• Grinders
  • Niche Zero - One Year in Review

I have the Niche for 2 years now and with the ACS EVO Leva you can use light roasts as much as you want… just tweaking the PIDs. Also I think Niche grinder is awesome for lever machines, since it’s fines helps with the extraction style lever pressure profiles applies and the higher water flow that usually they have.

For pour over, otherwise I find it always a passable grinder… clogging filters most of the time (used many different brands, with similar results).

Recently got a Fellow Ode and got Gorilla burrs in it, and V60 are next level. Still with some good sweetness and body, but clearer and more balanced… (and an obvious improvement on the clogging thing).

Also tried some espresso with the Ode and the Gorillas, and being also really tasty and notes appearing more clear… Niche still wins.

So, all of this is also to point out that grinders also have to be paired with a machine, and maybe pulling a standard shot with a Sage is not the best for the type of grinding a Niche delivers. I’m pretty sure playing with that Sage PiD, preinfusion parameters and some pro-barista mambo-jambo you can have a really good light roast espresso.

LMSC

I use my Niche mostly, yes I drink light roasts only (or would if I could be sure what I ordered was actually light).

I have no idea what most people are talking about in these ‘grinder wars’.

I also have no idea why Lance previously said the Niche was better than a Sette in taste testing, but now says that the Sette has a narrower distribution. Either distribution is not the be all & end all, or he just did a complete 180.

My Sette made nice espresso, but was not acceptable for filter. Measurably, it had the widest distribution I have seen from any grinder I have owned (this didn’t make it bad in terms of intended purpose, I would no doubt still be using it… if it worked & I bought it a year after getting my Niche).

I tried the Niche prototype, I had previously sold my Rocky because it was too needy in terms of purging & sweeping. I had no intention of ever owning another electric grinder again but the Niche offered the high dose consistency (with no puffing of bellows, nor sweeping) of a hand grinder without the arm work (Mark Prince AKA Coffeegeek defined a “zero retention grinder” as a grinder that could dose to within +/-0.5g, the Niche does this, it is not the only one, but there weren’t a lot of others in electric grinders when it was conceived).

The hype, for me, was simply that here is a grinder that grinds…you weigh the beans in, you get a consistent dose out, you don’t think about/fret over what your grinder is doing…you just get on with making coffee. I don’t recall any hype/overhype at the time it came out (outside of freshness/consistency of dose & retention claims), just an easy to use grinder with commercial burrs at ⅓ the price of its closest relative.

The grind consistency of the Niche Zero is perfectly normal, not poor, nor wide/abnormal/bad.

16 days later

another semi negative review from April coffee - saying it produces a lot of fines and uneven particle size. Though he never says compared to what exactly.

  • MWJB replied to this.

    Before I waste any of my life watching these ‘reviews’ can somebody answer one question:

    Did they dial the grinder in the produce the best shot, or did they arbitrarily decide on a ratio and adjust the grinder to produce it in a certain time, and then decide to make some judgement about the grinder?

    April? Seriously, if looks like Clickbait and smells like Clickbait…..

    Like you, there are so many questions I’d ask if I could be bothered throwing away the time just to be more irritated by another YouTuber bellend.

    I’ve owned my Niche well over a year now and although perfect it ain’t, for the price point and fitness of purpose it’s still to be beaten IMHO. I’m not blind to the trade-offs and that’s why I have more than one grinder

    gotters

    Ignore anyone who talks about “fines” & “uneven particle size”.

    You can only consider fines relative to the rest of the distribution, which no one shows any interest in. The best way to reduce the small bits in your grind is to go coarser. You don’t have any way of steering the distribution when adjusting a grinder, you can only go coarser/finer.

    The Niche isn’t magic, it doesn’t do anything hitherto unseen in terms of grind distribution, it is typical/normal…as most grinders are.

    A normal grind distribution of say 500um average will have a couple of % over 1mm, a couple of % under 250um. That would be considered ‘even’ in grinder terms…despite that to the eye/measurement is not even and no burr grinder is. Some are tighter (EK, Baratza Vario/Forte with Ditting burrs, OE Apex), some are wider (Porlex, De Longhi KG79, Zassenhaus grinders with wobbly burrs) but in brew quality is not so clear cut.

