Green Coffee Buying Club
Coffee Discussion boards => Hardware & Equipment => Topic started by: day on March 26, 2016, 08:29:57 PM
-
Hi guys, I spend most my time on home-Batista but I was browsing around here and noticed that nobody has mentioned the Rafino sieving system. There seems to be a lot less cross over between these two groups than say, coffee geek (if anyone still uses that one?) so I thought I would post here and see what you guys think, hopefully it's not considered "cross posting" though I didn't start that thread anyway, just wanted to share here. I ended up backing the full set, though admittedly one could by mesh screen sheets and build a homemade system for a bit less. Haven't gotten to ever really try out sieving properly before so it's mostly just a stab in the dark based on logic and some good reports of sieving in the past.
-
So, exactly what is the purpose of you bringing up this post? Also, you said you heard some good reports on it, from where? What did they say, how can one have a report when the item is not even available to the 'common man' yet. Id be highly cautious of 'good reports' from the manufacturers / sellers / people trying to get money, of COURSE their project is the best thing since sliced bread!
I would want to think static electric could cause big problems for you especially after freshly ground. Also, the shape of the 'ground' is important as well. You could beat up coffee with a whirly bird or with a burr grinder, and sieve out like sized pieces. Me wonders if they would taste different? If your main concern is getting dust out, you could just shake it with a regulated air flow across it and blow the dust out Id think.
Aaron
-
What did they say, how can one have a report when the item is not even available to the 'common man' yet.
Sounded to me like day was speaking of sieving in general, not specifically the Rafino.
Sounds like an interesting product, especially for someone that has not invested in a high end grinder or for use in combo with a hand grinder (when on the go) I brew mostly pour-over and am concerned more about consistancy rather than fine grind. However, I agree with Aaron in that the static could create an issue with the fines. Also curious on the claims of how effective this would be with a high end grinder...but what happens to all the fines and course grinds you are not brewing with? Toss them!? As much as I strive for that most excellent cup not sure if I'm ready to just be throwing away such great coffee every day, maybe for competition level but to just throw away great beans everyday, that is quite a waste.
-
Beandog I have to agree totally, that is just a waste of good coffee.
Another example. Ethiopian Coffee's. Some of them are HORRIBLE looking when green, they have so many defects in them WOW!! But.....
You roast them all up anyways, grind the menagerie of misfit beans and drink it and get a really good cup of coffee! All those 'imperfections' add to the overall experience of your 'cup', and it has been demonstrated many times that culling things some may deem 'unworthy' can drastically alter the flavor of the cup and sometimes, not always in a good way either.
I get the strive for perfection thing, but often times it's the imperfections which we crave, desire, and entice us.
Let's take another twist on this, aimed at nobody in particular.... Kopi Luwak, you will drink beans that passed thru the anus of a rodent, yet somehow proclaim you are looking for 'the perfect bean' :D, the perfect preparation. All the Pre Processing not withstanding, really? :P Sometimes I think 'perfection' is not always in our best interests.
Aaron
-
Sounds like an interesting product, especially for someone that has not invested in a high end grinder or for use in combo with a hand grinder (when on the go) I brew mostly pour-over and am concerned more about consistancy rather than fine grind. However, I agree with Aaron in that the static could create an issue with the fines. Also curious on the claims of how effective this would be with a high end grinder...but what happens to all the fines and course grinds you are not brewing with? Toss them!? As much as I strive for that most excellent cup not sure if I'm ready to just be throwing away such great coffee every day, maybe for competition level but to just throw away great beans everyday, that is quite a waste.
They covered the excess grinds from boulders and fines in the description, suggesting running boulders through your grinder a second time and using fines for coffee flavor in cooking or just composting it. They also mention that there should be only a small volume of fines with most grinders. I think it would be interesting to experiment with to see where my grinder is set, especially when grinding for espresso, but not sure it's worth the cost to experiment.
-
What defines 'fines' just mere size or shape too.
Burr grinders are claimed to be superior because they 'shave' the bean whereas a whirly bird 'beats' it up and creates dust.
What if you 'shaved' it small enough? What is it?
If you break a crumb in half, do you have half a crumb or two crumbs?
Aaron
-
Ever since I saw Kapo Chu placed 2nd in WBC 2014 using a sieve with the EK43, I've been wanting to try out one but found the price prohibitive. This is very reasonably priced. Another toy to play with! The Coffee Geek with 4 sieves should be good enough for me.
-
suggesting running boulders through your grinder a second time
My grinder wasn't particularly happy with my attempts to try this :p
I've played around with sieving a bit, and in my opinion it made for some tastier, cleaner, cups of coffee (notably reducing <250u grounds in pourovers, and increasing overall extraction). At the end of the day though, laziness usually kicks in and I often don't have the motivation to spend the extra time sieving (and cleaning the sieve afterwards), so the "improvement" wasn't really compelling enough to me I guess. I've had the opposite experience as well for certain coffees, where after tuning a recipe both with and without fines I ended up much preferring the one with them.
The one thing I can say about the Rafino is that it comes in at a decent price point (precision sieves are surprisingly expensive), so it could be worth it to someone looking to experiment with the idea.
-
So, exactly what is the purpose of you bringing up this post? Also, you said you heard some good reports on it, from where? What did they say, how can one have a report when the item is not even available to the 'common man' yet. Id be highly cautious of 'good reports' from the manufacturers / sellers / people trying to get money, of COURSE their project is the best thing since sliced bread!
I would want to think static electric could cause big problems for you especially after freshly ground. Also, the shape of the 'ground' is important as well. You could beat up coffee with a whirly bird or with a burr grinder, and sieve out like sized pieces. Me wonders if they would taste different? If your main concern is getting dust out, you could just shake it with a regulated air flow across it and blow the dust out Id think.
Aaron
Your passionate in your opposition seems misplaced here. And yes, you obviously skimmed the post, as you are more than capable of understanding what I wrote if you took the seconds needed to read it. As to its value, I think the logic and rationale is clear. Obviously the more consistent a grinder and more round the original particles the easier sieving would be, the more effective it would be, and the less waste it would produce. A Whirly blade could, no doubt, be improved but obviously the limitations would still have an influence in a variety of ways.
