Initial Impressions of the Ponte Vecchio Lusso - Page 4

[Arto]

This makes sense, but is not what I have experienced. Sure, increase the dose when looking for a ristretto, but the grind needs to be coarser to get the crema and body of a ristretto. To see what I am talking about, try loosening the grind a little from the point posted in your video, and using the same dose. I would appreciate your take on the resulting shot. To me, it is more like a ristretto.

Mark

Shouldn't this yield a lungo? For me, keeping the dose same but grinding coarser* should make the coffee bigger by volume due the lesser resistance in the puck. You don't mention if he should tamp harder or softer, so I assume to keep the tamp the same level.



*I guess that's what you mean by "loosening the grind"?

[timo888]

Lusso Double Basket dimensions

[Dogshot]

Diameter of the perforated area at the bottom of the basket?

[Dogshot]

Shouldn't this yield a lungo? For me, keeping the dose same but grinding coarser* should make the coffee bigger by volume due the lesser resistance in the puck. You don't mention if he should tamp harder or softer, so I assume to keep the tamp the same level.



*I guess that's what you mean by "loosening the grind"?

The water volume is fixed, so there are no volume changes. I keep the tamp the same, which is very light. If I grind fine enough but not so fine that there is no flow at all, the crema suffers dramatically. These are my worst shots.

Mark

[timo888]

Sure, increase the dose when looking for a ristretto, but the grind needs to be coarser to get the crema and body of a ristretto. To see what I am talking about, try loosening the grind a little from the point posted in your video, and using the same dose. I would appreciate your take on the resulting shot. To me, it is more like a ristretto.

The grind in that shot in the Afternoon Doppio video was dialed in fairly well relative to the Lusso's water draw and pressure profile. When I coarsen the grind as you suggest, and do not increase the dose but keep it at 11g, the shot begins to blonde early into the second pull. Tamping with greater force to compensate for the greater coarseness of the grind might prevent this from happening or delay it, but I prefer to moderate the dose and grind and keep the tamp a constant in the equation.

Regards
Timo

P.S. What threw me off your meaning in your previous post was your choice of the word 'taper', which means 'to become gradually smaller'. I thought, mistakenly, you were referring to the basket itself becoming gradually smaller; rereading, I see you were simply commenting upon the diameter of the filter relative to the diameter of the basket.

[Arto]

The water volume is fixed, so there are no volume changes. I keep the tamp the same, which is very light. If I grind fine enough but not so fine that there is no flow at all, the crema suffers dramatically. These are my worst shots.

Mark

Ok, now I understand (I guess)

I thought this way:

Because most of the blends tastes best at extraction-times around 30 s there should be a greater amount of coffee in the cup if ground coarser and pulled with the same pressure in same time.

A finer grind would yield in a smaller shot (ristretto) because the flow-restrictions produced by the finer grind and because the pressure is the same.



Because I don't own any spring-lever; I can't know. And therefore my derivations fail

[peacecup]

This is a very interesting discussion. Who would have thought a year ago that anyone would even be interested in the finer aspects of 45-mm espresso. We've come a long way.

Andy's ratios of ground-coffee to beverage are by weight

Fortunately, he also provides volumes in the table, so when I don;t have a scale handy I substitute these. And I maintain that a 14g, 1-oz. shot is smack dab in the middle of the ristretto range, and it happens to be delicioso.

and a loose (for lack of a better term)

is long a better term?

My three-pull 1.5 oz shots would be long ristrettos or short normales.

Its all semantics, and long ago I proposed that any time someone wants to describe a shot they should give as complete a description as possible, i.e. dose, shot volume (or wt), and probably time.

BTW, my first AM, two-pull, 1-oz espresso (for lack of a more exact term) was delicioso.


PC

[timo888]

Who would have thought a year ago that anyone would even be interested in the finer aspects of 45-mm espresso.

Actually, ever since I hooked up with La Peppina, the differences in the cup of a 45mm spring lever versus a manual lever and versus a 58mm pump machine have been of interest to me; indeed, there have been a few rather spirited threads about this subject.

