Is leveling off the coffee necessary? - Page 2

by **RegulatorJohnson** on Mon Jan 26, 2009 1:56 pm

Since technical points are now a max of 77 vs. 239 for sensory, I would say this is a doubtful conclusion,

what is the difference in points from 1st - 3rd place??

how much did HP lose by in the worlds??? perhaps a timed grinder and zero waste would have given her a win??

you are saying one or two extra points wont make a difference??

jon

by **Marshall** on Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:14 pm

RegulatorJohnson wrote:you are saying one or two extra points wont make a difference??

jon

No. I'm saying no one would give up leveling, if they thought it might compromise the cup in any way.

by **John P** on Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:51 pm

Marshall, to answer the question-- No.

I think recent advances in grinder design in the timing and dosing/distribution aspects are extremely beneficial to barista. But let's not forget that, technique wise, it's not revolutionary.

Many "classically trained" barista do this on a daily basis, and have done so for years. When you dose/distribute you round your index finger and create a nice little "dome" of coffee. Practice yields same results as settling by fork tapping. So in this case, it would be a slightly looser grind and a greater (appearance wise) fill on the portafilter. It depends on the style/taste profile, -- your espresso paradigm -- whether or not you choose to dose in this manner.

Many of the new barista["new" more in a sense of understanding the history of espresso fundamentals, as compared to just time behind the bar], believe that the only espresso paradigm that exists is their own. Understanding how to make great shots leveling vs. not leveling or updosing vs downdosing or tapping vs not tapping, finer grind vs coarser grind or any combination of those is a great asset to have. Making great espresso is about consistency and taste. They've found a technique that works great for them. Many millions of shots have been pulled using a similar technique for years. Let's hear it for history repeating itself.

by **Jasonian** on Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:53 am

shadowfax wrote:Marshall, I've noticed the same phenomenon of hands-free distribution. I know James Hoffman has talked about it, but I think I took notice when I saw my friends at Cuvée Coffee do this on their Super Jollies and K30s. It certainly works for them. And while Dan can thwack the crap out of the Super Jolly and hold the portafilter at a slight angle and get a perfectly centered mound that looks just like the ones out of the Mazzer Electronics, the K30 mounds are rarely so pretty--often fairly clumped-looking, in fact. But Clancy tamps them down, locks into the LM, and pulls. Always really nice results--even flow, and just wonderfully bodied shots.

I tried this with the Robur on my Vetrano some time ago with almost indistinguishable results from my carefully leveled shots. The Elektra T1 is a total $#%@& about it--really horrible results if you don't distribute the mound out to the sides: terrible channeling and sink shots below.

Next time you're there, have them pull a naked PF this way, and watch what happens.

I am not a fan of the no-distribution method. I've experimented with it quite a bit, long before it become a curious phenomenon. While I've had several results that tasted fine, the pours were atrocious, regardless of how well the distributing-dosing worked out. I simply cannot in good conscience consider it an honest representation of that coffee when the extraction is so uneven, regardless of how pleasant the results may be.

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

We either let the coffee be itself, or we don't. We either try to be as honest as possible, or we focus only on the morality of "taste".. which is hardly a complete morality at all, in my book.

Just my $.02.

by **shadowfax** on Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:34 am

Jason, I'm a bit confused by your post. Are you talking specifically on the K30, or on the general array of grinders that you've used? Also, what do you mean by "no distribution?" It's not possible not to have a distribution. How you arrive at the distribution you've got, and whether or not you get a good one for the machine you're working with, are at issue. I really don't understand the apparent claim that hands-free distribution inherently results in uneven extractions. My own minimal experience goes against this, at least on my Robur/Vetrano combo.

Would you mind to clarify these questions? Have I misunderstood you?

by **mikemckim** on Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:53 am

Nick,

I am of the opinion that the ultimate respect for the coffee is presenting a cup that showcases it as good as it can be...regardless of how you get there. Obviously there are known variables that will produce good or bad results, but there are fundamentals that can serve as a starting point. Every pro golfer has a slightly different swing, but all of them can pound a golf ball 300+ yards down the middle of the fairway. They all start with basic fundamentals and tweak them. We approach coffee much the same.

