Let's try a little test, shall we? (Marshall, you may be excused. I know you have a new toy to play with. ) Those who think that dosing by volume is accurate "enough", give your best estimate of the weight of these four doses.

No tricks, just four different doses in a standard LaSpaz 53mm double basket.

Same coffee, same grinder, same setting?

Sure. In fact, it was all the same coffee, just repacked. No tricks. I'll post actual weights tomorrow.

Here's another simple test, which you can try on your own equipment:
Ask a friend to pick an arbitrary dose between 14g and 18g. Try to hit that dose by eyeballing the volume, then check your accuracy with a scale. I'd be astonished if anyone can consistently get within 0.1g. That accuracy is trivial with a scale.

My point is obvious. If you weigh the dose, you know what you're getting. If you don't, you're just guesstimating.

That said... I am not an advocate of weighing every dose. In fact, I only weigh when I'm testing new gear or coffees. But I admire those who take the extra time to accurately measure their dose. Variance in "eyeball" dosing is greater than most care to admit, especially in the home environment.

Personally, I sort of look at it like this.

Just like you use a timer and a thermometer when you are getting to know your machine, whether it be for steaming milk, timing the flush, timing the shot, or a grouphead therm*, eventually, you drop the therm for the milk, and you drop the timer for the shot.

So, should we be using a therm everytime we steam milk, because we're at home, and why not be perfect? I dont use a therm in my milk anymore, except for "now and then", when I want to make sure Im still in the right ballpark, and, going by feel, I can consistently stop the milk at just the right temp so it wont "coast" past 155F.


I dont think there is ANYTHING wrong with weighing coffee, or doing the WDT. Heck, I weigh my coffee, every shot, and I used the WDT for a SOLID 8 months. I weigh my coffee simply because, why not? Less waste leads to less cleanup, and potentially, another shot or two. But its also out of Habit. I would LIKE to not weigh out my coffee everytime, and just use it as a check, like a bottomless, but i wont be attempting that until I can put a Photo-Timer on my grinder. The major is too fast, FOR ME, to Eyeball the grind and dose, without grinding too much.

The WDT-I call it my Insurance Policy Against Sink Shots. And, I must say, I LOVE this technique, and, up until just recently, from the time I got my Anita, I used it every single shot. And because of it, I literally have not thrown out a single shot because of channeling or under/over extraction, once I got used to machine, about a month. However, Just like I no longer use a Therm for my milk, or a Timer for my extractions, if there is no NEED for me to preform the WDT, then why do it? The whole point is the make better espresso, and hell, if it takes less steps to get there, isn't that good? If it makes you feel like you have improved as a barista, its good. That how I feel anyway.

For me, dropping the WDT has made the whole process more fun. I can add my dose to the grinder, dose right into the PF into a nice mound, do a quick Nutate and a light tamp, lock in and pull a nice shot. I dont need to dose into a yogurt cup or stir up the coffee and level it out. Again, I DID do this for months, and I STILL dont think there is ANYTHING wrong with doing it, but, IF ITS NOT NECESSARY, they WHY would I still do it?

And I agree with a statement typed more then once in this thread. Making Good Espresso is the Whole Point. If a few extra seconds or steps get you there, then BY ALL MEANS, DO THEM.

Oh, and aside from making it more fun, I no longer need to have a min-whisk and yogurt cup on my bench


Whatever steps you do or do not take to make your espresso, as long as you are enjoying the process, as well as the espresso, then you're clearly doing it correctly.

FWIW, with the Elektra Nino dosing by time I get variations in the range of 0.3 to 0.6 grammes between double doses in a Cremina double basket (small - around 14.5g), generally in the lower end of that range and once in a blue moon (for who knows what reason) 0.7 or even 0.9 - the biggest variation I encountered when I was playing with this. Some of the variation depends on me being attentive to moving the PF so as to contain the grounds and prevent them from bouncing/spilling out at the end.

Do I notice any difference in the cup? Well, I've not done a side-by-side, but I'd say no - and believe me I've looked/tasted hard.

I just do a very light nutating tamp after this, ending in a light straight down. I do not tap, level or anything else. In fact my experience is that the more fiddling, the worse the results. I reckon it's nearly all in the grind....

So I'd echo and reverse what other have written. If you get as good or even a better cup with less steps in the process, that heightens the enjoyment. Well, it does for me.

