The Weiss Distribution Technique is NOT a 'cheat'!

[Dogshot]

Split from The Buyer's Guide to the Quickmill Vetrano by moderator...

...

At the same time I was trying out the Weiss Distribution, discussed in Convex tamper and NSEW technique. Pros may eschew this technique, but John Weiss' (RapidCoffee) and my own experience support the assertion that the extra stir action does enhance the evenness of an extraction, especially for grinders that tend to clump. I bet newbies who are still working on their distribution technique will also see better results with this "cheat."


Tracing circles in search of better distribution (link)

While the difference in extraction quality with or without the Weiss Distribution may be minor with a forgiving E61, the difference is likely more stark for demanding machines, which reminds me of Ken Fox's point in the conclusion of The Impact of Preinfusion on the Taste of Espresso Shots:

If you have a rotary pump driven machine and it does not preinfuse the grounds, the modification I have done is fairly easy and cheap to do. The result of doing this modification should be greater tolerance to grind settings, easier switching between coffees, with less sink shots resulting. This is to say that with preinfusion added a non-preinfusing rotary machine begins to more and more resemble the way that a vibe pump driven machine operates. For ease of operation and less hassle, I'd suggest just installing the delay timer in your non-preinfusing rotary machine, without a need for an on-off switch.

His comment prompted me to work the last couple days trying to answer the question: Is a rotary E61 less forgiving than its vibratory pump equipped cousin? No doubt the difference, if it exists, is very small. I strived for hyper-even extractions in the attempt to demonstrate to myself that the difference was either noteworthy or negligible. After days of the most even pours I've ever managed, I'm still undecided. Perhaps this is a good group test for EspressoFest (Anita / vibe versus Vetrano / rotary), most even extraction wins?

Very thoughtful and interesting post Dan, but I must disagree with the assertion that the Weiss Distribution Technique is a) a cheat , or b) that the difference in extraction quality, even with an e61 may be minor, for the following reasons:

a) sure a pro would eschew this technique, as it takes more time than a NSEW, chop, or Stockfleth, and would lead to less through-put (ie.$); but it involves less pawing of the coffee, and is clearly a more consistent method of achieving even distribution. Sometimes the HB is in a better position to strive for absolute quality.

b) A naked PF will show gross errors (as Ken puts it) in the puck, the puck itself acts as another sign of errors, and the taste will show all errors. The Weiss Distribution often gives perfect NPF pours, perfect to near-perfect pucks, and my worst pours using the WDT taste miles better than my best NSEW pours.

It has made such a difference to my extractions that I hope that any reader who has not tried the WDT to give it a try before considering a new machine or grinder.

Mark

[HB]

I must disagree with the assertion that the Weiss Distribution Technique is a) a cheat , or b) that the difference in extraction quality, even with an e61 may be minor, for the following reasons:

(a) I wondered if the term "cheat" would set someone off. If you prefer, it is a compensation technique. I haven't determined if it compensates more for shortcomings in the grinder's distribution, the barista struggling to master more common techniques (e.g., Stockfleths), or both.

(b) My comparison was an E61 vibratory pump versus an E61 rotary pump, not Weiss Distribution versus Stockfleths, for example.

[skyryders90]

a) sure a pro would eschew this technique, as it takes more time than a NSEW, chop, or Stockfleth, and would lead to less through-put (ie.$); but it involves less pawing of the coffee, and is clearly a more consistent method of achieving even distribution. Sometimes the HB is in a better position to strive for absolute quality.

Not sure we can say it is "clearly" a more consistent method, unless you want to qualify that to say "for someone who is still mastering other distribution techniques." I don't know that my dose + Weiss distribute results in a better distribution than a pro's dose + stockfleths, etc. I know that when I'm really in sync, my dose + stockfleths results in almost identical shots to a dose + Weiss.

I DO agree that for someone with a grinder that has a real dosing bias to one side of the basket, and/or is struggling with other distribution techniques, the Weiss method is very likely to be better.

