| |
Main
Date: 24 Aug 2006 09:00:07
From: daveb
Subject: I MUST have missed it
|
You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
IMHO, not likely.
back to the standard handle for me.
it was fun, tho'.
Dave
106 pid silvias
|
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 16:11:06
From: Steve
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
On 24 Aug 2006 09:00:07 -0700, "daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com > wrote:
>You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
>shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
>and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
>Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
>IMHO, not likely.
>
>back to the standard handle for me.
Thank you for posting the most hilarious troll I've seen in some time.
>
>it was fun, tho'.
>
>Dave
>106 pid silvias
and still no clue.
|
| |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 03:45:32
From: Espressopithecus (Java Man)
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
In article <1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >,
davebobblane@gmail.com says...
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
It happens, but only occasionally. Not nearly as often as I'd thought
when reading the posts about it.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
No, you're not.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
I find it provides another useful and immediate source of feedback on
every shot. This is useful when you don't taste every shot yourself.
Rick
|
| |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 12:51:59
From: Rob van Loenhout
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
I had this only with coffee ground with my Rocky when the burrs were getting
worn, didn't try the rocky with the bottomless pf after changing the burrs.
Didn't get it with the Innova flat burr grinder that we we use at work, 2+
years 20+ shots a week and that's just my use of it.
My take on it is that it is an issue with the quality of the grind. I must
modify one of my pfs at home (into a bottomless).
I suspect that the Innova produces a better grind than the Rocky.
Rob vL
NZ
"daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
> IMHO, not likely.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
> it was fun, tho'.
>
> Dave
> 106 pid silvias
>
|
| | |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 17:25:51
From: Brent
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Rob,
you could always borrow mine...
>I had this only with coffee ground with my Rocky when the burrs were
>getting
> worn, didn't try the rocky with the bottomless pf after changing the
> burrs.
> Didn't get it with the Innova flat burr grinder that we we use at work, 2+
> years 20+ shots a week and that's just my use of it.
> My take on it is that it is an issue with the quality of the grind. I must
> modify one of my pfs at home (into a bottomless).
> I suspect that the Innova produces a better grind than the Rocky.
>
> Rob vL
> NZ
>
> "daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
>> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
>> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>>
>> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>>
>> IMHO, not likely.
>>
>> back to the standard handle for me.
>>
>> it was fun, tho'.
>>
>> Dave
>> 106 pid silvias
>>
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 23:39:39
From: Rob van Loenhout
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
"Brent" <me@privacy.net > wrote in message
news:4l7f07Fkd0uU1@individual.net...
> Rob,
>
> you could always borrow mine...
>
a belated thank you, but i will probably sort one of my own, the machine
must be close to a year old and the chrome has worn away from the inside of
the pfs so it won't feel quite as wrong to mutilate one.
Rob
|
| | | | |
Date: 08 Sep 2006 23:50:52
From: Brent
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Um mine was made by acquiring a new pf and getting it chopped...
don't feel bad
>> Rob,
>>
>> you could always borrow mine...
>>
>
> a belated thank you, but i will probably sort one of my own, the machine
> must be close to a year old and the chrome has worn away from the inside
> of
> the pfs so it won't feel quite as wrong to mutilate one.
>
> Rob
>
>
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 20:24:28
From: Neal Reid
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
In article
<1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >,
"daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com > wrote:
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
Indeed you must have missed it, S'been discussed to DEATH.
My experience is mixed. On a friend Expobar, the naked PF worked
well for me. On my own mystery machine, no amount of fiddling gave
good good results.
I'm not convinced (based on MY empirical evidence) that the
bottomless makes any difference or that it is a useful teaching
tool. As stated, with some fiddling on one machine I could make it
behave. On another, I couldn't. On both,I can pull wonderful
drinks...
--
M for N in address to mail reply
|
| |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 09:18:57
From: Brent
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
As pointed out - the jets indicate a problem with the pack, although the
theories are as much anecdotal I suspect as hard and fast research... (but
hey, prove me wrong)
One such reason for problems with load and pack, is of course that the
spouts usually provide a nice base on which to balance the PF while tamping,
and initially it takes a couple of goes to work that out. Don't know if the
"Barry 30 ton handstand tamp" is possible on a naked pf :)
As to taste, I am of two minds - I tend to use a normal PF from a
convenience point of view, as the taste difference didn't grab me, which is
not to say I gave it a fair go...
Lots of fun though.
Brent
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
> IMHO, not likely.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
> it was fun, tho'.
