Jump to content

Charliej

Members
  • Content Count

    4,183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

550 Excellent

1 Follower

About Charliej

  • Other groups Banned Users
    Contributor
  • Rank
    Thief and Fraudster - steer clear

Your Profile

  • Location
    Chorley Lancashire

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ben if you get no takers you can do as I did with mine and get some Peek brand metal polish and use it to get a polished shiny black rather than a matt finish, if it's the matt surface that you aren't getting on with.
  2. Mark what I was saying is that there are more variables at play and can effect the extraction than just a tamper, this average of up to 1% extra EY, only holds true for the comparisons he shows, so it's not a case that a Pergtamp will automatically give you a possible 1% extra EY, particularly if you are using tampers with no radiusing of the edge and are 58.35mm or over. Regarding 25 data points, submitting a product or theory to a rigourously peer reviewed medium, based on some very skewed comparisons and only 25 data points in the industry I worked in would run a very high risk of ridicule. What I'm saying is simple and should be easy for you to actually work out Mark, I'm simply using a different set of comparisons that also exist in the real world to illustrate my point. Point of fact when Greg Pullman owned and ran the company and made the tampers himself he preferred to either sell you a tamper and VST basket that were custom made to fit together as a pair or for you to send him your VST basket and he would make a tamper to fit that.Reg Barber still offer tamper bases in all sorts of odd sizes and Jens previously offered his oversize tampers as 58.5mm so there are a lot of tamper bases of 58.5mm or greater out there, and having had a good look online none of the more commonly used high end tamper suppliers offer a flat base with a 1mm radius to the edge, this includes the maker of both VST baskets and the refractometer and software so often referred to these days ( personally I would imagine they know a thing or two about all of this stuff and still only offer the one tamper). Price alone is not the only reason for buying a Torr Flat 58.5mm tamper, I can actually get a handle that fits my hands with a Torr- not so with a Pullman tamper. If when I get it and it makes a difference that makes my coffee taste better to me I'll keep it and sell one of the others if not I'll sell the 58.5mm, simples really. If I could afford it and the ongoing costs of testing espresso yes I would probably own a refractometer myself, simply as a good thing to own but not an essential one. I've got over ten times the cost tied up in my Sound and acoustic analysis software and microphones( this was something I needed as a freelance professional) so don't make assumptions that I am anti measurement, I'm not, but for me it is also tempered with a dose of do I really need it? and like untold thousands of people across the world I use the more easily accessible aspects of measuring my coffee in order to get it to taste how I like it, and if I like it I don't have a burning need to know its EY or the TDS of the complete beverage to know I like it the way I have made it. What I do know is that repeating that method as accurately as I can should result in tasty coffee time after time and experience has taught me what to change if the taste changes, after all I drink coffee not numbers and the taste of my coffee is, at the end of the day what I am more interested in,not the process of making it beyond a certain point.
  3. If you keep track of how you make your coffee by whichever method you use and then replicate this process every time and the result is tasty, you have no need to know what the resultant Extraction Yield is in order to repeat your process and make a coffee that you like, after all that is what you are affirming with measurement. Nowhere did I say that coffee tastes "the same" at a given yield, but one would hope that under ideal conditions and made the same way each time, using the same bean that it would taste the same that day i.e in your own kitchen/ place of work following your own method and recipe, otherwise where does this striving for consistency get you. My argument here has not been about the extraction, but Mark you seem to default to turning anything that mentions extraction to being all about that. My doubts centre upon the methodology used to provide the original data, it is very easy to make up comparative tests that will give the answer you want in the name of selling a product and it doesn't take much thought to understand that the larger the surface area of a flat based tamper is then the smaller the area of untamped grounds, so the obvious way to skew the data towards your desired result is to compare against something that has a lot less surface area e.g is equivalent to a completely flat base of either 56 or 56.35mm, when compared to a tamper with a tight edge such as the VST made 58.35mm or a Knock heft the differences are nowhere near as big. Yet to me if one is wanting to draw comparisons using VST baskets surely one should include the tamper VST designed themselves for use in their baskets or one with a more or less identical design where it comes to the base itself and the angle of the edge where it meets the side of the tamper. Given a 90 degree or greater angle between the base and side of the piston the difference in area becomes a lot less, in fact between a 58.5mm and 58.35mm there is only 0.13766 cm2 difference in untamped grounds. This is basically just an illustration of how choosing your comparisons can skew data and the thrust of something, nothing to do with the extraction yield or resultant TDS of the beverage, simply about the original data and methodology.