[HB]

I DO agree that for someone with a grinder that has a real dosing bias to one side of the basket...

You can rotate while dosing to compensate, but it's true that all the Mazzers I've used strongly favor the left. Doserless grinders like the Mini E / modified Super Jolly's are probably the biggest benefactors since the stirring breaks up the clumps and corrects for their tendency to dose unevenly. At the other extreme, the Versalab M3 grinder evidently sees no benefit from either the Stockfleths move or Weiss Distribution. From Abe's Day 4:

That distribution technique which works with all other grinders, does not work well with the M3. The grounds are already at a state of almost perfectly even density right out of the grinder, and the Barista's job is to mess as little as possible with it.

Let's face it, we're working hard to compensate for (most) grinders' shortcomings.

[Dogshot]

Sure, I can't generalize beyond my own ability and grinder, but the Weiss Distribution is the only technique that affects the distribution through the entire puck depth. The tamp then merely preserves the distribution. The other techniques (Schomer, Stockfleth, etc.) directly affect only the surface of the puck. Downward pressure has to be used, which impacts the density of the puck unevenly. In the hands of experts, it's clear that these other techniques work; I just can't see how the other techniques provide superior distribution when the WDT is the only one that directly provides even distribution throughout the puck.

Mark

[RapidCoffee]

My heartfelt thanks to Jon, Dan, Mark and everyone else who gave the WDT a try. FWIW, I also dislike the connotations of the word "cheat". But I tend to agree with Dan when he says this is primarily a method for overcoming grinder-doser inadequacies.

Many factors contribute to an excellent cup of espresso: freshly roasted beans, correct grind, good barista skills (dosing, distribution, tamping), correct brew pressure and temperature... This method only impacts distribution and dosing. There is little doubt in my mind that stirring with a needle leads to a more uniform distribution of grounds in the filter basket. As Mark says, the needle penetrates to the bottom of the basket, whereas other methods (Schomers, Stockfleth's, Chicago Chop, leveling with a straight edge) basically push the grounds around the surface of the puck.

I'm very glad Mark found this method so effective. Lest expectations run too high, my experience is perhaps closer to Dan's. Extractions are slightly more even and consistent with the needle stir, but I also get good pours without it. Dan and I are both using rotary pump Vetranos, which in my hands is an exceptionally forgiving machine. The stirring effect was greater on my previous machines (vibe pump Oscar and rotary pump Rancilio L7), which do not feature the preinfusing E61 group head. The grinder-doser undoubtedly contributes as well. My doserless Mazzer Super Jolly is, in Dan's inimitable words, a "clump monster". The needle is a great way to break up clumps.

Perhaps the main benefit of this technique is the focus it puts on distribution. A uniform distribution is the foundation for an even extraction, and an even extraction is the foundation for excellence in the cup.

- John

[HB]

My doserless Mazzer Super Jolly is, in Dan's inimitable words, a "clump monster". The needle is a great way to break up clumps.

I hope you don't mind me sharing your photo as Exhibit A:

Super Jolly transformed into doserless 'clump monster'

[skyryders90]

But I tend to agree with Dan when he says this is primarily a method for overcoming grinder-doser inadequacies.

I agree, too. If I still had my Mini-E I bet I would use the hell out of the WDT. These days I have a Cimbali Jr. which has very little, if any, clumping. It also avoids the throw-left bias of the Mazzer dosers, instead dropping clump-free grounds straight down. Don't get me wrong, it's not nearly requires-no-distribution-Versalab perfect or anything like that. I just find that I get pretty much the same pours using the needle as I do using stockfleths, and given that I tend to avoid the extra implements and time of the swirls.

Regardless of that, the word "cheat" is not appropriate. "Cheat" implies that you're doing something you're not supposed to be doing, and frankly the espresso police can kiss my $%@ when it comes to what is "right" and "wrong" - if the espresso produced is good then whatever I did was, by definition, "right." =)

[HB]

"Cheat" implies that you're doing something you're not supposed to be doing, and frankly the espresso police can kiss my $%@...