>
> Dave
> 106 pid silvias
>
|
| | |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 03:08:02
From: Barry Jarrett
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 09:18:57 +1200, "Brent" <me@privacy.net > wrote:
>"Barry 30 ton handstand tamp" is possible on a naked pf :)
>
yes, the grunt tamp is easily done with a chopped pf.
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 12:29:25
From: daveb
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Wow! what a bunch of sarcastic responses. to be expected.
And Harmon, always a thrill. -- you should see his ebay feedbacks and
responses to them. hah!
but anyway thank you Craig + Danny.
Dave
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 11:55:48
From: Karl
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
Your're getting channeling - work on your dispersion or tamping. The
main benefit of the bottemless protafilter is to let you see when
you're doing something wrong loading the shot, as you appear to be.
> back to the standard handle for me.
Unless you want to learn how to make better espresso. The problem isn't
the portafilter, it's how you're loading and tamping the basket. Going
back to a standard PF will just cover up the channeling - you'll get
the same results in the cup, just without the visible evidence.
> 106 pid silvias
You need to learn to use those silvias right after you pid them, daveb.
Karl "only 1 pidded Silvia, but shots run like honey (usually)" Rice
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 19:34:01
From: Danny
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
daveb wrote:
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
> IMHO, not likely.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
> it was fun, tho'.
>
> Dave
> 106 pid silvias
>
Exactly the point of the exercise. It proves that your dispersion or
tamping of the ground coffee is supect. Practice and get it right and
you will have honey-like pours such as those pictured on my site...
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 11:20:16
From: daveb
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
I have seen them, Craig.
very nice! but what about the mess? no mention.
dave
106
Craig Andrews wrote:
> "daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> > You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> > shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the
> > machine
> > and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
> >
> > Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
> Right..
>
> >
> > IMHO, not likely.
> >
> > back to the standard handle for me.
> >
> > it was fun, tho'.
> >
> > Dave
> > 106 pid silvias
> >
>
> Check out the Coffeegeek forums with LOTS of pics on the Naked or
> Bottomless portafilter..
> Craig.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 14:51:08
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
"daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156443616.566082.264560@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I have seen them, Craig.
>
> very nice! but what about the mess? no mention.
>
> dave
> 106
>
>
> Craig Andrews wrote:
>> "daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>> > You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee
>> > to
>> > shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the
>> > machine
>> > and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>> >
>> > Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>>
>> Right..
>>
>> >
>> > IMHO, not likely.
>> >
>> > back to the standard handle for me.
>> >
>> > it was fun, tho'.
>> >
>> > Dave
>> > 106 pid silvias
>> >
>>
>> Check out the Coffeegeek forums with LOTS of pics on the Naked or
>> Bottomless portafilter..
>> Craig.
>
Like Danny said below Dave, & I'll add., this is/was basically a
Baristra training method to show any inconsistencies in the
packing/tamping technique that will show channeling in a shot (&early
blonding), the little jets, shooters, etc... The Geeks caught on to it &
say that without contact with the bottom floor of the portafilter & the
spouts, the crema is fluffier & more voluminous., I suppose being that
the crema (a colloidal suspension of coffee oils, fats/lipids, etc) will
not first hit/touch those areas & start to collapse the crema somewhat..
The bottomless portafilter is an aid to control & perfect your technique
to greatly reduce &/or eliminate these flaws in a pour.
Cheers!
Craig.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 10:46:49
From: Danny
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Craig Andrews wrote:
> Like Danny said below Dave, & I'll add., this is/was basically a
> Baristra training method to show any inconsistencies in the
> packing/tamping technique that will show channeling in a shot (&early
> blonding), the little jets, shooters, etc... The Geeks caught on to it &
> say that without contact with the bottom floor of the portafilter & the
> spouts, the crema is fluffier & more voluminous., I suppose being that
> the crema (a colloidal suspension of coffee oils, fats/lipids, etc) will
> not first hit/touch those areas & start to collapse the crema somewhat..
>
> The bottomless portafilter is an aid to control & perfect your technique
> to greatly reduce &/or eliminate these flaws in a pour.
>
I've said before that I detect a superior shot with the bottomless.
It's tangible. I take sugar, and can almost drink a bottomless shot
without. Crema is different (I'd say improved).
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 15:01:37
From: Barry Jarrett
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 10:46:49 +0100, Danny
<danny@nospam.gaggia-espresso.com > wrote:
>I've said before that I detect a superior shot with the bottomless.
