# Adjusting brew recipe (lighter roast) to shorter espresso for flat white



## tripleshot (Jun 3, 2020)

I'll preface this by saying I am still working on achieving consistency on a 1:2 ratio and have only been at it for a week. But I've been thinking of what comes after.

So I drink milk drinks exclusively (flat white, latte) and I like my drink to have a strong taste of coffee but the majority of the liquid in the cup to be comprised of micro foamed milk. So naturally I wondered if I should be trying to pull a ristretto instead of a classic 1:2 ratio and replace that 20g of water in the cup with 20g of milk. But I've been educating myself regarding brew ratios, recipes and different roast levels and I can see it's not that simple.

A couple of videos I found very helpful are 



 and 



. My beans are Red Brick from Square Milke. The suggested recipe is 19g in, 38g out in 28-32 seconds @ 94C. The website doesn't state what roast level these beans are but the longer brew time and higher temperature suggests these are a lighter roast. My research suggests that lighter roast beans need to spend more time with water to extract the sweetness and often at a slightly higher temp as the beans are denser than a darker roast. So going by the suggested recipe it looks like Red Brick is on the lighter roast side, is that a fair conclusion?

But if Red Brick is a lighter roast then that 20g of water I am so eager to replace with milk plays a very important role in the tastiness of the shot as it sounds like it's key to extracting more flavourful compounds and sugar from the bean.Without it the shot would be under extracted and for the sake of 20g extra of milk I've sacrificed tastiness.

So the question is, is it possible to make the shot shorter but still as tasty as the suggested recipe?

One thing I don't understand about lighter roast beans is whether they just need to spend more time with the water OR whether the quantity of water passing through the bed of coffee is also essential to the tastiness factor. If they just need to spend more time with the water then options on the table are a) finer grind and/or b) pre-infusion to slow down flow and increase extraction in the shorter shot. Is that correct? Are there other options? But if they actually need higher quantity of water to pass through the bed of coffee then there's no way around it and I just need to accept that those 20g or so of water is an essential ingredient overall and can't sub them for milk without sacrificing taste.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Drewster (Dec 1, 2013)

Rule 1: There are no rules....

Supplementary: Work on consistency - if you can't do "it" consistently you can't be sure you can do "it" again.

Once you are consistent adjust your parameters (one at a time) if you want to. Until you get a coffee that you prefer. This might be a shorter shot, a longer shot, etc - only your tastebuds can decide. And it might change with the next bean.

Obviously if you "think" you want less coffee and more milk (why?) you could aim for your consistency with a shorter shot... but seriously - "why"?

Once you get your coffee "as you like it" all is good. No matter what other peoples thoughts and opinions on a "perfect" recipe/ratio..


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Drewster said:


> Rule 1: There are no rules....


 But that's a rule🤣


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Red Brick is on the medium light side of the roast spectrum. Lighter roasts benefit from longer extractions - 1:2 or slightly higher than 1:1 as, with ristretto pulls, you're likely to experience under-extraction. Lighter roasts don't release the coffee solubles as easily as darker roasts. You might think about increasing your dose say to 20grms > 40grms and experiment with the amount of milk added to get the result you prefer. Have you tried a cortado - half espresso and roughly half milk? Good way of saving the bean's tasting notes from getting drowned in milk. Also, with flat whites - what is the capacity of the cup you are using? With lighter roasts, IMO, any really unique flavour profile in a lighter roast gets lost above 150-160ml flat white cup and that's using 40-45grm of espresso.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

tripleshot said:


> But if Red Brick is a lighter roast then that 20g of water I am so eager to replace with milk plays a very important role in the tastiness of the shot as it sounds like it's key to extracting more flavourful compounds and sugar from the bean.Without it the shot would be under extracted and for the sake of 20g extra of milk I've sacrificed tastiness.
> 
> One thing I don't understand about lighter roast beans is whether they just need to spend more time with the water OR whether the quantity of water passing through the bed of coffee is also essential to the tastiness factor. If they just need to spend more time with the water then options on the table are a) finer grind and/or b) pre-infusion to slow down flow and increase extraction in the shorter shot. Is that correct? Are there other options? But if they actually need higher quantity of water to pass through the bed of coffee then there's no way around it and I just need to accept that those 20g or so of water is an essential ingredient overall and can't sub them for milk without sacrificing taste.
> 
> Any thoughts?


 The quantity of water passing through the bed makes more difference to extraction (at a similar grind setting) than just the time.

It is possible to under-extract to a point with shorter shots than 1:2 where you can hit high sweetness, this shot may/may not run faster than a typical shot, but if it is sour, pull shorter. Clarity of shot might not be tip-top, but it's up to you whether this is important.

As @Drewster says, some experimentation might be in order to see if you like/can find a sweet, shorter shot.

If a coffee is less soluble (might be because the roast is lighter, might also be because the origin/blend is just less soluble too), then to extract nominally you'd grind finer, the finer grind can make the shot take more time, but the grind is doing the work, the time is a byproduct of that.


----------



## Drewster (Dec 1, 2013)

The Systemic Kid said:


> But that's a rule🤣


 Rule 2: Oxymorons are never appropriate.


----------



## Blue_Cafe (Jun 22, 2020)

Does the end of a shot really matter if the shot is being used as a base for something else?

If you compare fluid ratios on a shot, for a pure espresso, is most of the extraction done at the front of the shot, with the back of the shot just being water, diluting the espresso?

That diluting may be crucial when the ratios are tight 50/50 but in a large drink?

Have you tasted the back end of a shot on its own too see what it tastes like?

