Brewing ratios for espresso beverages - Page 4

[timo888]

Dry coffee: 14.5g
Espresso: 30.4g
Brew Ratio: 48%
Shot Volume (incl Crema): 35ml
Total Shot duration: 24 seconds (including about 6 seconds for drops to form on bottom of PF).

There was some blonding right at the end of the shot, but overall the taste was pretty good, one of my average pulls.

Shot volume was low right? but the BR indicates about a standard double right?

What do you guys think?

14g should yield a double, say 50++ ml.

It could it be that the shot was overextracted with a higher ratio of solids making their way into the cup. You might try doing everything the same but give your machine a dramatically longer cooling flush and see what happens.

Regards
Timo

P.S. And/or you could try a coarser grind/heavier tamp.

[Genesis]

I find that the Quickmill Vetrano with a LM ridgeless likes 15g of coffee. That just gets the screen during the pull - 15.5 is the top; beyond that you hit on lock-in and/or get nasty channeling and/or choking.

If you dose into a cup and vigorously fluff (e.g. with a chopstick), then pour into the basket and level NSEW, you get an almost exactly full basket (no tapping, etc) with this dose - within 0.2g repeatedly.

I assume the Anita would be the same since the group is identical. I had all sorts of trouble with the stock QM basket due to the ridge; it would hang up on the tamper and result in a defective tamp, which made it truly hellish to get a decently consistent puck. The LM ridgeless baskets fixed that.

I'm getting reasonably consistent pulls this way. Not in "godshot" territory (by my standards anyway) but darn delicious. Still working on nailing the consistency side of my technique.....

[CyclingCraig]

I am still using the stock QM filter basket and I JUST yesterday changed to a RegBarber Convex tamper. (Bottomless PF) Thought the convex tamper would better match the shape of the dispersion screen on the Anita

I have NO binding issues with the new RB or my previous tamper(Delux Lava) with the stock QM filter basket

If you dose into a cup and vigorously fluff (e.g. with a chopstick), then pour into the basket and level NSEW, you get an almost exactly full basket (no tapping, etc) with this dose - within 0.2g repeatedly.

I do the "fluff" with an un-bent paper clip in the PF (WDT style), but get what seems to me, VERY similar results as you describe above

This mornings numbers:
Gound Coffee: 14.6g
Espresso: 37g
Brew Ratio: 40%
Total Vol (Approx): 47 ml (Incl Crema)
Total Shot time: 28s

Yesterdays shot was better than todays, I had some channeling and blonding today, but it was "OK". Didn't have time this morning for my second, had to run to work

I do find that after I remove the PF after pulling the shot. the puck is still a bit wet, and if it touched the screen during expansion, when I un-twist the PF the top of the puck gets all messed up and leaves grounds on the dipersion screen. Is this normal?

If I use 15g it seems like a *little* too much and the puck touches the dispersion screen during expansion and the puck gets messed up? Who the heck really knows though I am still a newbie

[default]

as a point of reference, i weighed plain water in a shot glass, using balance scale.

empty shot glass = 66.8g
with 0.5oz of water = 82.1g, water alone is 15.3g
with 1oz of water = 95.3g, water alone is 28.5g
with 1.5oz of water = 111.7g, water alone is 44.9

giving that the lines on the shot glass is not super accurate, i average them out, so a 0.5oz of plain water should be around 14.8g

-----

my thought is about "gross volume including crema": isn't it easier to measure gross volume after the guinness effect has settled. my experiment in my "fresh, spouted, 100% washed arabica, and rotary pump set up" found that crema is slowly reducing right after the shot is finished, so i don't know when to measure the volume. so i thought it might be more precise to measure the volume by the pure liquid, or after a certain amount of seconds after the shot is done.

BTW, i ended up with 14.8g coffee, 2oz w/ crema at shot cut-off (1.4oz gross w/out crema), and 42.6g gross beverage grams. should it be a med-low dose and pretty large double regular, or a med-low double lungo (by weight); or med regular double (by volume)? i'm kinda confuse when taking my numbers to compare to the chart.

please help. many thanks.

[DC]

Another latecomer... I've noticed that the vast majority of my shots fall in the 40 to 50% range, even those I would normally consider tight ristrettos by volume/time barely make it past 50-53%.

This leads me to believe that whilst a lot of people might think they are drinking ristretto-type drinks, by the BR definition they might well not be. That would make for an interesting survey, particularly as some coffees are best as ristrettos.... ristretto by BR or by volume...? How does the taste differ?

The brewing ratio concept in itself does nothing to improve your shotmaking (only your own experimentation and tasting can do that)

If my 35ml (inc. crema) 'ristretto-by-volume' shots are coming out with a 'normale' brew ratio, doesn't that imply that my coffee is being over-extracted - i.e. the shot is significantly 'heavier' than it ought to be? Wouldn't trying to bring your shot volume and shot brew ratio into alignment itself be a way (but not necessarily a better way) of quickly improving your shots as opposed to iteratively by taste?

If I've misunderstood something, or you can clarify, or you just want to tell me to be quiet.... please let me know!

