When I was a kid, those with training wheels took far, far longer to learn to ride because they were not focused on the correct elements.

Somewhat the same for espresso. If more searched out the taste of espresso, there might might be less focus on, and need for, the training wheels.

I had to add comment regarding the training wheels analogy because it does not hold in my opinion. Why not take the speedometer out of the car when you are able to guess the speed you are driving?

I usually try to dial in a new coffee on the weekend because I only have time to pull one or two shots weekday mornings, and weighing the dose is key to getting everything dialed in without wasting a lot of shots, and also in getting good results consistently - I don't want to throw out my one shot in the morning because I messed up the dose. I assume that if I used the same blend (or a couple blends) all the time I would be able to dose by sight more accurately, but I've found that the same weight can end up as very different volumes in the basket between different blends. Also, keeping notes on what works is a lot easier with weights than volumes.

I don't check my brew ratios as often, relying on taste instead, and not since the TGPII have I cut my shots by weight, but I agree that this would certainly be a more consistent way to stop a shot. I think I would want a 2nd scale if I were going to do it all the time. I also happened to be thinking this weekend that it would be great to have a scale that showed a "rate of change" to get a better idea of how the flow is changing, I think that would be really useful info for dialing in a tricky blend.

tekomino wrote:I had to add comment regarding the training wheels analogy because it does not hold in my opinion. Why not take the speedometer out of the car when you are able to guess the speed you are driving?

You actually look at that thing?

As as I said, there is no wrong answer, there is no right answer, just different answers. Use what ever you are comfortable with. For the record, I do advocate using a scale when learning. It does help improve consistency which leads to better espresso. I personally dont have a need for one on a daily basis but I do get it out every now and then. I am perfectly happy with my coffee as is.

While I weigh all of my pre-shot grinds I only weigh my shots when I am dialing in. I find that once I have a bean dialed in, I no longer have to weigh the shots. I don't even have to watch the flow except the beginning to assure good distribution. Using accurately weighed grinds from a good grinder, a well setup and maintained machine and a timer (the time of shot determined during the dialing in process), the only variable is technique.

another_jim wrote:... How hard is it, in 2010, to come up with a system that dispenses the same weights of fresh ground coffee and water time after time?

Hi, first post after much lurking.

With respect to the water part, wouldn't the volumetric buttons on an auto machine work for dispensing the water consistently enough, once set up by weighing? I understand that shot mass would be slightly greater than the water mass/volume because of the solids content, but wouldn't a small volumetric offset get the total close enough?

It seems the weight/weight technique assumes that you are achieving very consistent pour quality given an accurate dose, and are looking to further eliminate the variability in blonding judgment. OTOH with the blonding technique, if the pours do vary even with accurate dosing, you can still tweak the duration of each pull to get the best balanced shot from each pour. Is this a reasonable interpretation?

Additional reasons for "overstuffing the basket:"

(1) The more coffee that is used, the more you sell (if you are a roaster); this does not hurt the bottom line;

(2) Americans, especially, generally think there is never "too much of a good thing." This explains many things American, everything from what passes for "American cuisine," to Robert Parker's taste in wine, to the worldwide obesity epidemic (for which the USA has a "front row seat"). If 14g of coffee makes a good double espresso, then 18 or 23g will make an even better one. Lost somewhere in this approach to things in general is the idea of subtlety and refinement, however, don't post that on USA-based coffee website, because it will not be well received.

ken

Fascinating thread. Some comments:

I've been weighing my extractions for at least six months with excellent results. It has reduced the time to dial in new coffees, and it has produced more consistent results in the cup. It has also helped me to better correlate taste with different espresso styles (i.e., dose/extraction ratios), and learn more about judging flow rates and shot times.

However, a note of caution: extraction weight is not the same thing as extraction ratio. The extraction weight only tells you the total weight of the water and extracted solubles, not the all-important ratio of the two.

AndyS wrote:There's a logic behind James' 65% or Colin's 1.55x "rules of thumb." With most medium-roast espresso coffees, a competently prepared shot using that brewing ratio gives you an extraction yield somewhere around 18-20%. (In other words, 18-20% of the original dry coffee solids are delivered as solubles into your cup). Experience has shown that this degree of extraction often gives a sweeter, balanced beverage

The key here is "a competently prepared shot". Among other things, this means you have to adjust the grind to produce the "correct" volume. That's because you can get the same extraction weight with different volumes and extraction ratios. In other words, you can adjust the grind to produce different volumes that have the same extraction weight, but they won't all produce an extraction ratio of 18%-20%.

How do you determine the correct volume? Well, unless you have an extraction ratio measuring device like a coffee TDS meter or ExtractMojo, you have to use taste. The "standard" espresso guidelines for volume (1-2 oz) will help you get the grind setting in the right range, but you'll have to use taste from there on.

But it's even more complicated than that. The taste will be affected by the extraction time, too. As we know from Jim Schulman's writings on the subject, different solubles are extracted from the coffee at different times during the pull. So the time the water is in contact with the grinds will make a difference as well. Again, the "standard" espresso range of 20-30 seconds or so is a good guideline, but even an ExtractMojo can't tell you if unpleasant solubles are in the cup. Without some really expensive lab equipment, only your tongue can determine that.

Oh, and then there's temperature. Higher and lower temperatures will extract different solubles from the coffee, which complicates determination of whether you have adjusted the grind correctly (i.e., the volume and flow time are right.) Again, without lab equipment you have to use taste to determine the right temperature.

I assume this is what Andy means by "a competently prepared shot". Even if you weigh the dose and extraction, you still need to select the right dose, get the grind setting right, distribute the grinds in the basket properly, set the right temperature and time the shot to produce the best taste. Measuring dose and extraction weight are only a rough aid for doing this and achieving better consistency from shot to shot. I feel confident that a coffee TDS meter or ExtractMojo would refine the process even more. But while I think these measurements are very useful, they're not a silver bullet. There are still a lot of variables that can only be set by taste.

Ken Fox wrote:Additional reasons for "overstuffing the basket:"

(1) The more coffee that is used, the more you sell (if you are a roaster); this does not hurt the bottom line;

(2) Americans, especially, generally think there is never "too much of a good thing." This explains many things American, everything from what passes for "American cuisine," to Robert Parker's taste in wine, to the worldwide obesity epidemic (for which the USA has a "front row seat"). If 14g of coffee makes a good double espresso, then 18 or 23g will make an even better one. Lost somewhere in this approach to things in general is the idea of subtlety and refinement, however, don't post that on USA-based coffee website, because it will not be well received.

ken

This may be the understatement of the thread. I struggled endlessly until I began dosing much less (and weighing everything). Now I always start at 14gm doubles and work the grind and temp until it's as good as I can get it. Only then do I play with the dose. I also find it self serving to recommend large doses in roaster's recommendations. Then again, if you are drowning the coffee with milk and sugar, you need "in your face" taste to cut through.

This reminds me of audio. Many people would use loudness controls to pump up bass and treble and think it sounded great. Never mind the vocals got lost, between the pounding bass and searing treble, who cared??