How to get microfoam from a turbofrother

[MeTheGreat]

Split from Microfoaming and the 'pfft' sound I am missing...


Anyone have anything to say about the Gaggia turbofrother? I actually after much practice have gotten what I believe to be fairly successful foam out of it although the machine is rather touchy with its steam. This turbofrother has almost an open round bottom that sprays steam in four directions in a wide spread from each rendering whirlpooling rather hit-and-miss. Has anyone used one of these and does anyone have any suggestions for it? Maybe angles of steaming or variations on what is typical (typically discussed technique)?

Also, since I was planning on doing away with the turbofrother, does anyone know what steam wand would fit and be appropriate for a Gaggia Evolution?
After all this exciting discussion of steam tips I think I have tip envy...

[cannonfodder]

Correct me if I am wrong, that is a black plastic extension on the end of a chrome wand? Those actually fit over a single hole tip. The extension has 4 chambers in it, hence the 4 streams of steam. If you pull that off, you will have a single hole tip under it. The problem is that it is too short to use on its own.

I had a KitchenAid espresso machine for a short time that had the exact same assembly. I did make a couple of modifications that helped, but nothing too dramatic. I could get passable foam most of the time, and even decent microfoam now and then. I ended up replacing the machine and went to an Isomac Millennium which made a huge difference.

I do not believe there is a replacement option for that turbofrother, but I have been wrong before.

[MeTheGreat]

You are perfectly correct on all counts... thanks for the info. I guess I'll just have to practice then... Since you are familiar, do you have any tips that would be helpful about this particular tip/plastic extension?

[cannonfodder]

Those turbofrothers are designed to provide an 'acceptable' froth for the novice user, or person that does not want to take the time to learn how to create proper microfoam. There is not much you can do to improve their performance.

If you remove the tube and look inside the top, you will see a small groove that runs about a quarter to one half inch down to top portion. That is an air intake for the frother. Instead of dancing the steam tip on the surface of the milk, these are made to be submerged in the milk. Air is drawn in through that small slot and automatically injected into the milk.

On some machines (the FF's come to mind) there is a small hole in the side of the turbofrother. You can submerge the froth tip to that hole and then surf it on top of the milk to get microfoam. On the plastic body style you have, that is not an option.

I have taken the Turbofrother tube off and cut the top off even with the bottom of that groove. That essentially eliminates the 'automatic air injection'. Then you can reattach the tube to the wand and surf the tip on the milk to inject air. You have to make sure that the body will go back onto the tip after you have shortened it. On the machine I had, it was not a problem. I did have to chamfer the inside of the newly cut tube to get a good seal with the top of the steam wand.

It did make a slight improvement in the foam quality but it was still no where near latte art quality, but I was also pretty new to steaming. I also tried removing the frother tube and frothed with the single hole jet on the end of the wand. I had to use a small pitcher, around 12oz I believe, and I had to get the positioning just right. That actually worked much better than the Turbofrother.

I am afraid you will have to make the jump to a prosumer grade machine for real microfoam. Even then, it will take a lot of practice, but the results are much more rewarding.

[randomperson]

I can get pretty decent microfoam using the black plastic frothing attachment on my Gaggia Classic. The key for me is not to stretch too far, and to tap down and swirl the pitcher afterwards. My routine is this: only 4 oz at a time, organic skim milk only, in a 12 ounce pitcher, very cold. I use a thermometer too. I put the wand in maybe 1/2 inch below the surface at first. I let things stretch until the temp is 80 degrees. Then I lower the wand deeper into the milk -- not so far as to submerge the air intake thing near the top of the wand, but low enough so that the foam and milk seem to merge together-- this seems to create a smoother more uniform microfoam, with no separation of milk from foam. I stop when the temp reads 150 degrees. Then I knock the pitcher on a rubber mat, swirl for ten seconds, repeat knock, swirl, and so on, until things seem thoroughly combined. When the stars align, I get better than decent microfoam such that there is no milk/foam separation but rather a smooth pourable foam. Certainly I get better results this way then when I try to do things without the frothing attachment -- the wand is just too short without it. And I think skim milk makes things a lot easier.

[HB]

And I think skim milk makes things a lot easier.

Skim milk easily produces an airy, dry foam, but I get far better texture / mouthfeel from 2% (or whole if I'm feeling dangerous).

[cannonfodder]

Your method and results are very similar to what I use to do and get. Hacking the tip made a very small improvement. I do not think the level of improvement justified the amount of work it took.