I think that it is great that people like Jason ask questions and challenge the conventional, but the fact is that it is nothing new. When I worked for Espresso Specialists 7 years ago there were roasters and coffee shop owners experimenting with the exact same things. And 7 years from now, someone will come along and do and say the exact same stuff and they will think it something new.

Nick, keep working and experimenting. Philosophy of preparation is no substitute for practical experience. You have worked with Clancy and Dan and they are very talented coffee professionals with a good amount of experience in both the coffee shop environment and the lab. Remember that there are many roads that lead to Rome...or something like that.

Jasonian wrote:Next time you're there, have them pull a naked PF this way, and watch what happens.

I am curious why you phrased this as above. What exactly is going to happen? Dan and Clancy are both out of town or they might respond themselves, but since they were mentioned, they have spent many, many hours testing, experimenting, pouring with all types of equipment and the method they currently use is their preferred. Not based on philosophy, but based on practical experience and experimentation.

by **cafeIKE** on Tue Jan 27, 2009 4:02 pm

another_jim wrote:If the grind isn't clumpy, one can level by rocking the tamper slightly before pressing down.

Since any amount of force is going to compress the coffee, rocking a tamper could lead to an uneven distribution. Assuming a left to right movement, the coffee will be compressed and displaced on the left, compressed overall as the tamper levels and futher compressed and displaced on the right. The fore and aft points will be less compressed, perhaps leading to figure-8 pours.

The famous nutating motion would seem to build a mound that is then compressed.

by **Martin** on Tue Jan 27, 2009 10:14 pm

cafeIKE wrote:Since any amount of force is going to compress the coffee,

There's some sort of logical fallacy deep within this (counter)argument. "Any amount. . .could. . ." is hardly disputable, but isn't this going awfully deep into the ether?

I shake the pf to level before I level with my finger. Why? I like to shake.

As a coffee mortal, I employ all sorts of micro practices that are grounded in the partially empirical (I weigh the coffee to be more consistent than if I didn't weigh). Other practices may be no more than nervous ticks (WDT: right-left, right-left, right-left; up-down, up-down, up-down) for which I have no first-hand evidence. I also touch the bill of my cap and grab my crotch, practices that work for me in baseball and cribbage but await further study before I can I can give more than a preliminary recommendation for espresso.

by **John P** on Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:16 pm

...and grab my crotch, practices that work for me in baseball and cribbage...

Crotch grabbing in cribbage... :shock:

by **cafeIKE** on Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:07 am

Martin wrote:I shake the pf to level before I level with my finger. Why? I like to shake.

Me too. I almost never level with my finger. Usually only if I'm asleep at the switch and forget to move the PF.

Perhaps in 10 years we can look back and laugh, "Remember when we used to think tamping mattered?"

by **miKe mcKoffee** on Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:22 am

No leveling is not exclusive of competitions or exclusive of doserless grinders. Can and is used in production and with timer modified doser thwacked PF build grinders too. While I have the long standing Stockfleth habit of many years, a couple of my baristi use no level and I use no level technique occasionally when I think to NOT Stockfleth with the same results as with Stockfleth. This is with relatively lowly standard Majors modified with timed dosing. All nekkid pulls so if no level caused bad builds would be quite obvious. Haven't seen a spritz in weeks, flow builds even and nicely centered. Down tapping is not required unless updosing. We currently use one light tap for light updose with ESPN LM double ridgeless. Success is in the distribution from doser to PF of course.

FWIW pulling all shots nekkid isn't about ooing and ahhing over the shots, it's about very easily keeping PF espresso path clean in production. Some don't believe in post shot rinsing PF, I do. Knock puck, flush group simultaneously rinsing both sides of PF and hence basket, quick wipe dry of both sides of basket and ready for next build with virtually clean basket. Oh sure oils will build up in the holes over time even brew temp water rinsed, but not noticeably in a day and detergent soaked each night. The contention that rinsing the basket with leave it wet and hence lead to channeling doesn't hold up, unless not wiped dry of course.

by **dsc** on Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:05 am

Hi guys,

I've seen Stephen pull a shot for me and I was surprised how big the mount of coffee in the basket was. He simply tapped the PF on the fork to times and tamped it with a convex tamper doing a slight nutating motion. He even used a naked and the shot looked fine, there was no evidence of side channeling and it flowed really well. Taste-wise it was the single best espresso I've ever had, so much complexity I was shocked.

