The Myth of the Tamp and Tamper? - Page 6

Beginner and pro baristas share tips and tricks for making espresso.
User avatar
Peppersass
Posts: 3690
Joined: 15 years ago

#51: Post by Peppersass »

RapidCoffee wrote:I don't see much difference in "hard" tamping pressure (20#, 30#, 40#, etc.), but no tamping and very light tamping increases the likelihood of channeling.
This is consistent with my findings. I stated that in my experience tamping pressure doesn't make a difference, but I wasn't talking about no tamping or ultra-light tamping. I was talking about the difference between the minimum pressure needed to compress the puck evenly and make it level versus the pressure of harder tamping. I'd like to see how far down you can go before it does make a difference. How about 10# or 5#?

At about 1:59 in this video, Andy Schecter does what I would consider a minimal tamp, but clearly he's pressing down enough to compress the puck and make it level. I've found that the flow rate with this kind of tamping pressure is about the same as the flow rate at 30# of tamping pressure.

Tamping does serve a purpose, but aside from applying enough pressure to compress the voids out of the puck and keeping the puck level, it's not worth obsessing over.

nurxhunter (original poster)
Posts: 32
Joined: 8 years ago

#52: Post by nurxhunter (original poster) »

How important is tamping?

I see there are pictures of pucks with no tamp and tamp--missed this earlier. In re-reading posts there, the general consensus seems fairly summarized below.
cafeIKE wrote:No question that tamping is useful, but it's the LEAST important contributor to exceptional espresso.
The effort wasted 'perfecting' a tamp pays greater dividends invested elsewhere.
When I saw SCG videos and Gail consistently doing a 'lazy tamp', I thought she was incompetent. No, she was experienced. No matter what I do--so far--my shots are hit or miss using a VST18 and naked portafilter, with respect to 'perfect funnel-like, smooth extraction'. Sometimes perfect, more often not. Once in awhile, I get a bit of a messy spritz, more often than a perfect textbook-looking flow. But, no matter what they look like, they all taste pretty darn good. So long as a mess does not occur, I'm delighted. On QM Carola, tamp pressure seems simply not relevant at all. After switching from 30-40 lb to very light tamps (just to level the dose and a bit of spin-polish), the results are pretty much the same in appearance, flow and taste.

So, except for more links to actual data, this thread seems about the same as the link above. I see that now in retrospect. Glad I got some links to actual data. That helps make more confident choices, usually.

And now, I need to go take my homeopathic supplements, with a well-tamped espresso, and relax listening to my SOTA stereo system, benefiting greatly from top of the line speaker and interconnect cables, and Shakti 'The Stone' for good luck.

JimF
Posts: 37
Joined: 8 years ago

#53: Post by JimF »

I humbly propose a solution to this mystery. Before I comment, let me say that I have the notoriously inconsistent Rancilio Silvia, paired with the Rancilio Rocky grinder and the stock Rancilio double basket. I have modified my Rocky to be stepless. Some report that the tamp is not very important, and in the base note it is claimed that a barista can pull identical shots with or without tamping, or that over the range from 0 to 300 lbs, the resulting shots will be identical in (at least) volume and crema, if not in all other respects. Conversely, my experience on my setup is that the tamp was CRITICALLY important, and I demonstrated this by showing that on my setup, not tamping the coffee resulted in an 83g extraction, whereas tamping with nutation resulted in a 30.7 g extraction, with a corresponding world of difference in taste. So tamping is likely to be important, or not, depending on what equipment you've got, but what equipment is responsible for this difference?

I recently ordered and received an HQ 14g basket, which was recommended by several others here on HB. While what I am about to say is undoubtedly already known by others who have this basket (at least partially), it was unknown to me: the grind that you need with the HQ 14g basket is much, MUCH finer than the grind that is needed for the stock Rancilio double basket.

Whereas for 16g of ground coffee, a Rancilio Rocky grinder setting of about 7 yielded a nicely balanced shot, a setting of about 4 yields a 34g extraction in 30 seconds with the HQ 14g basket. For 12g of ground coffee, the Rancilio Rocky grinder setting of (wait for it, wait for it....) 1.0 produced a 1.2 oz extraction!! This was the minimum grinder setting that I was willing to attempt, and the result, if anything, tasted rather sour. So as far as I am concerned, a 12g dose is not an attractive option for the HQ 14g basket with the Rancilio Rocky grinder unless you happen to prefer your shots to be sour.

