Thoughts on measuring: scale vs. no scale - Page 2

Beginner and pro baristas share tips and tricks for making espresso.
zin1953

#11: Post by zin1953 »

another_jim wrote:. . . I have to say that the only point where volumetric dosing becomes really accurate is when you feel the depth of the puck as you tamp.
Agreed. When I tamp and the tamper goes down just so far, I know I'm in (or out of) the "correct" range.

Thread Drift:
HB wrote:Lately I've been dropping in/dropping out baskets, so weighing becomes a necessity since my basket volumes are slightly different. Try it, you'll find that 1 gram more/less makes an easily recognizable difference.
So what happens when you turn the pf over to "thwack" it into the knockbox?

I'm with you in that -- if I'm making several drinks back-to-back-to-back -- I'll pull out the clip and drop the baskets in and out. But otherwise, I keep the clips in place and use ridgeless baskets. The spring still keeps a ridgeless basket in place when I knock out the puck.

Cheers,
Jason
A morning without coffee is sleep. -- Anon.

User avatar
cafeIKE
Supporter ❤

#12: Post by cafeIKE »

zin1953 wrote:Agreed. When I tamp and the tamper goes down just so far, I know I'm in (or out of) the "correct" range.
:?
I change coffee about every two weeks and the tamp depth changes with each coffee, as does the grind and dose.

Do you have a "one depth fits all :?:"

zin1953

#13: Post by zin1953 »

cafeIKE wrote:Do you have a "one depth fits all :?: "
Yes.












Ian, do you ALWAYS have to be literal? NOTHING is exact. Is a 14g dose exactly 14? Is it 14.1? 14.01? 14.001? 14.000000000001????

As I wrote above, "I am in the 'correct' RANGE." (Emphasis added.)

Cheers,
Jason
A morning without coffee is sleep. -- Anon.

User avatar
cafeIKE
Supporter ❤

#14: Post by cafeIKE »

My tamp depth varies from about 8 to 10mm, depending on coffee. That's a ±11% or +25% from the minimum. As I aim for a better than ±3% consistency on dose, which results in a relatively constant tamp depth per coffee, if one can use a consistent tamp depth, then either the coffees are remarkably consistent or are other adjustments made?

User avatar
malachi

#15: Post by malachi »

another_jim wrote:I have to say that the only point where volumetric dosing becomes really accurate is when you feel the depth of the puck as you tamp
While I think that might be true for some (many?) people - it's not universal.
For some (many?) people - volumetric dosing is highly accurate, period.

("highly accurate" in this case defined as variance of +/- 0.3gram)
"Taste is the only morality." -- John Ruskin

User avatar
malachi

#16: Post by malachi »

cafeIKE wrote: I change coffee about every two weeks
Seriously?
Hmmm... Interesting question then... for most people - how often do you change coffees?
Guess I should create a new thread or poll.
"Taste is the only morality." -- John Ruskin

snaab (original poster)

#17: Post by snaab (original poster) »

really interesting discussion - thanks all for weighing in. and i am sold. or another scale is about to be sold, anyway. other than the fact that scales are surprisingly cheap, i think the most compelling idea has to be that a scale gives you another way to refine technique. since this is as much science as art--maybe another interesting thread, "science vs art", that i bet would generate some heated debate--having the ability to verifiably and accurately control a key variable is pretty appealing.

User avatar
cannonfodder
Team HB

#18: Post by cannonfodder »

I do believe you need one to start, or for testing. You have to have something to weigh your dose, even if it is simply a reality check to calibrate your eye. When testing a new coffee or machine I will always weigh my doses just to remove that factor form the long list of intra shot variables. I do believe that you can do without after a bit of experience. I can regularly hit within two tenths of a gram working by eye alone, often closer than that. I have a third party witness that could back that claim up as well. I would imagine a pro that pulled hundreds of shots a day would be even closer.
Dave Stephens

User avatar
sweaner
Supporter ♡

#19: Post by sweaner »

cannonfodder wrote: I can regularly hit within two tenths of a gram working by eye alone, often closer than that. I have a third party witness that could back that claim up as well.
I can verify that! Dave was always within about 0.1g.

However, I bet the competitors at the WRBC were not even weighing the doses. No weighing AND no leveling? What is this world coming to?
Scott
LMWDP #248

User avatar
RapidCoffee
Team HB

#20: Post by RapidCoffee »

snaab wrote:...the most compelling idea has to be that a scale gives you another way to refine technique. since this is as much science as art--maybe another interesting thread, "science vs art", that i bet would generate some heated debate--having the ability to verifiably and accurately control a key variable is pretty appealing.
Well said. I dose by volume. But a digital scale sure comes in handy for testing new gear, evaluating new coffees, or taking measurements (dose, brew ratio, basket capacity, to name just a few). Highly recommended.
John