# Change in technique, is this due to channeling?



## urbanbumpkin

I've recently started stirring the grind directly in the portafilter, then tramping and am getting sigficantly faster shots.

Previously I was grinding, tipping the grind onto a square of folded paper, breaking up clumps with a paperclip then tipping the grind into portafilter, leveling off flat, then tamping. This method was getting fairly consistent results although I was not using the same dose as I was grinding (as I was leveling off part of the dose).

I'm weighing the beans prior grind (16g), if I stir the grind in the portafilter the shots are taking 15-20 sec. If I break up the grind then pour it into portafilter, level it off (as best I can), then tamp I'm getting shots lasting 25-30 secs.

I'm not shaking or banging the portafilter. Are the results from stirring in the basket caused by channeling? How can I tell?

Is there a better method of stirring the grind in the portafilter? I'm currently using an unbent paperclip.

Any suggestions on how I can improve would be greatly appreciated


----------



## aphelion

urbanbumpkin said:


> I've recently started stirring the grind directly in the portafilter, then tramping and am getting sigficantly faster shots.
> 
> Previously I was grinding, tipping the grind onto a square of folded paper, breaking up clumps with a paperclip then tipping the grind into portafilter, leveling off flat, then tamping. This method was getting fairly consistent results although I was not using the same dose as I was grinding (as I was leveling off part of the dose).
> 
> I'm weighing the beans prior grind (16g), if I stir the grind in the portafilter the shots are taking 15-20 sec. If I break up the grind then pour it into portafilter, level it off (as best I can), then tamp I'm getting shots lasting 25-30 secs.
> 
> I'm not shaking or banging the portafilter. Are the results from stirring in the basket caused by channeling? How can I tell?
> 
> Is there a better method of stirring the grind in the portafilter? I'm currently using an unbent paperclip.
> 
> Any suggestions on how I can improve would be greatly appreciated


Yep, its possible you are getting some channelling (or you were getting channelling before and now you are not..)

I'd recommend investing in a bottomless portafilter, then you can then observe what is going right (and wrong)

Regards


----------



## garydyke1

Are you saying that variation 1 involves you not weighing the dose (just levelling off by sight) and variation 2 you weigh 16g and end up with 16g in the basket?

Could it be that a de-clumped, filled and level basket = >16g ?


----------



## urbanbumpkin

garydyke1 said:


> Are you saying that variation 1 involves you not weighing the dose (just levelling off by sight) and variation 2 you weigh 16g and end up with 16g in the basket?
> 
> Could it be that a de-clumped, filled and level basket = >16g ?


Sorry for any confusion

Variation 1 is...I'm weighing the beans prior grind (16g), grind directly into the portafilter and stirring in the portafilter. Tamp, the shots are taking 15-20 sec.

Variation 2 is.... Weighing 16g of beans, grinding into a container, stirring the grind in the container, then pouring the grind into the portafilter. I then level it off as best I can without losing any of the grind before tamping. I'm getting shots lasting 25-30 secs.

Prior to this I was over filling the basket after de-clumping the grind, then leveling flat and losing any excess grind.

Hope that makes sense


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Sounds like Variation 1 is causing channelling. Have you tried not stirring the dose in the portafilter basket - just levelling off the grinds in the NSEW method and see what happens.


----------



## garydyke1

Makes sense. Suprised there is such a huge difference. Maybe the act of levelling it off has a desired effect.

Could well be channeling due to clumps in variation 1. Presumably variation 2 is less clumpy - indicated by the same 16g dose having greater volume in the basket


----------



## autopilot

I was experimenting last week with both my Porlex and Rocky. Both clump to some degree, the Rocky more so.

I tried declumping and just grinding and tamping. I kept dose and everything else as consistent as posible. Now things might be different for you (although we are using practically the same gear) but I am very sceptical about how much difference the declumping makes. I found no difference at all after tamping. At the end of the day, the clumps are very light - just an extremely light touch and they fall apart, so I am really struggling to see how declumping does anything meaningful when your tamping well afterwards. I think other factors make much more of a difference personally, but im then fairly inexperienced and I'm happy to be proved wrong. The fact the classic is shipped with a much higher pressure than a normal machine might tribute too.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Thanks for the replies. I've video'd the following shots to see if this shed's any light on the results I'm getting.

These are as follows:-

1. No declumping






Any suggestions?


