# Boffin thread ( ek43, refracting, pressure profiling, ; other guff)



## Mrboots2u

One thread to bore them all....

Place so all the boffin posts can go in one place . and then its easy for those that aren't interested to ignore them. If its of no interest please feel free to walk on by to a thread that you are interested in...

More later ...


----------



## The Systemic Kid

More importantly - is that Jerry Lewis or a self portrait?


----------



## michaelg

Mrboots2u said:


> One thread to bore them all....
> 
> Place so all the boffin posts can go in one place . and then its easy for those that aren't interested to ignore them. If its of no interest please feel free to walk on by to a thread that you are interested in...
> 
> More later ...


Where are the safety specs, tut tut!

I think you should get yourself a lab coat with your name embroidered on it, Martin. My first lab job I had that and I was bizarrely excited about that! The novelty soon wore off though as I was making compounds not coffee!


----------



## Mrboots2u

Been playing around with the same coffee and different profiles last few days , in an effort, to see what it did to taste and extraction yield........Trying to get the tds ( strength ) up on shots , to get the brew ratio down , but still keep a higher extraction yield ....

This morning all the star aligned .....

Wanna say , I always taste before i refract , to get taste notes uneffected by extraction yield numbers

Papercup Rwandan - Nordic style roast

Tasting notes - perfect balance of cherry cola and sweetness , no bitterness , no acidity , stonking....

Numbers

Grind 1.4 Callum Dial

Dose 17.7g in 18 g vst

Tamp - less than finger pressure

Profile 1 - Leverish?

10 seconds at 2 bar - 4 seconds at 9 bar - 2 seconds at 6 bar - 2 seconds at 5 bar - 2 seconds at 4 bar - 3 seconds at 3 bar 2 bar til the end

Pump acceleration 225 means alot of preinfusion seemed to be at under 2 bar

Temp 93 deg ( offset 13.5 )

Weight out 42g

TDS 9.9

Extraction Yield 24.47 %

Wowsers , want another ............

View attachment 10775


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Refraction numpty here and still struggling to get my head round gauging TDS.

What's the TDS target that your aiming for? Is it somewhere between say 22-25% or does it differ from bean to bean.

Or is it a constant?

Or is it just another variable that you can tweak along with dose, extraction weight, time, temp etc......

Or is it the result of the combination of the above?

I've just realised I've asked loads of questions one after the other....sorry mate.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Pushing TDS to raise extraction yields above 21-22% unlock amazing sweetness in the bean - has the effect of balancing the fruit acidity in lighter roasts.


----------



## MWJB

The extraction yield (24.47% of the coffee in the PF being dissolved into liquid) is really the target, it just so happens that in Martin's case that at his brew ratio (depicted by the sloping green line), at 24.47% extraction yield that the %TDS (concentration of the shot, weight of the dissolved coffee as a proportion of weight of the coffee in the cup) is 9.9%.

You can make 9.9% shots at a bunch of ratios, but they coincide with a pretty narrow range of extraction yields. Extraction yield drives the flavour balance, sometimes you might pick up similar flavours from a brewed coffee as you do from an espresso from the same coffee, this is likely because you have hit a preferable extraction yield, despite the fact that the brewed coffee & the shot are very different strengths.

This chart shows (almost - with my laptop I can only hit 17.6 or 17.8g dose) Martin's shot...from the moment he decided to cut the shot ~42g from a 17.7g dose, his result was destined to land on the green line...most typical grinders (flat, or conical) would be aiming to land in the shaded box (between 7.5 & 8.5% TDS, though because they can't usually hit a nice tasting shot at 24%EY they'd often aim for a shorter brew ratio, higher concentration, raising them vertically up the chart).

  

When you are aiming for a certain extraction weight, you are (whether you know it, or not) also aiming for certain range of %TDS & % Extraction yield. Dose, temp, time & grind (water, prep, grinder...) all may affect how easy/hard it is to achieve a desirable/target yield. Sometimes you may have aim for a lower target EY to get the best flavour balance you can.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Thanks mark. Absolutely agree , some coffee taste better and more balanced at say 19 ish extraction yield ( although not many ....) This one, I wanted to push more sweetness into the espresso so tried going for a higher target extraction yield.


----------



## Mrboots2u

The profile i was using looks at first glance lever based. A lever when released will in general hit a pressure quite quickly ( unless you retard it slowly ). With the slow pump acceleration it gives this profile a slower ramp to 9 bar. In fact I'm not sure its hitting 9 bar as the pump as the acceleration may not allow it too. I'll try again tomorrow to check


----------



## garydyke1

To achieve 24% on the sage Id be looking at about 20g->55g out with a TDS considerably lower than 9.9! Bravo.

8.5-8.7% TDS ish


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Thanks MWJB, I've re-read this a few times and it's now hurting my head less.


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> Been playing around with the same coffee and different profiles last few days , in an effort, to see what it did to taste and extraction yield........Trying to get the tds ( strength ) up on shots , to get the brew ratio down , but still keep a higher extraction yield ....
> 
> This morning all the star aligned .....
> 
> Wanna say , I always taste before i refract , to get taste notes uneffected by extraction yield numbers
> 
> Papercup Rwandan - Nordic style roast
> 
> Tasting notes - perfect balance of cherry cola and sweetness , no bitterness , no acidity , stonking....
> 
> Numbers
> 
> Grind 1.4 Callum Dial
> 
> Dose 17.7g in 18 g vst
> 
> Tamp - less than finger pressure
> 
> Profile 1 - Leverish?
> 
> 10 seconds at 2 bar - 4 seconds at 9 bar - 2 seconds at 6 bar - 2 seconds at 5 bar - 2 seconds at 4 bar - 3 seconds at 3 bar 2 bar til the end
> 
> Pump acceleration 225 means alot of preinfusion seemed to be at under 2 bar
> 
> Temp 93 deg ( offset 13.5 )
> 
> Weight out 42g
> 
> TDS 9.9
> 
> Extraction Yield 24.47 %
> 
> Wowsers , want another ............


Sounds nice! Did you manage to repeat it? What was the final shot time?


----------



## Mrboots2u

Xpenno said:


> Sounds nice! Did you manage to repeat it? What was the final shot time?


Nope , not repeated yet...

Oh woe is me made some 22 % percent spro last night

Taste notes excellent , just not as sweet or as intense as the mornings shot , slight bit of grapefruit came through in the finish

Gonna move into another coffee today as nearly out of Rwandan

Gonna run one coffee through some profiles today ....

Got my profile from above

Gonna go slow slams up for another .

Flat 5 bar

Any other suggestions spence ?


----------



## Xpenno

That vintage LM lever profile does something different for sure. I got a really thick gloopy cup out of it which isn't the norm for EK









7sec 2bar - 3sec 12bar - 6sec 9.4bar - 7sec 8bar - 3sec 7bar - 4sec 5.6bar - 7sec 5.6

I would also try a pre-infusion with a straight 8bar which works nicely.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Ok ill add that in today . Was the gloopy shot on the Turks on the coffee burrs spence

Presuming pump acceleration was at 400 also .


----------



## Xpenno

Coffee & 400


----------



## centaursailing

Mrboots2u said:


> Been playing around with the same coffee and different profiles last few days , in an effort, to see what it did to taste and extraction yield........Trying to get the tds ( strength ) up on shots , to get the brew ratio down , but still keep a higher extraction yield ....
> 
> This morning all the star aligned .....
> 
> Wanna say , I always taste before i refract , to get taste notes uneffected by extraction yield numbers
> 
> Papercup Rwandan - Nordic style roast
> 
> Tasting notes - perfect balance of cherry cola and sweetness , no bitterness , no acidity , stonking....
> 
> Numbers
> 
> Grind 1.4 Callum Dial
> 
> Dose 17.7g in 18 g vst
> 
> Tamp - less than finger pressure
> 
> Profile 1 - Leverish?
> 
> 10 seconds at 2 bar - 4 seconds at 9 bar - 2 seconds at 6 bar - 2 seconds at 5 bar - 2 seconds at 4 bar - 3 seconds at 3 bar 2 bar til the end
> 
> Pump acceleration 225 means alot of preinfusion seemed to be at under 2 bar
> 
> Temp 93 deg ( offset 13.5 )
> 
> Weight out 42g
> 
> TDS 9.9
> 
> Extraction Yield 24.47 %


Nice one Martin, I'll give it a go this morning!


----------



## Mrboots2u

Ok been taking a different approach last few days

Ive upped the dose a little bit (19-21g )

Gone a little coarser on the ek ( a few mini notches on the EK )

Just to see how the coffee tastes - same brew ratios ish.....little bit longer contact time with the coffee ( shots are a little bit longer )

Current favourite profile is based on the T3

6 seconds at 2 bar then

1 at 3 bar -1 at 4 bar -1 at 5 bar -1 at 6 bar-1 at 7 bar

Rest at 9 bar....

with a larger dose i think i wanna extend the ramp up a little bit so am gonna keep first phase the same and extend the time at 3-5 bar

then put in a short share decline at the end from 9 bar . So 5-6 at 9 bar then one last phase at 4 bar ....

Pulled a lot of shots and refracted some different coffees over the last couple of weeks, in terms of taste and what you can tastily extract , the roast or how developed a coffee is plays a massive part ( not referring to how dark or light a coffee is here btw )

Perhaps cupping like prufrock and Rao do with the refractor might give a benchmark . Random thoughts i wont bore you with ( ill only do this with MWJB )


----------



## garydyke1

EK43 and chemex experiment.

Target - After the bloom all water in at once by 1 min 45sec mark.

Amend grind to get an acceptable target total brew time

Find ideal cup profile

30g / 500g / 4-5 mins?

bloom 75g water and churned up with a mini whisk 3 times. 30 seconds

Then exactly the same pouring technique each time, washing around the outside so no high and dry bang on 1min 45. coffee used was a delicious chocolately Bolivia Apolo.

Results :

grind setting (old dial) - total time

9 - 2 mins 40

8 - 3 mins

7 - 3 mins 40**

6 - 3 mins 55

5 - 3 mins 30

4.5 - 3 mins 20**

As you can see something odd occurs. Although the grind is progressively finer, the flow rate actually increases once we go past 6. Something must be occurring in terms of particle distribution , maybe less fines as we go finer?!!? In any case there was no stalling or choking of the brew unlike the Uber grinder which when you get too fine it just stalls completely and destroys the brew.

I ran out of this coffee but it would have been fun to keep going to 4, 3.5 and 3.

** These were the most tasty cups . Brews on 5 and 6 tasted very under extracted.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Hmm did you refract any ?

I will give this a go , if i can convert the dial to dial settings .....

Go a bag of the xmas filter I could use ...

So after bloom are you pouring in centre and out or as the post above suggests just round the edges?


----------



## garydyke1

Ive not got a VST at home at the minute, was going purely by taste (which is king) it helps if you know the coffee well.

Pouring in centre outwards and inwards....outwards and inwards finishing around the outside with the last 50g or so.

Bare in mind I have the MK2 fictional burrs


----------



## Mrboots2u

Was temp did you have the kettle set to ?


----------



## Mrboots2u

Ok am gonna give Garys experiment ago ......

75 g in for a 30 second bloom

Gonna try and hit an even flow rate ....

at

45 seconds total water added = 160g

60 seconds total water added = 245 g

75 seconds total water added = 330g

90 seconds total water added = 415g

105 seconds total water added = 500 g

then wait ........

Ill give this a go on the Ek the night try the haus also ...


----------



## Mrboots2u

getting that flow rate aint easy ....


----------



## garydyke1

Tried grind setting 4 today , different coffee. El Salvador Finca Argentina San Jorge tablon pulped natural , foliar sprays and molybdenum treatment. This coffee was amazing on the cupping table yesterday , although good cupping doesn't always equate to good brewed coffee in isolation.

Was more focused and in tune with the pouring , all water in by 1min 50 sec - 4 mins 50 seconds when final drips came through! First time it looked like it might stall. It was a nice cup, maybe a little boring (v low acidity and moderate sweetness, good body and clean), i've not woken up properly yet tho.

The two points of interest seem to be grind setting >6 and grind setting 4.54 we get a definite change of behaviour in flow rates either side of these points. I would like to stick to one coffee and run brews at settings 4.0, 4.2, 4.4 & 6.0, 5.8, 5.6, 5.4 this needs a lot of water and patience !


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> Ok am gonna give Garys experiment ago ......
> 
> 75 g in for a 30 second bloom
> 
> Gonna try and hit an even flow rate ....
> 
> at
> 
> 45 seconds total water added = 160g
> 
> 60 seconds total water added = 245 g
> 
> 75 seconds total water added = 330g
> 
> 90 seconds total water added = 415g
> 
> 105 seconds total water added = 500 g
> 
> then wait ........
> 
> Ill give this a go on the Ek the night try the haus also ...


Add more water right after bloom maybe to 250 total. Then add more at 1:30 and 2 mins but smaller amounts.


----------



## Mrboots2u

to be honest after the boom its a straight pour right through to 500g all the way

getting some tasty cups indeed and number too ( numbers are king )


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> Tried grind setting 4 today , different coffee. El Salvador Finca Argentina San Jorge tablon pulped natural , foliar sprays and molybdenum treatment. This coffee was amazing on the cupping table yesterday , although good cupping doesn't always equate to good brewed coffee in isolation.
> 
> Was more focused and in tune with the pouring , all water in by 1min 50 sec - 4 mins 50 seconds when final drips came through! First time it looked like it might stall. It was a nice cup, maybe a little boring (v low acidity and moderate sweetness, good body and clean), i've not woken up properly yet tho.
> 
> The two points of interest seem to be grind setting >6 and grind setting 4.54 we get a definite change of behaviour in flow rates either side of these points. I would like to stick to one coffee and run brews at settings 4.0, 4.2, 4.4 &  6.0, 5.8, 5.6, 5.4 this needs a lot of water and patience !


I would also include multiple runs at the same grind settings to rule out other factors... Good luck with that though as it could take some serious time.


----------



## garydyke1

Xpenno said:


> I would also include multiple runs at the same grind settings to rule out other factors... Good luck with that though as it could take some serious time.


At my old grind setting and previous method I found all brews within 10-15 seconds of each other once dialled in, at work with the Uber font it would be 5 seconds. More exploring to be done!


----------



## garydyke1

Really nailed the brew today but all water in by 2 mins. Final drips were 4mins 15 secs.

Christmas filter blend , grind setting 7 on 3FE dial. Focused on lots of agitation with the circular pours.

My guess a TDS of 1.32%


----------



## Mrboots2u

A frankenstein brew method based on Nick Cho

Clever Dripper - v 60 filter - EK at 15 ( coffee burrs )

Dose 12 g - Total water 186 g

50 g bloom for 30 seconds

Rest of water in by 1 minute

Steeped til 2.20

Draw down finished at 3.00

Came at 1.33 tds - EY ( immersion ) = 21.81

Nice tasting cup , gonna try this again a notch finer with the aspiration to Aim for 1.4 ish tds 22% plus EY to hot a bit more sweetness..

Notes posted on Whats in Your cup thread ....


----------



## Step21

Is the frankenstein the filter mis match? What kind of grind is a EK15 (Hausgrind for point of ref)?

You could try some vigourous stirring of the bloom to up the extraction?


----------



## Mrboots2u

Step21 said:


> Is the frankenstein the filter mis match? What kind of grind is a EK15 (Hausgrind for point of ref)?
> 
> You could try some vigourous stirring of the bloom to up the extraction?


I recon about 1.5 on the haaus , havent done one with it yet.

Yep stirring up could help ...il try that as an experiment too.


----------



## Mrboots2u

V60 with the hausgrind today of the current IMM ( Finca Loayza )

At 1.3 turns from zero

Perger style ( using mini whisk for stir at bloom )

Comes out a very tasty drink and hit tds 1.33 and extraction yield of 20.2 %

Ned to now do a comparative EK brew ( normally around 8.5 callum daily coffee burrs )


----------



## grumpydaddy

When you guys talk about grind size distribution, given that grinds are not spherical, how does one classify a grind/ground(?) By its largest dimension ??


----------



## garydyke1

Did you watch the Colin Harmon tamper tantrum talk? It is covered there with some pictures of individual particles etc

Flat burrs tend to produce spherical / rounder particles . conical burrs tend to produce more elliptical / flatter particles.


----------



## jjprestidge

grumpydaddy said:


> When you guys talk about grind size distribution, given that grinds are not spherical, how does one classify a grind/ground(?) By its largest dimension ??


That's the flaw in the comparison of grind particle sizes by Perger - he used diameter when he should have measured surface area. Even then there are issues with orientation.

JP


----------



## MWJB

grumpydaddy said:


> When you guys talk about grind size distribution, given that grinds are not spherical, how does one classify a grind/ground(?) By its largest dimension ??


For brewed coffee, sieving using a 4 sieve set has been used for decades, the proportion of grinds that are caught on the 4 sieves & the fines/smallest particles caught in the pan are useful indicators of grind distribution. A rough analysis can also be extrapolated from sieving, using a single sieve & assuming a reasonably typical distribution.

Sieves don't work well for espresso (median grind sizes from around 250 to 500um?) & very fine grinds (depending on your taste & where you live, brewed fines caught in the pan may be anything under 600um or anything under 400um nominally). Hence some grinder manufacturers & industrial roasters use laser diffraction.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Espresso results from this morning , as an experimenting with a few new prep techniques in order to get " even extraction " and i think someone on another thread was really interested in hearing how id got on.........

Coffee Finca Loayza - Hasbean

Ek grind setting 1.4 callum dial

Lightish flat tamp only ( no nutate )

18.2g into 46 g ( bit longer than i was aiming for ) EY =19.48%

21 seconds on a t3 type map up pressure profile ( difference max pressure though set at 8.5 bar )

Taste Notes

Light and Clean ( it was a lungo and tds was 7.4% )

It really brought the cherry and sweetness out , little hint of the lemon not much though ( i had extracted this into a chilled cup ) had a finish of the merest hint of dark chocolate .....

Pretty delicious actually ...but would like to push it a bit higher , so down dose it it later.....


----------



## Mrboots2u

Gary you said on another thread that your espresso preferences were 19-20% EY ? ( people other than Gary feel free to answer on this too )

What is it about 21% EY say that you find not tasty ( lack of mouthfeel ? clarity of flavour ? )

Do you think this a a function of the roast or development of the coffee your extracting ( not talking dark or light here perhaps style of roast ? )

Have you tried 24% flat 5 bar lungo ( not coffee shot ) extractions ? If so how did you find em?

Do you think there is a possibly a "hump " ala 17-18% EY where it may get sweeter and tastier at 24% with the right coffee?


----------



## jeebsy

I think 19-20% was with the clima pro boots


----------



## Mrboots2u

jeebsy said:


> I think 19-20% was with the clima pro boots


Ah yes ..your right

still like some views on the questions though , either via mythos or ek...


----------



## CallumT

Standard espresso grinders good shots normally fall in the 19 to 20% with 9.5TDS ish.

EK I still feel i have loads to work on, and learn about in terms of use for espresso. For a long time i was struggling to push past shots with a TDS higher than 9 that weren't nasty. Recently Jenns and the Torr TrapFlat - Equally the Pergtamp has helped this and Im finding results are better can increase the shots strength on the L1 as well as often finding it easier to get larger yields from the lever group. I've put it mainly down to better sealing, more preinfusion and less pressure leakage from around the puck, that could have previously been causing a drop in EY.

STILL finding it hard not to keep nipping back to Lee and pester for more of the LSOL Yirgs. Dang. Struggling on with more sublte coffees with the EK although was loving the standard stuff on the espresso grinders over the christmas break both in the roastery and on Spring Lever and Rotary pump driven extractions. Maybe this is down to me sitting in a hump in EY, need to measure and experiment.


----------



## Mrboots2u

CallumT said:


> Standard espresso grinders good shots normally fall in the 19 to 20% with 9.5TDS ish.
> 
> EK I still feel i have loads to work on, and learn about in terms of use for espresso. For a long time i was struggling to push past shots with a TDS higher than 9 that weren't nasty. Recently Jenns and the Torr TrapFlat - Equally the Pergtamp has helped this and Im finding results are better can increase the shots strength on the L1 as well as often finding it easier to get larger yields from the lever group. I've put it mainly down to better sealing, more preinfusion and less pressure leakage from around the puck, that could have previously been causing a drop in EY.
> 
> STILL finding it hard not to keep nipping back to Lee and pester for more of the LSOL Yirgs. Dang. Struggling on with more sublte coffees with the EK although was loving the standard stuff on the espresso grinders over the christmas break both in the roastery and on Spring Lever and Rotary pump driven extractions. Maybe this is down to me sitting in a hump in EY, need to measure and experiment.


Definitely finding unsurprisingly that the way the coffee is roasted or who developed it is , plays a massive part in Ek espresso

More coffees i find if difficult to get the TDS up 9 , no matter what pressure / dose / grind / tamp/ and temp I've run

Some though its been easy ( Foundry LSOL, Extract LSOL , Rwandan from Papercup )

I can get high tds and high EY with shorter shots with darker roasted coffee , but this just isn't to my liking anymore ( either through an EK or conventional grinder ) and I know that taste is the goal ( not TDS ) and that Ey is a measure to help do it again .

There is more than one way to skin a cat or produce a tasty ( and high EY ) espresso .....


----------



## CallumT

Alot of good points, but there are plenty of limiting factors on the L1 / EK when it comes to high EY there's only so much you can down dose and only so much water output the most likely solution key is the pre infusion stage, how long and how to manipulate grind and tamp to change what the pre infusion is actually doing.

Im not saying sub 9 on the TDS is dish soap, quite often the preference with the EK on the three group in the roastery before it was sold would have been mid 8's and larger yields. Things may change on the two group because of the changes to the group jetting I made during the re build.

Roast development also a key, we've had test roasts in the past go through aeropress' and struggle to raise EY and TDS despite grinding significantly finer with the consequent brews. Me and lee put this down to roast and changed the profile before any was sold.

One of the main issues as a whole is a lack of consistency, in testing of say roast solubility which leads to a wide variety of roasting styles as well as what is considered good extraction practices - Things are progressing, and IMHO my espresso moved on MORE because of my accepting shift from EBF of 1.6 to more like 2 than what they did becasue of the EK... EK just kind of by default makes you go longer be it the way it restricts flow.

EK43 and brewed coffee is a different league and thats where the grind size distro. is so easy to taste the change it makes in terms of clarity and 'focussing' of the flavour less under and over combined to confuse your pallete... Most of the now 'even with standard espresso grinders' I find my self pretty happy with the results 'a la' cupnorth and the L2 combined with battered Royals, id solidly put this down to the changes in EBF.

Anyway I mentioned this mainly because I feel the EK gains too much credit as well as to highlight the changes in widespread opinion / common practice of how to brew shots; which for me has come from reducing TDS increasing EY and pushing more water through the puck.

Like with everything coffee the beast is made with the guy who truly knows what change to input to the system results in changed output, and there is alot to trip you up / channeling bad distro etc. ... I guess I just feel lost with my spice grinder in the woods...


----------



## jeebsy

Ebf?


----------



## Mrboots2u

Back at you mate.....



CallumT said:


> Alot of good points, but there are plenty of limiting factors on the L1 / EK when it comes to high EY there's only so much you can down dose and only so much water output the most likely solution key is the pre infusion stage, how long and how to manipulate grind and tamp to change what the pre infusion is actually doing.
> 
> *YEP AGREE PRE INFUSION SEEMS TO BE THE KEY , BUT HAVENT DONE ENOUGH SYTEMATIC TESTING AND REFRACTING WITH ONE COFFEE TO REACH AND SOLID CONCLUSIONS . IVE STOPPED NUTATING AND AM NOW LIGHTER FLAT TAMPING AGAIN. SLOWING THE FLOW OF SHOTS DOWN WITH BIG NUTTING (EVEN WITH THE V )DIDNT SEEM TO HAVE A HUGE EFFECT ON TDS..THE SLOWER SHOTS MAY SEEM MORE PSYCHOLOGICALLY COMFORTING THOUGH ( I.E IF THAT 21 SECOND SHOT WAS LONGER I BET IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TASTIER )*
> 
> *
> EVEN EXTRACTION AND DISTRIBUTION WITH THE EK IS STILL REALLY HARD FOR ME TO DO " WELL " AND I THINK THAT NAILING THIS COULD BE KEY TO PUSHING UP EY AND RESULTING IN TASTIER SHOTS ( HAND IN HAND WITH PRE INFUSION ) *
> 
> *
> *
> 
> Im not saying sub 9 on the TDS is dish soap, quite often the preference with the EK on the three group in the roastery before it was sold would have been mid 8's and larger yields. Things may change on the two group because of the changes to the group jetting I made during the re build
> 
> *IVE BEEN PLAYING WITH PUMP ACCELERATION TO SEE IF IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE AGAIN NEED TO BE MORE SYSTEMATIC WITH ONE COFFEE. I DONT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT GIGLERS AND WHAT THEY ARE ON THE V TO UNDERSTAND IF CHANGING IT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> Roast development also a key, we've had test roasts in the past go through aeropress' and struggle to raise EY and TDS despite grinding significantly finer with the consequent brews. Me and lee put this down to roast and changed the profile before any was so
> 
> *HAVE YOU READ OR USED RAO PROCESS FOR CUPPING AND REFRACTING ?*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> One of the main issues as a whole is a lack of consistency, in testing of say roast solubility which leads to a wide variety of roasting styles as well as what is considered good extraction practices - Things are progressing, and IMHO my espresso moved on MORE because of my accepting shift from EBF of 1.6 to more like 2 than what they did becasue of the EK... EK just kind of by default makes you go longer be it the way it restricts flow.
> 
> *AGREE , AS DO PRUFROCK AND OTHERS. ALTHOUGH SHOTS AT 1;2 OF COFFEES ON " TRADITIONAL ESPRESSO GRINDERS " DONT SEEM AS SWEET ( TO ME ONLY ) . IVE MEASURED AND TASTED A FEW SDIE BY SIDE (EK V ROBUR) , NOT ENOUGH FOR IT TO BE ANY MORE THAN SUBJECTIVE OPINION THOUGH ..*
> 
> *
> *
> 
> EK43 and brewed coffee is a different league and thats where the grind size distro. is so easy to taste the change it makes in terms of clarity and 'focussing' of the flavour less under and over combined to confuse your pallete... Most of the now 'even with standard espresso grinders' I find my self pretty happy with the results 'a la' cupnorth and the L2 combined with battered Royals, id solidly put this down to the changes in EBF.
> 
> Anyway I mentioned this mainly because I feel the EK gains too much credit as well as to highlight the changes in widespread opinion / common practice of how to brew shots; which for me has come from reducing TDS increasing EY and pushing more water through the puck.
> 
> Like with everything coffee the beast is made with the guy who truly knows what change to input to the system results in changed output, and there is alot to trip you up / channeling bad distro etc. ... I guess I just feel lost with my spice grinder in the woods...


----------



## Mrboots2u

jeebsy said:


> ebf?


effective brew ? Formula ? = ratio


----------



## garydyke1

Ive not touched the pre infusion on my Sage since 'dialling in' with the older EK version. Its set to 10 seconds. I might revisit this one day ....maybe......


----------



## CallumT

Little by little martin, the force around you is quite strong...

- ''*HAVE YOU READ OR USED RAO PROCESS FOR CUPPING AND REFRACTING ?''*



*
*I have but still cupping and roast solubility would require a standardised grinder , grind size ect and this brings up manufacturing variances, variation due to burr wear etc. and no easy way to calibrate between roaster A and roaster B even if they have the same grinders water etc. Water also worth a mention although they're are spec sheets on this.

- *" TRADITIONAL ESPRESSO GRINDERS " DONT SEEM AS SWEET*



*
*I've also noticed this, but at least the small drop in quality comes with larger amounts of control and consistancy. Aswell as most likely an increase in speed on bar.

*- THE SLOWER SHOTS MAY SEEM MORE PSYCHOLOGICALLY COMFORTING THOUGH ( I.E IF THAT 21 SECOND SHOT WAS LONGER I BET IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TASTIER )*



*
*Another link back to the EK problems for me, I still find my self clinging to previous techniques. Shots with wetting on my L1 and Mythos used to often pass 45sec total time.


----------



## Mrboots2u

CallumT said:


> Little by little martin, the force around you is quite strong...