>It's tangible. I take sugar, and can almost drink a bottomless shot
>without. Crema is different (I'd say improved).
crema is "fluffier", as the more fragile elements of the foam end up
in the cup instead of collapsing in the space between the filter
basket and the spout.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 15:35:19
From: Steve
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:01:37 GMT, Barry Jarrett
<barry@rileys-coffee.com > wrote:
>crema is "fluffier", as the more fragile elements of the foam end up
>in the cup instead of collapsing in the space between the filter
>basket and the spout.
That description leads me to conclusion that the espresso would have a
mouth feel that would seem two distinct textures, as opposed to the
emulsified feel of "normal" espresso, much like the feel of an
artificially enhanced head on a stout produced by holding the bottle
at an exaggerated height.
It doesn't sound like a particularly good thing. Is that what you
experience?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 20:21:28
From: Danny
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Steve wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:01:37 GMT, Barry Jarrett
> <barry@rileys-coffee.com> wrote:
>
>
>>crema is "fluffier", as the more fragile elements of the foam end up
>>in the cup instead of collapsing in the space between the filter
>>basket and the spout.
>
>
> That description leads me to conclusion that the espresso would have a
> mouth feel that would seem two distinct textures, as opposed to the
> emulsified feel of "normal" espresso, much like the feel of an
> artificially enhanced head on a stout produced by holding the bottle
> at an exaggerated height.
>
> It doesn't sound like a particularly good thing. Is that what you
> experience?
No, I think the crema is heavier and fuller, both good things.
Whether one can argue that crema should feel as it does from a pf with
spouts, since that is how it's always been made (I assume) is open to
discussion, but there's always room for improvement. The crema
doesn't feel fake or "enhanced" artificially in any way, just better :)
Try it :)
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Aug 2006 03:07:36
From: Barry Jarrett
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:21:28 +0100, Danny
<danny@nospam.gaggia-espresso.com > wrote:
>No, I think the crema is heavier and fuller, both good things.
>Whether one can argue that crema should feel as it does from a pf with
>spouts, since that is how it's always been made (I assume) is open to
>discussion, but there's always room for improvement. The crema
>doesn't feel fake or "enhanced" artificially in any way, just better :)
>
try it at 10,000ft. :)
downright fizzy.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Aug 2006 19:00:46
From: Danny
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Barry Jarrett wrote:
> try it at 10,000ft. :)
>
> downright fizzy.
>
I'm at 0 feet (my house is unfortunately something like -2 feet with
the sea visible from here)
I'd have to strap the machine on my hang glider to try your altitude...
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 23:46:35
From: Barry Jarrett
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:00:46 +0100, Danny
<danny@nospam.gaggia-espresso.com > wrote:
>I'd have to strap the machine on my hang glider to try your altitude...
take that trailer of yours on "holiday" to the alps. ;)
--barry "you know you want to"
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 09:36:18
From: Brent
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
>
>> try it at 10,000ft. :) downright fizzy.
>>
>
> I'm at 0 feet (my house is unfortunately something like -2 feet with the
> sea visible from here)
>
> I'd have to strap the machine on my hang glider to try your altitude...
>
You will get photos, right???
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 19:33:15
From: Steve
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:21:28 +0100, Danny
<danny@nospam.gaggia-espresso.com > wrote:
>The crema
>doesn't feel fake or "enhanced" artificially in any way, just better :)
>
>Try it :)
Thank you, Danny.
I will!
|
| | |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 18:30:31
From: Robert Harmon
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
What can I say Dave, you are TRULY unique! Count yourself blessed that you
can entertain yourself with so little.
;)
--
Robert (duck & cover) Harmon
http://tinyurl.com/pou2y
http://tinyurl.com/fkd6r
"daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156443616.566082.264560@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I have seen them, Craig.
>
> very nice! but what about the mess? no mention.
>
> dave
> 106
>
>
> Craig Andrews wrote:
>> "daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>> > You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
>> > shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the
>> > machine
>> > and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>> >
>> > Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>>
>> Right..
>>
>> >
>> > IMHO, not likely.
>> >
>> > back to the standard handle for me.
>> >
>> > it was fun, tho'.
>> >
>> > Dave
>> > 106 pid silvias
>> >
>>
>> Check out the Coffeegeek forums with LOTS of pics on the Naked or
>> Bottomless portafilter..
>> Craig.
>
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 11:19:14
From: daveb
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Thank you Steve. just what does your post contribute? anything?
no
dave
www.hitechespresso.com
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 12:19:42
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
"daveb" <davebobblane@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156435207.332436.320250@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the
> machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
Right..
