields a preferred cup, then why would not the same concept apply for espresso?

perstare
perstare
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Jul 24, 2007
Location: New York, NY

Postby JimWright on Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:24 am

perstare wrote:Curious, if this is the case that pre-grinding for drip 12 hours before brewing yields a preferred cup, then why would not the same concept apply for espresso?

I'm sure Scott, Abe or others will correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe the much finer grind for espresso, and consequently much larger exposed surface area of the grounds, causes the beans to degas and oxidize much faster than the larger grind for drip.
User avatar
JimWright
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Dec 31, 2006
Location: Foster City, CA

Postby DavidMLewis on Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:30 am

perstare wrote:Curious, if this is the case that pre-grinding for drip 12 hours before brewing yields a preferred cup, then why would not the same concept apply for espresso?

Scott said, when I asked him that question, that he did in fact prefer it for espresso, but that since the C02 is such an important factor in controlling the flow rate, he found it too inconsistent to use; he felt that one would have to grind, then wait a fairly precise and consistent time before pulling a shot.

When I asked him what about the flavor of the pre-ground coffee his tasters preferred, he described it as "clarity of flavor." It will be interesting to see what Jim and Abe come up with, and also to try to figure out why the effect occurs. Perhaps it's possible with an alteration in technique to get better results from freshly-ground coffee, if something is done to enhance the wetting. Scott's experiments were with drip and cupping, neither of which methods really mix the water and grounds aggressively. Since both French press and vacuum pot do, I intend to do some playing around with those.

Best,
David
DavidMLewis
 
Posts: 435
Joined: May 08, 2005
Location: Santa Cruz, California

Postby bigabeano on Wed Mar 26, 2008 4:10 pm

david,
thanks for answering. those are my thoughts exactly. but i'm not so sure about the importance of "aggressive" mixing in a french press or vac pot. any thoughts on its significance, other than perhaps accelerating extraction some?
i did see a company in NZ use a system in which they kept just enough grounds in the doser to cover the triangular dosing chambers. for each shot they would use two or three (or however many) chambers/pulls of the handle. and then they would turn on the grinder between shots and grind a little, dose a little onto the doser's lid (or whatever), and then drop those grounds back into the chambers so the grounds once again just covered the triangular chambers. this achieved their goals of allowing a little degassing while also having a quick, convenient dosing method (click, click, and go, just like in italy). a nice side effect of this system is that when using the dosing chambers the way they were intended to be used (more or less), the grounds fall a little more vertically (ala anfim) than diagonally (ala mazzer shotgun dosing). i am not "endorsing" this system, but it worked well for them, and they managed to pull two shots that are still on my personal top 10 all-time shot list. (we all keep such lists, right?)

also, you'll be happy to know i'm doing a reprint next week and have axed all the typos. though i'm sure you'll find a new one :)
bigabeano
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Apr 15, 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada

PreviousNext

Return to Article Feedback