$50 vs $500 Vs $500,000 Coffee Grinder 

A little reorganization in the kitchen might be needed 🤔

🤣😂

@@beanbaka Like a new house to put the new kitchen in?

But bear in mind that you should only apply to win one of these if you've fallen on hard times and cannot afford to buy one yourself :)

How much patreon support is required to secure the cometeer industrial mill? Asking for a friend 😬

Most professional transparency on a technically not sponsored video with no affiliate link, he's not obligated to but he is anyway.

Yes! James does transparency right!

I just wish we could get an unbiased review of the product from RU-vid's foremost coffee expert

I love Internet Comment Etiquette's ads sooooo...

I refuse to buy his single origin coffee flavored condoms

I think that fancy spoon with its metallic coatings taints the taste of the coffee.

@@solidamber It's titanium oxide and it's way more hard and inert than you think

@ian gee to be clear, some spoons that look like his would likely taint the coffee flavors- that effect can be achieved in a number of ways, but oxidized titanium is going to be extremely unreactive, and should not influence taste- a cheaper spoon would likely be a different metal alloy.

@@solidamber it's specifically designed for tasting coffee, be pretty weird if they made it made it so it interferes with it's one job

@@punkdigerati I agree with this on premise but I think anyone you speak to given enough time to think, could name at least a dozen lay examples of things they've bought or used that have one job and are fatally flawed in such a way that interferes with their one job in the exact way you wouldn't want them to. The first example that comes to mind for me is a rotary engine, which is predicated on its ability to seal gases in distinct chambers while rotating, but the highest point of wear and tear and friction, because of it's rotation, is the seals that need to not fail for it to work. I'll work on 11 other examples and get back to you ;)

Hahahaha

Did Cometeer already send you the 'Stay right where you are' text?

One that they share? :)

This comment made my day! Thank you!

It'd have to be a thousand people to get the quantity

Oh, I’ve got a video on this lined up for you…

Is it? I actually could use this information for my own 500k grinder. 🤷😀

Idk, the amount of money it seems home baristas are spending, this sounds more like a mid tier build 😂

hahaha - too good!

Sounds likely to me, just a room full of Aldi grinders "don't go in there James, we've developed the worlds most sophisticated grinder that's just simply too powerful for people to see"

Theranos style

No, they are hiding all the empty Nescafe packages stored for disposal.

They might even have 50 clones of James grinding on a Comandante 24 hours non-stop.

Interesting, so it's actually the sieves that give it the edge with the tight particle size distribution? Maybe if he sifted the fines out of the Baratza and $50 grinder, he might have got a similar result.

@@goldencalf5144 Not quite. Its more like aiming for an espresso grind by grinding to a french press, then sifting, then regrinding to a drip, sifting, grinding for a moka, sifting, then finally grinding what little is left for an espresso, mixing it all together and using that. This isnt a great parallel, though, because (as James' video on regrinding shows) you would get a much larger percentage of fines due to a set of conical or flat burrs which fairly consistently produce a known percentage of fines with each grind, regardless of the size of what goes in. (I have to imagine this percentage would change based on the size of the input, though). In essense, its is 3 (or 4) mills that are designed to be used in sequence to progressively grind large beans into small grounds but because they are using rollers instead of burrs (even if the rollers may have burrs on them, those roller burrs dont function in quite the same manner as conical or flat burr sets) the amount of fines produces with each pair of rollers is minimized. By minimizing fines at each progressive "regrind", you can design a machine that can "step down" boulders into the distribution that is displayed on the graphs. Also, by changing the rate at which those steps occur (as well as the overall difference between the input size and output size), you can change the graphs, (a la the Cometeer 1 and 2 graph)

@@Musicman9492 This makes a ton more sense than the picture he showed, and also is probably more efficient in terms of getting the most/best correctly sized yield out of your throughput, because you aren't wasting energy on what is already correctly sized and you aren't just saying "good enough" to what isn't.

@@greysonsnyder6133 Totally. Much of the "good enough" is minimalized in the design process before the machine is finalized.

@@Musicman9492 At this sort of industrial scale couldn't they also give the fines and the target grind different, optimised extraction cycles and blend in the "cup" before freezing?

On the latter (studying those things, not buying James one. Sorry james)

As a Patreon supporter, I like where this is going!

A Beckman Coulter laser particle analyser will be more than USD 250k

Can we just help him lease one????

I've also got a Sboly, any chance you've ever tried the adaptations that some people have done to make it grind finer? And did it help?

@@filipebet I did not try any of those - for me, the two biggest issues Sboly had was grind consistency - and static. I don't have the equipment for espresso, so I didn't need the extra fine grinds. Sorry I couldn't be more help!

@@seanmcahill My Baratza produces a lot of static. Grinds floating and clinging everywhere. I started using a tooth brush (Brand new and only used for this!) and a glass of water. Dip the tooth brush and use it to sprinkle water over the beans in the hopper. Doesn't take much. Flip the brush and use the handle to stir it around. Bingo! Almost no static! Can't remember the name of the person this technique is named after, but it's really great. Zero effect on the machine or grinds, that I notice.

