LM Basket Woes - Page 2

[HB]

What? The shape and proportion of a LM double basket is significantly different to another double basket? A lot of double baskets are very similar in shape... Next you'll be telling me that some guy can taste the difference between 9.2 and 9.3 bar brewing pressure.

Err, Versalab's John Bicht said just that in Errors in temperature and pressure measurements:

As I have stated, no one has yet to fail to identify them. You might not, but I would find it hard to believe that someone with your interest in flavor would fail. A .1 bar change was even clearly noticed by a young woman who doesn't drink or like coffee. We didn't think to try her on .05.

The difference is not like red or white grapes, which if both of fine quality give equal pleasure. It is more akin to the difference between wonderful grapes and adequate/slightly inadequate grapes of any kind. Then within further revisions of pressure one will find a whole panoply of different flavors - some appealing and some not appealing and they all are difficult to describe, but clearly different.

I've not experienced a taste test to demonstrate his point. Back to the LM versus Faema baskets, I support Jim's assertion that the visual characteristics of the extractions are an immediate "tell" that something is amiss. The majority of the time I'm using the Faema-style ~18 gram baskets and pulling 1.25-1.75 ounce doubles, though this thread has piqued my interest in a change-up.

By the way, I assume Chris' comment about the subjectivity of taste refers to his preference, which seems an honest way of saying "I think it's better, but understand that all may not agree." Surfing the Internet on a related topic, I read an opinion column Straight Talk on Wine - Who is the Real Wine Expert:

A recent issue of the Wine Spectator compared 20 of the top cabernet sauvignons from California with 20 from the Bordeaux region of France. Two tasters were involved, an authority on California and another on Bordeaux. It was a blind tasting -- the wines were not identified to the tasters. They rated the wines on the 100-point scale used by most wine publications.

So what happened when two of the world's foremost experts tasted the same wines from the same bottles at the same time? They disagreed. In fact, the two experts disagreed on nearly 90 percent of the 40 wines. Some differences were minor; others were not. For example, they disagreed by 5 or more points on 25 percent of the wines.

(cont'd)

As you may surmise from threads like SCAA Sensory Skills [Psych] Test, I don't adhere to the dogma that one must be somehow gifted or super-initiated to hold an informed, valid opinion.

[Matthew Brinski]

I'd say it's just a fact. However unless it is backed up by objective testing it's not. Malachi claims his taste is subjective and that certainly is not scientific.

So is HB about scientific, verifiable and repeatable investigations in espresso or is it about something else?

GRB

'Cannonfodder' may very well be selling himself short, but his point is that 'Malachi' is an accomplished barista who's opinion is well respected. Does that mean he's absolutely right? ... no (even though I do believe he is in my very amateur opinion). I think we'll see about basket profiles in the near future. Last I knew, Ken Nye (Espressocraft) is working on baskets with different profiles regarding radius, wall thickness, dispersion hole patterns, etc. I think that we will see that different baskets profiles will yield different predictable results ... again, in my very amateur opinion.

Matthew Brinski

[malachi]

Illy has invested untold hundreds of hours of research into basket design.
La Marzocco has done the same.
I'm confident the same is true of numerous companies.

Thinking that basket design doesn't make a difference is foolish. Think about the physics behind espresso extraction. The basket design (volume, profile, depth, width, hole size, hole pattern, flow rate...) is obviously of integral importance.

[luca]

LM baskets also have a slightly different shape of hole at the bottom; this, I think, may make more of a difference than the shape.

In any case, it doesn't take a double blind testing, since the difference is quite visible: LM baskets tend to start with a lighter flow, that stays nearly the same color throughout the shot; whereas Cimbali and Faema baskets tend to start very dark and lighten more. This is why many people prefer the LM for normales and the other two for ristretto shots. In barista competition, where even colored crema and normale shots are a must, LM baskets definitely will give the competitor an edge. This is also true when making beauty pictures of espresso shots or extractions.

Agreed. We had our barista comp on ECM Venezianos and there was a marked colour change on them compared with Lineas.

At home I tend to use the LM (mega-ridged) double for coffee that's a few days old to keep the pour from speeding up too much.

It would be interesting to do a blind test ... but I'd want to do it with different shaped baskets of the same capacity.

Cheers,

Luca

[malachi]

By the way, I assume Chris' comment about the subjectivity of taste refers to his preference, which seems an honest way of saying "I think it's better, but understand that all may not agree."

