# Why are beans specific to method of making coffee?



## PreCoffeeCantankerousness (Dec 14, 2014)

Hi,

I've seen some shops say a particular bean is better for espresso and another bean for cafetiere, etc. I used to think it was just how the beans were ground but I'm only looking at whole beans now.

I've just got a la pavoni, so what would happen if I experimented with the wrong bean?

Thanks.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Not necessarily about the bean ....some roasters will refer to a specific bean being roasted to a style suitable for espresso or filter

Some won't cue omni roast ( trade mark Steve Leighton )


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

In espresso you only have a very limited time & limited water with which to extract the coffee, if the coffee isn't soluble enough you will not extract enough of the flavour to sweeten & balance the shot and it may be sharp/tart, grinding ever finer may not cure this.

If you find a bean that behaves like this stick it in the cafetiere, or even a pourover, but don't let it put you off experimenting.


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

No such thing as the 'wrong bean' - depends on a range of factors predominant of which is accurate extraction and personal taste. Historically, espresso favoured darker roasts so anything that was light to medium was considered more suitable for brew methods - V60, Chemex, cafetiere etc. It's harder to get as high an extraction yield, on the whole, with lighter roasts when using for espresso than with a darker roasts so it's easier for the resultant shot to taste sour as a consequence. Developments in grinder technology have helped boost extraction yields with the consequence, it's possible to get excellent extraction yields from lighter roasts revealing fruit complexity as well as other flavour profiles within the bean without the shots tasting sharp/acutely acidic or plain sour but it's more of a challenge to achieve this. Above all, be guided by your personal taste preference. Try different roast levels as brewed and espresso and see what you think.


----------



## PreCoffeeCantankerousness (Dec 14, 2014)

Thats some great info.

ok so I had to do a bit of googling&#8230;

V60 and chemex appear to be filter coffees

Personally, I've lost my liking for cafetiere and filter coffee and prefer bialetti or espresso based drinks. Although it would be an interesting experiment.

Systemic - you mention 'extraction yields'. How do you know if you are getting a high or low one? Is that something to do with the weight of the liquid in the cup over the time it takes before the stream coming out turns 'blond'? Or is that something else again?

You also mention developments in grinders boosting extraction yields. But if two models can both grind beans so finely that they clog up your machine so you have to dial it back a bit, then what other qualities does a grinder have that could affect taste/extraction yield?

Thanks


----------



## jjprestidge (Oct 11, 2012)

PreCoffeeCantankerousness said:


> Thats some great info.
> 
> ok so I had to do a bit of googling&#8230;
> 
> ...


Extraction can be measured, but it's either complicated (weighing inputs and outputs and drying the used coffee puck to remove the water from your measurements) or complicated and expensive (using a VST refractometer and their software).

Blonding is very much an archaic way to optimise extraction. It kind of works with old school over roasted beans, but it has little relevance to modern speciality coffee. Some people swear by it, but if you look at the UKBC and WBC you'll rarely find a competitor who cuts the shot off at the point that it blondes.

So, extraction is more about taste than anything else (although an espresso that takes say 1 min to produce 30g is almost certain to be over extracted, so there are some obvious parameters.) Tarry, smokey flavours are a good sign that the coffee is over extracted as a general rule.

JP


----------



## jjprestidge (Oct 11, 2012)

Oh, and different grinders will not produce the same distribution of particles at the same fineness. Some will produce particles whose surface area is largely the same, whilst others will produce a range if sizes. The latter distribution could result in the same mean average extraction as the former, but variance from the mean would be greater (bigger particles under extracting, smaller ones over extracting).

This is why some grinders, like the Robur, struggle to produce nice tasting coffee at high extractions, whilst grinders like the EK43 can, when all the other parameters are the same.

JP


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

jjprestidge said:


> Extraction can be measured, but it's either complicated (weighing inputs and outputs and drying the used coffee puck to remove the water from your measurements) or complicated and expensive (using a VST refractometer and their software).


It's actually fast & simple using the VST method (if you're weighing input & output already)...expensive? For a home user, yes, compared to not knowing, but if you do want to know, it's less laborious & faster than dehydration.

