Rainman wrote:Teme, you may be right about the fines settling to the bottom, but they at least do so in a uniform manner during redistribution (WDT) if that's the case. It may be a case of which is an overriding factor- fines mixed in the puck in the vertical plane, but not evenly spread out horizontally (a definite no-no), or evenly spread out along the bottom- I'm sure some are still suspended in the middle somewhere, and not ALL on the bottom. It does work with the cheaper grinders, especially those with doserless features- I'm guessing the mini-e's are the exception there.

That is exactly what I noted above. I don't dispute that the WDT could be helpful in some cases, but noted that there MAY also be an issue to consider. I did not claim that ALL the fines would end up at the bottom of the filter, but I did imply that the WDT may not be a substitute to a grinder that distributes properly in the first place. Ray, if I understand correctly, you have moved from a Rocky (doserless?) to a Kony? Out of curiosity, what is your experience with regards to the grinds distribution from the Rocky (with WDT) vs that from the Kony (without WDT)?

As for the Mini-E, my experience is that it does have distribution issues of its own although they are a bit different from those on a doserless Macap or Rocky. But these distribution issues and the fact that I would also like a faster grinder (among other things) have me looking for an upgrade...

Br,
Teme

You raise some very good points Teme. I do look at the usefulness of the WDT with objectivity and I believe your questions are quite valid and most interesting. I don't find anything wrong with looking at the aspects of pulling a shot and as you note I also feel it's vital to making progress as a barista. My questions were more along the line of how does one know then they are over analyzing? I agree that there are simply times to pull the shots, as there will always be some variables beyond human control. But that does not mean that one should not look deeper into their technique or the process as a whole.

I'd love to have a way to test your questions on the effects of the WDT. I wonder how one would go about testing that? Where's Jim Schulman when you need him?

TimEggers wrote:You raise some very good points Teme. I do look at the usefulness of the WDT with objectivity and I believe your questions are quite valid and most interesting. I don't find anything wrong with looking at the aspects of pulling a shot and as you note I also feel it's vital to making progress as a barista. My questions were more along the line of how does one know then they are over analyzing? I agree that there are simply times to pull the shots, as there will always be some variables beyond human control. But that does not mean that one should not look deeper into their technique or the process as a whole.

Thanks Tim. How does one know when they are over analyzing? Hmm... that's a good question. One thing is for sure, IMO it should be fun...

TimEggers wrote:I'd love to have a way to test your questions on the effects of the WDT. I wonder how one would go about testing that? Where's Jim Schulman when you need him?

I will probably try and explore this as well when I have time. I guess one could pull shots of the same volume, same shot time, same brew pressure, same brew temp, same coffee from the same batch, ground at the same fineness and analyse both the pucks and the shot taste. I would think that with proper technique even the dose would be the same, i.e. the only difference would be the distribution technique. Not sure if this would work, but I could try. I guess Jim would know the answer off the top of his head

Br,
Teme

Teme wrote:I am not disputing the usefulness of the WDT and I agree that if one does not mind the procedure, it will help in overcoming at least some of the weaknesses of clumping grinders. My point is that it may not be a perfect substitute for a grinder that distributes the ground coffee better in the first place.

I'm in complete agreement here. The fact that baristas must resort to thwacking the doser, rotating and tapping the PF, stirring the grounds, mid-dose tamps, etc. etc. clearly indicates that grinder technology is in serious need of improvement. Perhaps even more so than espresso machine technology, since we all tend to agree that the grinder is more important.

While I'd love a Mazzer Robur, I don't believe an espresso grinder for home use should dominate the kitchen and cost thousands of dollars. Simple changes to the geometry (notably a straight drop from the burrs to the filter basket or doser) could greatly improve clumping and distribution issues on existing grinders.

I'm delighted that so many have found the WDT to be useful. But I'd be even more pleased if it was eventually made obsolete by advances in grinder technology.

On my Tranquilo, a little more airflow would help tremendously. As the ground coffee exits the chute, it doesn't have enough momentum from the burrs. It comes out in clumps. I have forced air through it while grinding and had very little clumping. Too much air, OTOH, would blow the grounds right out of the filter.

I have an idea for how to remedy this, but it's still just an idea.

Jack

Teme wrote:That is exactly what I noted above. I don't dispute that the WDT could be helpful in some cases, but noted that there MAY also be an issue to consider. I did not claim that ALL the fines would end up at the bottom of the filter, but I did imply that the WDT may not be a substitute to a grinder that distributes properly in the first place. Ray, if I understand correctly, you have moved from a Rocky (doserless?) to a Kony? Out of curiosity, what is your experience with regards to the grinds distribution from the Rocky (with WDT) vs that from the Kony (without WDT)?

Yes, I had a doserless Rocky. The Kony is pretty incredible in terms of the "fluffiness" that everybody talks about- I don't do anything other than sit there w/ portafilter in hand and start flipping the doser lever (which I never did before- always ground into another container), level it off and tamp- done. The weird thing is the difference in pour times I'm getting between my i-Roasted stuff and some of the Black Cat blend I ordered from Intelligentsia; the grind setting on the Kony is a little more than a 90 degree turn of the adjustment collar for the latter. I know it's like comparing apples to oranges, but I don't remember having anywhere that big of a difference in grind settings between those two coffees w/ the Rocky to produce the same pour times (maybe just 2 or 3 clicks). Mostly, I think fluid bed roasters just dehydrate the bean more than professionally drum-roasted coffees do- at least that's been my observation... I borrowed a Hottop from a neighbor a few weeks ago, and had nearly identical results (had to open up the grind collar to achieve the same pour).