Cheers

Mike

TimEggers wrote:What's wrong with guesstimating? Does espresso have to be the exact same everytime?

I mentioned earlier that I typically overfill, level and tamp. Pretty simple and it does lock me into a pretty much set dose. I have done your experiment John and your right, the does does vary. Typically in the range of .3-gram with the occasional .5-gram, if I'm getting sloppy.

Here is the reason why it is wrong for me. As I wrote before, some of us have ended up with the conclusion that the need to carefully control dose weight is (at least in part) related to the size of the dose itself. My machine (Vivaldi II) is very forgiving of distribution carelessness. (as echoed by some of my fellow Vivaldi users). I dose low (around 15g most of the time, with adjustment for prevailing conditions) and the underdose (-0.3g) gives horrible pour and tate results, while overdosing (+0.3g) degrades the taste significantly. I did experiment with larger dose (16.5 to 20g) and indeed I can agree that larger variation (+/- 0.5g or more) had much less effect.

So, again it is a matter of taste. One (Mano dell'operatore) has to adapt his process in relation to the limitation/characteristics of the 3 M's (Macinadosatore (grinder-doser), Miscela (coffee blend), Macchina espresso (espresso machine)) to get to the espresso he likes. I know that it is cliché to write this but it is the core of the issue here.

After a while of working with a setup, one can develop techniques that will allow him to modify or get away completely from certain parts of the process based on his abilities, the coffee and the equipment one is using.

After re-reading my-self I realise that on top of repeating what other people have written I am now repeating what I myself have written. For this I apologise, but nonetheless I sign.


As for the test, I know from personal experience, with the same basket, I easily can see a variation between 16 and 20. Of course it depends on what was done to that coffee...

16-20g is a significant difference. But from 15 (your ideal) to 15.3 (where you find a shot significantly degraded) is likely less than the variations you will see during the day due to all sorts of other things that can affect grind consistency, including relative humidity, ambient temperature, air pressure....

go to your favorite local bakery.

ask the person in charge if they weigh the flour or measure by volume.

weighing the flour is the only way to get a consistent measurement of flour for consistent results out of the oven.

i think the same rule applies to making espresso.

jon

I was over at another HB members home a few months ago helping him dial in his kit. We had the same scale. I weighed out the first 4 or so doses to get us in the range we wanted. The next several I dosed by volume/sight then for kicks we weighed them to see how close I was. Every one was within 0.3 grams of the target. I still use a scale when I am working on a new coffee or basket so I get a feel for bean/basket. But after a few dozen i put the scale away.

michaelbenis wrote:16-20g is a significant difference. But from 15 (your ideal) to 15.3 (where you find a shot significantly degraded) is likely less than the variations you will see during the day due to all sorts of other things that can affect grind consistency, including relative humidity, ambient temperature, air pressure....

I was refering to John little test above, not any variation that I would see at home...(Just in case there is a misunderstanding).

But I do get variations of more 0.3g or more if I try to eyeball the shot at 15g within a few minutes. Thus, If I do not weight the shot I get a lot of sink shot.

cannonfodder wrote: I weighed out the first 4 or so doses to get us in the range we wanted. The next several I dosed by volume/sight then for kicks we weighed them to see how close I was. Every one was within 0.3 grams of the target.

But as stated by Dave, that same variation seems to be very acceptable to other Barista (I bow to your superior capabilities. ). Indeed, if I go for a 17g shot (like my second shot this morning, I just felt like it) than the variation is not as significant.

cannonfodder wrote:Every one was within 0.3 grams of the target.

Something remember when throwing around double-O-noughts:
Scales have an accuracy and a display precision something like 2% and ±2 digits.
The accuracy can either be full scale or reading
So a 15g weight on a 50g/0.1g scale with 2% FS accuracy could read from 13.8 to 16.2.

Generally, performance is much better, but knob-dickers going for that last 0.1g are kidding themselves.

I agree completely with your accuracy assessment. But based on my calibration checks (done at 20g) the ability of my scale to accurately measure 15g is within 0.1 easy.