As to comments in general, Odd looking natural processes Ethiopian beans vs a wide range of particle sizes when brewing is clearly two separate issues. However, only time and tasting will tell what results in the better cup, so I will leave it for now. Peace.
-
I did not skim your post, I inquired as to what it's intent was.
You apologized many times for an alleged cross posting and pointed us to a URL about a seive.
You said you heard some good reports on the sieve, I was assuming it was the one you crowd funded to since you were not clear in any mentions of any other sieves. Looking at the crowd funding effort it appears that sieve is NOT on the market yet so I asked who's opinion was saying 'good things' about it since it's not available to us little common people. I also cautioned that someone trying to sell something, sometimes their opinions on their something are a bit.. shall we say.. elevated.
The point with the Ethiopian beans, if YOU were to read and not skim was that sometimes the things we call defects are what embody the coffee and make it what we are looking for.
Finally, the round particles would sieve easier? If you are shaking the hell out of something, Id think that a particle under X micron size would fall through the X sized micron hole no matter what since you are adding energy to it to move it about. Hopefully we don't have a bunch of round particles as that is the bad stuff, ie the dust right?
Aaron
-
I did not skim your post, I inquired as to what it's intent was.
You apologized many times for an alleged cross posting and pointed us to a URL about a seive.
You said you heard some good reports on the sieve, I was assuming it was the one you crowd funded to since you were not clear in any mentions of any other sieves. Looking at the crowd funding effort it appears that sieve is NOT on the market yet so I asked who's opinion was saying 'good things' about it since it's not available to us little common people. I also cautioned that someone trying to sell something, sometimes their opinions on their something are a bit.. shall we say.. elevated.
The point with the Ethiopian beans, if YOU were to read and not skim was that sometimes the things we call defects are what embody the coffee and make it what we are looking for.
Finally, the round particles would sieve easier? If you are shaking the hell out of something, Id think that a particle under X micron size would fall through the X sized micron hole no matter what since you are adding energy to it to move it about. Hopefully we don't have a bunch of round particles as that is the bad stuff, ie the dust right?
Aaron
Come on man, I don't know why your coming at this with such a vitriolic tone. Obviously "good reports of sieving in the past" does not in anyway suggest that this particular product had been reviewed. That misunderstanding was on your end plain and simple. I had, however, assumed that you were familiar with the praise that Matt Perger, kapo chu and several other major figures have given to the value of sieving in the past. Not to mention some excellent Team HB over at home-barista, etc. I see now that you are not and did not look it up, my bad.
I did go a little overboard worrying about cross-posting. That error was with me.
and yes, I fully understood the intent of the Ethiopian bean analogy. My point was that the analogy is particularly ineffective when using it to determine if sieving has potential benefits or not. I really don't care to continue with with you in your current state though. I know your a great guy, but Way too intense man, this is not the hot topics thread.
-
whatever dude.
get over yourself.
May I recommend a nice Decaf, I believe Peter has some awesome ones for sale.
Aaron
-
I don't care who says what about what. When they mention the "best grinders" and show a baratza then show a pour over that looks like tea, I start to giggle inside a little.
Sometimes that tea looking coffee can be good, a lot of times it is what happens when third wavers get out of control. I'm not sure why you would want to screen your grounds I feel as if it would:
1. Waste too much time.
2. Make the grounds dead tasting by screening them releasing all the good stuff.
3. Basically be used once and then you get a hold of yourself and say "what the heck am i doing?"
Still I see lots of people using all the pre wetted filters, timers, and scales etc. when doing a pour over and I always thought that would go the way of the dodo too. I have had some excellent cups with those methods and some that I wish were roasted a bit darker, put in a dry filter, eyeballed and then get my excellent cup of coffee.
I am willing to try this kickstarter or any of these for a staff review if someone has connections. I am always willing to check stuff out. The Minipresso was awesome on my trip to Thailand.
-
2. Make the grounds dead tasting by screening them releasing all the good stuff.
This is one thing I've been curious about with respect to sieving that I haven't heard anyone comment on, I imagine shaking grounds around probably accelerates staling? Makes sense intuitively, but I wasn't sure if the short time spent in the tin was long enough to have noticeable effects (an easy thing to test, I suppose).
-
rbk I am assuming you are talking possibly aromatics that get released upon grinding, that would go into the cup if brewed normally, however might be released to the air if shaken around a bit more before brewing? I have also heard people say that after grinding that you should let the grounds rest 5 minutes or so before brewing them. If this were the case, sifting might help this as well.
That is a very interesting and good question there.
But think of it this way, if you sift fine enough, you can save all those fines and since they are so fine, eventually have enough saved up for a fine shot of finely sifted espresso!
Aaron
-
I'd be happy to try this system if I had an extra $70 lying around.
It would be interesting to see how sieving the coffee affects the cleanliness of the cup. It would also be interesting to see how it affects the complexity of the cup. I wonder how much of the dynamic range of a cup is influenced by this range of extraction. You have to imagine that when the criteria for over/under extracted was formulated (if only in your own personal head), it was done so without sieved coffee and I would bet with a less than perfect grinder. My guess is the range of particle sizes is one of the reason there is such a drastic change in coffee flavors from different grinder.
With this system you might end up with the cleanest cup of coffee you've ever had, or you could end up with the flattest cup of coffee you've ever had. In any case, I agree with Joe, I can't imagine this will last long as a reasonable step in a morning coffee ritual.
-
Badam, yes that is correct there. I have played with my french press and have tinkered with the same coffee, brewed same day, same way, but adjusted the grind level a bit and at times it made HUGE differences in the flavor. Now with this I'd assume you were really taking an 'average' grind size to be honest since your grinder spits out all sizes. Sifting it, might do the same as say, increasing the coarseness a notch or two, because it changes the average?
On that also... say you use 30 G of unsifted coffee per press full. That gives you X strength that you like, ALL the pieces give you your desired strength. Now that you sifted, lets say you lost 4 G due to sifter fallout. You are now brewing with only 26G of coffee. Do you now have to add more coffee to your dose to make up for the losses? Maybe instead of adding just 4 G (ok ok, 4G of SIFTED) you need to add 6 G because the bigger lumps mean less overall extraction? Your cup is now more expensive from a business standpoint.
Curious indeed!