Since peacecup brings up the issue of semantics, I want to go back a few posts earlier in this thread to something Dogshot wrote, not because I have a bone to pick with him but simply to clarify a point.

This greater tendency to under-extract is what I think allows the small volume baskets to produce richer tasting espresso than the brew ratios would imply.

The term underextraction might mislead some readers; it has negative connotations and is therefore not the most apt word to describe the extraction gradient when water under 6 bars of pressure passes through a tallish, narrowish cake of coffee as opposed to a shortish, broadish cake of coffee (i.e. 45mm tall basket versus 58mm broad basket). In the taller narrower cake, the coffee cake may undergo less extraction but the espresso produced is not underextracted in the pejorative sense.

Brew ratios are dependent upon a number of factors, including but not limited to depth and freshness of roast, type of bean and bean processing, dose, grind, tamp, temperature, preinfusion, and brew pressure -- and so it is best not to draw general conclusions from a limited range of very loosely controlled experiments. But I think one can say fairly safely that with 6 bars of pressure and taller baskets it is easier for the barista to avoid overextraction and the harshness that accompanies it.

Regards
Timo

[Dogshot]

The term underextraction might mislead some readers; it has negative connotations and is therefore not the most apt word to describe the extraction gradient when water under 6 bars of pressure passes through a tallish, narrowish cake of coffee as opposed to a shortish, broadish cake of coffee (i.e. 45mm tall basket versus 58mm broad basket). In the taller narrower cake, the coffee cake may undergo less extraction but the espresso produced is not underextracted in the pejorative sense.

Brew ratios are dependent upon a number of factors, including but not limited to depth and freshness of roast, type of bean and bean processing, dose, grind, tamp, temperature, preinfusion, and brew pressure -- and so it is best not to draw general conclusions from a limited range of very loosely controlled experiments. But I think one can say fairly safely that with 6 bars of pressure and taller baskets it is easier for the barista to avoid overextraction and the harshness that accompanies it.

Regards
Timo

Excellent clarifications! I use words like under-extraction, because I am borrowing from what Jim and Andy have been doing, and prefer to use the terminology that they are using, in order to minimize confusion. I agree that the term might imply to some that shots are deficient or unbalanced in some way, which is simply not the case.

re: brew ratios - I submit that the water volume of the shot is the single greatest determinant of this ratio. Therefore, I suspect that your variables selection may be more true for non-spring levers than spring lever machines. Given that 2 pulls will consistently give 30ml of water, there will be very little variance in brew ratios from a spring lever machine based on much other than dose. I know that using Andy's strict definition of brew ratio as the dry weight of the puck to the weight of the resulting shot, it is a huge challenge to produce anything with more than a 50% brew ratio on the PV. This falls on the low side of the brew ratios that I get from my Brewtus II, presumably because of the higher pressure and faster extraction rate of the pump machine and 58mm basket. I'm not sure what to make of brew ratios and the PV group, since my 50% Export shots are every bit as deep, rich, and full as the higher ratio shots I get from the DB, and certainly moreso than an equivalent ratio (45%-50%) shot from the DB.

I have tried several 13-14gm doubles on the Export over the past day. Squeezing 14gm into that basket is an art in itself, and I suspect that without doing some mid-tamping or serious PF tapping, I can't get much more than 13gm into the basket. What's interesting is that at 13+gm, there is no sign of brew-screen collision on the top of the spent puck, so the basket can certainly handle that amount. The shots have been...delicioso (thanks again PC). I mean seriously snacktacular shots (using both my home blend and Sweet Maria's Yemen San'ani). Regardless of whether the dose is 11gm or closer to 14gm, I now am convincing myself that the 45mm basket's tendency to extract slower (or less, ie. under-extract) can be offset by a faster pull to get a traditional-style shot. As Jim mentions in his paper on extraction, and is clear when brewing, a faster flowing shot will lead to a higher extraction rate. Based on this, and on the look and taste of the Peacecup-style shots, I think that for my taste and coffees, the best (richest, most balanced) shots are those where the pull does not slow to a creep (maybe 8-15 seconds, rather than 15-20 seconds). That is, the deeper column of coffee in the PV double basket benefits from a faster flow rate to get a 'traditional' extraction.

