# Merits or Otherwise of Chinese Made Levelling Button Tampers



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Starting this thread as it says to discuss the relatives or otherwise of the Chinese Made Levelling Button tamper which are very much of the moment on the forum now.

I bought one to look at how it compares to the PUSH tamper which will be arriving this week.

My first impression of the Chinese unit is that it seems to me to not be completely level. I quickly made some measurements which seemed to confirm this but as it is not congruent with the observations of some other members I will have to double check that when I have time this weekend.

I'm not going to have a chance to properly look at this until the weekend so I shall leave it there for now.


----------



## Missy (Mar 9, 2016)

Suppose it depends very much which Chinese unit? If as I suspect they are not all from the same place but are all using the same idea... It is entirely possible that some are wonky and some aren't...


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Perhaps. They do all seem to have the same style but wouldn't it be sweetly ironic for a Chinese knock off then be knocked off itself.


----------



## Missy (Mar 9, 2016)

In my other hobby of cleaning up after small things there is such a thing as a "Chinese cheapie" pocket nappy. The design was plundered from the popular brand, and they are all made with the same fabric patterns, but quality varies wildly. As such there is good business to be had in the UK importing wholesale and selling the "decent" ones. I guess it's a similar situation here. There's no way of being certain from eBay or Amazon whether you are buying a decent product or not, and even the price doesn't give a guide.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

I suppose that is true. I would have thought it worthwhile for a registered design or patent holder to pursue retailers of copies on Amazon. Pursuit on eBay is a full time job and perhaps the reason only the largest of firms pursue copies on eBay.


----------



## Missy (Mar 9, 2016)

But... Often having a rubbish version cheap can drive people to your premium product....

Nappies are of course slightly different, I'm guessing it's harder to register all but the most specific aspects of the design. All the makes are "mostly" the same (imagine trying to register the design for "a tamper"... It's the innovation you can register...)


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Registered Designs as a legal protection are relatively easy to do (relative to patent that is) Using the protection it affords really only works with Western based retailers and manufacturers. It is so difficult to go after Chinese companies that even Apple (dependent upon current stock valuation) the world's largest company can't stop all the Chinese iPhone copies sold with mainland China. It is only when they export these that Apple intervenes now.


----------



## whip (Jul 9, 2016)

This is one of the dobboco ones from amazon. Seems pretty level.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

whip said:


> This is one of the dobboco ones from amazon. Seems pretty level.


That is the one I have and to my eye I can see a slope when I view it on its side. Does your seem level completely around. Perhaps if you rotate it you will see the slope I have thought I have seen.


----------



## MrShades (Jul 29, 2009)

Doh... it's not THAT sort of level. You'll never see it or appreciate it purely by rolling it - you need to measure it with a micrometer, as it's only a very small amount.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Dallah said:


> That is the one I have and to my eye I can see a slope when I view it on its side. Does your seem level completely around. Perhaps if you rotate it you will see the slope I have thought I have seen.


Oops. Didn't notice up was a video. At one point I think I can see it is not level but maybe I'm seeing who I want to see. Will get the micrometer out on Sat and give it a more thorough measuring


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

MrShades said:


> Doh... it's not THAT sort of level. You'll never see it or appreciate it purely by rolling it - you need to measure it with a micrometer, as it's only a very small amount.


That would have to be a depth micrometer, not an outside micrometer.


----------



## MrShades (Jul 29, 2009)

With either it's not easy.... and with every method that I can come up with, there's probably a larger degree of error in the method that the degree of "slope" that I'd be worried about.

Some basic readings with the micrometer, measuring (using outside) from the bottom of the tamper base to the top of the middle section (having already checked the middle section and found it to be pretty much uniform in depth itself) gave a maximum variance of 0.15mm from highest to lowest reading. However, using this method introduces a "wobble" error - as without the top screwed down tight the base is free to move slightly.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Point taken. Hence the reason that I am going to take some time on weekend to try and.properly measure. Or at least as well as I can. To my eye I can see what looks like a considerable slope. Is it less than the potential slope of most barista's hand tamp? Probably. Maybe "not fit for purpose" was harsh. If it is does slope slightly like I believe it does, perhaps I should describe it as does not perform as expected? Will have to wait for the weekend.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

MrShades said:


> With either it's not easy.....


You can't use either, you have to use a depth guage from flat edge to rim, deviation from edge to any other surface is irrelevant.

Measurements however don't affect IP infringement. It would be a little more transparent @MrShades if you disclose in these threads that you are selling these products.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

MWJB said:


> You can't use either, you have to use a depth guage from flat edge to rim, deviation from edge to any other surface is irrelevant.
> 
> Measurements however don't affect IP infringement. It would be a little more transparent @MrShades if you disclose in these threads that you are selling these products.


I don't think it is on to accuse fellow members of underhanded behaviour @MrShades has never sought to hide that he was selling a few of these tampers. I also don't think he is making money or a business of selling these. I believe he was only doing so to make it economic for himself and a few other members.

I do agree about IP infringement and think people should think more about the impact on an English designer and his subcontracted manufacturer. Obviously I made that error initially but thankfully realised the error of my ways before I flogged mine on.

"Would the honourable member please withdraw the accusation?" LOL


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

There's no "accusation". For folk who haven't read every thread on this subject it would add clarity, everyone can do what they want. I won't mention it again, but I'm not changing anything I have written.


----------



## dsc (Jun 7, 2013)

MrShades said:


> With either it's not easy.... and with every method that I can come up with, there's probably a larger degree of error in the method that the degree of "slope" that I'd be worried about.
> 
> Some basic readings with the micrometer, measuring (using outside) from the bottom of the tamper base to the top of the middle section (having already checked the middle section and found it to be pretty much uniform in depth itself) gave a maximum variance of 0.15mm from highest to lowest reading. However, using this method introduces a "wobble" error - as without the top screwed down tight the base is free to move slightly.


Why isn't a depth mic measurement not easy? flip the tamper upside/down, stick the mic base on the tamper base and measure the depth to the outside edge as MWJB suggested. Do a check every 45deg around the perimeter and you should know fairly well what the errors are. You could also rest the outside edge on two V-blocks and swipe the tamper surface with a DTI, but that would be a bit more tricky.

Still, even if the errors are anywhere within 0.5mm, does anyone think this is going to affect the extraction? I'd say there's easily a few other more important things to worry about than being level to within 0.1mm.

T.


----------



## MrShades (Jul 29, 2009)

MWJB said:


> You can't use either, you have to use a depth guage from flat edge to rim, deviation from edge to any other surface is irrelevant.
> 
> Measurements however don't affect IP infringement. It would be a little more transparent @MrShades if you disclose in these threads that you are selling these products.


You need a better, more precise depth gauge / micrometer than I've got then - as if you use the depth gauge part of a normal micrometer then (again) the error from use is probably similar to the error in slope. Actually - having fiddled around a bit and trying to get a larger slope - it IS possible to get it to slope to a greater degree (still not much) depending on how the base it aligned when the top is tightened down to hold it in place. There's some play in the screw threads, and if you force the base up at one side or another and then clamp the top down then you can measure a great "slope". However, the opposite is also true - and if you are reasonably careful in tightening the top down then the degree of 'slope' seems to reduce.

