Coffee Forum
frame
› ›
After the old forum software breaking in a way that we were unable to fix, we've migrated the site to a new platform.

Some elements aren't working as we'd hoped - some avatars didn't survive the transition, and we're still having issues with attachments that weren't added as inline images, but we're hoping to have that all sorted out soon.

Dose and grind consistency - Your view

SystemSystem
edited April 2009 in Grinders
Dose and grind consistency methods, I want to hear peoples opinion. I would love to hear educated opinions please. If you are guessing or assuming.
Share on Facebook

Comments

  • larslars
    Hi caspresso - I think consistency of dose & grind are absolutely critical, but am not exactly sure what your're asking for here; by the way, what is stockfleths move?? L
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    I forgot to write methods at the end of the first statement, now fixed. Search for it (stockfleths), its on youtube as well. Its a grind distribution technique
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    Re stockfleth's, I think that if I had the luxury of time I would give it more thought, but the fact is that I am generally working as fast as I can, and stockfleth's doesn't give me the speed that I need to churn through, say, a line of takeaways. A simple, fast levelling sweep is all I use when I'm going fast - it's consistent enough, and any hit on quality is barely there if everything else - dose, grind, tamp - is set and done right. I tend to focus on a sort of Occam's razor approach to everything when it comes to coffee - the most direct path is the best path. Overcomplicating things, such as bringing Stockfleth into a busy rush, just risks your consistency and you can lose the kind of relentless, non-stop quality that comes with the least intrusive techniques. I should mention the baristas who tamp down 3-4 times and polish several circles! I must say though, I've not seen what I'd call proper Stockfleth's being performed here in Sydney. I see a lot of baristas attempting to do it, but many times I just see the same mound of coffee being pushed back and forth on top of the basket, disrupting the integrity of the cake, etc. If I am taking more time with my distribution, I'm generally more likely to use something like a simplified version of the chicago chop. By the way, it's great that you've revitalised the boards!
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    To the "pushing the grind around the top thing" I actually think the stockfleth method is purely that. "Glorified leveling". I'm gonna get a glass bowl around the same size of a poterfilter and see if its a valid technique. I have my doubts. There is a tendency for people to latch onto an idea cause its new or sounds good. And as I said in "Fundamentalism v's Reality" people like to be told whats right and have a hard time when questioned about the reasons why they believe it to be right.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    For people reading this without reading "Tamping - a gentle guide (kind of)". Its probably good to read that topic. A bit of fiesty back and forth about this topic.
    Share on Facebook
  • psaighpsaigh
    My view of stockfleths it that it is a very sound, though messy and time consuming method of dosing.  Having said that, there is a lot more to the movement than first meets the eye.  I really beleive it takes around a month or so to actually work it out.  Going through the actions is not enough, you need to have a keen understanding about why you're doing what you're doing.  The theory here is much more important than the prac (in the learning phase anyway).
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    Care to elaborate a little. What is happening to the dose in the basket while its being performed. And are you sure what you think is happening, is really happening. I'm also concerned that its another human addition to a mechanical process, and therfore inconsistant
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    I was also thinking that you could use a less inconsistant (in my mind) dosing method to the dose - tap - dose. And just do the correct dose, then apply stockfleths or another method. If dose distribution actually is a valid process (which I'm sure it is). I feel to not play with the actual dose too much by being fiddly, then...Do as i said; Correct dose - distribute - tamp - tamp - coffee love.
    Share on Facebook
  • psaighpsaigh
    Care to elaborate a little. What is happening to the dose in the basket while its being performed. And are you sure what you think is happening, is really happening. I'm also concerned that its another human addition to a mechanical process, and therfore inconsistant
    The whole idea behind stockfleths is an even distribution of coffee throughout the whole basket.  The 'swinging' action of the hand is designed to push coffee into every 'corner' of the pf basket.  Done improperly the coffee puck will appear consistent, but will be anything but.  Done correctly however, it is very consistent, but does require a certain level of skill to achieve.  I don't typically employ stockfleths myself, and don't encourage beginners to try and learn it unless they have someone who knows what they're doing to show them. However in saying that, the technique was developed and used by two previous world barista champions, so it's often hard to argue with that.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    I'n not sure that Being a WBC winner and using stockfelths necessarily go hand in hand (validity of method I mean). What I'm wondering is if it really does what is claimed. Describe to me whats happening inside the basket while applying this method (not the result). how far down the basket is movement happening. Also I understand that this method really does require consistant dosing to make it a useful technique. Which takes me back to free dosing and tapping not being the optimium choice in my mind
    Share on Facebook
  • psaighpsaigh
    well considering they both won while employing that method, surely that adds some credibility to the technique.  If it was good enough to please 7 world accredited judges (twice) than surely the quality of the method must be good. As for what's happening, check out http://www.home-barista.com/tips/stockfleths-move-for-dummies-t4594.html and http://www.home-barista.com/tips/please-describe-stockfleths-move-t3207.html
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    Are you suggesting that it was the stockfleths move that won them the title. I dont think so...Clearly they are good at what they do. You seem like the kind to compete. Do you think that a distribution method is the main component of the judging process? Sorry But you aren't very good at giving explainations for your thoughts. Maybe your not good at writing them. "Just Because" doesn't cut it for me I'm sorry. Trying not to be nasty here. But you do sound somewhat articulate. So I'll wait for a more involved answer when you can formulate it better. And it seems you keep avoiding answering on the movement of the grinds inside the porterfilter. Or is the process just a guessing game