Aaron
-
On that also... say you use 30 G of unsifted coffee per press full. That gives you X strength that you like, ALL the pieces give you your desired strength. Now that you sifted, lets say you lost 4 G due to sifter fallout. You are now brewing with only 26G of coffee. Do you now have to add more coffee to your dose to make up for the losses? Maybe instead of adding just 4 G (ok ok, 4G of SIFTED) you need to add 6 G because the bigger lumps mean less overall extraction? Your cup is now more expensive from a business standpoint.
Curious indeed!
Aaron
I had this thought as well. Do you weigh post sifting? I think all you do is add an additional variable to a process (coffee making) where the trend is to minimize variability, hence the scales, thermometers, etc.. Again, this variable can be made constant, by always using the sifter. However, the grinder that you then use becomes a factor: different grinder, different particle shape. Which leads to another problem that you pointed out of which particles make it through and does that now affect taste...
In regards to changing the average, my thought would be that sifting would slightly change the average, but mainly the distribution. Minimizing deviation, but not as much as they would claim in their video, due to particle shape which is controlled only by the grinder.
I think that you can attempt to control every minute detail in the brewing process and still end up with disappointing cups. The beauty of coffee making is in the imperfections. I spend all day thinking about standardizing experiments and controlling for variables. I'd prefer coffee-making be more artistic for me. However, I have nothing against those that would choose a different path.
I know that I'd have to roast about 20lbs at a go to control for only the variables off the top of my head and that doesn't include variables that I have no means of controlling.... When I finally got the perfect cup, I'd have to start over again due to a new bean or roast. Its a losing situation.
-
and you would have to do this with every coffee badam to tune it in, then when you get it juuuuust right, you are out of coffee and that years crop is already sold out and you start all over next year :D
Aaron
-
I think that you can attempt to control every minute detail in the brewing process and still end up with disappointing cups. The beauty of coffee making is in the imperfections. I spend all day thinking about standardizing experiments and controlling for variables. I'd prefer coffee-making be more artistic for me. However, I have nothing against those that would choose a different path.
That's me in a nutshell... I realize the coffee in my cup could probably always be better, but if I'm enjoying it immensely (as I usually am) then it's good enough. I refuse to geek out on the last few percentage points of pleasure because what it does is keeps me from appreciating and enjoying what I already have. Coffee, for me, is more of a 'zen' thing.
-
I can appreciate the idea of having the perfect grind. I just don't know that I would be willing to do this on a regular basis. Of course, I'm not entering a competition to make a perfect cup of coffee for myself or others.
I figure if I can control the freshness of the coffee, the quality of the beans, the quality of the grind (in general from a good grinder), the temperature of the water, and the source of the water, I will consistently beat 95% of the coffee that is brewed in the world for the average Maxwell House coffee connoisseur.
My 2¢ worth.
:)
-
Not to mention, just when you get your 'perfection' dialed in. 24 hours down the road, the beans aged, and parameters change again.
A fresh bean one may wish to process one way, yet same bean, same roast, say two weeks later, you are going to maybe process differently, because you know they are no longer super fresh and it may take different methods to get the best out of what's left to get.
I look at it like taking a trip. If you spend the trip constantly looking at the map (That would be GPS for you millennial types), you are going to miss all the scenery on the way to your destination, and it's the scenery which really makes a trip enjoyable right?
Aaron
-
I look at it like taking a trip. If you spend the trip constantly looking at the map (That would be GPS for you millennial types), you are going to miss all the scenery on the way to your destination, and it's the scenery which really makes a trip enjoyable right?
Aaron
Right you are Aaron!
-
Not a frequent poster here but found the reaction to the OP rather interesting. There seems to be some strong 'resistance' from a vocal few (not trying to generalize everyone here) to sifting. I agree it's not that we are lacking variables to play with, but sifting will allow you to do something entirely different. True, you can tweak the grind size to your heart's content and it will change the strength/flavor of the brew. But no matter what you do, you will always get fines & boulders in your grind, that's just the nature of grinding (worse with lousier grinder). As a result, you're brewing within the 'box' as imposed by the grind distribution or the nature of grinding.
Sifting gives you the possibility to get outside of that box. The same brewed coffee strength(assume similar TDS) from sifted and unsifted grind will taste different - almost a new type of brew if you will. Not everyone will sift for every cup and it's probably not worth doing so for every single cup. But, if it does make the brew really shines, why not (for the occasional indulgence)?
As to the tea-like brew comment, I agree. But how many good coffee machine manufacturers/suppliers out there that pull outright sink shots in their demo/videos? Uncountable... :P
For those who go by Zen-like process, no problem. I don't see the point of forcing yourself doing something you don't like just because someone said so. There's no forcing/peer pressure here. Heaven forbids, if you grind your coffee using mortar & pestle, brew your coffee over a camp fire, and think you get the best ever coffee, so be it. Nothing's wrong in that!! To each his/her own and I can see that is definitely super zen. :P
Regarding waste, I recall someone said something to the nature of 'each cup of coffee that wasn't brewed to its potential is a waste itself'. If you have an electric espresso grinder, surely purging will be part of your routine. Do you drink that stale grind just because it's a wastage (or for that matter re-brewing the spent ground like re-steeping tea)? ;)
Conventionally, sifting coffee is a tedious process due to the inergonomic sift (they're usually lab device designed for lab, not for daily use). Rafino seems to lower that barrier by making it in a more usable form factor (cheaper at that too). Of course, this is all assuming the production comes to fruition.
p/s: I thought Rafino was a fine idea and did back it up,while being fully aware of the (vapourware) risk.
-
Interesting, did you get it?
If so;
do you use it?
How often?
How much did it cost?
Real world example:
I have 3 bikes: My Tri-bike has Shimano Dura Ace components throughout, My Wife's has ultegra, My road bike has s105 group and Tiagra brakes...the cost differences between all of those components is astronomical, the speed/endurance gained from the top of the line from the middle of the line is nill.
So in everything splurging for that extra "benefit" needs to have non diminishing returns IMO.
-
As implied above, it's a project in progress. You don't get it until the 3rd or 4th quarter, assuming its production comes to fruition.
Do you use it?