I think we all accept that the PUSH is certainly a better engineered and almost certainly more precisely engineered product - and this will probably manifest itself in either less (or no) "slope" and/or less ability for the user to actually cause any "slope" when adjusting it.... unlike the cheap chinese versions. As I've said before, even if it was as much as 1mm out from one side to another then that's better that I could do with a regular tamper so it's still a winner in my view, and whether ANY Barista would appreciate a perfectly flat tamp rather than one that is 0.5mm out from one side to the other is a good question.

As per the comment from my learned friend above, I bought a handful of these to see what they were like - and bought a number sufficient to reduce the impact that air-freight shipping of these heavy things had on the price - and sold a few that were surplus to requirements on here. Past tense... Much like dfk41, I had some and don't have any left.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

MWJB said:


> There's no "accusation". For folk who haven't read every thread on this subject it would add clarity, everyone can do what they want. I won't mention it again, but I'm not changing anything I have written.


I've read all the posts, I'm reasonably literate and quite able to understand what has been posted.

@MWJB, it is no secret that @MrShades and I disagree here. Still, I don't think calling his integrity into question adds to the discussion and that is exactly what you did.

The sentence phrased like the speaker of the house was meant only as a jest. An attempt to inject a little levity. I don't think anyone need retract anything other than errors in fact or incitement to violence.

"Calm down dear. Its only a tamper"


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Thanks for the clarification on the issue of slope @MrShades. That would certainly explain what I am seeing. The threads do have quite a lot of "play" as it were.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

dsc said:


> Why isn't a depth mic measurement not easy? flip the tamper upside/down, stick the mic base on the tamper base and measure the depth to the outside edge as MWJB suggested. Do a check every 45deg around the perimeter and you should know fairly well what the errors are. You could also rest the outside edge on two V-blocks and swipe the tamper surface with a DTI, but that would be a bit more tricky.
> 
> Still, even if the errors are anywhere within 0.5mm, does anyone think this is going to affect the extraction? I'd say there's easily a few other more important things to worry about than being level to within 0.1mm.
> 
> T.


I never said the slope woukd affect the taste. I only stated that I saw and measured a slope on the piston of the tamper. I think in most ways the search for a level tamp allows one to just take one more variable out of the equation.


----------



## 7493 (May 29, 2014)

I've just done a quick and rather dirty experiment using a digital caliper. The maximum run-out is of the order of 0.5mm but depends to some extent on the way in which the cap is tightened down.

0.5mm is better than I can achieve consistently manually tamping. So I'm happy.


----------



## MrShades (Jul 29, 2009)

^^^ my point exactly, in a few less words.... Ta.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Rob666 said:


> I've just done a quick and rather dirty experiment using a digital caliper. The maximum run-out is of the order of 0.5mm but depends to some extent on the way in which the cap is tightened down.
> 
> 0.5mm is better than I can achieve consistently manually tamping. So I'm happy.





MrShades said:


> ^^^ my point exactly, in a few less words.... Ta.


Please stop making sense. I'm trying to rationalise paying £139 for a first edition PUSH.

Actually I would have gone for the PUSH just based on the looks.

I think of it in terms of buying a Torr instead of a perfectly serviceable MBK Heft (assuming it is delivered without drama). The accuracy of the dimensions are probably the same but the Torr is so much better looking so you pay the £70 difference.


----------



## paul whu (Sep 25, 2014)

I think some people worry too much. The actual question should be "is there any difference in the cup when using the Chinese tamper?" If you think there is then blind taste. Interesting thread anyway!


----------



## timmyjj21 (May 10, 2015)

If the Chinese tamper isn't level, don't you just give it a spin in the basket and the depth will then be even all the way around? I do that with mine unconsciously because that's what I have always done with a tamper...


----------



## dsc (Jun 7, 2013)

timmyjj21 said:


> If the Chinese tamper isn't level, don't you just give it a spin in the basket and the depth will then be even all the way around? I do that with mine unconsciously because that's what I have always done with a tamper...


Indeed this would effectively even it all out to the highest (lowest in the coffee bed) point on the tamper itself.

T.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

dsc said:


> Indeed this would effectively even it all out to the highest (lowest in the coffee bed) point on the tamper itself.
> 
> T.


Unless you were pressing it down evenly throughout the spin it would not evenly tamp the puck. If you apply pressure as you spin you are likely to crack your puck leading to channeling. At least according to Perger.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

anyone one on here ever tried splitting the atom for fun?


----------



## CamV6 (Feb 7, 2012)

Question. Genuine question.

Has anyone who has used one of these for any period of time been able to stand back and say "yes my coffee has been noticeably and consistently much better since I've been using this new bit of kit" ?

Discuss.......


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

CamV6 said:


> Question. Genuine question.
> 
> Has anyone who has used one of these for any period of time been able to stand back and say "yes my coffee has been noticeably and consistently much better since I've been using this new bit of kit" ?
> 
> Discuss.......


Tamper or OCD copy cam

OCD make my prep quicker and makes my nakeds look Better not sure it's Better coffee though . just allows me to have a simpler process . Some people won't need to tho there prep is better without one .

Would I pay 130-140 for one . Nope .

Although I do own some silly priced accessories - like scales . So to each there own.


----------



## drude (Apr 22, 2013)

I've found using an OCD improves my coffee, with much more consistent central pours with fewer dead spots as visible on naked extractions. However, on it's own it didn't - I needed to add some whisking in the basket to remove clumps. What I've not tried is whisking but no OCD, which I suppose I should to be able to fully answer your question.

As for the button tamper, not sure - I think I was just as happy with my Torr.


----------



## Dylan (Dec 5, 2011)

Level set tamper (Mahlgut version) takes any guess work out of tamping. I haven't done any taste tests on the end result but the advantage of just popping in the tamper and pressing down, with no accuracy or thought adds enough to my morning routine for it to be a winner for me.


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

CamV6 said:


> Question. Genuine question.
> 
> Has anyone who has used one of these for any period of time been able to stand back and say "yes my coffee has been noticeably and consistently much better since I've been using this new bit of kit" ?
> 
> Discuss.......


ONA supply some 'test evidence' to support their claims  here

Doesn't look that impressive. As I read it, the ONA was designed to improve technique in shops where there's pressure on time.


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

In the home, we have more time to get it right. The key, so far as the tests I've done using a refractometer to check results, is getting the best (most even) distribution of fines across the puck before tamping. Best way to achieve that is to shake the grinds hard in sealed container - yes it's a bit of a hassle but it makes a difference to the extraction yield and will ensure you get the best EYs from your grinder/machine set up.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

The Systemic Kid said:


> In the home, we have more time to get it right. The key, so far as the tests I've done using a refractometer to check results, is getting the best (most even) distribution of fines across the puck before tamping. Best way to achieve that is to shake the grinds hard in sealed container - yes it's a bit of a hassle but it makes a difference to the extraction yield and will ensure you get the best EYs from your grinder/machine set up.