With a bit of practice most people can produce pretty good foam. As Dan points out, the choice of milk, and even the pitcher shape and size makes a difference. Skim milk tends to produce much airier, dryer foam with a little grainier texture. 2% is my personal preference. It tends to produce silky, wet microfoam that seems to hold up better than skim. Then there is whole milk. I will occasionally get a half gallon just for fun. It makes a lower volume of microfoam, but produces very viscose velvety microfoam. A lighter, citrus espresso tends to get lost in the heavy fat of the whole milk. I find it works best with a heavy body (Java, Yemen, Sumatra) espresso.

If you are happy with the results you get from the machine, then there is no reason to upgrade. Most people (me included) tend to try to improve their results with bigger, more expensive equipment. While the machines ability to produce a better drink does tend to improve, the largest improvement is usually centered on the handle side of the portafilter. The best LM in the world is no substitute for practice and well developed barista skills. However, to get the kind of microfoam you see in the video, an upgrade will be needed.

[Gatewood]

Somehow I got the idea that a Silvia wand could replace the one on the Gaggia Classic, and maybe the other Gaggias, too. Is this not so? I got something about it off one of the forums (I think CG) and had planned to do that to my Classic. I'll be sad if it's not so. Even though the Gaggia wand is short with NO turbofrother parts on it, it seems to be a tube with a single hole, and I'm considering trying to froth a little milk with it in a very short pitcher.

[randomperson]

Skim milk easily produces an airy, dry foam, but I get far better texture / mouthfeel from 2% (or whole if I'm feeling dangerous).

Well, to be honest, I use "skim milk" that is organic and locally produced by cows that eat only daisies, or some such. In any case the milk is a lot thicker than typical skim -- and there is generally a layer of thicker stuff (fat??!!) on the top of the milk bottle. So, while I pretend that my arteries are thankful for this choice, I suspect my organic "skim" has quite a bit more fat in it. I do not get the same smooth microfoam when I use regular skim milk!

[cannonfodder]

Somehow I got the idea that a Silvia wand could replace the one on the Gaggia Classic, and maybe the other Gaggias, too. Is this not so? I got something about it off one of the forums (I think CG) and had planned to do that to my Classic.

Not sure, I have never tried to retrofit a Gaggia. As long as they use the same type of valve, it should be possible. Most machines share a lot of standard parts so they may be interchangeable.

[cannonfodder]

Interesting sounding skim milk. What you describe floating on the top sounds like cream. Back in the days of milk delivery and glass containers that was common. Hence the old phrase 'the cream always rises to the top'.

As long as you enjoy what you are making, why change.

[randomperson]

Interesting sounding skim milk. What you describe floating on the top sounds like cream. Back in the days of milk delivery and glass containers that was common. Hence the old phrase 'the cream always rises to the top'.

As long as you enjoy what you are making, why change.

Yep this milk comes in glass bottles and is produced just a few miles from where I live in Vermont. So I imagine it is cream rising to the top. The rest of it is certainly not thick like whole milk but it does have a more pleasant viscosity than trad skim milk.

It makes the most divine cappa!!

[Psyd]

Yep this milk comes in glass bottles and is produced just a few miles from where I live in Vermont. So I imagine it is cream rising to the top. The rest of it is certainly not thick like whole milk but it does have a more pleasant viscosity than trad skim milk.

It makes the most divine cappa!!

Could be my cousin's cows. His cows used to provide Ben and Jerry with cream, too! As I understand it, though, that layer of cream on top is cream, and is almost pure fat (if you believe my doc!). Could the bottle be labeled "SKIM (your own) MILK"?
I got that on a bottle of 2% once and it had been so long since I had cream on the top of milk that I was flabbergasted as to how my milk could have gone bad so long before the sell-by date.
BTW, I'll be back in Swanton this August. Where does this majickal skim milk come from? I'll be bringing Silvia and Rocky, and hanging by the lake, so I'll want the best mik I can get (unless I get to milk old 'Friendly')!

[randomperson]

Could the bottle be labeled "SKIM (your own) MILK"?
I got that on a bottle of 2% once and it had been so long since I had cream on the top of milk that I was flabbergasted as to how my milk could have gone bad so long before the sell-by date.
BTW, I'll be back in Swanton this August. Where does this majickal skim milk come from? I'll be bringing Silvia and Rocky, and hanging by the lake, so I'll want the best mik I can get (unless I get to milk old 'Friendly')!

