So the good news is that you can choose from a generic blind shaker or a WDT tool depending on your workflow preference. In my own personal experience I enjoy the workflow of both methods but find the blind shaker method to be a little more streamlined. Great video series. Thank you for taking the time to do this!
My data suggests that you may not even need a blind shaker. Just shaking using a regular dosing cup was statistically no different than WDT. The short summary of my data was that I was unable to see any difference between WDT and shaking on extraction yield regardless of whether I used a dosing cup, knock off blind shaker, or Weber blind shaker. Nor did it matter whether I dropped the coffee from a shaker from a height or just directly on top of the portafilter. I even did some meta-analysis combining my data from all the tests I did and did deeper multivariate analysis. I didn't report that, because I didn't see a reason to waste time explaining way more complicated stats that didn't say anything different. So, my opinion is that a person is probably ok doing whichever method they find most convenient and to their own satisfaction, without major worry that you're missing out on anything.
Thank you for your work ! This video truly feels unbiased. Sometimes, we would really like to see differences, but it is only unconscious bias. I feel as if the coffee world is approaching the audiofile world in the early 2000's. I believe a lot of coffee gear wouldn't pass a real double blind. I would love to see a test of the different hole patterns on high extraction baskets. Comparing the baskets open area or restriction vs yield, and see if hole pattern/distribution/size has any real impact.
Yup.... I often think back to the days when audiophiles claimed outlining your cd with a certain green felt tipped marker would improve the sound. That faze lasted a few years in the audiophile world. 🤔
subscribed man, thanks for this test. I'm currently using WDT and was curious if a blind shaker would streamline that a bit but was hesitant about the fiddly workflow. Your comments at 7:07 was my exact concern and aligned with my thoughts word for word.
The one thing I learned. Not to bother with either of these products. Seem like just another step needed to achieve the same results you would get if you didn't use one at all.
fantastic couple of videos, thank you for the information! I bought a knock off a while back and did my own testing vs wdt and i found that there was pretty much no difference either (very unscientific testing though) but I prefer using the shaker just because shaking for like 5 seconds vs doing wdt feels less fiddly lol
For everyone having trouble with retention, I bought a knock-off from Aliexpress and having trouble with retention found it helpful to shake lighter, prioritising a shaking motion that caused the grinds to collide with the rounded outer-walls rather then the top and bottom. Hope this can help a few people, but I agree with some comments that a better coating with less grind adherence would be helpful, and I would pay for it! lol. @Tech Dregs, how long did you WDT your shots in this experiment? Great work BTW I appreciate your times put into these videos. I've studied Stats as part of my uni degree and I must say, your methodology seems sound and the language you use is consistently, and surprisingly, professional haha.
Maybe 5-10 seconds for WDT. Here's an example of what I do, but I do it faster than the video shows because that was a demonstration. th-cam.com/video/5MbV0iv0XRU/w-d-xo.html Also, I appreciate that comment on the methodology. I may or may not have a professional background in research. :-D
i just bought $10 blind shaker (without closing lid), and for the result it is indeed helping to break the lump more efficiently than wdt tool with needles. also the espresso that came out from the portafilter is smoother and more streamlined
May be I missed somewhere but what grinder and burr combination are you using? Also at what pressure from what espresso machine? I have a relatively consistent Option O Lagom P64 with HU burr with La Marzocco Linea Micra at 9 bar. For Blue Bottle's Hayes Valley (med-dark), I prefer WDT due to Blind Shaker removing the Orange zest taste for some reason, consistently. Used 91C, 20g in 40g out For a med-light roast that I got from S. Korea (Fritz Coffee's Jan Chi Nal 10th anniv blend - 50% ethiopia, 20% Costa Rica, 30% Columbia ), I actually preferred Blind Shaker because the over extract-like taste exists with regular WDT method. I will have to say the taste profile definitely is different for Blind Shaker vs WDT in my experience. I dont think it should "replace" one for the other but used as a formula for making the coffee "you" want.