The mound that comes out of the doserless Major looks like this:

and I did try tamping that straight away with no levelling. Funnily enough there was no side channeling, although a few times I got a donut extraction. I guess it all depends how you tamp, because the no-nutating-motion-tamp shots were usually worse than the nutated ones.

I will give it another go today and in the upcoming days, but I'm simply surprised that the baristas still dose without moving the PF. You can rotate the PF while grinding and fill it with coffee in an even matter without touching the basket. Did anyone do that during the competition?

Regards,
dsc.

by **Randy G.** on Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:27 pm

Is ANY step in any portion of procedure necessary? That might be a better question, albeit a much longer thread.

At the Nuova Simonelli booth at the SCAA show (in Charlotte maybe?) I had a straight espresso made on one of their better commercial machines that had all sorts of computerized controls including flow rate, two or three PIDs, etc. The gentleman dosed into the PF, filling it about half way, more or less. He gently shook laterally a bit which settled and leveled the grounds. With no further preparation he locked it into placed and pulled the shot which was very drinkable and, dare I say, delicious. He used the same grinder setting that was used for a "properly" prepared straight shot that was dosed and tamped as you might expect and a pull done with the "standard" dose and tamp was excellent.

So....

- do what works for you. Level or not level. Tamp or not tamp. Weigh or not. Etc.

- don't hesitate to try something new, but don't hesitate to discard what doesn't work for you.

- don't necessarily try to emulate or copy what a pro barista does. They probably pull more espresso in a day than you do in a month (or a year), and they probably pull more in a year than you will in a lifetime.

- if you are having a problem, go back to basics that are repeatable, discover and eliminate the problem, and work back from there.

If you find that some specific action is absolutely necessary for decent results then you might be compensating for some other problem. For examples:
- a required very light tamp may indicate a too fine grind or a grinder (or a coffee) creating too much dust
- a required very hard tamp my indicate a too-coarse grind

You can learn by watching the pros, but this has to be tempered with common sense. I love watching Valentino Rossi ride, but never have felt the need to drift corners on my 1979 BMW R100RT, at least not two up.. :wink:

by **Psyd** on Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:57 pm

Uhm, yeah!
I still get confused at the 'must' and 'never' comments that show up here, and the complete poseur disdain-noselift that some show others that do, or do not, conform to some ritual or eschewing of such.
I've said a hundred times that we should all be here to he'p a brudda out. Well, at least thrice, anyway. If ya find something that makes your coffee better, go ahead and tell us about it. We'll try it. If it works for us, with our machine, and our coffee, and our present technique, in our country, with our electricity, and our weather, at our latitude, yada-yada-yada... we'll keep it. If it doesn't we probably won't.
This doesn't mean that your coffee didn't get better, or that we were in fact doing what it was that you were suggesting.
Is leveling necessary? I dunno. Try not-leveling with your machine, at your house, with your coffee, etc., etc., and if it gets better, stop leveling. If it doesn't, go back to leveling. In no way, shape, or form will I stop leveling if it works for you, or some pro, or some barista champion or another, if it makes my coffee taste less good.
And I got stopped on my '81 RT 'cause my knee was draggin' and the rear wheel wasn't quite following the front anymore. Being an es-cop, I asked why I was stopped, and he asked how fast I was going. I looked at the sign, told him that's how fast I was going, and smiled.
He had just stopped me because it looked like I was going fast!
I do have to say, if I see a pro doing something, I get to use pro kit often enough that I'll take a stab at it. If it makes the routine shorter or easier, or the coffee better, or both, I'll happily adopt it. If it does neither, or makes the routine easier/shorter but the coffee gets less good, I'll drop it like a Fivebucks Latte.

by **z0h** on Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:59 pm

I'd like to see a quantitative, scientific study of the opinions stacked up in this thread to support the claims- nothing so far. Anyone care to contribute at this level?

by **miKe mcKoffee** on Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:31 am

z0h wrote:I'd like to see a quantitative, scientific study of the opinions stacked up in this thread to support the claims- nothing so far. Anyone care to contribute at this level?

