Espresso Basic Training

#1: Post by **Psyd** » March 14th, 2008, 5:03 pm

So, this cat that has been my buddy for decades gets back in touch with me after not seeing one another for a few years, and I've moved on from my Krups to the two-group while he's moved up to a Gaggia tabletop model. He's coming over to play with the commercial toys; a pair of Majors and the Astoria, as well as the collection of paraphernalia. He expressed some trepidation, so I popped off a lil note.
He was very pleased and comforted by it, and suggested that this could serve as the basic beginning instruction for anyone thinking about getting into espresso, and suffering some fears.
I offer this as the skeleton; not a be-all, end-all espresso instruction, but as a simple, basic training, intro to espresso, quick start users guide. I invite all criticisms, as this is a work in progress, and presently limited by my imperfect knowledge and writing/typing skills.

There are only a few tricks to getting good espresso instead of bad or mediocre, and the first are the four M's:
Miscela, Macinadosatore, Macchina, and Mano.
Blend, Grind, machine, and hand.

Blend; start with good ingredients. Fresh coffee, roasted less than fifteen days ago, but probably more than three or five days, depending on the bean, and ground right before (within minutes) of extraction.
This implies good water, too. Good coffee and good water go a long way to getting good espresso. No matter what else you do, if you have bad coffee or bad water, you will end up with bad espresso. These are the basics building blocks, the foundation if you will. Without them, there is no hope.

Grinder is the thing that makes the bean give up it's treasures. The ground particles should be as identical in size as possible, as that will encourage each particle to spend the same amount of time as any other in the water. More important than the machine, therefore listed first.

Machine. Really, the espresso machine only makes water hot and pushes it through the puck at pressure. The difference between a Silvia and the La Marzocco GS3 is that the GS3 is far easier to control that temp and the pressure, and to do it consistently. Other than that, given a similar grinder and the same beans, the shots that you would pull on either should be nearly indistinguishable. A machine that pushes too much or not enough pressure through the puck, or water that is too hot or not hot enough, is inadequate. Once it reaches nine Bar and 88 to 96 degrees C, it's adequate. Anything more just makes it more reliable, more repeatable, or easier.

Hand refers to barista skills. They are fairly simple, and the topic of much controversy, but the basics are easy. Find a dose of coffee that and a grind for that dose that consistently provides a one-and-a-half to two ounce espresso in twenty-five to thirty seconds before blonding*. To find the dose, one grinds a level basket full of grounds, tamps, and lock the portafilter in the group. The top of the puck should just show the impression of the dispersion screen screw, or, lacking that screw, the faintest impression of a dime between the top of the puck and the dispersion screen. To find the proper grind, pull that dose, adjusting for a finer grind if it runs two ounces in less than twenty-five seconds, and adjusting for a coarser grind if it doesn't run an ounce-and-a-half in thirty seconds.**

*Blonding refers to the end of a pull, where the result of more water passing through the puck doesn't result in more of the good solubles in the cup. The Head of the pull will be dark, drippy, and sometimes look almost like driveway oil, the beginning will rapidly develop an auburn, or redwood coloured mousetail, or pouring-honey-like appearance, and then soon will start to tiger-stripe and mottle, with dark drops of concentrated dissolved goodness running in the pour. Once all evidence of these stripes and spots disappears, all of the good tasting solubles have been exhausted from the puck, and you are only extracting bitterness, ashiness, and other bad tasting elements.

**All of these timings are a general decent shot. Some beans will taste better with a short pull of two ounces, some will blonde after one-and-a-half ounces, and there is the occasional bean that will benefit, and stay dark, for a good long ristretto pull. Experiment within these parameters until you are comfortable and bored enough to explore.

Don't fear the big machines.The only difference between the inexpensive counter-tops and the industrial.commercial giants is that they are easier, more reliable, and more repeatable.

#2: Post by **zin1953** » March 15th, 2008, 9:44 pm

Psyd wrote:So, this cat that has been my buddy for decades gets back in touch with me after not seeing one another for a few years, and I've moved on from my Krups to the two-group while he's moved up to a Gaggia tabletop model.

I'm impressed. My cat would would probably find the top of a Gaggia too hot to curl up upon for a midday nap.

There are only a few tricks to getting good espresso instead of bad or mediocre, and the first are the four M's:
Miscela, Macinadosatore, Macchina, and Mano.
Blend, Grind, machine, and hand.

Blend; start with good ingredients. Fresh coffee, roasted less than fifteen days ago, but probably more than three or five days, depending on the bean, and ground right before (within minutes) of extraction.
This implies good water, too. Good coffee and good water go a long way to getting good espresso. No matter what else you do, if you have bad coffee or bad water, you will end up with bad espresso. These are the basics building blocks, the foundation if you will. Without them, there is no hope.