Obviously I will use it. For characterizing grinders, experimenting etc. I don't drink brew coffee usually, but would love to see what difference it makes.
How often?
As often as I like and whenever there's a need. ie: new brewing ideas, new grinders, new brewers etc. Time to time to check grinder's consistency. Ie. with a multimeter/thermometer, you might not use it every day or every so often. But when you need it that's when it comes in handy and you can't put a price to that. Another example that comes to mind - it's often you see someone gets a new hand grinder, and complains that he/she suspects the grind is not consistent (due to alignment). But there's no way to confirm that subjectively. Now this sifter will facilitate that.
Cost?
It costs about $100 for me. But if I do decide to sell that, I can at least get 50% out of it easily. It's a fraction of what you need to pay for a high end grinder.
A real example from me:
There's so much build-up hype on EK43 due to its claimed superior uniform grind distribution - for both espresso & brew. I almost wanted to buy one just to test the theory/hype. That's easily $3-4 grand there (even a used one), and from resale I will easily lose 10% and more. That itself will pay off for multiple sieve sets.
Diminishing return/benefit is subjective. It might not worth it for you but you can't extend that to everyone. To be honest, I wouldn't even spend on an entire bike for what you'd paid for that brake alone (just an example but it's true, and I'm not a bike person though I do use one for commuting regularly) . That's because everyone has different values. I just don't see the point of rejecting something passionately just because it is irrelevant to you (but completely relevant to the others - others as in those who has backed up the project and overshoot the funding goal by 300%. Assuming 80% of those people are dummies who have no idea what they're doing, that's still plenty of others who think this sift will be useful).
-
Oh I thought they were out already? I saw they had earned over 300% of their projected kickstarter, sounds like they need to get them going. Let us know about the glory after you have had a chance to give it a try. It looks like they are starting a new go on a different kickstarter clone, I'm not sure why they wouldn't just go into real business at that point?
Skepticism is part of our group and I prefer it to blind, "this is the next best thing" marketing hype.
A better real word for you would be Guitars, or Cameral Lenses..Those hold their value and perform at cost usually. Grinders do not. I have a $120 Mazzer Super Jolly and a less than $100 Cunil Tranquilo. Your $3-4K grinder is much like my Dura Ace components of which i bought for a song (compared to new) and upgraded my bike and made it automatically higher value, however performance benefits were nill. Unfortunately I would never recover the cost of a new Grinder, Bike Components, Camera Body, Sifter system - So as I said before there should always be the consideration of actual realized gains from investment. Most people don't like the idea of losing 50% of their investment (i think that would be optimistic).
Another real world example coffee related the Coava Kone, I realize lots of people still use these. Remember when the first model was like $100 or something way more than a Swiss gold filter? a few of us were critical of the need for such a filter but there were the people who felt as if the chemex compatibility and Made in the USA part of it was worth the extra $$$. It wasn't a year later I was gifted one for free here on the forums, I used it and immediately hated it, it wasn't even slightly good compared to my swiss gold/frieling and it was free, I gave it away for free here too. Saved myself a $100 experiment.
-
Oh, seems like you did follow the project. :P Yeah, I am not sure why they did that (starting another campaign) - didn't leave me a good impression for sure. I am not their spokesperson, nor Day who started this thread. We're just coffee lovers that happen to be a little more anal about our coffee.
Your grinders are bargains, would love to have some at that price (and resell them for a profit, haha!). I have tried to look for a used EK43 - sadly they're high in demand and you can't even find one for close to 2k (in our Aussie market). Would pay $1k in a heart beat even if that's not for a song like your case. Most people would pay much less than that for a grinder. As said, values & belief differ.
Taking any new idea/product with a grain of salt or skepticism is a good practice. But rejecting and bashing it outright seems a little extreme.
-
Oh, seems like you did follow the project. :P Yeah, I am not sure why they did that (starting another campaign) - didn't leave me a good impression for sure. I am not their spokesperson, nor Day who started this thread. We're just coffee lovers that happen to be a little more anal about our coffee.
1. Your grinders are bargains, would love to have some at that price (and resell them for a profit, haha!). I have tried to look for a used EK43 - sadly they're high in demand and you can't even find one for close to 2k (in our Aussie market). Would pay $1k in a heart beat even if that's not for a song like your case. Most people would pay much less than that for a grinder. As said, values & belief differ.
2. Taking a new idea/product with a grain of salt or skepticism is fine. But rejecting and bashing it outright seems a little extreme.
1. They were and are and unfortunately for me my super Jolly was bought at a time when Starbucks was selling all of them on eBay through a liquidator and I should have bought 5 of them. I kick myself to this day about it. But I take solace in the fact that I will never sell it and I will always have great coffee.
2. I don't think anyone bashed it. Skepticism can seem like bashing if your personally vested. I noticed questioning whether it would work or what it would provide as a benefit.
On forum netiquette where we are 1000% more lax than most forums(h-b,CG, et.al.), Day admitted he is a H-B poster mainly and it looks somewhat funny to promote a particular product as a foray back into our forums. Usually treading lightly on the promotion of products is best aside from big generalities i.e. "sifting? what do you think?" then saying something on a follow up post like I think I am going to give the Rafino a go, might have been a lot less red flag waving. We actually have policies against this sort of thing...I think you might be sensing normal shots across the bow to see if there are any ulterior motives.
-
True, there were quite a few posters that think it might be interesting(but not for $70 bucks interesting) which is fair enough. There are also some that said it'd be useless for their coffee approach, which is also fair enough. But then it carried on with attempts to describe how this will not work(based on their usage), and extrapolated into a conclusion that it's a useless product (disregarding the fact others might have different approach to coffee). That last bit wasn't quite right - agree with you that bashing probably isn't the right word - it's more a strong 'resistance' to sifting like I mentioned earlier.
As to Day's post, I don't know him personally but had seen him posting on HB regularly. Based on his contribution over there, I don't think he need to have any ulterior motive other than sharing. It's a common practice no? It's like you have found an interesting article/news,and then you share it with the group of friends you thought would be interested (and might not have seen it). I don't follow every coffee social media so I do appreciate this act of sharing on most platform. Also, I see that his post was modified somehow. Maybe I'm missing the full story so I don't know, but I don't think there's any ulterior motive going on (it's not like he only becomes active after the Rafino project is launched, then the motive is indeed dubious).
