so after a couple weeks with the hg-one i've stopped worrying as much about manual labor and grind distribution, and focusing on the taste in the cup which is really quite astonishingly good.

i've never had espresso that I didn't find bitter - i always thought people saying "oh that one is sweet" were being hyperbolic but... my god the espresso coming out of my machine is actually sweet.

i'm blown away.

What was your previous grinder?

rancilio rocky. not the best i know.

Not the worst either

I have been using my HG One 83 mm for little over a month. It wasn't all that great and satisfactory out of the box, but after initial frustration I have great results now.
Let me describe my experience with it.

Annoying things at first were:

1. Noise
2. Results being very inconsistent (I mean almost undrinkable shots at the beginning)

Noise:

- Noise is certainly greater with harder beans, and as I use pretty lightly roasted coffee, it was an issue for me
- Noise is eventually coming down with burrs braking-in
- I have made some mods to reduce vibrations and noise transfer to the countertop (posted here HG one Mods)
- Now it is much quieter

Consistency and results:

It was very difficult for me to dial in and pull semi-decent shot at first, I went from chokers to gushers, got really BAD channeling, whatever...

Several things contributed to gradual improvement:

- Burrs brake-in is certainly VERY important; I have ground thru several kilos of stale coffee I have got for free from local roaster.

- I have eventually settled with routine of powder "post processing" that works best for me. Actually grinding to paper cup and pouring powder to the basket after little shake/stir, is much more effective and gives better results than WDT in the basket directly. You may WDT as hell and have a squirting basket. It is just something magical in that transfer of coffee powder to some container and redistributing it to the basket thereafter. I should note that aluminum thingy, HG one is equipped with to grind to, doesn't work well for me, I don't know why, paper cup is WAY better. This stirring in the paper cup works also for other grinders I have tried it with and improves distribution and resulting evenness of the pour.

- I have experimented with RDT (water drops), it certainly helps with static, but I stopped using that. It just seems WRONG to me. If there is powder accumulation in the cone underneath the burrs, one little tap is what it takes, and all coffee is dislodged.

- What is also interesting is that powder produced by conical burrs of HG One is VERY different from that produced by Mazzer Major or other grinders I own. I have no experience with motorized big conical, but it has been described, that big conical burrs produce wider particle distribution. Powder producing same shot is much coarser (in comparison with Major), both visually and to tactile sensation. I have actually better results with lower doses, where I can grind finer.

- Pour and flowrate behaves very different from what I have seen before. I have been used to pours starting slowly and eventually building up from all grinders I have had chance to use. With this big conical burrs flow starts pretty fast, it just suddenly appears after preinfusion, and you would think that it would be a gusher, but that flow stays nice and constant or even slows down eventually. Sometimes on tighter shots and darker coffees it might even start to drip and almost stop. In that case it is hard to chase desired shot volume. I have never seen that before. David Schomer describes that same behavior in his article (when using robusta in his blends). I believe it might be that "fines migration" phenomenon. David Schomer also mentions several times in his blog and articles, that it is much harder to control flowrate with conicals than it is with flats.

- Jim Schulman posted somewhere in the TGP thread:

another_jim wrote: In the early bouts of this contest, I had to close my eyes in the first 15 seconds of the pour, so I couldn't see the Robur's identifying flow. It turns out that this flow is characteristic to all the big conicals when using a spouted PF. [cut]The flow simply switches on, no slow start, no dribbles; the pump starts, there's a dwell time, then there's a constant flow. [cut] I've been pulling shots a very long time, and there's something almost hypnotic about this. Even knowing it's just a glamor, I'd be loath to go back to a grinder that doesn't have these flow optics.

To conclude on my improvement with HG one, it was combination of two things:
burrs braking-in and learning how to use the thing.

I haven't done many back-to-back pulls of same coffee from HG one and Mazzer Major, and taste difference is certainly not all that big (as I have expected/hoped). But after getting better with HG one, I can say that once in a while, when all other variables are where they should be, it is capable of sweeter and more flavorful shots than Major. Amount of my sink shots has also decreased to almost zero. More comparison and maybe blind tasting would be interesting.

Here's something I haven't seen before on the HGOne page:

http://hg-one.com/the-hg-one-grinder/hg ... tribution/

http://hg-one.com/the-hg-one-grinder/hg-101/static/

then again I don't really check their website that often.

So ditch WDT and get your chopsticks out

Regards,
dsc.

dsc wrote:Here's something I haven't seen before on the HGOne page:

http://hg-one.com/the-hg-one-grinder/hg ... tribution/

So ditch WDT and get your chopsticks out

From the above link:

You'll hear the term WDT being bandied about frequently, especially in regards to use with the HG one. This unfortunately is misguided. WDT is used to break up clumps in the grounds in order to prevent channeling, which is why a thin dissecting needle is recommend. The HG one doesn't produce clumps in the grounds, so the pundits in the forums, are recommending a process that would have no beneficial effect on a shot.

For the best possible results, we advise not grinding directly into your portafilter basket, and instead using the blind tumbler or another device. We recommend quickly stirring the grounds, in order to achieve a homogenous puck.

My WDT article introduced both the dosing funnel and grinds stirring as a means of achieving an even distribution of grinds in the basket. Of course you can use whatever stirring implement works, but I maintain that a dissecting needle is the right tool for the job.

Statements like the above, which claim that the WDT is only about breaking up clumps, are simply wrong.

John, I meant that as a joke, I do agree that WDT is much more than just de-clumping.

Regards,
dsc.

It is hilarious that they told their users not to use WDT, but to effectively employ WDT to use their grinder properly.

What they describe makes it seem as though those who use WDT are searching for and breaking up clumps in the grind ONLY with laser-like precision. When, WDT is basically what they recommend their users to do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but they clearly don't know what the WDT process is if that's their stance.

Zero clumps here! I just move the grounds around to even them out in the basket.