# Kalita wave



## James811

Hey guys, I'm looking at getting a Kalita. I was just wondering, which size do you use? Because I've been looking but see different figures for the amount of brew that comes from either the 155 size or the 185 size.

Thanks for any help,

James


----------



## jimbojohn55

155 one cup

185 two cup

but this depends on the size of your cups


----------



## MWJB

The amount of brew that comes from either depends on how much coffee & water you use. That said, I prefer the 185 because it's less limiting in pulse sizes, you can make a single mug of brew from one 230g fill if you want. Papers (either size) seem to sit better in the 185 too. I don't rinse the papers.

I have only used the steel versions.


----------



## James811

Thanks boys. I shall go with th 185 as I suspected I would


----------



## the_partisan

How does the Kalita compare to V60, in terms of ease of use and consistency? I think flavour wise, the filters are pretty similar?


----------



## MWJB

You can get away without using a gooseneck kettle with the Kalita Wave, if you already have the gooseneck there's probably not much reason to buy another brewer. You'll likely need to change grind (coarser for Kalita) or the number of pulse pours (fewer for Kalita) when switching between the two. Both make excellent cups.


----------



## James811

I like the Kalita because it takes a little less pour control than the v60. The flat bottom and controlled flow also makes it easier (for me) to make more consistent brews


----------



## StusBrews

I've really been enjoying using my aeropress as a flat bottomed drip brewer. You can get the grind a bit finer and not run into issues with the brew choking as you can apply some light pressure with the plunger, which also doubles up to control flow rate.


----------



## MWJB

StusBrews said:


> I've really been enjoying using my aeropress as a flat bottomed drip brewer. You can get the grind a bit finer and not run into issues with the brew choking as you can apply some light pressure with the plunger, which also doubles up to control flow rate.


Once you have added the water to a drip cone, you just leave the rest to gravity, no need to chivvy it along or inconsistency from lifting brewer off the scales to plunge & varying brewed coffee weights. If your grind size is in the ball-park, your drip cone won't choke.


----------



## the_partisan

Do you also do pulse pouring in Kalita, or it's not really necessary?


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> Do you also do pulse pouring in Kalita, or it's not really necessary?


You can get consistent Kalita brews without pulse pouring, using a finer grind (this will be too fine for V60 though). But, I wouldn't necessarily be changing grind setting for every brew/brewer if alternating them, so if you are set up for pulses with the V60, I'd keep to the same grind setting & work out how many pulses gave you the same brew time (for same brew weights) for the Kalita, it should need fewer & wider spaced pulses than V60.


----------



## James811

Just for reference. My kalita routine is as follows

18g coffee 300g water

Add coffee to brewer

Bloom with 50g for 30seconds

At 30s add water up to 175g (15 second pour)

At 1 minutes another 125 taking you to 300g water in at 1:15

Leave to drain


----------



## the_partisan

In that case, is there any advantage to V60 over a Kalita, since Kalita seems much more forgiving to use as you can get away with fewer pulses. On top of that you can also use coarser grinds for same brew time, which means you'll have less fines (Scott Rao argues coarser grinds are better for brew coffee).


----------



## MWJB

V60 papers are less of a faff, can be stored flat.

Number of pulses isn't really an advantage, or disadvantage it's just what you have to do in order to hit brew time...unless of course, the pour regime gets too frantic to be sensible & repeatable.

Taste-wise I think it would be very hard to tell them apart at the same grind setting. At the moment the V60 is giving me very consistent extractions (13.5g:225g bloom 15g for 30s, then 35g every 20sec for ~3:10 total, 27 brews spanning 1.6%EY with a bunch of, but not equally rotated coffees, 2 different grinders)...maybe when I've done few more V60s I'll A/B against Kalita at a coarser grind (but that would mean using 2 grinders and another variable).

Whilst coarser grinds are giving me lovely sweet coffee around 20%EY, I'm sometimes hitting over-extracted flavours before 21%EY, with a fine grind I've had very sweet brews at 22%...I can't say what this might be attributable to (coffees themselves or grind size).


----------



## MWJB

MWJB said:


> Taste-wise I think it would be very hard to tell them apart at the same grind setting.


I think I'm going to backtrack on this slightly, a good brew from each might be hard to tell apart, but these might not coincide with the same grind setting.


----------



## James811

@MWJB

What brew time do you aim for on the kalita?


----------



## MWJB

James811 said:


> @MWJB
> 
> What brew time do you aim for on the kalita?


Depends on your dose & water weight, but for 13.5g dose to 225g brew water, 3:00 to 3:30, including 30sec bloom time.


----------



## fatboyslim

Just to offer an alternative, I use 15g into 240g brew water. Aim for 2:40 to 2:50 total brew time.


----------



## MWJB

fatboyslim said:


> Just to offer an alternative, I use 15g into 240g brew water. Aim for 2:40 to 2:50 total brew time.


Do you have bloom stage with that, or are you straight in with brew water pulses?


----------



## fatboyslim

MWJB said:


> Do you have bloom stage with that, or are you straight in with brew water pulses?


30-40 second bloom with a quick swirl. 30 seconds if I stop seeing bubbles.


----------



## James811

Thanks fellas. I usually work with 18g and 300g of water and a 4 minute brew time. Does this sound ok?


----------



## MWJB

James811 said:


> Thanks fellas. I usually work with 18g and 300g of water and a 4 minute brew time. Does this sound ok?


If it tastes good (sweet), then that trumps whether it sounds good 

I think 4 mins (average) could sound a bit long if you had no bloom stage (and had significant brewed coffee landing in the cup from the off), but if you are blooming for 30-45sec, could be ball-park. 4 min might also be OK if you had periods where the liquid above the bed completely drained out between pulses (but that then makes timings hard to compare).


----------



## James811

Thanks. Both of those comments apply as I use a 30s bloom. And then add 50g of water every 30s through from 30s-2:30 with the bed almost running try between each pour and a final time of about 3:45


----------



## rusty.brews.coffee

I prefer the 185, as it allows me to brew 2 small cups for my partner and I, or one HUGE cup for me! I typically go with a 40g dose


----------



## rusty.brews.coffee

4 mins is great! I try to aim for 3-4. Anything under that just tastes under extracted to me.


----------



## MWJB

rusty.brews.coffee said:


> 4 mins is great! I try to aim for 3-4. Anything under that just tastes under extracted to me.


Depends on brew weights, smaller brews (~15g doses) at 4 min will head towards over-extraction


----------



## fatboyslim

I brewed 12g in a 185 due to that being all the coffee I had left...?

I did find however that it seemed better extracted, at least subjectively, compared to my normal 15g brews. All at the same grind setting. Maybe lower slurry height helps evenness of extraction?


----------



## MWJB

fatboyslim said:


> I brewed 12g in a 185 due to that being all the coffee I had left...
> 
> I did find however that it seemed better extracted, at least subjectively, compared to my normal 15g brews. All at the same grind setting. Maybe lower slurry height helps evenness of extraction?


I tend to find smaller brews have more clarity & evenness, I tend to stick to 13.5g dose because that gives a nice mugful or 2x 5oz cups (& because I started logging them & stuck with that parameter until I have good sample), I think it's bed depth more than slurry height, as I can get pretty similar results whether brewing in a few big pours, or a lot of little ones with the smaller brews (so very different slurry heights for most of the brew).


----------



## the_partisan

I've gotten a 185 as a Christmas present, though yet to use it. I wonder what's the minimum amount of coffee acceptable for 185? Is 15g too little? I typically use 6 pours for V60 for the best consistency and even extraction, but reading this thread, I might get away with using only 3 for the Kalita?


----------



## MWJB

You can brew the same minimum dose in the 185 as you can in the 155, the bases are the same (10g+?).

I wouldn't change your grind from the V60 setting (the Wave doesn't seem to benefit consistency-wise from using lots of small pours), as you suggest, use fewer pours.


----------



## the_partisan

I did one brew with 3 pours, and same grind settings as my V60. 15g coffee, 40g bloom, and then 70g every 30sec for a total of 250g. It drained at 2:50 , with TDS 1.38/20.7%.

Taste wise very similar to V60 with same beans (and very nice), but it's kind of nicer to be able to do only 3 pours and the flat bottom made stirring the bloom somewhat easier. Feels like it felt more forgiving then the V60, but hard to say until I do more brews with it.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

I received a 185, I have left the grind the same as V60 and with a 13.5g dose I am getting nice results with a 25g bloom for 30 seconds, then 100g of water at 60 seconds and the final 100g at 90 seconds with a total brew time of 3.10 (plus 30 seconds of dripage).

With a V60 I normally go for @MWJB recipe via his google sheets calculator, again based on 13.5g dose


----------



## the_partisan

I've done 2 brews with 30g/ coffee 500g water now with 3 pours, doing 80g bloom + 140g every 45 sec and neither tasted evenly extracted. EY was 20.1% with one grind setting, and 20.9% in one finer setting. Total brew was 3:30 for both. First one was sour and lacking sweetness and second one was very bitter and not much sweetness either. I think I might be agitating the bed too much during the pour? I might go back to doing 6 pours for larger brews. Neither were as good as my single brew..


----------



## MWJB

How about going to 2 fairly quick pours, 60 sec apart?

In my experience, lots of pours with the Wave can lead to a silty & opaque brew and less consistency (opposite results with V60).


----------



## the_partisan

I will try that next - I'm currently using my Wilfa grinder as my Feldgrind is shipped to MBK for repair (one of the bearings rolled between floorboards..) and the Wilfa tends to produce more fines compared to the Feldgrind.

It sounds like you don't want the agitate the bed too much with the Kalita.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> It sounds like you don't want the agitate the bed too much with the Kalita.


That's my current thinking, maybe because the bed depth is less overall compared to V60 & Melitta?


----------



## the_partisan

Interestingly Nick Cho uses several small pours here:






Though his grind looks very even compared to mine.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> Interestingly Nick Cho uses several small pours here:


What's that 73g/L?


----------



## the_partisan

Yes he uses a fairly high ratio.


----------



## the_partisan

BTW this is the dripper he is now working on it seems:

https://twitter.com/DecemberDripper


----------



## the_partisan

Last few days I've been mainly doing single brews - so didn't have a chance to test doing 500g brews. However I have been trying to be very gentle with my pouring, and the last 3 brews have been incredibly consistent, within 0.01% TDS of each other. and +-0.20% EY. All with doing 3 pours. Quite happy with the results. Still not decided if it's superior to V60 or not though.


----------



## StusBrews

the_partisan said:


> Last few days I've been mainly doing single brews - so didn't have a chance to test doing 500g brews. However I have been trying to be very gentle with my pouring, and the last 3 brews have been incredibly consistent, within 0.01% TDS of each other. and +-0.20% EY. All with doing 3 pours. Quite happy with the results. Still not decided if it's superior to V60 or not though.


How would you say the Kalita Wave and V60 cup profile compare, in your opinion?


----------



## the_partisan

StusBrews said:


> How would you say the Kalita Wave and V60 cup profile compare, in your opinion?


Fairly similar I think. Unfortunately my V60 and Kalita brews aren't done with the same grinder, so it's a bit hard to say. I do think it's been easier to be consistent with the Kalita. I have got better results with V60 for bigger brews so far, since I have yet to find a good recipe for that with the Kalita.


----------



## the_partisan

I have had some brews where water only comes out of 1 hole instead of all 3. Anybody have this issue? It sounds like channeling to me. When this happens the brew tasted very bitter, and took long time to drain (3min+)


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> I have had some brews where water only comes out of 1 hole instead of all 3. Anybody have this issue? It sounds like channeling to me. When this happens the brew tasted very bitter, and took long time to drain (3min+)


Not sure I would worry so much about the no. of holes, as the time. The filter is suspended above the holes & extracted coffee may be all around the base of the brewer, so the coffee will leave by the easiest route. How it drains though the bed will be more critical.

...though, having said that, I haven't been watching the underside of the brewer at all


----------



## StusBrews

the_partisan said:


> Fairly similar I think. Unfortunately my V60 and Kalita brews aren't done with the same grinder, so it's a bit hard to say. I do think it's been easier to be consistent with the Kalita. I have got better results with V60 for bigger brews so far, since I have yet to find a good recipe for that with the Kalita.


I've been tempted to pull the trigger on a Kalita Wave and I might just have to. I do like the V60 and a find a coarser grind with more pours gets me better results, but I find it quite tedious. If I could get away with less pours on the Wave I'd be a happier bunny


----------



## MWJB

StusBrews said:


> I've been tempted to pull the trigger on a Kalita Wave and I might just have to. I do like the V60 and a find a coarser grind with more pours gets me better results, but I find it quite tedious. If I could get away with less pours on the Wave I'd be a happier bunny


At the same grind & brew weights the V60 will drain faster, so you will end up with fewer & larger pours with the Kalita anyway. Breaking up the pour into pulses (with a small conical grinder) seems to help with extraction & consistency with V60, but seems to make little difference to the Kalita Wave. I'd go for the 185 so you can, if desired, bloom & then fill with the remainder of brew water in one pour for a single mug.


----------



## the_partisan

I've also started to do single pours with Wave with good results. I try to pour gently without agitating the bed, and then let it drain. There seems to be quite some variance in drain times using this method - probably due to grind distribution? But results are quite good and not really any different than doing multiple pours.


----------



## MWJB

When I did my usual 10 brews (same recipe & grind setting) for the Wave & 6 pours, I noticed that the variance in brew time was proportionally smaller than the variance in extraction yield (same time resulting in a relatively big swing in EY). This might mean that it is harder to be consistent with lots of pours, whereas with all the other brews I have done, with consistent methods, had a bigger variance in time compared to EY (a little deviation in time could mean no change in EY).


----------



## the_partisan

I think importance of drain time of the last bit of the brew isn't so significant - it seems like there is a little bit of water left on the coffee bed which takes a while to drain, and this water is mostly transparent, and I think there isn't much extraction happening at that point since things have also cooled down and most of the solubles are already in the brew. Grind size and the first part of the brew seem to have far more importance.

For example, my last two brews:

6M setting on Vario - 15g/250g, 40g/30s bloom, then pour rest until 1:00 - drained at 3:20 - 1.36 TDS

7M setting (one macro coarse) same everything else, drained at 4:00 - 1.28 TDS. The last bit of the brew took very long time to drain in this case.

I haven't done enough brews with this setup yet though.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> I think importance of drain time of the last bit of the brew isn't so significant - it seems like there is a little bit of water left on the coffee bed which takes a while to drain, and this water is mostly transparent, and I think there isn't much extraction happening at that point since things have also cooled down and most of the solubles are already in the brew.


Indeed, this bit is relatively weak, but it still contributes to brewed mass, even if it doesn't greatly influence concentration...and both influence EY. Let's say you want 200g of final beverage at 1.33%TDS...if you get 5g more/less, at that strength, that's also +/-0.5%EY.


----------



## the_partisan

MWJB said:


> Indeed, this bit is relatively weak, but it still contributes to brewed mass, even if it doesn't greatly influence concentration...and both influence EY. Let's say you want 200g of final beverage at 1.33%TDS...if you get 5g more/less, at that strength, that's also +/-0.5%EY.


True, although in my case both final beverage weights were in the same ballpark (2.10). I've noticed the LRR for Kalita Wave is higher than V60. I seem to be getting 5-10g less beverage compared to V60. Again probably due to the flat bottom, more water is retained..


----------



## the_partisan

Any opinions about rinsing the filters vs not rinsing? I found it there isn't any real difference in taste, and if the paper had any flavour at all, it is long gone by the time coffee is dissolved. The main thing seems to be that the filters themselves do absorb some water (~5-8g?) - so the resulting brew is slightly stronger.


----------



## MWJB

I don't bother rinsing Filtropa, Kalita, nor Hario bleached white papers (unless using Hario 03 paper in a Chemex & then just because I leave it in for the preheat).

If the paper obviously impacts on the taste of the brew, change it for one that doesn't.

I think the flat bottom might be more the culprit, it's the same for Melita style cones...they all provide a shelf for liquid to sit on, Chemex & V60 don't.


----------



## the_partisan

I did two brews, one with rinsing and one without, same everything else and the final beverage on the not rinsed one was 5g less. Should be easy enough to add +5g extra when not rinsing though.


----------



## the_partisan

I got a flow restrictor for my Hario Buono kettle, which cut the flow rate to about 1/3rds. It's actually made for Nuovo Simonelli espresso machine, but fits very well into the Buono. It makes the pours a very gentle straight drop down, no matter what angle you're pointing and very very consistent. Seems like one of the best and cheapest improvements you can do to your pour overs?

Now my recipe for 250g is to bloom for 30sec, and then pour all the water very gently in about 1-1:15 min (up to 1:30-1:45).


----------



## StusBrews

I've been on the hunt for a flow restrictor for my buono kettle for a while now, but the Hario ones of coffeehit.co.uk are no longer available and I've not been able to find them elsewhere. Interesting that a flow restrictor for a Simonelli espresso did the job. May I ask where you got yours from?


----------



## the_partisan

As I live in Denmark, I got it from here (it's in Danish)

https://www.mokkahouse.dk/produkter/151-tilbehoer-til-kaffebrygger/905-flow-restrictor-til-hario-buono-175-mm/

There is different variations here, with different hole sizes:

http://www.kaffemekka.dk/shop/1620-restrictors--giglers/

In the other thread, this has been mentioned to work with Buono kettles:

https://www.coffeehit.co.uk/brewista-kettle-flow-restrictor.html

So the one I have is 8mm diameter, with a 1.75mm hole (I think, haven't actually measured - can do when I get home later on).

It really makes pouring very effortless and consistent since it gives you a constant and gentle flow regardless of how you hold the kettle.


----------



## StusBrews

Thanks @the_partisan, appreciate you sharing that info...unfortunately I am in the UK and it seems those Danish sites do not ship to the UK.

I saw it mentioned on the coffeehit site that the brewista restrictor doesn't fit, but that post seems to suggest otherwise. It's only a couple of pounds so maybe I'll give it a go


----------



## the_partisan

I measured the piece, and it's 8mm diameter the hole in the middle is 3mm wide (not 1.75 as I thought..) 1.75 would probably also work, but it would be even less flow.

Right now it takes about 50-55 seconds to pour 210g, if you're pouring as quickly as you can.


----------



## StusBrews

I actually had a brain wave last night. I have one of those metal wire scouring pads (unused) in the kitchen cupboards, so I trimmed some off, rolled into a sausage shape and packed it in the base of the spot. Did a quick test last night and seems to be pretty effective. I imagine that you can adjust how effective it is by how tightly you pack it in there.


----------



## James811

I've been re reading all the old posts from on this thread.

Ive now gone to a single pour using 14.5g coffee and 250g water. A 30 second bloom with 30g.

I can't see to get my drain time to extend beyond 2:15 ish without using a (what seems to me) too fine of a grind. And even then can't get it beyond 2:30.

I love the cup the Kalita produces but not being able to get the 'correct' time is setting off my OCD haha!


----------



## fluffles

Breaking up your pour will extend brew time, I wouldn't fixate on a single pour


----------



## James811

I'm certainly not fixated on it, just using it for a change


----------



## Mrboots2u

James811 said:


> I've been re reading all the old posts from on this thread.
> 
> Ive now gone to a single pour using 14.5g coffee and 250g water. A 30 second bloom with 30g.
> 
> I can't see to get my drain time to extend beyond 2:15 ish without using a (what seems to me) too fine of a grind. And even then can't get it beyond 2:30.
> 
> I love the cup the Kalita produces but not being able to get the 'correct' time is setting off my OCD haha!


Be guided by taste in the cup,make adjustments from this as opposed to a " time " .


----------



## MWJB

If you can't get beyond 2:15 with all coffees you need to grind finer. If it's just one coffee that comes up short, but tastes good, I wouldn't worry.

Why does the grind "seem to fine"? The grind's purpose is to hold coffee & water together long enough to get the good stuff out, if it can't do that, it's not too fine.


----------



## Nod

I thought I would add some OCD to the thread. I love the Kalita and spent a lot of time sorting a pulse brew profile... MWJB gave some advice which d_lash and I turned it into a profile... we also did a video if anyone is interested... it seems to work well....


----------



## Nod




----------



## Nod

Here is the version for 15 gr


----------



## Nod

If anyone wants to see the video (I'd be interested in feedback) let

Me know and I will add you to the list to view on YouTube....


----------



## the_partisan

James811 said:


> I've been re reading all the old posts from on this thread.
> 
> Ive now gone to a single pour using 14.5g coffee and 250g water. A 30 second bloom with 30g.
> 
> I can't see to get my drain time to extend beyond 2:15 ish without using a (what seems to me) too fine of a grind. And even then can't get it beyond 2:30.
> 
> I love the cup the Kalita produces but not being able to get the 'correct' time is setting off my OCD haha!


