TomC wrote:It's been a long time since I've seen a similar discussion on what we are willing to do in order to get the best possible tasting espresso so I figure it's a good time to have a discussion on what we do to get there. Some coffees, blends, more developed roasts are easy to stumble thru and get great results. Many others take quite a bit of tweaking to get to the promised land.

For many, we're willing to shell out thousands of dollars on grinders and double or triple that on the highest end machines. We examine grind particle distribution graphs and nanometer parallelism of burr surfaces, coatings, etc. If we get tired of that, we can also dissect our roast profile curves (for us home roasters) and deploy refractometers and build graphs.

I sometimes mock myself that I'm willing to invest so much into this hobby in terms of equipment and time, but usually the one place where I rarely am willing to dig deep into the pocket is the coffee itself. I'll buy the high end geisha lots that are quite pricy, but use them for filter. Rarely do I want to spend more than $17-18 a bag for something I'm going to pull shots from. I imagine that is part of my error. This is separate from the fact that many fancy, trendy and well-off roasters might still sell sour or unpalatable roasts for a premium price. And many of those seem to end up buried in milk anyway.

Of all my tips I could ever share with someone looking to make better tasting espresso, every single one of them pale in comparison to just telling them to let the shot sit for at least 2 minutes and let the darn thing cool off. I don't think I've ever encountered an outlier to this rule of mine. They're always better, sweeter, less metallic and sharp tasting once they've cooled down to just above warm.

Please share what you do.

Very interesting, i am fairly new to the art of producing espresso that is decent to good (5ish years). And i think i agree where a lot in the hobby are in for the process and the gear alongside coffee, some are just always chasing that god shot that we remember we had at some point or another. One thing i have learnt is that when i have quantified everything and said this is as good as it gets, something new comes up in my mind and i add another dimension and start to explore that.

e.g just in this post seems like everyone has been cooling the espresso before drinking, which i will try and catalogue my results. Most friends and guests want it hot so i have been preheating the cups (i actually do prefer to use 6oz cups for espresso which doubles for if someone wants a flat white).

I can say i am at a point in making espresso where i am confident that my procedure is good enough (constantly striving to better) to produce or display the flavour profile of coffees. I was reluctant to spend a lot of money on beans and i have learnt that the difference between a well roasted bean from a roaster who does use the refractometer and cares about the roasting profile curve and produces something they are proud about does make a difference in the cup.

I have been buying a lot of coffee mainly because of a gift i was given from a shop that roasted their coffee with not much care and i always looked through various offerings and got the coffee and always got a 6-7.5/10 shot.

Then i tried a roastery that boasts technology, refractometer, a good convo about coffee and its origins and something magical happened. My coffee flavour profile has gone up in the 7-8.5/10 range.

To close my rambling, it is an ongoing quest to perfect the "skill" or "art" of extracting flavour from the beans using our tools and techniques to the best of the ability and most of the time we are not paying attention to the most important part of the product, the water, and the coffee.

For myself, i use the late rpavlis' 1mmol/L KHCO3 water recipe to make my water. Good beans, no pre infusion and pull my shot at 1:1.5 - 1:1.7 ratio.
I have found for my medium to light roast freezing my beans alters the taste noticeably so i just vacuum seal them in a large mason jar and move one weeks supply into a smaller mason jar that i also vacuum seal after use.

Radio.YYZ wrote:... Good beans, no pre infusion and pull my shot at 1:1.5 - 1:1.7 ratio.

At any level of fineness of grind PI (purging the air from the puck so that water can flow) PI must happen. So even if you do not mess with PI settings headspace and gicleur conspire to PreInfuse the flow. The engineer of the machine saw to it that PI happens or the machine could not pull an espresso.

In other words PI happens because it is an inherent need of the puck - not of the drinker. As to whether you decide to prolong or modify the pI parameters that is up to you.