Drying a puck will tell you next to nothing about extraction yield.


----------



## jjprestidge (Oct 11, 2012)

MWJB said:


> It's actually fast & simple using the VST method (if you're weighing input & output already)...expensive? For a home user, yes, compared to not knowing, but if you do want to know, it's less laborious & faster than dehydration.
> 
> Drying a puck will tell you next to nothing about extraction yield.


You still have to dick around with distilled water and syringes. I'd call it simple if you could dunk a sensor in the coffee and get an instant reading.

JP


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

PreCoffeeCantankerousness said:


> Systemic - you mention 'extraction yields'. How do you know if you are getting a high or low one? Thanks


I use a refractometer which measures the amount of total dissolved solids (TDS) in a sample. With that information, referenced the amount of coffee you've extracted gives you a figure called extraction yield (EY). For pour over (brewed) coffee - my preference is Chemex - I aim to get an EY of around 19%. For espresso - higher.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

jjprestidge said:


> You still have to dick around with distilled water and syringes. I'd call it simple if you could dunk a sensor in the coffee and get an instant reading.
> 
> JP


Well, "simple" is relative...for what the VST is expected to do, it is simple. There is not now & never has been anything like you describe that is vaguely accurate. Espresso complicates the issue by being full of stuff other than dissolved coffee, that needs to be purged from the sample, hence the syringe filter. Distilled water is needed for calibration (a few drops for 20secs), you can get an inaccurate reading without it...but there are cheaper still ways to get a reading that is meaningless, like sticking your pinky in it & shout a random number? ;-)


----------



## jjprestidge (Oct 11, 2012)

MWJB said:


> Well, "simple" is relative...for what the VST is expected to do, it is simple. There is not now & never has been anything like you describe that is vaguely accurate. Espresso complicates the issue by being full of stuff other than dissolved coffee, that need to be purged from the sample. Distilled water is for calibration, you can get an inaccurate reading without it...but there are cheaper still ways to get a reading that is meaningless, like sticking your pinky in it & shout a random number? ;-)


I'm not saying that it's possible for it to be that simple, just that it's a bit misleading to call it simple in its current form. It's not, for instance, something that you can perform in a busy coffee shop whilst you have customers.

JP


----------



## coffeechap (Apr 5, 2012)

jjprestidge said:


> I'm not saying that it's possible for it to be that simple, just that it's a bit misleading to call it simple in its current form. It's not, for instance, something that you can perform in a busy coffee shop whilst you have customers.
> 
> JP


But surely you would be measuring TDS and exraction yield before opening up when noone was in the shop so that you could perfect recipe before selling it?


----------



## jjprestidge (Oct 11, 2012)

coffeechap said:


> But surely you would be measuring TDS and exraction yield before opening up when noone was in the shop so that you could perfect recipe before selling it?


Yes, but you know as well as I do that things change throughout the day, as trade fluctuates, burrs heat up, cool down, etc.

Having said that, it doesn't tell you what tastes good anyway; it only assists the process of dialling in.

JP


----------



## coffeechap (Apr 5, 2012)

agreed it is a referrence point, but all the same is required before you start, minor tweeks throughout the day come from skill and experience, but you will always have that intial reference point to refer back to.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

jjprestidge said:


> Having said that, it doesn't tell you what tastes good anyway; it only assists the process of dialling in.
> 
> JP


What do you dial in for, if not good taste? You're arguing both ends against the middle now.


----------



## jjprestidge (Oct 11, 2012)

MWJB said:


> What do you dial in for, if not good taste? You're arguing both ends against the middle now.


I'm not really arguing anything, other than it would be good (but probably impossible) if there was a simpler way of testing extraction yields.

JP


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Fair enough.


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

Papercup, one of my favourite shops in Glasgow (as I am wont to say), refract their coffee during the day. A few visits ago I ordered a couple of coffees, then the owner came over and showed me the refrac results on his phone for my drinks which validated how good they tasted


----------



## PreCoffeeCantankerousness (Dec 14, 2014)

Thanks all for the info.

I had to google every 2-4 letter acronym and every 5th word, but I got there in the end!

Some learning curve!

For now though, I'll keep it as simple as possible.


----------