Short of adding something about coffee/espresso actually being nothing more than water extracting the soluble elements from the beans, I think you're fine.

Grinder is the thing that makes the bean give up it's treasures. The ground particles should be as identical in size as possible, as that will encourage each particle to spend the same amount of time as any other in the water. More important than the machine, therefore listed first.

It's "its" -- no apostrophe: "its treasures" (not "it is treasures").

Machine. Really, the espresso machine only makes water hot and pushes it through the puck at pressure. The difference between a Silvia and the La Marzocco GS3 is that the GS3 is far easier to control that temp and the pressure, and to do it consistently. Other than that, given a similar grinder and the same beans, the shots that you would pull on either should be nearly indistinguishable. A machine that pushes too much or not enough pressure through the puck, or water that is too hot or not hot enough, is inadequate. Once it reaches nine Bar and 88 to 96 degrees C, it's adequate. Anything more just makes it more reliable, more repeatable, or easier.

Were it I, I would not name specific machines. I might say something like, "The difference between a home model and a commercial one . . . " or "The difference between a single-boiler/dual use machine, an HX machine, and a dual boiler machine is ease of temperature control and consistency." But again, that's me, and I wouldn't want to sound like I am endorsing or rejecting any specific machine or manufacturer.

Everything else seems fine to me.

Cheers,
Jason

#3: Post by HB » March 15th, 2008, 11:42 pm

Psyd wrote:Machine. Really, the espresso machine only makes water hot and pushes it through the puck at pressure. The difference between a Silvia and the La Marzocco GS3 is that the GS3 is far easier to control that temp and the pressure, and to do it consistently.

Other than consistency, they're the same?

I've read comments like that before, e.g., "A barista with good skills can pull as good a shot on a Silvia as the most tricked-out <fill in the blank>." That hasn't been my experience and it isn't limited to consistency. Simply stated, espresso machines like the La Marzocco GS3, Synesso Cyncra, Elektra A3, etc. are capable of pulling richer shots with greater clarity significantly more easily and consistently than prosumer class espresso machines. Whether you're willing to pay 4-10x the cost for that difference is another story.

It's pure speculation on my part, but I don't attribute the majority of this difference to temperature control or temperature stability, otherwise PID'd Silvias would rule. When it comes to a machine's theoretical "exceptional espresso" ceiling, I think it's an elusive combination of water temperature, pressure profile, and even water dispersion that separate the uber class from the prosumer class.

Apart from that minor quibble, I agree with everything you wrote.

March 21st, 2008, 7:47 pm

HB wrote:Other than consistency, they're the same?

I've read comments like that before, e.g., "A barista with good skills can pull as good a shot on a Silvia as the most tricked-out <fill in the blank>." That hasn't been my experience and it isn't limited to consistency.

I guess what I'm trying to imply here is that a newbie with a Silvia and a few weeks behind the PF and the same newbie with a few weeks behind the GS3 are going to get the same results from the same bean and grinder combo. Maybe the GS3 has some magical component that I'm not privy to, but I was pulling shots on my Astoria at my house that were rivaling the ones that I pulled, using the same Rocket Classic, on the GB5 and the Synesso at the AZBJ. Variances between all of the shots, of course, and my limited palate notwithstanding, I'd be hard-pressed to identify the shots from any of those three against the shots from my Silvia. Could be that I suck at all four machines! ; > I need to find some way to express that the differences in the machines would only be noticed by someone who is remarkably familiar with the nuances of espresso, while a Chainstore Espresso drinker would just find both to be exceptional, and then only in the hands of someone who is capable with the machinery. But in simpler, more direct terms. I always did suffer from a lack of didacticity...
Sure, in the hands of a skilled operator, the better the tools the better the results, but in the hands of an acolyte at the altar of the bean, study and practice will make a far more discernable difference in the end result than any espresso machine, once you've gotten into the realm of 'real' espresso machines.

Again, it could just be that I'm not better at any other machine than I've gotten with the Silvia.

Jason, good point. This was originally designed for someone that knows me and my machinery, so that's why I went for the name, and the GS3 has great name recognition. Technically, it is a home machine, isn't it?
And as for 'it's', it's one of the things I do quite frequently, like typing 'teh' for 'the'. Unfortunately, spell-checkers think it's just fine! ; >

#5: Post by HB » March 21st, 2008, 9:22 pm

Psyd wrote:I guess what I'm trying to imply here is that a newbie with a Silvia and a few weeks behind the PF and the same newbie with a few weeks behind the GS3 are going to get the same results from the same bean and grinder combo.