The cost of not prolonging the PI (if your machine can do so) is a cap on your dose and the fineness of your grind. Should the grind be too fine, or your dose too high, the PI will be too short. Water would permeate only partway down the puck and when the pressure would be applied by the pump, the wet top of the puck would push the air out of the dry bottom half and the puck would seal. Zero flow (or slow trickle). Prolonging PI would make that pull possible.

One current observation to add to PI "blooming" (Scott Rao was the first to write about it as a by product of marketing the Decent machine) is enhancing extraction. By allowing coffee to bloom one gets a darker, more extracted flow. We believe that this extra, zero pressure "bloom" allows fingering flows to coalesce and increase EY at lower TDS. That is currently in the "bleeding edge" so not yet a consensus so I state it here with a disclaimer that we may yet find out why not to do this.....

Machines provide the "built in" PI by either choosing low water debit "pumps" (like levers, gear and vibrating pumps), or by adding chambers (like the e61) or calculating headspace and gicleur pairs (like the LM saturated groups).

Why this long post? because one of the best ways to improve your coffee is to avoid dogma as much as possible. "Not doing" PI is impossible. Understanding what PI does will improve your understanding of how espresso extraction and percolation works. Understanding the mechanism then helps you make the right decisions to improve your coffee (even if you decide to not modify the PI parameters - that is also a decision!).

I have found for my medium to light roast freezing my beans alters the taste noticeably so i just vacuum seal them in a large mason jar and move one weeks supply into a smaller mason jar that i also vacuum seal after use.

Coffee is a processed food (they are picked, sorted, pulped, fermented, nearly incinerated....). If freezing the beans alters their flavor who's to say it doesn't improve?

It reminds me of preservation cans expiration dates. Usually it is defined as the first date in which a discernible flavor change happens. So 90% of the world throws away canned food on that day. But what happens inside the food? Enzymes, chemical reactions, low-temp maillard reactions, etc and the food softens... So in Spain and Portugal the same "sell by" date becomes the "do not sell before ..." date. Really expensive cans that are stored for years in warehouses.

Different strokes?

AssafL wrote:At any level of fineness of grind PI (purging the air from the puck so that water can flow) PI must happen. So even if you do not mess with PI settings headspace and gicleur conspire to PreInfuse the flow. The engineer of the machine saw to it that PI happens or the machine could not pull an espresso.

In other words PI happens because it is an inherent need of the puck - not of the drinker. As to whether you decide to prolong or modify the pI parameters that is up to you.

The cost of not prolonging the PI (if your machine can do so) is a cap on your dose and the fineness of your grind. Should the grind be too fine, or your dose too high, the PI will be too short. Water would permeate only partway down the puck and when the pressure would be applied by the pump, the wet top of the puck would push the air out of the dry bottom half and the puck would seal. Zero flow (or slow trickle). Prolonging PI would make that pull possible.

One current observation to add to PI "blooming" (Scott Rao was the first to write about it as a by product of marketing the Decent machine) is enhancing extraction. By allowing coffee to bloom one gets a darker, more extracted flow. We believe that this extra, zero pressure "bloom" allows fingering flows to coalesce and increase EY at lower TDS. That is currently in the "bleeding edge" so not yet a consensus so I state it here with a disclaimer that we may yet find out why not to do this.....

Machines provide the "built in" PI by either choosing low water debit "pumps" (like levers, gear and vibrating pumps), or by adding chambers (like the e61) or calculating headspace and gicleur pairs (like the LM saturated groups).

Why this long post? because one of the best ways to improve your coffee is to avoid dogma as much as possible. "Not doing" PI is impossible. Understanding what PI does will improve your understanding of how espresso extraction and percolation works. Understanding the mechanism then helps you make the right decisions to improve your coffee (even if you decide to not modify the PI parameters - that is also a decision!).

I think this is informative and i would agree by my experience that "zero pressure bloom allows fingering flows to coalesce and increase EY at lower TDS." It maybe that when the puck is soaked with non pressurized water that the oils that are disolving in the cup present more "chocolatey" flavours to me, instead of the fruity acidic flavours.