    Share on Facebook
  • Greg41Greg41
    I am wondering whether we are getting just a bit too technical when it comes to making a cup of coffee. Fair enough you have to have a good technique to arrive at a good cup of coffee but how far can we take it. I dont think you could say one method is right or wrong as long as the result in the cup satifies whoever is drinking or judging it. I suppose that could be another topic "Is coffee making getting too technical?" I dont want to be negative to this topic its just been my observation for some time.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    I totally agree with you greg. But its the complication in part, that I bring up these topics. I dont know if you've read the other topics I've raised, but my main goal is achieving a simplification to exact speed and consistency. Now there are a few components of coffee that are extreemly complicated. Noteably this topic of dose and grind + consistency. Unfortunately there are a hundred or more different combinations of methods we can apply to the final product. But its combining them properly and consistantly that creates the intricate debate. So sorry if it bores you. But I'm sure all the back and forth of opinions is at least a little entertaining
    Share on Facebook
  • Greg41Greg41
    Casp i did'nt say anything about the topic being boring. i said everything was getting too technical. you said there are components in coffee that a complicated. I dont find anything complicated in coffee. Thats my view only. its only as complicated as you want it to be.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    Just curious if your a professional. Because your response sounds either uneducated or arrogant
    Share on Facebook
  • Greg41Greg41
    Hey woo there tiger. i wasnt being arrogant just stating my viewas the title of the post is headed. What do you consider as educated?
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    just trying to gage you skill level. I'm a feisty fella, I like it when people validate/quantify their ideas not just blurt them out.
    Share on Facebook
  • Greg41Greg41
    Sorry if it sounds like im blurting, didnt think i was .I am a fairly laid back fella myself. Not here for an argument, just a discussion. Not the best when it comes to describing technical aspects of things. but thats through no fault of mine just my lack of education.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    See, being honest makes the world go round. Its OK to not be educated. But these topics are specifically aimed at the deep understanding of the "why" we do things. I thought you may have been one of the old garde coffee nazis, that love to tout worn out ideas of over simple ideas. I'm not a prick really!!!!
    Share on Facebook
  • Greg41Greg41
    Never said you were mate. They that we've cleared that up, what were we talking about.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    Casp, I do have to ask whether you're here to discuss things or overreact to everybody and misinterpret shit.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    Seems spilly, that you didn't read the opening question. My reaction to greg was based on the fact that he hadn't added to the discussion. Just offered an opinion based on his apathy for the labouriousness, of the intricate ideas around creating a consistent cup. Misinterperate that....Spizza.
    Share on Facebook
  • adminadmin
    Hey guys - appreciate if we could tone this one down a little [ca, please remember, if you disagree, feel free to say so, but please not in a personal manner]. thanks -A
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    casp, I meant re: psaigh both here and in another thread. You put forth good points but you also fail to comprehend others'. I'm not getting into an internet argument with you, that's the most ludicrous waste of time I could ever think of.
    Share on Facebook
  • Greg41Greg41
    casp, I meant re: psaigh both here and in another thread. You put forth good points but you also fail to comprehend others'. I'm not getting into an internet argument with you, that's the most ludicrous waste of time I could ever think of.
    Thanks Spilly. My thoughts as well.
    Share on Facebook
  • Unknown
    Well as clearly opinionated as I am. Over the last week, I have been practicing some techniques. Heres my EDUCATED opinion. Manual/Free dosing: Dont do it unless your cosistent Dose - Tap - Dose - Tap - Level: Even though you can achieve (closely) cosistency. Its hardly an exact method. And I have no doubt it creates different layers of density in the puck (dont quote me on that yet though, OPINION at the moment) Using the dosing chambers to dose: Very accurate if your grinder is well maintained. Specifically the burrs. I think Begginers should always apply this method. Get the fudamentals down before advanced techniques are applied
    I will say that a some "HIGH"(scoff) level baristas, dont percieve Using the chambers as cosistent, due to air pockets or clumping. This really isn't the case (unless your grinder is in bad shape), Especially when grinding on demand. Except if you pull the lever too fast when you dose (and yes that is a definate truth, fast action throws the grinds around the carosel). Grind on demand: Well Dah Manual/Free Dosing with Stockfleths or other Distribution Techniques: I think "yes" this a good way of achieving cosistency. Stockfleths particularly, Although it's VERY BLOODY MESSY. To add to that, I used the dosing technique where you swivle the handle while dosing. I would suggest replacing the tap in the middle with this. Tapping the Handle when tamping: Dont do it, creates fractures around the side of the puck. As for the inside of the puck. Not really sure about that, but its a reasonable assumtion that it does. To qualify my results, I weighed every dose method 5 times (in the handle) to ensure method cosistency. The most cosistent was using chambers in the carosel (although I'm sure I could get better at the others). And lots of tasting. Oh my god my kidneys. So, I hope this was enlightening
    Share on Facebook
  • askthecoffeeguyaskthecoffeeguy
    Thanks to Casp for his contribution to this forum - but I will reiterate for the record that having a go at other forum members does little to advance the coffee cause.   Casp has gone on to greener pastures and I'm locking this one down as it appears to be heading in circles Incase you're wondering I've been out of the country and only just got back otherwise I probably would've jumped on this one a little sooner Anyone who fels strongly about it is welcome to start a new thread Cheers,  Pat
    Share on Facebook
Sign In or Register to comment.

Coffee Forum

@ 2026 The Coffee Forum, All rights reserved.

Policies

Privacy Policy

Social