>
> IMHO, not likely.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
> it was fun, tho'.
>
> Dave
> 106 pid silvias
>
Check out the Coffeegeek forums with LOTS of pics on the Naked or
Bottomless portafilter..
Craig.
|
| |
Date: 25 Aug 2006 23:22:38
From: Alan
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
"daveb" wrote
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
> IMHO, not likely.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
> it was fun, tho'.
Just for the sake of discussion, I've posted a couple of photos on
alt.binaries.coffee of an old Vesuviana which had an apparently standard
"bottomless" portafilter configured with channels to focus the pour,
avoiding dave's problem. Is anyone aware of other espresso makers ("steam
toy" or otherwise) designed to be used with similar portafilters?
It kind of looks like a good idea . . .
P.S. It's a little hard to tell, but it also looks like the "basket" is
actually an integral part of the portafilter --- which may not be such a
good idea . . .
|
| | |
Date: 26 Aug 2006 04:57:02
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
|
| | |
Date: 26 Aug 2006 19:02:53
From: Danny
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Alan wrote:
> "daveb" wrote
>
>>You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
>>shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
>>and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>>
>>Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>>
>>IMHO, not likely.
>>
>>back to the standard handle for me.
>>
>>it was fun, tho'.
>
>
> Just for the sake of discussion, I've posted a couple of photos on
> alt.binaries.coffee of an old Vesuviana which had an apparently standard
> "bottomless" portafilter configured with channels to focus the pour,
> avoiding dave's problem. Is anyone aware of other espresso makers ("steam
> toy" or otherwise) designed to be used with similar portafilters?
> It kind of looks like a good idea . . .
>
> P.S. It's a little hard to tell, but it also looks like the "basket" is
> actually an integral part of the portafilter --- which may not be such a
> good idea . . .
>
>
As David noted, my Salton EX3 has a similar arrangement, but with a
removeable pf.
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Aug 2006 23:51:14
From: Alan
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
"Danny" wrote
> Alan wrote:
>> "daveb" wrote
>>
>>>You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
>>>shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
>>>and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>>>
>>>Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>>>
>>>IMHO, not likely.
>>>
>>>back to the standard handle for me.
>>>
>>>it was fun, tho'.
>>
>>
>> Just for the sake of discussion, I've posted a couple of photos on
>> alt.binaries.coffee of an old Vesuviana which had an apparently standard
>> "bottomless" portafilter configured with channels to focus the pour,
>> avoiding dave's problem. Is anyone aware of other espresso makers
>> ("steam toy" or otherwise) designed to be used with similar portafilters?
>> It kind of looks like a good idea . . .
>>
>> P.S. It's a little hard to tell, but it also looks like the "basket" is
>> actually an integral part of the portafilter --- which may not be such a
>> good idea . . .
>
> As David noted, my Salton EX3 has a similar arrangement, but with a
> removeable pf.
And do the stamped, elongated depressions resembling troughs radiating
toward the center of the filter help to focus the pour, or not?
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 14:52:36
From: Danny
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Alan wrote:
> And do the stamped, elongated depressions resembling troughs radiating
> toward the center of the filter help to focus the pour, or not?
>
>
Sorry, I meant similar as in chopped pf. The basket is part of the
PF, with no ridges etc on the base. The pf opening at the bottom is a
bit narrower than the basket, which would help to avoid spraying anyway.
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 07:25:21
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 05:46:51
From: Omniryx@gmail.com
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Alan wrote:
> And do the stamped, elongated depressions resembling troughs radiating
> toward the center of the filter help to focus the pour, or not?
"Focus"????
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 15:10:45
From: Alan
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
<Omniryx@gmail.com > wrote
> Alan wrote:
>> And do the stamped, elongated depressions resembling troughs radiating
>> toward the center of the filter help to focus the pour, or not?
>
> "Focus"????
Yes ---- "focus".
In the sense given in the American Heritage Dictionary:
"To direct toward a particular point or purpose".
And as opposed to being diffused, scattered, or all over the place ... which
had been dave's complaint.
Sorry if my usage was too obscure . . .
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 12:59:08
From: Omniryx@gmail.com
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Alan wrote:
> Sorry if my usage was too obscure . . .
Nice snipe but not obscure just atypical.
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 21:52:40
From: Danny
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Omniryx@gmail.com wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>
>>Sorry if my usage was too obscure . . .