My single pour brews also drain at around 2:15 - 2:30 so I think that's fairly normal. I use a fairly coarse grind on my Vario (6M) and end up around 1.35 TDS / 19.5% extraction. Go with flavour rather than drain time.


----------



## the_partisan

I will also share some of my experiences with Kalita

- I didn't see much benefit from pulse pouring, compared to V60 where the difference in single pour vs continuous was fairly large. I can still use a fairly coarse grind and do a very slow and gently single continuous pour and get good extraction. If anything too much bed agitation seemed to introduce rather bitter flavours..

- I don't rinse the filter anymore - seems to make no difference whatsoever in taste, expect the fact that slightly more water is retained (but not more than 5g)

- When doing single pours, a flow restrictor helps a lot with consistency and also slowing down the pour to make it very gentle.

- Pouring technique is still important - make sure to reincorporate grinds stuck between the nooks of the filter.. as quite a lot can stuck there.. I still get off tasting brews, when I haven't done a good job with the pouring. If you end up with a level bed, with not so many grinds stuck on the sides after all the water is drained, that means you have done a good job.

- I saw quite large variation in solubility from the beans - up to 2% EY using same grind setting. So each bean needs to be dialled in with the grinder differently.

My recipe is typically 6A-6M range on Vario w/ steel burrs (calibrated to burr touch 1A), quite coarse looking grind. I think on Feldgrind it would be between 2+8 or 2+12 or thereabouts. 15g coffee to 250g water, 30g-40g bloom for 30sec-40sec, and then pour rest for about 1 min. It should drain around 2:15-2:30. There is very little drip in Kalita compared to V60 after the water has drained, so you can take the brewer off at 3:00.


----------



## fluffles

I've recently acquired a 185 Kalita to compliment my existing 155. I've had some extremely slow brews in the 185 so far, way slower than the 155 at the same grind setting and recipe. This morning's 15g brew took over 4 minutes in the 185, when it was only 2m50s yesterday in the 155.

Only two things I can think are different: 1/ I rinsed the filter paper of the 185 quite heavily (I don't do this with the 155 as the paper gets mis-shapen), and 2/ I am necessarily pouring from a greater height into the 185 due to the size of the brewer which will be creating more agitation.

Are either or both of these things likely to be the cause?


----------



## fatboyslim

I've been experimenting with a much slower single pour, really paying attention to the agitation and I have to admit I like the results in the cup. It's also less hassle than pulse pouring. My grind is on the fine side.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> I've recently acquired a 185 Kalita to compliment my existing 155. I've had some extremely slow brews in the 185 so far, way slower than the 155 at the same grind setting and recipe. This morning's 15g brew took over 4 minutes in the 185, when it was only 2m50s yesterday in the 155.
> 
> Only two things I can think are different: 1/ I rinsed the filter paper of the 185 quite heavily (I don't do this with the 155 as the paper gets mis-shapen), and 2/ I am necessarily pouring from a greater height into the 185 due to the size of the brewer which will be creating more agitation.
> 
> Are either or both of these things likely to be the cause?


Same coffee? Both brewers of the same material (steel/glass/ceramic)?

Never timed enough rinsed Kalita papers so can't say there.

Higher more aggressive pour I would have thought would make for a faster brew.

Do a few brews with each, same coffee, same pour regime & see if a trend follows one brewer?


----------



## fluffles

Yep both steel. If anything would have thought the 185 to be faster due to sightly shallower bed. Puzzled.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Yep both steel. If anything would have thought the 185 to be faster due to sightly shallower bed. Puzzled.


The bases of the brewers are the same dimensions, so not sure there'll be a big difference in bed depth.

Puzzling indeed, you need a bigger sample base to see if it's 'a thing' or not though


----------



## PPapa

I thought walls on the 155 are a bit steeper?


----------



## MWJB

PPapa said:


> I thought walls on the 155 are a bit steeper?


But the base is the same diameter.


----------



## PPapa

MWJB said:


> But the base is the same diameter.


But if you keep the same brew regime, then there's more pressure/weight being applied?

On the second thought, that sounds like rubbish idea. Base diameter is still the same, so the force (weight * 9.81 / area) is gonna be the same. I'm clueless.


----------



## the_partisan

fluffles said:


> I've recently acquired a 185 Kalita to compliment my existing 155. I've had some extremely slow brews in the 185 so far, way slower than the 155 at the same grind setting and recipe. This morning's 15g brew took over 4 minutes in the 185, when it was only 2m50s yesterday in the 155.
> 
> Only two things I can think are different: 1/ I rinsed the filter paper of the 185 quite heavily (I don't do this with the 155 as the paper gets mis-shapen), and 2/ I am necessarily pouring from a greater height into the 185 due to the size of the brewer which will be creating more agitation.
> 
> Are either or both of these things likely to be the cause?


What'syour pouring regime?


----------



## PPapa

The enigma of the Waves...

I have metal 155 and glass 185 Wave brewers. I decided to time how long does it take for 105g of water to drain. No filter/coffee to eliminate those variables. It was consistently 8s for the glass 185 and 12-14s for the metal 155. 3 attempts each.

It was a bit difficult to time the metal one as the base is not as clear, hence the variance.

I now wonder whether this is something to do with the holes of the metal vs glass brewer or there's something about the steeper 155 walls.

Anyone got both brewers with the same material or some physics knowledge? I also wonder whether the coffee grounds just eliminate the difference between free flow.


----------



## fluffles

Another 185 brew...

- 15g ground at about 7 o'clock on the EK.

- Kalita white papers

- No rinse of filter

- Water 96C

0:00 bloom 30g and stir (wasn't very "wet", don't think I got it all saturated properly)

0:30 fill to 100g

1:15 fill to 175g

2:00 fill to 200g

Drained to the top of the bed at 5:45 (lol). The first half of the brew seems to drain as I'd expect, it gets progressively slower and is barely moving at the end.

BTW - anyone have tips for flow restrictor on a Bonavita electric kettle?


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Drained to the top of the bed at 5:45 (lol). The first half of the brew seems to drain as I'd expect, it gets progressively slower and is barely moving at the end.


It seems normal for the flow to visibly slow at the end, the bed compacts & there is less weight of water above it.

How was it?


----------



## PPapa

You might want to try a swirl and few taps (ala Perger's V60 method). 5:45 sounds quite a lot for a relatively small amount of brew?

I also started to stir the bloom, which combined with swirling and tapping decreases brew time by nearly a minute (from 4:30 to 3:20 for a 21g:350g brew when last pour is finished at c. 1:40). It feels like we brew very differently with the Wave. There's so many different ways I tried and been happy most of the time.


----------



## PPapa

Regarding flow restrictor... been looking for one, but no luck so far.


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> It seems normal for the flow to visibly slow at the end, the bed compacts & there is less weight of water above it.
> 
> How was it?


A bit "dull".

It usually slows at the end, but not like this. On the 155 brewer this brew is done at around 3:00. Current theory is that the paper is blocked from too aggressive a stir at the beginning. The bed was a bit dry and I think I was scraping dry-ish grounds over the bottom of the paper rather than stirring a liquid-y slurry. I'll bloom with a bit more water next time.


----------



## fluffles

The bed had a very "wet mud" look to it at the end and I've just re-read Scott Rao's recent hand brew guide and he suggests this can be caused by clogged filter papers (possibly due to over-stirring).


----------



## MWJB

PPapa said:


> It feels like we brew very differently with the Wave. There's so many different ways I tried and been happy most of the time.


I think the Wave is more tolerant of a single large fill than V60(with small conical burrs), for the same grind & brew ratio/weights it needs less pulses than V60, otherwise I don't really see a big difference.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> The bed had a very "wet mud" look to it at the end and I've just re-read Scott Rao's recent hand brew guide and he suggests this can be caused by clogged filter papers (possibly due to over-stirring).


Coarsen up?


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Coarsen up?


Yep I could try that too, though I'm already coarser than I've been before. Didn't have time to TDS it today unfortunately.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Yep I could try that too, though I'm already coarser than I've been before. Didn't have time to TDS it today unfortunately.


Or, try a single filling pour after bloom?


----------



## fluffles

For this morning's brew I left the grind where it was and did a single continuous pour. In order to help with this I placed some metal scouring pad in the base of the spout to help slow down the flow (as mentioned previously on this thread).

15g/250g and the water was all in by around 1:40 - it finished at 3:05. EY is a bit lower than I would aim for with the EK (1.33/18.89%).


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> For this morning's brew I left the grind where it was and did a single continuous pour. In order to help with this I placed some metal scouring pad in the base of the spout to help slow down the flow (as mentioned previously on this thread).
> 
> 15g/250g and the water was all in by around 1:40 - it finished at 3:05. EY is a bit lower than I would aim for with the EK (1.33/18.89%).


Now try 2 pours of 110g 50sec apart (after bloom).


----------



## the_partisan

fluffles said:


> For this morning's brew I left the grind where it was and did a single continuous pour. In order to help with this I placed some metal scouring pad in the base of the spout to help slow down the flow (as mentioned previously on this thread).
> 
> 15g/250g and the water was all in by around 1:40 - it finished at 3:05. EY is a bit lower than I would aim for with the EK (1.33/18.89%).


1.33sounds in the range of what I get (and enjoy) with this recipe. How was the taste? Some beans (mostly Kenyan/African) can hit high EY easily, while some don't taste as good in higher extractions, in my experience..


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Now try 2 pours of 110g 50sec apart (after bloom).


Finished at 3:15, 1.35/19.17%

I seived the grinds with the Rafino just to get an idea where I am. I used the 400/800 seives as recommended for pour over. There was very little in the 800. (I then put them all back together and mixed them up)


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Finished at 3:15, 1.35/19.17%
> 
> I seived the grinds with the Rafino just to get an idea where I am. I used the 400/800 seives as recommended for pour over. There was very little in the 800. (I then put them all back together and mixed them up)


It would be good to have the % of the weights in pan & on each sieve. 400 & 800um sieves target an average of ~570um, sounds like you are coarser than that & coarser than I'd use for a Kalita Wave with 1 or 2 pours.

E.g. ...








[/url]

This is the last drip brew I made, coarse grind. With the stock 400-800 I only have 24% in the target range, but we might assume that my average size was around 900 (see where line intersects 50% on chart, "over 800" is where the chart assumes 1200um will be). So I either grind finer to get in the 400-800 range, or, use larger sieves (600-1100). Note this was with a Kalita Uno & 9 pours of 25g...a much coarser grind than I'd expect for your Kalita pour regime.


----------



## fluffles

yeah i didn't have time to weight it all individually, will get round to it at some point.

is the brew time reasonable for a "coarse" grind and 1/2 pours?


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> yeah i didn't have time to weight it all individually, will get round to it at some point.
> 
> is the brew time reasonable for a "coarse" grind and 1/2 pours?


For a 19% EY it seems so  You should be able to stretch it out a bit with the EK though?


----------



## StusBrews

fluffles said:


> Another 185 brew...
> 
> - 15g ground at about 7 o'clock on the EK.
> 
> - Kalita white papers
> 
> - No rinse of filter
> 
> - Water 96C
> 
> 0:00 bloom 30g and stir (wasn't very "wet", don't think I got it all saturated properly)
> 
> 0:30 fill to 100g
> 
> 1:15 fill to 175g
> 
> 2:00 fill to 200g
> 
> Drained to the top of the bed at 5:45 (lol). The first half of the brew seems to drain as I'd expect, it gets progressively slower and is barely moving at the end.
> 
> BTW - anyone have tips for flow restrictor on a Bonavita electric kettle?





StusBrews said:


> I actually had a brain wave last night. I have one of those metal wire scouring pads (unused) in the kitchen cupboards, so I trimmed some off, rolled into a sausage shape and packed it in the base of the spot. Did a quick test last night and seems to be pretty effective. I imagine that you can adjust how effective it is by how tightly you pack it in there.


This is working very well for me as a DIY flow restrictor


----------



## bpchia

Have you guys read https://www.thelittleblackcoffeecup.com/blog/coffeechemistry

Chris Hendon whom I respect very much questions the accuracy and utility of refractometers. I have found my VST refractometer very helpful for dialling in my filter brews and confirm when something tastes over or under extracted. Also to check the effect of changes to my method. Not sure what to make of this observation by Chris. The obvious answer is if it's working for me then that's great but would like to discuss!


----------



## MWJB

bpchia said:


> Have you guys read https://www.thelittleblackcoffeecup.com/blog/coffeechemistry
> 
> Chris Hendon whom I respect very much questions the accuracy and utility of refractometers. I have found my VST refractometer very helpful for dialling in my filter brews and confirm when something tastes over or under extracted. Also to check the effect of changes to my method. Not sure what to make of this observation by Chris. The obvious answer is if it's working for me then that's great but would like to discuss!


I e-mailed Christopher, he said that he thinks that the refractometer's ability to correlate nD & %TDS only holds true for brewed coffee extractions.

He suggests that the make up of water, pressure of extraction & resulting sugar content of the brew may be enough to throw off the correlation for espresso.

I haven't seen any refractometer vs dehydration data to back this up. The coffee %TDS scale was established against dehydration & espresso doesn't require the level of accuracy that less concentrated brewed coffee needs.

He also said that each scenario (water, pressure, coffee) would require establishing a new metric by his anticipated method, so one person on one side of the world would not be able to calibrate with someone elsewhere, just by reading the beverage. This is rather different to EY, which is basically a mass fraction & used to be described in terms of ounces per lb, or fractions of a gram...2g of dissolved coffee is 2g of dissolved coffee everywhere. It's not a taste meter, it's an objective measure of brew efficiency, just like dose/brew weights are objective measures of...erm, dose & brew weight  They don't tell you what the coffee tastes like.

Nevertheless, his comments are interesting & if they lead to some kind of complimentary tool, that would be great.


----------



## fluffles

I'm still experiencing problems with slow draw downs - not every brew, but most brews. After today's slow brew I emptied almost all the coffee out of the paper and put it back in the brewer. Filled it with water and it dripped through very slowly, so the problem is obviously the paper getting clogged rather than the grind size.

I didn't have this issue with the 155, and this is obviously a different batch of papers. As far as I know they are bona fide Kalita white papers, are there different grades? Unforunately I don't seem to have any 155 papers left to compare against


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> I'm still experiencing problems with slow draw downs - not every brew, but most brews. After today's slow brew I emptied almost all the coffee out of the paper and put it back in the brewer. Filled it with water and it dripped through very slowly, so the problem is obviously the paper getting clogged rather than the grind size.


What could be clogging the paper other than tiny particles, which are a product of grind size?


----------



## fluffles

I've been monitoring this over the last week or so and doing identical brews across both 155 and 185. The 185 consistently brews slower than the 155 (circa 45 seconds to 1 minute). Same coffees, filter papers, recipes, grind setting, pour technique, alignment of the moons, etc. I've basically isolated every variable I could think of other than the brewer itself.

Looking at the two brewers (both stainless steel versions), there is a difference in the Y shaped raised bit in the base (presumably to hold the paper off the bottom of the brewer). On the 155 is is sort of stuck on and on the 185 it is more punched through from the bottom. Long story short: the Y section on the 155 is deeper and holds the paper further away from the base.

My 155 is quite old and I think they have changed the way they manufacture it. I'd be interested to know how the ceramic and/or glass versions are in this respect.

155 on the left:









155 on the right:


----------



## jlarkin

Glass 155 has holes in bottom, same sort of spacing and slightly domed on the bottom. you can sort of see that but hard to capture with a phone camera. Presumably for the reason you mention of keeping the paper from blocking it.


----------



## fatboyslim

fluffles said:


> I'm still experiencing problems with slow draw downs - not every brew, but most brews. After today's slow brew I emptied almost all the coffee out of the paper and put it back in the brewer. Filled it with water and it dripped through very slowly, so the problem is obviously the paper getting clogged rather than the grind size.
> 
> I didn't have this issue with the 155, and this is obviously a different batch of papers. As far as I know they are bona fide Kalita white papers, are there different grades? Unforunately I don't seem to have any 155 papers left to compare against


Are you covering up the hole on the lip of the brewer that sits on the cup? I always try to have that hole exposed to the inside the cup so the pressure can equalise. I find draw down time is longer if this hole is covered or exposed to outside of cup.


----------



## fluffles

fatboyslim said:


> Are you covering up the hole on the lip of the brewer that sits on the cup? I always try to have that hole exposed to the inside the cup so the pressure can equalise. I find draw down time is longer if this hole is covered or exposed to outside of cup.


Yep, and I also brew on a V60 server so there is also the spout to let air out


----------



## fluffles

Seems to brew at normal speed to start with, its the last 50-75ml that takes all the extra time


----------



## the_partisan

fluffles said:


> Seems to brew at normal speed to start with, its the last 50-75ml that takes all the extra time


I s the water mostly transparent at that point? I doubt much extraction is happening at the last 50ml..


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> I s the water mostly transparent at that point? I doubt much extraction is happening at the last 50ml..


Probably 10-15% of the overall extraction at least, maybe more for a single pour brew.


----------



## MWJB

Best cup yet of Has Bean El Salvador Finca San Jose, bloom as normal, give the brewer a shake or stir as per your preference, then use an Aeropress with able disc as a flow regulator/shower screen, pouring straight down the middle with buono kettle...








[/url]


----------



## MWJB

[/url]


----------



## fluffles

Oh blimey, hybrid brew methods now!


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Oh blimey, hybrid brew methods now!


Think of it more as a back to work scheme for an unemployed Aeropress


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

It's a hybrid Trinity brewer - get the glue out then get on kickstarter!


----------



## MWJB

Hairy_Hogg said:


> It's a hybrid Trinity brewer - get the glue out then get on kickstarter!


There's no coffee in the AP, just water.


----------



## Step21

This is essentially what the Brazen brewer does using a shower screen. Ingenious!


----------



## MWJB

Step21 said:


> This is essentially what the Brazen brewer does using a shower screen. Ingenious!


Fits right on a V60 01 without the need for a brew stand.


----------



## fluffles

I guess you'd be brewing with cooler water? It would lose heat as it drips through the AP


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> I guess you'd be brewing with cooler water? It would lose heat as it drips through the AP


To be honest, I never measure brew water/slurry temp (for drip), I always start the brew whilst the water in the kettle is still rolling. The only thing to really absorb heat is the Able disc and that must get up to temp almost instantly. The AP doesn't really hold the water for any time, it just disperses it. The benefit I am seeing is better brew clarity, shower is gentler than a pour. I did start out blooming through the AP too, but it seems manually blooming straight from the kettle helps get things going.


----------



## Step21

It will be losing some heat going through th AP but I start with 98C water.

I've just tried this using my AP and kaffelogic filter using a Biarro Altoair with a 185 wave filter paper. The beans are not the best being a home roast of Ugandan Sipi falls. Maybe it's beginners luck but this is a damned good cup of coffee full of sweetness and gentle acidity. I look forward to trying it with a decent roast.

Another gold star for @MWJB


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> To be honest, I never measure brew water/slurry temp (for drip), I always start the brew whilst the water in the kettle is still rolling. The only thing to really absorb heat is the Able disc and that must get up to temp almost instantly. The AP doesn't really hold the water for any time, it just disperses it. The benefit I am seeing is better brew clarity, shower is gentler than a pour. I did start out blooming through the AP too, but it seems manually blooming straight from the kettle helps get things going.


Are you just pouring it all in, or pulse pouring? I can't imagine how much the disk restricts flow


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Are you just pouring it all in, or pulse pouring? I can't imagine how much the disk restricts flow


I'm pulse pouring, but that's due to grind size, I could go finer & pour in 1 go I suppose. Perhaps "restricts" isn't the right word, the water drops through the AP almost instantaneously, but it is better dispersed as droplets, rather than a narrow column/jet. The difference in visible clarity of the brew (same regime without AP) is pretty obvious.


----------



## fluffles

will give it a go tomorrow

[obligatory boffin question]does it affect EY much versus standard kettle pour?[/obligatory boffin question]


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> will give it a go tomorrow
> 
> [obligatory boffin question]does it affect EY much versus standard kettle pour?[/obligatory boffin question]


Seemingly, not so far for brews of a similar overall time.


----------



## Step21

The clarity of the brew is very striking and the cup tastes very clean.

I had another go this time using a dutch v60 size 2 paper in the Altoair. The AP sits snugly on the top making the pour easy. It is strange not seeing the brew water land on the coffee - a blind pour. I found that i poured quicker than normal and the overall brew time was shorter. Refracted at 1.14 tds, so a bit weak. Need to grind finer or pulse pour more, my standard being 2 pours 15 sec apart.

Nice to find a use for the AP which had been languishing at the back of the cupboard.

Does this method make more difference to brew clarity than sieving?


----------



## MWJB

Step21 said:


> Does this method make more difference to brew clarity than sieving?