Is this a good thing ?


----------



## Mrboots2u

Hi ve created a new thread and brewed it across to the brewed sub forum ...

Makes it easier and ,ore searchable if other people wanna use it later..

All the post re new brew ratios etc are there now

http://coffeeforums.co.uk/showthread.php?21260-Ek43-Exploring-new-brewed-ratios&p=251013#post251013


----------



## Mrboots2u

Ok here is a set of variables for you

Ek 43 coffee burrs - hasbean coffee..

Making a traditional strength tasty shot on the vesuvius machine

Before we start... not meant to be a prep clip , i know you can't see me tamp etc.....






Dose 17.9g Ek 1.7 callum dial

the rest is on the clip

Taste wise a little bit strong for my personal palate , but its a traditional strength , chocolate tasting, ek espresso none the less....


----------



## Xpenno

Nice vid boots, I'm currently grinding at 1.9-2 on 3FE (equivelent to 1.7 on Callum's dial) and the pours have been great. Not refracted anything yet though...


----------



## jeebsy

18 secs pre infusion? 34 out? Wild bootsy!


----------



## Mrboots2u

jeebsy said:


> 18 secs pre infusion? 34 out? Wild bootsy!


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Would be interesting to see extraction yields at various pre-infusion times - 5, 10, 15 sec - all other factors kept constant. Over to you Boots.


----------



## jeebsy

I do 5 secs at two bar, no idea why that became the norm


----------



## Xpenno

jeebsy said:


> I do 5 secs at two bar, no idea why that became the norm


How fine are you grinding Jeebsy? I'm running 15 sec preinfusion at 2 on the 3fe dial and it's rocking.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

jeebsy said:


> I do 5 secs at two bar, no idea why that became the norm


Precisely.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

More consistent particle size distribution should permit finer grind? Finer grinds need more care to avoid channelling. Longer pre-infusion seems, intuitively, the way to go to to ensure best extraction yields but this needs testing.


----------



## Xpenno

One for the boffin thread









http://motherboard.vice.com/read/inside-the-worlds-most-advanced-coffee-laboratory


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Interesting thread, Spence. Anyone fortunate to get their hands on the five variants in HB's Finca Argentina offering would see how science, applied to coffee production/processing, is capable of making significant improvements in the cup.


----------



## jeebsy

Xpenno said:


> How fine are you grinding Jeebsy? I'm running 15 sec preinfusion at 2 on the 3fe dial and it's rocking.


4 on the 3fe dial with the current imm


----------



## Mrboots2u

The Systemic Kid said:


> More consistent particle size distribution should permit finer grind? Finer grinds need more care to avoid channelling. Longer pre-infusion seems, intuitively, the way to go to to ensure best extraction yields but this needs testing.


Defo need 18g in the 20g vst with these big pre infusion times . Just pulled another the coffee swelled up bonkers in the pf. Can tell as am using a ridged basket....

Pulled another now 18g in a 20g vst , bottomless extraction . 20.6% EY ..43 seconds long

Anyone wanna see a car crash naked ek43 extraction clip.....?


----------



## Mrboots2u

The Systemic Kid said:


> Would be interesting to see extraction yields at various pre-infusion times - 5, 10, 15 sec - all other factors kept constant. Over to you Boots.


Using what protocol though

Same brew ratio?

same dose , same grind ? same dose different grind ...

The 1.7 18 g shot at 5 seconds pre infusion chokes the machine .....


----------



## Xpenno

jeebsy said:


> 4 on the 3fe dial with the current imm


Makes sense, so we're going finer but increasing pre-infusion to ensure shot finishes within a "normal" time frame.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Same dose, grind, extractin time and brew weight. Pre-infusion the only variable.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Xpenno said:


> Makes sense, so we're going finer but increasing pre-infusion to ensure shot finishes within a "normal" time frame.


43 seconds


----------



## Mrboots2u

Rights lets see if the grind finer, pre infuse longer , better prep , makes a difference to the car crash naked pf extractions..........


----------



## jeebsy

THat pour looked not bad Bootsy, passable as a naked effort


----------



## Mrboots2u

jeebsy said:


> THat pour looked not bad Bootsy, passable as a naked effort


for an EK its no bad.....


----------



## jeebsy

Mrboots2u said:


> for an EK its no bad.....


Pah. THis is a naked EK shot


----------



## jeebsy

Xpenno said:


> How fine are you grinding Jeebsy? I'm running 15 sec preinfusion at 2 on the 3fe dial and it's rocking.


18 secs PI, ground at 2 on the 3fe dial, 51.8 out in 50 seconds. Think i tamped a bit harder than usual but motor skills are impaired by the fact it's under 8° in my flat just now. Shot was alright (still really tasty but not the best i've had from this bag though). This is one of the nicest choc-tasting coffees i've had.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Perhaps pulled the best shot of anything form the Ek tonight ...

Atkinsons Nigelle Gorbitu

Had it as brewed before and been trying to come up for a recipe for it , as the roasters are having the EK on the bar next week...

As brewed always got the tangerine and cities notes but subtle and sharp ( even at great extraction yields )

Over the day pulled a few then with the last few grams tried again.

17.5 g in 18g vst ( EK at 1.5 callum dial this is essentially a filter brew roast )

41.3g out tds 9.2 extraction yield =22.6

Pressure 16 seconds at 2 bar

2 at 3 bar - 2 at 4 bar - 2 at 6 bar - 10 at 8.5 bar

32 seconds total

The clearest sweetest tangerine orange notes of any espresso ive ever had little slight lemon citrus zing in the back end .

Super sweet super balanced ..... great body , good firm crema.....

Difference is been dialling this different way .

Using the naked making sure ive got the puck saturated up to 16 seconds but not extracting

Full stream then starts at 8..5 bar

I tuned the dose and grind to get to this point .....

First time i was getting streams at 2 bar or at start of ramp up...

Yeah there was still some micro channeling , with small dead spots around the centre ...

I think the flow and stream would be better at 8 bar or little less.

8. 5 bar seems to fix the extraction in the puck ...

Bloody hell it tasted good though...........


----------



## MarkyP

jeebsy said:


> Pah. THis is a naked EK shot


LOL!!!

You weren't kidding!


----------



## Xpenno

Coffee cupping session....










Closely followed by a water testing session....










Lessons learned

1. I should probably have better things to do with my life!

2. All of the coffee I tested was good

3. Not all of the water I tested was good


----------



## MWJB

Xpenno said:


> Coffee cupping session....
> 
> Closely followed by a water testing session....
> 
> Lessons learned
> 
> 1. I should probably have better things to do with my life!
> 
> 2. All of the coffee I tested was good
> 
> 3. Not all of the water I tested was good


You're a hero, one A/B test a day is all I can manage & still muster some interest, did I mention the washing up?.... C'mon spill the beans, may save me having to crack open the entire selection under my counter?


----------



## MWJB

PS, I bet the Sainsburys Caledonian was grim.


----------



## Xpenno

MWJB said:


> You're a hero, one A/B test a day is all I can manage & still muster some interest, did I mention the washing up?.... C'mon spill the beans, may save me having to crack open the entire selection under my counter?


Ha, wouldn't go that far. Water tests are a pain in the arse though. Just brewing a Kalita with the winning water from the cupping. Interested to see if it follows over into the real world test. Only refracted the coffee test, used only sensory info on the water test.

The waitrose came out on top of the 4 tested. It had a bigger smoother body but also more pleasant fruit notes. Felt a bit like the loudness button had been pressed on my stereo if you catch my drift. Anyway let's see what the Kalita says (not that I've mastered it in any way up to now!)


----------



## Xpenno

MWJB said:
 

> PS, I bet the Sainsburys Caledonian was grim.


It was Brecon Carreg from Waitrose. But yes the high Bicarb killed off all of the top-end as expected.

Ok, just had a very enjoyable Kalita (best to date!) from the Waitrose essential. More brew tests tomorrow. I've also got a couple more to test as well.

I'll add some notes over in the brewed water post


----------



## Xpenno

Just on the off chance that anyone is even remotely interested then here is my current prep for the EK. Boots made me record it and go bottomless which I've not done in bloody ages!!!






Excellent camera work by Jillicious I'm sure you'll agree


----------



## Xpenno

And a puckshot for ultimate sadness.










Shot tasted great, would have preferred 32-35 seconds but it was still really balanced, sweet and a tasty fruit twang!


----------



## jeebsy

Took the EK apart last night for a routine clean, took the front off, pulled the pre-breaker/burr carrier, brushed it all down, lubed the shaft, put it back, zeroed it but grind is all over the place now - at zero i'm getting 80 out in 25 (which is still tasty but not where I want to be all the time).

Didn't take the burrs so should be a case of them being misaligned. Any ideas?


----------



## jeebsy

Took it apart, did everything again, better but not where it was before. Getting a fresh bean shipment tomorrow so will be able to compare a few in case this lot of particularly fast.


----------



## jeebsy

Think I'm at/near proper 0


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Only worry when you go minus zero


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Being serious for a mo, it's best to take of the flange and clean off the burrs so when you are resetting them, you are not distracted by ghost noises - tighten until the burrs start to chirp and then back of a tiny amount - and I mean, tiny so the chirping stops.


----------



## jeebsy

By flange do you mean burr carrier thing?

Wasn't entirely sure about 0 as it would make a tiny chirp then go away, then make the chirp again. With the speed the burrs are turning, if they were actually touching you'd think the chirp would be constant...but guess this might be what you mean by ghost noises?


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Assembly that holds the adjustment knob - held on by two screws. Without thoroughly cleaning the residue off the flange that pushes against the rotating burr, it's not possible to be sure just where the burrs are starting to make contact. Mine squeaks at various settings. When I got my EK, it was squeaking from out of the box which made me nervous about going near zero despite the burrs being factory set. Once you've reset them yourself after cleaning out the chamber and assembly, you will be able to tighten the burrs and hear chirping without any ghost noises getting in the way. Once the chirping starts, back it off a tad - Mahlkonig say 10 degrees which is a gnat's whisker.


----------



## jeebsy

The bit you take off to get access to the burrs etc? Thats clean but will check all contact points when I'm home.

How does the adjustment work btw? With the front bit off, rotating the knob doesn't appear to affect the bit that rotates on the flange


----------



## The Systemic Kid

The adjustment knob assembly is called the 'grinder case casing' by Mahlkonig - so I'll refer to it with it's proper name. When you remove it, you will see a flange in the centre. As you turn the knob, you push the flange inwards which presses down on the rotating burr and brings it nearer the static burr.

With the casing removed, take out the carrier - need a pair of croc pliers for this unless you are lucky and can gently prise it out. Remove the pre-breaker off the shaft and thoroughly clean everything including inside of the shaft. Mahlkonig recommends Vaseline to re-lube - I use Loxeal. Make sure you clean the flange and put a sparing amount of lube on this. Lube the shaft and re-assemble. When refitting the casing - you will need to apply some pressure to compress the spring. Don't know why but I find I get a better adjustment if I compress the spring as far as it will go and then insert screws and tighten them up. A second pair of hands is helpful here. When tightening the screws, do them sequentially - that is, a bit each side then the other. You can then reset the burrs knowing that the chirping you hear is them beginning to touch. Do this gently and carefully and when they begin to chirp, back off 10 degrees which is a tiny amount. Lock the securing Allen screws and make yourself a shot.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Ill bring this thread back to life as been asked some questions on low pressure shots in the IMM thread


----------



## Mrboots2u

There is still a lot of twiddling and experimenting with pressure profiles going on. Normally me and Spence are messaging back and forth with various postulations without most of em going to public thread.

Getting even naked pf extractions with a Ek had always been an arse. But for whatever reason thanks to copying spence , seems can get a lovely espresso porn result for most profiles used. This means I have some confidence that the profiles used aren't being obscurer by my own can handed prep...


----------



## Mrboots2u

I'll leave Spence to post what profiles he had been using and enjoying ...buy out discussions have been around dose v output v contact time v extraction yield v body.... And how they all interplay...


----------



## Mrboots2u

So does a 21 % ey shot in 22 seconds taste different to one at 28 seconds ..( given strength is the same for both shots ). Of course a lot of this is purely subjective , we use different water , have different preferences , and different burrs but the chat and the intellectual challenge keeps it interestjng and it has pushed coffee in different directions directions taste wise...


----------



## Mrboots2u

So to low pressure. Currently last few shots have been at 20g super fine dose - very light blend - 45-50g out flat 7 bar . ... Getting more body and creamyness good strength and still super sweetness . shot times have gone up...

Ultra even extractions ...

This may mainly come from reading and chatting to a USA Ek owner and reading his blog where is he pulling flat 7 bar and Spence also who is pulling 10 bar at the moment ....so this profile isnt the end so to speak , just another step....think adding in some declining pressure might be the next step for it.....


----------



## jeebsy

Mrboots2u said:


> So does a 21 % ey shot in 22 seconds taste different to one at 28 seconds ..( given strength is the same for both shots ). Of course a lot of this is purely subjective , we use different water , have different preferences , and different burrs but the chat and the intellectual challenge keeps it interestjng and it has pushed coffee in different directions directions taste wise...


Different how? For normal shots (5-10 secs at 2 bar then 9 bar finish) my preference is probably for shots closer to 20 secs than 30 secs. They seem to have more of the qualities i like (sweetness, hipster flavours) but going towards 30 brings in some undesirable qualities for my palate



Mrboots2u said:


> So to low pressure. Currently last few shots have been at 20g super fine dose - very light blend - 45-50g out flat 7 bar . ... Getting more body and creamyness good strength and still super sweetness . shot times have gone up...
> 
> Ultra even extractions ...
> 
> This may mainly come from reading and chatting to a USA Ek owner and reading his blog where is he pulling flat 7 bar and Spence also who is pulling 10 bar at the moment ....so this profile isnt the end so to speak , just another step....think adding in some declining pressure might be the next step for it.....


Links to blog? Could be tempted to change my pump settings over the easter weekend


----------



## Mrboots2u

Different how > Dunno , i think there is a debate to have about how much , contact time effects whats in the cup with the EK43.. Its hard to quantify .

There is temp , pressure , etc at play... in the end with the VST it allows some real fine tuning of what your absolute preference is in the cup ...

Its not a question of " aiming for a number " as if often misintepreted but seeing where your preference lies after you have taken a sip ....

Blog wise this is the one I was referring to ...

http://no-stream.tumblr.com

Its an interesting journey that i think to some degree all Ek43 owners go through

More even extractions of course could be a function of just having put more coffee through the burrs , but I'm not sure this explains it 100%


----------



## Xpenno

Just to clarify, I'm currently running 10bar and then ramping down at the end of the shot. I'm getting massive flavour, massive, body, massive crema and great looking, evenly extracted. I annoy Bootsy as I hardly ever refract espresso, if it taste good then I'm drinking it and I'll try to replicate that next time, it's kinda like refracting the past. Maybe I should be using it to dial in, next week I plan to do some more with the VST and espresso.

For me higher pressure = more intensity in the cup. I love espresso that's intense, now that I have found my way with brewed I appreciate a strong, thick, tasty espresso more than ever!

I would say that a low pressure shot is like a stereo with the loudness button off, you may prefer that. Higher pressure is like engaging that button, you get more low and high end.

I'm currently not pre-infusing (aside form the natural E61 infusion) and much preferring the results. Pre-infusion seemed to make everything taste similar. Probably just me but that's what I'm doing at the moment.

I've also changed my tamp to "until the grind coffee doesn't compress any more". This has improved things across the board for me.

I'll try and quantify some of this with actual experiments over the next week :S


----------



## garydyke1

set the recipe 20g-44g->33 sec/preinfusion 10 [email protected]% then 9.5BAR ramping down to 8.5 to finish. Bolivia Uchamachi tasting super-dooper.

Remove preinfusion so 0-9.5 BAR in 4 seconds then 9.5BAR ramping down to 8BAR to finish. Tastes harsh, way less sweetness , way more bitterness. Body if anything seems less. No VST to prove anything .


----------



## Mrboots2u

garydyke1 said:


> set the recipe 20g-44g->33 sec/preinfusion 10 [email protected]% then 9.5BAR ramping down to 8.5 to finish. Bolivia Uchamachi tasting super-dooper.
> 
> Remove preinfusion so 0-9.5 BAR in 4 seconds then 9.5BAR ramping down to 8BAR to finish. Tastes harsh, way less sweetness , way more bitterness. Body if anything seems less. No VST to prove anything .


Remove pre infusion extract at 7 bar


----------



## Mrboots2u

As an aside , does the V have " natural " e61 pre infusion , i thought this was negated by cam and stuff so the gear pump could do its work


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> As an aside , does the V have " natural " e61 pre infusion , i thought this was negated by cam and stuff so the gear pump could do its work


Yes it does, the pre-infusion chamber has been removed so you are pre-infusing whilst the group fills. Somewhere between 2-5s is my guess.


----------



## garydyke1

Mrboots2u said:


> Remove pre infusion extract at 7 bar


I can do this on Sage by running pre infusion to match 7BAR for x seconds. Just would be trial and error to find what %=7BAR


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> I can do this on Sage by running pre infusion to match 7BAR for x seconds. Just would be trial and error to find what %=7BAR


77.7777777%


----------



## nostream

Hey I'm the USA EK owner mentioned. It's really cool to find a community of EK shot-pullers. I'm using a lowly CC1, so I don't have access to true preinfusion. However, I can adjust pressure by dissassembling the CC1 and adjusting the over pressure valve (OPV). Fortunately, straight to 6-8 bars seems to be a pretty tasty profile.

I stumbled into Xpenno's blog and read this post. I checked out my burrs, summer 2014 purchase, and I have the old burrs. I'm curious whether you have the new or old burr design and how that's affecting things.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Welcome no stream as far as a I know

Mrboots2u - old burrs

Garydyke1 - new

Xpenno - now new

Systemic kid - Turkish

Ronsil - old

Jeebsy - old

Gman147 - new

Markup - old

Callumt - old

Geordieboy - old


----------



## The Systemic Kid

nostream said:


> I'm curious whether you have the new or old burr design and how that's affecting things.


Gary uploaded some pics of his burr set - profiling is different to 'old' burrs. Grinding-wise, they seem to allow a higher setting for espresso, that is, whilst the setting might be closer to zero for 'old' burrs, new ones give more range.


----------



## garydyke1

New burrs - grind setting has to be fully open for a decent bulk brew on a Marco Jet brewing 3 to 6 litres

Old burrs - grind setting can be at approx the 6 o'clock position


----------



## jeebsy

Still got enough range for espresso?


----------



## Mrboots2u

The Systemic Kid said:


> Gary uploaded some pics of his burr set - profiling is different to 'old' burrs. Grinding-wise, they seem to allow a higher setting for espresso, that is, whilst the setting might be closer to zero for 'old' burrs, new ones give more range.


Pics are on the link to Spence's blog


----------



## garydyke1

jeebsy said:


> Still got enough range for espresso?


better range buddy


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> better range buddy


Yup, if anything you are on the edge at the brew end of the spectrum. Espresso range in much improved.


----------



## Xpenno

nostream said:


> Hey I'm the USA EK owner mentioned. It's really cool to find a community of EK shot-pullers. I'm using a lowly CC1, so I don't have access to true preinfusion. However, I can adjust pressure by dissassembling the CC1 and adjusting the over pressure valve (OPV). Fortunately, straight to 6-8 bars seems to be a pretty tasty profile.
> 
> I stumbled into Xpenno's blog and read this post. I checked out my burrs, summer 2014 purchase, and I have the old burrs. I'm curious whether you have the new or old burr design and how that's affecting things.


Welcome


----------



## Step21

Looking for some refracting help on the chemex. I hope that this is the right place to post. I'm trying to understand how to lower TDS and EY.

I thought that to lower TDS and EY the standard remedial is to grind coarser and/or dose less coffee? (keeping all other things as equal as possible).

I'm brewing with a 20ml bloom for 40sec then pouring the rest in one continous pour. All water in by 2:20.

Brew 1: exactly 12.00g/200g brew water. grind 1.2 on the hausgrind. 174g brew out time 4:32 TDS 1.35% - giving an EY of 20.38% (BTW i'm using the Windows PC desktop VST software)

Brew 2: 11.52g/199g brew water, grind 1.25 (slightly coarser), 178g out, brew time 3:47. TDS exactly the same at 1.35% - EY up to 21.73% (tasted more bitter on the finish than previous brew)

Obviously i can't be absolutely sure that my flow rate the whole way through was identical but it was as near as i can replicate.

Assuming i'm calculating the EY correctly (i may not be) why did the EY go up in brew 2?


----------



## Xpenno

Step21 said:


> Looking for some refracting help on the chemex. I hope that this is the right place to post. I'm trying to understand how to lower TDS and EY.
> 
> I thought that to lower TDS and EY the standard remedial is to grind coarser and/or dose less coffee? (keeping all other things as equal as possible).
> 
> I'm brewing with a 20ml bloom for 40sec then pouring the rest in one continous pour. All water in by 2:20.
> 
> Brew 1: exactly 12.00g/200g brew water. grind 1.2 on the hausgrind. 174g brew out time 4:32 TDS 1.35% - giving an EY of 20.38% (BTW i'm using the Windows PC desktop VST software)
> 
> Brew 2: 11.52g/199g brew water, grind 1.25 (slightly coarser), 178g out, brew time 3:47. TDS exactly the same at 1.35% - EY up to 21.73% (tasted more bitter on the finish than previous brew)
> 
> Obviously i can't be absolutely sure that my flow rate the whole way through was identical but it was as near as i can replicate.
> 
> Assuming i'm calculating the EY correctly (i may not be) why did the EY go up in brew 2?


A lot will come from the pour, it is very hard to consistently produce Chemex at exactly the same TDS/EY.

I would drop the dose down to 10.8g > 199g brew water, use same grind and method and see what you end up with. I find that gives me a TDS closer to 1.25-1.28 which I quite like for chemex.


----------



## Mrboots2u

With chemex the dykemex delivers pretty consistent every time. Do you have a pid kettle step21


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> With chemex the dykemex delivers pretty consistent every time. Do you have a pid kettle step21


Does dykemex work with the Hausgrind?


----------



## garydyke1

Mrboots2u said:


> With chemex the dykemex delivers pretty consistent every time. Do you have a pid kettle step21


Yep Garymex v consistant .

if TDS too high then drop the dose 1g at a time until happy. Note a drop in TDS can produce a higher EY if maintaining brewing water (good if using an EK)


----------



## Mrboots2u

Xpenno said:


> Does dykemex work with the Hausgrind?


Yes ...did it during brewed month


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> Yes ...did it during brewed month


Coolage


----------



## Step21

Mrboots2u said:


> With chemex the dykemex delivers pretty consistent every time. Do you have a pid kettle step21


No. I'm using a wee travel kettle. I find i can pour slowly and gently with it.

I tried the dykemex method when i was using the 3-6 cup chemex brewer for chemex. I got OK'ish cups but never really that great. I might try it again now having the refrac to see where i was going wrong.

After some experimentation, i switched to a hybrid brew - using a chemex filter in a V60 size 1 with the continous pour method and get far superior cups. Initially, I had been using this method for V60's and noticed improvement over my Rao V60 attempts. I thought i'd try a chemex filter instead (cut it to shape) and it tastes better than the V60 filter (IMO).


----------



## Mrboots2u

you may be loosing some temp with the kettle over the pours , but variably .....

this could explain difference in tds and EY combined with small variations in pours


----------



## Xpenno

Are you stirring during the pre-infuse stage? I think this is key to getting an even extraction using dykmex

Also 40 seconds will increase EY, I go with 30secs.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Xpenno said:


> Are you stirring during the pre-infuse stage? I think this is key to getting an even extraction using dykmex
> 
> Also 40 seconds will increase EY, I go with 30secs.


Stir , stir...mini whisk









5 times clockwise at 120 rpm


----------



## garydyke1

Less pours - fixed time - less variables . let the water and the grind do the work


----------



## Step21

garydyke1 said:


> Yep Garymex v consistant .
> 
> if TDS too high then drop the dose 1g at a time until happy. Note a drop in TDS can produce a higher EY if maintaining brewing water (good if using an EK)


If i want to keep brew water the same and lower EY? I want to get the EY down to around 19.5% ish. Grind coarser while keeping dose the same?


----------



## garydyke1

Step21 said:


> If i want to keep brew water the same and lower EY? I want to get the EY down to around 19.5% ish. Grind coarser while keeping dose the same?


yep. or lower temp


----------



## Step21

Xpenno said:


> Are you stirring during the pre-infuse stage? I think this is key to getting an even extraction using dykmex
> 
> Also 40 seconds will increase EY, I go with 30secs.


Swirling! aka the motion to mix oil & vinegar. I did stir with the garymex method - even used a mini whisk. Just wasn't doing the magic!


----------



## Step21

My theory as to why the Garymex method doesn't work well for me is that when brewing a small brew in the 3-6 cup chemex i can't get the kettle spout close to the grinds (this would be less of a problem with a pouring kettle). The chemex filter protrudes a fair bit over the top of the brewer, so i'm pouring from a higher position therefore getting more agitation.

With the V60/cut down chemex filter combo i can get the travel kettle very close to the grinds, resulting in a much gentler and more controlled pour.


----------



## jeebsy

Is it preferable to use output water when refracting (brewed) rather than input, or does it make a difference?


----------



## MWJB

jeebsy said:


> Is it preferable to use output water when refracting (brewed) rather than input, or does it make a difference?


For drip, it's the output weight that determines EY. For immersion mode (inc. typical Aeropress & Clever methods) it's the total brew water added.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

MWJB said:


> For drip, it's the output weight that determines EY. For immersion mode (inc. typical Aeropress & Clever methods) it's the total brew water added.


Can you elaborate, Mark. Would be helpful.


----------



## MWJB

Sure, for drip & espresso, we separate the brewed beverage from the grounds & ignore the liquid retained in the bed/puck, so EY is based on the TDS of the liquid that lands in the cup/carafe only. This is why it is important to weigh the output of the brewer, where that isn't possible, try and establish the typical LRR and put that in preferences.

For immersions, all the brew water is in contact with the all grinds for the full immersion time and the TDS of the beverage extracted is going to be similar to that retained in the grounds, in some cases it won't be easy to weigh the separated beverage (Turkish, cupping, French press where significant liquid is trapped under the plunger) & we base EY on the TDS of the weight of brew water used (changing LRR & gm bev in immersion mode won't change the reading).

For immersions that retain a lot of liquid, say at high brew ratios, this can give a skewed, low EY in drip mode...e.g. you make a French press and whether you pour out 1 cup, 2 cups, or 3 cups, they will have the same EY with regard to immersion, but depending on the amount of liquid removed from the grounds the "drip" EY will change.

After you have finished brewing a chemex & pulled the filter & grounds bed, after all the water has drained - everything in the pot is "extracted" & separated from the grounds, EY stays constant for the whole brew, no matter what you do with the liquid after this point. But if you started brewing 2 cups and pulled the filter after only extracting enough beverage for one, leaving liquid & grounds in the filter, you skew (drop) the EY (assuming brew was on target to start with) & effectively the LRR & brew ratios.


----------



## garydyke1

Step21 said:


> My theory as to why the Garymex method doesn't work well for me is that when brewing a small brew in the 3-6 cup chemex i can't get the kettle spout close to the grinds (this would be less of a problem with a pouring kettle). The chemex filter protrudes a fair bit over the top of the brewer, so i'm pouring from a higher position therefore getting more agitation.
> 
> With the V60/cut down chemex filter combo i can get the travel kettle very close to the grinds, resulting in a much gentler and more controlled pour.


Cut the filter paper with scissors.

Although I pour from a great height with the bonivita TBH


----------



## Step21

garydyke1 said:


> Cut the filter paper with scissors.
> 
> Although I pour from a great height with the bonivita TBH


I think the real problem is the lack of one of these EK43 grinders!


----------



## garydyke1

There are EKs and there are 'bitterness grinders''


----------



## garydyke1

just needs a varnish


----------



## ronsil

Gary are you offering that for sale?

If so it really ought to be in the 'For Sale' section


----------



## garydyke1

lol. No idea where it came from. Dale stuck it on our EK in the training area. Perhaps a staining and varnish needed


----------



## ronsil

My error - I read it as the EK just needing a varnish:dummy:


----------



## urbanbumpkin

ronsil said:


> My error - I read it as the EK just needing a varnish:dummy:


Me too


----------



## garydyke1

Sage DB - change pre infusion settings to be :

Time = 10 sec

Pump Power = 64%

This means when you press and hold the brew button the machine runs at pre infusion = 6BAR and reduced flow rate until you let go!