>
>
> Nice snipe but not obscure just atypical.
>
I read it perfectly, and I'm sure Alan didn't mean anything as a
"snipe". To focus the flow into one central pour rather than a spray
seems like a logical use of the word - a magnifying glass can be used
to focus the sun's rays into a single, concentrated beam.
--
Regards, Danny
http://www.gaggia-espresso.com (a purely hobby site)
http://www.malabargold.co.uk (UK/EU ordering for Malabar Gold blend)
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 08:01:33
From: gscace
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
The bottomless pf is easier to keep clean, shows up grinding and
distribution flaws. All of my machines use bottomless pfs if for
nothing other than cleanliness. It's also easier to see when the
stream starts to blond.
Dave, in addition to grind , tamp, and distribution errors,
microchanneling can be caused by using old coffee. All are
espresso-making faults, of course.
-Greg
daveb wrote:
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
> IMHO, not likely.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
> it was fun, tho'.
>
> Dave
> 106 pid silvias
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 10:25:29
From: Heat + Beans
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
What if bottomless were the traditional, standard espresso filter? Can
you imagine what sort of device someone would "invent" in order to
improve upon it? What would be the reaction if someone proposed to
baristas (or this list) an enclosed filter with single or double
spouts that had to be disassembled for proper cleaning and that allowed
channeling defects that could not be directly seen but had to be
intuited by taste (difficult for all but the most experienced cuppers)?
Regarding the "tiny jets":
1)The tiniest micro jets, themselves, IMO, do not affect taste
directly, but "may or may not" serve as indicators of other grind,
tamping, coffee quality, etc. defects. In other words, by themselves,
the jets are not a flaw but are worth noting.
2)Over time, the bottomless feedback has helped me to reduce all
channeling, and the additional mess caused by b-less is insignificant.
Martin
daveb wrote:
> You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
>
> Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
>
> IMHO, not likely.
>
> back to the standard handle for me.
>
> it was fun, tho'.
>
> Dave
> 106 pid silvias
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 22:55:13
From: Rob van Loenhout
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
"Heat + Beans" <heatgunroast@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1156958728.978908.241400@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> What if bottomless were the traditional, standard espresso filter? Can
> you imagine what sort of device someone would "invent" in order to
> improve upon it? What would be the reaction if someone proposed to
> baristas (or this list) an enclosed filter with single or double
> spouts that had to be disassembled for proper cleaning and that allowed
> channeling defects that could not be directly seen but had to be
> intuited by taste (difficult for all but the most experienced cuppers)?
>
Channelling can often still be spotted with spouts, the pour twists or bends
in, or one forward one back from the start. A good pour will usually hang
straight down for most of the pour time.
just my 2c worth
Rob vL
NZ
> Regarding the "tiny jets":
> 1)The tiniest micro jets, themselves, IMO, do not affect taste
> directly, but "may or may not" serve as indicators of other grind,
> tamping, coffee quality, etc. defects. In other words, by themselves,
> the jets are not a flaw but are worth noting.
> 2)Over time, the bottomless feedback has helped me to reduce all
> channeling, and the additional mess caused by b-less is insignificant.
> Martin
>
>
> daveb wrote:
> > You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> > shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> > and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
> >
> > Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
> >
> > IMHO, not likely.
> >
> > back to the standard handle for me.
> >
> > it was fun, tho'.
> >
> > Dave
> > 106 pid silvias
>
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 14:53:26
From: Heat + Beans
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
Rob van Loenhout wrote:
> "Heat + Beans" <heatgunroast@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156958728.978908.241400@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> > What if bottomless were the traditional, standard espresso filter? Can
> > you imagine what sort of device someone would "invent" in order to
> > improve upon it? What would be the reaction if someone proposed to
> > baristas (or this list) an enclosed filter with single or double
> > spouts that had to be disassembled for proper cleaning and that allowed
> > channeling defects that could not be directly seen but had to be
> > intuited by taste (difficult for all but the most experienced cuppers)?
> >
>
> Channelling can often still be spotted with spouts, the pour twists or bends
> in, or one forward one back from the start. A good pour will usually hang
> straight down for most of the pour time.
>
> just my 2c worth
>
> Rob vL
> NZ
I can't dispute that channeling might cause a twist, though I've seen a
variety or"twists or bends" from the bottomless with no apparent
channeling streams or micro-sprays. I can't confirm the cupping
difference between twisting or straight pours, but that could be a
limitation of my cupping skills.
