"Turpresso"? Turkish coffee with an espresso machine. - Page 7

Need help with equipment usage or want to share your latest discovery?
Jonk

#61: Post by Jonk »

If you try a finer grind you might have to use a filter paper underneath the puck to be able to reach higher extraction.

I'd suggest trying a coarser grind as well. Both strategies usually work for me, but the coarse route means less input of time and effort.

Speaking about work and extremely fine grinds, staccato espresso is also an interesting approach.. Sometimes it works, but extra disappointing when it doesn't :lol:

I just think ibrik is seriously underrated. Forgiving, high extraction without a lot of fuss and tastewise a happy medium between the two challenging methods espresso and pour over.

jpender

#62: Post by jpender »

That's interesting. Too fine and I guess you get too much channeling. I'm not too keen on the idea of paper filtered espresso so I'll try without.

But why would grinding coarser increase the extraction? It's going to be a faster shot with coarser grounds.

Jonk

#63: Post by Jonk »

jpender wrote:But why would grinding coarser increase the extraction?
I think you can find the explanation here: https://www.cell.com/matter/pdfExtended ... 19)30410-2

jpender

#64: Post by jpender »

So you think there's a good chance I'm already grinding too fine. Okay, maybe so.

I tried this morning to grind a bit finer and then another shot a bit coarser, keeping everything else (except shot time) the same. The finer ground shot was slightly lower in extraction (16.4% vs 16.8%) but the optical refractometer precision renders this difference not particularly meaningful. The coarser ground shot was slightly higher, again within the error range of measurement. Basically, I consider the cheapo refractometer to be good to ±0.2% TDS which for a normal espresso translates to ±0.4% extraction. And those might be optimistic estimates. So perhaps what I saw represents a trend toward higher extraction with coarser grinding. Or maybe it was just noise. I'll have to try going even coarser.

In terms of taste, the finer ground shot was richer and sweeter, one of the best I've had from this coffee. Why is this happening at just a little over 16% extraction? I forgot to stop my timer but it took something around 50-60 seconds. The coarser shot was bland, flat, dull. Nothing wrong with it but nothing right either. Two points of data only say so much.

jpender

#65: Post by jpender »

Jonk wrote:I just think ibrik is seriously underrated. Forgiving, high extraction without a lot of fuss and tastewise a happy medium between the two challenging methods espresso and pour over.
Underrated? It's just another way to make coffee. Fun, tasty, different.

It takes kind of a long time for such a puny little serving. And it's easy to end up getting a final taste that includes some river bottom silt. I'm still surprised the extraction was 26%. I measured another Turkish brew this morning and got the same result. The yield, on the other hand, wasn't nearly so impressive at just 18%. It's sure not a way to save either time or money.

Jonk

#66: Post by Jonk »

jpender wrote:And it's easy to end up getting a final taste that includes some river bottom silt.
I did get that the same day that I wrote that comment :lol:
My usual cups were dirty so I used a bowl shaped cup. Normally I use straight walled cups that do a better job at keeping the silt in the bottom. Even better if you can find cups with a wide bottom, like the ones from Sufi.

I do think the method is underrated - because the common way is to use stale, pre-ground beans of low quality and boil them to oblivion (sometimes with spices, then usually adding lots of sugar).
jpender wrote:I'm still surprised the extraction was 26%. I measured another Turkish brew this morning and got the same result. The yield, on the other hand, wasn't nearly so impressive at just 18%.
I don't think I understand your definition of extraction and yield.

jpender

#67: Post by jpender »

Jonk wrote:I don't think I understand your definition of extraction and yield.
By extraction I mean the percentage of the beans that dissolve during brewing. What I meant by yield is the percentage of the beans that end up dissolved in your cup. I think people usually mean something else, like beverage quantity. For espresso, extraction and what I'm calling yield are usually* taken to be one in the same. But for immersion they are not because the dissolved solids in the liquid trapped in the grounds are believed to be equal in strength to the part you drink. Turkish has very wet grounds and a high coffee/water ratio which means a significant amount of dissolved solids go down the drain.

(* Some people want to count the dissolved solids in the puck. A guy who posted as Netphilosopher some years back had a theory that included those dissolved solids. @another_jim also has espoused this notion. And recently Jonathan Gagne formulated a version of extraction that includes them.)

Jonk

#68: Post by Jonk »

Right, it's a more relevant figure. Do you filter out the grounds or just count the weight actually drunk?

jpender

#69: Post by jpender »

It's just two different things. Extraction is a flawed, but still useful, proxy for balance. What I'm calling yield is more of an economic issue.

I don't filter my Turkish. So the notion of "what's in the cup" isn't quite true. EVERYTHING is in the cup. It's really, "what did I drink". I only measured this once by noting the cup weight before and after. Normally I just weigh the beans. And I lose about half a gram because my Kinu grinder takes *forever* to grind that last little bit and I don't have the patience. I invert the grinder and dump those partially ground bits into the trash. For water I just fill the cup I'm going to use. I end up with about 7.5g of coffee and 75g of water, give or take. The beverage, what I actually swallow, is about 55g. So something like 25-30% of the coffee liquid goes down the sink.

Interestingly, my wife told me that while traveling in Syria and Jordan years ago she watched men down cups of Turkish style coffee as if they were espresso. I wonder if they were brewed in a large enough ibrik so that cups could be poured cleanly, off the grounds?

Anyway, for reasons that I don't understand my espresso extraction is very low. But it tastes good. Would it be better if I could raise the extraction? I've tried finer and coarser grinds and the effect seems to be that coarser results in a higher extraction. But it's a small change at best. And it isn't improving the taste. So I'm not sure what to do, or for that matter, if anything needs to be done.


Jonk

#70: Post by Jonk »

Did she see the coffee being brewed? It might've been a different method in Syria and Jordan. For example this: https://www.dayoutdubai.ae/blog/safari/arabic-coffee/ where the grounds are allowed to settle before straining through some kind of straw. I have also read about a style supposedly popular in Syria where the coffee is prepared for hours into a extremely bitter concentrate.