We are not all retired Patrick







plus at 6.00 in the morning I'm barely functioning , Anything that helps is a blessed relief .


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

The ONA or Chinese copy isn't a tamper - right? It's a stage you introduce into your prep before tamping. If are dosing on an EK into a tumbler - it takes a few seconds to cup your palm over the top, shake a few times and dump the dose into your portafilter basket. Can't see how that's any more demanding than using the ONA which won't, incidentally, distribute the fines as evenly as shaking in a tumbler.


----------



## jlarkin (Apr 26, 2015)

Mrboots2u said:


> We are not all retired Patrick
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The blind tumbler makes this very simple to do though?


----------



## dsc (Jun 7, 2013)

I always assumed and also read in a few places that shaking a mix of fines and coarser material isn't the ideal way to mix them as it actually separates them more. "Folding" the layers over is apparently the best way to achieve a proper mix.

T.


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

dsc said:


> I always assumed and also read in a few places that shaking a mix of fines and coarser material isn't the ideal way to mix them as it actually separates them more. "Folding" the layers over is apparently the best way to achieve a proper mix.
> 
> T.


Do you have the references, Tom? Be interested to see if the results with and without were refracted.

Helped a forum member who was getting under-extracted shots from a Mythos/lever set up push extraction yields into the sweet zone. Only variable altered was vigorously shaking the dose before dumping into the portafilter and tamping.


----------



## dsc (Jun 7, 2013)

The Systemic Kid said:


> Do you have the references, Tom? Be interested to see if the results with and without were refracted.
> 
> Helped a forum member who was getting under-extracted shots from a Mythos/lever set up push extraction yields into the sweet zone. Only variable altered was vigorously shaking the dose before dumping into the portafilter and tamping.


Here's a video showing a homogenising machine which apparently works well:






I was told this can be done by hand, but just shaking the grounds up / down will not be great (although probably better than not mixing at all).

T.


----------



## Beanosaurus (Jun 4, 2014)

With the OCD-ish distribution tool you can in effect 'tamp' with them if you set the level right.

If the tool is set too deep you'll get a bit of grounds on the centre of it when you remove it (and obviously there is a lot more resistance), but you can pretty much drop it in and spin after a shake and couple taps.

Though when I've been getting more clumps due to grinding finer, the tool obviously can't account for the lumpy static bits beneath it's range of reachable depth so I have seen some inconsistency in extraction uniformity that both the tool itself and an additional tamp can't rectify. - Long live WDT!









I was initially dismissive of the OCD due to it's ridiculous price tag but these tools do have a place at home and in the workplace, it would certainly be of benefit for cross-consistency of tamping for multiple baristas in shops,

and of course when you're staggering around in your dressing gown first thing in the morn.


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

dsc said:


> Here's a video showing a homogenising machine which apparently works well:


That's what I'm using


----------



## dsc (Jun 7, 2013)

Well that is more better then









T.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

I'm using one of the Chinese distribution tools. That said, does it actual distribute the coffee in the portafilter or does it just smooth out the top? I think, although I have no proof that it is swirling the very top and perhaps a few millimetres down but that it doesn't move any coffee past a certain depth.

I think the only thing it does is appeal to my OCD and gives me a nice and tidy surface to tamp on.


----------



## Beanosaurus (Jun 4, 2014)

Dallah said:


> I'm using one of the Chinese distribution tools. That said, does it actual distribute the coffee in the portafilter or does it just smooth out the top?


It does both but of course can only distribute to the depth that it can, a shake and double tap of the portafilter will ensure that your grounds are decently collapsed before you spin your thing.

You of course need to quantify if it's giving you the consistency in the areas you want within the context of your espresso making habits.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

I still do the Perger suggested palm bumps then a tap to collapse. I think those stages are the distribution. I think the doohickey just makes it look pretty prior to tamping. And that is fine with me.


----------



## MediumRoastSteam (Jul 7, 2015)

I've recently got one of those Chinese distribution things too. Two things I noticed: more consistent results and the group show per screen doesn't seem to be so dirty afterwards.

I don't tap to collapse the grounds anymore: I just grind, twist with the distribution thinggy and tamp. Works for me, very well, and I am really pleased with mine.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

So I've had a chance to compare and contrast the PUSH and Chinese leveling tampers. Measuring a round device with a micrometer in one hand while taking a picture was beyond me so I'll do my best to describe how I measured.

The PUSH weighed in at 374.9gms and the Chinese at 507.8 has.

At the base the PUSH had a diameter of 58.49mm and the Chinese was 57.9mm. The PUSH has a slight flare at the bottom giving a knife edge (although not sharp enough to cut).

The threads on the PUSH were very fine and I could not create a wobble or slope whether the grub screw was holding the piston or not. The threads on the Chinese unit were much larger (not sure of the pitch of either) and it was possible to create a slope if when locking down the adjustment, the user was holding the tamper on the side instead of level and horizontal. I was able to induce a difference of .58mm. Doing some basic maths this gives a negligible slope of .01%.

So the difference in accuracy is there and is measurable but probably not significant as far as giving a level tamp. The difference in diameter is significant in my opinion. The PUSH leaves no untamped ring around the edge in my VST basket. The Chinese tamper does leave a slight untamped ring. Similar to that left by my Heft tamper.

In use the Chinese tamper is pretty basic but that makes it quite robust. It is three pieces. The piston, a threaded ring which gives the lip to rest on the top of the basket plus the height adjustment. The third piece is a top hat with an internal thread which when tightened comes down to the top of the adjustment ring and locks it all in place. It is easy to use. On the piston are three horizontal parallel rings cut into the piston giving a way to judge how deep you have the piston. I tried multiple times to match an initial depth setting. I wasn't able to duplicate with anything better than 1.5mm which would make it difficult to maintain consistency if switching between multiple coffees with different tamping settings.

The PUSH has a piston which is hollow in the centre. The handle is hollow with a threaded piston extending down and which accepts the threads from the hollow in the tamping piston. The threads are very fine and it is not possible to get a wobble or slope in the piston. Measurements show that the piston is perfectly level and I was unable to produce a slope. As pictured the bottom of the handle has a series of regularly spaced numbered(0-9) ticks. In conjunction with a numbered vertical scale on the tamping piston it makes it a simple job of accurately reproducing settings if you are switching between coffees. The adjustment is locked through the use of a small grub screw. The screw has a green nylon end which grips the tamping piston without scratching it. A custom Allen key is provided to adjust the screw although it is a standard metric so you could replace with something purchased at B&Q. The screw is not captive so a muppet could unscrew it completely and lose it. Clockwork has confirmed it will carry spares so any lost or worn pieces can be replaced.

In use the PUSH has a premium feel. The matte finish of the handle provides a positive feel when gripping the handle. The edges of the handles are chamfered so provides a clean edge but not one that digs into the hand. All markings are laser etched and they will not wear off in home use during your lifetime.