I don't sieve out the smaller particles with drip, so for me yes it does.


----------



## fluffles

When you talk about "clarity of the brew", do you mean of the final cup or whilst its brewing? Certainly the latter was very noticeable, the water in the V60 as it was brewing was very clear I guess because of the reduced churn.

My brew came in at 1% EY lower. For this reason I can't really do any meaningful comparison, but it is a very tasty cup all the same.


----------



## the_partisan

I have to try this! would it work as well with the paper filter? Don't have the able disc. I only have the 185 though, but the Aeropress still fits on top. It feels like some grounds might be getting stuck to the sides though.


----------



## MWJB

I haven't tried it with just the paper, but give it a go? This method has seen the least coffee stuck to the wave filter walls of any I have tried so far.


----------



## the_partisan

Gave this a try - with the 185 and Aeropress paper filters. Bloom / stir as normal, and then single pour the rest, with the flow restrictor - somehow the coffee drained really quickly, normally it takes 3-4 min, now it was gone at 2:30. TDS was also very low - 1.05. My usual brews are around 1.30 at same grind setting. Definitely something different going on here! I don't know if the low TDS is from the fast drain time due to pouring pattern, or just loss of temperature. Taste is definitely drinkable though but fairly thin as can be expected from such a low TDS. Also no grind stuck to the sides at all. I will need to grind a lot finer and try again tomorrow.


----------



## StusBrews

the_partisan said:


> Gave this a try - with the 185 and Aeropress paper filters. Bloom / stir as normal, and then single pour the rest, with the flow restrictor - somehow the coffee drained really quickly, normally it takes 3-4 min, now it was gone at 2:30. TDS was also very low - 1.05. My usual brews are between 1.25-1.35. Definitely something different going on here! Taste is definitely drinkable though but fairly thin as can be expected from such a low TDS. Also no grind stuck to the sides at all. I will need to grind a lot finer and try again tomorrow.


I also gave this a try this morning with my AP and one of those metal filters with the tiny holes. I noticed the coffee was lacking body, but sweetness and clarity was massively improved. I reckon if I grind a bit finer on the next go it'll be spot on.

@the_partisan - My guess for your quicker drain time could be due to the fact agitation is minimal thus causing less fines to migrate and clog the paper filter.


----------



## the_partisan

It should be interesting to measure the slurry temperature compared to a normal pour.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> Gave this a try - with the 185 and Aeropress paper filters. Bloom / stir as normal, and then single pour the rest, with the flow restrictor - somehow the coffee drained really quickly, normally it takes 3-4 min, now it was gone at 2:30. TDS was also very low - 1.05. My usual brews are around 1.30 at same grind setting. Definitely something different going on here! I don't know if the low TDS is from the fast drain time due to pouring pattern, or just loss of temperature. Taste is definitely drinkable though but fairly thin as can be expected from such a low TDS. Also no grind stuck to the sides at all. I will need to grind a lot finer and try again tomorrow.


I'd keep grind setting the same (then you can A/B old method against this more easily), you seem to be able to pulse pour using the AP without getting a silty brew. I'm using the same grind setting I use for V60 with 6 pours & stretching out the 185 brews as necessary. With, or without the AP my brews are averaging 2:55 & around 21%EY.


----------



## the_partisan

MWJB said:


> I'd keep grind setting the same (then you can A/B old method against this more easily), you seem to be able to pulse pour using the AP without getting a silty brew. I'm using the same grind setting I use for V60 with 6 pours & stretching out the 185 brews as necessary. With, or without the AP my brews are averaging 2:55 & around 21%EY.


The grind setting I have gives me a TDS of around 1.30 with a single pour. Will try pulse pouring, or pouring slower next time. I'm a bit worried about too much temperature loss though, since the TDS was very low. Maybe the metal filter is better in this aspect and less insulating.


----------



## MWJB

If EY is much lower at a similar brew time, then maybe look into temp.


----------



## the_partisan

My current bag of beans is now finished, and I will dial the new one in using my usual methods before I attempt this again. It would be interesting if you could try to use the paper filters, and see if you get the same results? Visually, it looks to have the "shower head" affect as well, but as I said the speed / temperature of the dispension might be different?


----------



## MWJB

Will do when I get home this evening.


----------



## Step21

This method also works nicely with the Bonavita immersion brewer (so should also work on a Clever).

TDS was higher on the Bonavita compared to the wave filter on the Altoair with same parameters. I'll try a single pour next time.

My V60 attempt with multiple pours was very good but Tds was lower than with 2 pours with wave filter.

All my wave brews have been excellent so far with this method and there is most definitely a better separation and clarity of flavour.

I think you better patent this! @MWJB


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> My current bag of beans is now finished, and I will dial the new one in using my usual methods before I attempt this again. It would be interesting if you could try to use the paper filters, and see if you get the same results? Visually, it looks to have the "shower head" affect as well, but as I said the speed / temperature of the dispension might be different?


The paper seems to hold back the brew water more, today's brew was about a minute longer (3:47 vs 2:52) until dry bed than yesterday's with the Able disc. EY was only marginally down (19.9% vs 20.4%) but it wasn't a nice brew.


----------



## the_partisan

Thanks, that's interesting to know. I will probably stick to my usual methods for now then, which give me quite good results with a flow restrictor. I've tweaked my recipe to two pours for better consistency.


----------



## the_partisan

I've noticed with some beans, my drain time is really long (up to 6 minutes!) but this doesn't resolve in overextraction (TDS 1.3). I still quite haven't figured out what causes this, but is quite annoying as you have to wait for 3 minutes for the last ~30g to drip through... Seems to happen more with Ethiopian beans for me, happened with one washed and one natural. With some beans at same grind setting / pouring technique, it drains completely at 3, with some at 6 minutes! This never happened with V60.

This is with 15g coffee, 30g/30s bloom, and then a 30s pour up to 150g , and then another 30s 100g pour starting at 1:15 ending at 1:45.


----------



## fluffles

Well if you scroll back a page or two you'll see that I've often had that problem with the Wave, particularly the larger size.

I've done this Aeropress thing a few times and it seems to give good results, but all with lower TDS/EY than without. I will try grinding a bit finer and seeing what its like at equivalent extractions.


----------



## Elcee

If the goal is to maximise the evenness of an extraction, which is better out of continuous or multi-stage pours?


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> If the goal is to maximise the evenness of an extraction, which is better out of continuous or multi-stage pours?


Whichever gives you the most consistent brews/extractions, at the highest good tasting yield, with the least particles getting through the paper.

It will depend on your grind setting, a finer setting will work better with fewer pours, a coarser setting will tolerate more pours. E.g. I generally aim for a bloom & 3 pours 40sec apart with 13.5:225g with a 185, but might switch to 2 at 55sec apart, or 4 pours 30sec apart to normalise extraction. There is no great theory for me on the '3 pours'...it just so happens to suit my grinder setting, which in turn works well for a bunch of brewers so I'm not in a rush to change it. 

Evenness of extraction is likely more down to efficient pre wetting, dose size & grind distribution than how many pours specifically.


----------



## Elcee

How do you decide on the time interval between pours? I like the simplicity of a continuous pour but I find because of the higher water level there is a greater tendency for grounds to creep up the side of the paper partly because of the grooves in the kalita filter paper. A swirl/stir can mitigate this.

Multiple pours mean that the water level in the brewer is lower but water can dip below some of the larger grounds on the edges.



MWJB said:


> Whichever gives you the most consistent brews/extractions, at the highest good tasting yield, with the least particles getting through the paper.
> 
> It will depend on your grind setting, a finer setting will work better with fewer pours, a coarser setting will tolerate more pours. E.g. I generally aim for a bloom & 3 pours 40sec apart with 13.5:225g with a 185, but might switch to 2 at 55sec apart, or 4 pours 30sec apart to normalise extraction. There is no great theory for me on the '3 pours'...it just so happens to suit my grinder setting, which in turn works well for a bunch of brewers so I'm not in a rush to change it.
> 
> Evenness of extraction is likely more down to efficient pre wetting, dose size & grind distribution than how many pours specifically.


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> How do you decide on the time interval between pours? I like the simplicity of a continuous pour but I find because of the higher water level there is a greater tendency for grounds to creep up the side of the paper partly because of the grooves in the kalita filter paper. A swirl/stir can mitigate this.
> 
> Multiple pours mean that the water level in the brewer is lower but water can dip below some of the larger grounds on the edges.


I establish a brew time that gives a good extraction (averaged over a range of beans), deduct bloom time, then allow some dwell time after last pour.

E.g. A 3:00 target brew time less 30sec bloom = 150sec.

For 3 pours divide 150seconds by 4 (3 pours plus allowing for an imaginary pour as dwell time, for V60 with a lot of pours I allow 2 pours for dwell) = 38sec. But 38sec isn't an intuitive interval, so make a call on whether you go 35 or 40sec, fine tune based on real world brew times & results.

I give the Wave a shake at blooming, then another shake after last pour. With equal pulse sizes, the flow will slow at the last pour, so the water level should be high enough to wash down the walls at that last shake.


----------



## the_partisan

I tried with the new beans at same grind setting, but no stirring during bloom. Drained earlier this time, 4:10, and exactly same TDS as before. But it had a slight bitter taste which I didn't have before, so maybe uneven extraction?


----------



## Elcee

Thanks again MWJB for such a detailed answer! I like the consistency and control that multi stage pours offer. I am wondering about how you decide to shorten or extend the time interval. Right now I'm doing a 3 stage pour with my kalita. I often find that the first pour drains quickest and each subsequent pour takes longer to drain. Grounds end up being exposed in the time between the first and second. If I grind finer or shorten the time interval to account for this then the later pours raise the height of the water in the brewer. Potential solutions while keeping the same grind size could be increasing the amount of liquid in the first pour, shortening the time between the first and second pour or lengthening the time between the 2nd and third. Is this something that even matters?



MWJB said:


> I establish a brew time that gives a good extraction (averaged over a range of beans), deduct bloom time, then allow some dwell time after last pour.
> 
> E.g. A 3:00 target brew time less 30sec bloom = 150sec.
> 
> For 3 pours divide 150seconds by 4 (3 pours plus allowing for an imaginary pour as dwell time, for V60 with a lot of pours I allow 2 pours for dwell) = 38sec. But 38sec isn't an intuitive interval, so make a call on whether you go 35 or 40sec, fine tune based on real world brew times & results.
> 
> I give the Wave a shake at blooming, then another shake after last pour. With equal pulse sizes, the flow will slow at the last pour, so the water level should be high enough to wash down the walls at that last shake.


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> Thanks again MWJB for such a detailed answer! I like the consistency and control that multi stage pours offer. I am wondering about how you decide to shorten or extend the time interval. Right now I'm doing a 3 stage pour with my kalita. I often find that the first pour drains quickest and each subsequent pour takes longer to drain. Grounds end up being exposed in the time between the first and second. If I grind finer or shorten the time interval to account for this then the later pours raise the height of the water in the brewer. Potential solutions while keeping the same grind size could be increasing the amount of liquid in the first pour, shortening the time between the first and second pour or lengthening the time between the 2nd and third. Is this something that even matters?


I decide to shorten/increase the brew time by measuring extraction yield & balancing against taste. You could grind finer until all your brews are bitter, smoky, drying in the final sips then back off until they mostly have a sweet finish. From one coffee to another, you might see +/-20sec in brew time, so build a bigger picture by mixing up the coffees, otherwise what might work for an Ethiopian, might be no good for a central American natural. Some will naturally fall shorter, or longer than the average, this is only a problem if taste drops off.

For 3 pours, I see the bed drain out in the last few seconds before the 2nd pour, but there is still output from the brewer...it doesn't stop dripping.

Varying the amount of liquid & progressively longer intervals might work, but then things start to get very complicated in terms of weights, times & repeatability (for me, the most important aspect)...I'm not sure that degree of complexity is necessary. I try and work things so that I can make the changes based on memorised patterns, e.g. Bloom 25g then 100g every 55sec, bloom 15g then 70g every 40sec, bloom 25g, 50g every 30sec. I tend to stick to the same brew weights, ratio & grind setting as much as possible.


----------



## the_partisan

@MWJB With the Able Disc method, do you use the fine or the normal one? I might get one (useful for travelling anyway) and give this a try when doing larger brews with Kalita.. since I never seem to get consistent results in larger brews.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> @MWJB With the Able Disc method, do you use the fine or the normal one? I might get one (useful for travelling anyway) and give this a try when doing larger brews with Kalita.. since I never seem to get consistent results in larger brews.


I have the fine disc.


----------



## Step21

I've been wondering what the point of the filter is? It's the plastic perforated cover that redistributes the water into several streams and noticeably you get a better shower spread if you use an ordinary kettle rather than a gentle pouring kettle. If you hold the filter under a running tap it doesn't noticeably slow or spread the water.

I think I'll try a few brews without any filter in the AP and an ordinary kettle for comparison.


----------



## Elcee

The recipe I've been using recently for a 340 ml brew with 20.4 grams of coffee 60 g/litre in the kalita #185 is

00:00 Bloom with 60 ml then stir with a mini whisk.

00:30 Add 120 ml water, 180 ml in total. Swirl and tap the kalita.

01:10 Add 80 ml, 260 ml in total.

01:50 Add 80 ml, 340 ml in total.

Between 03:00 to 03:15 Brew usually finishes around here.


----------



## Step21

After some further experimentation I've now removed the filter and don't notice any difference. My theory is that it is the perforated AP cap that is making the change. I am now placing the cap inside the AP funnel supplied with the AP and using it as a holder, holding it centrally over the brew. Still using the gooseneck kettle.

What is striking is that the brew water now seems to sit almost perfectly clear on top of the coffee. It is not being churned up as in the typical pour. The resultant brew is visibly clearer. Time wise the brews are coming in a little shorter. Perhaps the fines are having less influence and not gathering at the bottom of the filter allowing the water to pass more quickly?

I use a Biarro AltoAir brewer which can accept a variety of filters. So far i've tried V60, Chemex and Wave. It is noticeable that the cone shaped filters of V60 and Chemex are behaving differently to the flat bottomed Wave. Typically my brews with V60/Chemex are weaker by around 0.15 Tds even at a slightly finer grind which doesn't happen normally. These brews have had EY's around 18% or just less but taste really good - sweet and clear if lacking body, so i may have to increase brew ratio with these. The Wave seems to produce similar EY's to my standard pour in a quicker time.

I've also tried the "fill n drain" technique with the Bonavita brewer using this method of pouring. It results in a noticeably quicker drain time and again a brew of great clarity but like the Wave EY is pretty normal.

What is going on? I think that this type of pour has the water hitting the surface with less force which must be a factor in the subsequent extraction as must be the filter shape?


----------



## MWJB

Cool, I'll try mine without the Able disc.

I think the gentler shower of water, as you say, hits the bed with less force, hence less undissolved solids are driven into the cup (lower body) & maybe the filter paper too. I have normalised brew time by stretching out the pour, so I haven't seen a drop in EY (previously, using a lot of pulses with a gooseneck meant less consistency than I am seeing now). My brews are averaging 20.7%EY at the moment.


----------



## Step21

I agree that it is the lack of turbulence that is the key factor. It doesn't seem to matter what you use to slow down the water speed before it hits the coffee. I've had success with a plastic egg poacher! It's got fewer holes than the AP cap but the key seems to me to have something with as much solid as holes. Too fine like a sieve and the water doesn't slow.

My brew ratio of around 56/57g p/l seems to work fine with the Wave/Bonavita but not V60/chemex. I'm going to push these up to 60g and see how that goes.

Is it possibly that the "boulders" don't overextract with this gentler approach?


----------



## MWJB

Step21 said:


> Is it possibly that the "boulders" don't overextract with this gentler approach?


Maybe, but I haven't seen any significant change in EY when considered in conjunction with brew time. It might also be less bittering micro-fines getting into the cup?


----------



## James811

Been following this closely. Looking forward to giving it a try when I get home.

When doing this are we still pouring in circles into the wave or just centralising the aeropress filter cap and allowing it to fill?


----------



## MWJB

James811 said:


> Been following this closely. Looking forward to giving it a try when I get home.
> 
> When doing this are we still pouring in circles into the wave or just centralising the aeropress filter cap and allowing it to fill?


Bloom as normal, straight from the kettle onto the bed, then place the AP above the brewer & pour straight down the middle. If making a big brew, with more water than the Kalita can hold, be sure to check levels in the brewer so you don't overflow it. If your brew time drops, increase the number of pulses to get back to normal.


----------



## Elcee

I enjoy brewing with my kalita wave however a problem I consistently run into is grounds getting stuck inside the flutes of the filter paper. I swirl/rao spin the kalita to tyr and mitigate this but it is still a persistent problem.

I notice this problem much more using a continuous pour.

Does the kalita necessitate a particular pouring style? Are there steps I could take to mitigate this?


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> I enjoy brewing with my kalita wave however a problem I consistently run into is grounds getting stuck inside the flutes of the filter paper. I swirl/rao spin the kalita to tyr and mitigate this but it is still a persistent problem.
> 
> I notice this problem much more using a continuous pour.
> 
> Does the kalita necessitate a particular pouring style? Are there steps I could take to mitigate this?


Grind a shade finer and do a 'double pour' for the last pulse, see if the higher water line is enough to incorporate the grounds, with a gentle swirl after the last water goes in?

Use the Aeropress/egg poacher/'something with holes to act as a shower screen' method. I get nothing stuck to the filter walls with this method.

I think it's fairly normal to have a little build up in the flutes, might be worse if the grind is too coarse?


----------



## Elcee

Generally it seems to be a build up of finer grounds rather than larger "boulders" and a finer grind worsens the issue. Swirling the Kalita keeps these grounds offer the peaks of the flutes but I think the water is not able to get in the troughs of the flutes to wash them out.

Because a continuous pour generally requires a finer grind and there is a higher peak water level, I am wondering if this means that a pulse pour is better for a kalita.

However, I've read things such as Scott Rao's observations on hand pours which advocate a continuous pour for a higher brew temperature.

That aeropress and kalita shower method seems really interesting to me. Does the aeropress sit on the kalita itself?



MWJB said:


> Grind a shade finer and do a 'double pour' for the last pulse, see if the higher water line is enough to incorporate the grounds, with a gentle swirl after the last water goes in?
> 
> Use the Aeropress/egg poacher/'something with holes to act as a shower screen' method. I get nothing stuck to the filter walls with this method.
> 
> I think it's fairly normal to have a little build up in the flutes, might be worse if the grind is too coarse?


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> Generally it seems to be a build up of finer grounds rather than larger "boulders" and a finer grind worsens the issue. Swirling the Kalita keeps these grounds offer the peaks of the flutes but I think the water is not able to get in the troughs of the flutes to wash them out.
> 
> Because a continuous pour generally requires a finer grind and there is a higher peak water level, I am wondering if this means that a pulse pour is better for a kalita.
> 
> However, I've read things such as Scott Rao's observations on hand pours which advocate a continuous pour for a higher brew temperature.
> 
> That aeropress and kalita shower method seems really interesting to me. Does the aeropress sit on the kalita itself?


I don't look at single vs pulse as better/worse, they just interlock with grind size. Pulse pouring allows more opportunity to wash down the walls, but I rarely use more than 3 pulses if pouring with a kettle. The Aeropress can sit on a 185 if a little precariously, I use a brew stand with Aeropress on the stand, Kalita straight on the cup (see link to my blog in my sig).

@Step21 has been just holding the Aeropress over the brewer.


----------



## Elcee

I'm trying to understand whether there is such a thing as a best recipe. There are so many recipes available and I wonder if they're comparable or if one particular approach yields better results. I also am not sure how to adapt a recipe for a different type of coffee. Is there a particular recipe or approach that is universally better than others?


----------



## MWJB

Any decent method should work for 9/10coffees of a similar roast level. You shouldn't need to be constantly messing with it. I didn't find a big difference between a bloom for 90 sec then all in with a fine grind, or going a bit coarser & using 3 pours with 30sec boom, or going coarser still & 6 pours. The shower screen method has given me the best consistency.

The objective of the 'recipe' is always the same - coffee of an appropriate strength, with sweetness & clarity, least objectionable bitterness & sourness.


----------



## Step21

I found pouring into the AP while hovering it over the coffee a bit awkward and hard to see what was happening below.

So, I now use the hexagonal funnel and place the cap centrally in it and hold it just above the coffee and pour into the cap. A pic might be more useful.

My stategy is a bloom just slightly over the weight of coffee. So say 225g water and 12.75g coffee. Bloom 20g (I bloom 1min 30 normally) then a 50g pour, let it just about drain, pour the rest. This is proving ultra consistent across a range of coffees. Gives a nice flat bed with no grinds on the sides. Ignoring the bloom the brew takes between 1min 45s and 2 min.