----------



## forzajuve

Definite channelling going on there in 1 and 2 (videos). I think the real issue is not clumping but distribution. In 3 not only are you de-clumping but the transfer back and forth will also distribute grinds far better than any WDT type method. An easier method is to grind directly into a container, throw the paper clip away, and just shake the container around which knocks out clumps and re-distributes, then load the portafilter.

People think clumps are the be all and end all as they are very visual, but distribution is far more important. One reason why dosers could be preferred, but methods such as above have the same effect.


----------



## garydyke1

Thats some crazy crema! Channelling is obvious in all videos really. Uneven pour from spouts L v R.

I should imagine it takes some work to get a good shot out of the Porlex


----------



## autopilot

forzajuve said:


> Definite channelling going on there in 1 and 2 (videos). I think the real issue is not clumping but distribution. In 3 not only are you de-clumping but the transfer back and forth will also distribute grinds far better than any WDT type method. An easier method is to grind directly into a container, throw the paper clip away, and just shake the container around which knocks out clumps and re-distributes, then load the portafilter.
> 
> People think clumps are the be all and end all as they are very visual, but distribution is far more important. One reason why dosers could be preferred, but methods such as above have the same effect.


How can you tell there is definite channeling from those vids? I have had shots run like that without channeling, sometimes if i tamp at wrong weight or grind badly etc. I thought the only way to be absolutely sure was to examine the puck. Other factors create massive crema and bad timings, no?

UB, have you tried a different basket? I have read on coffee geek that some baskets are more prone to problems like this. Or what about the Classic itself? Are there any inherent inconsistency issues with this 'budget' machine? (I have had some random gushers and chokers that have made no sense at the time). Just thinking out aloud here, maybe wrong!


----------



## garydyke1

autopilot said:


> *How can you tell there is definite channeling from those vids*? I have had shots run like that without channeling, sometimes if i tamp at wrong weight or grind badly etc. I thought the only way to be absolutely sure was to examine the puck. Other factors create massive crema and bad timings, no?
> 
> UB, have you tried a different basket? I have read on coffee geek that some baskets are more prone to problems like this. Or what about the Classic itself? Are there any inherent inconsistency issues with this 'budget' machine? (I have had some random gushers and chokers that have made no sense at the time). Just thinking out aloud here, maybe wrong!


You can tell by the intermittent flow rate and non-symetry from the spouts.

A naked portafilter will reveal all


----------



## autopilot

garydyke1 said:


> You can tell by the intermittent flow rate and non-symetry from the spouts.
> 
> A naked portafilter will reveal all


Gary I'm not saying your wrong, you have been doing this longer than me, but I have watched literally hundreds (well maybe a slight exaggeration) of shots being pulled on YouTube and in real life and I have never seen a perfectly symmetrical pour from a dual spout PF. Some very close, but I just can't wrap my head around how that would indicate channeling. Because even if there is EPIC channeling within the basket, the coffee still has to go through the smallish hole above the spout.

Please prove me wrong, I enjoy learning new things. There may well be channeling, but the explanations above don't make sense to me in terms of proving/disproving channeling. Is there any evidence when looking at the puck, as i was led to believe its quite obvious. Sorry, I'm not trying to be a pain


----------



## urbanbumpkin

autopilot said:


> How can you tell there is definite channeling from those vids? I have had shots run like that without channeling, sometimes if i tamp at wrong weight or grind badly etc. I thought the only way to be absolutely sure was to examine the puck. Other factors create massive crema and bad timings, no?
> 
> UB, have you tried a different basket? I have read on coffee geek that some baskets are more prone to problems like this. Or what about the Classic itself? Are there any inherent inconsistency issues with this 'budget' machine? (I have had some random gushers and chokers that have made no sense at the time). Just thinking out aloud here, maybe wrong!


As well as the Gaggia standard double non-pressurized basket I also have a La Marzocco Basket 17g which I haven't fully tried as yet (I thought I'd get the Gaggia standard sorted first).

It was interesting that distribution as an issue was mentioned as previously I was over filling and doing the NSEW technique and then leveling off. With this I was getting smaller crema's.

I had thought it might be down to my tamping technique, currently a single tamp followed by a light quarter turn polish.

All responses greatly appreciated.


----------



## autopilot

Well this thread has made me want to buy a bottomless PF now. God these forums are expensive









Can anyone recommend me one for the Gaggia Classic? (cheap as posible though).