The Chinese tamper has a good heft to it. It does not feel cheap. The black finish is slightly matte but slightly slippery. I can see this slipping out of my hand and onto my foot breaking a metatarsal in the process. The handle is rounded and comfortable to tamp with. The logo is painted onto my Chinese unit. Will it come off? It's not functional so I don't care.

So how is it in the cup? My coffee has always had a bitter edge to it. I just accepted that as what espresso tasted like. The first day with the PUSH showed me that it was down to my tamping technique. My espresso has lost that bitter edge. I assume this is because the PUSH is eliminating microchanneling and therefore no spots of over extracted coffee.

The Chinese tamper did improve the bitter edge but it was still there. I believe I was still getting some microchanneling around the edge where there was that small rim of under tamper coffee.

So which tamper? First issue is intellectual property. I think, having read the patent filing that Clockwork Espresso have made and which is pending that the Chinese tamper contravenes that pending patent. For me that is a deal breaker. I would not use pirated software and I don't download "free" music. Your opinion on the validity of the patent and whether you respect it if you believe there is a violation is down to you.

In use, I think the PUSH is superior although the Chinese is perfectly usable. In use to my mind the difference is akin to the difference between the Pertamp and the Heft. It is just the bit better and probably gives you that last 10% improvement you are going to get without upgrading your grinder but you will still get good results with the more basic Heft.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

What was the Chinese tamper meant to be manufactured to ? 58 or 58.5


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

The listing on Amazon just says 58mm


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Dallah said:


> So how is it in the cup? My coffee has always had a bitter edge to it.


 Comes with living in Manchester, Andrew


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

The Systemic Kid said:


> Comes with living in Manchester, Andrew


Yer twistin me melon man


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

If you would like, Andrew, could come over at some point and refract some shots to see where the extraction yields are at.


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Dallah said:


> Yer twistin me melon man


shouldn't that be bean??


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

The Systemic Kid said:


> If you would like, Andrew, could come over at some point and refract some shots to see where the extraction yields are at.


Does increased EY = better taste less bitterness?

I thought it measured the amount of dissolved solids and would not be able to distinguish between a sweet tasting solid and a bitter tasting solid?

Still it does sound like an interesting experiment.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

I think some back to basics reading is in order here


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Probably. I do enjoy wallowing in my ignorance at times.


----------



## Jason1wood (Jun 1, 2012)

Nice write up.

I have a cheap Chinese copy myself but just been to dfk41 to pick up the Mahlgut. Haven't compared them yet but I can honestly say it's a step up, IMHO. Maybe it's just my materialistic side showing!!!!


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Bitterness = over-extracted. Checking extraction yields will show if you are pushing your grinder beyond its limits extraction-wise.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

EY correlates to a balance of solubles & flavour, usually 18% of the dose to 22% dissolved in the cup, but can shift a bit. You can measure this a lot easier than you can tangibly detect micro-channelling. Channelling will usually result in a low &/or uneven tasting extraction, this is more likely what you are tasting, the more even the extraction then it may be lifted overall into the good zone.

Bitterness can be found at either end of the spectrum, so isn't necessarily a good diagnostic on its own, sourness usually indicates under-extraction, which is probably the most common fault with shorter shots & med/light roasts.


----------



## coffeechap (Apr 5, 2012)

Oh dear it would seem that you purchased an inferior, inferior copy! Mine was 58.5


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

coffeechap said:


> Oh dear it would seem that you purchased an inferior, inferior copy! Mine was 58.5


Maybe it's my micrometer that is the poor knockoff


----------



## MrShades (Jul 29, 2009)

My Chinese ones were all 58.5 - both tamper and smoother.

My Mahlgut is 58.55


----------



## Jason1wood (Jun 1, 2012)

MrShades said:


> My Chinese ones were all 58.5 - both tamper and smoother.
> 
> My Mahlgut is 58.55


My Chinese smoother is 58.58

My Mahlgut is 58.53

Using a cheap device from Aldi.


----------



## aaronb (Nov 16, 2012)

Has anybody compared the depth of the 'blades' of the Chinese distributor to the OCD? I had expected them to be deeper than they are.


----------



## drude (Apr 22, 2013)

If you mean which can go deepest into a basket, the OCD goes a tiny bit deeper than my faucCD. I was expecting it to be the other way - in fact, I bought the fake as I wasn't entirely happy with how deep the OCD goes and assumed it would be deeper.

If you mean which blades are deeper relative to the rest of it, the OCD is indeed deeper.


----------



## aaronb (Nov 16, 2012)

The latter. Is there much in it?


----------



## drude (Apr 22, 2013)

OCD on right


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

dfk41 said:


> anyone one on here ever tried splitting the atom for fun?


I've seen enough hairs split.


----------



## aaronb (Nov 16, 2012)

Ah yeah, that is quite a difference.

Do you find much in it when you use them both side by side?


----------



## drude (Apr 22, 2013)

The ONC is way nicer but for some reason grinds stick to it, but not the fake. It's a smoother spin. Way nicer, but still too expensive


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

CamV6 said:


> Question. Genuine question.
> 
> Has anyone who has used one of these for any period of time been able to stand back and say "yes my coffee has been noticeably and consistently much better since I've been using this new bit of kit" ?
> 
> Discuss.......





Dallah said:


> So I've had a chance to compare and contrast the PUSH and Chinese leveling tampers. Measuring a round device with a micrometer in one hand while taking a picture was beyond me so I'll do my best to describe how I measured.
> 
> The PUSH weighed in at 374.9gms and the Chinese at 507.8 has.
> 
> ...


Well here you go @CamV6. I did find that the PUSH and indeed the Chinese tamper improved my coffee compared to use a MBK Heft. They both reduced bitterness and in the case of the PUSH quite dramatically. If you look at post 6895 in "What did the Postie bring you today?" thread @Jason1wood found a similar reduction in bitterness when switching from a Reg Barber 58.35 to a Mahlgut levelling palm tamper. Jason has a Quickmill Verona teamed with a Mythos grinder, so it shows with all the high end kit in the world, simple things like a tamp which is level and reaches all the way to the sides of the basket can make a big change in the cup.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

Got to say, and this is an observation in general, I cannot remember the last time someone reviewed a fake and the real item, having bought them both, and found the cheap one better. It is kind of like you need to convince yourself. There are so many variables in coffee. So many things that you cannot guarantee to replicate every time before you try to test one against the other. For me, this is another item which goes under the heading of coffee bollocks.

What exactly is that? It is when people suggest something or some piece of kit which is going to redefine the art of pulling a shot. It is very hard to argue against the product, but the truth is if you could accurately measure the difference it might make to a shot, you would be splitting the atom again


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

dfk41 said:


> Got to say, and this is an observation in general, I cannot remember the last time someone reviewed a fake and the real item, having bought them both, and found the cheap one better. It is kind of like you need to convince yourself. There are so many variables in coffee. So many things that you cannot guarantee to replicate every time before you try to test one against the other. For me, this is another item which goes under the heading of coffee bollocks.
> 
> What exactly is that? It is when people suggest something or some piece of kit which is going to redefine the art of pulling a shot. It is very hard to argue against the product, but the truth is if you could accurately measure the difference it might make to a shot, you would be splitting the atom again


Try reading it again Dave. As I "reviewed" the two, I believed I got a better result with the PUSH and that is what is written.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but in this case your opinion is not informed as you have not tried the PUSH (nor the Chinese knock off I believe). With the PUSH and the Chinese unit you can eliminate two variables from the preparation and you seem to imply that eliminating variables contributes to better coffee.

