Sifting the grounds.
I meant to say, there is very little science involved in espresso, it seems.
Yeah, it's entirely subjective and even the stuff that isn't is monstrously more complex than it's given credit for. Grind distribution, grind shape, how many modal peaks there are (Unimodal vs bi/trimodal)... basket flow characteristics... you get the idea.Very little but not zero. See for example this article: https://www.baristamagazine.com/professor-chris-hendon-simplifies-coffee-with-science/
The cafe where this chemist got interested in coffee is my regular haunt and it has been really interesting to talk to the owner about their findings on water chemistry and the effect of grind on coffee extraction. Of course we are still far from knowing what makes the "best" coffee -- for one thing, how would that be defined? -- but at least some people are trying to be rational and methodical about it.
Absolutely, and I wonder if we could boil it down to using different methods and parameters (including water as in the article you shared) and measuring compounds extracted that contribute to acidity and balance those with compounds that contribute to body, etc. Obviously complicated (beyond my pay scale) but perhaps in that balance is a semi-sweet and tasty shot of espresso that would appeal to most people. Kind of like the Harman curve for coffee. With some blind testing, you could potentially inch closer and closer to the 'best' cup of coffee or espresso.Very little but not zero. See for example this article: https://www.baristamagazine.com/professor-chris-hendon-simplifies-coffee-with-science/
The cafe where this chemist got interested in coffee is my regular haunt and it has been really interesting to talk to the owner about their findings on water chemistry and the effect of grind on coffee extraction. Of course we are still far from knowing what makes the "best" coffee -- for one thing, how would that be defined? -- but at least some people are trying to be rational and methodical about it.
I really love coffee, I brew it in different ways (Turkish, French press, geyser coffee maker, 15 atmospheres carob coffee maker), I communicate with other coffee lovers and even coffee psychos, and have never come across what you wrote about.So, lately I've been venturing into the world of espresso, and I see no reason to overspend, much like how I approach my hifi hobby.
As any interest takes hold, I usually check out youtube to gain some insight into the whole thing, but I'm noticing a trend that leaves me frustrated.
Ask any espresso snob on social media, and you'll get the same "you need to spend at least $200 on a grinder" or "Any espresso machine under $1000 is garbage". Oh, don't forget to spend $150 on a fancy brass and stainless tamper when your included plastic tamper $1.50 does the EXACT same thing with NO ACTUAL BENEFIT.
So far, I've got a Delonghi Stilosa, a cheap-o conical burr hand grinder, and coffee. I'm still trying to get the crema to be more substantial like those nespresso's, but I don't want to go down that wasteful route. I've read a lot of it comes down to a good espresso roasted bean and a nice fine grind.
What are your thoughts on the snobbery? Have you noticed it?
Are you into espresso? What gear have you gotten? Thoughts on the fully automatic units?
Absolutely, and I wonder if we could boil it down to using different methods and parameters (including water as in the article you shared) and measuring compounds extracted that contribute to acidity and balance those with compounds that contribute to body, etc. Obviously complicated (beyond my pay scale) but perhaps in that balance is a semi-sweet and tasty shot of espresso that would appeal to most people. Kind of like the Harman curve for coffee. With some blind testing, you could potentially inch closer and closer to the 'best' cup of coffee or espresso.
So it seems they are so far using just the EY metric as a proxy for the entire make-up of the final cup of coffee, which is obviously a huge oversimplification (unless further research shows that it isn't, I guess.)In principle, it is preferable to make objective statements about the flavor of foodstuffs from knowledge of their molecular components. This poses problems for coffee because there are ~2,000 different compounds extracted from the grounds during brewing. In practice, we are limited to more easily measurable descriptors. The coffee industry uses extraction yield (EY), a ratio of solvated coffee mass to the mass of dry coffee used to produce the beverage, to assess extraction. EY is calculated by first measuring the refractive index, a property that depends on temperature. While a refractive index measurement cannot be used to characterize the beverage composition (i.e., it cannot be used to make qualitative statements about chemical composition; the refractive response is highly molecule specific), it has been shown to accurately correlate with extracted mass.
Ask any espresso snob on social media, and you'll get the same "you need to spend at least $200 on a grinder" or "Any espresso machine under $1000 is garbage". Oh, don't forget to spend $150 on a fancy brass and stainless tamper when your included plastic tamper $1.50 does the EXACT same thing with NO ACTUAL BENEFIT.
Take a look at some of James Hoffmann's videos they should give you a few ideas: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMb0O2CdPBNi-QqPk5T3gsQ/videos
So, lately I've been venturing into the world of espresso, and I see no reason to overspend, much like how I approach my hifi hobby.
As any interest takes hold, I usually check out youtube to gain some insight into the whole thing, but I'm noticing a trend that leaves me frustrated.
Ask any espresso snob on social media, and you'll get the same "you need to spend at least $200 on a grinder" or "Any espresso machine under $1000 is garbage". Oh, don't forget to spend $150 on a fancy brass and stainless tamper when your included plastic tamper $1.50 does the EXACT same thing with NO ACTUAL BENEFIT.
So far, I've got a Delonghi Stilosa, a cheap-o conical burr hand grinder, and coffee. I'm still trying to get the crema to be more substantial like those nespresso's, but I don't want to go down that wasteful route. I've read a lot of it comes down to a good espresso roasted bean and a nice fine grind.
What are your thoughts on the snobbery? Have you noticed it?
Are you into espresso? What gear have you gotten? Thoughts on the fully automatic units?
Sifting and weighing is part of the bullshit. As is needle stirring etc. A good grind of the correct consistency for the beans and roast (and that can change as they age) and a hard tamp sorts all that stuff out.That sounds about right with the local roaster. I've also heard to avoid pre-ground like cafe bustello like the plague.
I think it's potentially my inexperience showing, but I've found that when it comes to latte's, I really get no further enjoyment of a local coffee shop over my (prepare yourself) Keurig cafe with the heated milk frother & reusable k-cup baskets (I don't buy the disposable pods). Though, I've really noticed that I can't quite match a plain espresso for crema. The delonghi's steam wand is incredibly frustrating though, so I could maybe see spending more for that.
Ok, maybe it is more of a hobby than I'm willing to admit.
I've seen that the ground consistency is very important, but maybe I'm not ready to go down the route of doing all of that sifting and weighing to perfect what I see as a good enough ground consistency and size.
In the end, I'm not sure if I'll be chasing the dragon quite yet for the quest for a perfect espresso, but I'm pretty happy with where I'm at for the cost.