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Haha ha....that was my exact thought thought too.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

autopilot said:


> Well this thread has made me want to buy a bottomless PF now. God these forums are expensive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone recommend me one for the Gaggia Classic? (cheap as posible though).


Plenty out there - expect to pay around £35.00 - essential bit of kit if you want to check out what is going on during extraction and sort potential problems.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

urbanbumpkin said:


> As well as the Gaggia standard double non-pressurized basket I also have a La Marzocco Basket 17g which I haven't fully tried as yet (I thought I'd get the Gaggia standard sorted first).


With the LM/VST basket, you'll probably have to grind finer with the same dosage - LM/VSTs are more of a hassle to set up and will test your technique so getting a naked portafilter is a good idea so you can see exactly what's going on - especially if you hit a problem. When you start using the LM/VST, don't change more than one variable at a time (dosage, grind, tamp pressure, levelling technique). If you hit a problem, this way, you'll be able to isolate the variable that's causing the hassle. IMO, levelling, prior to tamping, is really important to avoid channelling - NSEW technique advisable.


----------



## coffeechap

I have a commercial naked pf that goes on the classic, will post it in the for sale section when I get back on Saturday, will do it for £25 including delivery....


----------



## coffeechap

Here is a link to the same portafilter used on tcr4x4 gaggia classic.

http://coffeeforums.co.uk/showthread.php?9376-My-Gaggia-Classic-after-OPV-mod-and-with-naked-portafilter


----------



## urbanbumpkin

coffeechap said:


> I have a commercial naked pf that goes on the classic, will post it in the for sale section when I get back on Saturday, will do it for £25 including delivery....


I'll take you up on that offer Dave, or do you want post it first? The Latte mugs arrived this morning excellent


----------



## coffeechap

urbanbumpkin said:


> I'll take you up on that offer Dave, or do you want post it first? The Latte mugs arrived this morning excellent


No need its yours, glad you like those mugs, I find them the perfect size for my morning cafe latte


----------



## coffeechap

Bottomless portafilter sold to urbanbumpkin, just to be totally transparent...


----------



## autopilot

UB, I did the OPV mod to my classic this morning... Wow, what a difference. Much more stable and consistent pours straight away. Not sure about the taste, but they do seem better and I think I can pick out the more subtle flavours in the Has Bean beans I'm currently using, which before often tasted a bit sour and different beans were hard to tell apart a lot of the time. That said, I also think there is a certain placebo element to all this, which is an elephant in the room which rarely gets mentioned.

Anyway, I highly recommend you do the OPV mod


----------



## garydyke1

autopilot said:


> Gary I'm not saying your wrong, you have been doing this longer than me, but I have watched literally hundreds (well maybe a slight exaggeration) of shots being pulled on YouTube and in real life and I have never seen a perfectly symmetrical pour from a dual spout PF. Some very close, but I just can't wrap my head around how that would indicate channeling. Because even if there is EPIC channeling within the basket, the coffee still has to go through the smallish hole above the spout.
> 
> Please prove me wrong, I enjoy learning new things. There may well be channeling, but the explanations above don't make sense to me in terms of proving/disproving channeling. Is there any evidence when looking at the puck, as i was led to believe its quite obvious. Sorry, I'm not trying to be a pain


I have no desire to prove anything.

Let the naked portafilter do the talking ; )


----------



## autopilot

garydyke1 said:


> I have no desire to prove anything.
> 
> Let the naked portafilter do the talking ; )


I completely agree mate, a naked portafilter is the only sure way (other than visually examining the spent puck for holes) to show channeling, which he may well have.

You can have the worst channeling in the world, but it all gathers in the bottom of the portafilter and then through one small hole, so uneven spout pouring can't show channeling by itself. You don't need to be a coffee expert to see that, it's basic fluid dynamics


----------



## garydyke1

Channeling might not be the best term here.... but if all the liquid 'runs' down the left hand side of the basket and hits that little hole on the left-hand side then the liquid will naturally take the shortest path down the left spout...

My pours are 100% even off each spout, unless I purposely tamp at an angle in which case I can get most of the liquid to come from a single spout for the first few seconds.

I might get a video to show what I mean


----------



## autopilot

garydyke1 said:


> Channeling might not be the best term here.... but if all the liquid 'runs' down the left hand side of the basket and hits that little hole on the left-hand side then the liquid will naturally take the shortest path down the left spout...
> 
> My pours are 100% even off each spout, unless I purposely tamp at an angle in which case I can get most of the liquid to come from a single spout for the first few seconds.
> 
> I might get a video to show what I mean


Ah, ok I can see that. I think of channeling being a lot of channels all over the puck.


