KRUVE sifter - First impressions - Page 8

Grinders are one of the keys to exceptional espresso. Discuss them here.
User avatar
AssafL

#71: Post by AssafL » Feb 04, 2017, 12:11 pm

You could try to sift it well, and reintroduce the boulders with WDT.

If EY goes down - it is indeed the boulders (and that would also explain why alignment is so critical.

If EY stays - it would be normalization.

If halfway - god's sign that we should be drinking tea.
Scraping away (slowly) at the tyranny of biases and dogma.

day

#72: Post by day » Feb 05, 2017, 2:13 pm

Any suggestions on sieve ranges for 35g batches of Chemex? Been playing with mine just over a week but haven't really settled on Ann ideal range yet, bouncing around different options, just brewed one removing everything 800+ to see what's happens.
Yes, i you per this on an iPhone

gimpy

#73: Post by gimpy » Feb 05, 2017, 4:06 pm

Day, have you gone onto the Kruve website, yet? They do have a quick, short video for the Chemex.

CathyWeeks

#74: Post by CathyWeeks » Feb 05, 2017, 6:21 pm

samuellaw178 wrote:I didn't mind the 1100um upgrade and I think that is way too coarse for brewing, even for press.
Do you typically grind for French Press?

My experience is 1100um is wildly, wildly not coarse enough (As in 36 out of 40 grams of beans remain on top of the 1100um screen) . I searched through other folks settings for both the LIDO2 and the Handground, and my "FP" grind settings aren't particularly out of the ordinary. In fact, for one of my grinders, I actually grind more finely than the recommended setting for FP.

samuellaw178
Team HB

#75: Post by samuellaw178 » replying to CathyWeeks » Feb 05, 2017, 6:40 pm

Depends what is 'typically'. :D I do espresso 99% of the time. The 1% of the time is exclusively French Press (no drip or others).

I think I get where you're coming from though. Most recipes recommend a coarse grind due to sludge reason - the finer you go the more sludge you get. However, many have found coarse grinds typically yield under-extracted brew especially when brewed with the 4 minutes recipe. So I wasn't convinced why there is a necessity to grind very coarse for French Press, or the benefit in doing that. When I was using my original grind setting (unsifted), I was doing the 10min+ steep time french press and indeed found that to give a fuller/richer cup.

My grind before sifting is really coarse as you have found as well, with a mixture of 'fines' (almost 20% of it) and 60% 'boulders' in the top tray. That can't be good in my opinion. SCAA recommends an average 1100um grind size but there's no reason to not go finer (extraction will complete faster if anything). I had to reduce my setting on the Helor by almost 1 revolution. That would likely result in a bitter Press if brewed unsifted.

My only gripe at the moment is I will throw out quite a bit of coffee if I really want a narrow particle size. I'm short of coffee at the moment after the experimentation (woes of home roasting). I think a better way might be to remove strictly the fine-fines (maybe <300um) and keep everything under 1000um (but we can also throw in the boulders so it has more sparkling acidity).

Grinders by design, tend to be more uniform when grinding on the finer range. So personally I don't see that as a major problem if I had to go finer than typically recommended setting.

CathyWeeks

#76: Post by CathyWeeks » Feb 05, 2017, 9:04 pm

samuellaw178 wrote:Depends what is 'typically'. :D I do espresso 99% of the time. The 1% of the time is exclusively French Press (no drip or others).
I'm roughly the opposite ratio. LOL. 99% of the time I do immersion brews with a coarse grind. Very occasionally I use the Impresse (also with coarse grind) or an Aeropress.
I think I get where you're coming from though. Most recipes recommend a coarse grind due to sludge reason - the finer you go the more sludge you get. However, many have found coarse grinds typically yield under-extracted brew especially when brewed with the 4 minutes recipe. So I wasn't convinced why there is a necessity to grind very coarse for French Press, or the benefit in doing that. When I was using my original grind setting (unsifted), I was doing the 10min+ steep time french press and indeed found that to give a fuller/richer cup.
10 minutes? Now THAT is a long brew time. I brew for 5:10.
My grind before sifting is really coarse as you have found as well, with a mixture of 'fines' (almost 20% of it) and 60% 'boulders' in the top tray. That can't be good in my opinion. SCAA recommends an average 1100um grind size but there's no reason to not go finer (extraction will complete faster if anything). I had to reduce my setting on the Helor by almost 1 revolution. That would likely result in a bitter Press if brewed unsifted.
I'm getting 90% of my grind out of either the Lido2 or the Handground as boulders (above 1100um). No more than 5% fines (below 400um). Remaining 5% between 400um and 1100um. That's with light roasts.
Grinders by design, tend to be more uniform when grinding on the finer range. So personally I don't see that as a major problem if I had to go finer than typically recommended setting.
I'm totally planning to experiment with finer grinds and shorter extractions. But... I'm really hoping Kruve will release 3 or so coarser screens. I can't evaluate the consistency of the coarse settings on my grinders without them. I can evaluate the amount of fines produced, which is totally valuable, but not the distribution of particle size within a range.

