Hi guys,

I agree, good points there Ken. Usually the way I work is cutting the shot when it blonds which is simple, effective and allows you to eliminate all the 'nasty' stuff in the cup (not always lighter means bad though, but that's a different story). Sometimes I try to measure the time in my head, just to see whether I'm in the ball park and more than often 25-27s equals the moment when the stream blonds and I turn off the pump. With that last SO that wasn't the case and so I've decided to ask whether other people experienced similar problems when pulling normal doubles (ie. 50-60ml). It's not that I don't like how my shots taste now, it's simply looking for something a bit different.

I do have a DIYed preinfusion system on my Elektra, but pressure build up is still very fast so it's not comparable to a vibe/e61 preinfusion. You can of course see how fast the beading goes and based on that judge whether the shot is too fast or too slow, but it happens way faster.

Regards,
dsc.

The people who brought espresso to the masses (i.e. baristas in Italy) had 2-oz cups to fill, so I suppose the target was to fill them. Developing procedures to make these as tasty as possible, from blending and roasting, to grinding, tamping, and pulling shots, was probably part of the development of what we now know as espresso.

If looked at this way, there is some interest in the original question re: how to pull a true double. As Jim S. frequently points out, for example, most espresso equipment probably has 1-oz solos and 2-oz doubles as a "standard" design feature.

Setting a volumetric goal (e.g. 14g double) seems to me to be a very useful exercise for learning about espresso extraction. It happens to be the way I got started, particularly after reading Mark P.'s article. The process of manipulating the multitude of variables that influence the taste of espresso, one at a time, until once gets good results, is a good way to get to know a lot about espresso.

PC

Mark Prince's 2003 article:

http://coffeegeek.com/opinions/co...emoment/06-10-2003

PC

If you do the math, the shots that Mark pulls in this article are somewhere between lungo and cafe crema territory (brew ratios of ~20%). 3oz of liquid from 17.5g of coffee? Wow. In my experience, it is the rare double that reaches 60ml without blonding, much less 75-90ml... and I'm talking crema volume, not liquid.

Hi guys,

I've read Mark's article and I agree that most people tend to brew ristrettos, but sometimes I find them a bit too intense. I also agree with what John said:

In my experience, it is the rare double that reaches 60ml without blonding

With the Elektra I usually stay below 15g with the dose, so it is indeed rather rare to get a full 60ml without blonding. That's actually the main reason why I decided to start this topic.

Regards,
dsc.

malachi wrote:If it tastes good - it is good. Who cares what the volume is?

Chris, you are in a better position than most to judge the quality of a pour. If you want to brew a 3oz double and pronounce it good, that's one thing. But as people develop their technique, it helps to offer them guidelines. The Italian "golden rule" of a 50ml double from 14g, pulled at 9 bar and 88C in ~25 seconds, is one such guideline. If you cannot achieve a decent pour using similar parameters, it often points to a problem in coffee, equipment, or technique.

Using the "cut a shot when it blonds" guideline, 90ml doubles are little more than an oddity (at least, in my experience). So when a noted figure in the coffee world starts advocating 75-90ml doubles, it's confusing and misleading, and spawns threads such as this one.

Or perhaps Mark P has the magic touch. That sure looked like a yummy shot in his article.

malachi wrote:But that's just not true.
If I gave you a pound of Stumptown Hairbender, or a pound of Vivace Dolce, or a pound of any of hundreds of coffees, and said "pull a good shot within these parameters" - you would fail... regardless of equipment or technique.
So unless you're saying that using one of these coffees is "a problem" - then having a newbie follow "the golden rule" is simply going to convince them that they suck or that their equipment sucks or that their coffee sucks.

What part of it is wrong? The brew temp? Espresso Italiano advocates 88°C ± 2°C, and I agree that many blends do well with a higher brew temp. But I think it's still a useful guideline, whereas advocating 90ml normale doubles guarantees a perception of suckage for almost everyone, regardless of coffee and kit. Well, for me, anyway.

malachi wrote:So... is it really a good idea to tell people who are just learning what espresso should be like - who are just learning how to make espresso - who are working with entry level equipment -- that THIS is what they should do?

Point taken. Counterpoint: as a teacher, I lie to my students all the time. And I'm completely upfront about it. While people are learning, it helps to have reasonable guidelines. This is true in all fields. You give basic principles first, then discuss exceptions as part of the refinement process.

For example, in chess we are told to develop our pieces, castle early, control the center of the board... But if you look at examples from grandmaster play, these guidelines are broken all the time. Are the guidelines bad? No, they are general principles that work well much of the time, and greatly assist in the learning process. Should they be followed blindly? Of course not.

OK, enough analogies, let's get back to espresso (hey, at least I didn't use cars ). Are there basic guidelines that work reasonably well for pulling "true" doubles? After all, that's the subject of this thread. I believe there are such guidelines, and the 45-60ml double lies well within the norm... whereas Mark's 75-90 ml "traditional double" falls into the category of exceptions.

forum newbie.....but I'm having the same challenges described by the OP.

