This evening, on my daily run through this board, I am struck by the shear "anality" of some of the posts and threads I've read. I don't want to embarrass anyone, which is why I'm not responding to any particular post and why I've chosen this "content not otherwise specified" forum for this post.

A LOT of the posts I've been reading aren't really about coffee, or something akin to "I had this great shot" and I'd like to reproduce it at home (or make it more often) but rather about this and that esoteric aspect of this or that esoteric thing that someone thought might in some way be related to something that might have something to do with coffee if we just thought about it enough.

Am I too sensitive?

ken

Ken Fox wrote:Am I too sensitive?

No, of course not!

Not too anal either

Ken, your observation is not new, nor unique to HB. Check out some of the sites mentioned in What is the HB equivalent for X, Y, and Z? for a reality check. Maybe it's a guy thing. *shrug*

He, he, if you don't have some form of OCD and/or are not anal you can't be into madness called espresso. Or into any other "madness" you choose.

Have interest in flashlights? Here you go: http://www.candlepowerforums.com

How about pipe smoking?

http://www.pipe-smokers.org/

Just be happy this isn't like an audio forum.

I modded my K10 with a $500 silver power cable and now all my shots all taste brighter, guys! How long should I let the cable burn in?

I agree... but the engineer in me likes the thirst for science as well.

I had a lengthy discussion with my Circuits professor about the internals of espresso machines (more specifically about electrical manipulations of pumps). He's about to finish his PhD. but I'm pretty sure I impressed him with the shear mass of explanation to get to my specific question - it was fun... and informative.

The juxtaposition of "the science of espresso" and "the art of espresso" is most likely permanent. When the focus of technological discussions is to directly improve the coffee experience, I'm all for it. However, when the discussion loses that human element in favor of the world's most consistent shot, it gets boring. We don't want to create the ultimate super automatic; we want to drink coffee.

I'm not immune to "lost topics." I started a thread about making my grinder quieter, which of course led to sound discussions on a high level. While it was very informative and interesting, all I really wanted to do was improve the sensory experience of grinding.

There is, of course, not a solution to all of this. I don't at all think you are being too sensitive, but it's still the way things go.

mini wrote:The juxtaposition of "the science of espresso" and "the art of espresso" is most likely permanent. When the focus of technological discussions is to directly improve the coffee experience, I'm all for it.

But we're not on a coffee site, we're on espresso site. Machines are welcome, no?

mini wrote: However, when the discussion loses that human element in favor of the world's most consistent shot, it gets boring. We don't want to create the ultimate super automatic; we want to drink coffee.

True, however there is that something beyond just drinking one shot - we make many shots, we want to be consistent in what we do, and that needs skill. But I understand very well your point: I enjoy mountain tourism and I have uncle who also does. But when I go in mountains, I have my camera, I take pictures, I enjoy the experience, air, views, sky, relax, and yet I make the planned distance. But he - he only makes the planned distance. Then he gets a signature he made the distance. Then he makes a combined or bigger distance. That's it for him. Probably one can make shots that way also

At least we're not into making our own mustard http://www.theonion.com/content/news/man_on_internet_almost_falls_into

Ken Fox wrote:This evening, on my daily run through this board, I am struck by the shear "anality" of some of the posts and threads I've read. I don't want to embarrass anyone, which is why I'm not responding to any particular post and why I've chosen this "content not otherwise specified" forum for this post.

A LOT of the posts I've been reading aren't really about coffee, or something akin to "I had this great shot" and I'd like to reproduce it at home (or make it more often) but rather about this and that esoteric aspect of this or that esoteric thing that someone thought might in some way be related to something that might have something to do with coffee if we just thought about it enough.

Am I too sensitive?

ken

I agree and those posts have lead newcomers to believe - including myself, even still kinda sorta... - that it WILL make better espresso. OR that one thing is what's missing in their preparation for... wait for it......waiiiit...foorr...ittt... pulling the 'god shot' akin to finding the mother-lode in a treasure hunt with clues that keep pointing you away from the goal disguised as helpful. When really, it's all experimental and subjective. This of course is outside of standard parameters, that I'm referring to.

It will remain that until the day everyone who can pull a shot of espresso can yell "GOD SHOT!!" all the time, there's always going to be scacing and profiling and this, that and the other.

Every time I've gotten a great shot pulled at a great spot, it's always been dosed by volume. Yet, we're so crazy about proper dosing whether it's up or under.... we just need to find things to talk about...the OCD for consistency...no eureka moment has been had so far.. I guess other than PIDing?