But for me if a coffee smells like blueberrys i want to have that note in the flavour profile, and i found for my personal taste the balance was not there and it was a bit biased (when pre infusing pre extraction by e61 half pull).

I think if i wanted to get into extraction yields that go beyond ratios i should look into a refractometer that would quantify the espresso % and then i wont have to explain to my guests why different ratios for different coffees - which i currently go by flavour only, which very well could be counter productive as i have nothing to quantify it with.

AssafL wrote: Coffee is a processed food (they are picked, sorted, pulped, fermented, nearly incinerated....). If freezing the beans alters their flavor who's to say it doesn't improve?

It reminds me of preservation cans expiration dates. Usually it is defined as the first date in which a discernible flavor change happens. So 90% of the world throws away canned food on that day. But what happens inside the food? Enzymes, chemical reactions, low-temp maillard reactions, etc and the food softens... So in Spain and Portugal the same "sell by" date becomes the "do not sell before ..." date. Really expensive cans that are stored for years in warehouses.

Different strokes?

I think so, for some it maybe the flavour profile they are looking for in the cup. For me freezing the beans got rid of the slight fruity acidity in the cup ! Preinfusion when i have done on the e61 just before engaging the pump, i found it gave a flavour that was more "chocolatey" from beans that have a fruityness associated to them.

cafederoberto wrote:.... in my case, my tamping was the biggest variability from shot to shot so I bought a palm tamper and tamp pretty firmly. Shots are amazingly more consistent now. Distribution was already good so no issues there. Grind I keep quite fine and just updose or downdose to get desired result, anywhere from 16-20g.

Having helped quite a few with tamping issues, usually the problem is elsewhere (WDT, distribution or dosing). If you need a heavy handed tamp something can be improved elsewhere. Grind finer, WDT, etc.

Remember the plastic tamper jutting from the front of old Italian grinders? They actually work! Yes, we looked down at them with our hydraulic and dynamometric and self aligning tampers, but if the prep was good they worked fine. As we would encounter in some pretty good cafes.

BTW - I say "usually" because I once helped a PA at a VC firm tamp (she was tamping at like a 15 degree angle.... Sheesh....). In that case tamping was a big part of the problem, but nowhere near the entirety of the problem (they spent an awful lot of money on awful coffee....)

Radio.YYZ wrote:I think this is informative and i would agree by my experience that "zero pressure bloom allows fingering flows to coalesce and increase EY at lower TDS." It maybe that when the puck is soaked with non pressurized water that the oils that are disolving in the cup present more "chocolatey" flavours to me, instead of the fruity acidic flavours.

But for me if a coffee smells like blueberrys i want to have that note in the flavour profile, and i found for my personal taste the balance was not there and it was a bit biased (when pre infusing pre extraction by e61 half pull).

I think if i wanted to get into extraction yields that go beyond ratios i should look into a refractometer that would quantify the espresso % and then i wont have to explain to my guests why different ratios for different coffees - which i currently go by flavour only, which very well could be counter productive as i have nothing to quantify it with.

I own a refractometer and go by flavor. Still measure once in a while for fun...

Even without measuring, the process you outlined above for choosing the PI parameter is far more helpful for others than the assertion of just not doing any PI (which is misleading).

But one thing I'll add to this is that sometimes, especially when going up the EY ladder, one needs to give an effort to "like" the new outcome.

Think about your friends who like sugar in their espresso. It makes most espressos taste the same (or very similar). Stepping to the no-sugar camp requires a leap of faith. 10-30 demitasses of sour and bitter "swill" to get the sugar withdrawal started.

If you make a big change in your espresso ritual - just like the sugar crowd, you'll need to give it ample time to either assert itself as a winner or end up in the heap of failed improvement attempts.... Personally, my minimum to make up my mind that I dislike a new method is a month of daily usage. And even then I double guess myself - maybe I am missing something??? [/quote]

[quote="AssafL"]I own a refractometer and go by flavor. Still measure once in a while for fun...