-
Yeah I just removed his direct link to their kickstarter. You know to make it less spammy.
But no man, its never ok on any forum I know of to just pop in and say "Hey check out www.spamisawesome.com (http://www.spamisawesome.com)" i haven't heard anyone talking about it and i normally don't post here...
get the drift? If you don't then you will probably have more bigger problems on other forums. For us we call it like it is and let you live unless it looks like that is how you are going to be.
btw you missed out on this Gem while wasting your time on other forums ;D
Super Grinder (http://www.greencoffeebuyingclub.com/index.php?topic=19920.msg318970#msg318970)
-
btw you missed out on this Gem while wasting your time on other forums ;D
Super Grinder ([url]http://www.greencoffeebuyingclub.com/index.php?topic=19920.msg318970#msg318970[/url])
Ouch! Not. :P I'm from the land down under, so not really feasible to bring it all the way here. That'd be $2.5k from our lens just from conversion alone. ;D
p/s: reasonable policies there, not many forum allows external links anyway.
-
Sweet, I spent some time in Catherine and Darwin while I was in the military. Sydney and a few surf spots from Endless Summer are on my bucket list.
I am curious to see how the sifter works and if people actually enjoy using it despite my skepticism for my personal use and so I wasn't joking when I said let us know when it comes in what your actual thoughts on it are.
-
You say that TDS changes the flavor of the coffee, and this sifter may alter that flavor because of a change in TDS. Agreed.
if the solids are truly dissolved I don't think they will be coming out of solution quite that easily. if you are talking about suspended solids now that's a different story and this sifting might get rid of some of the fines that hang in the coffee after brewing. On that though leaving the cup set out for a bit, a lot of the suspended stuff settles out and that would change the flavor too right?
Use your swiss gold / French press and you will see what I mean in the bottom of your cup after half an hour. I have a vac pot and the filter on that seems very fine and it gives a very clean pot of coffee. One could arguably say that using a finer filter may get rid of the solids just as easier perhaps even easier as you don't have to do all the manual labor of sifting now.
Whats the difference between 'fines' and 'finely ground coffee'. If you break a crumb in half, do you have half a crumb, or two crumbs? Will this sifter sort by shape of ground as well? One could feasibly use the sifted out fines in an espresso then?
Yes it's a new gadget to play with, but is it really functional? of COURSE the person selling it is going to try dearly to convince you it's the next best thing since sliced bread, they want to profit off you but is it really? I could stick the coffee under a pyramid, next to a sea urchins shin splinter, and pray to the moon fairy but is that really going to do something new to make it better that can't already be obtained with just a different filter method, brew method etc etc.
To put it another way, think of Sea Salt. Salt is Sodium Chloride. NaCl, plain and simple. it doesn't matter where you get it, NaCl is NaCl and all taste the SAME. People however like sea salt, say it taste better, but the reason is NOT because it's from the sea directly, but because of minor impurities in it, impart a slightly different flavor (salt fines maybe??) that people tend to like over the purer stuff. (It's not the Salt flavor they like it's the imperfections in it) Now let's do a little marketing spin and glamorizing and suddenly Sea Salt is the shiznit. But oh WAIT!! that's not good enough, you have to have PURE Sea Salt to really be an affectionato. If if's truly pure then that would actually ruin the flavor because you are removing the little things out of it that are what is wanted, and this wonderful sea salt would taste just like any other salt. UNLESS, you are actually marketing the pure impurities.. :o 8)
People like starbucks too, but is it really a better way to do coffee?
If this thing ever comes to market it will be very interesting to hear your report as you put it to the test.
Aaron
-
If you break a crumb in half, do you have half a crumb or two crumbs?
Aaron
Aaron? Is this anything like digging a hole half as deep? Your 'too-philosophical-for-me' post gets my vote for Post of the Thread award!
My 2.5 cents:
I get that some people are totally into the micro management of their coffee experience...I'm totally not one to judge. The success of the Rafino Kickstarter campaign proves that there are plenty of coffee lovers who would consider using a sieve system each and every time they prepare their "ideal" coffee, and I know that some of them will fail to clean their grinder each and every time they grind the beans that they sieve, which makes me chuckle. Everyone has their own way of enjoying the experience of coffee of which we all share a passion.
Being the guy who posted about the moisture tester I just acquired, I view sieving as nothing more than a "calibration" tool whose purpose is to confirm that the setting on ones grinder produces a consistent output upon which one bases their extraction variables, and not as a post grind correction. As others pointed out, this would be a very wasteful way of "perfecting" a cup of coffee. I am like Peter, I love the variation of the experience, and I love the imperfections of coffee, as you pointed out Aaron. I love to know what I am doing, and I love to make sure there is consistency in the process, so I would probably buy one of these for calibrating my grinder, and making sure that it is delivering a consistent output.
Cheers y'all!
Upshot
-
This device has excellent potential for some serious coffee geekage. I can have containers of coffee corresponding to each screen size stored in my freezer. I can run tests of each size through all my different types of brewing methods. After that, I can do it again and alter a different variable each time- such as, water temperature, bloom time, pulse pouring, total immersion pouring, clockwise pouring vs. counterclockwise pouring and others too numerous to mention. Then I can get into roasting each bean variety to different levels and performing the tests all over again! This could keep me occupied for years.
-
How do you get around the natural aging of your coffee changing the flavor while you get around to all these samples. Oh wait, you'll be awake 23 hours a day from drinking all that coffee so that should not be a problem either! Don't forget magnetic fields, you can polarize the grounds so they all point sweet side up so the water hits that side first and brings it down into the cup 8)
Aaron
-
How do you calibrate a grinder to give a better output? You can change the size of the grind but if it's not performing properly the only calibration is to get a better grinder, change the burrs, possibly re align the axis, or maybe just clean it or something along those lines. No matter what your grinder is set at, it will be consistent with it's output, unless it's a really cheap grinder, then it will be consistently inconsistent. If you take enough measurements from it you should be able to see the pattern of randomness it is putting out which you can use as a variable constant to adjust your burr aberration.