I'm learning that the PV is capable of producing a wide variety of shots, and that the range of shots rarely falls below the level that an espresso lover would consider 'very enjoyable'.

Mark

[timo888]

The lever has a finite per-pull water draw. One can bring more water to the extraction simply by giving an additional pull. If the additional pull results in more water than is necessary, simply remove the cup. Whether the machine be a manual-lever, spring-lever, or electrical pump, there are always two primary determinants to the brew-ratio: the dose and the water draw. Either of these factors can be increased or decreased within practical upper and lower limits.

I have found a nice two-pull routine. For me, those shots that conform to the classical 30 ± 5 seconds extraction time have been consistently delicious. With the coffees that I have been using (Rocket Dark Star and Caffe D'Arte Firenze), ground to the fineness I've been selecting, and tamped very lightly, this extraction time requires a dose of around 11g in the double basket.

That other types of pulls and modifications to the dosing are good also I do not doubt. But many variables go into a shot. There may be factors that account for the qualities you are liking that you are not taking into account: depth of roast, roast age, blend, coarseness of grind, etc. Enjoy the exploration.
Regards
Timo

P.S. What do you mean by "traditional"? My sense of what is traditional comes from using vintage levers, Peppina, Caravel, Cremina, and now the Lusso. Do you mean contemporary?

P.P.S. When you say 8-15 seconds, do you mean per-lever-pull or per extraction? If per-lever-pull, that would be a 16-30 second range for a two-pull extraction, a pretty wide range that encompasses the range I gave above for the shots most pleasing to me.

[peacecup]

It is so much fun to have a couple of PV users to disuss things with.

I weighed a number of full (but not touching the screen) baskets at 15g+ a while ago - haven't tried it lately, but will do so again. It probably depends on the roast level, freshness, and fineness aw well. Plus, I live in a temperate rainforest, so everything is usually at ~90 humidity.

I normally grind quite fine - often enough to slow or nearly choke the spring. I may then back off just enough to let the spring do its work. But sometimes, especially if I want a very full dose, I pull a "leaner" - this means standing over the machine and manually applying pressure to the piston via the cotter pin by which it attaches to the lever. The supreme balance and rubber feet on the Export make it possible to get my entire weight to bear - sometiimes I fear for the health of the cotter pin or even the four bolts that attach the group to the boiler. I really don't want to disable the little Export, but its all in the name of espresso.

RE: the volume of water - timo is correct - you can always add more (or less) via the number or duration of pulls. Also, coarser grinds and lesser doses tend to produce more water in the cup, as does greater boiler pressure I suspect.

On top of it all there is the "Fellini pull" which I use on virtuallt all doppios - this adds a considerable amount of water to the puck for preinfusion, so when the first lever pull comes, more volume ends up in the cup. Its essentially an additional 1/2 pull. You can see the base of my Export rocking in the videos, and a while ago I posted a video of the pull (inspired by Dr. Jim's video of a Fellini movie, The Opera Rehersal).

PC

[Dogshot]

That other types of pulls and modifications to the dosing are good also I do not doubt. But many variables go into a shot. There may be factors that account for the qualities you are liking that you are not taking into account: depth of roast, roast age, blend, coarseness of grind, etc.

Everything starts with a hunch, and this thread is, afterall, dedicated to initial impressions...


I appreciate hearing about PC's manual over-ride, but probably won't try that until I accidentally grind way too fine.

Mark

[timo888]

Everything starts with a hunch, and this thread is, afterall, dedicated to initial impressions...

Initial impressions are of course welcome to the extent that they apply to the Lusso, or apply to features of the PV Export that are the same or very similar to those of the Lusso.

What made me challenge some of your statements was that you seemed to be drawing radical conclusions from those initial impressions. While any germane comment whatsoever, even a radical conclusion, is welcome, you just have to be prepared to discuss and defend your methods if your conclusions purport to have a scientific foundation.