Would love your take on high extraction baskets. Yup, better start saving for that test:). I’ve been trying the shaker and find it would only be good if you have clumps from the grinder.
Have you seen lance's video on comparing different wdt/shaker methods? He was saying just using weber shaker + tamping was giving far superior extraction than any other methods... what are your thougths?
This is the end of an entire series I've done on it. th-cam.com/video/M0QuSNROy6M/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/5nQgo0BHWiQ/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/8iGhlvZEcfI/w-d-xo.html
@@TechDregs So where is the truth? Lance says blind shaker .7% higher extraction than other methods: th-cam.com/video/OyUaCuoqYWc/w-d-xo.html I think we will need more testing and you should show your superior wdt style.
I have not said WDT is superior, at least when it comes to extraction yield. I find there to be no difference. This is the last in an entire series on this subject. You even replied to a post when I post all of the videos I've done on it.
I set my OPV to approximately the same used in the original tests that yielded the results. I was doing my best to replicate that test as closely as possible with the equipment I had.
@ which original tests are you referring to? If you’re referring to Lance Hedrick his first test was 6bar pre infusion then 9bar extraction; second test was 1bar pre infusion then 9bar extraction.
Been a while since I did all that, so I don't have details on it. I thought I had it set the same, but you're right, his was a bit higher. I wasn't able to replicate everything he did simply due to having different equipment. For example, my preinfusion is simply a timer. We used quite different hardware in the grinders and espresso machines. IIRC I had the OPV for these at 7bar, which might be a difference that matters, but then again, everything else people told me to try never made any difference, so IDK. My datasets are out there, if anyone wants to test it themselves and compare or do meta analyses.
Not really. My data is posted, my methodology is posted, my analysis is posted. I tried multiple things based on feedback in comments, and I used pretty decent sample sizes. The data is what it is. I don't think he was (is?) even aware of this video. Could just be random experimental variation. Could be a different in equipment or grind or roast or who knows. But I gave the Weber to a friend, because they wanted to try it. They like it because they use a bottom filter and it keeps them from poking it with a WDT. :)
@@TechDregs yeah I honestly have no idea. I’ve done a blind taste test with my finance and we’ve both preferred the taste of the blind shaker every single time. It’s weird and I actually get annoyed cleaning it out and stuff so I just use WDT, but there was definitely a taste difference with my own experiments. I used the knock off one, but I’d imagine there’s not a massive difference. Even if the results were different I appreciate the time and effort you put into it. I wasn’t trying to come off as attacking btw…just curious about all the different results.
No worries man. I retyped my reply like 4 times because I was afraid of the same thing. I feel like if I really talk about the subject much, some people will assume it's an attack on Lance and then I'll have a bunch of his subs up my butt about it. LOL.
Always kind of suspected it’s BS that it does a better job at extraction than WDT. I wanted one as it seemed neat and made an easier workflow but going off your review, it’s worse so made the decision easy for me
Ridiculously consistent data. Kudos!
So the good news is that you can choose from a generic blind shaker or a WDT tool depending on your workflow preference. In my own personal experience I enjoy the workflow of both methods but find the blind shaker method to be a little more streamlined. Great video series. Thank you for taking the time to do this!
My data suggests that you may not even need a blind shaker. Just shaking using a regular dosing cup was statistically no different than WDT.
The short summary of my data was that I was unable to see any difference between WDT and shaking on extraction yield regardless of whether I used a dosing cup, knock off blind shaker, or Weber blind shaker. Nor did it matter whether I dropped the coffee from a shaker from a height or just directly on top of the portafilter. I even did some meta-analysis combining my data from all the tests I did and did deeper multivariate analysis. I didn't report that, because I didn't see a reason to waste time explaining way more complicated stats that didn't say anything different.
So, my opinion is that a person is probably ok doing whichever method they find most convenient and to their own satisfaction, without major worry that you're missing out on anything.