Aaron
-
How do you get around the natural aging of your coffee changing the flavor while you get around to all these samples. Oh wait, you'll be awake 23 hours a day from drinking all that coffee so that should not be a problem either! Don't forget magnetic fields, you can polarize the grounds so they all point sweet side up so the water hits that side first and brings it down into the cup 8)
Aaron
g
Well, I will be naturally aging also so it should cancel each other out. I will also be using heavy water since it is denser.
-
I don't accept that all things remain unchanged. A grinder, due to design, age, and a host of other variables, is likely to put out results that change over time. How does a nut loosen on a bolt? What is the output of a clean set of burrs vs. not clean? How much change occurs with each use? How often should a grinder be cleaned? These questions can't be answered without data. My grinder is likely not producing the same output at the same setting as the day I brought it home. If I know what the output should be, I can set it to THAT "notch" rather than the one I used when I first bought it. I don't know how to explain why information is important to me...perhaps it's due to the influence of a college professor who was always stressing the importance of accuracy. Maybe it's just that the 'a-pinch-of-this' and 'a-touch-of-that' technique is not an ideal way to achieve consistent results. I like to quantify the variables just so that I know the equipment is doing what it is supposed to be doing...delivering a predictable output.
-
Deuterium or Tritium? The Tritium may help on the light bill as it may impart some natural heating affects to the coffee. Also that green glow will help guide you to the coffee pot first thing in the morning when it's dark and you are looking for your wake up cup :)
Aaron
-
Well, I will be naturally aging also so it should cancel each other out. I will also be using heavy water since it is denser.
Old beans for old timers....I like it!! The heavy water part is genius...just don't stand too close please!
-
This device has excellent potential for some serious coffee geekage. I can have containers of coffee corresponding to each screen size stored in my freezer. I can run tests of each size through all my different types of brewing methods. After that, I can do it again and alter a different variable each time- such as, water temperature, bloom time, pulse pouring, total immersion pouring, clockwise pouring vs. counterclockwise pouring and others too numerous to mention. Then I can get into roasting each bean variety to different levels and performing the tests all over again! This could keep me occupied for years.
I can't say I would recommend pre grinding coffee in any scenario. Oxidation is the enemy and it starts as soon as the bean is broken (and to some extent prior to), freezing it at -20C will slow it, but not halt it. And freezing brings up other issues of its own.
But frankly if it works for you it is none of my business, to each his own! :D
-
I guess where I am at with it is that it should be easy enough to find some whatever size micron screens you want (nylon is common) and cut up some old tupperware containers and really find out for about $10 whether $70 is worth it.
I'm not there on the curious level.
-
I guess where I am at with it is that it should be easy enough to find some whatever size micron screens you want (nylon is common) and cut up some old tupperware containers and really find out for about $10 whether $70 is worth it.
I'm not there on the curious level.
Holy cow...I didn't even know there was a curious level...is there a device for measuring that? I'll buy one...just get it on Kickstarter and I'm in!
-
I don't accept that all things remain unchanged. A grinder, due to design, age, and a host of other variables, is likely to put out results that change over time. How does a nut loosen on a bolt? What is the output of a clean set of burrs vs. not clean? How much change occurs with each use? How often should a grinder be cleaned? These questions can't be answered without data. My grinder is likely not producing the same output at the same setting as the day I brought it home. If I know what the output should be, I can set it to THAT "notch" rather than the one I used when I first bought it. I don't know how to explain why information is important to me...perhaps it's due to the influence of a college professor who was always stressing the importance of accuracy. Maybe it's just that the 'a-pinch-of-this' and 'a-touch-of-that' technique is not an ideal way to achieve consistent results. I like to quantify the variables just so that I know the equipment is doing what it is supposed to be doing...delivering a predictable output.
No matter how many variables you monitor and attempt to keep consistent, there are always more. It is an exercise in futility.
-
I guess where I am at with it is that it should be easy enough to find some whatever size micron screens you want (nylon is common) and cut up some old tupperware containers and really find out for about $10 whether $70 is worth it.
I'm not there on the curious level.
Holy cow...I didn't even know there was a curious level...is there a device for measuring that? I'll buy one...just get it on Kickstarter and I'm in!
I actually own the patent on the curious level indicator as well as the diminishing returns from investment level and I am waiting for someone to send me the billion it will take to develop both - it's beyond kickstarter.
Seriously look at 500 micron screen on google or water screen size is your ideal. Not too expensive...
-
a fly swatter may work too, even cheaper yet!
Aaron
-
I don't accept that all things remain unchanged. A grinder, due to design, age, and a host of other variables, is likely to put out results that change over time. How does a nut loosen on a bolt? What is the output of a clean set of burrs vs. not clean? How much change occurs with each use? How often should a grinder be cleaned? These questions can't be answered without data. My grinder is likely not producing the same output at the same setting as the day I brought it home. If I know what the output should be, I can set it to THAT "notch" rather than the one I used when I first bought it. I don't know how to explain why information is important to me...perhaps it's due to the influence of a college professor who was always stressing the importance of accuracy. Maybe it's just that the 'a-pinch-of-this' and 'a-touch-of-that' technique is not an ideal way to achieve consistent results. I like to quantify the variables just so that I know the equipment is doing what it is supposed to be doing...delivering a predictable output.
No matter how many variables you monitor and attempt to keep consistent, there are always more. It is an exercise in futility.
So the choices are: 1) monitor all of them; or, 2) monitor none of them??
How about just monitoring the variables that are important? Before answering...I intentionally did not say "...the variables that I feel are important..." just to see if you'd bite! Monitoring variables is a necessary evil. Of course no one is interested in monitoring ALL variables, but I'd bet you'd expect your heart surgeon to be monitoring some of the important ones!!
-
I actually own the patent on the curious level indicator as well as the diminishing returns from investment level and I am waiting for someone to send me the billion it will take to develop both - it's beyond kickstarter.
I could physically feel my curiosity level elevate when I read your reply Joe...I just don't know by how much. Damn. Somebody give the man some money so we can put a number on this new variable...jeez!
-
I actually own the patent on the curious level indicator as well as the diminishing returns from investment level and I am waiting for someone to send me the billion it will take to develop both - it's beyond kickstarter.
I could physically feel my curiosity level elevate when I read your reply Joe...I just don't know by how much. Damn. Somebody give the man some money so we can put a number on this new variable...jeez!