  4. Easier than keeping track of how much coffee you make by weight? Once you have determined what recipe and ratio you will use for your espresso shots you will know how much dry weight of coffee you use per shot, there will inevitably be some wastage in spilled grinds, but it shouldn't take you long to keep track of how many shots you get per kilo and how long it takes to go through a kg. After that simply keep an eye on how many kg you are using a day and divide by your dose dry weight to get the number of shots, counting the cups used could end up being misleading as you will get some people who only want a single shot in their coffee, others a double shot and others again that want an extra shot.
  5. A smaller heatsink always get's warmer than a larger one given the same heat input and the heat produced by the machine while on constantly has to go somewhere and with less bean mass to absorb the excess heat there is more heat to go around per bean.
  6. Maybe it's a little like comparing cask strength single malts with the typical abv bottled ones, I love a neat cask strength whisky to sit and sip with nothing in it bar one of those whisky rocks to chill it a little, whereas for some people whisky at that strength is simply too intense for some people and they can only drink it adulterated in some way. I'm not a fan of a lot of blends as espresso but like SO beans as espresso.
  7. The question is where do you draw the line between data obtained in order to prove one's point and truly objective data Mark? If when promoting any new product whoever you are and wherever it is from, it is only tested a limited number of times against the worst possible comparison scenario consciously or not then it isn't truly objective. Pure science and measurement are not always the best judge of sensory data as everyone experiences things differently. To provide an example, I know for an absolute fact that when it comes to setting up a multi speaker, multi amplifier, actively crossed over sound system then the pure measured and adjusted to a flat frequency response does not in sound very nice to listen to and does not provide all the answers, particularly if such measurement has been done with a simple spectrum analyser, as it is very easy to misinterpret the data it gives as , for example, it can't distinguish whether or not a higher level of a particular frequency is due to either the source signal or a resonance in the room, therefore a much more complex measurement method is required in order to take time into account in order to determine more accurately where any problem areas are and even when your measurement equipment uses six data inputs at once in a larger room or arena etc you have to take measurements at many different points to gather a true picture, you then need to know how to interpret the data correctly. I have never yet heard or heard of an auto correction algorithm that actually made a system sound "better" the final judgement on tweaks once a baseline sound has been optimised for as much of the venue as possible are performed by ear, I have also come across "old pros" who have been doing the job since the birth of large scale sound reinforcement systems who by judgement alone are able to get close enough to a synthesised approach of objective measurement and subjective listening to be more than usable for the occasion. With making coffee simply going by the numbers from someone else's recipe, whether measured or not does not guarantee your attempt will taste the same as that of the originator of the recipe, inevitably you will need to tweak something to allow for the condition of your beans and environmental conditions where you make your coffee too and any of these factors as well as adding in human variance can also affect things by a far greater margin than 1% on your extraction.
  8. I would guess that power saving mode if enabled along with the timed on off settings would impact on this so the bean temperature under those circumstances, if left on all day I could see the bean temperature in the grinder rising as fewer and fewer beans try to absorb the heat output from the rest of the machine.
  9. The major issue being that more fingers are being put into the pot wanting a return which has impacted on ticket prices and it's the people that make the show happen and the artists who's fees get squeezed first. Singles sales have made very little money for years now and also very little money has been put into developing new artists and their careers either, despite the record companies still making huge profits, but as they are now owned by people who are more about the money than the music that is only to be expected. Twenty years ago a typical record deal, type of act depending, was for 2 albums and 3-4 singles, with a decent chunk up front as an advance, these days a 1 album deal or a 1 single deal is more usual with the only thing up front in any way is the recording costs being covered and even that is a double edged sword for the artist, as whoever owns the master recordings of that particular version of a song can do what they want with it as regards release, remix, re-release, license for use in movies or adverts as long as the artists get their contractually agreed royalties, it's basically a throwaway culture where you get one shot and that's it.