Replicate Slayer 1G performance for 1/6th of the cost.

EK shots have mouthfeel yay.

Only downside you have to run at 96c to compensate .


----------



## Mrboots2u

garydyke1 said:


> Sage DB - change pre infusion settings to be :
> 
> Time = 10 sec
> 
> Pump Power = 64%
> 
> This means when you press and hold the brew button the machine runs at pre infusion = 6BAR and reduced flow rate until you let go!
> 
> Replicate Slayer 1G performance for 1/6th of the cost.
> 
> EK shots have mouthfeel yay.
> 
> Only downside you have to run at 96c to compensate .


96 c to extract more coz of lower pressure

Am running 6 bar shots but no low flow profile at moment ...


----------



## garydyke1

Its more the slower flow rate, than pressure I think. The TDS is higher as a result of 6BAR+slower flow. Need to do more testing.

At 64% pump power, 6BAR max pressure, I get 160g water in 30 seconds

At 100%, 10BAR max pressure, I get 194g in the same time

It might be 6BAR isn't the answer here for best taste.

Not enough hours in the day


----------



## Mrboots2u

Normal 6 flat bar is giving me high tds at coarser grinds at mo


----------



## MWJB

Mrboots2u said:


> Normal 6 flat bar is giving me high tds at coarser grinds at mo


Is this giving a different result, or normalising shot time by compensating for the coarser grind with a slower flow?


----------



## garydyke1

Im getting lovely 'old school' naked portafilter shots, gloopy and central , which is very weird.


----------



## Mrboots2u

MWJB said:


> Is this giving a different result, or normalising shot time by compensating for the coarser grind with a slower flow?


Long day...

Are you asking if shot time is longer leading to higher tds?


----------



## MWJB

garydyke1 said:


> Im getting lovely 'old school' naked portafilter shots, gloopy and central , which is very weird.


Are you grinding coarser than typical too?


----------



## garydyke1

Im actually grinding finer. The slower flow and low(er) pressure means the whole coffee bed is getting a chance to saturate before water finds a channel...without choking the machine


----------



## MWJB

Mrboots2u said:


> Long day...
> 
> Are you asking if shot time is longer leading to higher tds?


No, not a longer shot necessarily, more a typical shot time & brew ratio, because the flow is slowed in relation to a coarser grind, by the lower pressure?

E.g. If you put the pressure up at the same grind & BR, surely the shot would flow faster, shorter shot time & lower EY?


----------



## Mrboots2u

MWJB said:


> Are you grinding coarser than typical too?


Think so..but its a new coffee which is well developed


----------



## garydyke1

measure your flow rates 6 v 9 boots.

On a vibe pump pressure goes up , flow goes down..usually..Unless you've got a Sage DB it seems ; )


----------



## garydyke1

Mrboots2u said:


> Think so..but its a new coffee which is well developed


You mean burned


----------



## Mrboots2u

garydyke1 said:


> You mean burned


Nope . Sqm


----------



## garydyke1

Mrboots2u said:


> Nope . Sqm


Yeah burned ; )

(jokin)


----------



## Mrboots2u

Ok 20 sec at 9 bar 190

20 secs at 6 bar 155


----------



## garydyke1

Mrboots2u said:


> Ok 20 sec at 9 bar 190
> 
> 20 secs at 6 bar 155


Wow , the Sage is much more restrained than yours. Stupid plastic box


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> Wow , the Sage is much more restrained than yours. Stupid plastic box


Lol, you're like Heston's bitch!


----------



## coffeechap

Xpenno said:


> Lol, you're like Heston's bitch!


hes not like it!


----------



## Xpenno

coffeechap said:


> hes not like it!


Gary and Heston in a tree....


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Xpenno said:


> Gary and Heston in a tree....


Jealous?


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> 96 c to extract more coz of lower pressure


I don't think so. 96c to compensate for the temperature of the water dropping more as it takes longer for it to get to the coffee from the boiler. That's what my Eric's Thermometer is tell me.


----------



## Xpenno

urbanbumpkin said:


> Jealous?


Absolutely not. Should I be?


----------



## coffeechap

sage slave


----------



## Xpenno

I can't believe that the Sage is still working tbh, I'm sure dfk forecast its demise long ago!


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Xpenno said:


> Absolutely not. Should I be?


Of Heston or Gary?


----------



## coffeechap

Xpenno said:


> I can't believe that the Sage is still working tbh, I'm sure dfk forecast its demise long ago!


others have not been so fortunate!


----------



## Xpenno

coffeechap said:


> others have not been so fortunate!


Same with any machine though? Frank's Verona died a death and that's Sage + £700. There are possibly more Sages out in the wild as well?


----------



## Xpenno

urbanbumpkin said:


> Of Heston or Gary?


If you're trying to start some kind of hair war then I'm not biting. I love people with and without hair, we can all coexist happily together!


----------



## garydyke1

Mr B runs a Linea PB and EK43 , so I am told.

Yeah the little Sage is still alive and refuses to die even running >200ppm water for 5 months. Its out lived a few 3 group Slayers , lol


----------



## Mrboots2u

garydyke1 said:


> Mr B runs a Linea PB and EK43 , so I am told.
> 
> Yeah the little Sage is still alive and refuses to die even running >200ppm water for 5 months. Its out lived a few 3 group Slayers , lol


I wonder if charle's is still working


----------



## garydyke1

Mrboots2u said:


> I wonder if charle's is still working


i misread that as ''I wonder if Charlie is still working'' haha


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> i misread that as ''I wonder if Charlie is still working'' haha


Haha, me too!


----------



## garydyke1

I thought I was blind drunk. Oh wait a minute I am


----------



## coffeechap

Mrboots2u said:


> I wonder if charle's is still working


who is charles


----------



## DoubleShot

charliej perhaps?


----------



## urbanbumpkin

garydyke1 said:


> i misread that as ''I wonder if Charlie is still working'' haha


Malfunctioned after a brass dispenser plate group buy. But hopefully back to usual service where ever he is.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Ok fiddled with some seetings

Water flow now 140g in 20 seconds .....


----------



## Mrboots2u

First shot of the morning

Flat 6 bar, 93.5c grinding quite coarse for my EK at 1.8 ( Callum dial )

Red Brick 20.2g > 45.2 g >26 seconds > TDS 9.2 > Extraction Yield = 21.4%

Taste = first you get the toffee and caramel moves smoothly into floral peachy like notes, not a hint of roastyness of previous shots.

Smooth central naked pf pour and certainly more mouthfeel

Now where to go with this.......grind a little finer , pull a little shorter , run a little hotter > more mouthfeel ?

Also try with a different coffee thats less developed and see what comes out ?

Anyway pleasant and easy way to start the day with coffee


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Mrboots2u said:


> Fist shot of the morning
> 
> Flat 6 bar 93.5c grinding quite coarse for my EK at 1.8 ( Callum dial )
> 
> Red Brick 20.2g > 45.2 g >26 seconds > TDS 9.2 > Extraction Yield = 21.4%
> 
> Taste = first you get the toffee and caramel moves smoothly into floral peachy like notes, not a hint of roastyness of previous shots.
> 
> Smooth central naked pf pour and certainly more mouthfeel
> 
> Now where to go with this.......grind a little finer , pull a little shorter , run a little hotter > more mouthfeel ?
> 
> Also try with a different coffee thats less developed and see what comes out ?
> 
> Anyway pleasant and easy way yo start the day with coffee


Fist shot! Sound like some of the ones I've pulled of late.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

garydyke1 said:


> Sage DB - change pre infusion settings to be :
> 
> Time = 10 sec
> 
> Pump Power = 64%
> 
> This means when you press and hold the brew button the machine runs at pre infusion = 6BAR and reduced flow rate until you let go!
> 
> Replicate Slayer 1G performance for 1/6th of the cost.
> 
> EK shots have mouthfeel yay.
> 
> Only downside you have to run at 96c to compensate .


Me and the Major had a go at this. 18=>40g in 35 secs. Kept the grind the same as the previous shot.

The shot ran slightly longer as when I released the manual shot button it continued so had to double press.

Definitely different to my previous conventional shot. At 93c pr07, pp60 pre-infusion.

Seemed clearer cleaner tastes but with a velvety mouthfeel that you tend to get with "thicker" shots.

Only the first attempt, so could just be a one off.

Thanks for the heads up Gary


----------



## jeebsy

Might turn my pump down to six bar and give this a bash


----------



## Xpenno

Been playing with 6bar ever since my session with Matt Perger last week and I find it works well for some and not so well for other coffees, its certainly interesting though.

This morning I'm running 9bar but at a lower flow rate of 180ml per 30 sec. 95.5c. Still maybe a little cool based on my group thermometer but it's OK due to the development. Coffee is a well developed roast from quarterhorse roasters here in brum. Loads of body, loads of tasty acidity. Its a Brazil Ethiopia blend and really delivers in the cup.

I'm running 23g in a 22g vst into 50g in 30 seconds and the results are just great. Sweetness, body, chocs then a fruit acidity that just balances everything out.


----------



## Xpenno

My current theories are lower water flow rate means less channelling and more contact time. It also means that you can grind courser which is the currently what is thought to be most desirable amongst those in the upper echelons of coffee.

I from my tests low flow rate seems more important to a good extraction than the pressure.


----------



## jeebsy

Might have to get that small gicleur in sooner rather that later


----------



## Xpenno

jeebsy said:


> Might have to get that small gicleur in sooner rather that later


I think they are just carburettor jets. I purchased a couple from ebay but the threads are slightly different. Need to do more research but if we can find that right version then we should be able to get them in a tonne of difference sizes.


----------



## MWJB

Xpenno said:


> My current theories are lower water flow rate means less channelling and more contact time. It also means that you can grind courser which is the currently what is thought to be most desirable amongst those in the upper echelons of coffee.
> 
> I from my tests low flow rate seems more important to a good extraction than the pressure.


This is fascinating, but for everyone reading who can't easily change their pressure & test this out, there are a couple of questions that present themselves...

Less channelling should show up as a higher EY? Are these going up relative to 9bar EK shots?

Isn't flow rate & contact time remaining reasonably constant, because the coarser grind is offset by lower pressure? Chicken & egg?


----------



## Xpenno

MWJB said:


> This is fascinating, but for everyone reading who can't easily change their pressure & test this out, there are a couple of questions that present themselves...
> 
> Less channelling should show up as a higher EY? Are these going up relative to 9bar EK shots?
> 
> Isn't flow rate & contact time remaining reasonably constant, because the coarser grind is offset by lower pressure? Chicken & egg?


EK Shots can be run with less output over a longer time due to the reduced flow rate. Previous EK shots were 20g > 50g in 20-26s generally. I'm now running 23g>50g in 30 seconds and my grind is courser. For me this means that contact time is up and the flow out of the bottom of the PF is more controlled and even.

The reasons for trying to go courser on the grind comes from a chat I had with Matt Perger last week, he has a paper coming out on it soon that will explain it a million times better than I could ever attempt to


----------



## DoubleShot

Xpenno said:


> a chat I had with Matt Perger last week


You're well connected!


----------



## Xpenno

DoubleShot said:


> You're well connected!


Not really but it was really cool to meet him and try to extract as much info from him as possible


----------



## DoubleShot

Please share whatever info you can. Thanks.


----------



## MWJB

Xpenno said:


> EK Shots can be run with less output over a longer time due to the reduced flow rate. Previous EK shots were 20g > 50g in 20-26s generally. I'm now running 23g>50g in 30 seconds and my grind is courser. For me this means that contact time is up and the flow out of the bottom of the PF is more controlled and even.


I think there is possibly a distinction between contact time & shot time. Shot time is easy to determine, contact time...not so much.

We know that after the shot the puck will hold roughly it's own weight of water, we don't really know how much a full puck holds under pressure, but maybe we can use the final weight to make an approximation?

The water in the group, above the puck, is travelling one way during flow, until it hits the puck it's not 'in contact'. When it has dropped out of the PF/basket, it's not in contact any more either. So for a 20:50g shot over 26sec the water in the puck is roughly replaced every 10.4sec. For a 23:50g shot in 30s, 13.6 sec? This time would seem to be able to decrease as brew ratio gets larger (heavier shots for a given dose being able to run shorter in time) for comparable EY?


----------



## Xpenno

MWJB said:


> I think there is possibly a distinction between contact time & shot time. Shot time is easy to determine, contact time...not so much.
> 
> We know that after the shot the puck will hold roughly it's own weight of water, we don't really know how much a full puck holds under pressure, but maybe we can use the final weight to make an approximation?
> 
> The water in the group, above the puck, is travelling one way during flow, until it hits the puck it's not 'in contact'. When it has dropped out of the PF/basket, it's not in contact any more either. So for a 20:50g shot over 26sec the water in the puck is roughly replaced every 10.4sec. For a 23:50g shot in 30s, 13.6 sec? This time would seem to be able to decrease as brew ratio gets larger (heavier shots for a given dose being able to run shorter in time) for comparable EY?


Sounds like an interesting way to think about it and significantly more scientific than my pocket science approach


----------



## MWJB

Xpenno said:


> Sounds like an interesting way to think about it and significantly more scientific than my pocket science approach


Ha ha, still pocket science, just a different pocket!


----------



## garydyke1

jeebsy said:


> Might turn my pump down to six bar and give this a bash


Your machine wont work in the same way, the reduction of pressure will be via the OPV valve not pump power. Your shots will likely piss through


----------



## jeebsy

garydyke1 said:


> Your machine wont work in the same way, the reduction of pressure will be via the OPV valve not pump power. Your shots will likely piss through


On the rotary you adjust the pump


----------



## garydyke1

forgot yours was the posh one


----------



## Taff

A bit of an aside... been looking at the VST app but wondering if there is any point without a refractometer? Hoping for a raft of responses to say its great without one too!


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Definitely don't need a refractometer to benefit from VST baskets. A naked PF will help pinpoint any barista technique problems which using VSTs will expose.


----------



## Xpenno

Taff said:


> A bit of an aside... been looking at the VST app but wondering if there is any point without a refractometer? Hoping for a raft of responses to say its great without one too!


I can't see a massive use for the VST app without a refractometer TBH. I might give you an idea of how to plan a shot out but grinders/machines etc. vary so much that I'm not convinced that it would be that accurate though.


----------



## Taff

Xpenno said:


> I can't see a massive use for the VST app without a refractometer TBH. I might give you an idea of how to plan a shot out but grinders/machines etc. vary so much that I'm not convinced that it would be that accurate though.


Ta. Thats my current thoughts!


----------



## Mrboots2u

Time to boffin it up

Current shots

10 seconds pre infusion at 2 bar , then 5.8 bar til the end

Getting tasty , tasty drinks from the EK43 as a result ....

Grinding at 1.5 Callum Dial , using 20 g vst

Shot time 28 seconds

The Numbers of nom are for Los Luchadores

View attachment 14620


----------



## Xpenno

Spent a good portion of this afternoon round Gary's cupping with some different waters. We had limited time and caffeine tolerance so there is nothing conclusive but some interesting observations maybe and maybe some follow tests to run.

The waters that we tested were

Waitrose Essentials (TDS 110)

Has Bean Roastery (380)

My standard brew water (250)

A hyped magnesium water (230)

SCAA spec with 50/50 Ca/Mg (125)

We cupped using 12.5g coffee and 239g each water. We had to stagger each so that we could heat each water individually. We tasted and took samples for refracting at the same time intervals for each and then carried out a bulk taste test at the end also. It's not perfect but was the best we could do on the day.

As well as refracting we made general descriptive notes and also gave each a rating for Acidity Presence, Sweetness and Mouthfeel. The results were really interesting.

Waitrose - Stewed Fruit, Tasted Over Extracted, Lacked Sweetness

Acidity Presence - 5 (of 5) - Jarring Acidity

Sweetness - 1

Mouthfeel - 1

EY - 23.5%

Has Bean - Balanced, Creamy, Full

Acidity - 2.5

Sweetness - 4

Mouthfeel - 4

EY - 23.5%

My homemade brew water - Fruity, a word I can't read....

A - 4

S - 2.5

M - 2.5

EY - 21.7%

Homemade with extra Magnesium - Drying, artificial sweetener, weird

A - 5

S - 3

M - 1

EY - 22.7%

SCAA (50/50) - Drying, boring, winey, flat

A - 3

S - 3

M - 3

EY - 22.5%

We're pretty sure that the extraction yields were no good as the % kept dropping and dropping, we only took small samples and couldn't rerun anything so I don't think they are accurate enough to read anything into here.

It's also worth noting that the cupping protocol is not designed for testing water but when comparing side-by-side the differences were there for all to see!

The (rough) conclusions that we drew for the test

1. Waters that have roughly half the mg/L alkalinity to mg/L Hardness seems to have a better mouthfeel This was true of both Has Bean and SCAA spec. The rest of the water had a higher ratio of these values (i.e. less than half the alkalinity).

2. Adding extra magnesium didn't product great tasting coffee and although sweeter on the whole the brew tasted somewhat fake and unpleasant.

3. A very low alkalinity level might be responsible for the Waitrose high but unpleasant acidity with this specific coffee.

4. If the TDS figures are to be believed at all then coffee can achieve massively different tastes and tactile attributes at the same EY when but brewed with different spec water.

5. On the whole we both preferred Has Bean water in this test which is odd as it flys in the face of the SCAA water specs. This said we did use a Has Bean coffee so this could have had something to do with it







We did a second round of cuppings to compare beans from different roasters using a 50/50 blend of Has Bean and my standard brew water and this water worked well across all of the samples.


----------



## Xpenno

Couple of pics....


----------



## MWJB

Nice work chaps.

I had found Essential Waitrose worked really well for some coffees, but was getting a slightly hollow, burnt white sugar taste with others, so been flitting between that & others. Inevitable question - is the HasBean water remineralised or representative of the mains supply, are the specs secret?


----------



## Jon

Interesting. Do you think the results would be similar in espresso?


----------



## garydyke1

The roastery water is post filter staffs tap water. Its about 375 post filter and 400+ pre.

Note the references to acidity , sweetness and mouthfeel were not 'how good was the acidity' but 'how much acidity could be detected'.


----------



## garydyke1

The word you couldn't read would be 'surprising' ?


----------



## Xpenno

jonc said:


> Interesting. Do you think the results would be similar in espresso?


No, very much doubt it.


----------



## garydyke1

I cant help but feel there is more than just calcium , magnesium and bi-carb at work here.

Would a 50/50 calcium/magnesium mix with 'ideal' bicarb taste different if the sulphate to chloride ratio was higher/lower?

I was disappointed with the magnesium heavy water after hearing that Maxwell's water has this attribute, perhaps his water is chloride heavy and what we experimented with was sulphate heavy?


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> I cant help but feel there is more than just calcium , magnesium and bi-carb at work here.
> 
> Would a 50/50 calcium/magnesium mix with 'ideal' bicarb taste different if the sulphate to chloride ratio was higher/lower?
> 
> I was disappointed with the magnesium heavy water after hearing that Maxwell's water has this attribute, perhaps his water is chloride heavy and what we experimented with was sulphate heavy?


There's a he'll of a lot in natural water that is not in RO and there is a good possibility, based on countless beer water threads I've read previously, that sulphate and chloride could alter the resulting drink. Ph is another variable that we didn't measure yesterday and is one that's very hard to alter. Brum water high high ph and ro doesn't seem to change ph.

Pretty sure I have magnesium chloride here so I'll look it out later and make a brew!


----------



## garydyke1

Xpenno said:


> There's a he'll of a lot in natural water that is not in RO and there is a good possibility, based on countless beer water threads I've read previously, that sulphate and chloride could alter the resulting drink. Ph is another variable that we didn't measure yesterday and is one that's very hard to alter. Brum water high high ph and ro doesn't seem to change ph.
> 
> Pretty sure I have magnesium chloride here so I'll look it out later and make a brew!


PH is easy to adjust downwards. a drop or two of lemon juice . Sometime the coffee Collective have been prescribing for years


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> PH is easy to adjust downwards. a drop or two of lemon juice . Sometime the coffee Collective have been prescribing for years


I tried adjusting with a dilute citric acid solution, it did strange (not in a good way) things to my brews


----------



## garydyke1

Coffee lemonade


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> Coffee lemonade


Yeah, in this weather you could be onto something









It made coffee with almost zero body


----------



## garydyke1

Xpenno said:


> Yeah, in this weather you could be onto something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It made coffee with almost zero body


Thats how the Danish like their coffee.


----------



## Xpenno

Just made the mgcl2 solution, takes a while to dissolve fully, will make a 2:1 mg:cl water and see what happens....


----------



## Xpenno

Brewed with the MgCl water. Maybe slightly more sweetness but also a slight bitterness. Body was good also. I might try increasing Alkalinity next and try again, maybe that will round out the brew and even everything out.


----------



## Xpenno

New day new water profile.

120ppm hardness (2:1 mg:ca)

60ppm alkalinity

Brew was think, creamy and intensely sweet. A little drying on the finish, forgot my bloody refrac so can't see where it's sitting exactly but it's really tasty, probably one of the best I've made to date.


----------



## Step21

I'm looking for some knowledge on why 2 different brews with the exact same extraction (same brewer, method, bean, grind, water, water temp, filter) can taste completely different.

Case in hand - 2 aeropresses :

Brew 1 : 12.76g/162g 94C water - TDS 1.51, EY 20.33% - taste - delicious, sweet & fruity

Brew 2 : 12.94g/175g 94C water - TDS 1.42, EY 20.33% - salty,bitter & generally rotten.

I'm perplexed.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Step21 said:


> I'm looking for some knowledge on why 2 different brews with the exact same extraction (same brewer, method, bean, grind, water, water temp, filter) can taste completely different.
> 
> Case in hand - 2 aeropresses :
> 
> Brew 1 : 12.76g/162g 94C water - TDS 1.51, EY 20.33% - taste - delicious, sweet & fruity
> 
> Brew 2 : 12.94g/175g 94C water - TDS 1.42, EY 20.33% - salty,bitter & generally rotten.
> 
> I'm perplexed.


Coz one is stronger than the other .....and has more water and in it

You can have two extractions yields the same , but in the case above they have been arrived at through different variables

I can have two espresso's the same EY but with differing strengths and water can result in different tasting cups ( i mean taste too not just " mouthfeel " )


----------



## Xpenno

Step21 said:


> I'm looking for some knowledge on why 2 different brews with the exact same extraction (same brewer, method, bean, grind, water, water temp, filter) can taste completely different.
> 
> Case in hand - 2 aeropresses :
> 
> Brew 1 : 12.76g/162g 94C water - TDS 1.51, EY 20.33% - taste - delicious, sweet & fruity
> 
> Brew 2 : 12.94g/175g 94C water - TDS 1.42, EY 20.33% - salty,bitter & generally rotten.
> 
> I'm perplexed.


Are the weights provided water in? Did you measure beverage out?

You are using quite different brew recipes as well although I've not worked out how relevant this is yet :S

Brew 1 is 78g per L and Brew 2 is 74g per L

EY yield doesn't = taste, it's just an indicator

TDS will affect how your tongue detects the flavours in the coffee. High TDS could be covering issues with the coffee. It could just be that this coffee works best at that TDS for your pallet. Poisons are mostly bitter, coffee is bitter also so humans tend to be quite sensitive to bitterness, you might just be hitting a specially bad concentration for you.

I'm sure someone much cleverererer than me will answer this for you


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> Coz one is stronger than the other .....and has more water and in it
> 
> You can have two extractions yields the same , but in the case above they have been arrived at through different variables
> 
> I can have two espresso's the same EY but with differing strengths and water can result in different tasting cups ( i mean taste too not just " mouthfeel " )


There you go!


----------



## Mrboots2u

Xpenno said:


> There you go!


Hmm im not clevererererererer than you ....


----------



## MWJB

What was your brew method with the AP?

Personally, I'd be aiming higher than 20% if it was a steep & release type brew (maybe try more like 23-25%), others seem to like brews in the 20% region (or even lower) but I find you're really just getting into the good zone here, you may be tickling the tipping point?

This is just my personal thought, no one I have ever spoken to agrees with it (hmmm, make of that what you will), but once the coffee & water have steeped together for a while, you're not simply pouring/spooning the beverage out of the top of the brewer again, like you would with a French press/Eva Solo/Sowden, you're pushing it through the bed of grinds again, where the coffee still picks up TDS but it doesn't seem to have such a detrimental effect on the cup, compared to rinsing the bed with fresh brew water. This means, based on my tasting & measuring, for my preference (sweetness & ripe fruit acidity, maybe at the expense of more interesting acidity) I aim a little higher (~25%) for Aeropress & Clever style steep than I do for French press/Eva Solo/Sowden etc (23%+).

But, one of the perceived benefits of the AP is quick, hassle free brews, so most folk don't get anywhere near 25% in typical brews (it takes time), so I don't think this region is particularly well explored.


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> Hmm im not clevererererererer than you ....


I'm not getting into a I'm clevererererererererererererer than you debate! Let's leave it at we're both stupid!


----------



## Mrboots2u

Xpenno said:


> I'm not getting into a I'm clevererererererererererererer than you debate! Let's leave it at we're both stupid!


Before anyone else sez it

Dumb and Dumber.....


----------



## Xpenno

MWJB said:


> What was your brew method with the AP?
> 
> Personally, I'd be aiming higher than 20% if it was a steep & release type brew (maybe try more like 23-25%), others seem to like brews in the 20% region (or even lower) but I find you're really just getting into the good zone here, you may be tickling the tipping point?
> 
> This is just my personal thought, no one I have ever spoken to agrees with it (hmmm, make of that what you will), but once the coffee & water have steeped together for a while, you're not simply pouring/spooning the beverage out of the top of the brewer again, like you would with a French press/Eva Solo/Sowden, you're pushing it through the bed of grinds again, where the coffee still picks up TDS but it doesn't seem to have such a detrimental effect on the cup, compared to rinsing the bed with fresh brew water. This means, based on my tasting & measuring, for my preference (sweetness & ripe fruit acidity, maybe at the expense of more interesting acidity) I aim a little higher (~25%) for Aeropress & Clever style steep than I do for French press/Eva Solo/Sowden etc (23%+).
> 
> But, one of the perceived benefits of the AP is quick, hassle free brews, so most folk don't get anywhere near 25% in typical brews (it takes time), so I don't think this region is particularly well explored.


I prefer high extractions but find I need to keep the TDS quite lower otherwise it has my tongue going bananas! I usually ramp the dose down and water up to get higher EY at a palatable TDS. I'm currently enjoying 13g > 227g Brew water.


----------



## Xpenno

Mrboots2u said:


> Before anyone else sez it
> 
> Dumb and Dumber.....


I like it! Pre-emptive self berating, better watch out or you'll have to moderate yourself for going OT


----------



## MWJB

Xpenno said:


> I prefer high extractions but find I need to keep the TDS quite lower otherwise it has my tongue going bananas! I usually ramp the dose down and water up to get higher EY at a palatable TDS. I'm currently enjoying 13g > 227g Brew water.


I also tend to brew a bit lower than Stephen was in the AP steeps, closer to what you do, 55g/l, 1.3%[email protected]%EY. I go a bit stronger in the Clever & Bonavita, because the grounds bed is deeper, better filtration, so thinner body at higher TDS (1.5%TDS at 25%EY, or 1.3-4%TDS 23%EY using a Swissgold & paper, as this lets the brew run around the bed rather than through it, less extra stuff picked up in draw down).


----------



## garydyke1

Well i'm stupid and weird.

I like 1.10-1.20 TDS brews


----------



## MWJB

garydyke1 said:


> Well i'm stupid and weird.
> 
> I like 1.10-1.20 TDS brews


So do I, just not in a AP (paper filtered), or Clever. 90% of the brews I drink are metal filtered steeps 1.11% to 1.24%.

The more/better filtration, the higher my tolerance to TDS, filtered Turkish up to 2.6%TDS, 2 cups I liked just as much: one with twice the brew ratio as the other, 1.5%TDS brew that was "weak". To be perfectly honest I'd be amazed if folk can identify TDS without knowing the brew method. If TDS over a certain level was unpalatable no one would drink espresso & vice versa. Maybe it's just me but I can't pin down a %TDS that is "it". Given a range of TDS from 1.11% to 10%+ there are all sorts of points where I really like coffee, there isn't that same swing in EY (2.5% to 25%).