As for the Mini-E, my experience is that it does have distribution issues of its own although they are a bit different from those on a doserless Macap or Rocky. But these distribution issues and the fact that I would also like a faster grinder (among other things) have me looking for an upgrade...

Br,
Teme

I've contemplated buying the doserless funnel for the Mini-e and creating a back panel plate (since the one created for the Mini is about a cm too short for the Kony), but hesitate.. that upgrade alone would cost $150 just for the funnel, and the possible alteration of the grind kinda concerns me. For now, I'm just dealing with the mess.. which isn't too bad, I guess- I'm not too old to modify my obsessive, neatnik behavior

Does that help, Teme?

Ray

RapidCoffee wrote:I'm in complete agreement here. The fact that baristas must resort to thwacking the doser, rotating and tapping the PF, stirring the grounds, mid-dose tamps, etc. etc. clearly indicates that grinder technology is in serious need of improvement. Perhaps even more so than espresso machine technology, since we all tend to agree that the grinder is more important.

While I'd love a Mazzer Robur, I don't believe an espresso grinder for home use should dominate the kitchen and cost thousands of dollars. Simple changes to the geometry (notably a straight drop from the burrs to the filter basket or doser) could greatly improve clumping and distribution issues on existing grinders.

I'm delighted that so many have found the WDT to be useful. But I'd be even more pleased if it was eventually made obsolete by advances in grinder technology.

Absolutely- If I hadn't felt the need for a grinder upgrade (my Rocky was 7 yrs old), and that much money just burning a hole in my pocket, I probably would have waited another 2-3 yrs to see what shows up on the home market for the conicals. I'm really sold on that, but as you see, I've made several mods to mine already (although I kinda like a grinder that's taller than me sitting on the shelf-- it's rather imposing where I have it, and there's ample room over there clear to the ceiling).

Ray

RapidCoffee wrote:While I'd love a Mazzer Robur, I don't believe an espresso grinder for home use should dominate the kitchen and cost thousands of dollars. Simple changes to the geometry (notably a straight drop from the burrs to the filter basket or doser) could greatly improve clumping and distribution issues on existing grinders.

I agree on the size aspect of the Robur. I wish there was a conical burr, grind on demand, clumpless grinder that was less than 20" tall with a hopper. The Casadio Instantaneo is getting close but it is so ugly that I cannot imagine having it in my kitchen (it must the ugliest grinder ever produced - by some margin). I hope that the rumours that Mahlkoenig is working on a conical version of the K30 are true...

RapidCoffee wrote:I'm delighted that so many have found the WDT to be useful. But I'd be even more pleased if it was eventually made obsolete by advances in grinder technology.

Oh yes. My thumbs up for both!

Rainman wrote:Yes, I had a doserless Rocky. The Kony is pretty incredible in terms of the "fluffiness" that everybody talks about- I don't do anything other than sit there w/ portafilter in hand and start flipping the doser lever (which I never did before- always ground into another container), level it off and tamp- done.

Rainman wrote:I've contemplated buying the doserless funnel for the Mini-e and creating a back panel plate (since the one created for the Mini is about a cm too short for the Kony), but hesitate.. that upgrade alone would cost $150 just for the funnel, and the possible alteration of the grind kinda concerns me. For now, I'm just dealing with the mess.. which isn't too bad, I guess- I'm not too old to modify my obsessive, neatnik behavior

Does that help, Teme?

No, it doesn't help. It just makes me want a new grinder even more - and one that doesn't currently exist

The Kony is very desirable, but it is still too large (=tall) in my opinion. The modification that you are contemplating sounds interesting. I do understand the hesitation due to cost and potential grind distribution/clumping issues, though. If you do decide to go ahead, you could also add an external grind timer and you'd end up with a Kony-E

Br,
Teme

Teme wrote:No, it doesn't help. It just makes me want a new grinder even more - and one that doesn't currently exist

The Kony is very desirable, but it is still too large (=tall) in my opinion. The modification that you are contemplating sounds interesting. I do understand the hesitation due to cost and potential grind distribution/clumping issues, though. If you do decide to go ahead, you could also add an external grind timer and you'd end up with a Kony-E

Br,
Teme

I was wondering if some sort of grind timer was possible.. I was thinking of maybe a foot-switch. Most of the ones available in the US at hardware stores are too low amperage- like 5 amps, I think- so it wouldn't work, but I'm sure somebody out there somewhere makes something more robust for that sort of application... just gotta locate it. The main switch on the side is rather big and not exactly meant to be turned on/off all that often (not that it would break, but I will probably develop a "grinders wrist" type of repetitive motion injury at the next party we have if enough people want espresso drinks!

Rainman wrote:I think fluid bed roasters just dehydrate the bean more than professionally drum-roasted coffees do

Hard to believe there could be a lot of difference, since roasted coffee moisture content is in the low single digits (although coffee cooled with water at the end of the roast can be a bit higher).

I don't doubt your grind is different between drum roasted and air roasted coffee, but there's probably another explanation for it besides moisture content.