I've adapted it slightly for V60 and bloom 15g then use 3 pours of 50g and a final bigger pour. 1 notch finer on the grind than for Wave.

Again extremely consistent and great clarity.

Can't decide between the two which I prefer. Nice problem to have.

It might sound a faff but it really isn't. The results in the cup are worth it imo.


----------



## the_partisan

The best recipe is the one that you can reproduce easiest and gives you consistent results. I find it easier to stick a single recipe and then adjust grind depending on bean or the amount of coffee I'm making. This way I don't have to think about variations in the recipe. Which recipe it is, I think doesn't matter as much, as long as you wet the bed evenly and have slow and steady pours ( a flow restrictor on your kettle or MWJB's shower screen method helps with this).

I find this video by TW quite good in explaining things:


----------



## Elcee

Thank you all for sharing your insights and tips.

@Step21 thanks for your tips. Would you mind sharing a

photo of your AP and pourover setup? Im curious









I wonder if I'm just simply overcomplicating and overthinking brewing here. While there are significant differences in recipes perhaps once dialled in the resulting cup doesn't differ significantly and thus what matters is the ability to execute the brew consistently.


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> I wonder if I'm just simply overcomplicating and overthinking brewing here. While there are significant differences in recipes perhaps once dialled in the resulting cup doesn't differ significantly and thus what matters is the ability to execute the brew consistently.


Sure, it's a question of seeing the wood for the trees, identifying what is important in getting a good cup. If you break it down...

Brew ratio sets the strength at a reasonable extraction, in reality your strength is going to vary a little, so once you are in a decent range there may not be great need to vary this.

Dose - ties in with brew ratio in order to provide a desired cup size, so if brewing into the same sized cup/mug/decanter all the time, again no great need to vary this.

Brew time - this might change a little from one pour regime to the next, but brews at the same regime will usually fall +/-15sec for the majority, the odd coffee might buck the trend.

Once you are in the ball-park extraction-wise & consistency-wise, the different recipes might affect the clarity of the brew. A course grind will drain faster & can take more agitation from lots of pulses/pouring/stirring (if you can still hit a desired extraction & brew time). A finer grind will drain slower & need less pulses & more susceptible to particles getting through the paper into the cup.


----------



## Step21

Elcee said:


> Thank you all for sharing your insights and tips.
> 
> @Step21 thanks for your tips. Would you mind sharing a
> 
> photo of your AP and pourover setup? Im curious
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if I'm just simply overcomplicating and overthinking brewing here. While there are significant differences in recipes perhaps once dialled in the resulting cup doesn't differ significantly and thus what matters is the ability to execute the brew consistently.











Hopefully this shows how the AP cap sits inside the funnel. I pour onto the cap holding the edge of the funnel (use a glove!) and hover it so that the end of the funnel is just above the water. Easy to control. The brewer is the Biarro AltoAir and i usually sit this atop my chemex glass to catch the brew.


----------



## tdfg7583

Slight tangent, sorry, but how are you guys measuring the extraction yield? Is there a more affordable option to the VST refractometer that will work well for pourover coffee?


----------



## MWJB

tdfg7583 said:


> Slight tangent, sorry, but how are you guys measuring the extraction yield? Is there a more affordable option to the VST refractometer that will work well for pourover coffee?


Unfortunately not.


----------



## the_partisan

tdfg7583 said:


> Slight tangent, sorry, but how are you guys measuring the extraction yield? Is there a more affordable option to the VST refractometer that will work well for pourover coffee?


I don't think there is. For brewed coffee the viable TDS range is rather small, because the coffee is so diluted compared to espresso. i.e. a 0.1% delta in TDS covers most of the "good" range. Has Bean them has them now for £600 or you can look for a second hand VST II like I did. I think it's definitely been a really good investment, but if you're happy with your cups, and not overtly OCD (like me, then it might not be necessary. I also think pour over is harder to get right than for example French Press, which is pretty foolproof.


----------



## Step21

As a caveat to a refractometer (I use one ) it is entirely possible to make bad coffee within the "ideal" extraction range. I know because I've done it myself....

It's not a panacea. You absolutely need good technique to make good coffee not a refractometer.

That said, it is a very useful tool for giving you absolute certainty about where you are with Tds and ideas how to tweak a brew to make it better.

I'd say that using a gooseneck kettle improved my coffee more than any other bit of kit.

I also find pourover to be more consistent than immersion, something I wouldn't have thought possible until recently.


----------



## tdfg7583

I think I'm just OCD enough to enjoy tracking the stats of my <gs id="4a7113c3-a636-44e8-90d8-4c567e2add74" ginger_software_uiphraseguid="d5500eb3-c3f5-4553-aec4-ab5c9a33247c" class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">brews</gs> with a <gs id="89cfbae1-9a3d-4daf-9c93-31297de317ce" ginger_software_uiphraseguid="d5500eb3-c3f5-4553-aec4-ab5c9a33247c" class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">refractometer</gs>, but I don't think I'm quite ready for the investment. As suggested, if a second-hand one comes up, I'll think about snapping it up, otherwise I'll just stumble on by taste alone


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

I am currently testing the 'fork suspension theory'


----------



## Step21

Interesting! Looks a tad precarious. Is it sharpening up your brews?









Try it without the filter and see if there is any difference.


----------



## MWJB

Found a collapsible colander that does the same job with my Chemex & Hario papers...came as a pair of colanders off Amazon, this is the smaller of the two...








[/url]


----------



## Elcee

That collander idea seems inspired









Has anyone tried a large sink strainer such as https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B06WW3YSC5?psc=1 and sitting it on top of a brewer?


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> That collander idea seems inspired
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone tried a large sink strainer such as https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B06WW3YSC5?psc=1 and sitting it on top of a brewer?


That might work, bear in mind I did try using a stainless steel can strainer, but it gives off a really powerful metallic odour, may be psychosomatic but I felt it was creeping into the brews. Worth trying out for the price though.


----------



## Elcee

wrong post


----------



## Elcee

Ah good to know. I'll see if there are plastic ones.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

Latest version - The Wagamama takeaway kids chopsticks bluetacked together (sorry for the bad picture)


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

Just had a really nice cup from this after some experimentation. Best for me was after tightening the feldgrind to 1+6, 90 second bloom then all in one continuous slow pour.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

I think we need to check with one of the 3D printer gurus here what simpler solution could be created for this as I think it definitely improves what ends up in the cup


----------



## the_partisan

I also had another go at this method, this time with the metal aeropress filter. The result was actually really nice. High EY without any of the bitterness. Kalita Wave in particular seems very sensitive to how you pour so this removes one element you have to think about. Flow restrictor also works quite well, but can be faff to get in and out if you want to use other brew methods like FP.


----------



## Elcee

I'm really keen to give the AP+Kalita method a try. What are safe ways to suspend or keep the AP in place?


----------



## the_partisan

Elcee said:


> I'm really keen to give the AP+Kalita method a try. What are safe ways to suspend or keep the AP in place?


I just put the whole Aeropress on it. Seems to fit the Wave 185 quite well, even though it touches the edge of the paper filter slightly. Just have to be careful not to pour too much at a time (100g seems to be the limit) or it will overflow. I'm sure a more elegant solution can be found, however..

I put the coffee and Aeropress on top, tare the scale, remove the aeropress, bloom and stir, put the Aeropress back on, and then pour about 100g at a time.


----------



## Elcee

the_partisan said:


> I just put the whole Aeropress on it. Seems to fit the Wave 185 quite well, even though it touches the edge of the paper filter slightly. Just have to be careful not to pour too much at a time (100g seems to be the limit) or it will overflow. I'm sure a more elegant solution can be found, however..
> 
> I put the coffee and Aeropress on top, tare the scale, remove the aeropress, bloom and stir, put the Aeropress back on, and then pour about 100g at a time.


 Thanks for explaining, I'll give that a try. At my work the quizzical looks and comments about my coffee brewing have been dying down recently so it is about time I give them more ammunition.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

Elcee said:


> I'm really keen to give the AP+Kalita method a try. What are safe ways to suspend or keep the AP in place?


Look up a few posts from your and you will see what I do.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

the_partisan said:


> I also had another go at this method, this time with the metal aeropress filter. The result was actually really nice. High EY without any of the bitterness. Kalita Wave in particular seems very sensitive to how you pour so this removes one element you have to think about. Flow restrictor also works quite well, but can be faff to get in and out if you want to use other brew methods like FP.


I found the best results when I left my metal disk in, I also had the most even bed using this method.


----------



## the_partisan

Hairy_Hogg said:


> I found the best results when I left my metal disk in, I also had the most even bed using this method.


Yes I use the metal filter as well. I got quite nice tasting 21-22% EY brews with this method, very pleased so far. I guess this is one of the reasons why batch brewers can produce very good results. My Aeropress is resting on the filter paper itself, rather than on the Kalita. The paper does get bent around the edges, but I doubt this would have any adverse effects.


----------



## PPapa

I can see a year later this topic will be like...


----------



## Elcee

@PPapa maybe a shower head attachment for pour over kettles is the next big kickstarter project?


----------



## the_partisan

I've got some uneven beds and very quick brews (


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> I've got some uneven beds and very quick brews (


Of 21 brews, a bunch of different coffees, these spanned 2:49 to 3:16. 10 brews with the same coffee were 2:58 to 3:10. I use a brew stand so the AP should be level.


----------



## the_partisan

MWJB said:


> Of 21 brews, a bunch of different coffees, these spanned 2:49 to 3:16. 10 brews with the same coffee were 2:58 to 3:10. I use a brew stand so the AP should be level.


What brew stand do you use? I might invest in one as well. aren't brew stands supposed to just hold the filter holder though, so how will it help with the AP?


----------



## MWJB

I have a couple, a Ubrew and a Hario. The Ubrew just allows the 185 & a cupping bowl to slide under the top of the stand, AP goes on top. Hario will give you more flexibility on cup height...








[/url]


----------



## the_partisan

MWJB said:


> I have a couple, a Ubrew and a Hario. The Ubrew just allows the 185 & a cupping bowl to slide under the top of the stand, AP goes on top. Hario will give you more flexibility on cup height...
> 
> [/url]


Thanks I found a slightly different solution using two chopsticks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0arx6gsqiyuy7k2/File%2026-04-2017%2C%2015%2046%2011.jpeg?dl=0

I find that with this method, the water drains much faster through, even when using a quite fine grind. How many pulses do you use and when is the last one? I typically used to do 2x100g for a 250g brew, 45 sec apart, with last pour at 1:45, but this seems too quick. Brew already ends at 2:00-2:10. Still getting good extraction however! but the bed looks quite hilly.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> Thanks I found a slightly different solution using two chopsticks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0arx6gsqiyuy7k2/File%2026-04-2017%2C%2015%2046%2011.jpeg?dl=0
> 
> I find that with this method, the water drains much faster through, even when using a quite fine grind. How many pulses do you use and when is the last one? I typically used to do 2x100g for a 250g brew, 45 sec apart, with last pour at 1:45, but this seems too quick. Brew already ends at 2:00-2:10. Still getting good extraction however! but the bed looks quite hilly.


I was using bloom & 6 pours 20sec apart at same grind as I'd use for normal v60 brews (because I'm lazy & wanted to use the same grind & timings for both). You can use more pulses due to less bed agitation/silt in the cup


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

OK, as using my Aeropress "end" and metal filter suspended by children's Wagamama chopsticks is now my favored method for the Kalita I have been thinking about a less Heath Robinson solution to this.

I was wondering if any of the 3D printer Guru's - @whiteyj @Dylan or @tcw could produce something like my very poor illustration below?









The diameter of 6.5cm for the disk is at the bottom of the "lower" bit if that makes sense. Would not have to have sloping sides either, they could be straight. Not sure if you can 3D print little holes or I would need to drill them post production?

ETA: Forgot to mention depth, around 6-7 inch would be fine


----------



## Dylan

Does the Kalita just sit on top of the Aeropress disc and top part?

Should be doable - are you imagining 4 legs or 2 walls?

It would also be possible to print just the top part and then have more aesthetically pleasing legs made out of wood or metal.

Also - can the part that takes the metal disk not just have a rim that the disk sits on and no need for holes? would avoid any possible flavour contamination from the plastic.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

Dylan said:


> Does the Kalita just sit on top of the Aeropress disc and top part?
> 
> Should be doable - are you imagining 4 legs or 2 walls?
> 
> It would also be possible to print just the top part and then have more aesthetically pleasing legs made out of wood or metal.
> 
> Also - can the part that takes the metal disk not just have a rim that the disk sits on and no need for holes? would avoid any possible flavour contamination from the plastic.


The Kalita sits under this on a mug, the only thing that sits on this will be the metal disk.

Do you think the plastic will produce a taste? If so I will need to think about the disk sitting on a lip as you have suggested or the bottom bit of the aeropress (the bit with holes) sitting on a lip might be better and then I drop the disk in there.

I was thinking two walls but if legs keep it more cost effective I am not overly fussed.


----------



## Dylan

So what exactly does the aeropress disk do on this contraption you have built?

Printing plastic isn't considered 'food safe' this is more to do with microbes getting in the surface and contaminating down the line than the plastic leaking flavour or chemicals but its worth noting.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

Dylan said:


> So what exactly does the aeropress disk do on this contraption you have built?


If you have a look from post #172 in this thread onwards you should get a good idea. Below is what I am trying to make less Heath Robinson.



Hairy_Hogg said:


> Latest version - The Wagamama takeaway kids chopsticks bluetacked together (sorry for the bad picture)
> 
> View attachment 26032


----------



## Dylan

Ok, I think I have a better idea of what's going on now. If the aeropress end works well for you then best not change it up too much I think, unless there is any advantage to not using it?

I'll throw a design together when I get the chance, should be pretty simple.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

Cheers @Dylan, I think we are at a brew station now with a custom hole to suspend the end of the Aeropress. As you said, should be quite simple now.


----------



## smidster09

Sorry to hijack the thread, I was hoping a kalita user could help me out. What are the dimensions of the filter? I am particularly interested in the diameter of the flat bottom section. I bought a dripper from a store called blue bottle coffee in US and neglected to buy the filters. I am sure the 155 will be the similar but was hoping someone could help me out as can't seem to find online.


----------



## MWJB

About 40-42mm


----------



## Elcee

MacGyver'd setup using bluetac and straws. The clarity of the brew water sitting on the grounds is cool.


----------



## Dylan

Will get to this 3d printed thing eventually. Work had been busy of late!


----------



## the_partisan

Recently I've been experimenting with doing longer brew ratios, closer to 55-56g/L with a target TDS of 1.32-35%. This way, you can get higher extraction (20.5%-21%) without the heavier mouthfeel of the standard 60g/L brews that I used to do (TDS 1.40-1.45 for 20-21% extraction). I think this makes the flavours come forward clearer. It also allows use of a quite coarse grind (which means less fines) and still get high extraction. So rather than locking dose and water, I find it gives me better results to lock in dose and TDS and adjust the amount of water instead.


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

Elcee said:


> View attachment 27401
> 
> 
> MacGyver'd setup using bluetac and straws. The clarity of the brew water sitting on the grounds is cool.


I would be careful that the straws do not sit in the filter paper, I found that this impacts the flow to the cup and extends the brew time.

I managed to get a Hario brew station for £16 and this has replaced my Heath Robinson set up.


----------



## Elcee

Hairy_Hogg said:


> I would be careful that the straws do not sit in the filter paper, I found that this impacts the flow to the cup and extends the brew time.
> 
> I managed to get a Hario brew station for £16 and this has replaced my Heath Robinson set up.


That is a nice deal as those brew stations are a bit pricey. Thanks for tip. Just curious why does it affect the brew time?


----------



## the_partisan

This seems to be an interesting variation on the Aeropress / shower head idea






By having a handle, you're able to move the shower head closer to the brew bed, and having it transparent is quite neat too. Still seems like in early prototype stage though.


----------



## the_partisan

I tried to make a homemade "Melodrip" using a takeaway chopstick and Aeropress cap:









Then I brewed using more or less the same method, keeping the cap as close to the bed as possible and pouring around it with the gooseneck kettle (still had the flow restrictor, but it might not be needed with this method). It was a lot less faff than putting the whole Aeropress on top! The resulting slurry:









Even though I was using a quite finer grind than my normal size, the LRR was significantly lower than my usual (2.66 vs 3.3). 15g coffee 268g water, and I ended up with 233g of coffee and 1.22% TDS, giving 19.74% extraction. The brew time was also significantly shorter, by 45sec. I would probably reduce the amount of water since there is a lot less water retained using this method. The resulting brew was quite clear without much bitterness, but since TDS was so low it's hard to compare to my normal brews. I will try going finer and using less water next time.


----------



## MWJB

With the AP, I tend to bloom with the gooseneck as normal & then just use the AP for subsequent pours. I got lower extractions blooming with the screen.


----------



## fluffles

If you find the melodrip website there's quite a detailed brew guide - talks about keeping the water level at a constant just above the coffee bed and also aiming for longer brew times. Might be worth a go with your mocked up version?


----------



## the_partisan

fluffles said:


> If you find the melodrip website there's quite a detailed brew guide - talks about keeping the water level at a constant just above the coffee bed and also aiming for longer brew times. Might be worth a go with your mocked up version?


More or less what I did, but you really need a quite fine grind to hold back the water using this grind. I think it needs to be closer to Aeropress in terms of grind size, rather than my usual drip.


----------



## fluffles

the_partisan said:


> More or less what I did, but you really need a quite fine grind to hold back the water using this grind. I think it needs to be closer to Aeropress in terms of grind size, rather than my usual drip.


You said the brew was shorter, how long? Think he was recommending 5 mins?


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> You said the brew was shorter, how long? Think he was recommending 5 mins?


Seems odd that it would need that long, what brew size?

I haven't noticed such a big change in brew time for a similar extraction with/without screen.


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Seems odd that it would need that long, what brew size?
> 
> I haven't noticed such a big change in brew time for a similar extraction with/without screen.


He comments that longer contact time compensates for reduced agitation. I see a significant drop in EY when using the screen at similar brew times. I will try his suggestion


----------



## Step21

I find that wearing a glove and holding the AP funnel with the AP screen inside gives me absolute control and don't see any need for further complication with chopsticks, melodrip etc...

Over the last few coffees with the Brewista Dripper (Kalita Wave clone) i've had very consistent and tasty results by completely ignoring brew time and adopting it takes what it takes....

Same grind, 225g volume 57.5g/l brew ratio

So my current approach is to bloom carefully but directly with gooseneck kettle. Put kettle back on keep warm function. Once it ready (usually about 1 min), pour into AP screen to 125g. When water has drained bed add 50g. When water has drained bed carefully add the last 50g directly but carefully so as not to kick up silt. I find this last direct pour gives a tad more body but still a balanced brew.

Generally speaking, ignoring bloom, brew time is around 3 - 5mins. It really depends a lot on the bean and the roast. The Yirg i have at the minute has taken the longest at nearly 5 mins plus bloom.

I do notice that LRR is less getting on average about 6 to 7g more brew than pouring without a screen.


----------



## Elcee

I've found I need to grind finer when using the AP screen to get similar draw down times.


----------



## Elcee

Do you need to use a paper or metal filter inside the AP for using it as a shower screen?


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> Do you need to use a paper or metal filter inside the AP for using it as a shower screen?


Works with either a steel filter (I get a flatter bed with this) or just the plastic end cap, no need to use paper.


----------



## Elcee

MWJB said:


> Works with either a steel filter (I get a flatter bed with this) or just the plastic end cap, no need to use paper.


Ah okay. How close should the spout of the pouring kettle be to the AP filter and do you pour in circles?


----------



## MWJB

Elcee said:


> Ah okay. How close should the spout of the pouring kettle be to the AP filter and do you pour in circles?


I bloom directly with the pouring kettle (might not be necessary with very large brews), then I use the whole AP & just pour right down the middle. AP is just above the Wave brewer.


----------



## StusBrews

I've been getting some consistently stunning cups with the 185 lately using various coffees, but using the same recipe, grind and pour regime.

15g to 250ml

3+6 on the Feldgrind (quite coarse to reduce fines)

Gooseneck kettle with flow restrictor

Water at rolling boil

0:00 pour upto 25g

0:30 pour upto 50g

At 1:00 pour 20g every 20 secs up to 250g

Dry bed is usually seen between around 4:50 to 5:10

Each pour is very gentle so as to avoid too much agitation.

I am finding the long brew with minimal agitation is consistently giving me delicious and clean cups.


