Marshall wrote:I was only taking an opportunity to honor David Bogie as one of my on-line mentors, not to cite him as authority for any particular proposition and certainly not to drag him into a nasty-toned debate. My apologies to you, David.

Marshall, considering where your experience has taken you, I am humbled by your reference and your vivid recollection of those early days on Usenet. My interest in espresso remains high. I devour everything I can find on the topic but have dramatically reduced my online presence simply because "others with more knowledge than I" have so much more interesting data. My last contribution to the field is in Whole Latte Love's research section. Look for my milk frothing article.

I missed the "deleted post" and truly appreciate your kind words.

david bogie

Randy G. wrote:And I will add to that... That same FAQ was where I began my espresso education, but beyond that, along with http://www.coffekid.com, David's FAQ it was my inspiration to begin my website.

Tip of the ol' Usenet beret to you, Randy, thanks buddy.

bogie

bogiesan wrote:My last contribution to the field is in Whole Latte Love's research section. Look for my milk frothing article.

I will, David.

peacecup wrote:A simple test - make a badish shot of espresso (i.e. loosen the grind so it pours too fast, and blonds a bit). Taste it to make sure its bad (can't tell by looking). Then add some well-frothed milk. Does it taste better? If so, then milk has "hidden" (maybe changed) some of the bad-taste characteristics.

So, intentionally make something that isn't good, and taste it to make sure that it really isn't very good, and in truth, really bad.
Then, make something that isn't bad, that is in fact good, and add it to the bad thing.
Taste that. Does it taste better with good stuff added to it?? It does? I'm so surprised!
All sarcasm aside ( I had to, moral imperative), it's a pretty simple equation. Bad stuff tastes bad, bad stuff with good stuff in it taste's less bad.
Another simple, but I think more apt equation would be: Add good stuff A to good stuff B and taste. Add bad stuff A to good stuff B and taste. If the first equation equals 'good' and the second equation equals 'bad', then the good stuff B isn't really hiding it when stuff A is bad.
Again, if you're a straight shooter (and IIRC, Peacecup, you not only prefer 'em straight, but straight from the lever, yeah?) it might not make as much sense to you as if you were a cappu drinker. To reverse that, if someone likes a lotta milk with a great shot in it, but didn't really drink a lot of straight shots, and really didn't prefer espresso straight, they may not be able to tell a great shot of espresso from a mediocre or even a bad-ish shot.

I don't worry too much about judging 'good' or 'bad'. It's easy to pick out glaring flaws like sour, bitter, astringent, etc. That's easy: you either have to toss it or you can drink it. Drinking mostly SO, part of the enjoyment is in the unique qualities of each bean, shot, roast level, etc. The idea of a 'perfect shot' (almost...) implies to me something static. Maybe the 'perfect' DP yirga, or Guat, etc, but even then, knowing how far the range of interpretation in the roast, I don't think there is such a thing. I'm comfortable leaving the score card to the judges and I'll use the excuse that I'm not qualified so I'll just cater to my own taste.

...try to get back on topic though, for me the ideal shot for a Capp is different than for a Straight Shot. I tend towards the limits on bright, light roasting for espresso. (Sometimes I go too far...) To me this works better for the Capp, while the Straight shot tends to be more unbalanced this way. Couple things really help like moderate dosing and brew temps 200-202F,( ahh, you can add sugar), but if I would send a sample to 'the judge' for scoring, it would likely be more 'conservative' roast: slower and mellower. (...err maybe 2 samples: the way I like and the other softer/mellower) I appreciate the origin character, enjoy the differences between the various beans and this light/fast roast profile tends to keep these characters in front, even in a Capp.

A good example is Ididio Dry Process Yirgacheffe. Most would agree this can make a great SO straight shot, and, to my taste a great Capp as well. It has a very narrow window of 'ideal' roast, both degree and duration. It needs a light roast around City+ (again...for me), and is one of the most difficult roasts to get right. ( I'm working to dial in the current batch from SM... I thought I had dialed in a new profile strategy using a MET probe... First round ended in the trash.) Taking it too slow (ie: to mellow for that straight shot balance) tends to evaporate delicate fruit and floral notes rather quickly. Take it too fast and you are suddenly off a cliff to sour/astringent. The difference between off the cliff and in the zone is maybe 30 seconds and 10F at most. The difference in finish time between straight shot and Capp shot is maybe about 30 seconds on the finish. I sure understand the difficulty in getting quality home roast, and to keep my bearings on the same planet, I will be taking advantage of the free shipping PT's is offering this week.

Nice post bro with my coffees even with my dads sugar sweetened double shot latte with extra milk. He can still taste the difference between when I make a regular double shot or a double ristretto.

The double ristretto is favored taste wise by most people that drink my home coffee including myself. This has been the cause of me aiming my shot timing to this level.

This big difference is when you make a shot the either pours too fast (milk thins out the taste even more) or way too slow (burnt ass with milk tastes like burnt ass with milk).