All that said, I'm not convinced that there is necessarily a linear, straight line up at 19%, or 22% where everything tastes great, I suspect it might shift in waves relating to %TDS and EY together?


----------



## jlarkin

MWJB said:


> But, one of the perceived benefits of the AP is quick, hassle free brews, so most folk don't get anywhere near 25% in typical brews (it takes time), so I don't think this region is particularly well explored.


What sort of times are you using to hit that %?


----------



## MWJB

jlarkin said:


> What sort of times are you using to hit that %?


Half an hour-ish.


----------



## jlarkin

MWJB said:


> Half an hour-ish.


Thanks - as you mentioned certainly a slight step away from the typical aeropress recipes .


----------



## Mrboots2u

MWJB said:


> All that said, I'm not convinced that there is necessarily a linear, straight line up at 19%, or 22% where everything tastes great, I suspect it might shift in waves relating to %TDS and EY together?


I'm with you on that


----------



## Step21

MWJB said:


> What was your brew method with the AP?


Thanks to all for the helpful replies - i'm trying to digest them!

This is a very simple Non inverted immersion brew (so i don't measure output).

Method: Grind reasonably fine (1.2 Hausgrind), pour water over coffee slowly (taking 35 secs to get all in), stir 10 secs, leave to steep, insert plunger at 1min30sec and plunge slowly for 30sec. Total brew time 2min.

After taking filtered refrac sample i tend to add around 20ml dilution to bring down TDS.

The TDS/EY obviously varies from bean to bean, but generally speaking for this method and brew ratio i find the EY to fall in the 19%-21% range. I know EY doesn't guarantee a tasty outcome but in this range they are rarely unpleasant. This one was and it didn't seem like a huge shift in parameters which made me wonder why.

When i want a long steeped immersion brew i use the Bonavita or French Press. I like this AP method because it's quick and usually pretty good.

I find for some reason that AP brews in the TDS 1.40's zone are generally not suited to my palette.


----------



## garydyke1

Amusingly The Sage Dual Boiler can achieve a higher extraction yield at lower beverage volumes......than the Slater 1 Group!

Using a particular coffee and same water profiles:

The highest extraction yield I could manage with the Slayer 1 group and the EK43 was 18.8% and this was 20->55g. I tried 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65g outputs. Grinding on zero and using both pre infusion and immediate full whack.

The first attempt on the Sage was 19.55% using 19.7->47.2g

Just sayin


----------



## nostream

garydyke1 said:


> The highest extraction yield I could manage with the Slayer 1 group and the EK43 was 18.8% and this was 20->55g. I tried 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65g outputs. Grinding on zero and using both pre infusion and immediate full whack.


That's very weird. Are you sure your Slayer is operating correctly? Was the coffee roasted poorly?

I can regularly achieve >20% EY at 50% brew ratios on my CC1. (Flat pressure profile at 7.5-8 bars basic PID machine) (And for what it's worth, I'm inclined to agree with Kaminsky that pressure profile doesn't affect EY much at all.)


----------



## garydyke1

nostream said:


> That's very weird. Are you sure your Slayer is operating correctly? Was the coffee roasted poorly?
> 
> I can regularly achieve >20% EY at 50% brew ratios on my CC1. (Flat pressure profile at 7.5-8 bars basic PID machine) (And for what it's worth, I'm inclined to agree with Kaminsky that pressure profile doesn't affect EY much at all.)


The Slayer is a brand new 1group , the only 'issue' is that its running from a bucket , not mains water. But then so is the Sage.

No our coffee is not poorly roasted, it was the same coffee, same batch.

Ive not tried 50% brew ratio on the Sage yet with this coffee.


----------



## Xpenno

Just ran a side by side test of Calcium only water vs Magnesium only water using aeropress. Usual caveats apply regarding the meaningfulness of my experiments







Both waters were made up to the same hardness to alkalinity ratio, TDS was not the same for each water.

Method - Ran 2 aeropress brews, exactly the same process but using the 2 waters mentioned above.

The results backed up my previous findings however I do feel that my brewed coffee skills have increased slightly since then so I would expect more accurate and better tasting brews all round.

Calcium (chloride) water - Really smooth and creamy, rich but with some bitterness but not in an over-extracty way. Still has sweetness and is really tasty but that grapefruit bitterness is there and isn't going away.

Magnesium (sulphate) water - less body and not so creamy, whereas the calcium sweetness was closer to the tip of the tongue the sweetness here feels more present on the sides of the tongue and feels more intense but less obvious if that makes sense. There are more fruit notes present and a really pleasant acidity. The bitterness is totally gone and there is maybe a very slight winey/sour note but only very small.

They are almost different drinks and even sat here taking turns sipping each one, I couldn't really say which I preferred. The rich body and creamyness that is missing in the magnesium brew does lower the experience but you don't miss the bitter peak in the taste....

Might mix the waters together 50/50 and brew a third beverage









Things that I would like to explore which are not put to the test here.

Effect of total TDS rather than hardness for each brew.

Effect of Chlorides vs Sulphates (this is very important in beer brewing so could be very relevant here but it's harder to test here)

For the record the EY for each beverage was

Ca - 23.43%

Mg - 23.98%

If I proved only one thing today it's that I know how to make tasty aeropress


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

I'm sure people have already seen this but if not, it's worth a read. Particularly interesting to see that using syringe filters has an significant effect on the refractometers ability to measure tds and also the considerable impact of temp when measuring.

http://socraticcoffee.com/2015/04/measuring-total-dissolved-solids-a-refractometer-comparison/


----------



## MWJB

foundrycoffeeroasters.com said:


> I'm sure people have already seen this but if not, it's worth a read. Particularly interesting to see that using syringe filters has an significant effect on the refractometers ability to measure tds and also the considerable impact of temp when measuring.
> 
> http://socraticcoffee.com/2015/04/measuring-total-dissolved-solids-a-refractometer-comparison/


I'd start by reading the comments first. There are issues with the methodology vs manufacturer's recommended use.


----------



## Step21

Brews involving discard: Can you refrac with any accuracy?

I brewed up a French Press today using the "no plunge" method which results in a discard of the top part of the brew which contains oils/bitters and the last part of the brew which contains fine grinds. If i take a refractometer reading of whats in the cup presumably it's skewed (lower) and not a "proper representation of the whole".

Is it worth taking the reading? Even if for comparitive purposes with other similar brews?

A similar case will result with drip where the filter is pulled off the brewer before complete drainage or an aeropress where the plunge leaves behind some possibly undesirable brew.


----------



## MWJB

A French press brew will be pretty even TDS wise (unlike a drip brew that might be 2-3%TDS at 5% extraction, down to maybe 0.05%TDS+ at the end of a pulse pour), I lose the oils & draw a sample ~1cm under the surface, do this around the time you start evaluating the taste, if you leave the rest of the contents in the pot for another 20-30mins TDS might creep up a shade? But at the time you take the sample it should be representative. Alternatively, decant the whole brew & give it a good top to bottom stir, take a sample & syringe filter. Be consistent. Remember, you're establishing your own preference as much as anything else.

The top part of the brew sampled will indeed contain oils & other solids, use a syringe filter to purge these from the sample to be read. The oils & fine grinds are not counted towards TDS.

Drip EY excludes anything left behind in the filter/brewer, it only counts the TDS of the beverage weight, stir drip samples top to bottom.

If the Aeropress was a steep, what's left behind will be pretty much the same strength as what landed in the cup, immersion mode would be best. If you are doing more of a percolation brew in the Aeropress use drip mode - drip mode EY is the measure of the TDS that makes it into the cup/carafe only. You can't taste anything that may have additionally been extracted but is still trapped in the brewer.


----------



## MWJB

Step21 said:


> Brews involving discard: Can you refrac with any accuracy?.


However, if you were making a drip brew, or an espresso shot & you let the first drips run off before capturing them in the carafe/cup, yes, this would make an accurate EY tricky, as the first drips are very strong and your measured EY would read low relative to flavour balance. It would be very complicated to work out, this method wasn't considered with respect to EY measurement.


----------



## Xpenno

Really interesting and well written read from Maxwell on grind evenness, putting an interesting slant on why the EK loves longer shots compared to other grinders.

https://colonnaandsmalls.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/whats-your-real-dose/


----------



## MWJB

I kind of see what he's trying to say, but ratios aren't weak or strong, they only end up that way because of the relative level of extraction, people used to pull longer shots than 2.44:1 (16:39) before there was an EK.

E.g. JP's shot could be 9%TDS at 20%EY, Maxwell's could be 9% at 22.5% (neither are stated)? Same strength but Maxwell would have 5g more espresso in the cup. Difference in mass extracted from the dose is about a 3rd of a gram in this case, nothing like 2 grams. If the grounds are wetted & had brew water flow through them, seems unlikely any would be totally unscathed in a tasty extraction?

Extraction yield is relative to the mass of the dose, it's possible that a proportion of some grinds would be relatively unextracted, you'd have to be hitting ~30% to get everything out, both Maxwell's & JP's shots leave over a gram of solubles in the PF.

Because the EK grind is more uniform it pushes the ratio longer for the same %TDS, but at a higher %EY. If EK shots were the same length as shorter 20% good extractions (2.125:1) they'd probably be very intense at 22-23%EY?


----------



## Step21

MWJB said:


> A French press brew will be pretty even TDS wise (unlike a drip brew that might be 2-3%TDS at 5% extraction, down to maybe 0.05%TDS+ at the end of a pulse pour), I lose the oils & draw a sample ~1cm under the surface, do this around the time you start evaluating the taste, if you leave the rest of the contents in the pot for another 20-30mins TDS might creep up a shade? But at the time you take the sample it should be representative. Alternatively, decant the whole brew & give it a good top to bottom stir, take a sample & syringe filter. Be consistent. Remember, you're establishing your own preference as much as anything else.
> 
> The top part of the brew sampled will indeed contain oils & other solids, use a syringe filter to purge these from the sample to be read. The oils & fine grinds are not counted towards TDS.
> 
> Drip EY excludes anything left behind in the filter/brewer, it only counts the TDS of the beverage weight, stir drip samples top to bottom.
> 
> If the Aeropress was a steep, what's left behind will be pretty much the same strength as what landed in the cup, immersion mode would be best. If you are doing more of a percolation brew in the Aeropress use drip mode - drip mode EY is the measure of the TDS that makes it into the cup/carafe only. You can't taste anything that may have additionally been extracted but is still trapped in the brewer.


Thanks Mark, that's a really helpful clarification as always. With FP brews i really don't want to decant the whole brew to get a reading. I've been taking readings from what ends up in the cup (via a syringe filter) but was unsure if that was "correct".


----------



## Xpenno

MWJB said:


> I kind of see what he's trying to say, but ratios aren't weak or strong, they only end up that way because of the relative level of extraction, people used to pull longer shots than 2.44:1 (16:39) before there was an EK.
> 
> E.g. JP's shot could be 9%TDS at 20%EY, Maxwell's could be 9% at 22.5% (neither are stated)? Same strength but Maxwell would have 5g more espresso in the cup. Difference in mass extracted from the dose is about a 3rd of a gram in this case, nothing like 2 grams. If the grounds are wetted & had brew water flow through them, seems unlikely any would be totally unscathed in a tasty extraction?
> 
> Extraction yield is relative to the mass of the dose, it's possible that a proportion of some grinds would be relatively unextracted, you'd have to be hitting ~30% to get everything out, both Maxwell's & JP's shots leave over a gram of solubles in the PF.
> 
> Because the EK grind is more uniform it pushes the ratio longer for the same %TDS, but at a higher %EY. If EK shots were the same length as shorter 20% good extractions (2.125:1) they'd probably be very intense at 22-23%EY?


I agree that the number sound a little out there but it was just an example. I've also read a load of posts in the past from Nicholas Cho who talks about surface over-extraction. He mentions it often in his articles and as far as I understand it (not very) when you have larger coffee particles you keep extraction from the surface of the particle instead of getting the compounds from the centre of it. I guess this is similar to what Maxwell is saying here.

I guess ultimately it boils down to this, the more even your grind size, the more even your extraction and the more even your extraction the more you can push the yield without over extracting to a level that is unpleasant.


----------



## MWJB

Xpenno said:


> I guess ultimately it boils down to this, the more even your grind size, the more even your extraction and the more even your extraction the more you can push the yield without over extracting to a level that is unpleasant.


Surface over-extraction is basically unevenness, so yes, related...oddly, Cho's fix for French press seems to be to grind coarser and exacerbate this.

I think it's more cause & effect, the more even the grind the more you have to extract, this necessitates more brew water for espresso, so the ratio for a higher extraction is longer. If they had EK espresso back when the 18-22% box was identified, we'd likely be talking about a 21-25% box now & maybe slightly lower TDS range (11%TDS may be tasty to some in a short shot @ ~19%, but at 23% might be too much of a smack in the mouth?), but the 18-22% box was identified using more typical grind distributions.

It's not so much you should adjust the EY mechanism to account for more extracted particles, you just shift the region of interest.

I guess what Maxwell's post really leads to, is ultimately to really know what you were getting regarding 'full potential', you'd have to establish what soluble content each bean actually had, perhaps exclude the cellulose? Then you'd be talking 66% or 75% of available soluble solids?

It does raise interesting thoughts about "over-extraction"...if EK yields are higher & more even because you are reducing under-extraction of boulders, you follow this to a logical conclusion of 'total uniformity of grind/extraction', then how much of that soluble material can we actually get at without undesirable flavours? I've seen 25-26% from non EK grounds in brewed, Nespresso can hit a similar range without obvious overextraction.

Is over-extraction ultimately down to smaller particles having too much extracted from them in an absolute sense, or is it the result of the combination of high (but not ultimately over) extraction causing imbalance with the under extracted boulders?

EDIT: Or, as Cho intimates, is it in fact the outer layers (I won't call it "surface area", because once you are digging below the surface area you are into 'volume', surely no grinds have enough surface area to provide a 20% extraction?) of the boulders that are massively over-extracting, more so than the smaller particles? Are the boulders screwing things up from both ends?


----------



## jeebsy

Got the 'EK noise' for the first time in months this morning. Haven't missed it.

On the plus side, after that last calibration i've got range for days at the bottom (well, griding at 1.5 for beans that need a fine grind)


----------



## Xpenno

Aeropress hopper mod on an R120 anyone?????


----------



## MarkyP

jeebsy said:


> Got the 'EK noise' for the first time in months this morning. Haven't missed it.
> 
> On the plus side, after that last calibration i've got range for days at the bottom (well, griding at 1.5 for beans that need a fine grind)


I think it's time I did mine again, I'm at 1 for the Rave Ethiopia Hunda Oli I'm currently playing with...


----------



## robashton

Slowly falling into line with the rest of the EK folk - still only using my taste-buds but there is a clear trend over my first 150 shots (dialled in by taste and taste alone)

View attachment 15340


----------



## MWJB

Going forward, you could also add in a taste prefernce score based on the 9pt hedonistic scale (1 = dislike extremely, 5 = neither like/dislike, 9 = like extremely...not so much concerned with what the tastes are, just how much you like them), add a column in the chart data for score x3 & include that on your chart with the current scaling.


----------



## robashton

MWJB said:


> Going forward, you could also add in a taste prefernce score based on the 9pt hedonistic scale (1 = dislike extremely, 5 = neither like/dislike, 9 = like extremely...not so much concerned with what the tastes are, just how much you like them), add a column in the chart data for score x3 & include that on your chart with the current scaling.


That raw data does exist









this is averages over groups of 10 - so the data gets lost in aggregation. Once I reach a thousand I'll do something more interesting!


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> Slowly falling into line with the rest of the EK folk - still only using my taste-buds but there is a clear trend over my first 150 shots (dialled in by taste and taste alone)
> 
> View attachment 15340


Its a shame you haven't got the means to plot TDS and EY over that ; )


----------



## robashton

I don't think I would have anyway! Filters are expensive!


----------



## Mrboots2u

@MWJB publish the gragh


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> I don't think I would have anyway! Filters are expensive!


You could just measure the odd one to get a rough idea


----------



## robashton

I'll have one soon enough! It'll be interesting to see where my tastebuds have got me.

years spent hopping some of the best coffee shops in Europe have left me fussy, so hopefully the data will back me up haha.


----------



## jeebsy

robashton said:


> I'll have one soon enough! It'll be interesting to see where my tastebuds have got me.


Mine is available from the end of this week


----------



## robashton

jeebsy said:


> Mine is available from the end of this week


Woop! I'll be back on Wednesday and will be pinging you as soon as my feet hit ground in glasgow!


----------



## MWJB

Mrboots2u said:


> @MWJB publish the gragh


This one?








[/url]


----------



## robashton

Nice - I'm not about to stick EY on mine even once I have the refractometer but all the rest of the data is there (plus rating)


----------



## MWJB

If you average it all out, you get 30second total shot time, 2.35:1 ratio, I only included shots that hit 21% and over (you can under-extract at any ratio).


----------



## MarkyP

Whoa!

there's a lot to take in here...


----------



## MWJB

MarkyP said:


> Whoa!
> 
> there's a lot to take in here...


Simpler than it looks really...in the context of Boots' shots recorded, once you get over 2.24:1 a 21%EY is easier, odds getting better the longer you go. Can take 23-33 seconds total.


----------



## robashton

My turn!

Got a new coffee in, it doesn't (with my first couple brazen brews) seem to be as soluble as coffees I've put through previously. Two things come to mind

1) Perhaps I don't want to extract more with this coffee, it might not improve flavour - perhaps I should just increase strength and be happy (so up dose)

2) But I want to extract more because how else can I learn about this coffee?

My first couple of brews were

27g + 500ml at 93C with 45s pre-soak = 1.03 TDS

28g + 500ml at 93C with 45s pre-soak = 1.16 TDS

I went slightly finer with that second attempt but I probably shouldn't go finer or the water will just punch through the coffee bed (past experience).

I could try a 96C bit of fun

I could say sod it, grind finer

I could counter-intuitively grind coarser

With most Has Bean stuff I've been getting 1.3 TDS with this recipe very easily.

No I'm not chasing TDS for the sake of it, both these coffees tasted weak to me - I know I prefer "moar".

[edit]

EY of the above is roughly 18% obvs, I don't really care about this too much, knowing if I get TDS up with less coffee EY will be higher


----------



## Mrboots2u

Derp sorry


----------



## Mrboots2u

Are you calculating the ey based on water added or final beverage weight.


----------



## Mrboots2u

I'll pm you something mark suggested around cupping and a solubility test as well


----------



## robashton

Final beverage weight.

My retention is pretty much what you'd expect from a pourover (2.2, I stick in 30g, the weight of the material in the filter is about 95g), I also lose a good 50ml through evaporation or whatever too.


----------



## robashton

Same coffee, going for one of my high EY aeropresses (I'll do the cupping method later), 14g of coffee into 230g of water at 96C, resulting TDS of 1.31 (yes I used a syringe filter for this one).

I'm a bit confused about coffee tools at this point as it still wants to use LRR and ask about the resultant brew weight - I thought for immersion we just used the input weight of water.

Anyway, either way it's a really high EY* (perhaps too high) but at least it's possible - I think I'm probably better off aiming for 20% or just below with this one on the behmor, and 96C for aeropress was probably a bit ambitious









*compared to earlier efforts with this bean


----------



## MWJB

The LRR doesn't impact in the EY calculation for immersion, just the beverage weight (say you are trying to brew a specific amount of finished coffee).

I don't know what the upper limit for good tasting immersion extractions is, I have had up to 26-27% still very sweet.


----------



## robashton

MWJB said:


> The LRR doesn't impact in the EY calculation for immersion, just the beverage weight (say you are trying to brew a specific amount of finished coffee).


Which in an aeropress is pretty much all the liquid unless you stop plunging at a certain point (okay there is some left in the grinds I guess - and I tend to stop just as the water hits the grinds rather than push past them).



> I don't know what the upper limit for good tasting immersion extractions is, I have had up to 26-27% still very sweet.


Depends on the coffee right? This one seems to be a bit woody/dry at the point I've hit it (and there are hints of that at lower too, best I've probably had it is 19% so far) - I'm having such a hard time pushing above this that I'll probably never know what it's like at 24+ anyway


----------



## MWJB

robashton said:


> Which in an aeropress is pretty much all the liquid unless you stop plunging at a certain point (okay there is some left in the grinds I guess - and I tend to stop just as the water hits the grinds rather than push past them).


The liquid retained in an Aeropress plunged through to the hiss is enough to throw out your EY significantly, if you were using drip mode & deducting LRR. You always lose liquid to the bed.



robashton said:


> Depends on the coffee right? This one seems to be a bit woody/dry at the point I've hit it (and there are hints of that at lower too, best I've probably had it is 19% so far) - I'm having such a hard time pushing above this that I'll probably never know what it's like at 24+ anyway


Well, coffees don't need to be extracted to the absolute tasty limit to be nice, people might find more interesting acidity at a lower EY and some coffees will be much harder to extract that far, but the vast majority that I have extracted as far as I can in an Aeropress have tasted sweetest there. 25% is as far as I have measured for the AP, 26-27% as Turkish seems pretty normal from my brews. It's a pretty rare thing to terminally over-extract a static immersion like a French press/Sowden (maybe happens 2 or 3 times a year to me?) my usual target is 23%. Seems to get easier to get a less even brew in immersions that drain through the bed though.

"woody/dry" doesn't scream over-extraction to me, sounds like a flat spot between good peaks.

If you have an EY that only works for a small minority of coffees, then it's probably not a realistic target to aim for when you start dialling in...but I'd never discount the value of a happy accident.


----------



## robashton

I wasn't using "drip mode" - I just clicked the immersion button and was surprised to see LRR there, having always thought with immersion you measured total water rather than yield. I take it I should be weighing my output from aeropress and using that in my calcs still rather than total water used.

I don't even know how you'd reach 24-25 with some of these coffees.


----------



## Taff

MWJB said:


> This one?
> 
> [/url]


Thanks for posting the graph. Really helpful for us without a refrac that are just trying to get some general rules to improve shot quality.

I know this thread is all about EK43 really, but is there any wisdom that has come out of it that non EK users can use? Looks like best EY's are at ratios of 2.25-2.5 is this a good rule to use to start from? I've certainly found that I'm in this range much more often since getting the royal and the taste great. Have also gone to it on the home setup with equally positive results.


----------



## MWJB

Taff said:


> Thanks for posting the graph. Really helpful for us without a refrac that are just trying to get some general rules to improve shot quality.
> 
> I know this thread is all about EK43 really, but is there any wisdom that has come out of it that non EK users can use? Looks like best EY's are at ratios of 2.25-2.5 is this a good rule to use to start from? I've certainly found that I'm in this range much more often since getting the royal and the taste great. Have also gone to it on the home setup with equally positive results.


EY is a little separate to brew ratio, brew ratio is more predictive of strength, assuming you can hit the desired EY.

Universally, the more water you run through the puck, the easier it becomes to hit a high EY.

At 2.25:1 to 2.5:1 an EK-43 EY of ~22-24% will relate to a slightly stronger drink than a 19-21% EY from a conventional grinder *at the same brew ratio*. Because a conventional grinder's EY target is usually lower, they can (but don't necessarily need to) hit their EY target in a shorter & stronger shot, maybe 2:1 or less (assuming good water & prep).

E.g. a ~9%TDS shot on a conventional grinder could be 18.5-19%EY at 2:1, but more like 22-22.5%EY at 2.4:1 on an EK. But ~8%TDS might be fine for you at ~2.4:1 on the conventional grinder?

Depends how much you value a thick mouthfeel (easier with shorter shots), or sweetness & clarity (easier with longer shots).


----------



## MWJB

robashton said:


> I wasn't using "drip mode" - I just clicked the immersion button and was surprised to see LRR there, having always thought with immersion you measured total water rather than yield. I take it I should be weighing my output from aeropress and using that in my calcs still rather than total water used.
> 
> I don't even know how you'd reach 24-25 with some of these coffees.


It's typical to go by brew water weight with Aeropress EY (though you can drip brew with it), or really any immersion method, as when the grinds & total water are all held together & mixed, all the brew water ends up with some coffee TDS in it (in a drip brew the last water above the bed can be just water).

Fine grind, hot brew water (~97C) & time...lots of time...no good if you're in a hurry...or even a lethargic amble


----------



## robashton

I've got an exciting new ceramic filter from Japan - I guess it's probably clean enough to do without a syringe filter and I'll be measuring the output water as it's just another pourover.

*excited*


----------



## robashton

Answer: No, you need the syringe filters


----------



## robashton

Or not - i don't think you do. Did the same measurements three times with and without and the results were all within 0.02 of each other (swirly swirly water to avoid layers of density..)

So.. this is from my ceramic thing - good right? This is by slowly adding water to the bed as it looks like it has started drying out, LRR is high because at some point it just stops flowing (at about 10 min) and I just chuck whatever is left away from the top. I guess the water constantly being added as a higher temperature instead of just sitting and cooling down accounts for the fairly high EY?

Either way, it's about 170g of super strength feel-good juice in about 10 minutes.

View attachment 16215


----------



## robashton

I can see the importance of measuring accurately here, just 10g of beverage weight difference makes a huge difference to the resultant EY calculation.


----------



## robashton

I guess if I wanted a lower EY (I think there are more flavours lower down that I'll enjoy), I'd just coarsen up and aim for a lower TDS with the same brew ratio


----------



## robashton

@garydyke1 I re-jigged the Sage earlier, reset the OPV and used the pre-infusion to bring pressure down instead - I have a few observations

At 1.5 on the EK (so pretty fine indeed), the pressure (on the dial) never gets above 2.5 and it takes 35s to get 40g

At 1.1 on the EK (very fine indeed) the pressure reaches 6.5 but quickly goes back to 4 and below and takes 38s to get 40g

(and a range in between basically not getting any real pressure or it taking far too long). This is no matter how much tamp I use.

What on earth are you doing differently that lets you get a reasonable pressure *and* coffee through in a reasonable amount of time.

==

With the OPV mod, I was getting about 20% EY at 20-21s, up to 23-24% EY at 25s (at 40g out from 17 in) - admittedly with a 4 week old coffee so it tasted pretty bad and extracted pretty fast. Now I've undone this I can't get above 9 TDS at these shot ratios


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> @garydyke1 I re-jigged the Sage earlier, reset the OPV and used the pre-infusion to bring pressure down instead - I have a few observations
> 
> At 1.5 on the EK (so pretty fine indeed), the pressure (on the dial) never gets above 2.5 and it takes 35s to get 40g
> 
> At 1.1 on the EK (very fine indeed) the pressure reaches 6.5 but quickly goes back to 4 and below and takes 38s to get 40g
> 
> (and a range in between basically not getting any real pressure or it taking far too long). This is no matter how much tamp I use.
> 
> What on earth are you doing differently that lets you get a reasonable pressure *and* coffee through in a reasonable amount of time.
> 
> ==
> 
> With the OPV mod, I was getting about 20% EY at 20-21s, up to 23-24% EY at 25s (at 40g out from 17 in) - admittedly with a 4 week old coffee so it tasted pretty bad and extracted pretty fast. Now I've undone this I can't get above 9 TDS at these shot ratios


The grind has to be spot on . Did you try 1.2 or 1.3.


----------



## robashton

No - you're kidding right? This doesn't seem like a practical solution - what happens when it heats up!? How do you dial back extraction? Just go for a shorter shot?

Did you configure it by setting pressure down to 60% and time to > 40s?


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> No - you're kidding right? This doesn't seem like a practical solution - what happens when it heats up!? How do you dial back extraction? Just go for a shorter shot?
> 
> Did you configure it by setting pressure down to 60% and time to > 40s?


Ive learned the ideal grind setting range . If pressure rises to 6.5 BAR and then drops to 4 before a flow starts you've ground too fine. Just kill and restart the shot , flow continues and 6.5BAR is maintained ...slowly ramping down to 5, 4, bar towards end of shot. TDS of 8-9-10% is typical across a good range of ratios

Vibe pump - flow and pressure are inverse.

Oh and use magic water, I wouldn't be doing this with Assbeck

Ive tried the full flow OPV shots and they taste rough and over extracted IMO.


