HB wrote:The point being that there may be a real difference between hopper and single grind dosing, but it's not significant enough to prove without more trials than most home baristas are willing to perform.

Good points all Dan.

And to be perfectly fair, I will stipulate that my opinion is just an opinion, and doesn't represent anything other than my personal subjective impressions. I will also stipulate that my palate is probably not developed enough to qualify me to judge in this case.

So I will continue to single dose the Robur and I will keep the hoppers loaded on the two Vario grinders, because this is what works for me.

HB wrote: That is, if the difference between A and B is small enough that it requires "careful, extensive and protracted scrutiny" to detect, my interest in pursuing it further is similar to the other minor performance/technique variants listed in the aforementioned Princess thread

I was wondering when the "Princess and the Pea" would come up

But that's quoting me out of context, Dan. I wrote "more careful, extensive and protracted scrutiny than they have received here". A nuanced single origin tested at a range of doses - as in the TGP - would have been more revealing. But then maybe you were quoting Jon quoting me....

Like Jon, I am quite happy to accept differences in preference and opinion, but still see no testing of this unorthodox grinder usage that leads me to doubt my own experience that the differences in dosing style on the same grinder can be as noticeable as the "Princess and Pea" differences noted between grinders in the TGP. They're not massive. They won't reduce a Robur to the level of a blade grinder and for some people they may not be worth the candle, depending on their taste in coffee as much as anything else, or how much they value convenience or economy in terms of bean usage. All I am saying is that for some people this may not be a "have your cake and eat it" situation: they may find there are compromises involved that lead them to decide not to single-shot dose.

If the week's worth of daily comparisons I made before venturing this opinion and sticking to it here lead people to experiment for themselves and see if they can tell any worthwhile difference with the beans they prefer - as a result maybe getting more pleasure out of their coffee - I will consider it worthwhile having gone through with these threads... even if the majority view amongst the regulars here on HB is that we can largely take it for granted there is no difference.

I'm more than satisfied with the improvements I'm getting in my cup...

And with that I'm going to bow out of this one. I have no desire to antagonise anyone on this or insist further. I respect the fact that Jon and Nicholas would rather have fun in the new year than engage in more testing, and indeed thank them for allowing me to do the same.

Cheers

Mike

PS: The fact that this appears to be my post number 666 is pure coincidence! As Jon proved quite conclusively I must be a good boy to have got a second Nino for Christmas.....

michaelbenis wrote:I am quite happy to accept differences in preference and opinion, but still see no testing of this unorthodox grinder usage that leads me to doubt my own experience that the differences in dosing style on the same grinder can be as noticeable...

I believe you have covered this point several times in multiple threads. Really, I get it.

michaelbenis wrote:I have no desire to antagonise anyone on this or insist further.

Normally I would send this as a private message, but since it's come up several times in the forums, I'll mention it publicly: Michael et al, please consider dispensing with the "apologies in advance" warnings. We're all adults. If someone is easily offended by a contrary opinion, they need to thicken their skin, not insist that others walk on eggshells around them. If necessary, HB's team of experienced moderators will handle disputes offline and/or offer coaching on the site's Guidelines for productive online discussion. Thanks.

michaelbenis wrote:I wrote "more careful, extensive and protracted scrutiny than they have received here" ... Like Jon, I am quite happy to accept differences in preference and opinion, but still see no testing of this unorthodox grinder usage that leads me to doubt my own experience that the differences in dosing style on the same grinder can be as noticeable

Michael, your posts on this topic aren't offensive; they are

Did you expect your memory of preferring hopper shots to magically disappear if someone did a contrary experiment ***correctly*** ?

Or is it that you still insist that hopper grinding produces flat out better tasting grinds than non-hopper grinding?

In our test, we did very careful side by side comparisons of shots, blind, and found a complete identity in the taste. Not a taste difference that we couldn't replicate, but a complete identity in the taste of four shots in a row. You, over the course of the week of sighted comparisons found you preferred the hopper shots.

I accept both these results, along with Jon's and Nicholas's. They support the hypothesis (stated before we ran any tests, btw), that there is no difference in the grinds themselves, but that there is a difference when operating longer term and making adjustments with the grinders in hopper and non-hopper modes.

You on the other hand, seem to be rejecting everybody's results except your own.

"Even a fool learns from experience. A wise man learns from the experience of others." Otto von Bismarck

another_jim wrote:I accept both these results....

You on the other hand, seem to be rejecting everybody's results except your own.

Hi Jim,

I'm not rejecting your results any more than you were rejecting mine when you wrote of there being "no evidence" of a difference in grind when single-shot and hopper dosing. You were being selective about what you could consider as valid test evidence based on the fact that my testing was not blind testing to a rigorous protocol and therefore a simple anecdotal report.

I have tried to respect that same approach here on HB because it maintains a valuable rigour for establishing a consensus for recommendations on the forum, although I personally do not find it a sine qua non for comparing experiences with and learning from other coffee lovers.

It was in this spirit that I "rejected" the results of the two recent experiments conducted: I don't think either meet the usual high standards of HB tests for establishing a consensus for recommendations on this forum, just as my own experiments didn't either.

But that doesn't mean I'm not storing away and "processing" the results or that we're not all moving towards some consensus about whether the differences (if any ) may be more noticeable on conical than flat burr grinders, on large burr rather than small burr grinders, on low rather than high doses, in nuanced/fussy single origins rather than "comfort" blends, whether these differences have more to do with consistency/ease of keeping a grind "honed in" over time than taste profile/mouthfeel in back-to-back blind test comparisons etc.

And to put my own experiences in perspective: I have been playing with a very nice northern Italian blend for the past week which is extremely tolerant in respect of practically everything: grind, dose, brew temperature, you name it. Nothing would surprise me less than to discover I could find absolutely no difference in the cup between grinding this blend in single-shot and hopper grinding mode on my Super Jolly...

Cheers

Mike