Controlled Grind

[Laurentius]

As far as I know, every method of and machine for grinding coffee creates a substantial volume of variously-sized particles.  Blade grinders are truly Wild West, with huge variances.  Burr grinders may minimize the max particle size, but don't come close to eliminating "fines".

 

Considering the care, concern, cost of makers and premium beans, and all the minutiae of the "perfect" cup for any given method, I'm puzzled that tightly-controlled grind--both minimum and maximum--get so little attention.

 

I have a couple of pretty good burr grinders.  But their output isn't controlled, and they contain a LOT of fines.  IME, these fines,  especially in, e.g. a French Press make for increased bitterness.  Same with drip.

 

So, does anyone here screen their grounds to minimize fines and/or more tightly control uniformity?  Or, do you buy coffee that is already screened?

[rotuts]

Fines , however you define them 

 

are just smaller bits of bean.

 

French Presses  ( made in FR )   sold in USA

 

used to include a very fine nylon mesh 

 

that pretty much eliminated the smaller fines , ie fin sediment in your cup

 

those same brands , made in France , sold in France , do not include that

 

some fines are thought to be desirable in a cup in France.

 

if you are getting too many times w your burr grinder 

 

you should consider getting a  better burr grinder.

 

check to see if your FP  has that nylon screen .

 

https://www.amazon.com/Bodum-Chambord-French-Coffee-Chrome/dp/B00008XEWG?th=1

 

Boded used to include the nylon screen in USA , and not FR.

 

its a matter of degree of fines , and ones interest in eliminating them.

 

fines are just coffee that's a bit over extracted , based on whatever extraction method you use.

 

I doubt commercially they are purposely eliminated .

 

but back to your question :

 

I don't know of any commercial sifting of ground coffee to eliminate fines.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by rotuts (log)

[weinoo]

I don't really run into this problem with the Rocky (who has new burrs!).  But then again, I don't do French Press often, if ever, as I prefer a cleaner cup.

[Laurentius]

5 hours ago, rotuts said:

if you are getting too many times w your burr grinder 

 

you should consider getting a  better burr grinder.

 

With respect, this isn't very helpful.  If you're aware of any burr machine that does not generate any powder-y fines, please let me know.

 

I assumed my two burr machines didn't, but after a trial screening, I found I was wrong.  Have you attempted to grade what comes out of yours?  I think you'd be surprised how un-uniform (on the low side) your grind may actually be.

 

5 hours ago, rotuts said:

fines are just coffee that's a bit over extracted

 

No, but if you're brewing for a certain grind (e.g., "drip"), the fines will be over-extracted, and that can lead to bitterness.  Then if you alter your brew to counter that effect (reducing temperature or time), you are averaging, which means skewing the extraction of coarser particles toward under-extraction.  This is the case even if you use your suggested nylon or paper filters.

 

Screening may not be worth it for everyone.  Make what and how you like.  But I've noticed a positive difference in both my espresso and French Press, and I expect the same will be true with other methods.

 

 

[rotuts]

my sincere apologies .

 

its unlikey that any machine of any kind will give  you exactly what you want.

 

as the price of the burr grinders goes up

 

they generate  a tighter bell shaped cure.

 

with regard to the size of individual pieces of ground coffee 

 

that satisfies most people .

 

you should look into a very fine sifter to get what you are after .

 

you won't get it w just a grinder .

 

P.S.:   you might look here :

 

https://www.home-barista.com

 

I recall reading some articles years ago about grind size distribution 

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by rotuts (log)

[Deephaven]

16 hours ago, Laurentius said:

As far as I know, every method of and machine for grinding coffee creates a substantial volume of variously-sized particles.  Blade grinders are truly Wild West, with huge variances.  Burr grinders may minimize the max particle size, but don't come close to eliminating "fines".

 

Considering the care, concern, cost of makers and premium beans, and all the minutiae of the "perfect" cup for any given method, I'm puzzled that tightly-controlled grind--both minimum and maximum--get so little attention.