The specific conclusion you reached that I took issue with was your claim that the PV was cannot pull a shot whose ratio of dose-to-beverage would make it a ristretto. Your results might well be caused by any number of things that profoundly affect the flow and the extraction: dose and tamp, the fineness or coarseness of the grind setting, the blend, how the beans were processed, the depth and age of the roast, also temperature. I would attempt to control for these variables before concluding that a machine cannot pull a ristretto.

There are different qualities in the espresso produced by a vintage spring lever. The 45mm basket does constrain the dose and affect the height of the cake, which will affect the extraction; and the lower, tapering brew pressure has implications too. A vintage spring lever will produce a different extraction from that produced by an electric pump at 9 bar with a broader shallower cake.

The espresso from a vintage spring lever is smoother and gentler than the espresso produced by a 9 bar pump machine or from a manual lever. The spring's crema tends to be more syrupy, less mousselike. The espresso from the vintage spring lever has more coffee tones.

Regards
Timo

[timo888]

I live in a temperate rainforest, so everything is usually at ~90 humidity.

That humidity asks for a coarser grind. Like the summers in southeastern Pennsylvania.

For your own safety, peacecup, reduce the dose. One slip, and your forehead is an integral part of the heat-sink

Regards
Timo

[Dogshot]

The specific conclusion you reached that I took issue with was your claim that the PV was cannot pull a shot whose ratio of dose-to-beverage would make it a ristretto. Your results might well be caused by any number of things that profoundly affect the flow and the extraction: dose and tamp, the fineness or coarseness of the grind setting, the blend, how the beans were processed, the depth and age of the roast, also temperature. I would attempt to control for these variables before concluding that a machine cannot pull a ristretto.

I have mentioned that the PV group cannot produce a ristretto as defined by Andy's brew ratios, while using the machine within its expected operating parameters. This is more an arithmetic inevitability than a radical conclusion, and I defy you to demonstrate (or propose) how a change in age of roast, temp, etc. could have a significant upward effect on the brew ratio. I also mentioned before that since dose and water volume largely determine this measure, variations in blend, grind, timing, etc. cannot possibly contribute enough difference to the measure to move the brew ratio of a PV shot into the 60% or above area of a ristretto. Of course you can pull a partial shot to get to more than 60% brew ratio, but that is not really a shot. In the context of the measure of brew ratio and the PV group, these variables that you refer to cannot profoundly affect the flow and extraction. Certainly not to the point of bringing the brew ratio beyond 60%. However, context is important to bear in mind here. It is obvious to the point of redundancy that many variables contribute to what goes in the cup.

I have been getting at the point that the PV cannot really produce a cup with a brew ratio greater than 50%. Nevertheless, the machine is capable of producing shots of differing character from the same bean/dose. I agree that the PV can produce a shot that has the qualities of a ristretto, which interests me given the brew ratio limitations. This is what I am interested in exploring.


Mark

[timo888]

I have mentioned that the PV group cannot produce a ristretto as defined by Andy's brew ratios, while using the machine within its expected operating parameters. This is more an arithmetic inevitability than a radical conclusion
...
I have been getting at the point that the PV cannot really produce a cup with a brew ratio greater than 50%.

Let me address with an experiment your "arithmetic inevitability" assertion:

Prerequisite: determine the grind required so that using the lightest of tamps (i.e. little more than the weight of the tamper, perhaps 2 pounds, just enough to give 6mm headroom in the double basket) an 11g dose takes 25-30 seconds to extract, in two pulls, i.e. about 12-15 seconds per pull.

The headroom is an important gauge. Please try to be meticulous in your adherence to this particular aspect of the protocol.

Now we will keep this grind setting but vary the dose while using a lower volume of water, all the while remaining well within "expected operating parameters":

1. Using the same grind and tamp and 10g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.
2. Using the same grind and tamp and 11g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.
3. Using the same grind and tamp and 12g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.
4. Using the same grind and tamp and 13g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.

Does any of these Fellini preinfusion + full single pulls result in a cup where the ratio of the weight of the dose to the weight of the beverage is approximately 1:1, i.e. the ristretto centerpoint as defined in Andy's schema? Does any of them result in an even tighter ristretto than 1:1, i.e. where the weight of the dose is greater than the weight of the beverage?