That's one interpretation. Cheat can also mean to deliberately violate accepted conventions. For example:

It is 80 years since Harry Houdini's last escape, but the enduring myth of his achievements remains. In the history of entertainment, Houdini is remembered as the magician who cheated death, over and over again - a master of suspense, a man of his age and of the people.

History Zone Films: The Houdini Myth, BBC Online

[skyryders90]

That's one interpretation. Cheat can also mean to deliberately violate accepted conventions.

Fair enough, though I think the "not supposed to do that" definition is the one that most would associate with the term used in the context that we're using it here. If you're using "cheat" to mean "deliberately violate accepted conventions," then I think the Weiss technique IS a cheat - the accepted convention certainly doesn't involve wiggling a needle through the grounds as a distribution technique. In this sense I don't mean it as a pejorative term at all.

Accepted conventions ... hmm. John Kenneth Galbraith once said that "[t]he conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking." In many cases I think he's right. Perhaps this is why I assumed you mean "cheat" to mean "not supposed to do that" - I tend not to worry much about the accepted convention.

[jrtatl]

All of this is making me wonder where my needle is. I'm still using my toothpick (with great results). John, did you get my SASE?

Thanks,

[RapidCoffee]

All of this is making me wonder where my needle is. I'm still using my toothpick (with great results). John, did you get my SASE?

Yes I did, and mailed it back promptly. Other early adopters have also experienced delays, and some received envelopes that were stamped 13 cents postage due. The needles are very light, and it just didn't occur to me that more than 39 cents would be required. Darn USPS...

Anyway, my apologies. If you don't receive them by midweek, let me know and I'll send you a couple more.

- John

[RapidCoffee]

Cheat can also mean to deliberately violate accepted conventions.

I prefer to think of it as innovative use of available technology - in this case, an old dissecting kit and an empty yogurt container.

[jrtatl]

Yes I did, and mailed it back promptly. Other early adopters have also experienced delays, and some received envelopes that were stamped 13 cents postage due. The needles are very light, and it just didn't occur to me that more than 39 cents would be required. Darn USPS...

Anyway, my apologies. If you don't receive them by midweek, let me know and I'll send you a couple more.

- John

Thanks John. I thought about the amount of postage only AFTER I sent it to you. It should get to me anyway. I listed my address as the sender's return address as well. I'll have $.13 ready for the postmaster just in case.

Thanks again, and I'll post some comparisons with my toothpick method.

[RAS]

Well, then, call me a cheater!

John, with a weekend came the opportunity to try the needle. As an espresso hobbyist, who only fires up the Andreja on weekends, this is a welcome tool to help improve my distribution and "NPF" shots. Worked like a charm the first time I tried it. I do not consider myself a barista by any means (and I've got the technique to prove it!), and this little "cheat" immediately improved my results.

There may come a time when I'll have more time to practice various "legitimate" distribution techniques, but while I've still got other interests in my life, this is a great aid.

Thanks John!

Bob

[cannonfodder]

I have not tried this yet. I am still fighting the urge; I don't have much desire to make my espresso process more complicated. I don't think I have a bad dosing problem. My espresso tastes pretty darn good to me.

After spending a night watching Barry and his barista crew slap shots out of his Mazzer, I started doing the same. Whacking that doser as the machine grinds really does break up most of the clumps. I don't let me mini doser handle slap back quite as hard but I do keep it moving as I grind. My little Gaggia MDF that I have at work benefited even more from the practice. I don't get anything that looks remotely similar to John's boulder spewing spout.

A direct vertical drop from the burrs would probably reduce most clumping. The Versalab M3 dream grinder uses a direct vertical drop from the burrs and produces a wonderfully fluffy looking bed of grounds. Unfortunately, it is way out of my price range.

I would not call this a 'cheat', it is simply another method. Not all tamp or level methods work for everyone. You have to experiment around to find what works best for you and your equipment. The technique I use at home with my Isomac and MM do not work for the MDF and Factory lever machine I have in my office.