 

I have a couple of pretty good burr grinders.  But their output isn't controlled, and they contain a LOT of fines.  IME, these fines,  especially in, e.g. a French Press make for increased bitterness.  Same with drip.

 

So, does anyone here screen their grounds to minimize fines and/or more tightly control uniformity?  Or, do you buy coffee that is already screened?

If you have a truly "screened" set of grounds you are going to find your coffee a bit lifeless.  Some distribution of grounds is helpful as there are different extractions depending on the size.  Of course getting more uniform is better.  Conical burr grinders will always have a wider gaussian distribution of grind size that a good flat.  For a flat IMO to get nice clarity and not have the issue you are describing a 64mm burr is about the minimum.  I recently upgraded my modified Super Jolly 64 to a DF83 single dose grinder.  It is really a great piece.  If you even want more uniform of course you could buy a high uniformity flat burr for it.

https://www.espressooutlet.net/turin/?gclid=CjwKCAjwrranBhAEEiwAzbhNtRX0fcrLj6g7AlWtEQxFhmAJa0YxQvI1jqWG4m0vRI-SWS7Qu3clNRoCQrgQAvD_BwE

Being they are directly sourced only I assume a link here is ok.  If not, I am sorry.  DF83 Grinder is what the link is to.  

1 hour ago, Laurentius said:

 

With respect, this isn't very helpful.  If you're aware of any burr machine that does not generate any powder-y fines, please let me know.

 

I assumed my two burr machines didn't, but after a trial screening, I found I was wrong.  Have you attempted to grade what comes out of yours?  I think you'd be surprised how un-uniform (on the low side) your grind may actually be.

 

 

No, but if you're brewing for a certain grind (e.g., "drip"), the fines will be over-extracted, and that can lead to bitterness.  Then if you alter your brew to counter that effect (reducing temperature or time), you are averaging, which means skewing the extraction of coarser particles toward under-extraction.  This is the case even if you use your suggested nylon or paper filters.

 

Screening may not be worth it for everyone.  Make what and how you like.  But I've noticed a positive difference in both my espresso and French Press, and I expect the same will be true with other methods.

 

 

Curious what grinder you are using that the screening is helpful on.  I drink coffee 3 ways.  I have a Decent DE1 Espresso machine for extractions, I enjoy a pour over occasionally and a french press.  All I have found the DF83 to excel at.  Yes there are more expensive grinders that do an even better job, but this one is pretty close to the end of my palette/effort as the other variations in the process are already rather significant.

[Laurentius]

16 minutes ago, Deephaven said:

If you have a truly "screened" set of grounds you are going to find your coffee a bit lifeless. 

 

This is counterintuitive, and not at all what I've experienced.  It would follow from what you say that coffee not of various roasts or brewed only at one temperature would also be "lifeless".

 

Same question as to rotuts: do you know how much fines are in what you grind?

[Deephaven]

Getting a good extraction with espresso is nearly impossible without some fines.  Not sure why you think it is counterintuitive.  The distribution gives you different extractions which are what can bring you mouthfeel along with flavor.  A single size you will have to pick versus getting both.

[Deephaven]

Btw - depending on the quality of your screening that also gives you a gaussian distribution of grinds.  

[Laurentius]

3 hours ago, Deephaven said:

The distribution gives you different extractions...

 

Of course.  Yet you're using but one temperature of water and a single brew duration.  By definition, such extractions can't be optimal across all particle sizes.

 

People may like a certain extraction imbalance, e.g., some bitterness along with weaker overall.  Or, they may tolerate a lot of bitterness from fines to get full extraction on the top end.  I just happen to like optimum extraction without much bitterness.

[donk79]

I have an Fellow Ode that produces ample fines.  I was hoping it would be better on that front than it is, but it sounds like I am unlikely to be willing to spend for a grinder that will produce fewer fines.

 

I do see the impact in my pourover (30 grams in a 2-cup V-60).  But for me the impact is in how long it takes my 500 grams of water to move through the coffee bed.  My response has been using a cheap sifter from Amazon.  I sift a good portion of the fines off (usually about 2 grams) then proceed with my coffee making, which I still have to pull off the cup at my preferred time to avoid off flavors. 