Thanks,
Dave

[jesawdy]

Wouldn't trying to bring your shot volume and shot brew ratio into alignment itself be a way (but not necessarily a better way) of quickly improving your shots as opposed to iteratively by taste?

Sure, you can use the brew ratio to try different things.

So you want something in a ristretto range?.... you need to either increase your dose weight, or decrease the final shot weight, or both, to do that. In either case, grind finer and see where you can get. Also, if you only have the Rancilio double basket, you may be limited in how much you will be able to increase your current dose.

[Dogshot]

Andy, this may be implied, at least I thought it was, but I wonder if you can clear something up?

I assume that the brew ratio measure is useful only to describe shots that are allowed to run to completion (ie. shots that pull to the point of blonding). Is this assumption correct?

For example, if I load my triple basket with 20gm, place my scale on the drip tray, and stop the shot when 1gm of espresso has poured into my cup (regardless of what the pour looks like or is doing), have I pulled a shot with a 20:1 brew ratio? I would think not.

Mark

[AndyS]

I assume that the brew ratio measure is useful only to describe shots that are allowed to run to completion (ie. shots that pull to the point of blonding). Is this assumption correct?

For example, if I load my triple basket with 20gm, place my scale on the drip tray, and stop the shot when 1gm of espresso has poured into my cup (regardless of what the pour looks like or is doing), have I pulled a shot with a 20:1 brew ratio? I would think not.

As far as I can see, the "point of blonding" is fairly subjective and a matter of personal taste.

The example you give, at a 20:1 brew ratio, would be so intensely acrid that it's undrinkable for most people. But the brewing ratio concept is still helpful, I think, in putting such a shot in perspective. You can easily see how out-of-whack 20:1 is compared to the usual continuum of decent coffee -- from about 1.4:1 for an ultra ristretto to about 1:20 for drip coffee.

[ozzyymclaren]

I'm newbie for espresso at this level. I find that brew ratio and chart a good point to start and experiment with.
I called this experiment.. my first results are like that.
With 16 gr. coffee grain (standard Illy beans) with 30 lbs tamping after finger sweep, try to pull double and the result is 39 gr beverage at 27 sec. As seen on picture 01.jpg. It tastes something I'm looking for, but not very very best.



My second try again with 16 gr. coffee grain (standard Illy beans) with 30 lbs tamping after finger sweep, try to pull double and the result is 50 gr beverage at 20 sec. The result can be seen on picture 02.jpg. It tastes not very good. Acidic. what is the difference between my two shots. Which variables effecting the situation?

[AndyS]

what is the difference between my two shots. Which variables effecting the situation?

The grind was the same? It sounds like the second shot experienced serious channeling, meaning the water poured way too fast through cracks in the coffee cake.

[ozzyymclaren]

The grind was the same? It sounds like the second shot experienced serious channeling, meaning the water poured way too fast through cracks in the coffee cake.

yes, same grind. i tried two more times. and different result I got. I must practice I think..

[cannonfodder]

I'm newbie for espresso at this level. I find that brew ratio and chart a good point to start and experiment with.
I called this experiment.. my first results are like that.
With 16 gr. coffee grain (standard Illy beans) with 30 lbs tamping after finger sweep, try to pull double and the result is 39 gr beverage at 27 sec. As seen on picture 01.jpg. It tastes something I'm looking for, but not very very best.

I would venture to say the Illy beans are part of the problem. Unless you live in Italy, they are not fresh. They get roasted, packed, sit a while in a warehouse, get packed in a container ship and shipped over ocean, sit in customs, sit in the distribution warehouse, sit on the store shelf and then get to your home. Not what I would call fresh roasted, maybe freshly opened, but not roasted.

Once a can of Illy is opened the beans degrade at lighting speed and could be contributing to the changes from shot to shot. There are a slew of other possible contributing factor, all on the handle side of the portafilter, but the bean of choice would be the first thing I would change.

[ozzyymclaren]

I would venture to say the Illy beans are part of the problem. Unless you live in Italy, they are not fresh. They get roasted, packed, sit a while in a warehouse, get packed in a container ship and shipped over ocean, sit in customs, sit in the distribution warehouse, sit on the store shelf and then get to your home. Not what I would call fresh roasted, maybe freshly opened, but not roasted.

Once a can of Illy is opened the beans degrade at lighting speed and could be contributing to the changes from shot to shot. There are a slew of other possible contributing factor, all on the handle side of the portafilter, but the bean of choice would be the first thing I would change.

i wish to change my bean but, illy is the best i can find in my country. there are no roast houses. all i can get is packed espresso beans. there are some rosters but they roast for turkish coffee.
all the other packed beans i can find are, segafredo, davidoff, starbucks, lavazza. so i have nothing to do...

[HB]

what is the difference between my two shots. Which variables effecting the situation?

The first shot's color is nicely hazelnut and there's visible flecking, which are good signs. The second shot looks lighter and monochromatic, which is consistent with your report of a speedy pour ("50 gr beverage at 20 sec.").