Sometimes the best solution comes from the most unexpected places. Who would have thought a biology dissecting needle would one day turn into an espresso dosing aid. Has anyone tried using a vibrating surface to break clumps and settle the grounds? Something like an electric toothbrush or engraving needle, just hold the PF against the device and let the harmonics break down the clumps. They use something similar when pouring concrete in rebar. The vibration settles the slurry into the rebar mesh and burps up any air pockets.

[RapidCoffee]

Has anyone tried using a vibrating surface to break clumps and settle the grounds? Something like an electric toothbrush or engraving needle, just hold the PF against the device and let the harmonics break down the clumps. They use something similar when pouring concrete in rebar. The vibration settles the slurry into the rebar mesh and burps up any air pockets.

Hi Dave. There was a post several weeks ago on CG, describing the use of an electric scribing pen for settling the grounds. I was intrigued enough to haul out an old massaging vibrator (don't ask ) and give vibration a try. It didn't work very well, but an engraving needle or electric toothbrush might work better.

If you change your mind, email me your address and I'll ship you a couple of needles. Stirring really doesn't complicate the process much.

- John

[cannonfodder]

Appreciate the offer but I have quite a few similar tools. I do quite a bit of shooting and have quite a few different sizes of angle probes. It makes getting into the receiver grooves and barrel lugs to clean much easier. Although the powder solvent may give the shot an off taste. One other trick, get yourself a 22 caliber nylon barrel brush and a short pistol cleaning rod. The brush cleans out a steam wand like a champ.

I was thinking of something like a test tube ultrasonic mixer. A little square box with a rubber pad topped platter. It oscillates so fast that you can place the bottom of a test tube on the pad and in a matter of seconds completely mixes its contents. A two or three second contact with something like that may be perfect (and more expensive than a new Mazzer).

[Psyd]

I was thinking of something like a test tube ultrasonic mixer. A little square box with a rubber pad topped platter. It oscillates so fast that you can place the bottom of a test tube on the pad and in a matter of seconds completely mixes its contents. A two or three second contact with something like that may be perfect (and more expensive than a new Mazzer).

Well, I noticed that I get a bit of vibration from the Mazzer Major, and I still get clumping.
I'm not sure if it keeps with the intent of the WDT, but I dose into a small tupperware container. I found one that sits in the forks of the major and *just* clears the doser, and will sit there during the grind, and the opening is just smaller than 58mm. I use an opened safety pin to stir the grounds, and then turn them over into the PF, and then use Stockfleth's move to distribute them into the filter basket. I'm guessing that, other than breaking up clumps, I'm not getting the full benefit of the Weiss of distribution. RapidCoffee, do you stir while the yoghurt cup is still in place, or after it's removed? Do you see a benefit either way other than the yoghurt cup keeps grounds from straying over the side?

[RapidCoffee]

Well, I noticed that I get a bit of vibration from the Mazzer Major, and I still get clumping.
I'm not sure if it keeps with the intent of the WDT, but I dose into a small tupperware container. I found one that sits in the forks of the major and *just* clears the doser, and will sit there during the grind, and the opening is just smaller than 58mm. I use an opened safety pin to stir the grounds, and then turn them over into the PF, and then use Stockfleth's move to distribute them into the filter basket. I'm guessing that, other than breaking up clumps, I'm not getting the full benefit of the Weiss of distribution. RapidCoffee, do you stir while the yoghurt cup is still in place, or after it's removed? Do you see a benefit either way other than the yoghurt cup keeps grounds from straying over the side?

Hi Psyd. The yogurt cup is an integral part of this technique. This improvised funnel allows you to stir as vigorously as you'd like, without spraying coffee grounds all over the countertop. Stirring with a safety pin in another container, and then dumping the grounds in the filter basket - I agree with your assessment. This will break up clumps effectively, but will probably not distribute the grounds as evenly. OTOH, if you're getting good results with Stockfleth's, you may not notice any difference in the cup.

I've still got dissecting needles to send out if you'd like to give this a try. You'll find them easier to handle than a safety pin.

- John