The goal is great TASTING espresso, not great LOOKING espresso

[HB]

To avoid losing Andy's point in an unrelated thread, discussion split from Doser Accuracy...

i have been using a minimalist approach lately. not as extreme as "no toucha" but it seems to work well. here is a shot of a recent shot. i have been really into these macro shots of the initial beads. it seems like the less i do the better these look. i let the coffee fall and then bump it around a bit then tamp. no re-distribution, trust gravity.

Nice even beading. They're not as attractive as a midpoint bottomless pour, but I believe the first 5 seconds of the extraction tells you much more than the next 15.

[RegulatorJohnson]

Nice even beading. They're not as attractive as a midpoint bottomless pour, but I believe the first 5 seconds of the extraction tells you much more than the next 15.

how do these look from the same shot:

a few seconds later.



the cup at the end of extraction ended shot just after the photo.



it was tasty.

jon

[HB]

how do these look from the same shot...

A video would be more revealing, but based on the stills, it looks as good as it gets.

[AndyS]

A video would be more revealing, but based on the stills, it looks as good as it gets.

Responses like this one from my buddy Dan are driving me a little crazy.

Several years ago, people used to talk about improving the TASTE of their espresso. Developing the ability to taste well was difficult, as was developing the vocabulary to describe what one tasted. But we struggled and learned.

Then the bottomless portafilter came along. Almost overnight, the goal was no longer a great TASTING shot; it was a great LOOKING shot.

Reading the posts here, you'd think that half the people don't drink espresso. They just enjoy watching beautiful bottomless pours flow into the drip tray.

Haven't any of you had a mediocre-looking bottomless pour that tasted better than the perfect-looking pour that came before it? I have.

[RegulatorJohnson]

Haven't any of you had a mediocre-looking bottomless pour that tasted better than the perfect-looking pour that came before it? I have.

of course.. i have also thought about, if i use the spouts, how many other shots am i also tasting? especially in a cafe' how often does the inside of the PF get cleaned? that alone is a good reason why i use the bottomless and seek it in commercial locations. and it also looks cool. a picture is worth a thousand words describing the taste. the internet is a visual medium. we do taste with the eyes and the tongue, yes?

jon

[HB]

Then the bottomless portafilter came along. Almost overnight, the goal was no longer a great TASTING shot; it was a great LOOKING shot.

You're right, it's really silly and I remarked on the obsession with pour appearance a couple years ago:

I'm not responsible, but I did contribute my small part to the bottomless portafilter craze by publishing Perfecting the Naked Extraction. No argument that a chopped PF is an invaluable diagnostic tool. No quarrel that it's pretty neat to watch. No quibbling that it is easier to clean up, assuming you've addressed the issue of channeling. But why the undying fascination with photographing an extraction?

(From Neverending Novelty of Nakedness... Not)

I consider the "look" a diagnosis tool and nothing more. A perfect looking pour and gorgeous looking crema aren't a guarantee of an exceptional espresso. I've had plenty of very good tasting espressos with quite ordinary looking crema, and even more espressos that tasted ordinary but looked nearly perfect.

Bottom line: It's a heck of a lot easier to pull an espresso that looks good than tastes good! Another of my pet peeves is the obsession with producing gobs and gobs of crema. Don't get me started.

[another_jim]

The problem is not that there's perfect pours that taste like crap, but that there are crap pours that taste perfect. It means that pour quality is not a necessary condition for good espresso. In fact, it seems we are currently in a debunking phase, and that there are no necessary conditions for good espresso left.

[RegulatorJohnson]

just for a second think about this:

imagine a world where the naked PF came first, instead of the spouted PF.

what would the benefits be for using the pants, other than splitting the shot into 2?

i personally think a spouted PF is gross regardless. it generally always has some standing water in there somewhere, maybe part of the last few shots as well.

if there were no difference in taste and im sure there is not much difference. .. what reason would there be for someone to make a PF with a bottom?

i dont think the shots are better tasting from either one or the other. i am sure we can agree that the taste isnt affected much either way.

Lets discuss the pros and cons besides taste and cool factor.

jon

[RegulatorJohnson]

a wise man once typed: in a thread on HB

Those who close their minds to alternatives like naked portafilters, triple baskets, up dosing, etc. stop growing in the art.

we all love espresso many for the same reasons and many for different reasons. but the fact is we are all here enjoying the same thing in different ways.

jon

[cannonfodder]

I do not normally use a bottomless portafilter. I got caught up in the bottomless is better rage a year or two ago. Since then I have decided I prefer the shots from my single spout over the bottomless. It is less a taste issue and more a texture issue. The bottomless PF creates an abundance of crema, however that crema tends to be larger bubbled than a spouted shout. I prefer the finer texture and silkier mouthfeel I get from a single spout. It is like comparing stiff bubbly milk to micro foamed milk for me.

At one point I found myself obsessing over how pretty the shot looked, kneeling in front of the espresso machine as if offering up a prayer to the espresso god. I put away the bottomless portafilter, quit obsessing, and just enjoyed the espresso.

[RegulatorJohnson]

oh great. now i look like a guy who only wants to make cool looking shots. not true.

i obsess about the entire process. i drink shots with my eyes closed. i look at the flavor wheel thats on the fridge. i truly enjoy great tasting espresso. i enjoy making it, the whole process.

however i also am a graphic artist i like cool looking pictures i like making cool looking things. this allows me to enjoy espresso in another way besides just drinking it.

some scientific types around here are obsessive with temps or pump profile or other things scientific and interesting to them.

i guess i want to make it clear that just because you really enjoy one aspect doesn't mean you don't care about the cup.

i dont kneel anymore. i just look in the reflection off the chrome drip tray.

i can understand the texture thing, i think i will dig out the single spot.

lets all enjoy some great tasting espresso, anyone can come over anytime just PM me.

jon

[espressme]

They did!