[cannonfodder]

I guess we occasionally forget that not everyone has a selection of good roaster within a day or two shipping.

One thing to keep in mind, espresso is a method of preparation as is Turkish coffee. The same bean or blend could be used for both the Turkish and Espresso preparation. It may be worth trying. You could also look into home roasting if green beans are available.

Illy pulls a pretty good shot the first day, after that it degrades quickly so those first few shots will be the best.

[ozzyymclaren]

I guess we occasionally forget that not everyone has a selection of good roaster within a day or two shipping.

One thing to keep in mind, espresso is a method of preparation as is Turkish coffee. The same bean or blend could be used for both the Turkish and Espresso preparation. It may be worth trying. You could also look into home roasting if green beans are available.

Illy pulls a pretty good shot the first day, after that it degrades quickly so those first few shots will be the best.

I'll keep in mind that. Honestly I'm in Turkey, which invented Turkish coffee, but Turkish people unfortunately dont have lots of knowledge about it. except a few the bean quality isnt important The mostly drinking coffee is instant coffees like nescafe. and when its come to brewing turkish coffee they use pre grounded coffee. so sad but modernity does that. we forgot our traditions.

[D-Caffa-nite]

The terms "ristretto, espresso, lungo," etc have meaning only if we all use them in the same way. I'm posting a graphic that suggests a way to do this. The chart is based on two concepts:

I am still a little confused about the precise definitions here - specifically why would you want to drink a lungo?

Is it a simple quantitative difference of volumes or more accurately, brewing ratios?

Are there are other consideration of dose/grind that need to be considered to achieve the desired effect? Bigger dose for lungo? Different grind?

What actually is the qualitative (taste/smell) difference you are aiming for with the lungo? If a ristretto extracts the pure essence of the bean, what is the point of drinking a bitter, overextracted lungo?

If you wanted a bigger (but nicer) drink then why not just pull five ristrettos into a cup? Apart from volume, what do you stand to gain from extending the length of the pour (apart from saving on the cost of beans)

[AndyS]

I am still a little confused about the precise definitions here - specifically why would you want to drink a lungo?

Is it a simple quantitative difference of volumes or more accurately, brewing ratios?

Are there are other consideration of dose/grind that need to be considered to achieve the desired effect? Bigger dose for lungo? Different grind?

What actually is the qualitative (taste/smell) difference you are aiming for with the lungo? If a ristretto extracts the pure essence of the bean, what is the point of drinking a bitter, overextracted lungo?

I apologize if I'm stating the obvious here, but...espresso, like everything else, is a matter of taste. I certainly don't believe that "a ristretto extracts the pure essence of the bean." A ristretto is simply one interpretation.

You seem to be implying that the ristretto is the only "true" espresso, and everything else is inferior. I don't share that belief.

I'm not ADVOCATING that anyone drink lungos, either. It's my experience that the "longer" the shots get (speaking in terms of brewing ratios), the more skill they take to prepare. Consequently, being of only moderate skill, I don't pull too many lungos.

If you wanted a bigger (but nicer) drink then why not just pull five ristrettos into a cup? Apart from volume, what do you stand to gain from extending the length of the pour (apart from saving on the cost of beans)

Perhaps one wants a lighter, more subtle drink. And certainly, one doesn't need five times the caffeine.

[D-Caffa-nite]

Perhaps one wants a lighter, more subtle drink. And certainly, one doesn't need five times the caffeine.

Forgive me, I am using hyperbole to espress an idea. Of course everyone is entitled to drink their coffee however they like - sweet, bitter, spiced, strong, weak, syruped or burnt. However, we speak of these variations on the norm without necessarily defining what result we are trying to obtain from them. I think a technical definition also needs to be combined with the desired subjective result - otherwise we are just playing with numbers.

On the point of a lungo and the skills required - how does one produce a result that does not end up being too bitter or weaker than the average espresso?

[jmvdigital]

I'm still a bit confused by this chart.

Assuming that you use the "average" amount of coffee for each (16gr, double), the only other variables are grind and time. Now, does that mean that if I want to pull a lungo, I use the same amount of coffee and grind for a regular espresso, but just let it over-extract and blonde for a while to get the higher shot volume? Are we not paying attention to the extraction point (i.e., using blonding to signal stop of pull) when producing these variations, and more worried about volume (i.e., ristretto under-extracted and a lungo over-extracted)?

If you start with an espresso, 16 gr. double, ground and tamped to give you say 2 oz. @ 30 seconds, what variable changes next to produce a ristretto or lungo from this starting point? For a lungo, using the same amount of coffee, if you grind finer you will get a longer pour time (before blonding) but the flow rate will be lower; if you go with a courser grind, your flow rate improves dramatically but the shot blondes much earlier... both variations would leave you with a similar shot volume, in theory anyway. No?

A ristretto seems easier for me to comprehend. Finer grind, slower flow, less volume of shot before blonding. Or do you simply use the same grind/volume of coffee as a regular double espresso, and just cut the shot short (before blonding) when you reach say 1oz?

What am I missing?

-J