User avatar
yakster
Supporter ♡

#77: Post by yakster » Feb 06, 2017, 12:04 am

Been playing with the Kruve a bit with my Baratza Vario (original version without any markings on the grind settings) and a Behmor BraZen brewer. Like others, I found I had to tighten up the grind quite a bit without the benefit of fines. I normally have my grinder set for about a 6 K.

I've been using an old Panama Elida Natural I roasted up with the 900 and 400 micron sifters. I grind out about 50 grams of coffee and then sift it and calculate what's left in the middle section to make my 1:16 brew ratio.

First batch: 48 grams ground on a 4 Kish setting
Top (boulders) 6.4 grams (13%)
Mid (brew) 38 grams (80%)
Btm (fines) 2.6 grams (5.4%)

Coffee tasted good, nice brightness and clarity, but looking at the output I figured I'd need to grind finer. Also, throwing away 20% of the home roasted coffee is a bit painful. This batch was flying by the seat of my pants and the calculations weren't as accurate, I also had to make more specialized water additive after I set up the brew so I spent quite a while setting up the Kruve and doing the water that morning making for a fiddly coffee day, but I think it was worth it.

Second batch: 49.6 grams ground in a 4 E setting
Top (boulders) 3.7 grams (7.5%)
Mid (brew) 42.5 grams (85.7%)
Btm (fines) 3.1 grams (6.3%)

This batch also tasted good, and I was happy to get another 5% for brew and see the fines and boulders balance out a bit.

I'm curious to dial in and try my Lido 2 and see if I get even more brew grinds with less boulders and fines.
-Chris

LMWDP # 272

samuellaw178
Team HB

#78: Post by samuellaw178 » Feb 06, 2017, 1:10 am

CathyWeeks wrote: 10 minutes? Now THAT is a long brew time. I brew for 5:10.

I'm totally planning to experiment with finer grinds and shorter extractions. But... I'm really hoping Kruve will release 3 or so coarser screens. I can't evaluate the consistency of the coarse settings on my grinders without them. I can evaluate the amount of fines produced, which is totally valuable, but not the distribution of particle size within a range.
Yeah, it is indeed long. :D It seems to be a cupping-adapted FP technique and was recommended by MWJB and James Hoffmann.

I am sure that can be done (if there is enough demand I suppose). Have you contacted Kruve about the idea?

samuellaw178
Team HB

#79: Post by samuellaw178 » Feb 06, 2017, 1:25 am

Sorry for 'spamming' the board. But I have been digging some of Socratic's coffee older Instagram posts on sifting, which I think is helpful to visualize what are we sifting off and what is the expected grind distribution profile. Unfortunately, I have not seen any graph that measures ground for French Press.

Effect of adjusting grind setting - you can see grind distribution getting tighter.
Image
https://www.instagram.com/p/--_xYYSuGG/
Image
https://www.instagram.com/p/BA3lzN0SuMT/


Some common hand grinders and electric grinders at filter setting
Image
https://www.instagram.com/p/BJclF7WjGNA/

Image
https://www.instagram.com/p/BBXZmd1SuBv/


This one shows the time we took to shake does affect the outcome slightly, particularly on espresso. Additionally, the surface area/size of the screen, the effort/pattern in shaking, the amount of coffee sifted will all have some effects.
Image
https://www.instagram.com/p/7A7KQsyuKR/

User avatar
TomC
Team HB

#80: Post by TomC » Feb 06, 2017, 1:33 am

yakster wrote:Been playing with the Kruve a bit with my Baratza Vario ....

I've been using an old Panama Elida Natural I roasted up with the 900 and 400 micron sifters. I grind out about 50 grams of coffee and then sift it and calculate what's left in the middle section to make my 1:16 brew ratio.....

My Kruve kit is still circling the center of the state for some reason, but I've been sieving for years. One fun thing about sieving ( you probably know but I'm sharing for others who may be new to sieving coffee) is that you can really crank up your brew ratio. 1:12 brews taste like explosions in your mouth.

If quality over quantity works for you, it's definitely worth a try for folks to really up the BR. There seems to be less amplified sours and bitters and just more of the sweet spot.

This is especially fun with snappy Kenyan's demonstrating their classic dense blackberry flavors.