Is leveling off the coffee necessary? - Page 4

by **Jasonian** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 4:26 am

Dan Streetman wrote:Jason,

I really did not want to have to respond to this, but it has grown tiresome. You say that you want to build a coffee community, but then you do things like this. I could forgive the assumption that my espresso would pull atrociously uneven with no distribution, even in the face of Nicolas witnessing our results and reporting the opposite. However, when you try to accuse me, and my coworkers of being disrespectful to the coffee you cross the line.

Whether you want to believe it or not I have a great deal of respect, and passion for coffee. Your attempts to take a moral high-ground with rhetoric are unnecessary and unproductive. If you want to treat using a taste test barometer as the coffee equivalent to moral relativity then be my guest. I would however appreciate it if you refrained from making naive Kantian assumptions. How many grinders, and espresso machines have you tested redistribution vs no redistribution on? As Mike stated before we did not rush to conclusions about our change in espresso preparation. I also do not condemn or discourage the use of redistribution for preparing espresso. I encourage people to try different methods and see what works best for them. I was also very skeptical of the Anfim at first because of what I presume you would call doughnut extractions (extraction around edge with no flow in the middle) but within a few days, I had adjusted to the difference and was getting even flows again. Although I think you should at least recognize you are not the arbiter of coffee morality. If you are, then it would be greatly appreciated if you could put into print the commandments of coffee honesty so that we may all come into accordance.

I also find it rather amusing that you only weighed in on this thread after we had been mentioned and decided only to comment in our direction, since the thread was started by Marshall out of observation at the WRBC. He noted that all of the top 3 did not redistribute the coffee with their hands after dosing. I could also note that the two past WBC champs, Stephen Morissey, and James Hoffman also did not redistribute their coffee. Not to mention Chris Baca, Kyle Glanville, Pete Licata, and Drew Catlin from last year's USBC finals. Are they all also disrespectful to the coffee?

Now that I responded to how your post came across I will address what I hope you were trying to say;

Jason,

thanks for sharing your experiences with naked extractions and no redistribution. We too have done some experiments with this and have had different results. However if I was noticing that we were having uneven extractions I would have to agree with you that this is probably not the best method for preparing espresso. While on occasion one may get lucky and have an unevenly extracted shot that tastes good, my assumption would be this is rather unreliable and that most shots prepared in this way would not taste good.

to the rest of everyone reading this thread I apologize.

Whoa, chill, Dan. I think you misunderstood something.

This should have been a PM.

And for the record, I only chimed into this thread because I had a referral hit from it, and I tend to check them. I have a lot going on, and I just don't check every coffee site as often as I used to.

And I didn't reply again until today because.. I had forgotten about it, but had another referral hit, so here I am.

I never intended to imply that you (or anyone, for that matter) didn't have respect for coffee. I expressed my own view, and if I seemed to pass judgment on someone else, I apologize, for this is not my intention. My intention was to offer a secondary opinion, and to allow anyone curious to decide for themselves. If it works, it works. I'm theorizing, here. Not accusing.

[edit: Thank you for addressing what I was trying to say in that last part. No-one is out to get you!]

by **luca** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:24 am

It looks like at least some of the participants in this thread are overlooking the role that levelling plays in making sure that you have the right dose and focusing exclusively on distribution. Part of the reason why you don't need to level with some of the grinders is because they have timers to take care of the dose. If you don't have a timer and you don't level, you need some other way to make sure that your dose is consistent. Short of weighing the ground coffee, what are people doing to ensure that they get a repeatable dose when they are experimenting with not levelling?

by **Jasonian** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:47 pm

Is it possible that the timers people are using are accurate enough to get a dose as consistent (or close) as doing it by hand?

I haven't done the testing to know, but if so, that would account for the dose weight consistency variable.

by **shadowfax** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:28 pm

The quality (repeatability and adjustment granularity) of timed dosing certainly varies from grinder to grinder. I believe that most of the very high end ones (Mazzer Electronics and Mahlkönig K30, for example) are pretty impressive on both fine-grained adjustments and consistency. I'm also reviewing the new Baratza Vario grinder, which has timed dosing, and it works pretty nicely on this front as well, although, so far, for the coffee I have used and my Elektra T1, it doesn't perform as well as the larger grinders at hands-free distribution. I get channeling and sometimes even a bit of spritzing at the beginning of shots when I just dose and then tap (or not) and tamp.

by **TruthBrew** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:09 pm

toma wrote:AFAIK it started last year at competitions when US baristas like Baca started to use the Super Caimano and skipped levelling. They also mentioned during their performances that with this grinder no distribution by hand was necessary.

