WDT and Tamping…

Ok … I just received my manufactured in China Blind Shaker, with top cover. When I shake for say 10 seconds and then place on a fairly tall dosing collar and then remove the cover and then lift and rotate the top of the post in small circles, the coffee invariably lands in my basket heaped unevenly to one side. Am I doing something wrong? What is the right technique?

Anyway I then do a very light shallow surface rake with my 0.35mm WDT needles, that evens the bed. Is this Ok? Or is a bottom tap preferable to even things out? Or will a bottom tap just unevenly compress what was an unevenly distribution of grounds? FYI, I stopped bottom tapping a long time ago, as IMHO this introduced a difficult to control puck compression variable that was better controlled through good tamper technique (I use an EazyTamp, which delivers consistent puck compression). I don’t fill my baskets to the point of needing to bottom tap, just to be able to tamp.

Furthermore, while I have only poured 10 shots with the Blind Basket, I noticed consistent gaps on the bottom of my basket (bottomless PTF) as the shot poured, sometimes at the beginning of the shot and sometimes through out the shot. I have not yet started puck inspections, though I did notice the odd top hole on some. We’ll see, but there is clearly some channeling going on.

Now I licked the whole distribution/channeling issue a long long time ago with proper distribution technique, which for me was deep, middle and top WDT with 5 or 6 well spaced 0.35mm needles. It’s no longer an issue for me and I have focused on other things like brew ratios and pressure/flow/temperature profiles and (just as important) finding a decaf coffee I like. Using the Blind Shaker feels like regressing to a time in my espresso journey when channeling was a problem.

Still, with the help of a friend on Basecamp Diaspora, and an Adaptive profile that he had tweaked for a decaf that is similar to mine, I just yesterday morning poured the best two decaf shots I’ve ever made; now I need to see if I can replicate then consistently and also whether the profile can be adapted to other decaf beans, including both tried and true beans, and beans that I had tried and dismissed. And I need to understand more about why that particular profile worked.

The interesting thing is that I had (about 10 shots prior to these two very good shots) started to use RDT and the Blind Shaker. And 20 shots ago started to use an Espresso Parts HQ 14g Ridgeless Double basket. And it is even more interesting that the apparent unevenness of my Blind Basket distribution (clearly visible on the bottom of my PTF) did NOT affect the quality of this very very small shot sample.

Too early/too soon to tell. Many more shots will be needed before I can draw any conclusions, with series that test one variable at a time. But my curiosity is peaked. My best guess is that it was either the shot profile OR the combination of the profile and RDT and the Blind Shaker.

Stay tuned.

In the meantime my faith in decaf and espresso is sufficiently restored to carry on.

I haven’t done many shots with the Blind Shaker (maybe 10), but every shot had some unevenness (ie flow gaps on the bottom of the PTF). I haven’t started inspecting pucks like I did before my WDT technique improved to a point that distribution and channeling ceased to be a concern. Now we are being told that we should throw out everything that every other professional has taught us, and just shake it up and distribution and evenness be darned? Channeling? Who cares?

Alot more study needs to be done by alot of other professionals before we start drinking this particular coolaid.

This being said, LH has stirred up an interesting debate, which may (or may not) change how we approach espresso.  And gained alot of PR and YouTube hits/$ in the process :)

All of this reminds me of a fable about an Emperor 😁

JHCCoffee Now we are being told that we should throw out everything that every other professional has taught us,

Not really, most professionals with on demand grinders dose into the PF, maybe tap & tamp. I’ve never seen WDT in a cafe (though I don’t doubt it happens in a small number).

MWJB

The cost to the customer is low, I just mean if someone gets traction online somewhere saying something like ‘OMG guys this $10 product literally revolutionised my espresso!’ and then 1000 people buy it. The person making the products did ok and the 1000 customers are happy until the next ‘revolutionary’ technique is discovered.

I’m not saying WDT etc make no difference, I’m just saying people partial to buying stuff on their quest for perfection will always lap it up.

This thread (and others like it) being the case in point

Emc2

I have a WDT tool, it stays in the back of a drawer. I honestly couldn’t taste a difference that warranted the additional step in the process. That’s just me though, I’m sure many others disagree.

MattH

“My refractometer says the best extractions are from three concentric circles spaced at 4mm and a triangle with at least one 47 degree angle”

I think the message is getting lost in translation. Can you get good coffee without WDT? Yes, you can. Does the shaker produce better tasting coffee and the WDT produces rubbish? Absolutely not.

With WDT and shaking, you get higher extractions, all other parameters being equal. What these techniques allow you to do is achieve the extractions at coarser grind settings, which means more consistent extractions. A high EY by itself means nothing. You can simply achieve that by changing the other parameters such as grinding finer. The problem is that when you do that, there’s more uneven extraction and more chances of extracting unpleasant stuff.

Essentially what you’re trying to achieve is consistent extractions which is where WDT/shaking helps. This is my understanding. Happy to be corrected.