Perhaps pull a shot and split it at the half way point and do a latte taste test with just the front of the shot Vs the whole of the shot.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Blue_Cafe said:


> Does the end of a shot really matter if the shot is being used as a base for something else?
> 
> If you compare fluid ratios on a shot, for a pure espresso, is most of the extraction done at the front of the shot, with the back of the shot just being water, diluting the espresso?


 If the end of the shot wasn't critical, then it would be impossible to pull sour/tart/under-extracted shots, because they can taste pleasant if simple, then sour, then a bit flat/woody, then pleasant again with clarity, the more you extract.

It's the sum total of extraction that's the big factor in dialling in.


----------



## Blue_Cafe (Jun 22, 2020)

MWJB said:


> If the end of the shot wasn't critical, then it would be impossible to pull sour/tart/under-extracted shots, because they can taste pleasant if simple, then sour, then a bit flat/woody, then pleasant again with clarity, the more you extract.
> 
> It's the sum total of extraction that's the big factor in dialling in.


 Aye, you explain that well and I am aware of the principles.

Let me put it another way;

If Grind and dose are fixed and you are tuning your shot based on time only, how much of the end of the shot is actually adding any flavours to the shot, rather than simply diluting the front of the shot to allow you to access the flavour which may be overcrowded in the start?

I say this because I tune my Americanos in much the same fashion. Too short, and I can't focus on the flavour as it's too "crowded". Too long, and I lose the intensity I like. It's a balancing act but I just use hot water for this.


----------



## Rob1 (Apr 9, 2015)

tripleshot said:


> a) finer grind and/or b) pre-infusion to slow down flow and increase extraction in the shorter shot. Is that correct?


 No, pre-infusion will increase the flow rate through the puck. A finer grind and a very long pre-infusion could be used to increase extraction. Depending on your equipment you could also get a muddy cup.

You should probably pull to a longer ratio than shorter one if you want more coffee taste.

Removing 20g of water (coffee really) and replacing it with milk will hide the flavour of the coffee more as you're adding more milk to less coffee....


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Blue_Cafe said:


> Aye, you explain that well and I am aware of the principles.
> 
> Let me put it another way;
> 
> ...


 If you brew at, say, 19:33g and the shot isn't sour, it's balanced, clean & ripe fruit acidity, there's probably not much to gain by pulling longer, unless your coffee is too intense to drink neat (not an issue if you dilute with more water after pulling, or add milk). Say you do then pull to 19:43g you may find the shot going a bit flat/dull, it's more likely that this is due to running more silt into the cup, rather than over-extraction. Sure the shot will be more dilute, but grinding coarser should get the balance back, which will be fine for an Americano.

The shot can't really be "overcrowded", if it doesn't have any obvious faults, other than being too intensely flavoured, then it's just too strong/concentrated (I guess you could call this overcrowded though, as it might be difficult to detect specific characteristics against a barrage of flavour) and likely that you should be brewing to a longer ratio, nearer to your preference/tolerance, to begin with. Thinking about it, I guess I was looking at "overcrowded" as if the shot started out as over-extracted, then dilution put it right (not saying that is what you meant), but you always extract more as the shot runs...even if the output is so weak it's not adding significantly to the extraction, just adding very diluted coffee.

If you never drink espresso neat at 1:2, I don't see any point in brewing at that (or any other shorter ratio), unless your putting the shots into milk, or serving them regularly to someone else who does prefer them to be short.

Depends on the final weight of the Americano really, I often drink less soluble coffees at 1:5 to 1:6 , without adding water (I make filter coffee if I want it to be weaker). I might drink more soluble coffees at 1:3 to 1:4, but then I'm not mad about mouthfeel and I don't like cloying shots and I hate tart/puckering shots. I do drink shots nearer to 1:2 if they're clean & balanced and still enjoy them...it's just not my priority that they be short.


----------



## Blue_Cafe (Jun 22, 2020)

Super reply. Thanks


----------



## tripleshot (Jun 3, 2020)

Rob1 said:


> Removing 20g of water (coffee really) and replacing it with milk will hide the flavour of the coffee more as you're adding more milk to less coffee....


 I accidentally achieved this today! I was experimenting with WDT tools and groomed the coffee bed 3 times trying to get it right. When I started the shot I noticed the pull was very very slow and decided to stop the shot at 19g (19g dose in). Timed it at 31 seconds. Couldn't have turned out better if I tried (for the purpose of this particular question that is!)

Anyway, I added 140 ml milk (this past week I have been mixing 39g yield + 120ml milk) to compensate for the lost 20g liquid in the espresso. I can confirm that the coffee taste was completely lost to the milk. I didn't think it would make that big a difference, it was quite surprising actually. Now another experiment might be going the other way at a 1:3 brew ratio with only 100ml milk. When I get to the point that I can achieve that (on purpose) I'll update the thread as it may help others.

On an unrelated note, I was really surprised at how big of a difference the grooming of the coffee bed made to extraction time. It slowed the flow of coffee by half (same bean from same batch, same grind). Is that consistent to other people's experience (i,e, what I can only assume was very good distribution to have such a big impact on extraction time whilst keeping grind the same). Assuming I can develop the skill to achieve this good a distribution consistently, does this mean I would have to make my grind coarser to achieve the suggested recipe? What kind of change in the cup would I then expect to see, do you think?

Thank you all for taking the time to reply


----------



## Rob1 (Apr 9, 2015)

Don't worry about the suggested recipe, just adjust what you're doing to taste.


----------



## tripleshot (Jun 3, 2020)

Rob1 said:


> Don't worry about the suggested recipe, just adjust what you're doing to taste.


 I plan to eventually once I'm able to achieve the suggested recipe consistently otherwise I am not really intentionality changing a variable at a time but rather introduce variance from my inconsistent prep, grind routine etc. When I'm able to get repeatable results on the suggested recipe then I'll be able to use that as a solid starting point to experiment


----------