----------



## robashton

garydyke1 said:


> Ive tried the full flow OPV shots and they taste rough and over extracted IMO.


This is why I'm dialling back, finding it really hard not to just nuke every shot into excess.


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> @garydyke1 I re-jigged the Sage earlier, reset the OPV and used the pre-infusion to bring pressure down instead - I have a few observations
> 
> At 1.5 on the EK (so pretty fine indeed), the pressure (on the dial) never gets above 2.5 and it takes 35s to get 40g
> 
> At 1.1 on the EK (very fine indeed) the pressure reaches 6.5 but quickly goes back to 4 and below and takes 38s to get 40g
> 
> (and a range in between basically not getting any real pressure or it taking far too long). This is no matter how much tamp I use.
> 
> What on earth are you doing differently that lets you get a reasonable pressure *and* coffee through in a reasonable amount of time.
> 
> ==
> 
> With the OPV mod, I was getting about 20% EY at 20-21s, up to 23-24% EY at 25s (at 40g out from 17 in) - admittedly with a 4 week old coffee so it tasted pretty bad and extracted pretty fast. Now I've undone this I can't get above 9 TDS at these shot ratios


Also 17g->40g TDS of 9% is 22% EY. Whats wrong with that?


----------



## jeebsy

garydyke1 said:


> Whats wrong with that?


That's numberwang


----------



## robashton

garydyke1 said:


> Also 17g->40g TDS of 9% is 22% EY. Whats wrong with that?


My biggest issue with shots that are

The best shots have been with the flat 6bar profile via the OPV mod (with a ~2s pre-infuse to keep things sensible), ignoring %EY for a second (I know that's uncool in this thread) but it's hard to have these shots not taste over the top and harsh.


----------



## garydyke1

Consistent routine consistent results


----------



## robashton

Except you know that's not true - when you've got coffee gushing from the portafilter, half a second makes a huge difference in the output weight and flavour. We've seen this in Perger's videos too - I don't want to serve gash coffee to my guests and I want to know what the coffee I'm serving tastes like. It's the same problem shops have just on a smaller scale.


----------



## MWJB

robashton said:


> Except you know that's not true - when you've got coffee gushing from the portafilter, half a second makes a huge difference in the output weight and flavour. We've seen this in Perger's videos too - I don't want to serve gash coffee to my guests and I want to know what the coffee I'm serving tastes like. It's the same problem shops have just on a smaller scale.


If your output weight is reasonably consistent & your EY, then half a second will make very little difference. Perger says note your shot time, but don't kill the shot by time (as does anyone who advocates brewing by ratio), focus on yield & taste. Maybe by insisting your shots meet a certain time you are making a rod for your own back?

Why are


----------



## robashton

Nooo - I want shot times **greater** than 25s for more control - by faffing with things to gain higher EY at higher strengths I was shooting myself in the foot because as soon as I got to a coffee that didn't want an EY > 22% I was having to pull the shots a lot shorter and lose a lot of control.

The reason I was getting 25s as a target time was because that's when I was hitting peak EY for this coffee at the flow rate I had set up earlier for a different coffee.

*I am not aiming for a specific time I am not aiming for a specific time*

Why do people keep assuming this when I mention time? The only reason I look at time is to know I'm in the ballpark for a specific weight. Literally all I am saying is that when you're gushing shots through in

It seems to me that unless you're using the right coffee (roasted well, a sensible age) and water that suits high EY at high strength, that faffing with flow rate and pressure profiles to eek out higher EY isn't a great idea - that is all I have learned from this exercise. When I noted the EY across that 10 second window between 20s and 30s I was using an older coffee which was tasting awful at 24%, then aiming for 20-22% was causing me real issues because I was trying to keep to a pressure profile that I'd set up for a coffee that was in its peak and tasting great at 24% EY.

I'm back at 9 bars with a 3s pre-infuse for this slightly darker coffee, I just did a 19.5% EY 17 -> 38g shot in 28s - a nice controlled repeatable shot at a reasonable setting on the grinder.

It seems to me that playing Gary's game of lowering flow rate by playing with pre-infusion will work well for a Has Bean IMM earlier on in its life, but remembering to go back to a more classic setting for coffee that isn't up to that is essential. That is what I have learned from this exercise.

So, Rob's current guide for dialling in a new coffee.

1) Try it at classic 9 bar profile, if it tastes good or I need to bring it back to

2) If it seems as though I want a higher EY and I don't want a 55g shot, drop flow rate by fiddling with pre-infuse, try again.

3) Go back to 1 if this works out real bad.


----------



## Mrboots2u

I use low pressure for a number of coffee's and roasters ( either with or without pre infusion ) getting the recipe right and the grind is key , as it is to all espresso making...


----------



## garydyke1

I find time to be of little importance so long as its within reasonable parameters.

Had mega tasty 24 sec shots and mega tasty 45 second shots. Its all fun


----------



## robashton

When you're sat there with a dozen bags of coffee and hot-swapping all the time, faffing with pressure for a recipe isn't desirable (yes that's my problem). Seems to me that classic 9 bars on my set-up gives the most consistently okay results to start from.

I set out this month not to buy a huge pile of beans precisely because I wanted to avoid noise, completely failed, again.


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> Nooo - I want shot times **greater** than 25s for more control - by faffing with things to gain higher EY at higher strengths I was shooting myself in the foot because as soon as I got to a coffee that didn't want an EY > 22% I was having to pull the shots a lot shorter and lose a lot of control.
> 
> The reason I was getting 25s as a target time was because that's when I was hitting peak EY for this coffee at the flow rate I had set up earlier for a different coffee.
> 
> *I am not aiming for a specific time I am not aiming for a specific time*
> 
> Why do people keep assuming this when I mention time? The only reason I look at time is to know I'm in the ballpark for a specific weight. Literally all I am saying is that when you're gushing shots through in
> 
> It seems to me that unless you're using the right coffee (roasted well, a sensible age) and water that suits high EY at high strength, that faffing with flow rate and pressure profiles to eek out higher EY isn't a great idea - that is all I have learned from this exercise. When I noted the EY across that 10 second window between 20s and 30s I was using an older coffee which was tasting awful at 24%, then aiming for 20-22% was causing me real issues because I was trying to keep to a pressure profile that I'd set up for a coffee that was in its peak and tasting great at 24% EY.
> 
> I'm back at 9 bars with a 3s pre-infuse for this slightly darker coffee, I just did a 19.5% EY 17 -> 38g shot in 28s - a nice controlled repeatable shot at a reasonable setting on the grinder.
> 
> It seems to me that playing Gary's game of lowering flow rate by playing with pre-infusion will work well for a Has Bean IMM earlier on in its life, but remembering to go back to a more classic setting for coffee that isn't up to that is essential. That is what I have learned from this exercise.
> 
> So, Rob's current guide for dialling in a new coffee.
> 
> 1) Try it at classic 9 bar profile, if it tastes good or I need to bring it back to
> 
> 2) If it seems as though I want a higher EY and I don't want a 55g shot, drop flow rate by fiddling with pre-infuse, try again.
> 
> 3) Go back to 1 if this works out real bad.


Be thankful you have the right machine to facilitate such changes to espresso brewing. Enjoy your coffee : )


----------



## robashton

garydyke1 said:


> I find time to be of little importance so long as its within reasonable parameters.
> 
> Had mega tasty 24 sec shots and mega tasty 45 second shots. Its all fun


That may be the case, but I don't want to inflict a fugging awful 24s shot on a guest just because I got an amazing one 30 minutes beforehand.

I don't want to boffin it up, I want consistent good results nearly all of the time, and I want to save pissing about with huge ranges for the weekend when I've got time.


----------



## robashton

garydyke1 said:


> Be thankful you have the right machine to facilitate such changes to espresso brewing. Enjoy your coffee : )


I'd prefer a magic box I put beans into and get espresso out.


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> I'd prefer a magic box I put beans into and get espresso out.


Wouldn't we all


----------



## garydyke1

robashton said:


> That may be the case, but I don't want to inflict a fugging awful 24s shot on a guest just because I got an amazing one 30 minutes beforehand.
> 
> I don't want to boffin it up, I want consistent good results nearly all of the time, and I want to save pissing about with huge ranges for the weekend when I've got time.


Maybe try a Mythos One?


----------



## MWJB

robashton said:


> *I am not aiming for a specific time I am not aiming for a specific time*[/i]
> 
> Why do people keep assuming this when I mention time?


Because you seem to keep attributing time with a significant impact & constantly mentioning it.

It may be that your awful tasting 24% EY shot wasn't awful just because it was 24%, but possibly because it wasn't even? You might find that if you go too fine shots speed up again, but don't taste as good even if the EY suggests they should?


----------



## robashton

MWJB said:


> Because you seem to keep attributing time with a significant impact & constantly mentioning it.
> 
> It may be that your awful tasting 24% EY shot wasn't awful just because it was 24%, but possibly because it wasn't even? You might find that if you go too fine shots speed up again, but don't taste as good even if the EY suggests they should?


That is a reasonable suggestion, even-ness has been a conversation point between me and the local baristas. It wasn't one shot by the way, I went through half a kilo pulling shots across the spectrum (and with the same parameters to make sure each one wasn't just an oddity). I've spent a lot of money on syringe filters..

Time is only important to me because when it's too fast I can't control it, beyond that I could give a rats ass - some of my favourite shots last month were the 45S ones I was doing with the crazy naturals from Has Bean I had in. Wish I'd refracted them, I imagine the EY wasn't that high but we'd gone past some sort of hump.


----------



## robashton

garydyke1 said:


> Maybe try a Mythos One?


If it wasn't for reports that the beans sitting on the heating element on the clima pro under periods of underuse effectively need throwing away and my competing desire for variety then that's where I'd be heading - I bloody love that grinder and the results it gives in store.

The EK is the closest thing available to perfection for my hooose, and I while I know it comes with some frustrating caveats I believe with more practise and education I'll be at the point where I can be confident I'm not serving crap to people. Having a refractomer is helping massively in understanding the tastes I'm getting so that's a start..

Also I'm not changing my gear, it's good gear - any desire to change my gear out of frustrating for the results I'm getting would be foolish.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Drink less coffee , enjoy it more , find a way to relax


----------



## robashton

Don't be so bloody patronising, that sentiment makes huge assumptions about the coffee I am drinking and the means via which I am enjoying it.

That I occasionally spend a few hours experimenting and measuring and trying to work out something doesn't detract from the standard shots I'm throwing through most days just for quicksy drinkies.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Was an attempt at humour .


----------



## robashton

I'm not relaxed enough for humour.


----------



## jeebsy

robashton said:


> When you're sat there with a dozen bags of coffee and hot-swapping all the time, faffing with pressure for a recipe isn't desirable (yes that's my problem). Seems to me that classic 9 bars on my set-up gives the most consistently okay results to start from.


Stop chopping and changing beans then.

If you want consistency get a Mythos and load up the hooper.

If you want an erratic, sometimes frustrating, but tasty, fun and exciting experience, use the EK.


----------



## robashton

Urgh.

I'm done with this thread.


----------



## jeebsy

I use the Mythos for 'after dinner coffees' btw.


----------



## Mrboots2u

jeebsy said:


> I use the Mythos for 'after dinner coffees' btw.


Is it like this


----------



## Mrboots2u

Or this


----------



## Mrboots2u

robashton said:


> I'd prefer a magic box I put beans into and get espresso out.


Perhaps this might be that box

http://www.jimseven.com/2015/05/21/an-analysis-of-nespresso-part-i/


----------



## jeebsy

Mrboots2u said:


> Is it like this


I go round with a tray of espresso cups like that


----------



## garydyke1

This is machines not confectionary









Batch brew was 29.88% EY yesterday. Oops the Jet wasnt set correctly


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Bit under-extracted then!


----------



## Mrboots2u

garydyke1 said:


> This is machines not confectionary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Batch brew was 29.88% EY yesterday. Oops the Jet wasnt set correctly


Nearly Coffeewang - Try harder


----------



## jeebsy

garydyke1 said:


> This is machines not confectionary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Batch brew was 29.88% EY yesterday. Oops the Jet wasnt set correctly


Taste?


----------



## garydyke1

jeebsy said:


> Taste?


New hump!


----------



## risky

What is coffeewang?


----------



## The Systemic Kid

risky said:


> What is coffeewang?


Boots' version of  this


----------



## risky

It's Mornington Crescent all over again!


----------



## robashton

Some observations after going through the backlog of spare beans that I was never going to actually get around to drinking...

Back up to 9bars I was struggling to push half of my Has Bean beans into the 20%s if I want to maintain sensible ratios of coffee (Yes I know it's an EK and we're all about low TDS mega-volume shots but get tae... I wanna do what I wanna do and where there is still range on the grinder, there is still possibility - it should be possible to get acceptable EY at 1:2.5!)

And now I think this is why I've been so dissatisfied with the results of my espresso-game over the past few months (having a refract and being able to see why has been really useful - no duh). Until dicking with pressure last week I'd been either simply under-extracting or under-extracting and at still by sheer chance hitting something halfway tolerable with half of the beans. (The other half have been in the other camp of being way easier to extract giving me a confusing experience when trying to apply the same practises to them - but then that was the same camp that was giving me high EY far too fast at the lower flow rates - most of these beans are from the same roaster (HB) but beans no doubt vary for many reasons).

Some compelling evidence for

a) Different pressures for different beans (or a happy medium...)

b) Not varying my beans quite so much to make this dance possible

A happy medium for now is to sit at 7.5 bars pressure (using pre-infuse trickery), and use other variables to influence extraction, I finally managed to consistently pull high strength/acceptable EY shots from the Has Bean stock I have lying around that I was having difficulty with previously using this method, there was even some proper sweetness from the more problematic beans too. I was then able to pull the coffee through that was too easily over-extracting at a sensible controllable pace too, as well as able to pull through the local darker stuff (that doesn't want to go above 20%!). Happy medium found (at least for the beans I have lying around). It is a happy medium though with all the caveats that implies. Apparently the five elephant stuff I'll be putting through next week likes that sorta pressure range so we'll see..

Also I shouldn't keep conflating flow-rate with pressure, even though that's what I'm doing here.

I've ordered 1.5kg of a same bean from Has Bean for the coming weeks and I'm going to work on getting decent EY at the strengths I want with that single bean. I suspect that once I've worked out using the taste buds and refractometer where that needs to roughly be at it'll be way more flexible than the Papercup stuff which only really has a narrow range of acceptability (it's darker, so very noticeable artifacts either side of 19-20% EY). I find the problem with the Has Bean stuff is that because the beans haven't been adulterated by fire that there are far fewer signs of whether you're one place or another in the extraction spectrum - over-extraction isn't a punch in the face and under-extraction goes from bloody obvious to "lacking sweetness", ergo I must sit down to assess and do a range of EYs and taste them and learn roughly what this tastes like. I'll probably become even more fussy (if that's even possible) as a result but meh.

You can make fun of me all you like for "not relaxing", or "spending so much time creating instead of drinking" and repeating the tired old platiitudes to me of "just enjoy what you're making" but you can get tae ... too, this is no different to learning to play guitar or whatever - it takes practise. You can either make one or two shots a day and slowly improve or you can practise by going through a few kilos of beans and taste, measure and learn - both are enjoyable and frustrating in their own ways. I want good coffee now, which means I want to understand as much as possible now. At least I'm not blaming my tools and I'm putting the time in to work out what's what through hard work and grit. The rest of you might have taken this journey a year ago and have little patience for explaining the supposedly bloody obvious while you're sat in your comfy armchairs enjoying your hassle free coffee typing "banter" into the internet at me but I don't have that luxury. The pay-off in the future where I stop drinking under-extracted guff (and help others attain the same) will be worth it.

Also I need to start using better water, especially for the HB stuff.


----------



## robashton

Oh and I started pulling 80g shots earlier to push EY and see what things are like up there, I approve highly. Wouldn't work with my "easy" local spro but massive lols and sweetness with Has Bean - I can see me filling a thermos this way for tomorrow's hike with what I have left..

I can see how irrelevant time can be sometimes, pulled a range of shots between 22s and 45s and went from 20ey to 22ey and back to 22ey again, none of them particularly awful - just slightly too acidic and slightly muddy/drying at either end.

guided by a refractometer I've had some of the best shots this year this evening.


----------



## Mrboots2u

supercalifragilisticexpialidocious


----------



## robashton

Them's big words given we barely know anything about it


----------



## robashton

You edited your post, that's cheating.

I've gone through the first 250g of the pulped natural so far, upping my aeropress game and first time through espresso today.

50g shot at 8.7tds was a bit of a misfire and tasted awful, 55g shot from 18g in had so much sweetness it was unbelievable - amazing what 5g difference makes. At 27s this was repeatable and I made a few more to make sure (they came throughat 27s, 27s 28s and 29s and all tasted good). Down at 1.2 on the EK dial (flat 6 bar pressure) though so not something you could get away with on a shop floor - shame because this was *amazing* in milk, refrac tells me that they were hitting ~23%

I'll be interested to see how the grind changes (if at all) over the coming weeks as the coffee gets older (it's only at six days presently).

On the Aeropress I've really started getting with the programme on this low dose high yield business, casting aside everything I previously learned with lesser grinders and lesser coffee, again pushing between 21% and 23% depending where on the dial I'm sitting. Focusing on keeping a clean feeling in the mouth through technique whilst maximising sweetness and intensity with grind and brew ratio.

What surprises me is how good something with such a low TDS tastes - we're hovering around 1.0 for most of the best brews (although when I backed down to '4' on the EK dial I updosed a tad to keep strength).

I think with good coffee there ends up being a huge range of acceptable flavours and extractions and this starts coming down to personal preference massively.

I note that with darker local roasts for espresso if I don't hit an exact time and weight for spro my results are less than pleasurable but with these light roasts while they're harder to control there is a wider range of good flavours.

I find myself puzzling at the world championship recipes for aeropress, as they are coarse grinds, high dose, low yield low temperature - are high extractions uncool for some people/judges?

View attachment 16405


----------



## Taff

Thanks for posting all that @robashton I'm way behind you so anything that helps me climb the curve is massively appreciated. I've ended up setting my machines at 8 bar out of taste so your 7.5 is interesting.

wondering which has beans you found were difficult?


----------



## robashton

What follows are my very rough thoughts so far and contains a pile of conjecture based on my experience and my experience alone

-----

I find the hardest beans (so far!) are the Has Bean ones - although it varies across their beans because they "roast very much to the bean" rather than to any particular style (At least it seems this way - obviously most roasters do this to an extent but Has Bean definitely seem to have some fun with this)

I also find that because they're generally quite light they have the following characteristics that I've perceived so far

- Tight grind required for sensible pour times

- Less soluble (more work required to pull out the flavours - or better water yes gary its okay I get it)

- high acidity (typically), this means if you don't hit "sweetness" espresso can be not pleasant, very easy to confuse this with sourness when you're at the beginning of the learning curve

- few over-extraction defects (typically you get muddy if you've pushed too far and are pulling too tightly and getting a lower EY, a certain "harshness" from the over-extraction peak and perhaps a touch of dryness if you've been too aggressive)

That said it also means you can push them further because you'll not generally hit any "roasty" flavours or bitterness, you might occasionally hit dryness (I found that at high temperatures this dryness could be amplified, and it's nice to do this so you know what over-extraction is (My signature is misleading in this case but you've really gotta try to make this unpleasant). I generally go for a brew ratio of about 1:3 with these now for spro, although some are good at 1:2 or between.

Bear in mind I'm using crap water, it may well be possible that my extractions would be more aggressive if I used harder water for example.

Obviously there are still peaks and troughs, there are dead spots on both filter and espresso where you just lose character so when dialling in I usually lock in a desired weight based on

- How intense the bean is (do I really want to taste it at > 9 TDS)

- How fast it's going to pour (if I'm going to be knocking 1.2, the brew ratio is gonna be 1:3ish, so deal with it)

And then taste across a spectrum 10g either side / 5s either side unless it's hyper obvious I need to go one way or another.

And that's basically it - I think that they're generally not only great beans but roasted in a way which makes them both incredibly flexible and tolerant of abuse but also therefore makes it harder to zero in on the greatness because so much tastes okay. (Does this even make sense?). I enjoyed Has Bean long before I got an EK43 and many people have too, but I never really shot for the "peak" that I do with my current setup - if it's not sweet, if there are any dryness, sourness, etc then I've failed, I've gotten better at this since getting the refrac and realising that I should be using less coffee and more water). I think with lesser gear there is a varying degree of muddiness that we're generally content with and the vast majority of shops are selling under-extracted (but higher strength) beverages (but can't push much further without dryness from uneven extraction or whatever)

At the opposite end of the Spectrum you have a of roasters roasting to make it easy to extract with crap gear (Mazzers) and crap water (Soft/Hard/Whatever), and you gain a huge pile of control at the expense of bitterness/roasty/nastiness at higher EY and presumably losing some of the more unique characteristics of the bean. At best this means you can do a good spro/filter easily providing you keep EY at a decent level and at worst it means that the bean is garbage (more often the latter).

Papercup is pretty much my golden standard for that tier, I'm keeping my house stocked with one of their natural ethiopians at the moment because it's really easy to dial in and get excessive sweetness, either side of where that excessive sweetness is roastiness or sourness - they're really obvious when you get them. The bean is less flexible but it's easier to work with and you can use a much coarser grind so in a shop environment it'd be far easier to consistently serve. More importantly it means if I just want a spro or a flat white or just want to serve a spro or a flat white to a guest I can stick the grinder where I know it needs to be, pull a shot at the right yield at the right time and eight times out of ten it'll be sweet (2/10 I'll have to adjust because the sun came out or something but it's still fast).

This flexibility is shared by some other roasters that aren't quite as drastic, Square Mile and Five Elephant both take a much coarser grind and have a decent amount of flex - but some would say that comes at some expense still.

All of this seems to be on a spectrum (I've plucked out the two extremes of beans that I've used so far and been able to use and get good results with).e


----------



## robashton

With the change-up of water I am now approaching "happy with my spro" game. Proof that all this fannying around delivers in the end.

I just re-dialled in all the beans I had lying around (I haven't got the refrac because I lent it to Mr Wallace) but I know roughly what 20% and above tastes like with these beans and I'm now in a whole new world of sweetness and pleasure.

I'm a fussy arse, I know I'm a miserable grump about this stuff but I think that's going to stop now as I'm finally in a place where it's all down to my technique rather than trying to balance on a tightrope between bad variables.

I also re-zeroed my burrs properly on the EK - as I realised that after I cleaned it I'd really not done it right and suddenly I've got the control back that I wanted (although the 27s shots are still the best for some of the Has Beans).

This is how I feel right now

View attachment 16486


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Glad you've persisted with the water. There's just too many parameters with this coffee lark.

I can't see what the picture is at the bottom though......

I'm hoping it's a happy one.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

With these cups you are spoiling us!


----------



## jlarkin

I'm slightly confused, haven't really used the refractometer with espresso until today. Now I had a 19g dose and a 40.9 gram output of espresso. I'm trying to put that into coffee tools, but I'm not sure if this is correct way to do that - have I missed something?

I meant to add because I couldn't recall what the BW (g) bit was about, I'm trying to check the instructions and think that's just an assumption on the amount of brew water needed to get to this size of drink with an espresso?

This was on the Sage DB with 10secs preinfusion @93C. I'm wondering where to go from this point it tasted a little sour to me and seems on the low side for extraction, so back to basics what would you do with that?

The input










And graph


----------



## Mrboots2u

@jlarkin are you filtering your sample ?

To increase extraction yield you can grind finer , keep the brew ratio the same . the drink will be stronger though ( higher tds )

You could keep everything the same and pit more water through it > this will make the drink weaker ( lower tds ) but higher extraction yield


----------



## jlarkin

Mrboots2u said:


> @jlarkin are you filtering your sample ?
> 
> To increase extraction yield you can grind finer , keep the brew ratio the same . the drink will be stronger though ( higher tds )
> 
> You could keep everything the same and pit more water through it > this will make the drink weaker ( lower tds ) but higher extraction yield


MrB yes syringe with the filter fitted onto the refrac "well". Thanks, I'll try finer grind, it didn't taste particularly strong to me. Thanks - I'm having a moment where my mind has pretty much given up for the day!


----------



## MWJB

Don't worry about the "BW(g)", you have set your target brew with your result, set the presets/target to, say, 19.5%EY & 19g dose (leaving you to enter bev weight), enter your reading under "measure" and it'll plot a blue circle (actual brew) relative to the red circle (target).


----------



## jeebsy

I was reading about the EG1 on Home Barista yesterday and the static/retention. This is it used as normal: (Credit to TomC at Home Barista for the pictures)

















Which should look fairly similar to anyone who's taken the thwacker off their EK. Grinds hanging to the left of the exit chute. If you take the EK apart, you also get a tiny amount of grinds retained in the burrs.

TomC said he'd been using RDT to stop this:









RDT seems to be mentioned a lot as a solution to static on the HG1 but I haven't really seen it mentioned for the EK.

I tried a few shots with it last night/this morning and had to back the grind off a bit from normal. It was suprising how little came out when thwacking the thwacker so I wonder if the moisture makes everything fall straight through the grind path instead of clinging to insides.

I don't use a naked PF with the EK as normally you end up wearing most of the coffee but got two of these in a row:

  Photo by wjheenan, on Flickr

The shot was much thicker than normal, amazing mouthfeel and was the closest to the tasting notes I've pulled in a while. One swallow doesn't make a summer but I'm looking forward to trying this out more.


----------



## ronsil

Interested in this.

Can you please set out your personal current exact procedure.


----------



## jeebsy

Weigh dose of beans in stainless steel cup

Apply 3-4 drops of water with a pipette

Dump beans into grinder

Grind into container, thwack

Transfer into pf using 3d printed funnel

Level and tamp

Applying the water to the beans is a bit of a work in progress, some people on Home Barista spray the beans with a wee vapouriser bottle but I think @The Systemic Kid said he just added a few drops using a pipette (and he's usually pretty reliable)


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Used to pipette a couple of drops into beans when I had a HG One to deal with static but have never done this on the EK.

I've removed the thwacker arm off my EK but left the chute so I can dose into the centre of the portafilter fitted with a Coffee Catcha. While the grinds are dropping into the basket, I move the portafilter around to aid even distribution across the basket. I always use a naked portafilter and don't have any problems with spritzing. I'm not bothered about the pour being a single plume - double or triple plumes seem to be the norm from the EK. I've experimented with tapping the portafilter sides, swirling the grinds as suggested by MP but I find using a soft haired brush to level off the grinds before tamping. I give the portafilter a gentle thwack on the work surface to settle the grinds and that's it.


----------



## Xpenno

Any ideas if rust could be a potential problem with adding water? I presume not really but thought I'd ask just in case.


----------



## Mrboots2u

I tried one shot a la Jeebsy.... One shot doesn't tell you the whole story - more came out all at once . No thwacking required . Shot took longer .

As spence says any dangers towards rust and the burrs


----------



## jeebsy

Xpenno said:


> Any ideas if rust could be a potential problem with adding water? I presume not really but thought I'd ask just in case.


That did cross my mind but people have been RDTing for ages and nothing seems to be reported


----------



## ronsil

Thanks jeebsy, Tried it this afternoon with impressive result.

Indeed I needed to open up the grind on the EK.

Some grindings that did adhere to the ss cocktail shaker seem to have disappeared with the drops of water.

Ordered an atomizer from Amazon. Think it will spread the water quicker


----------



## risky

Aren't most of the parts either coated or stainless anyway?


----------



## Xpenno

risky said:


> Aren't most of the parts either coated or stainless anyway?


I guess they are but at the price of a new set I thought it was worth asking just in case


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Ive heard of adding water to beans with the HG One but not others.

I have to say I'd be a bit nervous on the rust front too.


----------



## jeebsy

Been discussing this with the EK Strategy Group and the consensus is it does make a difference. Whether it's a good difference is still up for debate.


----------



## garydyke1

Ive seen EK burrs and pre-breaker go very very rusty when left in a warehouse for 12 months not in a protective bag. They were a total write off. No water is going anywhere near my EK.


----------



## jeebsy

Why would the ek be any more prone to that than other grinders?