----------



## the_partisan

StusBrews said:


> I've been getting some consistently stunning cups with the 185 lately using various coffees, but using the same recipe, grind and pour regime.
> 
> 15g to 250ml
> 
> 3+6 on the Feldgrind (quite coarse to reduce fines)
> 
> Gooseneck kettle with flow restrictor
> 
> Water at rolling boil
> 
> 0:00 pour upto 25g
> 
> 0:30 pour upto 50g
> 
> At 1:00 pour 20g every 20 secs up to 250g
> 
> Dry bed is usually seen between around 4:50 to 5:10
> 
> Each pour is very gentle so as to avoid too much agitation.
> 
> I am finding the long brew with minimal agitation is consistently giving me delicious and clean cups.


It's quite similar to the method I'm using currently, and I've also had even better results with my "mock" melodrip (see https://coffeeforums.co.uk/showthread.php?32138-Kalita-wave&p=506792#post506792) which gives even cleaner cups. If you have an Aeropress and a chopstick lying around, give it a try, you might need to tighten the grind slightly. The melodrip method is shown here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq4IFDZa1kg. The key is to pour very little at a time which makes it possible to draw out the brew with a quite coarse grind, but still get good extraction. Coarser grind at same extraction gives cleaner cups when using drip. It's still not quite as clean as when using an EK43, but you can get very close. Instead of Feldgrind I'm using a Vario with steel burrs, grind setting 6G or thereabouts, fairly coarse.


----------



## StusBrews

Haha, very novel @the_partisan. I used to brew with the aeropress balanced on top of the brewer, but I just found this setup a bit awkward. I gave your mock melodrip a go at the weekend and it definitely gave more clarity in the cup. Looking forward to giving it a try on some of the other coffees I have on the go at the moment.


----------



## fluffles

fluffles said:


> I've recently acquired a 185 Kalita to compliment my existing 155. I've had some extremely slow brews in the 185 so far, way slower than the 155 at the same grind setting and recipe. This morning's 15g brew took over 4 minutes in the 185, when it was only 2m50s yesterday in the 155.
> 
> Only two things I can think are different: 1/ I rinsed the filter paper of the 185 quite heavily (I don't do this with the 155 as the paper gets mis-shapen), and 2/ I am necessarily pouring from a greater height into the 185 due to the size of the brewer which will be creating more agitation.
> 
> Are either or both of these things likely to be the cause?


Many months on and I am still seeing this. It is driving my crazy, I just cannot consistently get a sensible brew time out of the 185. Same coffee, grind, pours, etc will typically give me a 3:00 brew time in the 155 and anywhere between 4:00 and 5:00 on the 185. Same filter papers (use 185 papers in the 155), and the same thing happens on my December dripper with all the holes open (setting 3). It starts fine but then crawls to a halt towards the end.

Completely bamboozled.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Many months on and I am still seeing this. It is driving my crazy, I just cannot consistently get a sensible brew time out of the 185. Same coffee, grind, pours, etc will typically give me a 3:00 brew time in the 155 and anywhere between 4:00 and 5:00 on the 185. Same filter papers (use 185 papers in the 155), and the same thing happens on my December dripper with all the holes open (setting 3). It starts fine but then crawls to a halt towards the end.
> 
> Completely bamboozled.


Didn't you say one brewer had a raised "Y" stamped into the base, the other a welded wire "Y"?


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Didn't you say one brewer had a raised "Y" stamped into the base, the other a welded wire "Y"?


Yes the 155 has a more raised bit, but given the same thing happens with the December and attempts at inserting things in the bottom to keep the paper away hasn't worked I was thinking that probably wasn't the reason


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Yes the 155 has a more raised bit, but given the same thing happens with the December and attempts at inserting things in the bottom to keep the paper away hasn't worked I was thinking that probably wasn't the reason


Aha! You're ahead of me there.


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Aha! You're ahead of me there.


I've gone extra coarse and done a single pour, all in by 1:30, still takes over 4 min


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

fluffles said:


> Many months on and I am still seeing this. It is driving my crazy, I just cannot consistently get a sensible brew time out of the 185. Same coffee, grind, pours, etc will typically give me a 3:00 brew time in the 155 and anywhere between 4:00 and 5:00 on the 185. Same filter papers (use 185 papers in the 155), and the same thing happens on my December dripper with all the holes open (setting 3). It starts fine but then crawls to a halt towards the end.
> 
> Completely bamboozled.


I get exactly the same with the 185 metal. I normally stick with the V60 these days but did find that picking up the filter to remove it from the bottom at the point you see it visibly slow down resolved the problem. Not ideal but it works...

Will try with the Aeropress water diffuser method tomorrow to see if that stops the problem, cannot remember to be honest.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Many months on and I am still seeing this. It is driving my crazy, I just cannot consistently get a sensible brew time out of the 185. Same coffee, grind, pours, etc will typically give me a 3:00 brew time in the 155 and anywhere between 4:00 and 5:00 on the 185. Same filter papers (use 185 papers in the 155), and the same thing happens on my December dripper with all the holes open (setting 3). It starts fine but then crawls to a halt towards the end.
> 
> Completely bamboozled.


Hang on a minute, you say they are 15g brews and you are pouring all the brew water in one go, you can't surely do this with the 155?

It's possible at the fine end of grind that flat bottom drip brews can stall/slow, but are the longer brew times in the 185 & December correlating to a high extraction? I have had 6+ minute brews in my Brewista that were normal, tasty extractions, brews can be +/- 1 minute without a problem...but don't know how relevant this is to your issue.

On the other hand, why not pour in a few pulses like you must be doing with the 155?


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Hang on a minute, you say they are 15g brews and you are pouring all the brew water in one go, you can't surely do this with the 155?
> 
> It's possible at the fine end of grind that flat bottom drip brews can stall/slow, but are the longer brew times in the 185 & December correlating to a high extraction? I have had 6+ minute brews in my Brewista that were normal, tasty extractions, brews can be +/- 1 minute without a problem...but don't know how relevant this is to your issue.
> 
> On the other hand, why not pour in a few pulses like you must be doing with the 155?


I've been doing a more or less continuous pour in the 155, can comfortably get 250g water in by 1:30. Using the larger papers so they do overhang a bit


----------



## fluffles

fluffles said:


> I've been doing a more or less continuous pour in the 155, can comfortably get 250g water in by 1:30. Using the larger papers so they do overhang a bit


I bloom 50g, pour to 125g then pause to give a little swirl and carry on with the rest


----------



## fluffles

Curious to know, does anyone with a metal Kalita 185 *NOT* have problems with slow draw down? i.e. can hit ~3 minute ish brews?


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Curious to know, does anyone with a metal Kalita 185 *NOT* have problems with slow draw down? i.e. can hit ~3 minute ish brews?


Yes, I have no problems hitting brews around 3 minutes with a metal 185, wire "y", white Kalita papers (13.5 g to 225/235g).

If you're pouring in one go in the 185 after blooming, I can't see why it would take you 1:00 to get 200g in there? Surely you could do it in half that time, or less with regular spouted kettle?

Sanity check - these long brews are with all coffees, not just Ethiopians/Kenyans?


----------



## fatboyslim

fluffles said:


> Curious to know, does anyone with a metal Kalita 185 *NOT* have problems with slow draw down? i.e. can hit ~3 minute ish brews?


I get between 2:30 and 2:45 usually on metal 185. Here is a video I made to see how my technique compares to others. I would say I normally get a bit more of a swirl/spin than on this one.


----------



## fluffles

@MWJB @fatboyslim

Any chance you could photo the bottom of your 185? Interested to see what your Y-thing looks like.

@MWJB - yes, with all coffees EDIT - incidentally, is it the case that Kenyan/Ethiopian drain slower?


----------



## MWJB

You say you went "extra coarse", what do you mean by this, how come grinding coarser isn't speeding up the brews?

Are all the cups smokey & drying?

Will take the photo when I get home tonight.


----------



## fatboyslim

@fluffles


----------



## fluffles

fatboyslim said:


> @fluffles


Thanks Mark,

looks like the same sort of Y as on my 185. How on earth you get a 2:30 brew is beyond me. Where do you grind on your EK? (tell me like on a clock face to account for different dials).


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> @MWJB
> 
> @MWJB - yes, with all coffees EDIT - incidentally, is it the case that Kenyan/Ethiopian drain slower?


Yes, I find Kenyans can drain slower & hit a higher tasty extraction, Ethiopians can drain slower but can be across the typical range of extraction for a recipe. The stalled, single pour, brews (needed a lift of the edge of the filter paper to get them flowing again) with the Brewista were all Ethiopian naturals.

Basically I wouldn't use either to gauge an average brew time.


----------



## MWJB

Wire Y...








[/url]


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Wire Y...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/url]


The plot thickens! I will do a video


----------



## fluffles

Chatted to a barista in a local cafe today and he said they had the same problem with the 185, now switched to V60


----------



## Elcee

Have you tried different kalitas?


----------



## MWJB

I'm still a bit unclear as to the "problem", is it just that the time is longer than expected?

Are you pre wetting the paper? If so, have you tried not doing this?


----------



## fatboyslim

Waiting for your video @. My Kalita grind is at 11 o'clock on my ek dial. Espresso starts at 1.5 to about 2.


----------



## the_partisan

I've also had brews that took ~6 min to drain with Kalita, I think it has to do with fines clogging. Too aggressive stirring which deforms the paper might also have something to do with it? However it doesn't seem to affect extraction much. Using a aeropress screen to reduce agitation seems to prevent this from happening completely. I usually aim for 3:00-3:30 brew time (excluding bloom, as I start the timer after blooming) with 19.5-20% EY.


----------



## fluffles

fatboyslim said:


> Waiting for your video @. My Kalita grind is at 11 o'clock on my ek dial. Espresso starts at 1.5 to about 2.


Yeah I might have time tomorrow, but I haven't yet figured a way of mounting my phone at the right angle to film it.

11 o'clock or 11 on the dial? For drip I grind at about 8 o'clock which is about 11 on the dial


----------



## fluffles

I know there are different V60 papers in circulation that seem to drain differently, is anyone aware whether the same is true for Kalita papers?


----------



## fatboyslim

fluffles said:


> Yeah I might have time tomorrow, but I haven't yet figured a way of mounting my phone at the right angle to film it.
> 
> 11 o'clock or 11 on the dial? For drip I grind at about 8 o'clock which is about 11 on the dial


11 o'clock and 5 on the dial for kalita and 3 o'clock and 1-1.5 for espresso.


----------



## fluffles

fatboyslim said:


> 11 o'clock and 5 on the dial for kalita and 3 o'clock and 1-1.5 for espresso.


Wow, that is way way finer than me and I still get these slow brews. Brewed at 11 on the dial (about 7:30 on the dial) today and hit 22.7% EY.


----------



## fatboyslim

fluffles said:


> Wow, that is way way finer than me and I still get these slow brews. Brewed at 11 on the dial (about 7:30 on the dial) today and hit 22.7% EY.


Yes I found I can grind much finer after burr alignment, with visibly reduced fines and get a great tasting cup.

Minimal agitation is key.


----------



## Step21

Presumably the function of the wire Y is to improve drainage by keeping the holes open underneath the coffee

Just for comparison, here is a pic of the Brewista Smart Dripper which has the holes at the perimeter and a slightly convex base to make the liquid run off. looks like the holes are larger than the Wave.


----------



## fluffles

Sorry still no video, but I have had a breakthrough of sorts. As @fatboyslim said, agitation is a big part of it. If I am really careful not to agitate much then I can get 3:30 brew no problem.

Only trouble is I feel if I don't give it a good stir at the start then I don't get very even flow out of the bottom, like maybe its channeling a bit


----------



## fatboyslim

fluffles said:


> Sorry still no video, but I have had a breakthrough of sorts. As @fatboyslim said, agitation is a big part of it. If I am really careful not to agitate much then I can get 3:30 brew no problem.
> 
> Only trouble is I feel if I don't give it a good stir at the start then I don't get very even flow out of the bottom, like maybe its channeling a bit


Have you tried to achieve a spin yet? I find it relocates most of the fines to the outer "flutes" or channels whatever you want to call them, of the filter paper. Takes them out of the brewing stage early?

My kalita grind is ridiculously fine but a lack of fines allows me to push the extraction that bit further....

Maybe I'm just talking nonsense


----------



## MWJB

fatboyslim said:


> My kalita grind is ridiculously fine but a lack of fines allows me to push the extraction that bit further....
> 
> Maybe I'm just talking nonsense


Grinding finer makes more small particles (& less big ones). But if you add the water quickly you might be able to keep over-extraction at bay.


----------



## fatboyslim

MWJB said:


> Grinding finer makes more small particles (& less big ones). But if you add the water quickly you might be able to keep over-extraction at bay.


Still di-modal though. Still get tiny boulders and fines. Less fines and more tiny boulders is good.....probably...again, no idea


----------



## MWJB

fatboyslim said:


> Still di-modal though. Still get tiny boulders and fines. Less fines and more tiny boulders is good.....probably...again, no idea


What are you calling a "fine", we can add it to the list of arbitrary definitions of a "fine" then 

If a fine is particle under a certain size (what some folk say), then these increase as you go finer on grind.

If a fine, or boulder is above/below a certain size relative to the average grind size (a universal relationship to distribution), then the standard deviation drops as you go finer...but between a medium grind & finer grind for a 1 mug drip brew it's unlikely you a greatly affecting this, unless your 'medium' brew is 12 pulses of 20g brew water.

Maybe, you are & your cups, from various origins, are averaging well over 22%EY?

if you can tell a bi-modal grind from a uni-modal grind by looking at it, you're some sort of cyborg from the future ...or you have LPA equipment at home. 

Bi-modal means a peak of fines, e.g. more than if you were coarser.


----------



## the_partisan

I tried applying Scott's V60 method to the Wave with 18g/300g , 45s bloom and then stir after pouring everything in at once, and a final swirl. I found it hard to do a swirl because Kalita is shallow. After the bed drained there was a moat around it as he describes and the coffee was underextracted and bitter.


----------



## Elcee

I'm having trouble with a new coffee that has quite a violent bloom and drains fast. Any tips on taming it? Is the obvious solution grinding finer?


----------



## Step21

Possibly immersion might be a safer bet with this problem?

But you could try extending the bloom maybe stretch it out to 90 secs to 2 min. Try a short and gentle first pour (shower screen?), which might still be a bit bubbly, and let it drain until you can see the bed before the next pour, by which time the bloom should be tamed. I use this technique with some of my home roasts which can be vigorous when fresh.


----------



## Elcee

Step21 said:


> Possibly immersion might be a safer bet with this problem?
> 
> But you could try extending the bloom maybe stretch it out to 90 secs to 2 min. Try a short and gentle first pour (shower screen?), which might still be a bit bubbly, and let it drain until you can see the bed before the next pour, by which time the bloom should be tamed. I use this technique with some of my home roasts which can be vigorous when fresh.


 Yeah I am using an AP screen. I will try extending the bloom as i was just using 30 seconds.

Do you find the brew temperature is still high enough when letting the bed drain through?


----------



## Step21

I don't find any problem with brew temp. Bloom is at 98c and after 2 mins the kettle reads 92c. I could keep it higher between bloom and pour but can't say I've detected any noticeable difference in the result from doing so. But I'm using a Brewista glass brewer with Wave papers rather than a Kalita per se, which could change things.

If your kettle loses heat quickly it might be an issue.


----------



## coffee-king

Dont buy the 155 size its not been designed properly. The angle of the dripper is not wide enough so the coffee catches and sticks in the waves.

I'm waiting for my 185 to come from Japan.


----------



## GingerBen

Looking at getting a 185 at the moment. I hear you can get away without having a gooseneck kettle which appeals as I'm not really interested in getting one of those right now. HasBean do a deal on the brewer, carafe and filters which looks good value.


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> Looking at getting a 185 at the moment. I hear you can get away without having a gooseneck kettle .


Indeed you can


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Indeed you can


That's good. bloom then one pour or bloom then a couple of gentle pours?


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> That's good. bloom then one pour or bloom then a couple of gentle pours?


Bloom (I do 90sec, less might work), then all in in one quick (10sec), spiral pour. I have a small kettle so I can heat exactly the right amount of total brew water (240-250ml for a 14g dose), otherwise you'll just have to slow down & be a bit more careful with a larger kettle.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Bloom (I do 90sec, less might work), then all in in one quick (10sec), spiral pour. I have a small kettle so I can heat exactly the right amount of total brew water (240-250ml for a 14g dose), otherwise you'll just have to slow down & be a bit more careful with a larger kettle.


great thanks. Most videos I see suggest a 30 second bloom for pour overs at roughly 2x water:coffee weight. Do you think that matters or is it just about getting the grounds wet and letting them off gas?

Also do you stir your bloom? Seen that suggested too.

Sorry for the rapid fire questions!


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> great thanks. Most videos I see suggest a 30 second bloom for pour overs at roughly 2x water:coffee weight. Do you think that matters or is it just about getting the grounds wet and letting them off gas?
> 
> Also do you stir your bloom? Seen that suggested too.
> 
> Sorry for the rapid fire questions!


No problem 

If you're pouring in pulses, or continuously pouring with a gooseneck then you might get away with less bloom, as you are continually agitating the coffee & sinking floating grounds. I use the long bloom so that when I add the remaining water quickly, the grounds get waterlogged ASAP & don't float around on the surface. I do use 20-40sec when blooming a pulse poured brew.

With flat bottomed brewers & a 14g dose, there isn't a lot of depth for stirring, I find blooming with a gentle pour & then giving the brewer a side to side shake helps distribute the water OK. Maybe prod any dry clumps to help wet them if you see them.

There's a persistent myth that coffee holds twice it's own weight in water, which is where the 2xbloom idea comes from, but it varies and this amount is based on what the grounds can hold at the end, not the start of brewing. The 185 might hold more like 2.7 to 3x dose weight, but I generally bloom with enough to get everything wet, but not so much that I have more than a handful of g of drip through before adding the remaining brew water 20-25g should be enough...the world won't stop turning if it's 30g, just try to be consistent


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> No problem
> 
> If you're pouring in pulses, or continuously pouring with a gooseneck then you might get away with less bloom, as you are continually agitating the coffee & sinking floating grounds. I use the long bloom so that when I add the remaining water quickly, the grounds get waterlogged ASAP & don't float around on the surface. I do use 20-40sec when blooming a pulse poured brew.
> 
> With flat bottomed brewers & a 14g dose, there isn't a lot of depth for stirring, I find blooming with a gentle pour & then giving the brewer a side to side shake helps distribute the water OK. Maybe prod any dry clumps to help wet them if you see them.
> 
> There's a persistent myth that coffee holds twice it's own weight in water, which is where the 2xbloom idea comes from, but it varies and this amount is based on what the grounds can hold at the end, not the start of brewing. The 185 might hold more like 2.7 to 3x dose weight, but I generally bloom with enough to get everything wet, but not so much that I have more than a handful of g of drip through before adding the remaining brew water 20-25g should be enough...the world won't stop turning if it's 30g, just try to be consistent


thanks. Very helpful as usual! I like to understand the why not just the how so I appreciate the detail.


----------



## ken0062

Not sure if I have made a mistake getting a 185 when I only usually brew 13.5/225 seem to be getting very long brew times (4 min to level bed then another 45 sec for it to fully drain thats including 30 sec bloom) and I seem to always get a oily taste to the coffee, if I grind courser it then tastes under extracted.

Not sure whether to give up and go back to V60.

Currently trying Has bean Kenya Karagoto (grinding 18 on Baratz virtuoso)


----------



## MWJB

ken0062 said:


> Not sure if I have made a mistake getting a 185 when I only usually brew 13.5/225 seem to be getting very long brew times (4 min to level bed then another 45 sec for it to fully drain thats including 30 sec bloom) and I seem to always get a oily taste to the coffee, if I grind courser it then tastes under extracted.
> 
> Not sure whether to give up and go back to V60.
> 
> Currently trying Has bean Kenya Karagoto (grinding 18 on Baratz virtuoso)


Can you describe the brew regime (how many pours & timing)? Seems about a minute longer than I'd expect.


----------



## ken0062

30 sec bloom, then multiple pulse pours usually 5 to 6 keeping level around 5 to 7mm above grounds usually finishing pour at around 2min 20sec (thats with 13.5 to 225)


----------



## MWJB

ken0062 said:


> 30 sec bloom, then multiple pulse pours usually 5 to 6 keeping level around 5 to 7mm above grounds usually finishing pour at around 2min 45sec (thats with 13.5 to 225)


Maybe cut back on the number of pours (bloom 40sec, then 70g every 40sec), try and start the last pour ~2min. If you pour too often with too fine a grind you'll get off flavours from undissolved particles.


----------



## ken0062

MWJB said:


> Maybe cut back on the number of pours (bloom 40sec, then 70g every 40sec), try and start the last pour ~2min. If you pour too often with too fine a grind you'll get off flavours from undissolved particles.