I got ideas..... lots of ideas!
-
I don't accept that all things remain unchanged. A grinder, due to design, age, and a host of other variables, is likely to put out results that change over time. How does a nut loosen on a bolt? What is the output of a clean set of burrs vs. not clean? How much change occurs with each use? How often should a grinder be cleaned? These questions can't be answered without data. My grinder is likely not producing the same output at the same setting as the day I brought it home. If I know what the output should be, I can set it to THAT "notch" rather than the one I used when I first bought it. I don't know how to explain why information is important to me...perhaps it's due to the influence of a college professor who was always stressing the importance of accuracy. Maybe it's just that the 'a-pinch-of-this' and 'a-touch-of-that' technique is not an ideal way to achieve consistent results. I like to quantify the variables just so that I know the equipment is doing what it is supposed to be doing...delivering a predictable output.
No matter how many variables you monitor and attempt to keep consistent, there are always more. It is an exercise in futility.
So the choices are: 1) monitor all of them; or, 2) monitor none of them??
How about just monitoring the variables that are important? Before answering...I intentionally did not say "...the variables that I feel are important..." just to see if you'd bite! Monitoring variables is a necessary evil. Of course no one is interested in monitoring ALL variables, but I'd bet you'd expect your heart surgeon to be monitoring some of the important ones!!
Clearly your choices are more diverse than measuring all or none. My response was simply to indicate that you will never monitor all variables, and yes many are interested in doing this. You have to decide by what measure to define the variables you would like to monitor:
Is fresh ground coffee important to you?
How fresh?
3 minutes?
60 seconds?
15 seconds?
How about weight?
10:1?
What about the tolerance on your scale?
What about air pressure?
A fan nearby?
Different elevation?
What about water temperature?
How about the tolerance of your probe?
Water source?
Impurities in the water?
Temperature of the brewing device?
I'm sure there are at least 1000 more variables that can be addressed by reasonable means.
If you want to worry about grind, I would first focus on your grinder. No matter what they say about this "system" it will not and cannot change the shape of the grind and will never be able to substitute a cheap grinder for a quality one. And even better, you don't have to spend 5-10 minutes shaking a small box to get your grounds. However, the work might make the coffee taste better, like lemonade after working in the yard all day. Also, I don't think this system will do what you expect it to, by giving you a direct readout of grinder conditions you listed above. This would vary grinder to grinder, bean to bean, day to day, etc....
More power to you for purchasing this system, without people to try new things we couldn't have progress. I would also curiously test it out. However, don't be fooled by their marketing ploy, it is not an end all be all for coffee grind. It is simply another variable to introduce into your daily routine. It might turn out great or might be terrible, destroying the complexity of the bean.
Evaluating the negatives of this product does not amount to trashing it, by giving it genuine thought, those posting here have done more for the product idea than those using it for an outlet of extra cash, buying into a new fad product for the heck of it (For the record I am not implying or saying that this is you.).
-
I actually own the patent on the curious level indicator as well as the diminishing returns from investment level and I am waiting for someone to send me the billion it will take to develop both - it's beyond kickstarter.
I could physically feel my curiosity level elevate when I read your reply Joe...I just don't know by how much. Damn. Somebody give the man some money so we can put a number on this new variable...jeez!
I got ideas..... lots of ideas!
Everyone always tells me to keep my ideas to myself. :-\ :(
;D
-
I actually own the patent on the curious level indicator as well as the diminishing returns from investment level and I am waiting for someone to send me the billion it will take to develop both - it's beyond kickstarter.
I could physically feel my curiosity level elevate when I read your reply Joe...I just don't know by how much. Damn. Somebody give the man some money so we can put a number on this new variable...jeez!
I got ideas..... lots of ideas!
Everyone always tells me to keep my ideas to myself. :-\ :(
;D
people always complain that I don't listen or something, I don't know I wasn't paying attention.
-
Oh they want you to listen all right! Listen all day and night hours and hours on end, they just don't want you replying is all. What I have to say is important enough that you BETTER listen, but you are NOT allowed to comment on, answer back, etc. Ahh... Marriage at it's finest :D
Aaron
-
Clearly your choices are more diverse than measuring all or none. My response was simply to indicate that you will never monitor all variables, and yes many are interested in doing this. You have to decide by what measure to define the variables you would like to monitor:
Is fresh ground coffee important to you?
How fresh?
3 minutes?
60 seconds?
15 seconds?
How about weight?
10:1?
What about the tolerance on your scale?
What about air pressure?
A fan nearby?
Different elevation?
What about water temperature?
How about the tolerance of your probe?
Water source?
Impurities in the water?
Temperature of the brewing device?
I'm sure there are at least 1000 more variables that can be addressed by reasonable means.
If you want to worry about grind, I would first focus on your grinder. No matter what they say about this "system" it will not and cannot change the shape of the grind and will never be able to substitute a cheap grinder for a quality one. And even better, you don't have to spend 5-10 minutes shaking a small box to get your grounds. However, the work might make the coffee taste better, like lemonade after working in the yard all day. Also, I don't think this system will do what you expect it to, by giving you a direct readout of grinder conditions you listed above. This would vary grinder to grinder, bean to bean, day to day, etc....
More power to you for purchasing this system, without people to try new things we couldn't have progress. I would also curiously test it out. However, don't be fooled by their marketing ploy, it is not an end all be all for coffee grind. It is simply another variable to introduce into your daily routine. It might turn out great or might be terrible, destroying the complexity of the bean.
Evaluating the negatives of this product does not amount to trashing it, by giving it genuine thought, those posting here have done more for the product idea than those using it for an outlet of extra cash, buying into a new fad product for the heck of it (For the record I am not implying or saying that this is you.).