----------



## garydyke1

dunno. Those rusty burrs haunt my dreams


----------



## jeebsy

HG One appear to have been recommending RDT as a way to counter static and haven't read any reports of rust or corrosion.


----------



## jeebsy

And @AndyS has seen it in action as far back as 2005? http://www.home-barista.com/grinders/ross-droplet-technique-eliminating-grinder-static-t24051.html


----------



## risky

I would have thought that anywhere the water is going to get, would already be coated in a thin film of oil from the coffee beans and would continue to be coated in such a film? We aren't talking a great volume of water here.

This also made me wonder if this issue couldn't be avoided by using some kind of coating on the grinder, rather than using water.


----------



## jeebsy

And it seems the water gets mixed up with the grinds, can't see it hanging about inside


----------



## Phil104

No rust at all on my HG one and I always use the RDT - with an eye dropper, though. I got a diffuser to begin with but found that hard to control. It only needs a couple of small drops.


----------



## AndyS

risky said:


> I would have thought that anywhere the water is going to get, would already be coated in a thin film of oil from the coffee beans


Agreed, coffee oils protect the grinder's guts from the tiny amount of water used in RDT.


----------



## jeebsy

AndyS said:


> Agreed, coffee oils protect the grinder's guts from the tiny amount of water used in RDT.


Any thoughts on RDT in relation to the EK? Pours take longer at the same grind setting using it. Haven't come to a conclusion on taste yet.


----------



## S-Presso

Recently started using RDT (2 drops only!) in my 'crappy' old Mazzer SJ, since snagging a Lyn Weber blind tumbler and cocktail whisk. Difference is remarkable. Grounds feel, to the touch, much more even in size and clumping has disappeared completely. Shots much improved - especially mouthfeel, much thicker. Yum.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Being able to go a bit coarser on the Ek - may have some advantages - less micro channeling - as Ek grind setting is powder for espresso normally - caveat is that this may not have the same desired effect for a traditional smaller burr grinder . Being able to grind finer ( if you grinder is up to it ) > higher extraction yields with the right recipe and temps .

Touch won't tell you much about changes in consistency .

I could only really say that rdt is reducing static ( same in same out without tapping ) on my Ek at mo .

Shot times for whatever reason are longer . Meaning to get same BR - I've backed off 4-5 notches.


----------



## urbanbumpkin

Do you think the extended shot times are caused by an almost pre pre infusion?


----------



## Mrboots2u

We are all running different pressures I think . Me 3bar at 6 seconds then flat 6 bar . Jeebsy classic e61 so fixed pre infusion . Spence whatever the random number generator throws up









To answer your question urban - don't think so .

Minimal moisture applied

Plus even if there was More pre infusion ( pre wetting ) at coarser grind would shorten extraction time ( time to extract after pre infusion )


----------



## ronsil

Most of my Profiles start at 8-10 seconds at 2.00 bar


----------



## jeebsy

Mrboots2u said:


> We are all running different pressures I think . Me 3bar at 6 seconds then flat 6 bar . Jeebsy classic e61 so fixed pre infusion . Spence whatever the random number generator throws up


I pre infuse at regulated line pressure (two bar) for 6-8 seconds then let the E61 do its thing


----------



## Mrboots2u

urbanbumpkin said:


> Do you think the extended shot times are caused by an almost pre pre infusion?


No - we are taking miniscule amounts of moisture


----------



## AndyS

jeebsy said:


> Any thoughts on RDT in relation to the EK? Pours take longer at the same grind setting using it. Haven't come to a conclusion on taste yet.


I haven't noticed that, but then again I've done RDT on every EK shot for a very long time. Seems to make sense that reducing "static cling" could result in a more uniform coffee bed. Less channeling = longer shot times. And possibly a marginal increase in extraction yield, depending on technique, equipment, etc.


----------



## Xpenno

AndyS said:


> I haven't noticed that, but then again I've done RDT on every EK shot for a very long time. Seems to make sense that reducing "static cling" could result in a more uniform coffee bed. Less channeling = longer shot times. And possibly a marginal increase in extraction yield, depending on technique, equipment, etc.
> 
> View attachment 19060


Hey Andy, that's great!

Just out of interest, what's your prep process?


----------



## AndyS

I will make a video eventually but basically:

Dose 18-20 g

EK43

RDT

VST 20

WDT

15-20 sec @ 300 kPa

20-30 sec @ 600 kPa

EBR = 2.5 to 3


----------



## Mrboots2u

On the speedster presumably


----------



## AndyS

Mrboots2u said:


> On the speedster presumably


True


----------



## Mrboots2u

AndyS said:


> True


You also need to post re your mods

To that at some point too


----------



## AndyS

Mrboots2u said:


> You also need to post re your mods
> 
> To that at some point too


I am SHOCKED to hear you suggest that I might have modified a factory-built machine. That could void the warranty!


----------



## jlarkin

AndyS said:


> I will make a video eventually but basically:
> 
> Dose 18-20 g
> 
> EK43
> 
> RDT
> 
> VST 20
> 
> WDT
> 
> 15-20 sec @ 300 kPa
> 
> 20-30 sec @ 600 kPa
> 
> EBR = 2.5 to 3


You know something is serious is occurring when you have to google the units of measure. . .


----------



## jeebsy

Is that for a total shot time of 35-50 seconds?


----------



## risky

jlarkin said:


> You know something is serious is occurring when you have to google the units of measure. . .


300kPa = 3 bar. 600kPa = 6 bar

It's actually the correct unit, and the one we should use to refer to pressure, Bar was invented for weather forecasts.

@AndyS what bean is it you're enjoying at 24%+?


----------



## jeebsy

George Howell Kenyan (espresso roast)


----------



## dsc

How much dust does the EK accumulate from shot to shot? I know most people take of the thwacker but just curious what comes out of the grinder when you thwack the hell out of it the day after your last grind? I do this on the Guat which I've been using for espresso recently and there's loads of fine dust that comes out. If the EK is similar, RDT will probably stop that from happenning, which means more fines end up in your dose.

T.


----------



## jeebsy

dsc said:


> How much dust does the EK accumulate from shot to shot? I know most people take of the thwacker but just curious what comes out of the grinder when you thwack the hell out of it the day after your last grind? I do this on the Guat which I've been using for espresso recently and there's loads of fine dust that comes out. If the EK is similar, RDT will probably stop that from happenning, which means more fines end up in your dose.
> 
> T.


Thwacking gets most out after each grind. A full strip down and clean usually yields about 2g of grinds from the various nooks and crannies inside the grinder which aren't affected by the thwack.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

I clear my EK's throat with a brush before switching it on to clear any dust/chaff residue which isn't that much. There is a bit more after grinding for espresso than for pour over. Use a stainless steel cocktail tumbler for pour over grinding and find that static causes chaff and dust to stick to the upper side of the tumbler wall which helps prevent it getting into the dose as I use a teaspoon to transfer it to a small plastic container to check final weight before brewing.


----------



## dsc

Must be some differences in the build then as the Guat holds quite a lot between shots (this is pure dust mind you).

Do you thwack before dropping a new dose and turning it on? Just to make sure its clean and no old stuff comes out.

T.


----------



## jeebsy

Thwacks after grinding are usually sufficient to clear it out. Providing you'd thwacked after (or used EDT), nothing comes out if you thwack before a subsequent shot


----------



## NickdeBug

The Systemic Kid said:


> I clear my EK's throat with a brush before switching it on to clear any dust/chaff residue which isn't that much. There is a bit more after grinding for espresso than for pour over. Use a stainless steel cocktail tumbler for pour over grinding and find that static causes chaff and dust to stick to the upper side of the tumbler wall which helps prevent it getting into the dose as I use a teaspoon to transfer it to a small plastic container to check final weight before brewing.


Patrick - some metals and plastics can cause a lot of static attraction due to their position on the tribocharge series. If you go for something either neutral or a similar charge to the ground coffee then you shouldn't see anything sticking. Wood is always a good bet. Copper is another good neutral. Both look quite nice as well. I bought some copper ramekins for about £10 which work really well.


----------



## risky

The Systemic Kid said:


> I clear my EK's throat with a brush before switching it on to clear any dust/chaff residue which isn't that much. There is a bit more after grinding for espresso than for pour over. Use a stainless steel cocktail tumbler for pour over grinding and find that static causes chaff and dust to stick to the upper side of the tumbler wall which helps prevent it getting into the dose as I use a teaspoon to transfer it to a small plastic container to check final weight before brewing.


Interesting, because the thinking with RDT seems to be that you want the dust in the dose.


----------



## dsc

In my experience on various grinders that dust can make a lot of difference.

T.


----------



## risky

dsc said:


> In my experience on various grinders that dust can make a lot of difference.
> 
> T.


Well if fines are good, then the dust is superfines and might be even better? People are certainly reporting longer shot times but the jury's out on improved taste.


----------



## nostream

Interesting posts regarding knocking and RDT...Historically I've knocked and not used RDT. (I have experimented with both and settled on that combo because I noticed little benefit with RDT and liked the additional functional grind fineness of including knocks and the benefit of getting out the input weight minus no more than .1-.2g.)I tried RDT this morning and didn't notice much difference. But I do typically knock for espresso, so if RDT is just incorporating the fines, then one wouldn't expect any benefit. By the way, I don't knock for drip, but I obviously don't have any concerns about not being able to grind fine enough for drip. Those of you who don't knock - are you just afraid of fines? I've had some good non-knock shots, but they flow much faster. And the last few notches on my precision dial simply taste over extracted and medicinally bitter.


----------



## jeebsy

If you don't thwack the remains are just going to come out in your next shot. They can't all stay in the grinder forever.


----------



## nostream

jeebsy said:


> If you don't thwack the remains are just going to come out in your next shot. They can't all stay in the grinder forever.


When I've tried non-thwacking, I've just thwacked after dosing and dumped the grounds. That costs in the realm of 2g per 15g dose - not ideal but OK and something you can work around. You could also thwack at the end of the day or every x number of shots to reduce the inefficiency caused by non-thwacking.


----------



## jeebsy

Is what you're not getting out the grinder useful for your coffee though?


----------



## dsc

You can get permanent retention which simply stays in the grinder forever, stuff compacts and fills any voids inside and the only way to get it out is a good clean, which is kind of pointless as the process repeats on the next grind.

The question is indeed whether what's left behind is good for your dose or not.

Also curious if you mix the output from the grinder before transfering to the basket or not? Wondering if it affects pulls in any way.

T.


----------



## jlarkin

I'm having one of those mornings where I feel a bit lost in coffee...So boffins, what makes you of this information? I'm not quite sure if it'd better slightly quicker a la jeebsy, or not. I just had an espresso 19g dose (in 18g VST), 52.5g yield, 27 seconds. Sage DB with 3 secs pre-infusion and then standard pressure. Refracted at 6.75 TDS and 19.14 EY. Taste was OK, nothing too special really but not bitter or sour. Hoping for more sweetness and clarity so do I go longer only, or adjust the grind. I'm not sure I know exactly what I'm looking for - in a way - so not sure which way to go. Or just try different things and try and work out what I'm looking for?


----------



## jeebsy

Preinfuse for a bit longer, try 6-10 seconds. You'll have to go a bit finer which should push EY up.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Grind a bit finer - perhaps decrease the BR just a tad ...to say 48 out outpjt Taste . Spock if you wanna .


----------



## garydyke1

jlarkin said:


> I'm having one of those mornings where I feel a bit lost in coffee...So boffins, what makes you of this information? I'm not quite sure if it'd better slightly quicker a la jeebsy, or not. I just had an espresso 19g dose (in 18g VST), 52.5g yield, 27 seconds. Sage DB with 3 secs pre-infusion and then standard pressure. Refracted at 6.75 TDS and 19.14 EY. Taste was OK, nothing too special really but not bitter or sour. Hoping for more sweetness and clarity so do I go longer only, or adjust the grind. I'm not sure I know exactly what I'm looking for - in a way - so not sure which way to go. Or just try different things and try and work out what I'm looking for?


Run the whole shot at 66% pump power, youll need to change the grind to get an appropriate flow rate to be hitting >20% EY


----------



## jlarkin

Have you boffins found much solid info on solubility in coffee? Or have you sometimes come across big differences?

From what I've read, but I can't remember where that was, some coffees are generally more soluble than others anyway and also the roasting - development time etc. can have an impact on this.

I've been struck by it because I've been really struggling with a Columbian coffee to get higher extractions, albeit mostly with an immersion brew (and some Brazen brews). I then opened a Coffee Collective Kenyan, put it through the Behmohr Brewer and got nearly 25%Ey. It wasn't bad either not that fruity or anything but taste was fine for the first cup. I just wish it'd stop raining so I could make the dash across the garden for another!


----------



## MWJB

Kenyans, in my experience, can be at the more soluble end.

You can use your French press to make a couple of brews with each new coffee, at the same grind setting, brew ratio, time (plenty of it) & water for all tests, and see where they fall? I'd do this at the lower end of the brew ratio spectrum, say 52-54g/l.


----------



## risky

Oh there's differences for sure. Dictated by green and roasting I would think. Some coffees just give it up really easy, others have to be pushed hard to give up the goods. Often it's the ones that need to be pushed hard where the reward is massively worthwhile, and the easy extractors that can be problematic.


----------



## jlarkin

MWJB said:


> Kenyans, in my experience, can be at the more soluble end.
> 
> You can use your French press to make a couple of brews with each new coffee, at the same grind setting, brew ratio, time (plenty of it) & water for all tests, and see where they fall? I'd do this at the lower end of the brew ratio spectrum, say 52-54g/l.


Yes I was kind of thinking about that - having a sort of standard starting check could be interesting for me I think. So far I haven't kept much by way of notes but I feel a spreadsheet coming on .


----------



## MWJB

risky said:


> Oh there's differences for sure. Dictated by green and roasting I would think. Some coffees just give it up really easy, others have to be pushed hard to give up the goods. Often it's the ones that need to be pushed hard where the reward is massively worthwhile, and the easy extractors that can be problematic.


You can always extract less from a soluble coffee (grind coarser/higher brew ratio), but if you hit a ceiling from a less soluble coffee you can only make it stronger at a lower extraction. With drip you can still get nominal extractions from underdeveloped coffee, but they may not taste great.


----------



## MWJB

This is well worth a read: http://www.prufrockcoffee.com/the-test-roast-solubility-quality-check/


----------



## fluffles

Couple of quick refractometry questions...

1. I watched Matt Pergers guide to using a VST, he wipes the lens with an alcohol wipe and then starts using it. He doesn't wipe away the alcohol, is that OK then?

2. I know EK espresso tastes best at higher EY than non-EK, is the same true for pourover? If so then recipes would need to be adjusted unless you like chewing your coffee?

Ta!


----------



## MWJB

The alcohol should evaporate very quickly. I tend to use alcohol before & after a session, just DI water & lint free Kimwipes from sample to sample in the same session.


----------



## garydyke1

fluffles said:


> 2. I know EK espresso tastes best at higher EY than non-EK, is the same true for pourover? If so then recipes would need to be adjusted unless you like chewing your coffee?
> 
> Ta!


When I was at the HasBean towers I used to compare the EK and Marco Uber grinder on a daily basis. My preference was 52.5-55g/L EK versus 60g/L Uber . Resulting drinks were more diluted on the EK and with around 2% higher EY on average


----------



## fluffles

I've refracted a few shots from the E37S, been surprised at how easily I've been getting 21+% extractions (that taste good). Ratio 1:2 or slightly over.

I've noticed that the moisture and co2 values affect the EY a lot, do people generally leave them at default?


----------



## Phobic

my cuppa this morning was 24% at 1:3

good question on CO2 and Moisture, from what I remember lots of people set these to zero on the basis that you're not measuring them, others leave them as defaults.

I guess what's important is that you're consistent, if you're not sharing info with others for them to use to compare specific EY, then just make sure you keep them set the same for your own use from test to test.

would be interested what others do though, particularly when sharing data.


----------



## fluffles

Yes but you've got an EK ?


----------



## MWJB

fluffles said:


> Yes but you've got an EK


Grinder doesn't generally affect how EY is calculated, the EK may just shift the target up a tad. Set the moisture & CO2 to VST defaults unless you have better info. The method for calculating EY from a coffee %TDS refractometer was invented by them. Even the CBI/MIT acknowledged moisture content of coffee dose, AOAC (amongst others) also has a standardised method for determining moisture in coffee, Illy cites a couple of studies that estimate CO2 in roasted coffee (but we can see that, so we certainly know it's there)- somewhere along the way, the mass of your coffee that is other than coffee got overlooked.


----------



## dan1502

I've left the settings at default. I wipe with isopropyl alcohol and a microfibre or lint free cloth or decent kitchen towel as I have 5l of alcohol I bought for various uses and it's very cheap in bulk. Have to admit I'm struggling a lot at the minute though and very frustrated with inconsistent results despite my best efforts and relatively few good or great tasting results. Not sure whether it's due to my methods, my understanding or a problem somehere. Most likely a combination of the first two and a combination of the huge number of variables being difficult to make sense of.


----------



## MWJB

dan1502 said:


> I've left the settings at default. I wipe with isopropyl alcohol and a microfibre or lint free cloth or decent kitchen towel as I have 5l of alcohol I bought for various uses and it's very cheap in bulk. Have to admit I'm struggling a lot at the minute though and very frustrated with inconsistent results despite my best efforts and relatively few good or great tasting results. Not sure whether it's due to my methods, my understanding or a problem somehere. Most likely a combination of the first two and a combination of the huge number of variables being difficult to make sense of.


How inconsistent & in what way? when you see an opportunity for inconsistency, shut it down by standardising what you do.


----------



## dan1502

I am trying to standardise my method though a couple of changes have just been introduced in the form of Kees shower screen and a flat 58.5mm tamper base which finally arrived to fit the Mahlgut tamper with a convex base I have. I have to get on with the day now but shall try and summarise my methods, thoughts and frustrations later. That said I've also asked a few questions directly to friends on here so I'd probably best not start spreading my frustrations around everywhere for now.

My process is single doses of 20.1 - 20.2 of beans, one spritz, good shake, catch in a metal jug, into the basket using a mini sifter via a 3d printed funnel, rotational shake to try and get a flat pile, tap down if necessary due to grounds above basket edge, OCD tool set very shallow to flatten further, tamp, weigh basket, profile with 1s ramp from 2-6 bar then constant 6 bar. Water is 75% Waitrose Essential, 25% Smart Water. VST 20g ridgeless basket. Old style coffee burrs. When refracting I leave a minute or so, stir, syringe into cold cup after wiping crema from syringe before fitting filter, pipette onto refractometer, leave for a bit then test (having calibrated). Before testing I taste.

I then give some thought as to in theory what I might change with reference to the charts etc to get where I want to be and try that next time. Next time might be the next day during the week or at the weekend I make two at a time or more if I'm determined to experiment in the morning and perhaps another two in the afternoon.

That's the background but more on my thought and results later as I'm way behind on what I have planned for the day.


----------



## MWJB

dan1502 said:


> I am trying to standardise my method though a couple of changes have just been introduced in the form of Kees shower screen and a flat 58.5mm tamper base which finally arrived to fit the Mahlgut tamper with a convex base I have. I have to get on with the day now but shall try and summarise my methods, thoughts and frustrations later. That said I've also asked a few questions directly to friends on here so I'd probably best not start spreading my frustrations around everywhere for now.
> 
> My process is single doses of 20.1 - 20.2 of beans, one spritz, good shake, catch in a metal jug, into the basket using a mini sifter via a 3d printed funnel, rotational shake to try and get a flat pile, tap down if necessary due to grounds above basket edge, OCD tool set very shallow to flatten further, tamp, weigh basket, profile with 1s ramp from 2-6 bar then constant 6 bar. Water is 75% Waitrose Essential, 25% Smart Water. VST 20g ridgeless basket. Old style coffee burrs. When refracting I leave a minute or so, stir, syringe into cold cup after wiping crema from syringe before fitting filter, pipette onto refractometer, leave for a bit then test (having calibrated). Before testing I taste.
> 
> I then give some thought as to in theory what I might change with reference to the charts etc to get where I want to be and try that next time. Next time might be the next day during the week or at the weekend I make two at a time or more if I'm determined to experiment in the morning and perhaps another two in the afternoon.
> 
> That's the background but more on my thought and results later as I'm way behind on what I have planned for the day.


Phew! All that & no mention of brew ratio?  Look at variable as being from shot to shot, not month to month depending on what kit you have.

Variables:

Shower screen - eliminated

Tamper - eliminated.

Burrs - eliminated.

Measurement protocol - eliminated.

Pressure - eliminated.

Dose - eliminated for now.

Brew ratio?

Time?

I know why you are using that water, but it's not going to be a commonly used combination & it seems low in bicarbonate.

When you look at the chart in Coffeetools, at the same brew ratio, finer takes you right & up along the green BR line...until you go too fine then you fall, left & lower, as you do when too coarse.


----------



## Phobic

dan1502 said:


> Today's was 20.14 > 45.25 in 42s, 9.9 TDS, 23.1 EY same grind setting. Both shots looked good at the PF when extracting and no evidence of chanelling on top of the pucks at the end. I then recalibrated the refractometer again and remesured and got 10.1 TDS which would be 23.56 EY just as it seemed a big difference to yesterday. It's early days but if that's how much better the flat tamper is I'm quite shocked (sounds dramatic but when you get into this measuring **** it gets to you like this). I am using filters every time as well. Importantly it tasted really good too. Quite intense but bursting with acidity but much more enjoyable in every way really. Any thoughts from the boffins (what a word) out there?


from nov LSOL thread.

as per my other comment, not sure if you've tried 1:3 ratio rather than 1:2?


----------



## dan1502

Ok, so data from my last eight shots using the LSOL beans:

Dose Yield Time	TDS	EY	Grinder Setting

19.8 43.5 32	9.1	20.72	2.4

19.97	43.4 ?	9.1	20.46	2.4

20.3 49.9 ?	8.7	22.16	2.4 *

20.06	50.68	43	8.1	21.17	2.2

20.06	50.00	?	8.4	21.65	2.1

20.12	44.67	42	9.0	23.10	2.1

20.14	45.25	42	10.1	23.56	2.1 **

20.21	49.99	36	8.9	22.83	2.1

20.11	42.34	39	10.0	21.81	2.1

*This is where I removed the spring from the portafilter and starting the weighing the full basket. The previous doses were weighed by sifting into a container before dosing.

** This was the best tasting shot from what I recall and the first one with the flat tamper. Both this and the one above looked like nice smooth extractions, the one above (and all before being with the convex tamper).

The only other thing is my scales have started to creep. I use the initial reading but need to replace them. They give a reading then start creeping down. I'm just deciding what to buy. I'd love some Lunar scales but they're silly money so something decent but better value especially as all I need them to do is weigh.

The ? are where I didn't note the time before it disappeared from the Versuvius's display (can you set this to remain longer?).

I have been recording details for a lot longer but as I wasn't weighing the dose as accurately I don't think it would help to post them. Also with the scales as they are I'm not sure whether the above data is all that useful.

One other thing I had wondered was whether I ought to try a lower dose in the 20g VST to give a bit more head room when preparing/tamping as when the grinds are nice an fluffy they can be proud of the top.


----------



## Mrboots2u

I feel like I'm looking at the raw data of the matrix . How do they taste ? They the data they matters .


----------



## dan1502

I know, I do always taste but haven't been noting the taste. The nicest shot had plenty of acidity but nicely balanced and no dry or nasty aftertaste in the mouth. The last two shots IIRC didn't flow well and left a nasty aftertaste. I think some dryness but also probably some sour notes. My guess was uneven extraction being the culprit. I made two more after that to drink but without weighing or measuring and aiming for about 45g yield to get close to the nicest and whilst nice with milk they weren't anything like as nice as the nicest shot. I have to admit I still struggle with taste descriptors and when tasting myself I mostly notice sour, sweet, dry, bitter and fruity acidity and of course whether overall I liked it or not.


----------



## garydyke1

So this is the best tasting shot?

20.14	45.25	42	10.1	23.56	2.1

This was using flat tamper, has the highest EY and longest contact time (coincidence ?)

I think I can see a pattern


----------



## Mrboots2u

I feel like I'm looking at the raw data of the matrix . How do they taste ? They the data tHats matters . Everything Else is purely a measure to help you repeat again , or adjust accordingly


----------



## MWJB

Your EY varies less than your shot weight, try and get your dose weight to the same decimal point each time (rounding up to the first will be OK). Try and get the output weight more consistent.

Don't worry so much about specific descriptors, think more about "nice/neutral/nasty", then think about what's wrong with the worst ones, then you can expand to "very nice/quite nice/neither/a little nasty/very nasty".


----------



## MWJB

Mrboots2u said:


> I feel like I'm looking at the raw data of the matrix . How do they taste ? They the data tHats matters . Everything Else is purely a measure to help you repeat again , or adjust accordingly


Indeed, all the other data has no relevance without taste assessment.


----------



## MWJB

garydyke1 said:


> So this is the best tasting shot?
> 
> 20.14	45.25	42	10.1	23.56	2.1
> 
> This was using flat tamper, has the highest EY and longest contact time (coincidence ?)
> 
> I think I can see a pattern


The shot above it has a smidge longer contact time @dan1502 how did shot #6 taste too?


----------



## dan1502

Ok, I should be able to get my dose weight to be spot on but will probably have to test the sifter retention as I think it's best to sift into the basket rather than into something else then chuck it in the basket. I've been using what comes out of a weighed dose but measuring it accurately in the basket at the end of all processes.

Without refracting I just tried two shots with 18g doses. The first was 18.21 > 43 in 34 s at 2.1 grind setting. I thought it tasted ok. I didn't overanalyse it though however my wife said it was a bit sour and yesterday's was better (though she tasted after milk was added). I then tried out of interest another at 2.5 grind setting. This time 18.33 > 43.1 in 31 s and to me it was drinkable but definite sour notes and also what I might possibly describe as a cigar or tobacco like dry aftertaste (which I think is something I quite commonly encounter). In both cases the extraction started even with a bit of a struggle to get going I guess then became much more eratic as it progressed. They never squirt all over the place but the most even looking extractions do seem to have produced better results in the cup. I might try wacking the grinder up to 3.0 later to see what happens my thinking being that trying some extremes might be helpful. That said I only have a few shots worth of beans left. Once my 3kg from Foundry arrive I shall be better placed to experiment.


----------



## dan1502

MWJB said:


> The shot above it has a smidge longer contact time @dan1502 how did shot #6 taste too?


I'm trying to remember. All I remember is that it was not as nice without that burst of fruity acidity. I should write tasting notes too but bear in mind most of these are in the morning before work and what with refracting using the full filtered process I have been in a bit of a rush so I remember from shot to shot and have a think about things in the evening ready for the next shot. I wasn't really planning on posting at this stage thinking I'd do that after a weekend session where I could take my time and make more notes etc. I will do from now on though.


----------



## MWJB

As Gary said, you have told us that the highest extraction & 45g/42sec shot tasted best. Your extractions at a coarser setting are lower and, from a single time given for gind set 2.4, faster. Why jump from a known good scenario into something pretty much destined to disappoint?


----------



## dan1502

MWJB said:


> Indeed, all the other data has no relevance without taste assessment.


I have taken Martin and Gary's advice on this and always taste whilst the sample is equalising on the refractometer i.e. taste first then view results. I view the refractometer as something that can help me understand what is happening and to spot anomolies plus how I might adjust the recipe in an attempt to achieve the characteristics I desire rather than trying to get a theoretically perfect result. That said I have also thought of trying to hit somewhere nicely in the green zone as a starting point.


----------



## dan1502

Point taken. I suppose what surprised me was when I tried to replicate it I didn't manage to and everything went a bit heywire. I don't know why really other than reading that extractions can get uneven when grinding too fine that I've had it in my mind that perhaps I have been doing so. I know shot time isn't something to aim for but I was wondering whether 43s is a bit longer than normal range. (meanst to quote post #433)


----------



## dan1502

So, I'm wondering...

When I get my next decent sized batch of beans and have some time on my hands, what would be a sensible plan for experimentation?

I feel I should get some realiable scales beforehand and (long story) my Mahlgut tamper should be complete by the end of the week. I should then be able to be consistend with my workflow and rely on the measurements.

Given my kit and workflow where would you suggest I start with a new bean and to what extremes would you think worth while in order to experience the extremes before zoning in on the best recipe? In what way do you use the refractometer to help? How do you settle on a grind setting?