    He is right though that the standard grind scale markings are too fine at 50 for a lot of drip brewing. Easily fixed with another dot.

    But you shouldn’t be setting a grinder by the average grind size anyway, grind based on the smaller end that gives you the extractions you want, that taste good. If this is coarser than another grinder, slow down the pour.

      MWJB He is right though that the standard grind scale markings are too fine at 50 for a lot of drip brewing. Easily fixed with another dot.

      This may be a stupid question (please ignore me, or tell me if it is): isn’t the fact that he needs to grind so far outside of the scale on the Niche means he is using the grinder out of it’s intended (or optimal) range? Should every grinder be able to optimally perform for every grind size? Could it not be that Niche was developed with a certain range of grind sizes in mind and that it will therefore not be at it’s best if used outside of this range? (again, this might be a stupid question, but this was my thought when I watched the video).

      • MWJB replied to this.

        Doram

        The markings on the Niche are in the wrong place for brewed/drip, so the normal drip range is outside the markings.

        It’s not a grind/grinder issue, it’s a paint issue.

        Patrik Rolf says he intends to grind at 730-750um average (though I’m not sure that’s what he’s getting, but let’s go with that), OK fair enough, but US drip grind has been between 800 & 850um for over 70years, this is about 92-94 on the Niche and about 32-34 on a Wilfa Flat (well within it’s marked range, as it is on any of my grinders I brew drip with).

        SCAA/Agtron cupping grind is around 700um (you can still use this for drip), again still way outside the Niche markings.

        If a grinder is normal and it can go fine enough for espresso, it will still be normal in the drip range. Its optimal setting for a brew method, will still be optimal at the different settings, that suit that method.

        I do wonder whether the markings have driven some to brew at finer settings than they normally would, hence allegations (unfounded) of “lot’s of fines”.

          MWJB That’s very interesting mate! I do know you have been grinding outside the Niche range; if my memory serves right, you grind in the 90s, unless I read somewhere in your thread as 60s.

          I haven’t seen anyone mentioning this with such a conviction about the brew range. After yours’, the guy on the video mentions gringing outside the range. Not sure, JH mentioned it anywhere. So, most of the Niche critics do not know the actual grind size for brews/pour overs is outside the range. Perhaps, they didn’t try. That’s hard to believe, or is it?

          I also do not think the Niche would not be aware of this. I’m sure they do. The only thing is why they haven’t tried to correct it. They could have corrected in the last 5 years. I do not want to speculate. Perhaps, there is a reason. If it is a case of making changes to the marking, they could / should have fixed it IMO. Because, it helps iron out the ambiguities and helps the community.

          In a nutshell, I’m not surprised you don’t find any issue with Niche as far as brewing / pot over is concerned. Thx

          • MWJB replied to this.

            LMSC

            Yeah, I’m mostly at 94 for pour over, though I have been as low as the high 50’s for faster pour regimes.

            • LMSC replied to this.

              I’ve only gone slightly past the 50 on the Niche before but tempted to now try further, especially with this nifty technique I’d never have sussed myself but saw on youtube - calibrate, take it round to 50 then put a sticker or dot on the calibration ring back at zero, you can then use this dot to add whatever you want over the 50 without guesswork (i.e. taking the mark at zero round to the official 20 on the dial gives 70).

              Seems so obvious I feel a bit thick for thinking I’d do it via guesswork.

              MWJB Considering you mainly drink light roast, the general opinion being conical isn’t suited for light roast (clarity), you grind mostly at 94, do you get clarity of notes or do you also think it’s kind of mixed please?

              Perhaps, you should consider providing an indicative marking beyond 50 for the benefit of Niche owners who use it for brewing.

                LMSC I use the method Doram mentions above, an extra dot at “0” when set at 50, so you add your new number to 50 (44+50=94).

                “Clarity” is too vague a term and has too many other potential confounding factors. I don’t believe conicals are not good for brewing light roasts as a blanket statement, if it is so, why do you see so many hand grinders at World Brewers Cup?

                Coffee ground on the Niche is generally as nice as coffee I grind on the Wilfa flat, at equivalent settings the Wilfa can be a little more silty, the Niche a little brighter/sour (does that make the coffee clearer, or not?)