I don't think what I wrote is anymore "coffee bollocks" than your post is plain old bollocks.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

dfk41 said:


> ...you would be splitting the atom again


Great analogy...I mean, who ever noticed nuclear fission?


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

Dallah said:


> Try reading it again Dave. As I "reviewed" the two, I believed I got a better result with the PUSH and that is what is written.
> 
> You are of course entitled to your opinion but in this case your opinion is not informed as you have not tried the PUSH (nor the Chinese knock off I believe). With the PUSH and the Chinese unit you can eliminate two variables from the preparation and you seem to imply that eliminating variables contributes to better coffee.
> 
> I don't think what I wrote is anymore "coffee bollocks" than your post is plain old bollocks.


I think I said, that I would be surprised if you had not 'thought' you had a better result from the Push. Correct me if you are wrong. I did not say your thoughts were coffee bollocks. I said the idea that the Push or any of its variables were another case of CB, based on the fact that in theory you cannot argue against what they might achieve but in reality I doubt very much if a true blind test were set up in a scientific manner that anyone would notice any difference. I have not tried a Push but I have tried 2 different copies and I bought a Mahlgut (some many months before the Push was anything but a twinkle) and came to the conclusion that they did naff all in the building of the shot or in making it better. So, the placebo effect, if it works for you I am glad and of course, you have the added attraction of being able to think of your dear wife everytime you use it....


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

MWJB said:


> Great analogy...I mean, who ever noticed nuclear fission?


any ideas where I can borrow some Uranium......


----------



## CamV6 (Feb 7, 2012)

So what are we saying, this helps correct poor technique? Or can we expect to see this as part of standard kit in this years wbc contenders' tool kits?


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

dfk41 said:


> I think I said, that I would be surprised if you had not 'thought' you had a better result from the Push. Correct me if you are wrong. I did not say your thoughts were coffee bollocks. I said the idea that the Push or any of its variables were another case of CB, based on the fact that in theory you cannot argue against what they might achieve but in reality I doubt very much if a true blind test were set up in a scientific manner that anyone would notice any difference. I have not tried a Push but I have tried 2 different copies and I bought a Mahlgut (some many months before the Push was anything but a twinkle) and came to the conclusion that they did naff all in the building of the shot or in making it better. So, the placebo effect, if it works for you I am glad and of course, you have the added attraction of being able to think of your dear wife everytime you use it....


And while I might be having the placebo affect, if your opinion was the levelling tampers did not work, and then you tried them, confirmation bias is just as likely to convince you that nothing changed.

I'd be happy to try a blind test if someone would host me or someone wants to come here.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

CamV6 said:


> So what are we saying, this helps correct poor technique? Or can we expect to see this as part of standard kit in this years wbc contenders' tool kits?


 @CamV6 if you are someone who can apply EXACTLY the same amount of pressure when you tamp every single time I would say you are better in that aspect than every single other barista in the world. Is that poor technique or being human? If it is poor technique then hands up to poor technique.

Level tamp. I have always found tamping with a standard tamper to be uncomfortable. Adopting the position that is recommended just doesn't work for me so I do get inconsistent levels on my tamps. It improved when I started to use my fingers to position the top of the tamp piston but again being human, not every tamp is perfect.

The PUSH and the other levelling tampers take two variables out of the mix which surely is a good thing.

If I was a robot and could guarantee a level tamp with consistent pressure every time, I would venture that I would get the same results with the Pergtamp or perhaps a Torr Ti.

Does every WBC competitor use the Pergtamp? It seems like the WBC is a showcase for new tamper designs. The same year that Maxwell was using the PUSH, Ben Put was using that funky tamper with the handle that looked like the handle from a handsaw. When competitors were allowed to choose any grinder they wanted to use, there was a big range of grinders used. I think everyone would agree that a change in grinder can be tasted in the cup, so why then have WBC competitors not all been using a single agreed best grinder? Until of course the competition mandated they all use the same grinder.

@CamV6 that was a lot of words to simply say that your inference that unless all competitors used the PUSH it could not make an improvement in the cup, was nonsense.


----------



## jlarkin (Apr 26, 2015)

I think it's been mentioned but PUSH doesn't give you same pressure every time. It should give same depth, with pressure being dependent on the grinds. Or something like that.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

It would give you the same pressure every time in as much as any tamper which is pressed against a similar weight of grounds in a similar basket and the same distance would.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

The calculation for pressure for the inlet of a pipe would apply in this case so that is as such:

Atmospheric pressure * density of the coffee * gravity * height.

So I think my previous answer is correct in that all the values would be the same between two similarly sized tampers tamping the same amount and fineness of grinds over a similar distance. I expect an engineer shall correct this shortly but I do think it is applicable.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

These tampers sound like magic









Worth saying you can still trap uneven ( I can't find it know but there is a gif of maxwell using one that's uneven too ) with em and you can still apply different amounts of pressure each time .

Beyond that if used correctly they are a really great tamper to use , but not infallible ....


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Mrboots2u said:


> These tampers sound line magic


Take a Pergtamp, make it apply a consistent pressure and completely level.

Magic? Or simply ensure "best practice " every time I tamp.

If tamping with an excellent tamper makes no difference over a good tamper it then follows tamping with a good tamper makes no difference over tamping with a poor tamper.

So the Italians have been right all along. Those plastic jobbies included with espresso machines are all we actually need.

I don't understand why it seems so outrageous to suggest a good tamper which ensures a good tamp every single time has improved my output.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

FFS I'm out of here

Was just trying to make an objective point .


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Mrboots2u said:


> FFS I'm out of here
> 
> Was just trying to make an objective point .


 @Mrboots2u tapatalk only displayed the first line of your comment which is what I was replying to.

Maxwell would obviously have technique which would make make my attempts appear to be done by a chimp wearing oven mitts.

While I don't see how I would get an inconsistent result if you have seen that we'll I'd have to accept that.

It's a good tamper which has improved my coffee. The amount of difference it makes is probable proportionate to the scope of improvement there is with a person's technique.

In the hands of Maxwell I imagine a Pergtamp produces the same results. In my hands it makes a big difference. Its hardly magic and it was a point well made. Especially after I read it


----------



## coffeechap (Apr 5, 2012)

unless your side is exactly the same and you distribution exactly the same each time oh and the coffee exactly the same each time even the level tamp tampers are still inconsistent although the inconsistency is less. I found using a standard tamper all Be it 58.55 gives me better results ( personal preference)


----------



## CamV6 (Feb 7, 2012)

Yes it's the magic enchanted coffee perfecting tamper that cures all ills

Oh brother.