----------



## garydyke1

even at the start


----------



## coffeechap

Uneven spout pouring can be caused by many factors like even surface, uneven tamp as gary has illuded too, however gary was right in his observations about the fluctuating pour, because when a Channel is created in the puck, you will see a noticeable increase in pour rate at the point that channel breaks the puck, which it appears to be happening on the vids.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

autopilot said:


> UB, I did the OPV mod to my classic this morning... Wow, what a difference. Much more stable and consistent pours straight away. Not sure about the taste, but they do seem better and I think I can pick out the more subtle flavours in the Has Bean beans I'm currently using, which before often tasted a bit sour and different beans were hard to tell apart a lot of the time. That said, I also think there is a certain placebo element to all this, which is an elephant in the room which rarely gets mentioned.
> 
> Anyway, I highly recommend you do the OPV mod


Funnily enough I have been thinking about doing the OPV mod although I don't have a pressure gauge. I don't suppose you know of anyone that has one (ideally in the Birmingham area). If anyone does have a spare I'll be happy to pay post.


----------



## garydyke1

urbanbumpkin said:


> Funnily enough I have been thinking about doing the OPV mod although I don't have a pressure gauge. I don't suppose you know of anyone that has one (ideally in the Birmingham area). If anyone does have a spare I'll be happy to pay post.


Ive got a group pressure gauge / manometer


----------



## urbanbumpkin

garydyke1 said:


> Ive got a group pressure gauge / manometer


Cheers Gary will have to pop over and borrow it if that's cool with you.


----------



## coffeechap

Nice one Gary should help him out a lot


----------



## garydyke1

Sure, or bring the classic over if you want and mod it here - be quicker dialling in with a commercial grinder etc


----------



## coffeechap

And a few hints and tips along the way no doubt! Hate to harp on but this forum really does help people out!


----------



## garydyke1

Coffee isnt only a tasty beverage (when brewed correctly) but brings people together who otherwise might never meet


----------



## urbanbumpkin

coffeechap said:


> And a few hints and tips along the way no doubt! Hate to harp on but this forum really does help people out!


Agreed, it does..... as well as keeping Nespresso machine sales down!!!!









Cheers Gary will PM you to sort out a good time to do it.


----------



## autopilot

urbanbumpkin said:


> Funnily enough I have been thinking about doing the OPV mod although I don't have a pressure gauge. I don't suppose you know of anyone that has one (ideally in the Birmingham area). If anyone does have a spare I'll be happy to pay post.


Well I was going to send you mine, but seeing as Gary has kindly offered to help you I will extend that offer to any other regular forum users who might want it.


----------



## garydyke1

urbanbumpkin said:


> Agreed, it does..... as well as keeping Nespresso machine sales down!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers Gary will PM you to sort out a good time to do it.


Make sure you bring your naked portafilter for the gaggia (hopefully the opening in it is big enough for the manometer to fit through) the manometer is attached to a standard sized blind basket


----------



## autopilot

And please report your findings in this thread


----------



## coffeechap

garydyke1 said:


> Make sure you bring your naked portafilter for the gaggia (hopefully the opening in it is big enough for the manometer to fit through) the manometer is attached to a standard sized blind basket


Will have o be next week as I will have topmost out the naked on Tuesday!!


----------



## garydyke1

Im guessing e61 lugs and gaggia group heads dont mix


----------



## coffeechap

Are yours 9 o'clock 3 o'clock lugs or 7.30 1.30, hope that makes sense as the gaggia are the latter


----------



## urbanbumpkin

autopilot said:


> Well I was going to send you mine, but seeing as Gary has kindly offered to help you I will extend that offer to any other regular forum users who might want it.


Thanks Autopilot, very kind of you to offer. Just out of interest did you make your own or buy one ready made?


----------



## autopilot

urbanbumpkin said:


> Thanks Autopilot, very kind of you to offer. Just out of interest did you make your own or buy one ready made?


Made it. Cost be about £7 in total.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

autopilot said:


> Made it. Cost be about £7 in total.


That's good, I'm guessing you adapted your existing portafilter? You'll have to post how you did it.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Weirdly enough over the weekend I took the light polish out of my tamp and noticed I was getting much slower shots and it appeared to be helping with the channeling issue, to the point of having to making the grind coarser.