 

I will also note that I prefer rather light roasts.  My observations suggest super light roasts produce more fines in my grinder than roasts closer to medium.   This is not absolute,  but is a strong trend.

Edited August 30, 2023 by donk79 (log)

[Laurentius]

2 hours ago, donk79 said:

the impact is in how long it takes my 500 grams of water to move through the coffee bed.

 

Really good point--clogged vs. free-draining filters is another aspect

 

[Deephaven]

On 8/29/2023 at 6:08 PM, Laurentius said:

 

Of course.  Yet you're using but one temperature of water and a single brew duration.  By definition, such extractions can't be optimal across all particle sizes.

I can vary the temp across the extraction, not a variable I have played with but it is completely possible with the DE1.  Duration I change greatly depending on the roast.  Light roasts take quite the preinfusion blooming step to get nice extractions out of.  I also vary pressure.  The machine has too many variables actually as it can almost drive you crazy....

[weinoo]

I'm sure you all have seen this:

 

The taste of fines in coffee grind

 

 

Quote

The smallest particles in ground coffee are called “fines”.
Are they god or bad for the taste ? The role of fines for the taste is disputed.

 

[Laurentius]

10 hours ago, Deephaven said:

I can vary the temp across the extraction, not a variable I have played with but it is completely possible with the DE1. 

 

Then you are in a very tiny minority.

 

10 hours ago, Deephaven said:

Duration I change greatly depending on the roast. 

 

This goes without saying.  But you're still using one duration per brew.  Even if It's drip, and you resort to the Impatient Breakfasteer Gambit (pouring off the first production), the pouroff is one duration--you're emphasizing optimum extraction from smaller grits at the expense of larger.

[Laurentius]

2 hours ago, weinoo said:

I'm sure you all have seen this:

 

Actually, I hadn't, thanks.

 

Aside from the interesting aspect of agglomeration, I didn't get much from this article.  I wish the author had explored the effect of static electricity more.  I think only the very last sentence was the nib.

[Deephaven]

10 hours ago, Laurentius said:

This goes without saying.  But you're still using one duration per brew.  Even if It's drip, and you resort to the Impatient Breakfasteer Gambit (pouring off the first production), the pouroff is one duration--you're emphasizing optimum extraction from smaller grits at the expense of larger.

95% of the coffee I drink is espresso based.  Duration is changeable.  For light roasts I use a bloom in order to help develop the puck so that the extraction can still be done at higher pressure.  Without some fines that would be impossible or really hard to achieve.  The lighter the roast the way easier it is to get channeling.  Good extractions and channeling do not go hand in hand.  Automated pour overs if desired temp can easily be changed on each addition of water to anything within 1deg C.  It's a cool machine though...

[Laurentius]

1 hour ago, Deephaven said:

Good extractions and channeling do not go hand in hand. 

 

So use paper or cloth...

[Deephaven]

10 hours ago, Laurentius said:

 

So use paper or cloth...

Proper puck prep is much more consistent than adding a flow restrictor as well as that restrictor hides flaws in technique that are much more detrimental to the final product.  Same reason I run a naked portafilter.  I don't need to mask possible errors in my prep only to taste them in the cup.

[Laurentius]

2 hours ago, Deephaven said:

I don't need to mask possible errors in my prep only to taste them in the cup.

 

Then you're perfect.  Here I thought you were bothered by channeling...

[Deephaven]

If there was no distribution of grind size I would be which was my point.  You were talking about trying to make everything uniform via filtering...

[Laurentius]

3 hours ago, Deephaven said:

You were talking about trying to make everything uniform via filtering...

Not really.  At root, I'm talking about screening out excess fines.  Plenty still make it, whether by agglomeration, static electricity, a wet spoon or mesh size(s).

 

Wanting excess fines to prevent channelling strikes me as a sow ear purse.

[Deephaven]

First time in this whole thread you used the word excess.  I was never referring to excess.  

[weinoo]

How many cups of coffee do you @Deephaven and you @Laurentius drink per day?

[Laurentius]

Usually 3-4.