I was at an "R Miguel" coffee event last year where Andrew Millstead (at the time a barista at Kopplin's Coffee in St. Paul) was pulling some of this very expensive coffee as shots also using an Anfim without leveling. The shots turned out fantastic. I questioned him at the time and he believed the grinder did such a superior job of distribution that any manipulation would have detracted from the cup rather than improved.

by **Psyd** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:29 pm

Which leads us back to what I was saying. If it needs it, use it. If it doesn't, spare yourself the additional step. If you won that grinder, or one that performs like it, you don't need to level. The rest of us notice a spectacular increase in the cup when we level. 'Necessary' is fairly situationally dependent. Like flushes to cool the HX. They aren't necessary if you don't have an HX, but might be to warm up the group on a DB, if the boiler is somewhat remote.
I'm not sure why the demagoguery has increased around here, lately, but I used to come here to get away from it. There have been lots of questioning of techniques, a touch of elitism from 'traditionalists', and just a whole lot of rhetoric from the 'specialists'. I'd thought we had all come here to share a similar interest and help one another understand that interest.
None of it is necessary. Some of it makes the coffee better in some situations with some gear. Again, things like levelling came about because someone noticed that if it were level, the puck made better espresso. It isn't like they made it up to see how many gullible HB'ers they could get to level their puck each day.
Try stuff. Post the stuff that works for you, and try the things that work for other people. If they *don't* make your espresso better, assume one of two things:
Your kit isn't being helped by that particular modification of your routine, or;
Your tastes are different than the poster's, and the change is positive to him, but not you.
If you can *NOT* fit it into one of those two possibilities, then go ahead and attack it...

by **Randy G.** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:02 pm

Psyd wrote:.... It isn't like they made it up to see how many gullible HB'ers they could get to level their puck each day.

"Take this letter and send one spent puck to the person at the top of the list. Add your name to the bottom, and then send a copy of this letter to 8 of your friends. In just a few short weeks you will receive over a million pucks, AND the espresso you make at home will become better, as if by magic! But BEWARE! The last person who broke the puck chain ended up working at Starbucks where he developed carpal tunnel syndrome in his right middle finger from pushing the brew button over and over and over and over until his finger fell off... FELL OFF! The he got fired because he couldn't count to ten any more! He couldn't even express to his boss how he felt about him because he was right handed!"

by **networkcrasher** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:06 pm

Dang Randy, that was pretty good!! :-)

Also, you misspelled something...

In just a few short weeks you will receive over a million pucks, AND the expresso you make at home will become better, as if by magic!

by **Psyd** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:14 pm

Y'all are both making me spew cappuccino!

by **shadowfax** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:43 pm

C'mon Chris, I know you're just spewing that cappuccino because it sucks: you forgot to level your %$#@ puck again, huh?

by **Psyd** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:44 pm

NONO! Stop! It's burning in my nose! ; >

by **Randy G.** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:46 pm

"Do you drink coffee? Do you work at a computer? Do you like to read humorous posts on the internet? Maybe even humorous posts ABOUT coffee? I know I do. If you're like me, you spend a lot of time cleaning espresso out of your keyboard. The new Keyboard Shamwow will make you life better, make your wife prettier, and keep your fingers from sticking to the keys, at least from coffee... Watch this.. camera guy, are you following me...? Look at that. See that coffee under the "G" key? There's your mold... There's your smell.... One wipe... Dry as can be. Now we can't do this all day, but if you call now......"

by **sweaner** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:57 pm

Just watch as it soaks up an entire sink shot without spilling a drop!

But wait, if you act now I will double your offer, so you can pull twice as many sink shots.

by **Jasonian** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:35 pm

Can I have that middle finger that fell off? I get tired of "barista finger" from leveling.

by **mikemckim** on Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:47 pm

Jasonian wrote:Is it possible that the timers people are using are accurate enough to get a dose as consistent (or close) as doing it by hand?

I did quite a bit of testing when we were trying to decide what direction we wanted to go with espresso grinders. I have to try to find all my notes on my computer, but my testing was with the Ditting/Mahlkonig espresso grinder. I ran 250 shots based on the assumption that every coffee house should shoot for serving at minimum 250 espresso drinks each day. I ran both a single origin coffee and a blend. The blend did have more variation, but my theory is that is due to density of coffees at different degrees of roast and the ratio of those coffees in each shot. I will look for my notes, but I want to say that I never had more than 1 gram differential and in the single origin it was single digits and the blend was less than 20 shots. I do understand that 1 gram can make a big difference, but I would challenge that with the most accomplished barista leveling 250 shots any day...hmmmmmm, maybe I should give Clancy a new job description. :twisted:

by **mikemckim** on Fri Feb 06, 2009 5:43 pm

Jasonian wrote:I tend to agree that cup quality is more important than how pretty a pour is.. but the pour does tell us something about the extraction, whether we want to admit it or not.

