Marshall wrote:For what it's worth, my rarely-weighed doses are typically 19g in a VST double basket. But for me this is useless information that only comes up after the fact, when I have adjusted time and grind to taste. This would be 6 ticks above zero and 11 seconds on my ProM for the Paradise Espresso Nuevo I am drinking this week. Of course, if your grinder and timer are reliable, time becomes an analog for weight. But dosing by time has the huge advantages over dosing by weight of (1) not having to measure the dose for each shot (the timer automatically repeats the dose) and (2) not having to single dose.

After reading this post, it becomes clear that you do value measurement over "eyeballing" the dose. The main difference between you and the opposition is the degree of accuracy you are willing to accept. We are all in agreement that there needs to be a measuring system in place that is repeatable and consistent.

mitch236 wrote:After reading this post, it becomes clear that you do value measurement over "eyeballing" the dose. The main difference between you and the opposition is the degree of accuracy you are willing to accept. We are all in agreement that there needs to be a measuring system in place that is repeatable and consistent.

Yes, I covered that in a post earlier this year: How I Avoid Single Dosing.

Eyeballing is measurement. It's accuracy depends on the eyeball.

I don't think anyone in this thread has espoused never measuring. Rather the thrust of the "don't weigh every time" side of the argument is not to weigh every time as opposed to never measuring or never, ever weighing.

Like Marshall, like a few others, and as I made clear in my first post in this thread, I use my grinder's timer for everyday measurement.

In my opinion, the "weigh every time" argument doesn't stand well on its own without a great deal of context. At minimum it needs to be said that some baskets and machines are very particular about particular weight ranges, others less so.

Similarly, dose weight doesn't mean a hell of a lot without extraction weight... in other words, brew ratio.

Distribution comes into play very strongly as well, as exact weights don't mean much in the face of varying extraction ratios, i.e., whether the coffee is under, fully or over extracted.

Accuracy is as accuracy does.

Something people should have learned in high school chemistry is that you can't make an entire system more accurate by more accurately measuring a single element. That reduces one aspect of inconsistency, which is very nice, but until you've got a decent handle on ALL of the important variables you're dancing in the dark.

That basic truth seems to have gone by the wayside for a lot of people. Not all, but a lot. Science can become "anti-science" by over-reliance on some things and inadequate consideration of others. Context. Context. Context.

It makes more sense as a matter of practical convenience to weigh beans for single dosing, than it makes sense to weight already ground coffee when beans are dispensed from the hopper. With sufficient accuracy in the alternative methods of measurement (timer, doser thwacks, overload and finger wipe, or whatever works to "good enough") convenience trumps accuracy.

The argument that Marshall needs to supply concrete examples of great shots made without weighing is poorly taken in that the burden of proof is on those who claim there's only one way of doing things well. However, if you must: Heather Perry, Scotty Callaghan, Marshall and me. You may doubt Marshall and me, but what about the other two?

Don't quote Jim Schulman on the importance of consistent and accurate weighing to me, unless you include the complete context of Jim's methods -- which include, inter alia, not adjusting grind for conditions, and the limitation that different coffees get different weights. The same goes for Dan, Jim Fox and a lot of other authorities whose acumen, taste and methods I greatly respect.

I am (or more accurately, we are) always interested in what they say and enjoy puzzling it out, but they're not the only role models on the block. Actually, the same goes for me. If you think about what I've written and it enriches context, whether or not you do as I suggest, I've succeeded. I can't speak for him, but it appears Marshall has the same goal.

My old machine was fine with it, but my new machine didn't do well with overdosing the stock basket and finger wiping to set the dose. Empirically, the La Cimbali does best with an 18g Strada basket in the stock, double pf; and an 18g (plus 0.3, minus 0.5g) dose. The combination of machine, pf and basket are cranky that way. With a known and dialed in bean, my Max Hybrid doses close enough for exceptional espresso using my attached timer. Weighing every shot isn't necessary; and great is good enough, at least for me.

Similarly, I get enough information about brew ratio and extraction levels by watching the stream and the surface of the pour. When I do weigh (and yes, I occasionally check just as Marshall does), I find that my brew ratios are very consistent with those coffees I brew often; variables sufficienly controlled.

New coffees and roast profiles require calibration of timer and senses. No surprise. My scale (remember, my basket wants something pretty damn close to 18g) makes things easier

Along the same lines, it's a good idea to encourage beginners to purchase a scale which can weigh doses and shots; and use it to determine an appropriate dose range for their equipment, and their preferred dose ratio(s). But, I agree with Marshall that over-hyping the importance of extreme accuracy can be off putting, and that our primary responsibility is to encourage rather than brow beat.