                A few years back the SCAA did grinder study,160 coffee professionals served filter coffee in a double blind test test couldn’t say whether a flat or conical grinder was used. Only after knowing in further tests did they attribute drier flavours to flat and brighter flavours to conical.

                Do I believe it’s possible that some grinders with certain characteristics might be able to provide unusual clarity (once the attribute is defined, at present it isn’t, much like “astringency”)? Maybe, but I’m not hunting the Loch Ness monster, or Bigfoot, I expect typical grinders to deliver acceptable results & work flow is important to me.

                I tend to think that if as much naval gazing was applied to roasting as it is to grinders & water make up, we’d all be enjoying great tasting filter coffee more frequently. The last 3 bags of light filter roast I have bought were darker than some Nespresso coffee.

                  MWJB why do you see so many hand grinders at World Brewers Cup?

                  Isn’t the speed at which you grind/torque different with a conical hand grinder vs. a Niche for example, which may lead to a different type of grind?

                  • MWJB replied to this.

                    Is that setting 94 for v60 or french press ?

                    • MWJB replied to this.

                      Comparing the Pharos to the Niche, the Pharos was less consistent (sifted using kruve). It was less consistent in terms of repeatability and distribution, probably due to stalling and varying spin speed. I didn’t bother testing the Lido in the same way but no reason to think it would be abnormal. The pharos has burrs closer in size to the Niche, unless I’m mistaken, and so provides a better comparison than smaller grinders with swiss burr types.

                      HVL87 I don’t know, I have lots of hand grinders, some make a measurably tighter distribution than the Niche, others wider, so it’s not clear to me what effect burr speed has. (Tightness/wideness of distribution for most grinders does not have a clear cut effect on brew quality)

                      Inspector Is that setting 94 for v60 or french press ?

                      I brew French press finer than drip (whether V60, Chemex, Kalita etc.). For an hour steep in an insulated press I guess I’d be around 60 on Niche, for a small glass press & 20min steep, maybe 35-40? I can’t be more specific because I make French press very rarely, I can’t even recall if I used Niche for it, other than the prototype when I got to test that.

                      MWJB Thank you!

                      Wouldn’t clarity be associated with telling the notes apart — say a bag specifies blueberry and blackberry as notes? This is assuming the roaster descriptions of the roast and notes are correct, which aren’t the case with a lot of roasters.

                      So a lack of clarify would mean the cup is muddled, which some ascribe to Conical. We have got to make too assumptions before taking the lack of clarity seriously. Some examples assumptions are no roasting, puck prep, dialling malfunctions.

                      When a barista on the YT says pay attention to clarity and not the body, they seldom explain what a clarity is and why it is important over the body / texture.

                      I am not sure brightness is clarity. You say Niche gives a brighter cup. The JX pro cup is equally brighter, even when I pull a shot off a medium dark bag. I can’t say it gives clarity in the cup vs pulling a shot of the same bag from a flat grinder. I haven’t tried and therefore I do not know.

                      This is far too a complex and a disputed area. I don’t think there will ever be an agreement on this subject.

                      I am not surprised you find the recent light roasts bag are on the darker side. I can understand in the case of decaf.

                      It does disappoint me when I find the bags are a lot darker or inconsistently roasted.

                      When I find the roasts and notes are way off the description, I begin to suspect that those descriptions are pure marketing key words.

                      It will a good read if you could link the SCAA study.

                      Edit :

                      Members here or on other forums can learn a lot from members like you. So, we are better informed than the majority. Unfortunately, the general public or lots of home baristas have to rely on opinions expressed by the You Tubers.

                      • MWJB replied to this.

                        LMSC I think the lack of clarity claims made for conicals are more espresso related, than brewed.

                        I usually get the flavour notes, but I like a certain amount of mouthfeel and I like my coffee around 1.40-1.65%. Making it weaker, with lower alkalinity water would give more clarity, but I wouldn’t enjoy it as much.

                        Here is the SCAA grinder study, one of the criticisms at the time was that they didn’t brew espresso, so we don’t need to bang that drum again :-)

                        NBC/SCAE grinder research