And to contradict myself (yet again?), presenting a great tasting cup is of a very high importance when presenting a particular coffee to a consumer. Presenting a lackluster cup of coffee can give the wrong impression of the growers or roaster of that coffee. And yet.. the philosopher in me just can't get past the previously mentioned factors/concepts.

I can't imagine that anyone will dispute that the pour and/or visual appearance can indicate something about the coffee. Based on my experience, "proper" pours will yield a superior flavor in the cup. I have never had an "ugly" pour yield me a great cup. This is evident at barista competitions over and over. The people with higher technical scores also tend to have higher sensory scores. There is definitely a direct correlation. But this was never really about the pour...this was about leveling/dosing. The question was, it leveling necessary. The answer is that for some people it is necessary, for others it is not. Leveling or not leveling is only one step of many. The fact is that you can get a perfect/consistent pour not leveling. And you can get a perfect/consistent pour by leveling. It is demonstrated by many people as cited in several of these posts. I have also witnessed it first hand.

Where we got off track was with the philosophy...the respect of the coffee...all of that. I guess I don't understand how something other than the best taste is an accurate representation of the coffee. Coffee is a sensory beverage; therefore a positive sensory experience is paramount. But then again, I am a college drop out and definitely not a philosopher so it is very possible that I am missing the point.

Jasonian wrote:I'm just not under the impression that the best taste is always the most accurate representation of the coffee. I see it as sort of a loophole to get the desired results, despite the coffee (rather than because of the coffee). Of course, this is just my perspective, and as always, your mileage may vary.

Man, I apologize, but I have absolutely no idea what this means :?:

by **Jasonian** on Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:55 pm

Coffee, like a person, has many sides.

Let's run with a person as a representation of a single coffee.

You can display its good sides, its bad sides, or an accurate ratio of both based on how that individual would normally behave.

To show only a person's positive attributes is to be dishonest. To show only a person's negative attributes is to be dishonest. Even a 50/50 balance may be dishonest, dependent on the individual.

While a person who is portrayed as having only, or mostly, positive attributes is easier to sell as a candidate for ______ than a person who is portrayed with their honest ratio of positive to negative characteristics.

This is not to say that the coffee isn't just chock full of positive attributes, but this is probably not always the case.

This is just an attempt to explain the confusing bit.

by HB on Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:54 pm

Jasonian wrote:This is just an attempt to explain the confusing bit.

Sorry, I have to join Mike in the "man, I have no idea what this means" camp. But that's OK, I'll re-read what you wrote, nod appreciatively, and pretend that I understood.

by **VS_DoubleShot** on Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:14 pm

On the question of how we can know what the dose is if we aren't using a timer and we're not leveling - is it possible to dose and weigh once or twice, take a good look at it, and then eyeball it in the future (maybe even take a picture and hang it on the wall next to your setup). If I fill a basket from the doser and weigh that, now I know what (just an example) 16g looks like in the basket, unleveled, straight from my grinder and now I can duplicated that if my eyes function properly in a well-lit kitchen.

Once in a while you'd have to weigh again to be sure that you aren't way off but don't we all do a bit of measuring one way or another at some time or other (temps, times, weights) to be sure we're on track?

Anyone could argue this is too much guess-work, especially for a barista in a busy shop, and I'd say that's probably right.

FWIW, I think (forgive me if I'm wrong) that Jason is saying that the best tasting shot of espresso from a particular coffee is not necessarily a true representation of the characteristics of that coffee.

by **another_jim** on Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:30 pm

I watch the grinds pile up inside the hopper, and stop grinding when it looks right. When I weigh them I find I'm within 2/3 of a gram, not really good enough for consistent pours. Feeling how deep the tamper goes as I tamp is the best non-weighing guide, good to about 1/4 gram. But fixing a bad dose at that point is a huge time waster.

You want to get to within 1/3 gram of target every time to get consistent pours. So you either need to eyeball twice as accurately as I do, weigh the dose, use a leveling tool, or waste time repacking the basket if it fails the tamp test.

Of course, you can learn to celebrate the many facets of a coffee, both good and bad, by letting go of your rigid, over-controlled, western will to power, and never dosing the same twice


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: 1.0s, avg: 0.5s, max: 2.5s