  10. Mark for someone who says they have no iron in the fire you sure as hell enjoy getting personal about it. I don't have to look at my tampers I know they don't have a radiused edge apart from my convex ones and I haven't been using the convex ones in relation to this discussion. I'm going to buy myself one of Jen's bases and see for myself I nowhere said anything about the relative price that's your insertion. My scepticism is based on the limited amount of test data given and I have stated my objections to that and given figures calculated when dealing with a tamper base that has no radiused edge, which clearly shows that the difference isn't anywhere near as big. Matt Perger is trying to sell a product whether you like it or not and in the past you have also cast aspersions over the methodology manufacturers use to obtain figures they quote, so where is the issue in this case? Given the issues that get repeatedly aired regarding tamping it is fair to say his figures are what he achieved, but given that everyone is different his figure of an average extra 1% extraction will more than likely not be achieved by all users so this extra is only a possibility not a certainty. If I was that prejudiced against the notion I wouldn't be bothering with a Torr 58.5mm flat tamper. Regarding the burrs used in the Lido 1 and the Hausgrind and also a whole host of cheaper electric grinders, well for starters I've owned an electric grinder with that burr set and used it for espresso, I have also used my Hausgrind for espresso and it makes a better job of it than the MC2 did, a lot of that will be down to how well the grinder is built and keeps it's burr alignment not simply the burrs alone, where did I state that it was the burrs alone ? I'm not alone in having this opinion either, or are you trying to suggest that an MC2 is just as good as a Lido 1 or Hausgrind?
  11. The Brass ones were quite a long way under that. The price I have nothing against it's the messianic zeal with which his every assertion is received, implicit in his blog post is that he is trying to sell you something, so to me there is an element of hyperbole there, in this case it was to assume worst case scenario other tampers in the maths and use them also in the very simple and limited run of tests he talks about. What I found puzzling was in some of his other posts, lets take the man vs volumetrics one, there were more tests done for a post where he wasn't trying to sell you something. Anyway as I said in an earlier post a Pergtamp is too big for my hands anyway.
  12. How have you been getting on with the volumetrics Martin, as I would imagine when you take into work that would be the most used way for them to get the best shots they can.
  13. The assumption in his blog is that every tamper is made that way (or being uncharitable that assumption makes his idea look better), when in reality the differences are far far smaller when working with a none radiused edge. The guys that have bought them love them and at £95 I'm sure they were bound to, for me until I have my Torr 58.5mm base then the jury is out. I guess those of you using an EK need at least something that makes the process a little neater and less messy
  14. Artists have always made the money out of tours and merchandise mainly, unless they sold huge amounts of singles or albums. The difference is these days the record companies want their slice of the touring and merchandise money by only signing so called 360 deals where they get a piece of everything. In 15 years the costs of putting a show on have risen dramatically, venue hire, more stewards/bouncers are required by law, health and safety concerns add costs, and of course people who make the shows happen have had their pay rise in those 15 years the same as you have Daren, one major thing that no longer happens I mentioned in my earlier post. Record companies used to pay money towards the tour costs even though they got none of the cash from the tour or merch, it was called tour support and was seen as part of the promotions budget for the most recent release, they no longer do that as many artists tour far more than they do new albums, so a big chunk of money that covered the costs is no longer there, but the costs still remain.
  15. £75-80 for the surgery and it doesn't matter what it would have cost even if it meant not eating for a bit for me. I just don't get anyone who would have an animal euthanised simply because of cost. A pet is a companion regardless of what variety of animal you have and you do what it takes to make sure they stay healthy, in this case the only answer is surgery and if it means missing a raffle then c'est la vie. He might be "only" a hamster to some but like any pet you get attached to them.
×
×
  • Create New...