But anyway what we should be looking for is more repeatability than accuracy. If in fact the dose is 15.5 rather than 15 than I don't care as long as the next one that I want to be at the same weight is at the same weight.

cafeIKE wrote:Something remember when throwing around double-O-noughts:
Scales have an accuracy and a display precision something like 2% and ±2 digits.
The accuracy can either be full scale or reading
So a 15g weight on a 50g/0.1g scale with 2% FS accuracy could read from 13.8 to 16.2.

Generally, performance is much better, but knob-dickers going for that last 0.1g are kidding themselves.

A new nickel weighs 5.0 gm. Put three of them on your digital scale. Mine (600 gm limit) reads 15.0 gm. If yours is anywhere closer to 13.8 or 16.2 then I suggest you throw it in the garbage and buy another.

Jon..about that bakery thing. Worked my way thru college in a bakery/coffee shop about a hundred years ago and we weighed not only the dry ingredients but also the liquids. Water = A pint and a pound the world around.

GC7 wrote:A new nickel weighs 5.0 gm. Put three of them on your digital scale. Mine (600 gm limit) reads 15.0 gm. If yours is anywhere closer to 13.8 or 16.2 then I suggest you throw it in the garbage and buy another.

Is that an American or Canadian nickel, from 1950, 1980 or 2009, worn or not

The point is without a calibration AND a repeated test procedure to test the accuracy of the instrument, it's pure speculation.

For example with a Crapola1b, it would be possible to measure anywhere from 13.8 to 16.2g and have it read close to 15g.

Additionally, many [ cheep ? ] scales have a 'Dynamic Instability' and will retain an erroneous reading for several seconds.
See Scale Dynamic Instability

My scale is accurate within .1% and tops out at half a kilo. It has a calibration weight so it can be calibrated if, for some reason, it drifts. Every single time I've decided to calibrate it, it comes up 200.0g. Over four years. I'm pretty comfortable that if I measure 16.5g or 18.5g that each time I do that I'm getting the same weight, even if the one isn't exactly 16.5g or the other isn't exactly 18.5g.


There is a very common mistake made quite often on the internet. It's the assumption that if anyone has a different opinion than yours, they must be wrong. If you can allow forks to have a different opinion, these types of conversation would be a hecuva lot more helpful to everyone involved.
If you walk into an internet forum with your ideas firmly entrenched, without any flexibility, you really reduce your chances to learn anything new. And when you get here, those that are trying to learn new things will not have the salt to take your advice, as they tend to view someone without that flexibility as dogmatic.

I've changed my technique fairly drastically in the past few weeks, but it was because I had changed coffees. Had I been dogmatic about my techniques, there is a good chance that I wouldn't be nodding and smiling while reading Abe's descriptions of the Black Cat shots he's been getting lately.

Psyd wrote:There is a very common mistake made quite often on the internet. It's the assumption that if anyone has a different opinion than yours, they must be wrong.

They aren't?

ken

I would respectfully like to add my .02 centavos.
Depending on the bean/blend, FOR ME, weight is not the only factor in consistency. How about VOLUME?
I CAN take say 30 beans of a full cith roasted Guat and it will weigh "X" grams
I can take 30 beans of a city roasted (the same) Guat and they will it will weigh "Z" (moisture content differences)
Further more, a blend of 3 beans including say a yemen might fill my PF at a 15 gram weight, while the same 15 grams of a SO yemen might not...or it might over fill.

To me, it's consistency of where the puck height sits that gives me the best result...ASSUMING all else is consistent. (Distribution/tamp)
In my case, the Cremina likes 3mm of clearance. YMMV.

This is not to say I don't try for weight consistency. I try. Assuming I'm staying with the same SO or blend, by using the timer on the Vario, my doses will all be within .5 grams.
Close enough for me.

Of course we are Ken. Of course they are!

Psyd wrote:There is a very common mistake made quite often on the internet. It's the assumption that if anyone has a different opinion than yours, they must be wrong.

And so it should be. If I did think that what is written was wrong and I didn't feel the need to question and dispute then there wouldn't be much of a forum going. I question and dispute not to win an argument or to be the last on a post (actually I hate being the last), I do so to learn more and to share a bit of my very small knowledge (I learned to be humble in these parts).

"I want to establish in your mind clearly that you must not think that I deny all that I do not admit. On the contrary, I think there are many things which may be true, and which I shall receive as such hereafter, though I do not as yet receive them; but that is not because there is any proof to the contrary , but that the proof in the affirmative is not yet sufficient for me " Michael Faraday.