My experience in preparing food -- including general cooking and bread baking -- tells me that accurate measurement can only take you so far. That relying only or too heavily on numbers is limiting. And that going beyond requires "touch" and taste.

You may be more of an exact measurement recipe follower than a line cook or recipe writer, and still be a great cook. Nothing wrong with it. Certainly, you can save yourself a lot of time and grief by dialing in the acceptable (or even "very good" if you like) before you start delving too deeply into nuances.

My scale is very helpful for set up and to occasionally calibrate other methods of measurement (including those which are strictly sensory), but once set up and calibrated, weighing every time is far more nuisance than an aid. That said, I respect you, your palate, and your methods even though those methods are not mine. Please respect mine (and Marshall's) equally.

BDL

I think everyone here is basically after the same goal, to give good advice to someone who is just starting to make espresso at home. And I think the most important piece of advice that everyone is trying to give is "learn to measure how much coffee you're using" because it's obvious that that has a huge impact on taste. If there's two "sides" to this discussion, than it probably boils down to something like this:

• Telling every new home barista that they need to weigh ever dose will make it seem like espresso is too difficult, and will scare them off before they get started.
• If a new home barista doesn't start off by weighing their dose, it will be difficult to learn to be consistent and improve, and they may get frustrated and quit.

What people aren't recommending is that new users need to learn to pull espresso like a barista in a cafe at home, or that weighing every shot means you care more about numbers than taste. Everyone giving advice has found a set up that works for them, and no one should be saying that whatever they're doing will work for everyone. It would be great if the next time a new user asks a question, everyone can remember not to go overboard in either direction:

• If you think scales are the best invention ever, and you use them every time you pull a shot, don't forget to mention that the goal is the best tasting espresso, and the scale is a tool to get there (as opposed to get to a specific number).
• If you think that home baristas should "learn" by feel, don't forget that people are different and using a scale might actually be the best way for someone to learn. And don't forget to mention that however anyone ends up preparing their morning espresso (weight, time, sight, ect) everyone's goal is tasty espresso.

If Ms. n00b just dropped a kupla kilobux on hardware, she's kommitted. Instruction on how to get the best is not going to scare her away.

Joe n00b that spent all of $90 on a whacker and steam toy needs scaring away until he ponies up the entry fee.

Marshall wrote:Yes, I covered that in a post earlier this year: How I Avoid Single Dosing.

You really ought to change the title of that thread to "How I Avoid Weighing the Dose".

Single dosing and weighing are two different animals with two different purposes. It's true that single dosing may involve weighing the beans and/or the dose, but that's beside the point.

Single dosing is primarily for those who make frequent changes to the grinder setting, usually in order to change coffees or adjust for environmental conditions and/or coffee aging. It allows such changes while wasting the least amount of coffee. Single dosing allows you to change coffees quickly and easily, without having to remove the hopper, pour out the beans, purge the beans in the throat of the grinder, refill the hopper, etc. If you find that the grind needs to be adjusted due to environmental conditions or coffee aging, you can do so without wasting any beans to purge the burr chamber and chute, or having to pull a shot or two to get past the transition between the old and new grind settings. Single dosing also avoids dose variations due to low hopper levels. Those dose variations can be avoided by keeping the hopper filled, but what do you do when you get down to the point where the variations start and you don't have any more of those beans left? More wasted coffee.

As for weighing single doses, that's usually the best way to do it, but it's not required. If you simply cannot abide weighing, and if you have a grinder with minimal retention, or at least predictable retention, you can figure out how many scoops of beans you need to slightly overfill the PF and use the swipe and eyeball method. It's fair to say that if your grinder has a timer it won't be very useful for single dosing. But it's also true that grinders with timers tend to have chutes with minimal retention so they may work well for single dosing.

Although I've presented single dosing in a favorable light, it's not for everyone. AFAIK, no one has said that single dosing is a must for anyone. It's a personal preference and, as in many things espresso, there are tradeoffs in time, convenience, waste and consistency between single dosing and using a hopper. Also, not all grinders do it well. With all that said, I fail to understand your disdain for single dosing. In some ways it requires more time and effort than a hopper, and in other ways it's more efficient than using a hopper. Unlike weighing the dose, it's not something one could argue is "unnecessary". It's really a just a preference that's as valid as using a hopper.