"SKIM (your own) MILK" -- I Like that! ;]

This milk comes in glass bottles and is called "Strafford Organic Creamery" milk from Rockbottom Farm in Strafford, Vermont.

Great stuff if you can get it! And yeah I remove the top creamy stuff!

[tangsta]

Split from Microfoaming and the 'pfft' sound I am missing...


Anyone have anything to say about the Gaggia turbofrother? I actually after much practice have gotten what I believe to be fairly successful foam out of it although the machine is rather touchy with its steam. This turbofrother has almost an open round bottom that sprays steam in four directions in a wide spread from each rendering whirlpooling rather hit-and-miss. Has anyone used one of these and does anyone have any suggestions for it? Maybe angles of steaming or variations on what is typical (typically discussed technique)?

Also, since I was planning on doing away with the turbofrother, does anyone know what steam wand would fit and be appropriate for a Gaggia Evolution?
After all this exciting discussion of steam tips I think I have tip envy...

I've in the same boat as you with my Evolution.

The Silvia wand does apparently work on Gaggia machines, here's a guide to replacing it on the Carezza... http://coffeesnobs.com.au/YaBB.pl?num=1126833848 iono if it works on the evolution though. Presumably, because the internals are the same, it should.

I also remember reading a thread about it on CG, where Jasonian mentioned he's had good results by blocking the air intake by moving the red rubber ring down one notch inside the wand. Oddly enough, I had good results making a nice smooth microfoam when the intake got plugged with dried milk ...ewww... i know

I'm gonna try the trick with the red ring, and i'll post my results.

[cannonfodder]

Moving the seal ring may do it provided it fills in the air channel. When I had a turbofrother machine, I took a more permanent solution by chopping down the top of the turbofrother arm. You could also put a piece of masking tape around the seam between the metal wand and plastic body. You can see how it will work before making any irreversible changes.

I do feel compelled to interject that upgrading to a prosumer grade heat exchanger or double boiler machine will yield a remarkable improvement in milk frothing, given adequate practice. It can be very financially daunting, but equally rewarding when the time comes.

[MeTheGreat]

The idea of moving the o-ring one notch down is rather intriguing as the air intake is only one small slit on the side of the frother and would in fact be completely blocked by a more deep-set o-ring. Unfortunately the attachment would have to be routed out for the outer attachment to fit. It looks like it is worth a shot though as routing out the lower section would not have any lasting effect if forced to return to the original area. Great idea, thanks for the help.

Does anyone have any idea what the result of filling in or plugging up some of the openings in the exterior attachment would be? It seems to me that by plugging a few of these the steam would be much easier to control, but I could be wrong (again).

[tangsta]

The idea of moving the o-ring one notch down is rather intriguing as the air intake is only one small slit on the side of the frother and would in fact be completely blocked by a more deep-set o-ring. Unfortunately the attachment would have to be routed out for the outer attachment to fit. It looks like it is worth a shot though as routing out the lower section would not have any lasting effect if forced to return to the original area. Great idea, thanks for the help.

Does anyone have any idea what the result of filling in or plugging up some of the openings in the exterior attachment would be? It seems to me that by plugging a few of these the steam would be much easier to control, but I could be wrong (again).

So I gave the modified attachment a try today, and got a very satisfying and smooth microfoam out of it. Now I gotta work on my pouring skills... All I did was slide the red rubber o-ring down one notch on the inside part of the wand. The sleeve still fit over it without any problem.

To get a decent whirlpool for texturizing, I had to ignore the usual technique, and ended up tilting the pitcher to almost a 45 degree angle, and had the wand submerged only to about half of the depth of the milk.

I'll try and get some pix when my gf returns with my camera.

As for plugging the holes in the exterior, I think that plugging the intake hole should make the panarello behave as a normal steam wand. Not sure what's the best way to plug it is, although moving the o-ring seemed to have done the trick.

[MeTheGreat]

Thanks for the info. I unfortunately had to shave a small bit of plastic off of my attachment to make it go over the new o-ring placement (not too much). I'm glad to hear I didn't do that for nothing. Have you had excessive foaming problems at the start of frothing? Apparently you got decent results... I am interested to know what you did at the beginning of the cycle. How much did you open the steam valve and how submerged was the wand etc.?

I am familiar with the 45 angle business though, boy that gets annoying when frothing in excess of 6-7 oz.


Thanks again for the update, I'll try that tonight.

[tangsta]

How did this work out for you?

Here's one of mine



Terrible picture, I know... but lighting was not on my side, and I didn't want to take so long as to let the foam separate.