Yes.
Or, perhaps more accurately, "It tastes better to me but might taste worse to you."

There is no right answer - there is only the right answer for you.

[luca]

Hey Chris,

Just going slightly OT: Kees' brother in Perth dropped by their barista comp and had a chat with BenB. He's going to bring his speedster into their barista academy for him to play around with ;P

Cheers,

Luca

[malachi]

very jealous...

[GRB]

Err, Versalab's John Bicht said just that in Errors in temperature and pressure measurements:

John wrote:
As I have stated, no one has yet to fail to identify them. You might not, but I would find it hard to believe that someone with your interest in flavor would fail. A .1 bar change was even clearly noticed by a young woman who doesn't drink or like coffee. We didn't think to try her on .05.

I wouldn't hold that suggestive survey up as a model of experimental design! Two shots each with a difference of 0.1 bar, and then ask the subject if there is a difference? !! You only need a first year psychology student to tell you what's happening there. A change of 0.05 bar in say 10 bar is 0.5% so to reliably produce two pressures 0.05 bar apart you need to control the pressure to better than ~0.25%. And of course you need to control the resistance of the puck to that level as well. Even with versalab's fancy packing device I doubt that's possible but I would love to see some repeat measurements to verify it.

'Cannonfodder' may very well be selling himself short, but his point is that 'Malachi' is an accomplished barista who's opinion is well respected. Does that mean he's absolutely right? ... no (even though I do believe he is in my very amateur opinion). I think we'll see about basket profiles in the near future. Last I knew, Ken Nye (Espressocraft) is working on baskets with different profiles regarding radius, wall thickness, dispersion hole patterns, etc. I think that we will see that different baskets profiles will yield different predictable results ... again, in my very amateur opinion. Matthew Brinski

In my original post I did ask malachi what "it was better than" but got no response. So I assumed we were comparing quite otherwise similar baskets. I am pretty sure there would be a difference between obviously different basket shapes.

Illy has invested untold hundreds of hours of research into basket design.
La Marzocco has done the same.
I'm confident the same is true of numerous companies.

Thinking that basket design doesn't make a difference is foolish. Think about the physics behind espresso extraction. The basket design (volume, profile, depth, width, hole size, hole pattern, flow rate...) is obviously of integral importance.

Foolish? No offense taken! Just what is the physics behind extraction? It's gonna be hard to post differential equations here! Is this the same Illy (motivated by the "science of quality") who pack their beans in little tins and flog em around the world for about 3-4 times the cost of a locally roasted product?

Or, perhaps more accurately, "It tastes better to me but might taste worse to you."

So what is the point of stating an opinion if it can't be tested, repeated and ultimately generalised for the benefit of other home baristas looking to improve their technique? This is basically an espresso self help forum right? Or is it for receiving wisdom from false gods?

GRB

[another_jim]

So what is the point of stating an opinion if it can't be tested, repeated and ultimately generalised for the benefit of other home baristas looking to improve their technique? This is basically an espresso self help forum right? Or is it for receiving wisdom from false gods?

The problem with the LE mantra of "any statement that can't be empirically tested is nonsense" is that it is, under its own criteria, nonsense. Wittgenstein, who made the statement (actually "whereof one cannot speak, one should be silent"), decided he was being a complete ass about knowledge, language and science within 15 years of writing it. Your posts are getting close to being equally doctrinaire, not to mention, trollish; doubtlessly, they have readers coming to similar conclusions.

[GRB]

The problem with the LE mantra of "any statement that can't be empirically tested is nonsense" is that it is, under its own criteria, nonsense. Wittgenstein, who made the statement (actually "whereof one cannot speak, one should be silent"), decided he was being a complete ass about knowledge, language and science within 15 years of writing it. Your posts are getting close to being equally doctrinaire, not to mention, trollish; doubtlessly, they have readers coming to similar conclusions.

I think you are going to an extreme here. You know we still do science following scientific principles and we do receive some benefits from doing that. This forum is about improving espresso technique. I am just asking if there is any real evidence for these claims. I am not calling them nonsense. Afterall, the reviews of machines that H-B posts on this site follow a more or less scientific or objective model - and so do most of the other forum discussions - as far as I can see. So what is the big deal with calling for some evidence when subjective claims are made?