Thanks
You answered my silent questions about blind shaker effectiveness, thus saving me from buying one and being disappointed.
Thank you for your work ! This video truly feels unbiased.
Sometimes, we would really like to see differences, but it is only unconscious bias. I feel as if the coffee world is approaching the audiofile world in the early 2000's. I believe a lot of coffee gear wouldn't pass a real double blind.
I would love to see a test of the different hole patterns on high extraction baskets. Comparing the baskets open area or restriction vs yield, and see if hole pattern/distribution/size has any real impact.
...Litz wire vs coat hangers... ;-)
Yup.... I often think back to the days when audiophiles claimed outlining your cd with a certain green felt tipped marker would improve the sound.
That faze lasted a few years in the audiophile world. 🤔
subscribed man, thanks for this test. I'm currently using WDT and was curious if a blind shaker would streamline that a bit but was hesitant about the fiddly workflow. Your comments at 7:07 was my exact concern and aligned with my thoughts word for word.
The one thing I learned. Not to bother with either of these products. Seem like just another step needed to achieve the same results you would get if you didn't use one at all.
fantastic couple of videos, thank you for the information!
I bought a knock off a while back and did my own testing vs wdt and i found that there was pretty much no difference either (very unscientific testing though) but I prefer using the shaker just because shaking for like 5 seconds vs doing wdt feels less fiddly lol
For everyone having trouble with retention, I bought a knock-off from Aliexpress and having trouble with retention found it helpful to shake lighter, prioritising a shaking motion that caused the grinds to collide with the rounded outer-walls rather then the top and bottom. Hope this can help a few people, but I agree with some comments that a better coating with less grind adherence would be helpful, and I would pay for it! lol.
@Tech Dregs, how long did you WDT your shots in this experiment? Great work BTW I appreciate your times put into these videos. I've studied Stats as part of my uni degree and I must say, your methodology seems sound and the language you use is consistently, and surprisingly, professional haha.
Maybe 5-10 seconds for WDT. Here's an example of what I do, but I do it faster than the video shows because that was a demonstration. th-cam.com/video/5MbV0iv0XRU/w-d-xo.html
Also, I appreciate that comment on the methodology. I may or may not have a professional background in research. :-D
Thanks for this video. Very sorry for your Video having so less views
i just bought $10 blind shaker (without closing lid), and for the result it is indeed helping to break the lump more efficiently than wdt tool with needles. also the espresso that came out from the portafilter is smoother and more streamlined
May be I missed somewhere but what grinder and burr combination are you using? Also at what pressure from what espresso machine?
I have a relatively consistent Option O Lagom P64 with HU burr with La Marzocco Linea Micra at 9 bar.
For Blue Bottle's Hayes Valley (med-dark), I prefer WDT due to Blind Shaker removing the Orange zest taste for some reason, consistently. Used 91C, 20g in 40g out
For a med-light roast that I got from S. Korea (Fritz Coffee's Jan Chi Nal 10th anniv blend - 50% ethiopia, 20% Costa Rica, 30% Columbia ), I actually preferred Blind Shaker because the over extract-like taste exists with regular WDT method.
I will have to say the taste profile definitely is different for Blind Shaker vs WDT in my experience. I dont think it should "replace" one for the other but used as a formula for making the coffee "you" want.
It's an Ascaso Dream PID with a Eureka Mignon Crono (with espresso burrs), running 6-7 bar.
Thanks for not faking you can taste the H2O of the country the metal came from with hints of moronberry.
Would love your take on high extraction baskets. Yup, better start saving for that test:). I’ve been trying the shaker and find it would only be good if you have clumps from the grinder.
IDK, I'm already fighting my extraction being too high. If those baskets worked I wouldn't have any puck left after a shot. LOL.
Have you seen lance's video on comparing different wdt/shaker methods? He was saying just using weber shaker + tamping was giving far superior extraction than any other methods... what are your thougths?