----------



## GlennV

dan1502 said:


> . Water is 75% Waitrose Essential, 25% Smart Water.


That gives a GH of 95 and a KH of 25. As MWJB points out, that's very low in buffer, falling well inside the "corrosion risk" zone defined by SCAE (KH1.8). Shouldn't be a problem short term but, for my taste, that buffer is also too low for nice tasting coffee - typically producing an unbalanced acidity.


----------



## dan1502

Ok, @garydyke1 suggested I give it a try, I think to increase magnesium. I'm open to suggestions on this but I have to buy rather than concoct my own from scratch.


----------



## GlennV

Increasing magnesium without increasing KH would just make things worse. Replacing the waitrose with volvic would give you 100/50, which is good for coffee and good for the machine.


----------



## dan1502

So are you suggesting 75% volvic, 25% smart water? Volvic's a bit harder to get hold of in large bottles but I find somewhere that stocks it. I have loads of Waitrose left but can drink that.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

I use smart water/Buxton 3:1 for pour over and Volvic for espresso. Works for me with the EK43.


----------



## fluffles

An interesting first day playing with EK43/L1 espresso. I had assumed I'd need a bigger dose and fine grind so went in at this level and pretty much choked it. Ended up dosing 15g into a VST 15g basket, not on finest setting at all and getting 30s pours. Pulled 4 shots in total, EY ranging from 21% to 24%.

Taste is quite different to what I'm used to. Sweetness is higher but so is acidity, like everything has been turned up. Feels a bit like I'm starting all over again in terms of finding my way.


----------



## fluffles

One for the EK boffins... Refracting shots around the 23% mark but tasting a little unbalanced- too much acidity not enough sweetness. Anywhere from 15g-35g to 15g-40g. EY already high so wasn't sure about lengthening the brew ratio. Assembly LSOL beans


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Shouldn't be getting much acidity at that EY. Try 1:2 which should bring the EY down a tad. But remember, EY figures are just that - they are no guarantee of what the coffee will taste like. I'm brewing LSOL at 20% EY for pour over and it's spot on.


----------



## Mrboots2u

fluffles said:


> One for the EK boffins... Refracting shots around the 23% mark but tasting a little unbalanced- too much acidity not enough sweetness. Anywhere from 15g-35g to 15g-40g. EY already high so wasn't sure about lengthening the brew ratio. Assembly LSOL beans


There will come a point when higher EY doesnt give you the balance you want . it will be bean and roast dependent in my experience

I have have some espresso at 24 % thats good . And some thats awful .

You can do try and push though .. to see if you get over the next hump

Either go finer and keep ratio the same increasing Tds and hence EY

Or Put more water through > decreasing tds but increasing EY

It may be though that you have reached the limits with that bean and water and gear combo


----------



## fluffles

Thanks, I wondered if the low dose might be giving me uneven extraction, but wouldn't I be struggling to get 23% if unevenness was a major problem?


----------



## Mrboots2u

fluffles said:


> Thanks, I wondered if the low dose might be giving me uneven extraction, but wouldn't I be struggling to get 23% if unevenness was a major problem?


You might be getting an uneven 23%









How does it look in the pour ?


----------



## dan1502

@fluffles - welcome to the funny farm!


----------



## garydyke1

fluffles said:


> One for the EK boffins... Refracting shots around the 23% mark but tasting a little unbalanced- too much acidity not enough sweetness. Anywhere from 15g-35g to 15g-40g. EY already high so wasn't sure about lengthening the brew ratio. Assembly LSOL beans


Never had success with a 15g VST and EK unless using very very calcium heavy water


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> Never had success with a 15g VST and EK unless using very very calcium heavy water


Same here, 15g vst never results is great tasting shots for me either. Always unbalanced with high acidity and light body. Much prefer 18g or 20g vst.


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Ditto. 18grms > 36grms is my preferred formula for espresso.


----------



## fluffles

Xpenno said:


> Same here, 15g vst never results is great tasting shots for me either. Always unbalanced with high acidity and light body. Much prefer 18g or 20g vst.


That would fairly accurately describe this morning's shot!


----------



## fluffles

Mrboots2u said:


> There will come a point when higher EY doesnt give you the balance you want . it will be bean and roast dependent in my experience
> 
> I have have some espresso at 24 % thats good . And some thats awful .
> 
> You can do try and push though .. to see if you get over the next hump
> 
> Either go finer and keep ratio the same increasing Tds and hence EY
> 
> Or Put more water through > decreasing tds but increasing EY
> 
> It may be though that you have reached the limits with that bean and water and gear combo


Went a notch finer kept everything else the same... Big difference, acidity mostly gone, sweeter, but if anything a bit over (!)










Maybe next will keep the finer grind and shorten the shot slightly. Then I'll try 18g VST.


----------



## dan1502

Are you using filters?

Grinding really fine seemed to work best for me with this bean and about 1:2.5 ratio in over 60s (at 6 bar with steady ramp up). It still had plenty of acidity but balanced by being very sweet and a full rounded flavour.


----------



## garydyke1

Last weeks IMM the killer Honduras .

18g->42g->38sec. Ugly as hell tripod naked pour.

21.5% EY Lush lush lush in the mouth

My usual 18->45g pushing >22% EY wasn't working out

Coffee is weird sometimes


----------



## the_partisan

Just noticed that hasbean have dropped the price on VST Lab III significantly:

https://www.hasbean.co.uk/collections/vst/products/vst-lab-iii

I can't recommend this tool enough!


----------



## fluffles

Had a frustrating time yesterday, different bean but still getting a cup of sours.

I was initially at 1.4 on the Callum dial and tried various ratios (all well over 1:2). Shot times were long, between 30 and 40 seconds not including pre-infusion. Refrac readings all over 23%, sometimes pushing 24%.

In a moment of desperation I tried loosening the grind to 1.7 and found that neither the shot time or EY decreased. The taste was *possibly* a bit sweeter but still not where it should be.

It's left me wondering a couple of things...

1. I thought I was tasting under-extraction, but given the EY readings I'm not so sure.

2. Was I grinding too fine at 1.4? The result of the 1.7 shot was unexpected, so I'm thinking of going coarser still.


----------



## Mrboots2u

I'm my experience , there is a point where you can stall the Ey by going to fine .

It's easier just to stick to taste descriptors or simple lack of balance , etc describing a shot .

Did you do the dilute test with water to see if it opened up the taste ?

Lastly - what are you basing " where it should be " on ? A taste you have already achieved with this bean , or just want you think it should taste like ? Is it way off the tasting notes ?


----------



## fluffles

Mrboots2u said:


> I'm my experience , there is a point where you can stall the Ey by going to fine .
> 
> It's easier just to stick to taste descriptors or simple lack of balance , etc describing a shot .
> 
> Did you do the dilute test with water to see if it opened up the taste ?
> 
> Lastly - what are you basing " where it should be " on ? A taste you have already achieved with this bean , or just want you think it should taste like ? Is it way off the tasting notes ?


It was a lack of sweetness and an initial sourness. I've had the same experience with 3 different beans now


----------



## Mrboots2u

fluffles said:


> It was a lack of sweetness and an initial sourness. I've had the same experience with 3 different beans now


In what context though .... at what EY ? and BR ? while you are at it give me the Tds as well


----------



## dan1502

Have you tried cupping it? I've only just started doing it but find it helps a lot in terms of identifying the baseline taste and characteristics of the beans. Also are you sure you're not confusing sourness with acidity? I only mention that as you mention initial sourness and I often get results with an intial quite strong acidity (which I like if balanced by sweetness).


----------



## fluffles

dan1502 said:


> Have you tried cupping it? I've only just started doing it but find it helps a lot in terms of identifying the baseline taste and characteristics of the beans. Also are you sure you're not confusing sourness with acidity? I only mention that as you mention initial sourness and I often get results with an intial quite strong acidity (which I like if balanced by sweetness).


I'm very definitely a light roast man, acidity welcome as long as it's balanced as you say. The "sourness" registers the same across different beans ranging from washed to natural. I managed to find a good place with one of them, but then ran out (doh).

I'll put all my notes together and post them up tomorrow


----------



## garydyke1

Us EK bredrin always start out like this ........you will find the right path eventually


----------



## dan1502

Which beans out of interest? Also I asked about the filters as although I believe they tend to make about 0.2% TDS difference they made a lot more than that when I tried with and without with the LSOL beans so I'm only posting results if I've used one.


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> Us EK bredrin always start out like this ........you will find the right path eventually


Yup, this! ^


----------



## Xpenno

Ek is all in the prep, do that right and the rest falls into place.

Are you an L1 user?

I find that a declining pressure profile gives a shot a strange astringency. That's probably just me though.


----------



## garydyke1

dan1502 said:


> Which beans out of interest? Also I asked about the filters as although I believe they tend to make about 0.2% TDS difference they made a lot more than that when I tried with and without with the LSOL beans so I'm only posting results if I've used one.


Ive done a bit of playing recently and the variance was around 0.3-0.35% filter / non filter . The 'offset' is pretty consistent


----------



## dan1502

I'll try with and without again when I next experiment.


----------



## fluffles

garydyke1 said:


> Us EK bredrin always start out like this ........you will find the right path eventually


At this rate I might be calling your highly recommended training services


----------



## fluffles

So I've got a coffee I had been struggling to get the best from as pour over. I've now found a really good place, but the journey was an interesting one. To cut a long story short, I wasn't having much luck at a coarser grind but I have fiddled a but with the temperature and moved to a finer grind and it's loads better. Interestingly, the TDS/EY readings are much the same between the good and bad brews.

I guess there's more than one route to the same place, and the result at the end can be quite different?


----------



## Thecatlinux

Is this where all the coffee jedl s hang out ?


----------



## MWJB

No. Jedi's use an unseen, unquantifiable energy to bend the will of matter & laws of the Universe to do their bidding.

This is where we measure, record, adjust...more like carpenters (adhering to the known laws of the universe), then taste, adjust, record...like, erm, I dunno, someone making a recipe for a food product?


----------



## Dayks

MWJB said:


> No. Jedi's use an unseen, unquantifiable energy to bend the will of matter & laws of the Universe to do their bidding.
> 
> This is where we measure, record, adjust...more like carpenters (adhering to the known laws of the universe), then taste, adjust, record...like, erm, I dunno, someone making a recipe for a food product?


So the place where the Vulcans hang out then.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Thecatlinux said:


> Is this where all the coffee jedl s hang out ?


----------



## Thecatlinux

MWJB said:


> No. Jedi's use an unseen, unquantifiable energy to bend the will of matter & laws of the Universe to do their bidding.
> 
> This is where we measure, record, adjust...more like carpenters (adhering to the known laws of the universe), then taste, adjust, record...like, erm, I dunno, someone making a recipe for a food product?


i am supposed to be measuring things ? Making notes ? I keep getting sidetracked and drinking the stuff


----------



## MWJB

Thecatlinux said:


> i am supposed to be measuring things ? Making notes ? I keep getting sidetracked and drinking the stuff


That would be the tasting part, you can drink muddy water if you need to, but if I'm going to go to the effort of making my own coffee it's going to be something I really enjoy & can serve to someone else with confidence (well, mostly).

if all your coffee is consistently great, without measuring anything, then maybe you are a Jedi afterall?


----------



## dan1502

Ok, so I'm two shots short of getting through my first 500g of Foundry Moata. Until the last one I havent refracted any due to having changed the water to 50/50 Volvic and Waitrose Essential and not having had much time. I've just gone by taste. I zeroed my burrs again yesterday so wasn't so sure where I was with grind settings but judging by the shot time I guess about right in terms of carrying on where I left off. I've also fitted an 8.5 mm silicon gasket in place of the tired 8 mm one to see if the head space meant less of or got rid of the impression on the puck. I also bought an 8 mm one so I can switch. So the results with a filter were:

20.0 to 52.4 in 41s with a TDS of 8.6% and EY of 23.35%. Taste wise I feel I am there or thereabouts but not quite there. It's a bit intense and still has an aftertaste that lingers. It might sound daft but I'm not certain whether it's bitter or sour. My gut tells me to try increasing the yield a bit so I'll try that and if it gets worse I'll go the other way, probably a couple of grams either side. Regarding extraction it seems I'm getting consistently high yields. Maybe I should deliberately try and get some lower yields within the more normal range by lowering yield to see how they taste.

The gasket has reduced the impression on the puck significantly but it's still present. Does this matter? I'm wondering whether to try reducing the dose to 19g in a 20g VST or, if necessary, 18g.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Try getting some lower yields and taste those ...


----------



## dan1502

Will do. I think I've fallen into the habit of ballpark dose to yield ratio range and grind settings as looking back at my last 10 or so measured shots they've all been over 21% and most over 22% EY.


----------



## garydyke1

I was running a training session today and for a laugh we tried matching espresso ratios to a conventional grinder (K30) and hitting exactly the same numbers using 9BAR and Volvic Ashbeck mix. Not the most soluble coffee but hey :

k30 - 18g/36g/35 sec . 19% EY. Sweet but drying and lingering bitterness

EK43 - 18g/36g/37 sec. 19.2% EY . Insane clarity sweetness and super clean finish

I was absolutely amazed how good a conventional espresso had tasted from an EK, low yield and soft water . Tasted better than anything at 6 BAR and 40-50g yield.

Don't knock it till you try it.


----------



## dan1502

I'll give conventional a go then including the pressure profile as I've stuck with 6 bar for quite some time now.


----------



## GlennV

Which burrs?



garydyke1 said:


> I was running a training session today and for a laugh we tried matching espresso ratios to a conventional grinder (K30) and hitting exactly the same numbers using 9BAR and Volvic Ashbeck mix. Not the most soluble coffee but hey :
> 
> k30 - 18g/36g/35 sec . 19% EY. Sweet but drying and lingering bitterness
> 
> EK43 - 18g/36g/37 sec. 19.2% EY . Insane clarity sweetness and super clean finish
> 
> I was absolutely amazed how good a conventional espresso had tasted from an EK, low yield and soft water . Tasted better than anything at 6 BAR and 40-50g yield.
> 
> Don't knock it till you try it.


----------



## garydyke1

GlennV said:


> Which burrs?


Mk2 Coffee . very very very very seasoned and according to the Perger scale ''adequately'' aligned


----------



## dan1502

Ok, so I tried it. 18.0 to 37.3 (slight overshoot) in 25s. Now this is where I am confused. I calibrated the refractometer and used a filter and got a TDS of 10.6% (multiple button presses) resulting in an EY of 22.76. I then tried without a filter (pippette below surface rather than syringe) and got 10.1% TDS. I then tried again with a filter and syringe and got 10.3%. I can't understand why it would be lower without a filter! The shot was quite nice but a slight lingering aftertaste. I'll try grinding a bit finer and hitting 36g next time.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Because sometimes you get outliers when not using a filter . End of day , not using filter , not actually measuring tds per se .


----------



## garydyke1

TDS readings with filters are reliant on exact number of drops , there's a wendelboe video that demonstrates this


----------



## fluffles

HASBEAN GUATEMALAN EL LIMON BLACK HONEY X NATURAL

Really wasn't getting on with this, weird sourness followed by bitterness.

Dialled everything right back and at 18g>40g>5s pre-infusion + 14s pour (lol?) it's really quite good! I really get the cherry sweetness now. Quick pours seem to be getting the best out of the L1/EK43 combo for me at the moment.


----------



## Mrboots2u

fluffles said:


> HASBEAN GUATEMALAN EL LIMON BLACK HONEY X NATURAL
> 
> Really wasn't getting on with this, weird sourness followed by bitterness.
> 
> Dialled everything right back and at 18g>40g>5s pre-infusion + 14s pour (lol?) it's really quite good! I really get the cherry sweetness now. Quick pours seem to be getting the best out of the L1/EK43 combo for me at the moment.


That was my experience with a lot of coffees with the same gear combination


----------



## fluffles

Mrboots2u said:


> That was my experience with a lot of coffees with the same gear combination


It's funny, because with my previous grinder (E37S) I found the opposite - more time really helped, often went for 40s pours.

This setup just seems to extract the hell out of everything, I have to really fight to keep the EY down.


----------



## Mrboots2u

fluffles said:


> It's funny, because with my previous grinder (E37S) I found the opposite - more time really helped, often went for 40s pours.
> 
> This setup just seems to extract the hell out of everything, I have to really fight to keep the EY down.


Where reduced flat pressure helps


----------



## dan1502

Just to add I used a flat 9 bar profile. I'll check the video regarding the number of drops. This is something I was wondering about. Still, I go for a lower EY and still end up with over 22%. Must try harder...


----------



## Mrboots2u

dan1502 said:


> Just to add I used a flat 9 bar profile. I'll check the video regarding the number of drops. This is something I was wondering about. Still, I go for a lower EY and still end up with over 22%. Must try harder...


Reduce your brew ratio . Grind coarser .


----------



## dan1502

Yes, I know. On this occasion though I was just trying to get 18 to 36 at 9 bar (but did overshoot a bit). My main concern at present is making sure my readings are accurate as from what's been said so far they may all have been unreliable.


----------



## MWJB

garydyke1 said:


> TDS readings with filters are reliant on exact number of drops , there's a wendelboe video that demonstrates this


Any of the samples in the well should be 0.2 to 0.4g, I think Wendelboe was talking about consistency (as in "always 3 drops"), just do things the same & don't put in 0.1g one time then a gram the next.


----------



## garydyke1

dan1502 said:


> Just to add I used a flat 9 bar profile. I'll check the video regarding the number of drops. This is something I was wondering about. Still, I go for a lower EY and still end up with over 22%. Must try harder...


Think it was this video


----------



## dan1502

Ok, so a bit too much caffeine now today but I had to give it another go.

First attempt was 18g to 38 i.e. I overshot again as it flowed pretty fast so I drank half and binned the rest.

Second attempt on the same grind setting was 18 to 35.6 in 42s, TDS 10.7, 21.93 EY. Once again, the second shot was a lot slower which suggests to me that the EK does require a purge to get consistent shots or is consistent from the second shot onwards which I hoped wouldn't be the case. When I took the front off the other day there were quite a few loose grouds near the front. I realise a ring can build up but these were loose grounds mainly at the six o'clock position. The trouble is ideally I want to be able to leave it set up so that the first shot of the day is spot on as I often only have one but then the second is way off....

Still a bit of an aftertaste but the EY isn't much less so I'm not surprised. Maybe if I'd tried a third with the grind backed off a bit but I don't like wasting coffee.

However I did test with and without the filter again and this time I got 10.7 with and 11.1 without so more normal. I used 0.25 ml samples which is the first line on the pipette so easy to replicate.

I will probably try once more to get a 18/36 shot in the 25 -35 s range and this time will aim for it on the second shot of the session but it will have to be tomorrow or probably Saturday.


----------



## dan1502

Ok, so 18.0 to 35.6, ground a mark and a half coarser. I missed the time before it cleared but it was faster than above and I would guess 25s ish. TDS 10.0% and EY 20.50%. My first time within the normal zone I think. Taste wise, strong acidity, a bit too much. Smooth mouth feel and some creaminess and sweet enough. Much cleaner though still an aftertaste but I think probably in line with my cupping experience. It looked to extract quite evenly but there were a few dimples on the puck making me think I can still improve my prep (better manual flattening before tamping probably). Any thoughts on reducing/balancing out the acidity? This was a flat 9 bar profile again and this morning I chucked 4g through a purge as I wasn't making two shots.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Did you filter the sample ?

Would the cupping and the roaster notes suggest that the acidity is part of the experience of the coffee ?


----------



## fluffles

On the subject of retention, I'm finding at a given grind setting its not too bad but if I move from espresso to filter grind, I get an extra 0.4g or so. I guess the coarser filter grinds are knocking through a few stuck finer grinds. Anyone else find this?


----------



## MWJB

dan1502 said:


> Ok, so 18.0 to 35.6, ground a mark and a half coarser. I missed the time before it cleared but it was faster than above and I would guess 25s ish. TDS 10.0% and EY 20.50%. My first time within the normal zone I think. Taste wise, strong acidity, a bit too much. Smooth mouth feel and some creaminess and sweet enough. Much cleaner though still an aftertaste but I think probably in line with my cupping experience. It looked to extract quite evenly but there were a few dimples on the puck making me think I can still improve my prep (better manual flattening before tamping probably). Any thoughts on reducing/balancing out the acidity? This was a flat 9 bar profile again and this morning I chucked 4g through a purge as I wasn't making two shots.


How about leaving everything the same for a few shots, measure EY & see where your average is? Ideally we want to see how repeatable, otherwise identical, shots are before assessing what you need to do to shift the average. If your shots are say +/-1.5%EY (probably less than this, but good to know what they are) over a handful of shots, the changes you are making could be being swamped in the general noise of variation.


----------



## dan1502

I did filter the sample. I like a bit of acidity and it every shot has had some but this time it was very intense. Still drinkable and I didn't add milk but only just.

In terms of the beans in and grinds out there is hardly any difference but perhaps there's a consistent amount of retained grinds being pushed through each time as I suspect the first shot of the session contains some stale grinds. Either that or the burrs warm up but that seems unlikely given it's only one shot and I'm not the quickest in terms of time between shots.


----------



## dan1502

MWJB said:


> How about leaving everything the same for a few shots, measure EY & see where your average is? Ideally we want to see how repeatable, otherwise identical, shots are before assessing what you need to do to shift the average. If your shots are say +/-1.5%EY (probably less than this, but good to know what they are) over a handful of shots, the changes you are making could be being swamped in the general noise of variation.


Ok. I'll leave things as they are and test over the weekend. The only trouble is trying to get the yield consistent due to the delay when dropping the handle.


----------



## MWJB

dan1502 said:


> Ok. I'll leave things as they are and test over the weekend. The only trouble is trying to get the yield consistent due to the delay when dropping the handle.


if you can't slide the cup & scales out of the stream, see if you can slip a small saucer between the spouts & cup when you hit your consistent target weight in the cup.


----------



## mazi

Maybe you don't need to be so consistent. With differenet yield you will have differenet TDS.

But EY should be similar or am I wrong?


----------



## MWJB

mazi said:


> Maybe you don't need to be so consistent. With differenet yield you will have differenet TDS.
> 
> But EY should be similar or am I wrong?


If you hit the same weight from the same dose & the TDS changes so does the EY in an intuitive & linear fashion. But if the shot weight varies & so does the TDS then you could have a consistent EY, or not. It's not immediately obvious which way you are going with changes & kind of makes the measurements pointless, if you're aiming to replicate good shots & improve less good shots.

If your shots are +/-1%EY (Sdev over say 10 shots) or more, with the same coffee & weights, then I'm not sure you could call that consistency.

Output weight, from a given dose (over reasonable time) is the biggest factor in consistency.


----------



## garydyke1

fluffles said:


> On the subject of retention, I'm finding at a given grind setting its not too bad but if I move from espresso to filter grind, I get an extra 0.4g or so. I guess the coarser filter grinds are knocking through a few stuck finer grinds. Anyone else find this?


yep, i always purge between brew methods (4-5g)


----------



## Xpenno

I've owned all coffee related EK burrs, I didn't get along with Turkish but have enjoyed both types of coffee burr. I've been running the new coffee burrs for ages and have been enjoying the results. However, as per usual I fancied a change in my coffee journey so instead of going out and buying a new grinder I decided to stick some old Coffee Burrs back in my EK43. I was immediately surprised by the results!

I got to thinking that maybe there were more differences between the burrs than just the achievable fineness in grinds. As with anything there's always a honeymoon period but at present I'm making some of the best coffee I have in ages. Spro is noticeably sweeter at lower brew ratios, shots seem cleaner also. It could just be from messing but I'm really enjoying it. Also back is the old EK wobble on shots









The new burrs certainly make for nicer looking shots and are perhaps "easier" to work with but the results in the cup are killing it at the moment


----------



## fluffles

Xpenno said:


> As with anything there's always a honeymoon period but at present I'm making some of the best coffee I have in ages. Spro is noticeably sweeter at lower brew ratios, shots seem cleaner also.


 Pretty sure you said the same when you went old to new?


----------



## The Systemic Kid

Went over to Turks from original coffee burrs to get more leeway for lighter roasts. Where I was grinding at zero to get acceptable pours and still struggling with some beans, the Turks produce the same shot time at grinder setting three on the original dial. Prep technique has come a long way since the early days with more attention focused on the role of fines' distribution and how it affects extraction and evenness of pours. It's subjective, but the Turks work for my set up and prep technique. Fruit notes are devoid of any hint of sourness and, when a bean's tasting notes mentions sweetness, it comes through in spades as is the case with December's SSSSS - you would be forgiven for thinking some sugar has been added. I was concerned that the Turk's advantage in being able to grind finer would come as a cost to being able to grind sufficiently coarse for various pour over methods - not so.

At the Rave lever day, where we had EKs with original coffee burrs alongside one with Turks, I was surprised the coffee burrs retained more than the Turks - noticeable but not significant.


----------



## garydyke1

I think there are more variables at play here than just burrs. You could stand 20 EKs next to each other with the same burr sets and get 20 totally different shots of espresso / filter brews


----------



## Xpenno

fluffles said:


> Pretty sure you said the same when you went old to new?


I imagine so, at least changing burrs is cheaper than buying a new grinder


----------



## Xpenno

garydyke1 said:


> I think there are more variables at play here than just burrs. You could stand 20 EKs next to each other with the same burr sets and get 20 totally different shots of espresso / filter brews


True they do all seem to have their own personalities.


----------



## fluffles

Xpenno said:


> I imagine so, at least changing burrs is cheaper than buying a new grinder


A nice luxury to have spare burr sets lying around!


----------



## dan1502

Xpenno said:


> I imagine so, at least changing burrs is cheaper than buying a new grinder


Only just!


----------



## Phobic

this has triggered a thought, would expect @Xpenno had both sets aligned very well, but do the burrs need realigning periodically as they wear?

not sure for home use they'll wear that quick.....


----------



## Xpenno

Phobic said:


> this has triggered a thought, would expect @Xpenno had both sets aligned very well, but do the burrs need realigning periodically as they wear?
> 
> not sure for home use they'll wear that quick.....


I doubt they wear down as such, the cutting edges just get blunt like knives etc...

You are unlikely to notice an axial different due to wear. Aligned burrs should wear evenly also.


----------



## Scotford

Xpenno said:


> I doubt they wear down as such, the cutting edges just get blunt like knives etc...
> 
> You are unlikely to notice an axial different due to wear. Aligned burrs should wear evenly also.


Mine have probably had about 300kg through them since I last aligned and they've only needed zeroing very recently and that was so negligible it needn't have happened.


----------



## Phobic

good to know thanks


----------



## fluffles

I learned a lot from reading through this thread so thought I would add my own experiences after a couple of months using the EK43 with an L1 in case it's of any use to anyone.

I was initially concerned that the EK43 with (new) coffee burrs might not be a good match for the L1, due to:

1. The L1 has a fixed amount of water and I have read a lot about people pulling shots up to 60g output. The L1 simply won't do this.

2. The EK doesn't always grind fine enough and you have to use big doses to control the flow. As the dose gets bigger, the less room there is for water and the amount of water I have to play with gets less and less.

3. Many people running EKs use a lower pressure (e.g. 6BAR). There's no ability to control pressure on the L1.

As it turns out, I haven't really had any problems with the above. I'm typically grinding between 1.5 and 2.0 on the Callum dial. I've never had to dose more than 18g and I've rarely gone above 42g out. I've actually found it starts to taste really weird if I let it run much longer. The pours are not as crazy or fast as I had been lead to believe they might. The burrs perform more like I expected the Turks would. Typically I'm finding ~22EY is a good place to be and I can comfortably hit this in the 18g-42g ballpark.

The ability to swap between beans is a real pleasure, and I love the lack of waste from purging. I've had some of the best espresso I've ever had. I still feel like I'm getting to grips with it on the brewed side, which is weird as I thought I'd find it the other way round.

Despite this, my suspicion is that the L1 isn't the perfect match for the EK. Something with pressure control and no limits of water output is probably the best place to be (not based on experience, just my hunch), but I'm more than happy. I'm yet to have a bean that I haven't been able to make tasty espresso with (light-med roasts, some of them nominally filter roasts).