Even without measuring, the process you outlined above for choosing the PI parameter is far more helpful for others than the assertion of just not doing any PI (which is misleading).

But one thing I'll add to this is that sometimes, especially when going up the EY ladder, one needs to give an effort to "like" the new outcome.

Think about your friends who like sugar in their espresso. It makes most espressos taste the same (or very similar). Stepping to the no-sugar camp requires a leap of faith. 10-30 demitasses of sour and bitter "swill" to get the sugar withdrawal started.

If you make a big change in your espresso ritual - just like the sugar crowd, you'll need to give it ample time to either assert itself as a winner or end up in the heap of failed improvement attempts.... Personally, my minimum to make up my mind that I dislike a new method is a month of daily usage. And even then I double guess myself - maybe I am missing something???

AssafL wrote:I own a refractometer and go by flavor. Still measure once in a while for fun...

Even without measuring, the process you outlined above for choosing the PI parameter is far more helpful for others than the assertion of just not doing any PI (which is misleading).

But one thing I'll add to this is that sometimes, especially when going up the EY ladder, one needs to give an effort to "like" the new outcome.

Think about your friends who like sugar in their espresso. It makes most espressos taste the same (or very similar). Stepping to the no-sugar camp requires a leap of faith. 10-30 demitasses of sour and bitter "swill" to get the sugar withdrawal started.

If you make a big change in your espresso ritual - just like the sugar crowd, you'll need to give it ample time to either assert itself as a winner or end up in the heap of failed improvement attempts.... Personally, my minimum to make up my mind that I dislike a new method is a month of daily usage. And even then I double guess myself - maybe I am missing something???

I am solely going by flavour on what i like and one of my friend who is NOT a coffee drinker and he enjoys my espressos and eagerly awaits his drinks. I have a no sugar policy, if people do not like pure espresso i am happy to make them a cortado or a flat white.

I do stick to a variable change for atleast a few dozen drinks and note the results. My primary goal is flavour and secondary is fulfiling the desire to have newer better gear, a healthy 70/30 ratio... ok maybe more like 60/40 ratio!

Double guessing is something i have done a lot, so many variables and sometimes they are counter productive to change. The single most important change i have made is sticking to my water recipe that gives a clean clear palete for the espresso.

I am very eager to try the cold cup 2-4min wait espresso shot!

another_jim wrote:In the last decade or so, there's been a rather large change in what an exceptional espresso is.

Back then, mouthfeel was king; if the espresso wasn't an emulsion with a mouthfeel somewhere between molten fudge and a smoothie, it wasn't exceptional. Throw in a chocolate truffle taste, with a twist of alcoholic or berry ferment, and you had the complete god shot. A combo of the right Harar or Yemen, with a good Sumatra or PNG, a good Cerrado, and a dash of a high end Ugandan robusta, and you were home free. Of course, godshot Harars or Yemens only came around every few years or so. Between those times, you had slight misses that reminded you of the perfect ones. Cooling a shot like this would have been as insane as waiting for the souffle or zabaglione to collapse before eating it.

Now people are looking for espresso akin to the perfect brewed coffee, only with ten times the concentration. Cooling for this style shot is a good idea. In any case, the seductive emulsion shots are gone until this style falls out of favor. When that happens, we'll all need an entirely new set of expensive gear and secret tweaks.

For us traditionalists, who love that over-the-top mouthfeel, is there a type of grinder that can enhance that aspect of an espresso brew? Does for example, the Pharos do a better job if we are seeking syrupy espressos? Or the Monolith Flat? Or the Sette or Niche? Or is the type of grinder not so relevant to this end?

I do appreciate your input. Thank you! I hope other "traditionalists" will share as well... although I think I am in the minority amongst so many of the more modern third-wavers.