Hmm-m... A newbie learns on one of the most predictable espresso machines available that delivers excellent clarity versus one of the most unpredictable espresso machines available that delivers notably less clarity. Said newbie tastes no difference? You've lost me.

Psyd wrote:I need to find some way to express that the differences in the machines would only be noticed by someone who is remarkably familiar with the nuances of espresso, while a Chainstore Espresso drinker would just find both to be exceptional, and then only in the hands of someone who is capable with the machinery.

I think you underestimate the taste discernment of John and Jane Public. Most faced the "Pepsi Challenge" and demonstrated real taste preference. Presented with two espressos side-by-side, I believe John and Jane could do the same. If you presented two drinks 10 minutes apart, many would struggle to recall their taste memory with sufficient clarity for either challenge.

March 24th, 2008, 1:21 am

HB wrote: Said newbie tastes no difference? You've lost me.

Said newbie learns (key word, indicating past tense) to work the machine to get an acceptable shot, then comparisons are made. I do tend toward the extremes, but usually to throw the minute differences between similar machines into sharp relief. I'm not saying that the learning curve won't be remarkably different for each machine. In fact, that's kind of the point that I'm making. The newbie who gets a GS3 will probably be pulling excellent shots in rapid succession in short order, with proper instruction and some practice, while the Silvia newbie will require the same instruction and an internet full of tricks and hints, and ten times the practice to get decent shots with that occasional excellent.

HB wrote:I think you underestimate the taste discernment of John and Jane Public.

I'm sorry, what is Starbucks trading at today? ; >

HB wrote:If you presented two drinks 10 minutes apart, many would struggle to recall their taste memory with sufficient clarity for either challenge.

I'm sure that the former comparison would yield some meaningful results, but it's the latter comparison that really sorts out if they need to spend the money, n'est ce-pas?

I meant to represent the Alpha and Omega of the home espresso spectrum. Truthfully, you can probably get the same shots out of a Silvia as a hobbyist/enthusiast (and yeah, I'm excluding anyone that uses their shops electron microscope or super computer, and anyone that has their espresso machine hooked directly to a plotter or computer, and certainly anyone that has kit shipped directly from the manufacturer or distributor for evaluation in the 'hobbyist/enthusiast' category) as you can a GS3, but it will take you one heckuva lot more time and trial.

Or, hey, I could be wrong. I'm just some guy spouting an opinion. I'm not married to it, I just feel that way. Anyone who wishes to actually PROVE me wrong can send the GS3 to:
POB 463
TUCSON AZ 85702

Let me know when it's on the way, so I can make some arrangements. The postal employees are prolly gonna be a little freaked if it shows up unannounced, 'coz my box is a bit smaller than the GS's shipping crate. ; >

#7: Post by **cannonfodder** » March 24th, 2008, 11:50 am

Good espresso is not hard to make given some basic skills practice and equipment, but exceptional espresso takes much more refinement in both barista skill and equipment. I have a few years under my belt and think I mastered the good espresso a few years ago but I am still working on the exceptional (consistently exceptional) espresso.

#8: Post by **frustrated_uk** » March 24th, 2008, 12:02 pm

It's "its" -- no apostrophe: "its treasures" (not "it is treasures").

"It's" with a posessive apostrophe (as opposed to an abreviated apostrophe) is correct.

Treasures which belong to 'it'. Like something which belongs to John is John's.

How I love the Queen's English!

March 24th, 2008, 2:31 pm

cannonfodder wrote:Good espresso is not hard to make given some basic skills practice and equipment, but exceptional espresso takes much more refinement in both barista skill and equipment.

I think that that pretty much stands to reason. I guess my point was that any newbie with enough training and enough practice will be able to pull good espresso on any home machine that is up to the task, Silvia being the most commonly accepted (but by no means the only accepted) bottom rung of that ladder, and the GS3 similarly and arguably considered the top rung.
The difference between the two that correlates experience to cost is the amount of effort required to make the espresso, and to learn to make the espresso.
CF, IIRC, you fall right out of the 'hobbyist/enthusiast' category, and somewhere in the 'scientific kit wielding fanatic' category, no?

#10: Post by **cafeIKE** » March 25th, 2008, 1:41 am

cannonfodder wrote:Good espresso is not hard to make given some basic skills practice and equipment, but exceptional espresso takes much more refinement in both barista skill and equipment. I have a few years under my belt and think I mastered the good espresso a few years ago but I am still working on the exceptional (consistently exceptional) espresso.

Isn't "consistently exceptional" oxymoronic?