Rafino sieving system

[Badam]

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.

[Ascholten]

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

[Badam]

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.

[Ascholten]

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

Aaron

[peter]

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.

[mp]

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.

 

[Ascholten]

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

[mp]

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!

[samuellaw178]

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... 

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.

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.

[Joe]

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. 

[samuellaw178]

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).

[Joe]

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.

[samuellaw178]

Oh, seems like you did follow the project.  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.

[Joe]

Oh, seems like you did follow the project.  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.

[samuellaw178]

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).