Thanks, that definitely seemed to be a improvement, finished the pour at 2:25 and level bed by 3:45 fully drained at 4:10, still think it was slightly under extracted, may try next time to get water temp slightly higher rather than risk it stalling with a finer grind (currently using 94 deg C)


----------



## MWJB

ken0062 said:


> Thanks, that definitely seemed to be a improvement, finished the pour at 2:25 and level bed by 3:45 fully drained at 4:10, still think it was slightly under extracted, may try next time to get water temp slightly higher rather than risk it stalling with a finer grind (currently using 94 deg C)


Use water at boil for the bloom, you want to actualy brew starting at 93/94C, the brewer & grounds will eat up heat, so you're likely brewing in the mid 80's.


----------



## ken0062

I am using standard electric kettle water poured into pre heated pouring kettle, highest temp I can get is 96 deg c without a lot of messing putting pouring kettle on the gas hob, is that warm enough


----------



## MWJB

ken0062 said:


> I am using standard electric kettle water poured into pre heated pouring kettle, highest temp I can get is 96 deg c without a lot of messing putting pouring kettle on the gas hob, is that warm enough


Should be fine, I pre heat the pouring kettle, then pour the rolling electric kettle water into the gooseneck, lid on & bloom straight away.


----------



## ken0062

MWJB said:


> Should be fine, I pre heat the pouring kettle, then pour the rolling electric kettle water into the gooseneck, lid on & bloom straight away.


Thanks will have another try tomorrow.

Just one more question though, do kalita papers let more coffee oils through than V60 as I still seem to be getting a more oily after taste with the Kalita.

its a job to tell though as I have not had a go with this coffee yet on the V60.


----------



## MWJB

ken0062 said:


> Thanks will have another try tomorrow.
> 
> Just one more question though, do kalita papers let more coffee oils through than V60 as I still seem to be getting a more oily after taste with the Kalita.
> 
> its a job to tell though as I have not had a go with this coffee yet on the V60.


Not that I have particularly noticed. The coffee will be a tad stronger than with a V60, at the same extraction, as the Wave holds more liquid back.


----------



## ken0062

MWJB said:


> Should be fine, I pre heat the pouring kettle, then pour the rolling electric kettle water into the gooseneck, lid on & bloom straight away.


Thanks for the advice, think I have cracked it this time and no more messing with thermometer before pour.


----------



## GingerBen

Drinking Square Mile's 'Herbazu' filter roast at the moment. Just had a lovely kalita with it at 15:250 with a 3:4 grind on the feld. Method was 50g:30s bloom then two 100g pours finishing at 1:30. There was still a thin layer of water on top of the bed at 3:50 so I decided to pull it at that point. Coffee was good but could it be better if I loosen grind a touch further? 4 mins seems a lot for a small brew but it's my second go at it so I'm no expert! Any help greatly appreciated.


----------



## MWJB

Might be more useful to say when your pours start? If you were pouring every 30sec, for instance, maybe get the water in by 10-15sec after starting the pour.

I'd grind coarser if you have water at the end of brew time, but time the brew until the water disappears as it won't be easy to determine how much water you are dumping, nor brewed coffee weight (letting it drain will be very consistent).

With 2 pours of 100g I'd be spacing them about 50sec apart & expecting a dry bed at ~2:45.


----------



## the_partisan

I get generally good results with doing a very slow continuous pour, keeping the spout as close to the coffee bed as possible. Last 40% of the water I mostly pour in the center at same spot, finish pouring about 1:30-1:45 after 30 sec bloom, 15:250 like yours. Do a light swirl after all water is added. It usually drains by 2:30-3:00. Every now and then I get a brew that's not perfect though, it's hard to be 100% consistent when using manual pours and Kalita is really sensitive to brew bed agitation. A flow restrictor helps a lot but mine is a big hassle to put on and then off again because it's screws in too tight the the spout, so I don't use it anymore.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Might be more useful to say when your pours start? If you were pouring every 30sec, for instance, maybe get the water in by 10-15sec after starting the pour.
> 
> I'd grind coarser if you have water at the end of brew time, but time the brew until the water disappears as it won't be easy to determine how much water you are dumping, nor brewed coffee weight (letting it drain will be very consistent).
> 
> With 2 pours of 100g I'd be spacing them about 50sec apart & expecting a dry bed at ~2:45.


first 100g pour starts at 30 seconds and second one at around a minute or so. I haven't been precise tbh which I may need to do better.

To hit around 2:45 I'll have to go quite a bit coarser. What number on the feldgrind do you typically use for a kalita? .


----------



## Hairy_Hogg

GingerBen said:


> Drinking Square Mile's 'Herbazu' filter roast at the moment. Just had a lovely kalita with it at 15:250 with a 3:4 grind on the feld. Method was 50g:30s bloom then two 100g pours finishing at 1:30. There was still a thin layer of water on top of the bed at 3:50 so I decided to pull it at that point. Coffee was good but could it be better if I loosen grind a touch further? 4 mins seems a lot for a small brew but it's my second go at it so I'm no expert! Any help greatly appreciated.


If you are using a 185 you may have the same problem as @fluffles experienced earlier in this thread. I find a stir post bloom OR using a diffuser (like an aeropress as per this thread) removes the "pooling" water problem.


----------



## GingerBen

Hairy_Hogg said:


> If you are using a 185 you may have the same problem as @fluffles experienced earlier in this thread. I find a stir post bloom OR using a diffuser (like an aeropress as per this thread) removes the "pooling" water problem.


Yes it's a 185. I have been stirring The bloom briefly and perhaps once more during the process if there is any obvious floating crust


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> first 100g pour starts at 30 seconds and second one at around a minute or so. I haven't been precise tbh which I may need to do better.
> 
> To hit around 2:45 I'll have to go quite a bit coarser. What number on the feldgrind do you typically use for a kalita? .


I use 2+6, but for a ~2:45 brew with 2 pour of 100g after bloom. Go with time & taste more than an arbitrary number on a grinder dial.

You mention a 2nd stir if there is a floating crust? There shouldn't be any floating crust if your pre wet worked. I tend not to stir the bloom with flat bottomed drip cones, just add the bloom water and give the brewer a swirl/shake to make sure the whole bed is covered.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> I use 2+6, but for a ~2:45 brew with 2 pour of 100g after bloom. Go with time & taste more than an arbitrary number on a grinder dial.
> 
> You mention a 2nd stir if there is a floating crust? There shouldn't be any floating crust if your pre wet worked. I tend not to stir the bloom with flat bottomed drip cones, just add the bloom water and give the brewer a swirl/shake to make sure the whole bed is covered.


i tried a 2+6 brew yesterday and it was over 5 minutes before there was a dry bed which seems odd. I'll try one without stirring the bloom and see if that makes a difference.

My best tasting so far was at 3 or 3+4 I can't remember which. Just tried a 3+8 and it was still wet at 3:30 so I pulled it. The drink isn't great, thin and lacks the nice acidity of the previous ones.


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> i tried a 2+6 brew yesterday and it was over 5 minutes before there was a dry bed which seems odd. I'll try one without stirring the bloom and see if that makes a difference.
> 
> My best tasting so far was at 3 or 3+4 I can't remember which. Just tried a 3+8 and it was still wet at 3:30 so I pulled it. The drink isn't great, thin and lacks the nice acidity of the previous ones.


Thin? Do you mean lacking in flavour, or mouthfeel? I like plenty of flavour but not a thick mouthfeel.

Sounds like you might be going too coarse.

Can you post a video?

Forget 3, 3+4, 3+8, your numbers don't tally with mine...focus on the taste.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Thin? Do you mean lacking in flavour, or mouthfeel? I like plenty of flavour but not a thick mouthfeel.
> 
> Sounds like you might be going too coarse.
> 
> Can you post a video?
> 
> Forget 3, 3+4, 3+8, your numbers don't tally with mine...focus on the taste.


mouthfeel was ok it just lacked flavour. I'll video the next one and stick it up. What do you want to see - whole process or something specific?


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> mouthfeel was ok it just lacked flavour. I'll video the next one and stick it up. What do you want to see - whole process or something specific?


Whole process please, from kettle clicking off at boil.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Whole process please, from kettle clicking off at boil.


will do


----------



## fluffles

The slow draw down thing for me is not due to grind size, seems to be more about agitation. Solution is to use V60!


----------



## fatboyslim

fluffles said:


> The slow draw down thing for me is not due to grind size, seems to be more about agitation. Solution is to use V60!


Or a December brewer...as soon as boots posts me mine!


----------



## fluffles

fatboyslim said:


> Or a December brewer...as soon as boots posts me mine!


I get the same on a December. Smaller kalita is fine though ?


----------



## GingerBen

fluffles said:


> The slow draw down thing for me is not due to grind size, seems to be more about agitation. Solution is to use V60!


thays interesting. I'm using a normal kettle at the moment which I can control fairly well but I'm sure it's kicking up more of the bed than a gooseneck would. Having said that I tried a single pour yesterday and it still took nearly 5 minutes to drain.


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> thays interesting. I'm using a normal kettle at the moment which I can control fairly well but I'm sure it's kicking up more of the bed than a gooseneck would. Having said that I tried a single pour yesterday and it still took nearly 5 minutes to drain.


OK, this might be relevant.

Bloom with 30g, leave it 90sec. then add all the way up to 250g as quickly as you can (15-20sec?) in a rough spiral/circle, a gentle swirl when last water is in. What is your brew time?


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> OK, this might be relevant.
> 
> Bloom with 30g, leave it 90sec. then add all the way up to 250g as quickly as you can (15-20sec?) in a rough spiral/circle, a gentle swirl when last water is in. What is your brew time?


almost 3:30 on the nose although I crept slightly over 250g. Tastes good.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> OK, this might be relevant.
> 
> Bloom with 30g, leave it 90sec. then add all the way up to 250g as quickly as you can (15-20sec?) in a rough spiral/circle, a gentle swirl when last water is in. What is your brew time?


18:300 with a 50g bloom then all the water in quickly afterwards has just produced a lovely mug full. Thanks for the advice (again!)


----------



## bertrandlucas

155 is really great


----------



## GingerBen

Struggling a bit with my kalita 185 now I'm learning how to use the gooseneck kettle.

My method has been as follows 15:250g

30g bloom for 30 seconds

After bloom second pour up to 100g

After 1 minute third pour up to 150g

After 1:30 pour up to 200g

At 2 mins pour up to 250g. Gentle swirl to clean edges and leave.

At a fairly course grind 3+6 on the feldgrind it's taking anything from 4 - 4:30 to drain to a dry bed.

Now I could just grind more course but I suspect I'm pouring too much and need to reduce it to perhaps 2 bigger pours after the bloom. Does this sound right? If so would I need to make the grind finer or leave it the same?

I seem to be brewing quite a lot of coffee I don't like so something is wrong with my process. Either grind, pours or probably both!!


----------



## Step21

You seemed to be happy with less pours a couple of posts ago. Why have you switched to multiple pours?


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> Struggling a bit with my kalita 185 now I'm learning how to use the gooseneck kettle.
> 
> My method has been as follows 15:250g
> 
> 30g bloom for 30 seconds
> 
> After bloom second pour up to 100g
> 
> After 1 minute third pour up to 150g
> 
> After 1:30 pour up to 200g
> 
> At 2 mins pour up to 250g. Gentle swirl to clean edges and leave.
> 
> At a fairly course grind 3+6 on the feldgrind it's taking anything from 4 - 4:30 to drain to a dry bed.
> 
> Now I could just grind more course but I suspect I'm pouring too much and need to reduce it to perhaps 2 bigger pours after the bloom. Does this sound right? If so would I need to make the grind finer or leave it the same?
> 
> I seem to be brewing quite a lot of coffee I don't like so something is wrong with my process. Either grind, pours or probably both!!


What grind setting were you using for the single pour brews with a regular kettle?

For now, keep the grind the same, bloom 40g 45sec. Give the brewer a shake to make sure the water is evenly over the bed.

00:45 add up to 110g, spiral pour.

1:30 add up to 180g, straight down middle.

2:15 add up to 250, straight down middle.

Swirl brewer.

What happens?


----------



## GingerBen

Step21 said:


> You seemed to be happy with less pours a couple of posts ago. Why have you switched to multiple pours?


got the kettle so wanted to make use of it. I also have a v60 brewer I want to learn to use so it's all good experience.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> What grind setting were you using for the single pour brews with a regular kettle?
> 
> For now, keep the grind the same, bloom 40g 45sec. Give the brewer a shake to make sure the water is evenly over the bed.
> 
> 00:45 add up to 110g, spiral pour.
> 
> 1:30 add up to 180g, straight down middle.
> 
> 2:15 add up to 250, straight down middle.
> 
> Swirl brewer.
> 
> What happens?


3 I think. I'll give this a try as soon as I can and come back. Thanks.


----------



## Step21

GingerBen said:


> got the kettle so wanted to make use of it. I also have a v60 brewer I want to learn to use so it's all good experience.


The number of pours in itself is irrelevant, gooseneck or not. Tasty is much more relevant. You match the grind to the pours. Tasty can be had with one pour or multiple pours. More doesn't equal better.

A potential problem with multiple pours is increased agitation and stirring up fines potentially clogging the filter and slowing down drain time.

However many pours you decide on, be as gentle as you can, even with a gooseneck.


----------



## GingerBen

So just to back track a bit and give myself a base line with these beans I've done a couple of brews with the first single pour method @MWJB gave me which was 30g bloom for 90 seconds then all water in a spiral pattern in one. A gentle swirl and leave it.

Ive had the following results

3+6 on feld - 4:15 seconds - cloudy tasting drink

3+10 - 3:50 seconds better but still not a great cup

3+12 - 3:40 seconds getting a bit watery now. Thinking if I go any coarser I may as well use a pestle and mortar

so next plan will be to follow the above advice using the 3+6 setting as that's where I was before.

FWIW these beans are previously frozen Foundry Duromi a which is a washed Ethiopian heirloom varietals. Notes of huge florals (don't get this), Pimms and a tea like complexity.


----------



## StusBrews

Hey @GingerBen,

I suspect your pours are causing too much agitation in the coffee bed therefore clogging the paper filter. I used to have this issue which resulted in surprising long brew times for quite a coarse grind, yet not a great cup of coffee.

If you have any new stainless steel scouring pads to hand, try trimming some off, balling it up and bunging in the base of the spout in your gooseneck kettle. This will help restrict the flow, give you a gentler pour and give you more control.

You can buy flow restrictors, but this DIY method works great.


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> So just to back track a bit and give myself a base line with these beans I've done a couple of brews with the first single pour method @MWJB gave me which was 30g bloom for 90 seconds then all water in a spiral pattern in one. A gentle swirl and leave it.
> 
> Ive had the following results
> 
> 3+6 on feld - 4:15 seconds - cloudy tasting drink
> 
> 3+10 - 3:50 seconds better but still not a great cup
> 
> 3+12 - 3:40 seconds getting a bit watery now. Thinking if I go any coarser I may as well use a pestle and mortar
> 
> so next plan will be to follow the above advice using the 3+6 setting as that's where I was before.
> 
> FWIW these beans are previously frozen Foundry Duromi a which is a washed Ethiopian heirloom varietals. Notes of huge florals (don't get this), Pimms and a tea like complexity.


This is with the regular kettle & post bloom brew water added at 90sec, all in by 100-105 sec?

The grinder setting numbers you are quoting are about 2 turns coarser than I would expect for this method (e.g. yesterday I used this technique with a Melitta & 13.5:225g brew, Feldgrind was set to 1+8). It might be worth posting a photo or 2 of your grinder & burrs.

The single, very fast pour shouldn't be creating a lot of agitation, as it's all over in a few sec.


----------



## Step21

I was just about to say that I have never used such a coarse grind setting for drip of any kind.

My regular Kalita method is a 2 pour with the majority of the volume in the second pour (2nd poured via sieve, actually aeropress cap) to decrease agitation and increase brew clarity. My regular setting for this is 1 + 6 on the Hausgrind which equates to approx 2 + 0 or 2 + 1 on a feldgrind.


----------



## fluffles

Another member of the inexplicably long kalita 185 brews club. Welcome, you're not alone! It has nothing to do with grind size


----------



## GingerBen

This is the grounds at 3+6 for this brew









Used the gooseneck and the method described on the previous page 40g bloom 45 seconds etc

got to this stage at 3:15 then took nearly a minute to finish









Dry at 4:20









Just waiting for it to cool down before tasting but not expecting great things


----------



## the_partisan

I can have a large variation of drain time on Kalita, particularly after the last pour.. I don't think a lot of extraction happens at the final drawn though since temperature is dropping and coffee is already pretty well extracted at that point. I think up to 4:30-5:00 should be a reasonable range?

I typically use setting "5F" on my Vario, which seems quite close to MWJB's 2+6 setting with Feldgrind. This is now the method I use and seems to work well mostly:

15g dose / 250g water

pour 40g in, stir gently with a spoon

At 0:30 pour quickly until 100g and saturate the bed.

Between 1:00-1:45 pour rest of the water, after 150g I just pour it very gently in the same spot with spout of kettle close to the bed.

This usually drains between 2:45 to 4:30 and gives me a beverage of 215-220g.

I have two measurement for same beans & grind size, one took 3:00 and the other 4:30 using roughly same method. EY for 4:30 was only 0.3% higher than the other one, and I actually rated it as tasting slightly better. So I wouldn't worry about brews taking too long necessarily. Go by taste instead.


----------



## GingerBen

Tastes alright but a bit bitter. Wouldn't be jumping up and down to drink it again like this


----------



## the_partisan

Does it taste more bitter if you try at 2+6? Bitter can also be due to underextraction? You should be getting some sweetness at least if you're not underextracting.


----------



## GingerBen

the_partisan said:


> Does it taste more bitter if you try at 2+6? Bitter can also be due to underextraction? You should be getting some sweetness at least if you're not underextracting.


ill give it a go now and film it as best I can. I'll be doing 15:250 at 2+6 using the method on the previous page.


----------



## GingerBen

Film as above


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> Film as above.


Your filling pours are a bit fast/aggressive, I can see the water in the slurry rolling over around the edges of the brewer.

The filling pours are about 7g/sec., or faster. Try and pour so there is less of a 'hose' effect & so that the water drops straight down from the spout, rather than in an arc. I'd expect each 70g pour to take about 20sec, rather than 10. You're trying not to kick up the bed too much (you will, it's inevitable) but you don't want to see too much sign of it at the surface.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Your filling pours are a bit fast/aggressive, I can see the water in the slurry rolling over around the edges of the brewer.
> 
> The filling pours are about 7g/sec., or faster. Try and pour so there is less of a 'hose' effect & so that the water drops straight down from the spout, rather than in an arc. I'd expect each 70g pour to take about 20sec, rather than 10. You're trying not to kick up the bed too much (you will, it's inevitable) but you don't want to see too much sign of it at the surface.


Ok thanks that's easy to try and change so I'll do that next. Got some acaia pearl scales coming tomorrow so will be interesting to track it on them too. Thanks Mark


----------



## GingerBen

Just made a brew with same method and attempting a more gentle pour. Could have been better but it came through in 3:50. Coffee not nice, hard to tell if sour or bitter but I'm saying sour. Sort of taste that gives you a bit of stomach ache. Really confused now and surprised at how hard this is lol


----------



## the_partisan

What grind size did you use last? What coffee and water are you using?

Your pour didn't look that bad to me, you should be getting something tasty at least. I think either the coffee or water might be the problem..

Maybe try getting some Kenyan coffee from a reputable roaster. Those are usually very easy to extract and forgiving.


----------



## fluffles

Your video is very similar to what I see - seems normal to start with but the last 50-75ml ish takes ages.


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> Just made a brew with same method and attempting a more gentle pour. Could have been better but it came through in 3:50. Coffee not nice, hard to tell if sour or bitter but I'm saying sour. Sort of taste that gives you a bit of stomach ache. Really confused now and surprised at how hard this is lol


Bitter won't tell us much, you can get bitter at any extraction, depending on what the cause of that kind of bitterness is. Smokey/sickly/caramelly & throat drying, specifically, would normally be associated with over-extraction.

If I thought brewing coffee would potentially give me a stomach ache, I would stop. That said, under-extracted coffee (so it sounds like brew time needs to be longer) can give me acid reflux, but once dialled in, this should happen extremely rarely.

You had good brews using the regular kettle & a long bloom with single pour. Why not make life easier on yourself & go back to that?

I'd still like to see how your burrs look (gap, concentricity).

Not wanting to add to your pain, but there isn't a manual brew method that is more consistent, or easier to troubleshoot than drip.

What grind setting do you use with the Moccamaster? It may be possible to brew the Wave with that, then we may be able to take grind setting out of the equation & have one less variable.


----------



## GingerBen

the_partisan said:


> What grind size did you use last? What coffee and water are you using?
> 
> Your pour didn't look that bad to me, you should be getting something tasty at least. I think either the coffee or water might be the problem..
> 
> Maybe try getting some Kenyan coffee from a reputable roaster. Those are usually very easy to extract and forgiving.