I must say that I had thought it was the American tendency to be polite (I know that's stereotypical thinking) that limited more vociferous calls for hard evidence to justify certain statements but since I have been called foolish, doctrinaire and trollish I am reconsidering.

Thanks for the participation. Should I stop?

GRB

[HB]

I am just asking if there is any real evidence for these claims. I am not calling them nonsense. Afterall, the reviews of machines that H-B posts on this site follow a more or less scientific or objective model - and so do most of the other forum discussions - as far as I can see. So what is the big deal with calling for some evidence when subjective claims are made?

If we're still talking about LM baskets versus Faema baskets (for example), then it won't take long to convince yourself there's a difference, the visual qualities of the extractions being the most evident. With due respect to Chris' well-studied opinion, it's of course his opinion that one tastes better to him and thus subjective.

At home I tend to use the LM (mega-ridged) double for coffee that's a few days old to keep the pour from speeding up too much.

Ah yes! As Jim suggested, I use Faema-style baskets for ristrettos and LM for true doubles, but you raise a good point. Next time the beans are getting tired, I'll try switching baskets.

[malachi]

taste it for yourself.

[LeoZ]

if a basket can get me more crema, im in!
it makes sense that a more cylindrical design would give more crema since the coffee isnt channeled down onto itself, almost like being forced to extract more than it should.

in any event, i have to start my first post off with a newb question!
i thought the ridges were tamp lines in my giotto P. they arent? when i tamp to the ridge, i get a perfect looking puck after the shot, and only a bit of grinds on the screen..

[HB]

if a basket can get me more crema, im in!

Eh? Chris' assertion was about taste, not crema volume. I like a goodly amount of crema as much as the next guy, but it's not on my list of difficult problems to solve.

i thought the ridges were tamp lines in my giotto P.

It's a handy reference point, but the ridge's purpose is to give the portafilter retainer clip something to grab onto.

[LeoZ]

Eh? Chris' assertion was about taste, not crema volume. I like a goodly amount of crema as much as the next guy, but it's not on my list of difficult problems to solve.

this sounded to me like more consistent crema. no, it isnt necessarily as much of a problem to achieve as other variables, but it certainly cant hurt to improve on it!

In any case, it doesn't take a double blind testing, since the difference is quite visible: LM baskets tend to start with a lighter flow, that stays nearly the same color throughout the shot; whereas Cimbali and Faema baskets tend to start very dark and lighten more. This is why many people prefer the LM for normales and the other two for ristretto shots. In barista competition, where even colored crema and normale shots are a must, LM baskets definitely will give the competitor an edge. This is also true when making beauty pictures of espresso shots or extractions.

[cannonfodder]

I can pull 90% crema shots from my Faema, Isomac and Gaggia lever machine. While the appearance of the crema is an indicator of how well you ground, tamped, timed the shot, it is not necessarily an indicator of good flavor.

Crema is more a function of the beans freshness. I have had incredible looking shots that tasted like the pith from a lemon peel. I have also had modestly crema laden shots that had a wonderful flavor. Crema is a good indicator of the shot quality, but crema alone is not the final judge of taste.

[LeoZ]

Crema is more a function of the beans freshness.

more crema = fresher beans? i also find i get less crema with decaf beans. i think thats typical, right?

[Grant]

I must say that I had thought it was the American tendency to be polite.

Hey! Us Canadians that have the world monopoly on polite! We don't have much else, so don't take that from us!

Take a holidays to the states...you'll soon realize that "politeness" is not a "tendency" in America (to broadly over-generalise). Confident, loud, proud, patriotic....yes. Polite...No!

Grant

[LeoZ]

Hey! Us Canadians that have the world monopoly on polite! We don't have much else, so don't take that from us!

Take a holidays to the states...you'll soon realize that "politeness" is not a "tendency" in America (to broadly over-generalise). Confident, loud, proud, patriotic....yes. Polite...No!

Grant

having married a canadian girl, ill partially agree with you. americans can be polite when they arent apathetic about their job (man i hate that). when you do find politeness, it isnt as 'soft' as it is in canada. its there, just more direct.

[cannonfodder]

more crema = fresher beans? i also find i get less crema with decaf beans. i think thats typical, right?

I do not do decaf, but I believe your observation is correct. Decaf beans (in the green) go bad faster as well. A fair amount of damage is done to the bean in the decaffeination process.