E37S will be heading for the sales thread as soon as I get round to it


----------



## dan1502

I've never had a problem with it not going fine enough and tend to be in the range of 1.6 to 2.4 on the 3FE dial but that will depend on zeroing. I've moved from 20g doses to 18g and am getting better results. Typically I am also finding yields of around 40-42g best but I'm not experimenting all that much. EYs are I think typically around 22 to but I can easily get that higher but is doesn't necessarily taste nice. Consistent distribution seems to be very important. I might try a lever profile to see whether it makes much difference to a flat 6 bar.


----------



## nostream

For what it's worth, I'm also using an L1 with the EK and have been for quite a while by now. I'm typically pulling 40-45 grams from a dose of 17-18 grams in a VST 20 basket. I find the need to underdose due to headspace restrictions in the L1. Grind is typically around 1.5 on my Mahlkonig precision dial (0-20 with .1 stop ticks), and flavor tends to get a bit muddy and bitter if I push it finer than around 1.4. Shot times tend to be very fast - 17-24 seconds. I know other EK-L1 owners have reported fast shot times, so this isn't shocking. We're grinding very fine, after all. Extraction yields are typically 21-23%.

I'd be very curious to hear any direct comparisons between lever and flat 6 bar or similar profiles. I would've preferred a Vesuvius, but they're uglier and nearly twice as expensive.


----------



## fluffles

nostream said:


> For what it's worth, I'm also using an L1 with the EK and have been for quite a while by now. I'm typically pulling 40-45 grams from a dose of 17-18 grams in a VST 20 basket. I find the need to underdose due to headspace restrictions in the L1. Grind is typically around 1.5 on my Mahlkonig precision dial (0-20 with .1 stop ticks), and flavor tends to get a bit muddy and bitter if I push it finer than around 1.4. Shot times tend to be very fast - 17-24 seconds. I know other EK-L1 owners have reported fast shot times, so this isn't shocking. We're grinding very fine, after all. Extraction yields are typically 21-23%.
> 
> I'd be very curious to hear any direct comparisons between lever and flat 6 bar or similar profiles. I would've preferred a Vesuvius, but they're uglier and nearly twice as expensive.


Which burrs?


----------



## nostream

fluffles said:


> Which burrs?


I'm using the original coffee burrs (not the revised version). They're been re-zeroed twice (first time let me get much finer) and audibly sound fine, although I haven't bothered to precisely align them. Shots start to taste bitter before burr rubbing becomes a concern, and, actually shots don't flow any slower past around 1.3-1.4 (presumably due to micro-channeling or something along those lines).


----------



## Phobic

make the effort to align them properly even if you're not grinding right at the limit, it will help with grind consistency.


----------



## fluffles

Anyone with an EK have an opinion on "filter" and "espresso" roasts? Some roasters offer a single roast, and others roast specifically for brew method. My understanding is that this is at least partly due to espresso being traditionally harder to extract to the same level. With an EK this isn't really a problem and I've had no trouble with filter roasts.

Would you pick a filter or an espresso roast for use as espresso?


----------



## Mrboots2u

fluffles said:


> Anyone with an EK have an opinion on "filter" and "espresso" roasts? Some roasters offer a single roast, and others roast specifically for brew method. My understanding is that this is at least partly due to espresso being traditionally harder to extract to the same level. With an EK this isn't really a problem and I've had no trouble with filter roasts.


I would judge it by roaster . With SQM I used coffee roasted for filter that was lovely as espresso but also used their coffee roasted for espresso and it was great . They though do not roast the same coffee two ways. I can't think of many roasters that i use alot that roast two ways ( origin perhaps but never had a problem with them , Roundhill also - but with them , they had distinct taste descriptors for their espresso and filter bean , i just used to pick the one i liked )


----------



## The Systemic Kid

fluffles said:


> Would you pick a filter or an espresso roast for use as espresso?


With the EK, prefer to use a dedicated SO espresso roast and 'filter roasts' for pour over.


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

The Systemic Kid said:


> With the EK, prefer to use a dedicated SO espresso roast and 'filter roasts' for pour over.


As omni roasters, it can be tricky to get the coffee soluble enough to extract well using the EK. I do think that's it's almost always possible though, just sometimes needs more work at the profiling stage. Some roasters just develop the roast more for espresso as this almost always increases solubility. The risk there is that you go past the super tasty stuff in the process.


----------



## Phobic

that's really interesting to read, I'm not sure I can picture in my mind how the EK's more even grind size requires a more soluble coffee, assuming it's the grind evenness that's the problem here.

can anyone explain what's going on please?


----------



## fluffles

Ditto, @foundrycoffeeroasters explain yourself ?


----------



## Xpenno

Phobic said:


> that's really interesting to read, I'm not sure I can picture in my mind how the EK's more even grind size requires a more soluble coffee, assuming it's the grind evenness that's the problem here.
> 
> can anyone explain what's going on please?


The more even particle distribution allows you to push extraction further, it unlocks those levels there were not available whilst remaining drinkable. To achieve tasty high extraction shots you need both excellent green coffee as well as a roast that allows the coffee to be extracted well at an acceptable brew ratio.


----------



## Obnic

foundrycoffeeroasters.com said:


> As omni roasters, it can be tricky to get the coffee soluble enough to extract well using the EK. I do think that's it's almost always possible though, just sometimes needs more work at the profiling stage. Some roasters just develop the roast more for espresso as this almost always increases solubility. The risk there is that you go past the super tasty stuff in the process.


Lee, Callum, another fascinating snippet. This is stuff I just don't know about. I know you're really busy but should you have time and the inclination, I for one would love to read a primer written by you guys on how you go about designing a roasting profile - the choices you make and why.


----------



## Phobic

Xpenno said:


> The more even particle distribution allows you to push extraction further, it unlocks those levels there were not available whilst remaining drinkable. To achieve tasty high extraction shots you need both excellent green coffee as well as a roast that allows the coffee to be extracted well at an acceptable brew ratio.


ok this might be confirmation bias but i've been thinking about getting into home roasting at some point and the main reason I can think of is to roast specifically for my grinder and palette, I guess this explains in part why.

are there any general trends for roasting for the EK then? if the EK needs the coffee to be more soluble, does that imply a longer roast to make it more developed? (trying to avoid saying darker here!)


----------



## Xpenno

Phobic said:


> ok this might be confirmation bias but i've been thinking about getting into home roasting at some point and the main reason I can think of is to roast specifically for my grinder and palette, I guess this explains in part why.
> 
> are there any general trends for roasting for the EK then? if the EK needs the coffee to be more soluble, does that imply a longer roast to make it more developed? (trying to avoid saying darker here!)


Its unlikely, that's the beauty of coffee, every roaster has their own take, its not just about solubility or EK, its development of sugars, enhancement of acidity etc etc. Essentially your job is to realise the coffees potential.


----------



## fluffles

Is anyone grinding from the freezer a la hendon/perger etc?

I did so this morning for a pour over and it's made a very sweet cup. sample size of one means nothing, but curious to know if anyone else is doing it. if so, do you pre-dose and freeze? what do you use to store the beans in?


----------



## MarkyP

I do, and use little aluminium pots as bought in a group buy on here...


----------



## Phobic

the majority of time I'm grinding from frozen.

however I'm lazy and I tend to freeze 250g in Kilner jars and then just weigh out straight from the jar, then put the jar back in the freezer - I'm ninja quick so don't think there's much chance of the beans defrosting


----------



## fluffles

Phobic said:


> the majority of time I'm grinding from frozen.
> 
> however I'm lazy and I tend to freeze 250g in Kilner jars and then just weigh out straight from the jar, then put the jar back in the freezer - I'm ninja quick so don't think there's much chance of the beans defrosting


No problem with air in the container? I think the boffins are all in for vac packing


----------



## Scotford

fluffles said:


> Is anyone grinding from the freezer a la hendon/perger etc?


Yep. Been side by side brewing frozen (vac packed) and ambient for a while and taking data. Coming towards the end of a 6month experiment now so will share the data when it's compiled


----------



## Phobic

fluffles said:


> No problem with air in the container? I think the boffins are all in for vac packing


not enough that I notice, which means that lazy wins. Need to do a true side by side comparison on this really, but I just don't have the energy, and I suspect the difference would be marginal over the length of time I keep beans frozen for (rarley over a month).

There are lots of things I can do to make things taste better, I don't always do them! it's certainly good enough for me versus the effort involved.


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

Phobic said:


> that's really interesting to read, I'm not sure I can picture in my mind how the EK's more even grind size requires a more soluble coffee, assuming it's the grind evenness that's the problem here.
> 
> can anyone explain what's going on please?


Well, I'm not sure I can explain what's going on entirely but maybe I could put it a slightly different way.

Sometimes we develop a profile that results in tasty coffee. Next step would be to check that the coffee is 'soluble enough'. We usually do this by brewing the coffee in a certain way (e.g. Using the V60) using a standard recipe, grind setting and then measuring the tds from the resulting brew. We'll have a figure in mind and a margin either side that we would find acceptable (e.g. 1.3 tds +/- 0.05), so if the coffee measures between 1.25 and 1.35, we're happy that it's soluble enough.

If we find that the coffee is to the left of our lower range, we can never get good shots on the EK, so trying to make EK Spro becomes a second check that the coffee is as soluble as we want it to be.

Earlier in our learning, we would occasionally release coffee that would fail this solubility test because we couldn't find a way of getting the solubility we wanted whilst keeping the coffee tasty. This could result in some people (depending on their water/equipment etc) struggling to get the best out of the coffee.

We have developed our understanding sufficiently to realise that roasts have to be developed to balance both solubility and flavour. It's not magical, just that coffee is really different - origin, moisture content, varietal and processing all affect the green. So sometimes you can roast the coffee with a lot of heat quickly and still get the flavour and the solubility. Other times you need to go slower, or apply the heat more gently, or at a different stage during the roast to get the results you want. Otherwise you get one or the other (tasty or soluble). We're after both. The reason we omni roast is that we know it's possible to get both soluble and tasty. We don't roast differently for different brew methods because we don't think it's necessary.

Espresso roasts are generally more developed roasts than we put out. I think that's fine. The roaster probably has a preference for more developed roasts when drinking espresso. That's great, each to their own, it's not right or wrong. If your preference matches theirs then you'll enjoy what they are doing - I struggle to understand why people in the industry get so aerated about it.

More developed roasts are more soluble but development doesn't necessary relate to colour of beans. You can get dark beans that are underdeveloped and light ones that are well developed. Imagine cooking a steak in a pan that's super hot. You'll get caramelisation on the outside and it can be dripping blood in the middle. Bad example perhaps, I haven't eaten a steak in 25 years.

Anyhow, someone asked how we go about developing profiles. We have maybe 3 profiles that 95% of our coffee will be roasted to. In fact 80% + ends up being roasted to one of two profiles. Profiles are just graphs of bean temp over time. So we might be applying wildly different levels of heat at different times to different coffees but we're basically trying to develop heat in the beans in a similar way if we're using the same profile. We tend to start with the profile that is most often the finishing profile and go from there. If we lose tastiness before we get to the solubility we want we'll usually switch to a different profile that's usually a bit gentler. This usually means the sugars get brought out later in the roast, giving the coffee a chance to become more soluble. It's like trying to get the two paths to cross at the same time. It can be tricky.

Tasty can come and go within 15 seconds.

I'm happy to answer any questions about this stuff if people are interested. I'm not putting myself out there as some sort of roasting guru though, there is still so much that I don't understand.


----------



## Phobic

very interesting read thanks.

I think this has confused me on the EK a bit though, I thought that solubility increases as grind size reduces because more surface area increases solubility. The EK extracts more because the average grind size is smaller, so shouldn't it follow that the EK would prefer less soluble coffee?

what's going on?


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

Phobic said:


> very interesting read thanks.
> 
> I think this has confused me on the EK a bit though, I thought that solubility increases as grind size reduces because more surface area increases solubility. The EK extracts more because the average grind size is smaller, so shouldn't it follow that the EK would prefer less soluble coffee?
> 
> what's going on?


I think there are other factors going on with the EK too but consider this maybe. Coffee is not made more or less soluble by a grinder or anything else. It's an outcome of roasting. Grinding finer means that you can extract more from a coffee that's less soluble, that's all. With the EK, it's sometimes not possible to grind fine enough (with coffee burrs) to get the flow restriction you need to make the shot tasty if the coffee needs a finer grind because it's less soluble. Of course, some of you will be running lower pressures to help with this. Remember, we're talking about espresso here. With brewed we're obviously a lot coarser so it's easier to compensate for less solubility by grinding finer.


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

On a side note, we've been playing with the Kruve sieves this last week. In order to get particle sizes between 400 and 800, we've been grinding around 50g+ of coffee to get a 10g dose. The EK may well produce more uniform particle sizes than other grinders but the amount of fines and boulders is still pretty astonishing. Of course burr alignment, or lack of, will be coming into play here too but that's a whole other can of worms.


----------



## garydyke1

foundrycoffeeroasters.com said:


> With the EK, it's sometimes not possible to grind fine enough (with coffee burrs) to get the flow restriction you need in the shot if the coffee needs a finer grind because it's less soluble.


This is where machine flow rate (water debit) and higher mineral content of water can play a part in helping out in these situations.


----------



## Phobic

thanks for taking the time to explain, that's making sense.

my Kruve set arrived today, I'm also surprised by the amount of boulders that it produces, need to spend some time getting my head around how best to grind and sieve but so far very impressed with the results!


----------



## Xpenno

Phobic said:


> thanks for taking the time to explain, that's making sense.
> 
> my Kruve set arrived today, I'm also surprised by the amount of boulders that it produces, need to spend some time getting my head around how best to grind and sieve but so far very impressed with the results!


What are you sieving at I.e. what are you classing as boulders?

Also what grind setting are you at?


----------



## MWJB

Xpenno said:


> What are you sieving at I.e. what are you classing as boulders?
> 
> Also what grind setting are you at?


Indeed, what your boulders are will relate to your average grind size, so if you are set coarse you may have a lot on the top sieve, but most of it will be coarser than boulders.


----------



## Xpenno

MWJB said:


> Indeed, what your boulders are will relate to your average grind size, so if you are set coarse you may have a lot on the top sieve, but most of it will be coarser than boulders.


Mega boulders ?????


----------



## MWJB

Sorry, I meant *finer *than boulders, doh! Big grinds are most of what you get in a coarse grind, "boulders" are abnormally big given the average...just how big though?


----------



## Phobic

for me at least don't read anything into a subjective statement about more boulders than expected, better wording would be more like I'm surprised that's what an EK grind distribution looks like based on a sample size of 1.

as I've said elsewhere I'd like to do some test grinds and sieve them to get an idea of how distribution changes over the range. I'm hoping others might do the same so we can compare burrs and effect of alignment - for no other reason than it's geeky (and it might encourage me to align better)


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

Phobic said:


> for me at least don't read anything into a subjective statement about more boulders than expected, better wording would be more like I'm surprised that's what an EK grind distribution looks like based on a sample size of 1.
> 
> as I've said elsewhere I'd like to do some test grinds and sieve them to get an idea of how distribution changes over the range. I'm hoping others might do the same so we can compare burrs and effect of alignment - for no other reason than it's geeky (and it might encourage me to align better)


Yeah, we'd be happy to try to run some little experiments if people have suggestions around what would be useful. We've only just started scratching the surface with the sieves but I'm already thinking that the grind size choice is going to be important. I guess we really want to find an optimum grind size, coupled with the right sieve sizes and then adjust recipes and or doses accordingly. The last few brews I've done, I've not been able to get the EY to register i.e it's over 26% and too strong (1.4 tds from memory with a 9g dose on the Perger method V60). That's using the 400 and 800 sieves.


----------



## fluffles

On the EK you have to go way finer than your normal drip setting in order to get an even split between 400/800 sieves. I did some tests using a single sieve to try and get 50% under and 50% on top (this is apparently finding the median size). Results were:

11 - 1000um - 82.4% through

11 - 800um - 48.4% through

9 - 1000um - 90% through

9 - 800um - 61% through

9 - 600um - 33% through

7 - 1000um - 94% through

7 - 800um - 84% through

7 - 600um - 51% through

All grind settings are on the Callum dial. Going by those figures, if you want to sieve at 400/800 then you would pick 600 as your target median grind size and grind at setting 7. Like I said - way finer than a normal drip (unless I've been doing totally wrong!). Happy to be corrected on this theory @MWJB


----------



## MWJB

foundrycoffeeroasters.com said:


> Yeah, we'd be happy to try to run some little experiments if people have suggestions around what would be useful. We've only just started scratching the surface with the sieves but I'm already thinking that the grind size choice is going to be important. I guess we really want to find an optimum grind size, coupled with the right sieve sizes and then adjust recipes and or doses accordingly. The last few brews I've done, I've not been able to get the EY to register i.e it's over 26% and too strong (1.4 tds from memory with a 9g dose on the Perger method V60). That's using the 400 and 800 sieves.


9g to 200g? 45g/L? Sounds low, maybe try 11 or 11.5g?

Maybe start with 350/400 bottom & 1000/1100 top, then adjust grind setting until you have about 15% either side of the sieves, reducing top sieve & increasing bottom as necessary? For a given sieve set you might get 70% between them at a fine setting for that set & more small particles, fewer big. As you go coarser with the same set, small & big will even up until big overtakes small & % between sieves will drop.

Not an EK, but something like this...








[/url]

@Phobic I'd be surprised, but pleasantly so, if the Kruve can provide resolution enough to differentiate between good & nominal alignment.


----------



## fluffles

foundrycoffeeroasters.com said:


> Yeah, we'd be happy to try to run some little experiments if people have suggestions around what would be useful. We've only just started scratching the surface with the sieves but I'm already thinking that the grind size choice is going to be important. I guess we really want to find an optimum grind size, coupled with the right sieve sizes and then adjust recipes and or doses accordingly. The last few brews I've done, I've not been able to get the EY to register i.e it's over 26% and too strong (1.4 tds from memory with a 9g dose on the Perger method V60). That's using the 400 and 800 sieves.


I can see why you're getting huge EYs if you're brewing at 9g/200g. I imagine you're doing this to keep TDS in check? Why not brew at a more "normal" ratio and dilute?


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

fluffles said:


> I can see why you're getting huge EYs if you're brewing at 9g/200g. I imagine you're doing this to keep TDS in check? Why not brew at a more "normal" ratio and dilute?


Yeah, that's exactly what we ended up doing.


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com

MWJB said:


> 9g to 200g? 45g/L? Sounds low, maybe try 11 or 11.5g?
> 
> Maybe start with 350/400 bottom & 1000/1100 top, then adjust grind setting until you have about 15% either side of the sieves, reducing top sieve & increasing bottom as necessary? For a given sieve set you might get 70% between them at a fine setting for that set & more small particles, fewer big. As you go coarser with the same set, small & big will even up until big overtakes small & % between sieves will drop.
> 
> Not an EK, but something like this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/url]
> 
> @Phobic I'd be surprised, but pleasantly so, if the Kruve can provide resolution enough to differentiate between good & nominal alignment.


As usual your posts will take me a little while to digest (a compliment which may not sound like one). Thanks for taking the time to share your ideas, I'm sure I'll be working through the suggestions.


----------



## Xpenno

Phobic said:


> for me at least don't read anything into a subjective statement about more boulders than expected, better wording would be more like I'm surprised that's what an EK grind distribution looks like based on a sample size of 1.
> 
> as I've said elsewhere I'd like to do some test grinds and sieve them to get an idea of how distribution changes over the range. I'm hoping others might do the same so we can compare burrs and effect of alignment - for no other reason than it's geeky (and it might encourage me to align better)


If you're referring to my post then I presumed you'd sieved an ek grind based on the words you used and was genuinely interested in your results....

I've just purchased a kruve and was interested to have something to compare to.


----------



## Phobic

MWJB said:


> @Phobic I'd be surprised, but pleasantly so, if the Kruve can provide resolution enough to differentiate between good & nominal alignment.


I'll bow to your wisdom as you have a much better grasp of these things than me!







I was vainly hoping that being able to measure to 0.1g accuracy of "boulders" in the 1100 sieve at grind setting 12 might allow us to see some coarse correlation between EKs, but confess I don't have an intuitive feel for what's realistic.


----------



## Phobic

Xpenno said:


> If you're referring to my post then I presumed you'd sieved an ek grind based on the words you used and was genuinely interested in your results....
> 
> I've just purchased a kruve and was interested to have something to compare to.


happy to share any results, it was literally my 1st grind though and I didn't record any data, it's on my to do list







will share when I get round to it, hopefully this weekend.

it was more that I remembered being surprised at what I saw but that's not really a good basis for comparison


----------



## MWJB

Phobic said:


> I'll bow to your wisdom as you have a much better grasp of these things than me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was vainly hoping that being able to measure to 0.1g accuracy of "boulders" in the 1100 sieve at grind setting 12 might allow us to see some coarse correlation between EKs, but confess I don't have an intuitive feel for what's realistic.


Well, you can no doubt weigh to 0.01g resolution (I do) & maybe do 3 tests to get a reasonable average, but EK alignment seems to be more an issue at the finer end & for espresso settings. Given that the average grind size in this case is probably around the smallest sieves you have (~200-250) and that static is going interfere with getting clean results (even sieving an average grind of ~500um determined with a mesh sieve, I had dust all the way through the Kruve with a 200 on the bottom), so even if you determine your average grind size, getting down to the nitty gritty of the distribution at lower values than that, is going to be impossible. It's not really what the Kruve was intended for, more of a brewing aid than a fine tolerance analytical tool (though for coarser than espresso grind settings, it does allow reasonable comparisons).

For drip? I don't know, I haven't seen any analysis for the EK at the coarser end, I'm not sure that there is much acceptance that behaves as differently in that region compared to typical grinders?

I guess if you did want to pursue this (I'd be interested in what you found as much as anyone, so don't feel I'm trying to put you off, more suggesting what might be a more realistic use of your time) I'd dial the grinder in for a given recipe, sieve a few samples taking out the top fraction only & to see how repeatable. Then try alignment & repeat & see what difference you have?


----------



## Phobic

thanks for explaining Mark, i'd not really thought about it in that way but that makes a lot of sense.

I was actually planning on doing some testing at the coarser end mainly to understand what the effect of regrinding is. My thinking being that sieving is a real PITA, I want to avoid doing it as it takes too long and is too messy, right now I can see a benefit in sieving & regrinding the boulders, so what if I just regrind everything without sieving? That way I can keep at the coarse end (~17 on the 3FE for CDD) which minimizes fines production but produces more boulders, but use the same setting to reduce the boulders by regrinding - best of both worlds maybe? Right now I'm finding that I need to grind finer than I normally would to make the sieves + boulder regrinding viable.

This is going to reduce the boulders overall and I'd expect an increase in fines, however I'd hope the fines would increase only slightly compared to the boulder reduction - in my mind I'm thinking fines production will be greater from whole beans than from boulders at the same grind setting.

the resulting ground coffee hopefully will have a better proportion of fines:ideal:boulders without the need to sieve. Something that will easily & quickly fit into the work flow with minimal fuss and mess.

I'll use the sieves to measure the output by splitting the grinds out each time I grind and weighing what's at each level before recombining everything, mixing, and regrinding. Then sieve and weigh the outputs to see what the regrind did, rinse and repeat until the boulders are within an acceptable place, then look at the affect on the fines:ideal:boulders distribution.

The accuracy of the Kruve might not be there to draw real scientific conclusions but I'd hope it should be indicative of what's going on - let's hope the result tastes good!

any thoughts?


----------



## dan1502

Does a lot of the ground coffee not get stuck on its way to the burrs if you try and regrind with the EK?


----------



## Phobic

yes it does.

I've been using a camera blower to push it through, works very well.


----------



## MWJB

Phobic said:


> thanks for explaining Mark, i'd not really thought about it in that way but that makes a lot of sense.
> 
> I was actually planning on doing some testing at the coarser end mainly to understand what the effect of regrinding is. My thinking being that sieving is a real PITA, I want to avoid doing it as it takes too long and is too messy, right now I can see a benefit in sieving & regrinding the boulders, so what if I just regrind everything without sieving? That way I can keep at the coarse end (~17 on the 3FE for CDD) which minimizes fines production but produces more boulders, but use the same setting to reduce the boulders by regrinding - best of both worlds maybe? Right now I'm finding that I need to grind finer than I normally would to make the sieves + boulder regrinding viable.
> 
> This is going to reduce the boulders overall and I'd expect an increase in fines, however I'd hope the fines would increase only slightly compared to the boulder reduction - in my mind I'm thinking fines production will be greater from whole beans than from boulders at the same grind setting.
> 
> the resulting ground coffee hopefully will have a better proportion of fines:ideal:boulders without the need to sieve. Something that will easily & quickly fit into the work flow with minimal fuss and mess.
> 
> I'll use the sieves to measure the output by splitting the grinds out each time I grind and weighing what's at each level before recombining everything, mixing, and regrinding. Then sieve and weigh the outputs to see what the regrind did, rinse and repeat until the boulders are within an acceptable place, then look at the affect on the fines:ideal:boulders distribution.
> 
> The accuracy of the Kruve might not be there to draw real scientific conclusions but I'd hope it should be indicative of what's going on - let's hope the result tastes good!
> 
> any thoughts?


The CCD is an immersion brewer, I'd grind fine enough (reducing boulders without regrinding) to hit the extraction you want & sieve out the bottom 15% or so. Regrinding is probably easier in a gravity fed, rather than auger fed, grinder. 17 on the dial sounds pretty coarse, I don't have much experience of grinding coarse for a CCD brew, so can't really comment on what you might be aiming for.

I aim to sieve out the largest component for drip (keeping fines to control flow) and sieve out the fines (or both fines & boulders if losses are low enough) for immersion. I only regrind (conical hand grinder) if I have a grinder that leaves more than 15-20% above the 1100 sieve at its finest useable setting.

Sieving out the boulders only reduces your average grind size (makes everything that is left finer), lifts extraction and allows a sweeter brew. Sieving out fines only reduces undissolved solids & silt that make it into the cup but does not reduce your average grind size with respect to 0um, it just narrows the particle spread. So if your largest particles are between say 500 & 1000 with 15% over 1000, taking out the


----------



## Phobic

17 is very coarse, it's not really about CCD, just using that as an example grind size to illustrate the point of going coarser to achieve a lower average grind size without increasing fines too much.

will have a play if I get chance and see what it's like, I think the biggest problem will be regrinding in the EK though.


----------



## fluffles

I have kindly been given a QM Verona on loan for a short while and thought I would explore the world of low pressure.

Question for the boffins: What differences should I expect when lowering pressure? Anything at all - both qualitative and quantitative.


----------



## Scotford

fluffles said:


> I have kindly been given a QM Verona on loan for a short while and thought I would explore the world of low pressure.
> 
> Question for the boffins: What differences should I expect when lowering pressure? Anything at all - both qualitative and quantitative.


Lower than 7bar, I'd expect to be looking at slightly longer than usual shots and you may have to drop your temp by a °C or so. I've seen a massive drop in channelled shots at 5bar (maybe 1 in 50) and a huge difference in the cup.


----------



## fluffles

Scotford said:


> Lower than 7bar, I'd expect to be looking at slightly longer than usual shots and you may have to drop your temp by a °C or so. I've seen a massive drop in channelled shots at 5bar (maybe 1 in 50) and a huge difference in the cup.


Thanks. Drop temperature to account for longer contact time?

Do you run largely the same recipes 6bar vs 9bar? I noticed that Maxwell CD has dropped dose since going low pressure.


----------



## Scotford

fluffles said:


> Thanks. Drop temperature to account for longer contact time?
> 
> Do you run largely the same recipes 6bar vs 9bar? I noticed that Maxwell CD has dropped dose since going low pressure.


At 5bar, midweek I run (with current blend) 18-37 in about 35+ seconds at 93°c. Weekends I drop that time to sub-30sec shots for speed of service. I've had our blend roasted to work well with both lots of contact times though.


----------



## Mrboots2u

Temp will vary on the machine used , an e61, i would have thought will drop temp the longer it is on , as opposed to Scotfords which will be more stable .


----------



## Scotford

Mrboots2u said:


> Temp will vary on the machine used , an e61, i would have thought will drop temp the longer it is on , as opposed to Scotfords which will be more stable .


This. Forgot to say that, I'd look into the temp stability of your machine over 30-60sec shots if you're planning on this long and slow lark


----------