Using coffee from a Foundry and other speciality roasters so it isn't that. I'm using volvic water so don't think it's that either.

Its a grind issue mainly I think I'm just struggling to get it dialled in for some reason. That and my technique needs practice.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Bitter won't tell us much, you can get bitter at any extraction, depending on what the cause of that kind of bitterness is. Smokey/sickly/caramelly & throat drying, specifically, would normally be associated with over-extraction.
> 
> If I thought brewing coffee would potentially give me a stomach ache, I would stop. That said, under-extracted coffee (so it sounds like brew time needs to be longer) can give me acid reflux, but once dialled in, this should happen extremely rarely.
> 
> You had good brews using the regular kettle & a long bloom with single pour. Why not make life easier on yourself & go back to that?
> 
> I'd still like to see how your burrs look (gap, concentricity).
> 
> Not wanting to add to your pain, but there isn't a manual brew method that is more consistent, or easier to troubleshoot than drip.
> 
> What grind setting do you use with the Moccamaster? It may be possible to brew the Wave with that, then we may be able to take grind setting out of the equation & have one less variable.


definitely a dry mouth feeling after a sip of the coffee.

I guess i felt (perhaps wrongly) that I could improve those brews by a different method.

Do do you want photos from the underneath of the grinder?

I havent cracked the moccamaster yet. Using the sage I'm one click of as coarse as it will go and a 30:500 brew has just taken nearly 5:30 seconds and tastes bitter. I'm not sure the sage is great at more coarse stuff tbh. I may just use the feld for that as I think it's more consistent.

Re your PM thanks. I'll do that ASAP.


----------



## Elcee

@GingerBen Have you tried using a flow restrictor with your kettle? I don't have a temp controlled kettle but I used to use a 1 litre gooseneck Vario kettle with a larger spout and I was noticing it was hard to keep the flow consistent. Ever since I got a smaller kettle with a narrower spout I've found it so much easier to control the flow rate from the kettle and be more consistent with pouring.

I use an aeropress filter which acts like a shower head. This is placed on top of the kalita over the top of the grounds and I pour through that. I've found it really minimises the agitation of the grounds to the point where the water on top of the grounds is almost clear. Minimising agitation helps keep a flat bed with fewer grounds up the sides and in the flutes of the paper.


----------



## GingerBen

Elcee said:


> @GingerBen Have you tried using a flow restrictor with your kettle? I don't have a temp controlled kettle but I used to use a 1 litre gooseneck Vario kettle with a larger spout and I was noticing it was hard to keep the flow consistent. Ever since I got a smaller kettle with a narrower spout I've found it so much easier to control the flow rate from the kettle and be more consistent with pouring.
> 
> I use an aeropress filter which acts like a shower head. This is placed on top of the kalita over the top of the grounds and I pour through that. I've found it really minimises the agitation of the grounds to the point where the water on top of the grounds is almost clear.


No I don't have one of those at the moment. As it happens my kettle is going back and being replaced as it's making some odd electrical noises so I'll be without it for a few days. Good time to dial in the moccamaster!


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> definitely a dry mouth feeling after a sip of the coffee.
> 
> I guess i felt (perhaps wrongly) that I could improve those brews by a different method.
> 
> Do do you want photos from the underneath of the grinder?
> 
> I havent cracked the moccamaster yet. Using the sage I'm one click of as coarse as it will go and a 30:500 brew has just taken nearly 5:30 seconds and tastes bitter. I'm not sure the sage is great at more coarse stuff tbh. I may just use the feld for that as I think it's more consistent.
> 
> Re your PM thanks. I'll do that ASAP.


Dry like bitter beer? Then this sounds like over, go coarser.

All manual drip methods are essentially the same, differences between good brewers are very subtle, mostly down to strength (brewers that hold back a little more liquid make a slightly stronger brew, but they all overlap. Some brewers are poorly designed & hard to be consistent with, but we're not discussing any of those here). Most take a fairly wide range of grind sizes.

Yes please photos/video of the underneath, to see how central the burr is (maybe perfectly fine, as @fluffles says brews might just take a bit longer than normal, but we may as well rule it out).


----------



## GingerBen

Just went coarser to 2+9. Brew took 3:55 which was a 15:250g brew. Think my pouring was better, according to my pearl scales my average flow rate was 4.92g/s. I don't know if that's fast or slow as its the first time I've used it but it's there as a benchmark.

So hard to describe how the coffee tastes, I'm not good at that. Definitely got a leathery note to it and some acidity but it tastes out of balance like the acidity is jumping out in one big hit then leaving a drying bitter aftertaste. It's not horrible but I suspect this coffee can be much nicer. It's not like some I've had where I just want to glug it all and immediately want to make another.

Pictures of grinder below, let me know if this is useful or you want more.


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> Just went coarser to 2+9. Brew took 3:55 which was a 15:250g brew. Think my pouring was better, according to my pearl scales my average flow rate was 4.92g/s. I don't know if that's fast or slow as its the first time I've used it but it's there as a benchmark.
> 
> So hard to describe how the coffee tastes, I'm not good at that. Definitely got a leathery note to it and some acidity but it tastes out of balance like the acidity is jumping out in one big hit then leaving a drying bitter aftertaste. It's not horrible but I suspect this coffee can be much nicer. It's not like some I've had where I just want to glug it all and immediately want to make another.
> 
> Pictures of grinder below, let me know if this is useful or you want more.


Sorry, I have no idea on how to get anything meaningful from the Acaia flow rate, but to me it seems fast. You're blooming with 40g if that's all in within about 10-15sec & left for another 30sec, then that's 3-4g/sec. Your 70g pours are spaced 45 sec apart and I'd expect them to be in by about half that interval time, so 70g/23sec = around 3g/sec again. In fact, I find it hard to pour faster than 3g/sec without the stream coming out like a garden hose & ceasing to drop straight down from the spout.

Pouring too fast may flush too many particles into/through the paper, slowing flow & causing leathery/pruney flavours if they land in the cup.

There's not anything obvious that jumps out from the burr pics, have a look at the gap between the burrs at a certain point & turn the shaft, without wobbling the grinder, does the gap visibly change as the burr rotates?

Next time you get brews that you just want to glug straight down, do that thing you did, exactly the same, over & over & don't change anything  Not every brew will be 9/9, the coffee you use will vary in flavour more than the mechanical process of brewing it, but you shouldn't get many/any less than 6/9 if you are consistent.


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Sorry, I have no idea on how to get anything meaningful from the Acaia flow rate, but to me it seems fast. You're blooming with 40g if that's all in within about 10-15sec & left for another 30sec, then that's 3-4g/sec. Your 70g pours are spaced 45 sec apart and I'd expect them to be in by about half that interval time, so 70g/23sec = around 3g/sec again. In fact, I find it hard to pour faster than 3g/sec without the stream coming out like a garden hose & ceasing to drop straight down from the spout.
> 
> Pouring too fast may flush too many particles into/through the paper, slowing flow & causing leathery/pruney flavours if they land in the cup.
> 
> There's not anything obvious that jumps out from the burr pics, have a look at the gap between the burrs at a certain point & turn the shaft, without wobbling the grinder, does the gap visibly change as the burr rotates?
> 
> Next time you get brews that you just want to glug straight down, do that thing you did, exactly the same, over & over & don't change anything  Not every brew will be 9/9, the coffee you use will vary in flavour more than the mechanical process of brewing it, but you shouldn't get many/any less than 6/9 if you are consistent.


Fair enough, I think I need to work on my technique using the grind setting I'm at now to take that out of the equation first. If I use 2+6 as a base line I can go from there. It's tricky to balance the pour between dropping straight down, dripping and coming out like a hose. That's what I need to practice I think. I don't think I'm far away now that we have identified this as a likely issue. Thanks again for your help, you'll be delighted to know I have a V60 in the cupboard that I want to learn to use too....  maybe after Christmas...


----------



## GingerBen

just done one in 3:35 with 2+6. My spiral pour was a bit dribbly which slowed down that section and may have caused too much turbulance but the other two pours were better. Shows this grind setting is capable of sub 3:30 seconds so thats encouraging.

Next thing is how to scale this up to brew for two people in terms of pours?


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> Fair enough, I think I need to work on my technique using the grind setting I'm at now to take that out of the equation first. If I use 2+6 as a base line I can go from there. It's tricky to balance the pour between dropping straight down, dripping and coming out like a hose. That's what I need to practice I think. I don't think I'm far away now that we have identified this as a likely issue. Thanks again for your help, you'll be delighted to know I have a V60 in the cupboard that I want to learn to use too....  maybe after Christmas...


 You'll also be delighted to know that when you nail down the Kalita with 3 pours of 70g, with V60 & Japanese made white papers you should be able to everything pretty much the same but use 6 spiral pours of 35g 20sec apart (each pour taking about 10sec).


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Dry like bitter beer? Then this sounds like over, go coarser.
> 
> All manual drip methods are essentially the same, differences between good brewers are very subtle, mostly down to strength (brewers that hold back a little more liquid make a slightly stronger brew, but they all overlap. Some brewers are poorly designed & hard to be consistent with, but we're not discussing any of those here). Most take a fairly wide range of grind sizes.
> 
> Yes please photos/video of the underneath, to see how central the burr is (maybe perfectly fine, as @fluffles says brews might just take a bit longer than normal, but we may as well rule it out).


From my own personal experience, I would put the Kalita 185 in the "poorly designed" brewer section. I can pour fast or slow with V60 and with Kalita 155 and still get repeatable results. With the 185 it is generally very slow as noted here, but occasionally I'll get a brew that behaves more like the V60 and will be done in 2:45. Can't do it when I try though!


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> just done one in 3:35 with 2+6. My spiral pour was a bit dribbly which slowed down that section and may have caused too much turbulance but the other two pours were better. Shows this grind setting is capable of sub 3:30 seconds so thats encouraging.
> 
> Next thing is how to scale this up to brew for two people in terms of pours?


Easiest way - Make 2 brews, or serve 1 brew as 2x smaller drinks, in 5oz cups.

Bigger brews usually means a coarser grind, you might be able to get in the zone by keeping grind the same & 2 larger pours (maybe a minute apart) & brew a bit less than twice the size?


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> From my own personal experience, I would put the Kalita 185 in the "poorly designed" brewer section. I can pour fast or slow with V60 and with Kalita 155 and still get repeatable results. With the 185 it is generally very slow as noted here, but occasionally I'll get a brew that behaves more like the V60 and will be done in 2:45. Can't do it when I try though!


Well, I have tested the 185 with several pour methods (my favourite being AP as dispersion screen, but it's pretty consistent with long bloom, fast fill & regular kettle) & I can keep brews consistent, no better/worse than V60/Kalita Uno/Melitta brewer...they're all about the same. For me, a poorly designed brewer won't keep consistent, reasonably good tasting (e.g. not a common fault discernable with multiple brews on that same brewer) extractions with a consistent method...sometimes you can tweak the method.

My personal deciding factor is no more than 3% span of EY over 10 brews, each with a different coffee.


----------



## fluffles

There appears to be variation between models. I sat close up and watched a local barista use one the other week and he was pouring pretty fast, stirring, swirling and not really paying much attention to keep agitating low and it flowed through in no time. I guess there could be differences between metal, ceramic etc but his was metal too.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> There appears to be variation between models. I sat close up and watched a local barista use one the other week and he was pouring pretty fast, stirring, swirling and not really paying much attention to keep agitating low and it flowed through in no time. I guess there could be differences between metal, ceramic etc but his was metal too.


Yours is with the pressed "Y"? I'll swap you mine with a wire "y" if you like, to compare.


----------



## fluffles

MWJB said:


> Yours is with the pressed "Y"? I'll swap you mine with a wire "y" if you like, to compare.


Yes it's pressed... I'm game if you are! Do you want to PM me your address? Do you still have mine?


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Yes it's pressed... I'm game if you are! Do you want to PM me your address? Do you still have mine?


I'll post it up, yes, still got your address.

Will do re. PM


----------



## GingerBen

Mine is pressed too - be interesting if you two could post any differences you notice out of curiosity.


----------



## GingerBen

Made a few brews today using 2+8 and the method previously discussed. All of them are nudging 4 minutes even though my pouring is getting better. Do I consider going more coarse or keep it the same and see if improving technique will bring it down?

Annoyingly im at the end of these beans now so have something new to try tomorrow after one more small cup of what I'm on now. I'll stick with all things the same and see how it goes before considering changes as above.

Shot of slurry below. Can see the later of fines on the top of the bed which I imagine is what is slowing down that last 50ml or so but of course had an effect throughout.


----------



## MWJB

GingerBen said:


> Made a few brews today using 2+8 and the method previously discussed. All of them are nudging 4 minutes even though my pouring is getting better. Do I consider going more coarse or keep it the same and see if improving technique will bring it down?
> 
> Annoyingly im at the end of these beans now so have something new to try tomorrow after one more small cup of what I'm on now. I'll stick with all things the same and see how it goes before considering changes as above.
> 
> Shot of slurry below. Can see the later of fines on the top of the bed which I imagine is what is slowing down that last 50ml or so but of course had an effect throughout.


Try knocking 5 sec off each stage, so 40s bloom, 40s intervals.

I tend to see larger/average sized grinds at the surface of the bed at the end of brew (even with 8 pours & my Kalita Uno), so I suspect that there's still a bit too much turbulence & that the waterlogged larger grinds are sinking to the bottom of the bed.

How full are you filling your pouring kettle? If there is a lot of water in it, it's hard to keep to a gentle pour, maybe aim around 300g per brew? Get the kettle spout close to the bed.


----------



## MWJB

[/url]


----------



## GingerBen

MWJB said:


> Try knocking 5 sec off each stage, so 40s bloom, 40s intervals.
> 
> I tend to see larger/average sized grinds at the surface of the bed at the end of brew (even with 8 pours & my Kalita Uno), so I suspect that there's still a bit too much turbulence & that the waterlogged larger grinds are sinking to the bottom of the bed.
> 
> How full are you filling your pouring kettle? If there is a lot of water in it, it's hard to keep to a gentle pour, maybe aim around 300g per brew? Get the kettle spout close to the bed.


ok thanks I'll try the shorter stages. I usually have around 500g in there so will cut that down too


----------



## the_partisan

Do you have an Aeropress? If you have one, try sticking a chopstick through one of the holes of the cap and pouring through that instead?

See this post here: https://coffeeforums.co.uk/showthread.php?32138-Kalita-wave&p=506792#post506792


----------



## GingerBen

the_partisan said:


> Do you have an Aeropress? If you have one, try sticking a chopstick through one of the holes of the cap and pouring through that instead?
> 
> See this post here: https://coffeeforums.co.uk/showthread.php?32138-Kalita-wave&p=506792#post506792


i do yes


----------



## the_partisan

I went back to using the Aeropress cap with chopstick today.

15g/250g

40g bloom, without using cap and stir

add to 100g at 0:30

add to 150g at 1:00

add to 200g at 1:30

add to 250g at 2:00

Very nice and clear brew, and also higher extraction than I got with these beans using the continuous pour. You also get a few grams less water retained in the bed this way..


----------



## GingerBen

the_partisan said:


> I went back to using the Aeropress cap with chopstick today.
> 
> 15g/250g
> 
> 40g bloom, without using cap and stir
> 
> add to 100g at 0:30
> 
> add to 150g at 1:00
> 
> add to 200g at 1:30
> 
> add to 250g at 2:00
> 
> Very nice and clear brew, and also higher extraction than I got with these beans using the continuous pour. You also get a few grams less water retained in the bed this way..
> 
> View attachment 30569


thanks for breaking that down. I'll give it a try


----------



## GingerBen

Best brew of recent memory just made 15:250 as usual. 2+9 on feldgrind with dry bed at 3:19. Pretty hefty tasting coffee (Guatemalan from Mokxa as part of Dog and Hat sub) but good. Might go a touch coarser to see if it opens up a bit but if not then this will do nicely.









No sludgy layer of fines on top. Might be different beans but hopefully down to better pouring tekkers too


----------



## GingerBen

There's a danger I might be getting the hang of this (jinx!)

15:250 2+8 on feld dry bed at 3:05 - I cut 10 seconds off the bloom time and brought the other timings forward by 10 seconds and it's made a very nice cup. I'll do it again and hopefully this might be a go to method. Thanks for all the help again @MWJB and others.


----------



## fluffles

GingerBen said:


> There's a danger I might be getting the hang of this (jinx!)
> 
> 15:250 2+8 on feld dry bed at 3:05 - I cut 10 seconds off the bloom time and brought the other timings forward by 10 seconds and it's made a very nice cup. I'll do it again and hopefully this might be a go to method. Thanks for all the help again @MWJB and others.


What are you doing differently?


----------



## GingerBen

fluffles said:


> What are you doing differently?


I'm pretty sure it's down to pouring technique. My method has been as follows

15g:250g

40g bloom, getting water in fairly quickly (5 seconds or so) then leaving it for 30 seconds

at 35 seconds add water up to 110g total weight in spiral pattern

at 1:20 add water up to 180g straight down the middle but pretty slowly so water falls from spout rather than arcing

at 2:05 add remaining water up to 250g as above and give a gentle swirl to wash grounds from the fins of the filter.

Leave it to drain.

I tried this same method loads of times before and it was taking ages even at a coarser grind but slowing those central pours down seems to have been the deal breaker for getting sub 3:30 brews.

I'm also using different beans from the other day so that may play a part but I'm sure the beans alone wouldn't make a 30-60 second difference so it must be the pouring.


----------



## the_partisan

I went back to using my Aeropress cap last few brews, and it really makes the brew a lot less sensitive to pouring technique and you don't need a surgeon's hands to not agitate the bed too much. Flow restrictor also achieves a similar goal.

I tried it with V60 as well but with V60 it forces you to use a quite fine grind to get a good extraction, the water drains really fast using the cap.


----------



## GingerBen

the_partisan said:


> I went back to using my Aeropress cap last few brews, and it really makes the brew a lot less sensitive to pouring technique and you don't need a surgeon's hands to not agitate the bed too much. Flow restrictor also achieves a similar goal.
> 
> I tried it with V60 as well but with V60 it forces you to use a quite fine grind to get a good extraction, the water drains really fast using the cap.


I've not cracked open my V60 yet as I fear it will be a tricky one to master so I'd rather get consistent with the Kalita first then try it and see which one I prefer.


----------



## StusBrews

the_partisan said:


> I went back to using my Aeropress cap last few brews, and it really makes the brew a lot less sensitive to pouring technique and you don't need a surgeon's hands to not agitate the bed too much. Flow restrictor also achieves a similar goal.
> 
> I tried it with V60 as well but with V60 it forces you to use a quite fine grind to get a good extraction, the water drains really fast using the cap.


I love using the aeropress cap with the able disc. I drop it inside the kalita as the conical shape of the brewer holds it a couple of cm's from the coffee bed. I then do a gentle and long brew...my method is as follows...

14/250 (I can get a high extraction so 15/250 was a bit strong for me)

2+6 on the feldgrind (I may tweak it depending on the coffee)

50 in with a quick stir to wet everything and bloom for 1:00

At 1:00 add 20g every 20secs all the way up to 250g.

Aiming to see a dry bed at 5:00 to 5:30.

If I am not getting enough acidity, then I'll reduce the number of pours...say 30g every 30secs


----------



## CoffeeRat

> I love using the aeropress cap with the able disc. I drop it inside the kalita


is it 155 or 185 kalita?


----------



## StusBrews

The 185


----------



## the_partisan

I did a brew today sifting

With Kalita the brew seems very sensitive to suspended solids, and even with sifting this is still a problem as I guess it still doesn't remove the tiniest particles stuck to larger ones. It might be less of an issue with a superior grinder like EK43, other than that pouring very very gently or using something similar to Aeropress cap seems to be the best option to prevent this from happening.


----------



## jlarkin

MWJB said:


> Yours is with the pressed "Y"? I'll swap you mine with a wire "y" if you like, to compare.


Did either of you notice a difference between the models?


----------



## MWJB

jlarkin said:


> Did either of you notice a difference between the models?


I did notice about a 15second increase in average brew time with the pressed Y, but extractions were on par with previous run. Seemed to be the Kenyans & Ethiopians that lead to longer brew times (~4:00), dragging up the average.


----------



## jlarkin

MWJB said:


> I did notice about a 15second increase in average brew time with the pressed Y, but extractions were on par with previous run. Seemed to be the Kenyans & Ethiopians that lead to longer brew times (~4:00), dragging up the average.


I'd noticed - casually as in I don't really record the times etc. - that Ethiopians seem to always take longer to drain.


----------



## MWJB

I have been using the water tank from an OXO pourover with the 185 brewer & 155 papers, as well.

