The Myth of the Tamp and Tamper? - Page 2

Beginner and pro baristas share tips and tricks for making espresso.
brianl
Posts: 1390
Joined: 10 years ago

#11: Post by brianl »

tamp pressure means little. you just meed to be consistent. You can surely screw up a shot if you don't tamp level and with the vst baskets you can get intense donut extractions with a small tamper.

nurxhunter (original poster)
Posts: 32
Joined: 8 years ago

#12: Post by nurxhunter (original poster) »

AssafL wrote:Tamping I think, was important for everyone involved as it served as an anchor to the process of distributing, grooming and levelling (before anyone knew any better). These remain very important to prevent channeling
Sound point, I think. Thanks.

I am a novice and I am not suggesting tamping is irrelevant, but the data I have seen suggest it is not very important. The poll suggests otherwise.

How important is tamping?

That said, I do SEEM to get more spritzing with light tamps than ~30 lb or more force. The taste and flow are similar, but I get less mess with a naked porta and VST 18 basket when I tamp hard, compared to light. I've been thinking of going back to a spout. Life seem simpler with a spout?

Simpler as well not using a VST basket; however, my subjective opinion is that with VST, I need to grind a setting finer, and that affects flavor in my limited experience so far. It's only very recently that I've started to pay great attention to the extraction. I'm transitioning from latte to espresso, and fighting some taste genetics in the process.

MCALheaven
Posts: 127
Joined: 8 years ago

#13: Post by MCALheaven »

nurxhunter wrote:In another series of experiments examining the impact of several lovely tampers on TDS, Socrates (et al) conclude that, except for a negative impact on TDS of one particular tamper: ...."all others were statistically not different"


This article had me rolling with laughter. How could someone go to such great lengths to create an impartial formal scientific inquiry and then assume that slightly lower TDS is a negative? The only mention in the whole article of one of the four tampers being curved, (the most obvious difference) is that the curved La Marzocco tamper had a negative impact on TDS. It's easy to guess that I'm in the Italian espresso camp here, don't really enjoy what my fellow Americans tend to call espresso. Coffee is about taste and taste is subjective. It's hard NOT to be subjective, even for Socrates.

nurxhunter (original poster)
Posts: 32
Joined: 8 years ago

#14: Post by nurxhunter (original poster) »

In the future I'll post some peer-reviewed literature on the power of subjective bias based on published clinical trials of placebos, as well as the power of instilling bias from a 'moderator' to 'subjects' in 'psychological' experiments. Amazing data. Scary, actually. This is the elephant in the room that (hardly) anyone recognizes.

It seems Italians have different taste genes than Americans. How else to explain what appear to be huge taste preference differences across the Atlantic? The espressos I have had in Philly at top joints have tasted sour to me. Some I had to toss. I understand that is called bright. In Berlin and Italy, I loved the espresso! I'll have to explore more American joints. It seems to me that it is as hard here in my hood to get a good espresso as it is to get a good bagel, or a good slice of pizza. My taste genes must be part Jewish and part Italian. Hard to fight genetics. Or, if not genetics, we may like best the flavors and textures that 'mama used to make'. That also could involve genetics.

The pictures and discussion of the document another poster pointed me to makes it crystal clear, in very simple language, that tamp pressure is not a significant variable. See pages 17-21. Other such 'data' posted elsewhere here have concluded same.
http://www.partsguru.com/user/SCAA%20Pr ... design.pdf

I'm ready to accept that tamp pressure--and certainly tampers--are not critical variables that govern the end extraction in the cup. Others may differ, so viva la difference.

Graci to all!

User avatar
aecletec
Posts: 1997
Joined: 13 years ago

#15: Post by aecletec »

MCALheaven wrote:This article had me rolling with laughter. How could someone go to such great lengths to create an impartial formal scientific inquiry and then assume that slightly lower TDS is a negative?
Negative is the direction of change. Rather than a positive effect, which would be an increase.

MCALheaven
Posts: 127
Joined: 8 years ago

#16: Post by MCALheaven »

I understand the definition of negative vs. positive. I'll have to read the article again. I could've sworn they said "negative effects".

desmodici
Posts: 256
Joined: 11 years ago

#17: Post by desmodici »

SJM wrote:What you are missing is that this is a forum. People contribute what they believe at the time to be true, what works for them, and what doesn't. Time and experience and equipment changes; and the determination of taste is dependent on individuals. Your job is to try what seems pertinent and to determine what of the information is applicable to your situation.
+1. Well said and spot on.

User avatar
Peppersass
Posts: 3690
Joined: 15 years ago

#18: Post by Peppersass »

nurxhunter wrote: however, my subjective opinion is that with VST, I need to grind a setting finer.
That's not a subjective opinion. It's a well-known property of VST baskets. You have to grind finer to get the same flow rate. This helps to obtain higher extraction yield from light roasts, which is one reason VST baskets are so popular.

User avatar
aecletec
Posts: 1997
Joined: 13 years ago

#19: Post by aecletec »

MCALheaven wrote:I understand the definition of negative vs. positive. I'll have to read the article again. I could've sworn they said "negative effects".
No, this is the only time "negative" is in the article:
Based on the tampers we tested, only the La Marzocco tamper had a significant (albeit, negative) impact on TDS and extraction yield.
Any other meaning obtained is not theirs.

User avatar
AssafL
Posts: 2588
Joined: 14 years ago

#20: Post by AssafL »

nurxhunter wrote:That said, I do SEEM to get more spritzing with light tamps than ~30 lb or more force. The taste and flow are similar, but I get less mess with a naked porta and VST 18 basket when I tamp hard, compared to light. I've been thinking of going back to a spout. Life seem simpler with a spout?

Simpler as well not using a VST basket; however, my subjective opinion is that with VST, I need to grind a setting finer, and that affects flavor in my limited experience so far. It's only very recently that I've started to pay great attention to the extraction. I'm transitioning from latte to espresso, and fighting some taste genetics in the process.
I never use a spout and life is simple. I use VST and life is simple. I tamp lightly - but level, and life is simple. I don't weight measure dose accurately (many here do) since it complicates stuff. But my volume based tamper level is within 0.5gr. It is reasonable - for me - and simple.

But It took a long time to simplify life. Naked PF showed up and required my process to improve (or be humiliated by coffee everywhere). VST baskets showed up and required my process to be Substantially Better. By the time the Refractometer showed up - I was pretty consistent. But it was a nice corroborator of experience.

I use a simple flat bottom tamper as close as possible to the VST basket diameter. I no longer use a clicker or stand on a bathroom scale to measure 30 pounds. But I did - and you have the option to bypass the sorry experience of it trying to measuring 30lbs. Or you can enjoy the romantic aspect of tamping hard. Or buy into the Italians who seemed to have know this all along and had those plastic tampers protruding from the grinders (how pretentious were we - or I - to make fun of those???).

I can now use a spout, but I don't since it is easier to clean a naked PF.

It is a hobby. Enjoy it any way you want to.
Scraping away (slowly) at the tyranny of biases and dogma.