Death of the big conicals? Big flats are coming... - Page 12

February 27th, 2015, 3:31 pm

Joco wrote:Maybe a Clima Pro doesn't make sense in a home environment, but the standard Mythos, or low rpm version does. As does a K30.

Point being is that from what I can tell is that the general consensus on H-B is that conicals are the holy grail of grinders (thus the TGP).

I agree that is the impression that one can get at a read-the-headlines level. The truth is in the details, though. It has quite a few months since I read through those threads, but I do not remember reading any pronouncement based on the results presented of four legs good, two legs bad, er, I mean, conical good, flat bad. Some people jumped to that conclusion, but they made the logic flaw of confusing particular machines with particular technologies. Now some folks are committing the same fallacy, but in the 'reverse' direction. Either way, a fallacy is a fallacy.

Besides, everyone knows that roller coffee grinders are better than flats or conicals!

#112: Post by **Marcelnl** » February 27th, 2015, 3:32 pm

Consensus , on HB ?

I do not believe conicals are better no matter what, who knows what flat burr is coming?
As if you say that the latest Ferrari model is a better car than anything yet to come.
As with a TV, I'd scrutinize its qualities before dismissing the salesman based on expectations and assumptions..but this is admittedly being said by someone listening to a flea powered tube amp..

#113: Post by **nickw** » February 27th, 2015, 4:22 pm

I don't understand how this is still a debate about burr type alone.

bostonbuzz wrote: OKokokok. So what flats are here or are "coming"?

1. Almost certainly not "better" than 68/71mm conicals, but simply different and more finiky grind setting.
• 64mm Super Jolly Burrs - Most folks on this forum with a titan conical at one point owned this grinder and upgraded.
• 83mm Major Burrs - Similar enough to the SJ that people mostly skip it upgrading to conicals.
• 75mm? Super Caimano burrs - Typical flat, doesn't seem to be "better" in any sense, just a little different.

Conicals are easier to align due to their smaller outside diameter.

A 71mm Robur has a 49mm outside diameter on the burr. So compared to a 64mm super jolly the Robur is easier to align and has a longer cutting path. No wonder it wins.

But that alone doesn't make conicals better than flats, there are holistic pro's and con's to each burr type.

Implementation matters more than type.

#114: Post by **Terranova** » February 27th, 2015, 4:30 pm

The funny thing is, looking at the signatures of each writer who seems to be strictly against "big flats are coming..." or those who really see it as a pure marketing strategy / conspiracy by Kaminsky, Perger, Harmon & Co are using a conical grinder.

Don't take it personal, nobody says that your espresso doesn't taste good.
Relax and think a bit more objective about it.
The roasting culture has changed a lot and the Italians will never ever change to flat burrs, easy dialing in very little adjusting through out the day.

I am absolutely convinced that lighter roasts do benefit from a more uniform particle size like flat burrs are able to produce. (flat burrs in general, not talking about the EK 43)

Personally I am not really in to this WBC stuff and I have never watched any WBC, although some parts might be interesting.
Is a WBC something like "The Emperor's New Clothes" ?
If there is really just marketing strategy behind it then I am pretty sure that many participants will use a conical grinder. (those who are not involved in MK, Nuova Simonelli)

baldheadracing wrote: Besides, everyone knows that roller coffee grinders are better than flats or conicals!

And why are they better ? Because they produce an even more uniform particle size, like flat burr grinders are able to produce

#115: Post by **TomC** » February 27th, 2015, 4:43 pm

Terranova wrote: Is a WBC something like "The Emperor's New Clothes" ?
If there is really just marketing strategy behind it then I am pretty sure that many participants will use a conical grinder.

Sponsorship changes a lot of things, as does rule changes year to year.

#116: Post by **Marcelnl** » February 27th, 2015, 4:47 pm

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence..
Until a clear trend would have been found consistenly across a great number of blind taste tests I'd keep an open mind and be happy with whatever works fine here and now, if that's a conical it's a conical, if it happens to be flat it's a flat for you.
Until a great enough number of tests is done to be conclusive mucho water has run under the bridge...or espresso in the cups...