Has anyone come across this before, could the polish in my technique be causing the channeling?

To twist/polish or not to polish?...there is the question!


----------



## garydyke1

Are you pressing down whilst twisting, polishing?


----------



## urbanbumpkin

garydyke1 said:


> Are you pressing down whilst twisting, polishing?


No, I was pushing down in one movement, then removing the pressure (with the tamp still resting on the puck) then twisting 90 degrees without applying any pressure. Could this be where I'm going wrong?


----------



## garydyke1

No , that sounds standard & I'm suprised you're finding such a marked difference.

Even with exactly the same technique grind settings change for the same coffee as it gets older & humidity in our environment changes , could it just be these variables influencing your results ?


----------



## painty

garydyke1 said:


> the manometer is attached to a standard sized blind basket


Gary, any info/link on how to make one of those pls? - sounds like a better idea than using up a whole PF for it.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

garydyke1 said:


> No , that sounds standard & I'm suprised you're finding such a marked difference.
> 
> Even with exactly the same technique grind settings change for the same coffee as it gets older & humidity in our environment changes , could it just be these variables influencing your results ?


It could be, I can't think of anything else.

I had thought it might have been the action of twisting afterwards that may have scratched the puck and encouraged channelling. But from what your saying possibly not.


----------



## garydyke1

painty said:


> Gary, any info/link on how to make one of those pls? - sounds like a better idea than using up a whole PF for it.


http://coffeeforums.co.uk/showthread.php?7191-Pressure-Measurement-naked-filter-basket&highlight=gauge


----------



## garydyke1

urbanbumpkin said:


> It could be, I can't think of anything else.
> 
> I had thought it might have been the action of twisting afterwards that may have scratched the puck and encouraged channelling. But from what your saying possibly not.


We can do some diagnosis when you pop round, just bring all your kit ; )


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Naked Portafilter arrived.

First shot done with a 17g dose in the basket. Stirred grind in PF, shot faster than usual noticed what looked to be some pin hole leaks. Not sure if it's an indication on my technique or the PF? Let me know what you think?


----------



## garydyke1

Grind a little finer!


----------



## The Systemic Kid

urbanbumpkin said:


> Naked Portafilter arrived.
> 
> First shot done with a 17g dose in the basket. Stirred grind in PF, shot faster than usual noticed what looked to be some pin hole leaks. Not sure if it's an indication on my technique or the PF? Let me know what you think?


Looking a bit fast and your report of pinholes is backed up by the uneven spout from the naked portafilter. Are you grinding very fine? Might be an idea to back of the grind a tad and try that whilst keeping everything else constant, i.e. dose, tamp pressure etc. and see if that eliminates the channeling - if you are, don't apply pressure if twisting at the end of tamping - can cause problems. Also, crucial that dose in portafilter is evenly distributed prior to tamping - NSEW method works fine.


----------



## coffeechap

what you will find is that the naked filter will expose any issues that you have in the preparation of the portafilter, so what you have to focus on now is eliminating the variable, so make sure the portafilter is dosed properly and evenly, ensure your tamp pressure is even and consistent and work on the grind settings to get to where you need to be, have you adjusted the opv yet?


----------



## urbanbumpkin

The Systemic Kid said:


> . Might be an idea to back of the grind a tad and try that whilst keeping everything else constant,


Thanks for the advice, are you recommending to grind finer or coarser (as my instinct would say to go finer).

Am currently not using a twist at all or any shaking of the PF when the grind is in to level off. All I'm doing at the moment is stirring the grind in the PF and then doing the NSEW before tamping fairly hard.


----------



## garydyke1

Try both extremes and see what occurs. I would say finer tbh. On my expobar the first drips hit the cup 10 seconds after starting the shot, e61 has a little more preinfusion time though.

Why not video the whole shot prep


----------



## The Systemic Kid

urbanbumpkin said:


> Thanks for the advice, are you recommending to grind finer or coarser (as my instinct would say to go finer).


Agree with Gary - try both. My advice is based on the following. With a finer grind, you have much greater resistance in the puck - compounded, if you do, by heavy tamp. As water, under pressure, enters the puck, it will find the path of least resistance and will be greatly exacerbated by any technique problems caused by uneven grind and distribution and level of puck. Personally, I would only grind finer if, at the same time, I was going to reduce the dose. On my set up, which admittedly is different, backing off the grind but keeping the dose the same solved my channeling problem.