So is it fair to say that the twists and bends may, but do not
necessarily, result from channeling? For now, I'll stand by my
not-very-origial view that directly viewing the pour is generally more
reliable than inferring what the pour is like from the stream as it
leaves the pf spout. To which I'd add, what's the downside? As I
recall from this thread the only counterindicators of a bottomless pf
that have been mentioned are a) Dave gets his sleeves spritzed on
(Yay!) <:o) and b) someone else speculates on the somewhat
different quality of the crema
Martin
>
> > Regarding the "tiny jets":
> > 1)The tiniest micro jets, themselves, IMO, do not affect taste
> > directly, but "may or may not" serve as indicators of other grind,
> > tamping, coffee quality, etc. defects. In other words, by themselves,
> > the jets are not a flaw but are worth noting.
> > 2)Over time, the bottomless feedback has helped me to reduce all
> > channeling, and the additional mess caused by b-less is insignificant.
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > daveb wrote:
> > > You know, where "bottomless" portafilters allow tiny jets of coffee to
> > > shoot in various -- and unwanted -- directions such as: on the machine
> > > and the countertop when one pulls a shot.
> > >
> > > Am I the very first to discover this phenomena??
> > >
> > > IMHO, not likely.
> > >
> > > back to the standard handle for me.
> > >
> > > it was fun, tho'.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > > 106 pid silvias
> >
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 23:36:40
From: Rob van Loenhout
Subject: Re: I MUST have missed it
|
"Heat + Beans" <heatgunroast@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1157061206.038880.251180@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Rob van Loenhout wrote:
> > "Heat + Beans" <heatgunroast@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1156958728.978908.241400@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> > > What if bottomless were the traditional, standard espresso filter?
Can
> > > you imagine what sort of device someone would "invent" in order to
> > > improve upon it? What would be the reaction if someone proposed to
> > > baristas (or this list) an enclosed filter with single or double
> > > spouts that had to be disassembled for proper cleaning and that
allowed
> > > channeling defects that could not be directly seen but had to be
> > > intuited by taste (difficult for all but the most experienced
cuppers)?
> > >
> >
> > Channelling can often still be spotted with spouts, the pour twists or
bends
> > in, or one forward one back from the start. A good pour will usually
hang
> > straight down for most of the pour time.
> >
> > just my 2c worth
> >
> > Rob vL
> > NZ
> I can't dispute that channeling might cause a twist, though I've seen a
> variety or"twists or bends" from the bottomless with no apparent
> channeling streams or micro-sprays. I can't confirm the cupping
> difference between twisting or straight pours, but that could be a
> limitation of my cupping skills.
>
We have a chopped pf at work on the lever spring la Cimbali. This is the
only pf i use at work. The only time i had jets was in use with my Rocky
which had seen a lot of service by then, this actually prompted me to
replace the burrs in Rocky. When used with the Innova flat burr grinder at
work i have never seen jets from it. Very rarely if ever have i had a
visually poor shot with channelling from this machine I don't recall ever
seeing a divot in the top of the puck. Also don't think i have seen the pour
twist from the chopped pf. Lever machines are IMO more forgiving than pump
machines.
At home i have a VBM 2 group and a Mazzer SJ, i haven't chopped a pf on this
yet it just doesn't seem right to attack nearly new gear with a cut off disc
or hole saw. I'll get over that one day soon. The VBM is certainly less
forgiving than the la Cimbali at work.
Even with a std twin spout pf (on the VBM) 9 times out of 10 i can tell if
there will be a divot or some evidence of channeling in the coffee puck
before i take the pf off the machine and the taste usually backs this up.
I'm certainly no super taster.
I'm a fan of the chopped pf but just haven't seen as big need to sort one
for home. The cleaning issue would probably be the thing that tips me to
bother.
> So is it fair to say that the twists and bends may, but do not
> necessarily, result from channeling?
From my experience more than "may" more like "usually"
For now, I'll stand by my
> not-very-origial view that directly viewing the pour is generally more
> reliable than inferring what the pour is like from the stream as it
> leaves the pf spout.
Fair comment
> To which I'd add, what's the downside?
None, ease of cleaning is an additional upside. Sigh..... i thinked i've
talked myself into taking a pf to work tommorrow to run a hole saw thru it.
Rob vL
NZ
As I
> recall from this thread the only counterindicators of a bottomless pf
> that have been mentioned are a) Dave gets his sleeves spritzed on
> (Yay!) <:o) and b) someone else speculates on the somewhat
> different quality of the crema
|
|