BUT...

at 16g, I can pull a more or less similar shot than I can with the standard Rancilio double basket. I'm not sure that it has as much depth and dimension, but a grind of 4 the HQ basket is more or less similar to a grind of 7 on the stock basket; however, with the finer grind needed for the HQ it seems to be vastly more consistent. So much so, that the tamp might even be unimportant. I don't seem to need to do the 'nutation' dance any more, and every shot seems to come out more or less like the others. This contrasts sharply with the results that I was able to get with the stock Rancilio double basket, which was critically dependent on a good tamp.

So, the question of the importance of the tamp has been raised here and elsewhere, and as far as I know the answers have been largely ambiguous, except to say that you can pay more and get more consistency. I humbly propose that the answer may be found in either the precision of the basket, or in the fineness of the grind needed to make a balanced shot in a precision basket. With the class of basket that is represented by the stock Rancilio double basket, the required grind is relatively coarse and the tamp is the critical variable that makes the difference between a sink shot and a "God shot". With the class of basket that is represented by the HQ 14g basket, the required grind is relatively fine and the tamp doesn't seem to matter very much.

Edit: fixed typo above to change "oz" to "g"

User avatar
aecletec
Posts: 1997
Joined: 13 years ago

#54: Post by aecletec »

That certainly does make more sense and interesting to hear your experiences, thanks.

User avatar
homeburrero
Team HB
Posts: 4863
Joined: 13 years ago

#55: Post by homeburrero »

In a recent Sprudge article, These New Wave Tampers Are Everything Right Now, by Zachary Carlson:
The Puq Press, spotted on the bar at the UNIC booth at the 2016 Specialty Coffee Association of America Expo, delivers an automated and adjustable tamp. The user can input a specific weight of pressure (the above photo shows the machine set at 27lbs of pressure). In a very loose demonstration, we were given shots of espresso at 15, 25, 27, and 30lbs of pressure with noticeable differences.
Of course, it does beg the question as to whether the same loose demonstration at 25, 25, 25, and 25 lbs of tamp force would also have produced shots with noticeable differences.

I think the product makes sense in light of the fact that baristas reportedly do have repetitive stress injury associated with tamping, and this would certainly help with that. And making it possible to dial in that force is probably necessary for making the sale, as a lot of shop owners and barista trainers do seem to think that you can change the tamping force to make a shot extract faster or slower. I wonder whether shops that use this gadget will be dissuaded of that opinion.

Edit addition:
Just realized that yakster's post #49 a page or two up covered this Sprudge article info. I somehow missed that. :oops:
Pat
nínádiishʼnahgo gohwééh náshdlį́į́h

nurxhunter (original poster)
Posts: 32
Joined: 8 years ago

#56: Post by nurxhunter (original poster) »

JimF wrote:Conversely, my experience on my setup is that the tamp was CRITICALLY important, and I demonstrated this by showing that on my setup, not tamping the coffee resulted in an 83 oz extraction, whereas tamping with nutation resulted in a 30.7 oz extraction, with a corresponding world of difference in taste.
The quoted text from a couple of posts above is very interesting indeed.

Marcelnl
Posts: 3831
Joined: 10 years ago

#57: Post by Marcelnl »

83 vs 30 ounce or is that rather grams?
LMWDP #483

JimF
Posts: 37
Joined: 8 years ago

#58: Post by JimF »

That was a mistake, of course. Thank you. It should have been 83g vs 30.7g, with the only difference being the tamp

Marcelnl
Posts: 3831
Joined: 10 years ago

#59: Post by Marcelnl »

Ok, that sounds like more likely range :wink:
My experience is that no tamp does not work as I can only get something like 10 grams in the basket but that with a slight levelling tamp and my usual pretty fine grind espresso (or rypically ristretto) comes out quite nicely...BUT with a lever the volume is largely dictated by the piston/chamber volume, and the flow rate may be a bit higher/faster.
LMWDP #483

pcrussell50
Posts: 4010
Joined: 15 years ago

#60: Post by pcrussell50 »

There seems to be two sets of answers to only one question. Some people are answering as if other people here are implying that no tamp makes no difference*. If anybody has said that, I've missed it. Certainly not any of us who's been around here a while. What we have said, is that once the voids are collapsed and the puck is of uniform density, further tamping force has little effect on the flow rate. Our collective observation agrees with the physics of the situation. The "myth of the tamp", IMHO, is the persistent notion of adjusting flow rate, by increasing tamp force over and above what is required to collapse the voids making a homogeneous puck.

Where the notion of "no tamp" came into the thread, and why it persists, is a headscratcher.

-Peter

*Though statistically, there will be times that even with no tamp at all, when the 130 psi hits the untamped puck, it will hit evenly and extract evenly. It's just that the odds are not in your favor of things breaking this way every time.
LMWDP #553