Opinions based on observations and tasting but gee wiz no scientific study of level versus no level. Personally with 100+ nekkid shots a day pulled mixed of both ways for over a year with results in the cup which say it doesn't matter (given accurate dosing and good distribution), I'll accept the non-scientific taste as definitive enough for me.

by **galumay** on Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:07 am

i dont level - and dont really have the option, with the PF in my Bezzera BZ35 a 14gm dose in the double basket is quite a bit less than full. i rely on a bit of a tap on the fork as i dose from my grinder and then a standard tamp.

as i see it the coffee behaves in a similar way to a liquid anyway so the coffee is probably dispersed evenly by the tamping anyway.

i use a naked PF so any major issues introduced by the inability to level would be fairly obvious IMO.

personally i find accurate dosing to be the most critical variable in the preparation process, (hence i weigh), and an even and consistent tamp next most critical.

as others have said its all about whats in the cup and your engagement with it! if it tastes great then you must be doing something right!

by **z0h** on Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:17 am

miKe mcKoffee wrote:Opinions based on observations and tasting but gee wiz no scientific study of level versus no level. Personally with 100+ nekkid shots a day pulled mixed of both ways for over a year with results in the cup which say it doesn't matter (given accurate dosing and good distribution), I'll accept the non-scientific taste as definitive enough for me.

totally agree- I should have been more clear that I was being a bit sarcastic about the scientific study comment.

But I was really hoping to see a particle distribution chart and a precision profile of dosing weights from a large conical grinder. Then a GC profile of extracted organics to conclusively show that the flavor profile is indeed similar to 70% chocolate.

by **Randy G.** on Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:23 pm

miKe mcKoffee wrote:Opinions based on observations and tasting but gee wiz no scientific study of level versus no level.

For most any given step in preparation, some may find it critical and others will find it useless. As an example, most users have to deal with the clumps that Rocky creates while users of other grinders which create an even and clumpless grind do not. Is someone going to invent a levelometer to quantify the testing? 3D laser mapping? :wink:

There is a scientist who carries around a refractometer (I think that's what it is), and he uses it to prove that his device makes espresso, and uses it to prove his device makes better espresso than other machines, and yet his coffee maker creates no crema whatsoever. I like the man, and love his coffee-making device, but no argument can sway his opinion of the coffee his device produces. This is what happens when science takes over and art and subjectivity are pushed aside.

Never say always....
DOH!

by **drdna** on Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:34 pm

It may be obvious, but I just wanted to point this out:

It is well described that coffee grounds are a relatively noncompactible solid substance. That is to say, once you are pressing down with 40 pounds of force, increasing this to eighty pounds of force is NOT going to make your puck half as tall and twice as dense.

Further it has also been described before that the compressed upper layers of the puck have little impact on the lower layers physical structure, because of the way the coffee grinds pack. Thus, continuous compaction must be done with less force to achieve the same effect as a single tamp at the end.

THUS: coffee grounds will follow the path of least resistance and be pushed out to the sides of the basket as tamping occurs, NOT compacted directly downwards. As long as the tamping procedure is symmetric and the distribution is symmetric (not necessarily level, it may be conical etc.) the end result should be quite similar with leveling and no leveling.

Adrian


Contact Us	Legal disclaimer and copyright: This content and all its parts are copyrighted, all rights reserved. Content including all text and images in part or in whole may not be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission. Home-Barista, Home-Barista.com and related logos are trademarks of Home-Barista.com, LLC. Other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. By accessing this site, you agree to the terms of service. Overall speed: fast, current page: 0.9s, avg: 0.5s, max: 2.1s