Fad after fad after fad. Yet another way to part a fool from his money.

There's no more fervent supporter than the newly converted.

All baristas including at WBC use a tamp of one type or another. We all accept a tamp is necessary.

When I see a device of this type being used routinely by pro's I'd be prepared to believe it represents a step change in espresso prep.

It's my prediction that 95% of these items will be found unloved in the back of a drawer somewhere within 12 months.

The point so many seem to be trying to make which isn't being heard is WHATEVER process or tool you use, your application of it and the other circumstantial variables need to be consistent too, and therein lies the inherent issue at which point skill and technique (which we all strive to get to grips with one way or another) take centre stage, not a funny shaped doohickey that costs many pounds.

There comes a point where surely we have to say enough spending, learn what you own.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

Troll alert


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

I've made my points as well as I can so on that front I'm done.

A fool parted from his money? A troll by any other name would still be a troll.


----------



## CamV6 (Feb 7, 2012)

Lol, yeah, someone disagrees. Must be a troll............


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

CamV6 said:


> Lol, yeah, someone disagrees. Must be a troll............


Quite a few people have disagreed with me. Read some posts other than mine to verify that. I have disagreed and attempted to reply accurately to them all. Other than your last post, no one went personal and insulted me. No one else has been trolling other than you. So called out and tries to hide behind a false statement. That's the LOL. I'll leave the last word to you as I think this thread has run its course.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

In an environment with people making coffee who don't actually care about coffee (most cafes hotels restaurants) then I can see a benefit to the push style tamper.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

garydyke1 said:


> In an environment with people making coffee who don't actually care about coffee (most cafes hotels restaurants) then I can see a benefit to the push style tamper.


I spoke too soo.







I guess this covers a place with a high turn over of staff. You could have people who are passionate about coffee who are still cack handed like myself right?


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

My thinking on this after a great deal of discussion, earnest and no so earnest, is that it is akin to the use of a calculator to get the square root of a large noneven non-prime number. It is possible to do so manually and in fact it is in many ways preferable to be able to do so manually in case you don't have access to a working slide rule or calculator but the use of a calculator eliminates errors by the less skilled and is most likely quicker even in the hands of someone who can do the work the work manually.

It eliminates errors in my techniques and I think it ensures consistency in my technique (although that may be a false assumption as @Mrboots2u has pointed out).

I feel good that I have been able to stimulate so much debate of late.


----------



## UncleJake (Mar 20, 2016)

I had a Chinese one for a while - it was a perfect fit in a VST. As far as levelling goes - I think it added to consistency for me. The thing I couldn't get with is setting the depth with different coffees. With a normal style tamper you feel the grounds compress and resistance build up, and then (attempt to) tamp consistently - or indeed vary the pressure to micro-adjust your extraction. With the button style you don't have this - so you tamp to the depth you set it too - I found setting the depth introduced problems. I could under or over tamp without really knowing. It was a real process getting it right. Then change coffee/grind and you need to start again.

When set-up perfectly (and not changing beans or grind size) I reckon a well-made one would improve my game a little - but working with different beans every day as I do so having to reset all the time would drive me nuts. I can get much closer, much quicker, by 'hand'.

If I was in a competition where I was using the same coffee and grind - I'd definitely use one - as the time invested setting it up would pay off in consistency. I can see why Maxwell would use/help create one. Whereas for me - basically a child playing in a sand pit - it took a bit of the fun away.

If my wife bought me one and added a secret inscription... I'd use it every day and brim with pride.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

Can we agree, that the act of tamping is the last part of a list of processes needed to build or make a shot. Because it is the last part, any inconsistencies in any other part of the shot build will be brought forward and NOT cured by the Push style tamper. In that case, why waste money and just buy a copy, as if you cannot CONTROL all the other bits it the Push going to make any difference


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

CamV6 said:


> ...your application of it and the other circumstantial variables need to be consistent too, and therein lies the inherent issue at which point skill and technique (which we all strive to get to grips with one way or another) take centre stage, not a funny shaped doohickey that costs many pounds.
> 
> There comes a point where surely we have to say enough spending, learn what you own.


So, we have variables. You need to be consistent, so wouldn't a tool that helps with consistency be an advantage? Espresso inevitably costs many pounds to make at home. You see to already realise that. The drink & it's flavour should be taking centre stage, more so than individual's perception of their skill. Coffee (the beverage) does not occur naturally, it is a wholly man made product (espresso being the most technology reliant). To make stuff we use tools, if we like a certain tool for it's tactile feel, or its cosmetic appeal, or because it improves what we make (or all three), so what?

Or does every machine, grinder & barista have to undergo rigorous lab tests to meet a new BS/ISO standard we're not aware of, before hitting the market/being approved?


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

The instructions for setting the depth and therefore the pressure that came with the PUSH I think would help and would work for the Chinese unit.

Get your weight in portafilter as you want and distributed in the portafilter as preferred. Take your tamper and unwind it as much as possible and then tamp to the depth and pressure you want but leave the tamper in place. Now wind your locking ring all the way down until the locking ring just touches the top of the basket. Lock everything as set and jobs a gud'un



> If my wife bought me one and added a secret inscription... I'd use it every day and brim with pride.


It was extremely thoughtful and made me very happy. Even moreso because she normally drinks tea and my coffee corner is called "your coffee crap."


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

dfk41 said:


> Can we agree, that the act of tamping is the last part of a list of processes needed to build or make a shot. Because it is the last part, any inconsistencies in any other part of the shot build will be brought forward and NOT cured by the Push style tamper. In that case, why waste money and just buy a copy, as if you cannot CONTROL all the other bits it the Push going to make any difference


Yes it is the last step building up to a shot. I also agree it does not cure inconsistencies. What it does is prevents me creating any further inconsistencies. I think the PUSH is superior to Chinese copies because like a Pergtamp it tamps right to the edge of a VST basket which the Chinese copies do not. The Chinese copies leave an untamped ring which if you believe the science that Matt Perger put forward to back his claims for the Pergtamp gives a better shot.

If you don't buy into Matt's science well the PUSH just stops me from making my shot any worse.

It's not magic. I never claimed it was magic. It is a very nicely designed (subjective) and engineered and built piece of kit which helps me to not make my espresso any worse with a crap tamp.


----------



## UncleJake (Mar 20, 2016)

Dallah said:


> The instructions for setting the depth and therefore the pressure that came with the PUSH I think would help and would work for the Chinese unit.
> 
> Get your weight in portafilter as you want and distributed in the portafilter as preferred. Take your tamper and unwind it as much as possible and then tamp to the depth and pressure you want but leave the tamper in place. Now wind your locking ring all the way down until the locking ring just touches the top of the basket. Lock everything as set and jobs a gud'un


That indeed would have saved me aeons. May try again one day... For now though I'm enjoying playing in the sandbox (albeit with a very fancy bucket and spade).


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

UncleJake said:


> That indeed would have saved me aeons. May try again one day... For now though I'm enjoying playing in the sandbox (albeit with a very fancy bucket and spade).