After reading this thread I decided to try pulling true doubles. and it is not easy

Once I tried the naked PF + triple basket three years ago, I never looked back. I've been pulling risteros without using anything else. My skills are lacking doing anything else.

I will continue to work on my technique. I think doing this fundamental shot with excellence is a worthwhile goal.

Chris

Based on your last post perhaps you can interpret my espresso making experiences limited as they are and answer a couple of questions. I've experimented quite a bit with dose and temperature and flushing and no flush techniques. Most all of my experience is with my home roasted coffees with one exception.

I've come to the conclusion that 14 gm doses give me consistent good drinks that I enjoy most every time. I weigh the dose, use WDT and then distribute NSEW with my finger before (usually) flushing to about 203-205* waiting 25 seconds and pulling the shot (HX QM Anita machine). Usually I go for 1.5-2 oz in 26 seconds or so and most come out that way after minor adjustments to my Compak K3 grinder (sorry but a $1K or more grinder is not in the cards). I also from time to time just lower my PID controlled boiler temperature and pull shots without flushes keeping a similar 199-202* depending on my taste shot temperature. This gives me I find a flatter shot temperature profile when observing the group thermometer. The taste results are generally the same as with flushing.

I've been enjoying Moka Kadir blend (Yemen and Ethiopian coffees) lately and the shots are as described above good and probably Dan would rate them 2.5 or so. Then for the heck of it and partly due to reading these threads I used 19 gm of Moka Kadir in a triple basket and pulled the same shot volume (1.5 oz). This was about the best shot I have ever pulled at home with a taste profile similar to that Tom at Sweet Marias described. It was like eating a bittersweet chocolate bar with strawberries, lemon finish and floral fragrance. It had a richer mouth feel, body and consistency to go along with the taste. Then I did it again. I'm thrilled.

However, for the holidays I treated myself to some Counter Culture Toscano blend to see what a professional espresso roast was all about. Other then noticing that this coffee was easier to dial in for proper time and volume the tastes at 14 gm doses are OK and quite similar to Monkey blend.over a few degree temperature range. I was not seriously impressed so I tried the updosing and it was worse.

So, I understand the point you are making but do we then have to experiment extensively with every coffee we wish to try as espresso? What are the general guidelines to follow to get the best tasting coffee (in your opinion)?

Are there some basic rules about coffee origins, blends or taste profiles we wish to emphasize that tell us what doses, temperatures and volumes to begin experimenting?

Finally, without that expensive grinder (I think my Compak is pretty expensive by the way - as is my Anita and far more then I ever anticipated spending on coffee) and ultra temperature controlled machine can we expect the results you are claiming are in those coffees?
Thanks

malachi wrote:1 - choose a coffee that will give you that sort of volume.
2 - use a very high quality grinder. *
3 - either use a machine that doesn't have a dramatic drop off in brew temp over 30 seconds or use a coffee that responds to a decreasing brew temp (even to low temps). **
4 - get a good consistent bed of coffee in the portafilter basket without gaps either in the bed or between the bed and the portafilter wall (don't tap or rap the edge of the portafilter is a good short cut).
5 - either use coffee only at its peak or choose a coffee that has a lot of naturals and semi-washed coffees (and likely some robusta).
6 - Be flexible on dose volume. ***
7 - Match basket to coffee / dose. ****

I already meet these requirements:
1. Self-correcting. If I don't care for a coffee, I don't order it again.
2. Robur.
3. Vetrano with EricS digital thermometer, recently supplemented by a Spaziale S1. The Vetrano has the typical humped HX profile, but the S1 will be reasonably flat. Both machines should be capable of bringing out the best in a coffee (at least, compared to others in their price range).
4. Based on NPF, no problems there.
5. See #1. Not much robusta in my diet.
6. Typical dose: 16-17g in Vetrano ridgeless double basket, about a gram less in the 53mm S1 double basket. More like 14g in my Gaggia lever. I vary the dose from 14-20g, depending on the coffee.
7. See #6. I pull singles and triples only out of curiosity, tend to prefer doubles.

So I think the question boils down to: is there such a thing as a traditional double? And if so, what are its characteristic features?

No argument about taste being paramount, that's a no-brainer. The whole point of reasonable guidelines is to assist in getting the most out of a coffee. Some roasters supply suggested brew parameters. But what if they don't? Or if you have significantly different equipment?

I believe there is merit in general guidelines for coffee brewing, whether it's espresso or drip or whatever. With that said, I intend to bow out of this discussion while I can still do so gracefully. This doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the thread, which has been quite interesting. But I don't have much more to say, and simply repeating myself isn't going to add much value.

RapidCoffee wrote:So I think the question boils down to: is there such a thing as a traditional double? And if so, what are its characteristic features?

The only people that I've heard describe it 'officially' are arguably the two bodies that have the most authority; the Nation if Italy, and the WBC. The WBC's definition as a bit more vague than Italy's, but if you're looking for a 'traditional' double, I'd say that Italy has a say in what that is.