Let us know how you get on and good luck.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Thanks guys for bearing with me. Will try both options and will let you know how I get on.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Ok I've managed to do 3 different shots



One coarser


One Slightly finer


One more finer


I've done a clip of de-clumping, distribution/tamp and then a video for each shot. Would appreciate your thoughts on how I can improve my technique.

All shot have 17g dose, ground on a Eureka Mignon (difference between the 1st and the last shot is half a turn), tamp has no twist/polish. I've tried to do all with the same tamp pressure (I have recorded the de-clumping and dist/tamp for all of these if you needed). I did knock the PF on the worktop by accident on the 2nd shot.

All feedback would be greatly appreciated.

De clump






I can't believe how much details it picked up on my hands ...scary!!


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Wow, that's some attention to detail. You're getting mega crema there too? What did each shot taste like? Extraction on all looks pretty consistent. Are you happy with the results? If that is mainly crema, are you're getting around 1.5oz extraction in 25-27 secs? Rather than declump in a cup, have you tried the yogurt pot method? Cut one down so it fits snugly in the basket and deposit the grinds straight into it - then you can declump before removing the yogurt pot and tamping. Main thing though, is you've got your benchmark for no channeling. Nice one.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Thanks for looking at this and for letting me know I'm some where on the right track at least

I think the last one tasted the best, once the Crema had settled it was at 2oz level (not including the crema).

I think the last one lasted about 28secs, I let it run over a bit as the crema seems pretty big (not sure if that is a good thing or not). The roasted bean is called Torricelli from a roaster local to me which does produce a big crema. I'm never too sure where to stop the shot. It may be worth me trying a different "tried and tested bean"...any suggestions?

Taste wise I'm still learning, so as far as I can tell it tastes good but don't have anything to compare it to.

Yes the prep is a bit OTT







but I was just trying to get some kind of consistency. With the dose being not level with the basket I seem to struggle with getting it right up to the edge of the PF and also getting it level(ish). Generally if I overfill the basket it's pretty straight forward (maybe it's just me)

However with the naked PF I have started just putting it on the worktop and then lightly getting it level with the tamp before doing the actual tamp. This has been working for me as prior to this my tamps have been crooked more often than not.

I will try the yoghurt pot straight into the PF and see how I get on and see if I can take out some of the faffing.

Next up tackling the OPV mod and the LM Basket

PS I thought "6 Music" playing in the background added a certain drama to the declumping/ distribution process


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Funny you should mention crema being part of the shot. DK41 has just started a thread about the same thing - is it part of the shot. The replies are helpful. If you are getting 2oz in 28secs - you're deffo in the zone. As for taste, it's purely personal. For me, any bitterness is a no, no. The shot should be intense and you should be able to pull out the flavour elements provided on the packet. I sometimes, especially, with a new bean, after I've drunk the shot, let the cup dry and then turn it over on the saucer and leave it for a few minutes. You'd be surprised how much you can identify in the smell. Worth a go just for the fun of it.

Don't apologise for your prep being OTT - the main thing is to know you're getting it right, you can always bin elements that, by trial and error, you know, for your set up, don't make any difference to end result and if you do go for an LM basket, believe me, rigour is essential.


----------



## bubbajvegas

Goddamn that's some mega crema :-o


----------



## urbanbumpkin

bubbajvegas said:


> Goddamn that's some mega crema :-o


This was it after about a minute later after the guinessing had stopped. Not sure if big crema = good shot but feel like I've created the Dirk Diggler of shots

View attachment 2514


----------



## garydyke1

urbanbumpkin said:


> It may be worth me trying a different "tried and tested bean"...any suggestions?


I can highly recommend Extract coffee's espresso Blend for someone new to espresso, its so forgiving and packed with caramel and chocolate flavours (comfort). For something a little more unique, unusual and flavour-packed try Smokey Barn's Purple ribbon (adventure)


----------



## The Systemic Kid

urbanbumpkin said:


> This was it after about a minute later after the guinessing had stopped. Not sure if big crema = good shot but feel like I've created the Dirk Diggler of shots


Certainly looks as if you've nailed it. Crema varies from bean to bean. Freshness is a factor too. But big crema doesn't automatically mean perfect espresso. It's a bit of a myth not helped by machine manufacturers supplying pressurised baskets to artificially increase the amount of crema and lead the user to believe this is, per se, a good thing which it definitely isn't.


----------

