I am going to propose in this post that there are two distinct beverages being discussed on this website and elsewhere, both called "espresso," but which are so very different that using the same term for both produces a lot of confusion. No, I am not talking about milk drinks vs. straight shots, or properly pulled shots vs. the plonk one gets from a chain store superautomatic machine. Rather, I am addressing the differences between double shots pulled with lower doses (for the sake of argument, 16g or less), and those pulled with larger doses such as 18g and above.

I decided to start this discussion after having read through much of an earlier thread that I somehow missed, What does single dosing lose? which seemed to get lost in a lot of bickering and other disagreements without really reaching any sort of conclusion. And NO, it is not my intention to revive that old thread (which concerns the use of large grinders in "single" and "non-single" dosing modes), nor is it my desire to start another endless discussion on the merits of lower vs. higher doses, complete with all the old points of disagreement that we have all read countless times before. Of interest, however, is that if you read through that long multi-page thread, you will find in the middle somewhere the fact that "apples" and "oranges" were being compared, in that some posters in disagreement on observations were in fact making drinks with very different doses of coffee used.

RATHER, the point I would like to open for discussion is that there are really two different beverages out there that we discuss here, which are very different, and the fact that we fail to distinguish between them leads to a lot of confusion and apparent disagreements that in fact may have more to do with which of these "types" of espresso the user typically makes and/or drinks.

Let's agree for the moment to dispense with all the old tired labels and value judgments often applied to "updosed" and "downdosed" espressos, and even to the concept that every coffee or machine or basket has its "proper" dose and that any standard dose used will be "wrong" much or most of the time. We have had these discussions before and speaking at least for myself, I'm tired of endless discussions that never reach any conclusion and that don't change peoples' opinions, rather just solidify them.

So, I'd like to start a discussion on the idea that in fact there are a couple of types of espresso out there, varying by the dosage used, and that most people probably prefer (and drink) one sort most or nearly all of the time. As a result, most people have become habituated to the particular sort of beverage they tend to drink, and since these drinks are different (updosed vs. downdosed), many observations made by an "updoser" are likely not to be replicated in the hands of a "downdoser" (and vice versa).

My question is, do you buy into my idea that we have two major sorts of espresso beverages we discuss here on HB, as if they are one, when in fact they are TWO?

ken

For me, the basic distinction isn't made by the dose, but by something else: the difference between what I'd like to call (painting with a very broad brush) the 'South European' style of espressos (Italy, Spain, Portugal, France to an extent) and the 'North European' style, the latter going more for fruitiness, acidity, floral undertones etc., with less appreciation for Robustas, more SO's or single varietals, etc.

I'd call an South European and a North European espresso two distinctly different drinks (and I prefer the South European style).

Within the South European style the dose doesn't create a distinctive difference for me. I stay with normal doses (say 6-8 g for a single). Updosing doesn't give me 'better' or 'different' espresso.

It's possible that updosing has more influence on Northern European espressos.

My first reaction is that the two types of espresso Ken describes are probably different, but not so different that I'd call them different drinks. Think of it like wine, it might be more like two different kinds of red wines as opposed to a red vs. a white. Most people would agree that a red and white wine are different types of drinks - although a lot of people (including pros) have trouble tasting the difference between reds and white. So, maybe things would be easier if low dose shots came out a different color than high dose shots.

My second reaction is "why stop at two?" Dosing isn't an either/or choice, so why should the drink that comes out be one of two different types. It seems that we would need a spectrum to describe the different kinds of drinks.

Of course this all rests on the assumption that dose is independent of the beans used, that we should be able to use a low dose if we like that drink, or a high dose if we prefer that instead. I haven't found that to be true, at least not all the time. Some blends work at just about any dose, and some I've only been able to get good shots from at either high or low doses. I'd say my preference is about 15g, and most of my shots fall between 13g and 18g. my guess is I'd have to do a lot of blind testing, with different grinders, machines and coffees to figure out if I'm tasting a low dose espresso or a high one.

Basically, I think it comes down to this, if there's two different types of espresso, I'd want to be able to tell the difference between them by either tasting them, or measuring some quality of the drink. And I don't think I can do it by tasting, at least not consistently.

The point I'm trying to make is that although there are some people who have very eclectic tastes and who change their dosing in large increments to accommodate that, I would be willing to bet that the great majority of my fellow HB denizens dose relatively consistently, within a gram or two most of the time.

This choice, if in fact it is reflective of how most home baristas operate, then further magnifies itself in the choice of coffees one chooses to use.

Picking myself as an example, I don't like updosed shots and I avoid coffees that don't taste good at lower doses. Reading through thousands of posts on this board over the last few years, it is obvious that there are many posters here who take the exact opposite approach. Hence, dosing preference is a strong determinant in the coffees that people choose to drink and how they prepare them.

If you can take the above as a given (and I do, personally), then all sorts of observations and strongly held opinions need to be examined within this context. Taking but the one example stated in my first post, referring to the thread on single vs. non-single grinder dosing, you have a situation where, again as an example, it might be that single dosing works better with certain dosing patterns and less well with others. People choosing to single dose choose certain types of grinders (those reported to work best with single dosing) and the results they get depend to some extent on how they dose.

In summary, what I am saying, is that a lot of the personal observations that people here make, their strongly held beliefs on this or that technical aspect of how they make espresso, are inextricably tied with their own dosing preferences. Everything is related. As a result, more than one sort of observation could be correct, because of this dosing and technique difference. And when we discuss (or argue) about these things, the "elephant in the room," the dosing pattern, is often considered only as an afterthought.

ken

ethiopie wrote:Within the South European style the dose doesn't create a distinctive difference for me. I stay with normal doses (say 6-8 g for a single). Updosing doesn't give me 'better' or 'different' espresso.

It's possible that updosing has more influence on Northern European espressos.

Good point. I totally agree. And although I am from South Europe I prefer SO's so I use higher doses (12 to 13 gr for a single). South Europe countries (including Italy) tend to use robusta in the blend so lower doses work better (7 gr for a single).

Ken, I think that's an excellent point, I kind of missed the "people prefer a certain dose" point for the "there's two kinds of doses" point. I think that you're right and that people probably do gravitate towards blends/grinders/machines based on how they like their espresso, and this taste is very much determined by the dose.

Personally, I've never been one to do 20 or 21g doses and looking back through my notebook (that I don't update as often as I should) I find that I usually prefer a dose slightly less then the recommended dose on here, and the few times I've used the same blend for more then a couple weeks straight (usually ambrosia, the wife loves it) I ended up lowering the dose over time. But this isn't to say that I don't like higher doses, the last couple coffees I've tried have been in the 17-18g range, just that I like them lower than average (those two were recommended in the 18-20g range).

It'd be interesting to hear if other people have similar preferences, and how that correlates with other choices.

I might be atypical in sense that I change blends a lot, but my doses range from 13-21 grams and I don't feel like I am drinking two types of espresso at all. While you will get different taste profile from 14 gram and 20 gram dose both would not be mistaken for something else.

The dose for me is function of blend. For example Klatch Belle on my GS/3 and at 14 gram dose and ~70% brew ratio delivers undrinkable to me beverage. Dosing at 19-20 grams and same brew ratio delivers great tasting espresso.

Conversely I make Stella Suprema blend with 14-15 grams only and really love it at that dose. Higher doses are undrinkable for me with this blend.

With every new blend I try low-medium-high dose and see what I like the best...