Regards
Timo

[Dogshot]

Prerequisite: determine the grind required so that using the lightest of tamps (i.e. little more than the weight of the tamper, perhaps 2 pounds, just enough to give 6mm headroom in the double basket) an 11g dose takes 25-30 seconds to extract, in two pulls, i.e. about 12-15 seconds per pull.

The headroom is an important gauge. Please try to be meticulous in your adherence to this particular aspect of the protocol.

Now we will keep this grind setting but vary the dose while using a lower volume of water, all the while remaining well within "expected operating parameters":

1. Using the same grind and tamp and 10g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.
2. Using the same grind and tamp and 11g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.
3. Using the same grind and tamp and 12g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.
4. Using the same grind and tamp and 13g dose, do a Fellini preinfusion, followed by a full single pull.

As I have already mentioned that while a partial shot can result in a higher ratio, but is not really a shot, I must mis-understand something in your post. If I set up a shot according to your prerequisite, then I have a shot that extracts into 2 pulls. If I now use a similar or higher dose and extract into a single pull, then I am pulling only half the shot? If I were to pack 14gm in a basket and then stop the shot at 1.4gm, I have a stopped shot, not an uber-ristretto with a brew ratio of 10:1.

The reason I was talking about the PV group's tendency to uder-extract is that it is relevant to the discussion of decreasing volume and increasing dose. To me, a proper shot is not determined by duration or volume, but by the point at which it blondes. Although I have not tried it, I would have to grind very coarse to get a single pull to start to blonde from 11gm in the double basket. Would this even be espresso, or would it be a tiny cafe crema at this point?

Does any of these Fellini preinfusion + full single pulls result in a cup where the ratio of the weight of the dose to the weight of the beverage is approximately 1:1, i.e. the ristretto centerpoint as defined in Andy's schema? Does any of them result in an even tighter ristretto than 1:1, i.e. where the weight of the dose is greater than the weight of the beverage?

Based on what you have presented, I would have to say no - they result in partial shots.

Mark

[timo888]

Based on what you have presented, I would have to say no - they result in partial shots.

Well, your answer clears up something that has been baffling to me about your arithmetic necessity. A 'shot' does not have to be aligned with 'single-lever-pull' One can bring water to the coffee however one likes in any combination of partial pulls and full pulls. The barista simply has to bear in mind that, with the spring lever, the brew pressure will vary depending upon the depth of the lever pull. At its maximum compression the spring can have twice the force it has as it approaches decompression. So this, and the dose, place tight limits on the number of times one can do a full pull.

This tapered brew pressure has a pros and cons; foremost among the benefits, IMO, is that the gentleness near the end of the extraction helps to avoid overextraction as the puck is becoming nearly spent. It is enough to push out what Jim Schulman has called 'the sog' that collects in the lowest section above the filter without overextracting the upper layers.

Regards
Timo

[peacecup]

I need to concur with timo that a shot does not need to include only combinations of complete lever pulls. How, for example, would one reconcile this with a pump machine, which does not operate in discrete units of volume. I have always held that PV shots will be different from shots produced on a lever that pulls two oz. per pull. How does one produce a 1-oz ristretto on a commercial lever? Remove the cup before the pull is complete.

PC

[Dogshot]

I need to concur with timo that a shot does not need to include only combinations of complete lever pulls. How, for example, would one reconcile this with a pump machine, which does not operate in discrete units of volume...

I absolutely agree with this statement 100%.

A 'shot' does not have to be aligned with 'single-lever-pull' Exclamation One can bring water to the coffee however one likes in any combination of partial pulls and full pulls.

I completely agree, and don't have any idea how you got the impression I thought otherwise. I specifically refer to partial shots, not partial pulls.

If you define the end of the shot as the point at which it begins to blonde, then I maintain that with the way the PV group under-extracts, there is no way you can get a brew ratio near 60%. If you can show me how to brew a shot on the PV that ends at the point of blonding and where the shot weighs significantly less than 170% of the dose weight, I would love to see it (and try it).

If you define the end of the shot as any point at which you decide to pull the cup away or stop pulling the lever, then I don't think we can talk about brew ratios.

Mark