Very glad I could help


----------



## CamV6 (Feb 7, 2012)

MWJB said:


> So, we have variables. You need to be consistent, so wouldn't a tool that helps with consistency be an advantage? Espresso inevitably costs many pounds to make at home. You see to already realise that. The drink & it's flavour should be taking centre stage, more so than individual's perception of their skill. Coffee (the beverage) does not occur naturally, it is a wholly man made product (espresso being the most technology reliant). To make stuff we use tools, if we like a certain tool for it's tactile feel, or its cosmetic appeal, or because it improves what we make (or all three), so what?
> 
> Or does every machine, grinder & barista have to undergo rigorous lab tests to meet a new BS/ISO standard we're not aware of, before hitting the market/being approved?


There's some force in what you say, and to an extent I agree. If the variables are machine, grinder/grind, bean, tamp, recipie and finally climate (i.e hot/humid or cold kitchen/coffee prep area) as a non exhaustive list, then yes, I'd agree that a tamper that eliminates the inconsistency in that one part helps, but only with that one part.

also I f you have to set the height/depth of this tamper I'd also suggest that this could be even more of a PITA and counter productive because different beans and their respective grinds end up being different volumes/heights in the basket if you see what I mean.

Personally i reckon this item IN THEORY removes a variable, but in practice probably isn't as helpful as you might think. I used to have dynametric tampers but I got rid of those becuase actually they were as unhelpful as they were helpful.

Ultimately I found there was no substitute for 'feel' learned from experience.

Having said that, each to their own. What works for one may not work for another. However, just because something helps one person, that doesn't make it the 'end of the rainbow' so to speak.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

CamV6 said:


> There's some force in what you say, and to an extent I agree. If the variables are machine, grinder/grind, bean, tamp, recipie and finally climate (i.e hot/humid or cold kitchen/coffee prep area) as a non exhaustive list, then yes, I'd agree that a tamper that eliminates the inconsistency in that one part helps, but only with that one part.


You have a lot of variables there....I think most people have fewer. Do you make coffee on different machines all the time? Do you use different grinders all the time? Differences in bean are handled by changing your grind setting. Recipe isn't a variable it's a target...a good result. So, assuming you typically use the same machine at home, the same grinder, an appropriate dose - your main variables are grind setting, distribution & tamp. If your distribution is good, then it's grind setting & tamp. If your tamp is consistent then it's grind setting.


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

MWJB said:


> You have a lot of variables there....I think most people have fewer. Do you make coffee on different machines all the time? Do you use different grinders all the time? Differences in bean are handled by changing your grind setting. Recipe isn't a variable it's a target...a good result. So, assuming you typically use the same machine at home, the same grinder, an appropriate dose - your main variables are grind setting, distribution & tamp. If your distribution is good, then it's grind setting & tamp. If your tamp is consistent then it's grind setting.


"Stop making sense" - David Bryne


----------



## foundrycoffeeroasters.com (Jun 19, 2014)

Interesting thread. We have cheap Chinese OCD copy grooming tools, a PUSH tamper and a Pergtamp (amongst other similar things). We've been lucky enough to have the PUSH for quite some time and I've been using the OCD thing for a few weeks now too. In summary, I have absolutely no idea whether any of it helps me to make better espresso, or even more consistent espresso. I guess I could pull a tonne of shots and measure them all and log everything but I'd still be unwilling to ascribe any of the noted differences to a piece of equipment I was using for shot prep. It seems to me that that there are so many other things likely to be influencing the results, even when using the same machine and grinder. In essence, I'm convinced that the PUSH tamps consistently but I'm not convinced that this in itself makes the drinks I'm making more consistent.

I will continue using the OCD because it makes the coffee really smooth and level and makes tamping level really easy, which is pleasing. I'll also continue using the PUSH because it feels nice and it means I don't really have to think about tamping. It's also really quick in service once you get used to it. Adjusting the PUSH can end up being a bit of a pain but if you're in a situation where you are going to knock out a couple of hundred drinks using the same bean and grinder, I wouldn't be without it.

For usual 'let's pull a few shots of this new.....' Sessions, it'll be the Pergtamp because it's a completely fantastic, well made tamper.


----------



## dan1502 (Sep 8, 2012)

I've only just received the Chinese levelling tool but it's satisfying to use before tamping with the Mahlgut I received with my machine so first impressions are that I'm pleased with it. I'm currently tending to stick with the same beans for a while so shouldn't need to adjust them regularly. Taking away (or vastly reducing the range of) a variable or two should help me with other parts of the process I need to practice as although I've been making espresso for a while I consider myself a beginner.


----------



## CamV6 (Feb 7, 2012)

MWJB said:


> You have a lot of variables there....I think most people have fewer. Do you make coffee on different machines all the time? Do you use different grinders all the time? Differences in bean are handled by changing your grind setting. Recipe isn't a variable it's a target...a good result. So, assuming you typically use the same machine at home, the same grinder, an appropriate dose - your main variables are grind setting, distribution & tamp. If your distribution is good, then it's grind setting & tamp. If your tamp is consistent then it's grind setting.


I use two grinders at home, one a flat burr and one a conical burr.

I know it sounds unlikely but I genuinely have experienced 18g in the basket of two different coffees at exactly the same setting resulting in a different tamped height in the basket. Sounds odd I know and it surprised me too.

Surely recipie isn't the outcome, it's the ingredients namely grind level, amount of grinds, time, heat of water, amount of fluid out, no?


----------



## fluffles (Sep 4, 2012)

I definitely get nicer looking pours with the Chinese OCD and it definitely helps me tamp level with my londinium tamper.

As others have noted, I can't say what effect it has on tastiness.

My gut feeling tells me it is absolutely no replacement for good manual distribution, but more an add on. If you leave humps and hollows before using it you are clearly just compressing unevenly before you spin. Although it looks level, underneath the surface I think you've created uneven density.

But if you can get it level ish before using, it does create a lovely flat surface to tamp which I find very satisfying


----------



## Dallah (Jan 31, 2015)

CamV6 said:


> I use two grinders at home, one a flat burr and one a conical burr.
> 
> I know it sounds unlikely but I genuinely have experienced 18g in the basket of two different coffees at exactly the same setting resulting in a different tamped height in the basket. Sounds odd I know and it surprised me too.
> 
> Surely recipie isn't the outcome, it's the ingredients namely grind level, amount of grinds, time, heat of water, amount of fluid out, no?


Isn't the outcome tasty (hopefully) coffee? Everything else is a means to an end.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

CamV6 said:


> I use two grinders at home, one a flat burr and one a conical burr.
> 
> I know it sounds unlikely but I genuinely have experienced 18g in the basket of two different coffees at exactly the same setting resulting in a different tamped height in the basket. Sounds odd I know and it surprised me too.
> 
> Surely recipie isn't the outcome, it's the ingredients namely grind level, amount of grinds, time, heat of water, amount of fluid out, no?