Weighing doses, on the other hand, is done to consistently produce the same dose in the basket each and every time. Weighing doses eliminates the variations due to eyeballing, hopper fill level, environmental conditions, coffee age, grinder internal configuration, etc. It certainly can be argued that this isn't necessary, especially if one uses a timer and takes steps to ensure consistency of the timed dose. And we can argue until the cows come home whether or not it's better for noobies to start by weighing doses and shots. But the point of this post is that it can be done whether you single dose or use a hopper.

boar_d_laze wrote:Similarly, dose weight doesn't mean a hell of a lot without extraction weight... in other words, brew ratio.

I agree that if you want to accurately target a given brew ratio, you need to weigh both the dose and the shot. But I don't agree that if you don't weigh the shot then weighing the dose has no value. I weighed the dose and not the shot for many months before discovering the advantages of also weighing the shot. Weighing the dose, by itself, allowed me to freeze that variable so I could concentrate on the effects of adjusting other variables, like shot time and volume, temperature, etc.

boar_d_laze wrote:My scale is very helpful for set up and to occasionally calibrate other methods of measurement (including those which are strictly sensory), but once set up and calibrated, weighing every time is far more nuisance than an aid. That said, I respect you, your palate, and your methods even though those methods are not mine. Please respect mine (and Marshall's) equally.

Oh, I do. Really. The reason I've responded with intensity to Marshall's remarks is that he doesn't respect my methods and puts down those of us who prepare espresso differently than he does. Here are some selected excerpts from this thead (emphasis mine):

Marshall wrote:[in response to a poster saying his wife would think he's "mad" to weigh shots] And she will probably be right. There is useful information on Home-barista.com. But you also have to understand that when you step into Home Barista Land you have entered a highly skewed domain of engineers and scientists who have trouble fully enjoying anything that can't be measured, digitized, recorded, graphed and compared.

But, not only is it unnecessary to normal espresso brewing, it will refocus your attention from the coffee to the process and turn you from a barista to a digit watcher.

Of course that's true. But, you don't need to be as proficient as a working barista to put aside these rituals. It's like Dumbo and his magic feather. Forget it, and, with a little practice, you find you can fly without it.

and every fetishistic step is justified in the name of "exceptional espresso,"

Some people get their knickers into a twist, because occasionally a shot is subpar, and they might have to make an adjustment. Those same people may then feel it is necessary to turn their home bar into a mini-CERN lab and adopt obsessive habits to avoid such a crisis in the future.

But, I actually think it is the misplaced worship of commercial grinding equipment, specifically the giant conicals, that has created the perceived need for weighing and single dosing rituals.

These quotes don't sound like respect and tolerance, either for the methods or those who use them. It's one thing to argue that a method isn't necessary, takes to much time, isn't appropriate for newbies, etc. It's another thing to criticize it without providing evidence or well-reasoned aguments, and quite another to put down its practitioners.

I dunno guys (and gals, if there are any on HB), Marshall's incendiary comments seem more trollish than disrespectful. He likes to get the bees angry, and watch them buzz.

As for single dose, it does depend on the grinder. My Vario does it perfectly, while my MXK does it poorly. The latter prefers beans in the hopper.

YMMV.

Btw, are there any gals on HB?

I'm not a troll. But, if I were, I would be highly gratified by some of the epic-length responses I got here.

I've put a lot of time over the years into consumer coffee education, though admittedly not so much lately (I'm giving another lecture this spring). If I didn't care about consumer impact, I would just read the "engineers' espresso" recommendations with quiet bemusement. But, it wasn't a discussion among enthusiasts that prompted me to jump in. It was the repeated advice to an inquiring newbie that he weigh every dose and shot forever.

I assume that every newbie post stands for many times as many readers who don't post. And I also assume that the readership includes many curious people considering the possibility of making espresso at home. I care passionately about those people and hope that they get encouraged here to become home baristas.

I think the obsessive techniques that are routinely recommended here are more likely to turn people off than encourage them. I know the counter argument is that obsessive techniques will lead to earlier success and then a lifetime of home crema shlurping and are therefore not "obsessive." But the most active posters here really overestimate the public's enthusiasm for geeky rituals. That's because they are mostly techie types and view the world through that prism.

Ten years ago the online mantra to newbies was: "Home roast. It's the only way you'll ever have good coffee at home." I used to object to that one, too, and am glad to see it has disappeared.

I plead guilty to using provocative language, but that just makes the writing a little more fun for me. My central points were sincerely felt.