I mistook your comment "It is an exercise in futility" to mean that measuring variables is futile. No worries...I think we are on the same page. My point about using the screens to "calibrate" a grinder are similarly misleading. Yes, a poor quality grinder will not produce the same results as a high quality grinder. A post grind screening can correct that, but at a cost of time and loss of product. In the case of monitoring moisture content of coffee beans the scenario is the same. You purchase 100 lbs of beans that have a moisture content of 13% and loose more to roasting than if you had purchased beans with 10% moisture content...plus you have a bean that will behave differently during the roast, maybe insignificantly, you just won't know if you don't quantify your variables. If a screen is used to ensure that a grinder is delivering the output that it was purchased to deliver, or to ensure proper maintenance standards are being maintained, that is a good thing. As I said, my interest is not in this product, but in having a tool to measure that my equipment is functioning as it should. As anyone, if I can achieve this with minimal expense, that would be swell. If not, then the level of importance of having this information would have to be evaluated...perhaps with Joe's level of importance monitoring device.
-
I actually own the patent on the curious level indicator as well as the diminishing returns from investment level and I am waiting for someone to send me the billion it will take to develop both - it's beyond kickstarter.
I could physically feel my curiosity level elevate when I read your reply Joe...I just don't know by how much. Damn. Somebody give the man some money so we can put a number on this new variable...jeez!
I got ideas..... lots of ideas!
Everyone always tells me to keep my ideas to myself. :-\ :(
;D
people always complain that I don't listen or something, I don't know I wasn't paying attention.
The first step in recovery is recognizing you have a problem. Joe? Joe?? JOE??
-
I would think that the first step in making your data useful is knowing how it applies and if it's important.
Buying beans with 10 percent moisture because you can get more bang for your buck than 15 percent moisture beans, hmm. Something tells me that while you are pursuing more bang for your buck you are walking your way right to some old stale ass beans. More information is not necessarily better if it's not pertinent or you are not knowledgeable to it's significance to your application. There is little use in reinventing the wheel unless you just want to do it. Maybe you can get the old guy to buy some buggy whips too ;)
Aaron
-
I would think that the first step in making your data useful is knowing how it applies and if it's important.
Buying beans with 10 percent moisture because you can get more bang for your buck than 15 percent moisture beans, hmm. Something tells me that while you are pursuing more bang for your buck you are walking your way right to some old stale ass beans. More information is not necessarily better if it's not pertinent or you are not knowledgeable to it's significance to your application. There is little use in reinventing the wheel unless you just want to do it. Maybe you can get the old guy to buy some buggy whips too ;)
Aaron
Good point Aaron...Joe? HEY JOE!! I've got a couple of buggy whips...you interested??
BTW, who said anything about using moisture content information to get more bang for one's buck? Obviously moisture content is relevant information, otherwise no one would care and moisture content would never be discussed in the coffee trade. Knowing whether the quality of ones purchased beans lives up to ones standards, and the claims of the seller, is not something I will ever leave to chance. EVER. Maybe you are more trusting than I. As far as having confidence that the output of my equipment, as in the case of the grinder, is consistent, I am not sure why one would leave that to chance either...especially if one has invested thousands of dollars in the equipment.
Basically, your position is that knowing the moisture content of green coffee is irrelevant, no? And having a way of knowing if your equipment if effing up is also immaterial right? :)
-
Seriously look at 500 micron screen on google or water screen size is your ideal. Not too expensive...
eBay has listings for 12"x12" SS screens in 100 - 1000 micron sizes for about $7.00 each. That's a bit more affordable. So you're opinion is that 500 micron is the low threshold? I'm not that geeky about fines...in fact, I actually enjoy a muddy cup of coffee on occasion and break out the press. Not sure I'd purchase more than three screens though, unless I start geeking out real hard...hey, I'm not a young guy anymore and anything could happen!
-
I don't accept that all things remain unchanged. A grinder, due to design, age, and a host of other variables, is likely to put out results that change over time. How does a nut loosen on a bolt? What is the output of a clean set of burrs vs. not clean? How much change occurs with each use? How often should a grinder be cleaned? These questions can't be answered without data. My grinder is likely not producing the same output at the same setting as the day I brought it home. If I know what the output should be, I can set it to THAT "notch" rather than the one I used when I first bought it. I don't know how to explain why information is important to me...perhaps it's due to the influence of a college professor who was always stressing the importance of accuracy. Maybe it's just that the 'a-pinch-of-this' and 'a-touch-of-that' technique is not an ideal way to achieve consistent results. I like to quantify the variables just so that I know the equipment is doing what it is supposed to be doing...delivering a predictable output.
That's what your palate is for upshot, to tell you when one of the parameters needs changing. "What?", you ask. "How's my taster supposed to taste that?" That's my point; if you can't taste it, why concern yourself?
Half in jest / half serious.
-
You are the one who mentioned moisture in your post, but I see you are twisting around here so will leave it be, im not into correcting grammar and 100 fold cut paste / quotes.
Enjoy your screen and please let us know how it works for you.
Aaron
-
Really Aaron? I thought the start of this thread was just a fluke...a misunderstanding, but now I'm beginning to think there is a comprehension deficit in play here. I will try to keep my analogies to a minimum so as not to be misunderstood.
Peter, you are spot on...no need to qualify your statement...I'm really not that thin skinned! The true test of everything that is done shows up in the cup. If some people take the long way to get there, so be it. My moisture tester will be used to confirm that what I think I bought is actually what I bought. If this variable proves to red flag bad experiences in the cup, that would be a great outcome, if not, no matter, it takes less than a minute to check moisture content. Having found that screens can be had on eBay for a song...essentially. I will purchase a couple and once in awhile, when I'm bored, I will screen a grind to see what, if anything has changed. Other than this. I'm probably going back to stealth mode. Too many critics spoil the brew...THAT is a paraphrase of an old adage Arron...
-
Seriously look at 500 micron screen on google or what ever screen size is your ideal. Not too expensive...
eBay has listings for 12"x12" SS screens in 100 - 1000 micron sizes for about $7.00 each. That's a bit more affordable. So you're opinion is that 500 micron is the low threshold? I'm not that geeky about fines...in fact, I actually enjoy a muddy cup of coffee on occasion and break out the press. Not sure I'd purchase more than three screens though, unless I start geeking out real hard...hey, I'm not a young guy anymore and anything could happen!
$7.00 x what ever size floats your grounds seems like a nice discount. I don't profess an ideal size I grind to taste -zen style. Also you can actually buy sieves they use them for geological sifting I bet they don't have that "wow" factor when you bust them out to show it to your buddies though. The Rafino definitely has the apple coolness going for it. Geo sieves are more for the Indiana Jones crowd.