Cheers
richard
PS my 1¢: The bottom was added to save repaints of the kitchen when the high pressure boilers became common!> That would definitely reduce spits! I know from experiences with the older "Vesuvius" style steamers. These pfs are taken from them!

just for a second think about this:
imagine a world where the naked PF came first, instead of the spouted PF.
what would the benefits be for using the pants, other than splitting the shot into 2?
...long snip..

Lets discuss the pros and cons besides taste and cool factor.

jon

[Psyd]

The way that a shot looks is a really good indicator as to how it will taste. I think that we can all agree that if it flows like water and it's as blonde as Barbie, it's probably not going to taste so good.
Looks are an indicator, and fairly dependable, but as the saying goes, looks can be deceiving. Let's all realize that I can't show you a picture of how my new technique tastes, but I can show you a picture of how the results looked. Describing taste is somewhat subjective, too, and (lighting and quality aide) pics tend to tell the story objectively.
Serious donuts are bad, and tend to taste bad. Serious simultaneous beading at the beginning of a pull tend to be good, and they'll taste better than the donuts, usually.
I gotta say that using looks as a secondary indicator of quality isn't so bad, given the lack of alternatives. It ain't that we all want shots that look good instead of shots that taste good, it's that we've been shown and told what good tasting shots look like, so we try to get our shots to look like that in the hopes that they will taste better.
And they do. Sure, there are exceptions that prove the rule, but if I had to make a bet, I'd bet that the shot in that pic was gonna taste purdy danged good! ; >

[AndyS]

The way that a shot looks is a really good indicator as to how it will taste.

That's pretty much the point that Jim and I are disputing. In the range of bottomless shots that vary from "mediocre looking" to "fantastic looking," I've found NO correlation to taste. During some espresso sessions I keep score, and it's been no more likely than 50:50 that the fantastic looking shots taste better than the mediocre looking shots.

IOW, in my humble experience, the obsession with the look of a shot is an unfortunate distraction.

(Obviously, grossly channeled or grotesque shots do NOT taste good).

[Jasonian]

the obsession with the look of a shot is an unfortunate distraction.

That's a mouth full in a very concise print, if I do say so myself.

I've had more beautiful shots that tasted off than I care to count. On the flip side, I've had a surprisingly high number of pours that looked to be mistakes that tasted wonderful.

I've had some rather strange experiments with massive updosing sans the re-distribution ritual that led to horrendous channeling, yet, resulted in shots that actually tasted more like the coffee the blend was comprised of, and less like the "sum of its parts". I found it quite surprising, and very desirable.

The naked pours would have made half of this board sick to look at. The particular espresso was a huge step of enlightenment.

[Matthew Brinski]

Since then I have decided I prefer the shots from my single spout over the bottomless. It is less a taste issue and more a texture issue. The bottomless PF creates an abundance of crema, however that crema tends to be larger bubbled than a spouted shout. I prefer the finer texture and silkier mouthfeel I get from a single spout. It is like comparing stiff bubbly milk to micro foamed milk for me.

Dead on.

Also, despite the argument continuing for some time to come, I believe that spouts DO have an affect on taste. I think it's evident with brighter coffees especially when comparing bottomless to double spout.

[Matthew Brinski]

Reading the posts here, you'd think that half the people don't drink espresso. They just enjoy watching beautiful bottomless pours flow into the drip tray.

Haven't any of you had a mediocre-looking bottomless pour that tasted better than the perfect-looking pour that came before it? I have.

We're supposed to drink this stuff? I just installed an espresso film studio in my basement.

[King Seven]

Can't agree more over the frustration with the look of the bottom of the basket and also with producing as much crema (this one really bugs me - all too quickly becomes an absurd pissing contest) as is possible. Whilst any professional will tell you that on a bar the look of a pour is a better indicator of quality than can be discerned from the average consumer nothing beats tasting, tasting, tasting as you go...

[JR_Germantown]

just for a second think about this:

imagine a world where the naked PF came first, instead of the spouted PF.

what would the benefits be for using the pants, other than splitting the shot into 2?

Great way to look at it, and I have my answers:

To keep my wall clean?!
To keep that hot coffee out of my eyes?!

Jack

[RegulatorJohnson]

the obsession with the look of a shot is an unfortunate distraction.

remove the word "shot" and replace it with any other food item.

is this why at most restaurants they just toss the food onto the plate without a care?

what is garnish for anyway?

can presentation affect the taste of what you are about to eat or drink?

serve the same chocolate mousse presented 2 different ways to the same person. one is just a spoon in the bowl, dropped on the table in front of you.... the other is piped gently into a champagne flute... etc.

food service is about presentation because we eat with our eyes first. a FN sea foam capp with dry giant bubble overflowing the cup does not look or taste as delicious as a gently textured micro foam with shiny glossy sweet milk.

BTW. i was showing the pic to show my distribution progression based on "no toucha anything". i didnt say hey look how delicious this shot looks. Dan said he could tell more about the shot later in the extraction so i put up the other pics. they are taken that way to record my progress and too look cool, im an artist. i never said my goal is to only take cool looking pictures of extractions.

hey dan maybe you need to remove the image upload capability of the website? since no one wants to enjoy pics of coffee extractions anymore. only charts and graphs allowed..?

a picture is worth a thousand words. i can share a picture with you guys easier than i can share an espresso, anyone is welcome to come over to my house, in salt lake city utah, for a shot, PM me first.

--
jon