John P wrote:When brewing espresso, metrics are merely a way for us to explain HOW we arrived at the particular espresso that concluded in the cup. Consistency in the cup comes from skill and repetition. All the measurements in the world won't save your espresso if you're a lousy barista.

Dose. Distribute. Tamp. Pull. Taste. If you've decided your espresso was good, repeat. I would argue that taste is the most important measurement you can take. Make certain to record it accurately.

Nobody is arguing that taste shouldn't be a major consideration for espresso. The reason this thread exists is the "repeat" step. If you weighed your dose for that good shot, you can dose exactly the same amount of coffee for the second shot or any shot thereafter and pull the same good shot. Weighing the shot itself is a quick and easy way to see if you're in the right ballpark while you're dialing in, and to and make sure you stay there over time.

Bob_McBob wrote:If you weighed your dose for that good shot, you can dose exactly the same amount of coffee for the second shot or any shot thereafter and pull the same good shot.

I think another advantage of weighing a shot (even if it's not every shot) is so that you can tell other people how much coffee you used for it. If you say "16g" I'm a lot more likely to get the right dose when I try that coffee than if the parameter is "dose 1/4 under the rim of the basket."

And getting back to the point of this thread, saying "cut the shot when it weighs 22g" is a lot more accurate than "cut it when it's just a little blond." If you're just as consistent eyeballing as weighing there's no reason for you to switch all the time, but it's a good weigh to explain what you were doing

Bob,

Dosing espresso is no different than steaming without a thermometer. Consistency is achieved through perfect practice. Once you know that you can dose consistently, move on. Using equipment to monitor your consistency is fine, but not moving past it is an indication that either your skills or your confidence need improvement. Measurement is a tool, but it is not the tool.

If you ask most world class barista "How much espresso do you grind per shot?", the answer you would often hear is, "The right amount".

John P wrote:If you ask most world class barista "How much espresso do you grind per shot?", the answer you would often hear is, "The right amount".

Well, a lot (maybe most) of them could tell you what weight they aim for (and you can bet that weighing was an important part of preparing for competition), but they don't weigh their coffee in the competition itself or in their daily work.

Marshall wrote:Well, a lot (maybe most) of them could tell you what weight they aim for (and you can bet that weighing was an important part of preparing for competition), but they don't weigh their coffee in the competition itself or in their daily work.

I don't regularly have the chance to visit high end cafes, given that I live in a rural area, however, I do travel with some frequency and when possible I visit those places. My experience mirrors what Jim S. has posted numerous times, that there is a serious consistency problem in the "good cafes," in that an unacceptably high percentage of shots delivered on the line are mediocre to poor. This undoubtedly comes as a direct result of relying on unrepeatable and inaccurate dosing mechanisms.

So if this approach produces pleasing results for you, Marshall, than all I can say is that you are either better in your own way of doing this than the baristas working in these places, or you are satisfied with those results. There aren't any other likely ways of evaluating this.

ken

Ken,
If you read what I wrote, you will see that I was only reporting and not critiquing. But, as a matter of fact, my experiences are generally good and may reflect either my selectivity or that I am very nice to the baristas I meet (or both).

Ken Fox wrote:But what if you have no taste?

Then why is that you drink espresso?
I mean seriously, there still may be a reason; there are people going to concerts who do not love (or who detest) music. And I personally know people who have no taste for food really, a piece of meat is a piece of meat and you say 'oh it's so tasty' to be polite.
I think, those people eventually do not need to measure anything. (no offence intended)

John P wrote:I would argue that taste is the most important measurement you can take. Make certain to record it accurately.

Oh yes?
In my example with trying taste several times while cooking, I meant that there is a certain aim where the cooking person is heading and thus the many tries.
In espresso preparation, if you alter the dose half a gram either way it changes the taste; if you change stop point - it changes the taste, etc.
You can be satisfied both with a cup pulled from let's say 16g in 32 seconds and with a cup pulled from 15.3g and the rest compensated but they will not taste the same. This is what is a lousy barista.
If one screw up shots then one is a barista-wanna-be, not a lousy one.

My experience at my counter mirror Jim's posts. Eyeballing the dose is imprecise.
And it is not like with steaming milk; milk produces certain sounds at certain moments and this doesn't change and if you screw up you immediately see it.

I bought one of the Triton T2 scales since the readout is the correct orientation for weighing shots. It's faster and more decisive than my $7 Hong Kong special. It was $20 with batteries, but I think it's worth the extra cost over the cheaper scale. I'm ordering a second one as a backup.

Good choice Chris. I like T2, precise and fast read-out.

FWIW, I checked the calibration with a 200g weight and found it was 0.8g off. After calibration, dead on the mark. Measurements are repeatable to within 0.1g, and the scale is very fast. I ordered a second one so I can keep one at work for coffee and tea. The only thing I'd like is a higher weight limit so it could be used to weigh water. The $7 Chinese scale goes to 1kg.