Home-Barista.com

lucasd wrote:I guess you don't know one of the greatest Heston Blumenthal.

And BTW if you can find difference using TDS (objective) the point is already proven there is a difference. In such case subjective panel may show that on average people cannot see difference, but does not exclude possibility that few does.
But going by that logic on average people don't like ligh roasts, so why you drink them

Maybe the comparison to cooking is not the best? Cooking (unlike baking for the most part) can be handled with more "art" than science... A better comparison is probably to the wine and beer industry and process where measuring things like sugar content, tds, etc. is more valuable. I dont recall eating a steak or pasta where TDS and brix content really mattered in any way shape or form... What is the TDS of a steak anyway?

Unfortunately, the coffee industry is still way behind wine making and beer making so we still dont have a good grasp on what we measure and why, outside of our taste buds...

bakafish wrote:Maybe it is because my big conicals produce more fines than SSP flat burr grinders do and less boulders than Robur does, so more sweetness are extracted. I don't feel they are under extracted as I use Slayer style extraction for light roasts. The other reason, maybe it is because I don't have the experience of tasting 25% EY espresso.
I have a custom grinder with Mazzer 186C burr set and I replaced the 186C with the Gorilla Gear RoBlack. The Mazzer 186C produces much more boulders.

The coffee used was Ethiopia Uraga from da Matteo roasted for filter.
My Ek is OCD alligned,also I've replaced the carrier with a turkish one from Frank.
Although your conicals may produce less boulders than my Robur,you will still not hit a 25%EY using a conical grinder because of the widw particle distribution.Another obstacle in achieving high extractions is the obsession of producing ratios
so my questions remains: What is there to love about 1:2 ratio?

Moderator Note:
Discussion regarding TDS measurement and filtering continued in The impact of filtering on refractometer TDS and extraction yield measurements

Denis wrote:
There are machines out there that have real time feedback so a big force is taken away from the coffee puck if it starts to lose integrity. An example would be either the La Marzocco Leva or the Speedster Idro-matic. It is easier to have higher EY on these type of machines. In order to close, all I can say is that there is a big difference in taste between a long PI long brew high P shot and a short PI-bloom shot-.

By real time feedback you mean Flow rate, pressure, time, volume ?


my Cremina with SEP reads it all the time and best profile is recorded and saved

Agree with the taste differences... Long PI and Brew vers high PI and short shot.

That is the nice thing about it "the coffee you like best is the one for you" try to repeat it as close as possible, then one needs SEP or similar.

I know this and YES we talk about brew ratio, brew ratio you can control with any machine, and PI with Cremina you can control without pressure as you can with others. BUT you have to have also a PID in order to control the brew temp, that is not possible. You want higher temps for light roasts. Some coffees like it better especially on light roasts.

I would like to see chart and measurement of flat grinders with all parameters. and what was said in post #84 why to hit if if tastes good.


By the way guess the only machine that can control all with data is the DE1

bakafish wrote:I think I have answered. Yes, not hit 25% EY, but is balanced, sweet, thicker and richer mouth feel than a 1:3 shot. Since a conical grinder cannot hit that high EY even at brew ratio 1:3, why should I do 1:3? The conical particle distribution is different, and pressure profiles are different, so it is not necessarily under extracted. The lower EY doesn't mean under extraction for different grinders and coffee machines.

The richness and silky mouthfeel are generated by the amount of sugars dissolved and by the lipids emulsified form a given coffee.You cannot ask such things from a washed light roasted Kenyan coffee ,it will not be rich at 1:2.
I'm not saying that you should pull 1:3 ratios from conical grinders since I never pull that kind of shots .I also like my Robur on some light roasts and I explained why.
My rant is about being dogmatic rather than observant.Focus on the extraction itself rather than aiming a ratio.Yes at 19%EY on my Robur my palate says balanced,it may come from a 1:1.8 or 1:2 shot and I don't care.If i try to squeeze a 22%EY from EK in a 1:2 ratio it will taste acidic,and that is quite the opposite of rich.When i pull a 25% from a light floral coffee the effect is jaw dropping.
In spite of that I still love my big conical and I cannot imagine parting ways with that fat grinder, but I am aware that it was designed with the purpose of low extracting low quality italian blends roasted to obliteration and heavily seasoned with robusta, or robusta only. So the full body and silky mouthfeel associated with big conicals may come from the fact that they are mostly associated with dark oily coffees.

How would a Titus grinder with the hybrid DRM burrs fair in this list?

So I did some readings this morning with the VST refractometer.

I'm finishing off a bag of Counter Culture Apollo, 100% Worka Ethiopa, roast date 1/22/19. The roaster says it is agtron 71, but I cannot confirm this, as the contents of "Apollo" rotates through the year. It is a "light" roast, but not as light as scandivian roasts I've pulled in the past.

The coffee was pulled on a Linea Mini with Strada 17g basket, (more or less a LM branded VST style basket). Pressure 9.0 bar, temperature 93c (199.5f). Water is my formulated mineralized blend at about 80 TDS. (find my thread on it elsewhere).

Grinder is the monolith conical, adjusted as needed to produce beverage weight in desired time. Starting point is 29.5 out in 30 seconds, as measured with an Acaia Lunar scale.

Dose is as weighed in basket.

I use the VST recommended process to measure TDS. VST recommends drawing the sample into a syringe, attaching a VST filter and pressure filtering the sample, then allowing it cool to room temperature. Further, I calibrate the VST with distilled water between each sample.

Filtering is controversial. VST recommends filtering, and it results in lower TDS readings. Some notable persons recommend skip it, and there are threads on it. However, I find it to be useful for consistent readings and can be used to compare various brewing methods.

Unfiltered refractometer measurements are higher than filtered.

I measured two of my typical morning espressos and then did 3 more with different parameters to see how the extraction proceeded. I also tasted each hot, partially cooled (recommended) and well cooled to room temperature of about 68f.


Data and calculated value table:




My preference is for the smaller shots with TDS around 10% with this coffee. It is denser and the flavors are very good, nicely balanced with EY ranging from 17.5% - 18%.

All the shots were good though, none exhibited over-extracted flavors. Had slight channeling on the 36g dose. The very long shot of 54g (~1:3) was very fruity and juicy, with no bitterness or harsh flavors and lots of clarity. However, I don't particularly care for the body at the density it produced. It ran for 38 seconds.

So honestly, with the Monolith Conical, the LMLM and a light roast ethiopian, I was able to pull over 22.24% E.Y. with good results and no particular effort on my part, other than just dialing the grinder a little bit.