February 27th, 2015, 5:08 pm

Terranova wrote:... And why are they better ? Because they produce an even more uniform particle size, like flat burr grinders are able to produce

LOL ... I heard that it was because they go to 11

.

In any case, I have a grinder with flat burrs designed to produce a bimodal particle size distribution, but I will soon (USPS willing) have another set of burrs designed to produce a unimodal particle distribution. According to the manufacturer, which burr set is 'better' depends on the coffee - bean, roast, and brewing method. As they have my money either way, I am inclined to believe them.

#118: Post by **OldNuc** » February 27th, 2015, 5:14 pm

Terranova wrote:The funny thing is, ... The roasting culture has changed a lot and the Italians will never ever change to flat burrs, easy dialing in very little adjusting through out the day.

I am absolutely convinced that lighter roasts do benefit from a more uniform particle size like flat burrs are able to produce. (flat burrs in general, not talking about the EK 43)

Personally I am not really in to this WBC stuff and I have never watched any WBC, although some parts might be interesting.
Is a WBC something like "The Emperor's New Clothes" ?
If there is really just marketing strategy behind it then I am pretty sure that many participants will use a conical grinder. (those who are not involved in MK, Nuova Simonelli)

And why are they better ? Because they produce an even more uniform particle size, like flat burr grinders are able to produce

That is the big cause of the push to flat burrs, lighter and lighter roasts. Soon the roast to have will be just entering 1st crack.

#119: Post by **nickw** » February 27th, 2015, 6:06 pm

OldNuc wrote:Soon the roast to have will be just entering 1st crack.

[start side track]

I drink many coffee's just starting first crack.

I've been really liking 49th Parallels small lot series. Most are just starting first crack and roasted with brew in mind. But dang, if you can pull a good shot, it's some of the best shots I've ever had!

It took me a while to figure out how to get consistently good shots from light stuff. Now that I can, I don't want to go back to "normal" espresso in the city+ to full city range.

[end side track]

As for how that effects the grinders I use:

In my experience, with coffee's in the city+ to full city range (machine/basket dependant) a medium/wide grind distribution makes it dang easy to get good pours and nice shots. When you extract for the modal size and to avoid bitters the bigger particles will underextract which gives some liveliness and flavour in the shot. As Jim would say, the sugars and caramels don't end up masking the flavour. If I drank coffee's in that range, I might of ended up with a Robur/K10/etc. If this is the kind of coffee you like and you're happy, that's great

Going to a grinder with a tighter distribution (like the EK43) with city+/Full-city roasts it becomes harder to get a nice shot. Not only does technique start mattering a lot, and you'll probably end up overdosing and under extracting. Otherwise a balanced shot tastes very roasty (because it is). You can still get a good shot, but it's more work.

On more typical espresso roasts between the two (and generalizing pretty hard):
- A medium/wide distribution is easier to pull a good shot with.
- A tighter distribution is harder, but sill possible (the tighter it is, the harder it becomes).
Neither is wrong, both are good, but different in taste, pick your preference.
I prefer the tighter distributions, it's more work, but I like the taste, and they also works for light roasts.

Going to a light roast, and no contest, I'll take a M3 or EK. I'm also not just saying that because that's the equipment I have. If I wanted a Robur/K10 I would buy one. With light roasts, most people can agree you need an even and full extraction. So a tight grind distribution becomes important. A wider distribution will either taste sour, bitter or a little of both, depending on how you extract.

As for the Mythos:
I've had some great shots from a it at Revolver in Vancouver, but no personal experience making coffee with one.

#120: Post by **OldNuc** » February 27th, 2015, 6:20 pm

What you like the taste of and what roast/origin you are grinding has such a large impact on the grinder characteristics/design every grinder test or discussion is only anecdotal without this information specified up front.