90s bloom via the tank with twice the dose weight, give the brewer a shake to get the bed evenly wet, reboil brew water and add to 235g total. This gave just as consistent extractions and more consistent brew times as brews poured with a kettle (same grind, same weights).


----------



## jlarkin

MWJB said:


> I have been using the water tank from an OXO pourover with the 185 brewer & 155 papers, as well.
> 
> 90s bloom via the tank with twice the dose weight, give the brewer a shake to get the bed evenly wet, reboil brew water and add to 235g total. This gave just as consistent extractions and more consistent brew times as brews poured with a kettle (same grind, same weights).


Like this one? That looks pretty handy actually rather than having to concentrate on pours. Have you tried the actual brewer bit of that?

I got the brew time down from 5 minutes, to 4mins 30 seconds with this coffee by being as gentle as I think I've ever been with the pouring.


----------



## MWJB

jlarkin said:


> Like this one? That looks pretty handy actually rather than having to concentrate on pours. Have you tried the actual brewer bit of that?
> 
> I got the brew time down from 5 minutes, to 4mins 30 seconds with this coffee by being as gentle as I think I've ever been with the pouring.


Yes, that's the brewer...not had much luck with it, with the tank, nor without myself. Brews taste uneven and vary a lot, haven't worked out why. I just notice the water tank slotted onto the 185 with 155 paper perfectly, just happens to be pretty much spot on with my brew size & grind.

With a gooseneck, I pour spirals for the bloom & 1st pour, then my 2nd & 3rd pours go straight down the middle, with a gentle swirl at fill. I think pouring aggressively can clog things up.


----------



## Sheena_Lance

my brother owns a kalita wave 185 drippers for 26-45 grams of coffee approximately between 16 and 26 ounces of brewed coffee.


----------



## 9bar-ista

Any point owning both a kalita and a v60? Or are there too much similarities between he two?


----------



## MWJB

9bar-ista said:


> Any point owning both a kalita and a v60? Or are there too much similarities between he two?


They do the same thing. Owning both just means you have 2 types of filter paper to keep in stock. You really need a gooseneck kettle for V60, if you don't have one already, Kalita Wave brews are possible with a regular kettle.


----------



## Zephyp

9bar-ista said:


> Any point owning both a kalita and a v60? Or are there too much similarities between he two?


Taste is the most important factor in my opinion. They give a bit different cups, and it's individual which you prefer. Some like V60, some like Kalita, some like both. You can also find some coffees tasting better on one dripper and one better on the other.

I used a Kalita for a few years before trying a V60, and now the Kalita doesn't get much runtime anymore. I fell in love with the clarity and intensity of the V60.


----------



## the_partisan

I find the Kalita Wave more forgiving for smaller brews (~13-15g dose) and V60 better for larger brews (~24g-30g dose). Flow rate in V60 is much higher, so you need to break up your pours when doing a smaller brew whereas with Kalita it's mostly pour and forget.


----------



## 9bar-ista

Zephyp said:


> Taste is the most important factor in my opinion. They give a bit different cups, and it's individual which you prefer. Some like V60, some like Kalita, some like both. You can also find some coffees tasting better on one dripper and one better on the other.
> 
> I used a Kalita for a few years before trying a V60, and now the Kalita doesn't get much runtime anymore. I fell in love with the clarity and intensity of the V60.


Ah interesting. I've often heard of people moving the other way around instead due to the Kalita being more forgiving


----------



## Zephyp

That's also true, people generally find Kalita to be more forgiving. For me, I don't find the V60 too difficult to brew with. I sometimes get lost in dialling a recipe in, but when I'm being systematic and writing down everything I try, I can produce consistently good cups. Sometimes they are amazing and sometimes just fine. With the Wave I never got those amazing ones with clarity and fruitiness. I'd rather risk a few ok cups with the possibility great ones than just good cups more consistently.

I've also had my share of disappointing cups with a Kalita, so it's not fool-proof.


----------



## stassinari

I wanted to give a try to the Kalita instead of my usual V60 and Aeropress, not sure I'll do that anymore now ^^


----------



## the_partisan

I'm considering getting rid of my Kalita 185 and replacing it with 155, as I brew max 250g on it at a time. Is there any differences in flow rate between the two? My 185 also sometimes suffers from very slow draw down, like many here also reported. I haven't been able to pinpoint it to one particular thing.


----------



## fluffles

the_partisan said:


> I'm considering getting rid of my Kalita 185 and replacing it with 155, as I brew max 250g on it at a time. Is there any differences in flow rate between the two? My 185 also sometimes suffers from very slow draw down, like many here also reported. I haven't been able to pinpoint it to one particular thing.


I like the 155, it is more consistent for me and I don't get slow drawdowns with it unlike the 185. The papers don't sit as well in the brewer and they can crumple up when rinsing filters if you're not careful. Rao spin helps with grinds trapped in the waves


----------



## the_partisan

When using the 185, in the final drawdown, do you get coffee dripping through all 3 holes or just 1?

I did two identical brews, with same recipe, and in one of them in final drawdown was happening through all 3 holes, while in the other only one hole. The one with 3 holes ended up finishing 30 sec earlier, and also had higher extraction and was tastier. The other one had 0.5% EY lower and tasted more dry, which leads me to think there can be some channeling going on? Not quite enough data as I wasn't paying attention to this before, but will collect some more data as I do some more brews..

I wonder if the 155 or December Dripped also have this issue?


----------



## jaffro

the_partisan said:


> When using the 185, in the final drawdown, do you get coffee dripping through all 3 holes or just 1?
> 
> I did two identical brews, with same recipe, and in one of them in final drawdown was happening through all 3 holes, while in the other only one hole. The one with 3 holes ended up finishing 30 sec earlier, and also had higher extraction and was tastier. The other one had 0.5% EY lower and tasted more dry, which leads me to think there can be some channeling going on? Not quite enough data as I wasn't paying attention to this before, but will collect some more data as I do some more brews..
> 
> I wonder if the 155 or December Dripped also have this issue?


Yeah I've been noticing this every now and again. Assumed it was channelling as well, so thought I just needed to work on technique. Can't say I can consistently make it happen either way enough to compare results in the cup though.


----------



## the_partisan

Any thoughts on pouring straight down middle vs spiral pours after the first pulse? Which one do you prefer? Pouring all in centre seems to give cleaner cups, but maybe slightly weaker due to less agitation? Unfortunately didn't measure the brew but just going by taste. But I think this can be compensated by grinding a little finer?

Would the temperature uniformity in the brew bed be affected by only pouring in one place?


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> Any thoughts on pouring straight down middle vs spiral pours after the first pulse? Which one do you prefer? Pouring all in centre seems to give cleaner cups, but maybe slightly weaker due to less agitation? Unfortunately didn't measure the brew but just going by taste. But I think this can be compensated by grinding a little finer?
> 
> Would the temperature uniformity in the brew bed be affected by only pouring in one place?


I get it all wet with the bloom, 1st pour spiral, 2nd & 3rd centre pours, as you say, for a cleaner cup. No problem averaging 20.8% at my regular grind setting. Water's a pretty good conductor of heat, but if I was using a much coarser grind, with less slurry in the brewer I'd pour with more spirals to spread it around better.

For me, if there's something that limits the enjoyment of the cup, deal with that thing first. With all spiral pours, at my usual setting, it's the siltiness, temp doesn't seem to present any problems?


----------



## the_partisan

Recently I've been going for "maximum turbulence" and this has been giving surprisingly good results. 15g/250g, fairly coarse grind. Bloom with 30g, at :30 pour up to 150g quickly, stir the top with a spoon creating a "whirlpool", and at 1:30 (water should be almost gone) pour up to 250g and stir again. You also can do a swirl towards the end to settle all the grounds evenly.

This seems to go against conventional wisdom but seems to give me very well extracted brew, and doesn't seem to have more silt than usual brews.


----------



## StusBrews

the_partisan said:


> Recently I've been going for "maximum turbulence" and this has been giving surprisingly good results. 15g/250g, fairly coarse grind. Bloom with 30g, at :30 pour up to 150g quickly, stir the top with a spoon creating a "whirlpool", and at 1:30 (water should be almost gone) pour up to 250g and stir again. You also can do a swirl towards the end to settle all the grounds evenly.
> 
> This seems to go against conventional wisdom but seems to give me very well extracted brew, and doesn't seem to have more silt than usual brews.


I've previously experimented with maximum turbulence brews too with surprisingly decent results. My assumption is that turbulence just speeds up the extraction process, so with the right grind size and an even agitation of the slurry then you'd get a decent even brew. My preferred method is still a long brew time with gentle agitation


----------



## the_partisan

Has anyone played around with bypass brews? I'm using the following:

14.5g, bloom with 40g, at :30 add up to 120g, at 1:00 add up to 180g. Once drained fully add 40g additional water. This usually ends up at relatively low EY (18-19%) but I get really clean , bright brews full of flavour with very clear tasting notes.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> Has anyone played around with bypass brews? I'm using the following:
> 
> 14.5g, bloom with 40g, at :30 add up to 120g, at 1:00 add up to 180g. Once drained fully add 40g additional water. This usually ends up at relatively low EY (18-19%) but I get really clean , bright brews full of flavour with very clear tasting notes.


Clean & clear, or just brighter due to lower EY? I mean, how do they compare to your regular method, coarser grind to hit same EY at the same bev weight?


----------



## the_partisan

MWJB said:


> Clean & clear, or just brighter due to lower EY? I mean, how do they compare to your regular method, coarser grind to hit same EY at the same bev weight?


My brews typically doing two pours always have higher EY, but also flavours are less distinct. I haven't really tried to hit similar EY without bypass, I think I would have to grind a lot coarser. But this can have the effect that you don't penetrate inside the large particles? My two pours without bypass usually don't drain before 3:30, while these end up sometime around 2:30.


----------



## MWJB

If you're hitting 18-19% now, why would you be penetrating the larger grinds any less at same EY & bev. yield, at similar brew time, with 2 pours & coarser grind?

We don't really have any specific data, nor way of measuring particle penetration in a drip brew.


----------



## fluffles

In my admittedly limited experience, a 19% brew at a fine grind and a 19% brew at a coarse grind can taste quite different. I did dabble a while back in grinding finer, using less brew water and adding bypass water with quite good results.


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:
 

> In my admittedly limited experience, a 19% brew at a fine grind and a 19% brew at a coarse grind can taste quite different. I did dabble a while back in grinding finer, using less brew water and adding bypass water with quite good results.


Indeed, they can, but as both are 19%, they're still 19%. If I'm using a coarse grind I might get lovely, bright, cups at 18-19%, whereas I might get lovely syrupy sweet cups at 21-22% at a finer grind, but these can be dull at 18-19%.

In this case, finer grind particles with shorter brew time & bypass may not be penetrated any more because we used less brew water & brewed for less time?

Agreed, no reason whatsoever to only brew with final water weight, if bypass works for your regime & grind size go ahead, it's just difficult to draw conclusions from that about penetration of particles.


----------



## the_partisan

Does anyone else have both the 155 and 185? I noticed that 155 drains much quicker, 1:45 vs 3:00 using the same pouring regime and grind size.


----------



## fluffles

the_partisan said:


> Does anyone else have both the 155 and 185? I noticed that 155 drains much quicker, 1:45 vs 3:00 using the same pouring regime and grind size.


Yes. I can't use 185 unless it's with melodrip, the thing just stalls the me


----------



## fatboyslim

December dripper never stalls


----------



## MWJB

To be fair neither does the 185. I don't doubt @fluffles experiences, but there is probably some tangible, but maybe abnormal, reason for it.


----------



## fatboyslim

MWJB said:


> To be fair neither does the 185. I don't doubt @fluffles experiences, but there is probably some tangible, but maybe abnormal, reason for it.


Flow restrictor in the kettle?


----------



## MWJB

fatboyslim said:


> Flow restrictor in the kettle?


I wouldn't know, as I have never tried a flow restrictor.


----------



## the_partisan

My Kalita 185 also had a tendency to clog, going over 4-5 minutes sometimes.. Not sure why the 155 seems to drain so much quicker.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> My Kalita 185 also had a tendency to clog, going over 4-5 minutes sometimes.. Not sure why the 155 seems to drain so much quicker.


Of around 50x 185 brews I logged, 3 were 4:00 or more, one at 4:01 was one of the best brews I have made with this brewer. All brews over 3:50 were Ethiopians & Kenyans. Shortest brews were ~2:30. I just feel the 185 has a wider deviation in normal brew time, for same range of extraction (about twice the time variance over V60), maybe due to higher surface area of the shallow bed at draw down?

Got rid of my 155 a while back as the filters never seemed to fit nicely & I couldn't do 'all in' pours with it. The main difference seems to be closer to vertical walls, so maybe the weight of water is more centred over the bed, compared to 185?


----------



## Jony

Yep, I can't go all in with my 155 either, was going to get a 185 to sample


----------



## the_partisan

MWJB said:


> Of around 50x 185 brews I logged, 3 were 4:00 or more, one at 4:01 was one of the best brews I have made with this brewer. All brews over 3:50 were Ethiopians & Kenyans. Shortest brews were ~2:30. I just feel the 185 has a wider deviation in normal brew time, for same range of extraction (about twice the time variance over V60), maybe due to higher surface area of the shallow bed at draw down?
> 
> Got rid of my 155 a while back as the filters never seemed to fit nicely & I couldn't do 'all in' pours with it. The main difference seems to be closer to vertical walls, so maybe the weight of water is more centred over the bed, compared to 185?


If the water just won't drain fast enough, usually I just stop the brew, after 3:30 or so. and the liquid that's drained afterwards doesn't taste the best, but I guess is kind of thin enough not to affect the flavour too much. It really seems to depend on the beans and the roast.


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> If the water just won't drain fast enough, usually I just stop the brew, after 3:30 or so. and the liquid that's drained afterwards doesn't taste the best, but I guess is kind of thin enough not to affect the flavour too much. It really seems to depend on the beans and the roast.


3:30 seems a bit arbitrary & well within normal range, even for v60. My 185 brews average 3:20 with a 40s bloom. The extraction & flavour balance at the end of the day is the total output in the cup, pretty much any smaller section by itself won't taste right. The window of time for a good 1 mug brew is pretty wide (I've had good 6-7min brews with another brewer - 11-13min, then yes, there is likely a problem, but this is very unlikely with a typical 185 average brew time of 3:10-3:20) Sure, some beans/origins will skew the time from average, but time isn't the primary driver in percolation extraction, grind size is. Time has the biggest deviation in your brew parameters & this is normal.


----------



## the_partisan

Yes I broadly agree that whether it drains in 3:30min or 5 min doesn't make a large difference and that last 20-30g or so is typically quite diluted but also doesn't contribute much to overall flavour. Rather than waiting an extra min or two it might be more practical to stop the brew and then top up with some extra water instead?


----------



## MWJB

the_partisan said:


> Yes I broadly agree that whether it drains in 3:30min or 5 min doesn't make a large difference and that last 20-30g or so is typically quite diluted but also doesn't contribute much to overall flavour. Rather than waiting an extra min or two it might be more practical to stop the brew and then top up with some extra water instead?


I guess so, if you can be sure that you have it a reasonable extraction without that 20-30g. Bear in mind that 20-30g could account for ~2% of your extraction in a 1mug brew, that's a big shift from one brew to the next, with the same coffee/recipe. Hard to see how you can 2nd guess this as there are no visible cues?


----------



## sasij

Hi guys, got my Kalita 185 this week and needing a bit of help getting grind dialed in. I have a Smart Grinder Pro, so if anyone has the same I'd be interested in hearing your setting.

Secondly, what is your favourite recipe for the 185?


----------



## MWJB

sasij said:


> Hi guys, got my Kalita 185 this week and needing a bit of help getting grind dialed in. I have a Smart Grinder Pro, so if anyone has the same I'd be interested in hearing your setting.
> 
> Secondly, what is your favourite recipe for the 185?


Instructions are in the info under the video, my brews average 3:20-3:30, but can be as short as 2:40, as long as 4:15.

It's a big time deviation so don't sweat a few sec. either way, go by grind setting that gives a good flavour balance with a few different coffees.


----------



## Alan Kilroy

Been using a 185 Stainless steel for a few months now, not always, but most weekends a cup or two. About 15-17grs, not too fussy, no gooseneck kettle or anything, 2 part pour.

Bailies Microlot sub.

My other method is a Gaggia Classic.

The flavour from the Kalita seems to be noticeably far superior to my Black Americano from the GC.

Just saying............


----------



## AndyZap

I have the opposite - happy with my espresso and FW from Gaggia Baby Class, started using Kalita 185 a week ago and not sure that I am getting this one right.

I use Kenya Karumandi AA from Foundry. From the description "Oodles of blackcurrants and a big juicy body sit with smooth caramel notes - and then the whole experience is rounded off by an incredible fizzy, rhubarb acidity". I am not good at describing the taste, but can say that my espresso could fit the description, not to forget the long-lasting aftertaste.

I use the Kalita recipe from #414 above (the 3 part pour). Do not have a gooseneck, so use the "AP end cap on a chopstick" and an electric kettle, Brita-filtered water. Also tried 1-part pour. Adjusted the grid to get dry bed at about 3:00. The timings are consistent pour after pour. I use Monolith Flat grinder.

I have not tried a good filter coffee and did not know what to expect. So I diluted my espresso to get the filter brew ratio. It tasted like "espresso diluted with water", with boiled water taste first and all espresso notes behind. So I expected something "better" from the filter. The filter drink does not have this boiled water taste. It seems sweet and has long after taste, but also does not have much of the espresso notes. I tried coarser grind (time 2:40), the after taste disappears, but still no acidity or anything "interesting", so moved the grind back to target 3:10.

Do I have any other variables but the grind size to get more from this coffee? Or maybe Kenyans are hard to get right with the filter? Or maybe this is how the filter suppose to taste like, very soft and mellow?


----------



## MWJB

AndyZap said:


> I have the opposite - happy with my espresso and FW from Gaggia Baby Class, started using Kalita 185 a week ago and not sure that I am getting this one right.
> 
> I use Kenya Karumandi AA from Foundry. From the description "Oodles of blackcurrants and a big juicy body sit with smooth caramel notes - and then the whole experience is rounded off by an incredible fizzy, rhubarb acidity". I am not good at describing the taste, but can say that my espresso could fit the description, not to forget the long-lasting aftertaste.
> 
> I use the Kalita recipe from #414 above (the 3 part pour). Do not have a gooseneck, so use the "AP end cap on a chopstick" and an electric kettle, Brita-filtered water. Also tried 1-part pour. Adjusted the grid to get dry bed at about 3:00. The timings are consistent pour after pour. I use Monolith Flat grinder.
> 
> I have not tried a good filter coffee and did not know what to expect. So I diluted my espresso to get the filter brew ratio. It tasted like "espresso diluted with water", with boiled water taste first and all espresso notes behind. So I expected something "better" from the filter. The filter drink does not have this boiled water taste. It seems sweet and has long after taste, but also does not have much of the espresso notes. I tried coarser grind (time 2:40), the after taste disappears, but still no acidity or anything "interesting", so moved the grind back to target 3:10.
> 
> Do I have any other variables but the grind size to get more from this coffee? Or maybe Kenyans are hard to get right with the filter? Or maybe this is how the filter suppose to taste like, very soft and mellow?


The Aeropress cap won't regulate the flow, so you still need a gooseneck kettle to use this method. Also when using the Aeropress cap, you need to break the pours up into smaller & more frequent pulses - using the same grind as in the video, that would be 20g bloom (without AP cap) for 30s, then 35g every 20s thereafter.

Without a gooseneck kettle, I wouldn't bother with pulse pouring, grind finer, bloom 25g for 90seconds, reboil then quickly pour up to 225g total (helps if you have a small kettle that will boil 1 cup at a time, so you can pre weigh out the water - DON'T DO THIS WITH A 700ml minimum boil kettle), stir at the surface & let drain. Should take about 3:00 to dry bed.

Very consistent brew times are not normal, nor a sign of consistency in themselves.

Brita filtered London water is unlikely to give a great result.

What weight of coffee do you end up with when you dilute your espresso? The filter brew will end up weighing about 14 times that of the dose.

Your expectation is a similar flavour profile & juiciness as the espresso, but a weaker mugful.


----------



## MWJB

Here's another option, use the water tank off an OXO pourover brewer...


----------



## AndyZap

Thanks a lot for the tips. I diluted espresso to 60 g/L, as in your filter recipe. I use Volvic in Gaggia (probably this is another reason for better tasting espresso), so will use Volvic for filter and to dilute espresso (when comparing the taste). Even Brita cannot take out the taste of London


----------



## MWJB

Cool, for dilution it'll be more like 70g/L in the cup, because you'll lose the equivalent of 10g/L, the difference being absorbed by the grounds.


----------