This is the end of an entire series I've done on it.
th-cam.com/video/M0QuSNROy6M/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/5nQgo0BHWiQ/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/8iGhlvZEcfI/w-d-xo.html
@@TechDregs So where is the truth? Lance says blind shaker .7% higher extraction than other methods:
th-cam.com/video/OyUaCuoqYWc/w-d-xo.html
I think we will need more testing and you should show your superior wdt style.
I have not said WDT is superior, at least when it comes to extraction yield. I find there to be no difference.
This is the last in an entire series on this subject. You even replied to a post when I post all of the videos I've done on it.
What if you try the blind shaker on coffee grinds with bad particle distribution?
I think it’s one of the worst devices the coffee industry has ever tried to convince us to use. Thanks for all your effort
I feel like if the coating was improved so there was no retention then it would actually be useful.
Leveling spinners is still the winner for me
Results may be different if you tested using 9bar shots, as lower pressure generally provides less variability.
I set my OPV to approximately the same used in the original tests that yielded the results. I was doing my best to replicate that test as closely as possible with the equipment I had.
@ which original tests are you referring to? If you’re referring to Lance Hedrick his first test was 6bar pre infusion then 9bar extraction; second test was 1bar pre infusion then 9bar extraction.
Been a while since I did all that, so I don't have details on it. I thought I had it set the same, but you're right, his was a bit higher. I wasn't able to replicate everything he did simply due to having different equipment. For example, my preinfusion is simply a timer. We used quite different hardware in the grinders and espresso machines. IIRC I had the OPV for these at 7bar, which might be a difference that matters, but then again, everything else people told me to try never made any difference, so IDK. My datasets are out there, if anyone wants to test it themselves and compare or do meta analyses.
Any thoughts on Lance’s video addressing videos like yours that go against a multitude of evidence showing the exact opposite of yours ?
Not really. My data is posted, my methodology is posted, my analysis is posted. I tried multiple things based on feedback in comments, and I used pretty decent sample sizes. The data is what it is. I don't think he was (is?) even aware of this video. Could just be random experimental variation. Could be a different in equipment or grind or roast or who knows.
But I gave the Weber to a friend, because they wanted to try it. They like it because they use a bottom filter and it keeps them from poking it with a WDT. :)
@@TechDregs yeah I honestly have no idea. I’ve done a blind taste test with my finance and we’ve both preferred the taste of the blind shaker every single time. It’s weird and I actually get annoyed cleaning it out and stuff so I just use WDT, but there was definitely a taste difference with my own experiments. I used the knock off one, but I’d imagine there’s not a massive difference. Even if the results were different I appreciate the time and effort you put into it. I wasn’t trying to come off as attacking btw…just curious about all the different results.
No worries man. I retyped my reply like 4 times because I was afraid of the same thing. I feel like if I really talk about the subject much, some people will assume it's an attack on Lance and then I'll have a bunch of his subs up my butt about it. LOL.
@@TechDregs Is it possible that your new refractometer is faulty, despite being Japanese? Could you do some kind of sensitivity/bandwidth test on it?
Why would you presume the refractometer is faulty?
コーヒー器具の多くは、気持ちの問題(コーヒーというより心理学の話)で、美味しく感じさせるというものだと思います。動画などでインフルエンサーがおいしいと言えば、それを見た人は思考にバイアスがかかり、美味しいと感じてしまう。この器具もそれに似ていると思います。本当に調べたいなら、統計学の手法を持ち込み、試行回数の適正化、実験順序のランダム化、などを取り入れてやってみるべきです。多分、そのやり方で実験すれば、コーヒー器具の多くは、有意差無し、という結論が出るのでは、と思っています。
Used it for first time today and spilled it all!
Always kind of suspected it’s BS that it does a better job at extraction than WDT. I wanted one as it seemed neat and made an easier workflow but going off your review, it’s worse so made the decision easy for me