The ingredient is coffee, always coffee. Grind level you can't convey other than reading a number off a grinder's adjustment mechanism, you would need calibrated grinders, otherwise it's only relevant to you. Time is not the major driver of extraction. Why would you constantly change the heat of extraction if you were looking for consistency, maybe if you wanted to fine tune, or were always hitting malfunction, but then what is the range of temperatures that will throw out a nominal extraction? Amount of fluid (relative to dose) is brew ratio, you wouldn't normally be changing this to maintain consistency, you can hit the same extraction at a range of brew ratios. A *recipe* has an expected result, like a sweet, balanced coffee, reflective of the bean/tasting notes. Yes there will be broad instructions on how you achieve it, but the result trumps the minutiae of tailoring for each different scenario, in each different kitchen.

When you follow a recipe, a basic description of your cooker might be briefly covered, but they don't say you must have such & such brand of oven, maybe "bake until golden brown", or "until the chicken's juices run clear"...I wouldn't eat a raw chicken whatever the brand of oven, time, or heat applied, was quoted as being. I'd expect any competent cook to achieve a cooked chicken.

Likewise, I'd expect a decent shot to be sweet & balanced, irrespective of a specific time, temp, grind setting or amount of fluid (assuming all are in a normal range). But for a given scenario, for a home barista, with a machine & a grinder (less variables in gear), these things may fall in a narrower range.

I don't doubt that 2 coffees gave a difference in puck height at the same setting, but what other differences did you measure? What was that difference relative to a known difference in puck height that will throw a spanner in the works. What was the difference in tamp force, which has a wide window? What other aspects of each extraction were also different?

I don't expect answers, I know I'm being a bit of PITA, but we can all look at individual aspects of different shots & say they were different because of X, Y, or Z. Without the bigger picture & eliminating other variables it's difficult to isolate the things that do matter & should be changed, to achieve the desired recipe result (usually this is primarily grind).

The whole "recipe" vs "brew ratio/brew instructions/things that we do that may not be relevant to anyone else" is a bit of a bug bear of mine, so I apologise if this seems a little ranty (it's not meant to be).


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Dallah said:


> Isn't the outcome tasty (hopefully) coffee? Everything else is a means to an end.


Hmmm, I wish I'd wrote that instead of the mini-essay I just did!


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

But what is tasty to one man...........


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

dfk41 said:


> But what is tasty to one man...........


If the tasting note & style are not to your preference why would you buy it in the first place?

Some like apples, some like bananas, but those who like either might largely agree on under ripe & rotten, with a fair margin for edible.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

MWJB said:


> If the tasting note & style are not to your preference why would you buy it in the first place?
> 
> Some like apples, some like bananas, but those who like either might largely agree on under ripe & rotten, with a fair margin for edible.


You do not really believe all that guff written as tasting notes! How can you assume, unless you are one of our white coated brethren who carry an array of scientific tools, that you can replicate the grind and brew method that the roaster did to create the tasting notes?


----------



## CamV6 (Feb 7, 2012)

I dunno this whole conversation is just replaying for the sake of it now. Folk arguing points on and on down to the Nth degree is an exercise in analysing coffee to the Nth degree with little end result, and is what robs all of the joy out of it all for my tastes.

I was just trying to say if it helps a person feel like they are eliminating one of various variables, then ok, I get that, but for my money this bit of kit goes in the envelope marked "coffee guff"

You guys feel free to keep over analysing tho, don't let my weariness spoil your fun!

A long way back I posed a simple honest question, does it improve the flavour of the coffee that enters your gob? A couple of voices say yes, a couple say no. Jury is out.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

dfk41 said:


> You do not really believe all that guff written as tasting notes! How can you assume, unless you are one of our white coated brethren who carry an array of scientific tools, that you can replicate the grind and brew method that the roaster did to create the tasting notes?


The flavour of the coffee is evident, or should be, in all sorts of brew methods...different brew methods just affect the strength (more than flavour balance) & mouthfeel. I have no scientific tools to taste the coffee with, I use my taste buds. Ultimately, this is how good cups are always determined...everything else is irrelevant if it doesn't end with a good cup. If you don't buy into the "guff", why do you buy the coffee that you do, obsess over roasting & resting times, brew it on expensive, highly engineered machinery built to fine tolerances & published specifications? Surely, if you aren't bothered about brewing a representative cup, you can achieve a cup of brown drink by wrapping the beans in a tea towel, hitting them with a hammer & leaving them in a jug of hot water, for a perfectly decent cuppa?

You're not saying, "don't spend money", you're not saying, "don't buy nice things", you're not saying, "don't buy accessories"...you're just saying buy the things that you recommend/sell on...& apparently now, "don't get your hopes up on the result after doing so". If people are struggling with their coffee & not enjoying it, what is there in this that can help them...it's essentially always the same advice, "you have the wrong machine/grinder/beans/tamper, even if you do have the right kit, the coffee won't taste like it's supposed to anyway". Can someone perhaps give some tips on what forum I should be on to find people who actually like & enjoy coffee?


----------



## Beanosaurus (Jun 4, 2014)

After reading all this I now have a threadache...


----------



## gman147 (Jul 7, 2012)

Using a button tamper would take away most of the enjoyment from the prep for me.

I like the fact that I can sometimes totally mess up a tamp. Thankfully this happens rarely but it keeps me on my toes whereas I feel the button tamper would make me rather slapdash. I can imagine for a busy cafe the button tamper would be invaluable.

I like that I have the option of nutating to tighten up the pour.

For me the button tamper is a big no but the button distribution tool incorporated into my routine has provided so many positives.

Horses for courses I guess.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

You can try the Facebook group mark


----------



## gman147 (Jul 7, 2012)

MWJB said:


> The flavour of the coffee is evident, or should be, in all sorts of brew methods...different brew methods just affect the strength (more than flavour balance) & mouthfeel. I have no scientific tools to taste the coffee with, I use my taste buds. Ultimately, this is how good cups are always determined...everything else is irrelevant if it doesn't end with a good cup. If you don't buy into the "guff", why do you buy the coffee that you do, obsess over roasting & resting times, brew it on expensive, highly engineered machinery built to fine tolerances & published specifications? Surely, if you aren't bothered about brewing a representative cup, you can achieve a cup of brown drink by wrapping the beans in a tea towel, hitting them with a hammer & leaving them in a jug of hot water, for a perfectly decent cuppa?
> 
> You're not saying, "don't spend money", you're not saying, "don't buy nice things", you're not saying, "don't buy accessories"...you're just saying buy the things that you recommend/sell on...& apparently now, "don't get your hopes up on the result after doing so". If people are struggling with their coffee & not enjoying it, what is there in this that can help them...it's essentially always the same advice, "you have the wrong machine/grinder/beans/tamper, even if you do have the right kit, the coffee won't taste like it's supposed to anyway". Can someone perhaps give some tips on what forum I should be on to find people who actually like & enjoy coffee?


Couldn't have put that any better.


----------



## hotmetal (Oct 31, 2013)

I've somehow received a few more likes and followers than I would give credence to recently. I started to feel good briefly, but then decided it was probably a tapatalk thing. Looks like it's quite widespread.


----------