"A number of rods churn the compacted grounds, this essentially rounds out the rough edges and binds fine particles to larger ones" The industrial mill depiction wasn't revelatory but your comment was. You made me realise uniformity of size meant as spheroid as possible. As opposed to say a granule of equal weight but were spiky or sharp edged. Spiky granules would lead to unequal precipitation. The closer to a spheroid the more even the extraction it is. Even if at a micro level that didn't hold I'm thinking the time factor for extraction would have some bearing on that outcome. The big eye opener you stated was recombination, " ...binds fine particles to larger ones". Is that right? Wow. The fines are reconstituted/bound back into other granules to a sought after size. That's amazing and something I thought one couldn't do. Is that because there is a very small amount of inherent liquor, or remaining moisture, or electrostatic charge as the attractant? Or is it just a physical process? Just speculating on the outcomes there - what does it do to husk? Do the husk fines more readily or less so, recombine? If the later you would end with with more pure coffee and a better taste. (Unless the husk serves some other function?) John if you could write a piece on r/espresso it would be an absolute eye opener. Thanks for your comment. I need to think about that for a while. Good stuff man.

@@southboundaustral Yeah this densifier stuff is the biggest difference, I suppose. Of course adjusting the middle rolls to get other distributions is interesting, but in terms of pure quality, having a more even distribution (with less fine particles that get "over extracted") must be the biggest factor

I regret not doing the pre-frozen brew with a frozen one, that would be really interesting

@@jameshoffmann they might be brave to let you do that!

@@jameshoffmann Extraordinarily well worded statement. The question we have is "Did they refuse to let you?"... wait for it... wait for it... ...*crickets*

Are you referring to what eventually becomes instant coffee?

I watch a German ASMR artist called Alexa Breit. James Hoffman doesn't have quite the same effect on me but it's close.

Nothing to be embarrassed about. Welcome to the journey!

By this time, not only is his pallette extremely refined, but he probably detects a much more subtle degree of sweetness, b/c this is what he does.

That's because coffee is not sweet at all. It's just the brain trying to find words to describe different "shades"/kinds of bitterness. This is like people describing "velvet textures" in wine. There's a lot of bias in all of this. Just embrace that fact and enjoy the experience. Don't do it like him and start claiming your taste is more "objective" than others hehe

@@gaslitworldf.melissab2897 Oh I have no doubt , but even In my cheep 500 buck machine when I alter the grind settings I notice the difference . This is new to me and I'm very happy that I'm learning and my palette also .

@@WalterGirao I did taste a sweetness , I was dubious at first but I did notice a change . Thanks for the input

Such as? Titus nautilus? Even the kafatek isn't that expensive

@@tobiasbouma4071 eg Weber EG-1. Yeah, 1500 below 5k but still a lot closer to 5k than to 500

3700 i think Is about as expensive as they get and i am curoous too, would be a small difference in taste. What makes the 500k grinder so good Is being able to adjust fines and coarses individually on top of mass production grinding. But to a certain point there simply is a good distribution we all love and it cant be that expensive to get there. An ssp burr is 250 then you just gotta make them spin.

Let me quickly explain my thought behind my comment… The 50 USD Grinder delivered the expected results- we already knew how it would stand up against the 500 USD Grinder. What would’ve been interesting to know is: Can we produce a cup of coffee at home that is of no noticeable difference to a 500k commercial grinder? If we took a top-of-the-line grinder and there would’ve been a difference, we’d know that, pretty much, no matter how expensive you go, you won’t reach the levels of a big commercial grinder. If it would taste the same, we could draw conclusions from that regarding other cheaper grinders, knowing the results of earlier grinder reviews (e.g. Ultimate Grinder Showdown). Now we „only“ know that a jet plane goes faster than a Porsche, and the Porsche goes faster than a bobby car.

Also, makes me wonder.. was this left out on purpose in order to avoid the de-mystification of the 500k grinder, in case the top-of-the-line domestic grinder outperformed it? Seeing how close the Baratza already is, it would've absolutely been possible I think.

I use the same model for sediments in my lab too! Made me happy to see it in this video, and just as happy to see someone sharing my thoughts in the comments. Ours has a wet dispersion unit, so no coffee through ours, but we have a Camsizer that I'm curious to run coffee through now.

Let us know your findings

@@slimmysan7689 Could always run grounds suspended in water in a Hydro LV unit, as you probably could get enough obscuration for a good measurement, and they probably would stay suspended long enough to make a quick measurement? (The lab I worked in for the last four years does a lot of PSD analysis, as it's a Dairy R&D lab)

I want to know more too!

Wonder why they are not feasible for a home grinder, like a multi-step or recirculating pasta maker.

@@kozhevnikov That was my initial taught - would it be possible to scale it down to a reasonably sized consumer grinder. Maybe just two roller sets, but with some extra controll over each roller spacing, tilt etc.

interesting systems for sure,

Hmm, I assume three sets are needed to get it course enough, so maybe two sets wouldn't work

That would've been a great idea

I'm pretty sure they sort for particle size since the contents of the pod always appear to be perfectly uniform.

Would this comparison show the elements of no matter how good your technique, or expensive the equipment, you cannot turn poor quality coffee into gold.

I think for the pods they grind, brew, fteeze then grind again.

They use these exact grinders, though possibly in larger size. They start ~$200k and go up from there, you only get more throughput no extra bells and whistles.

Good Q!

But I mean, if you’re having 5,000 people over then the speed could matter.

Just a bit expensive - But I think that's a Mastersizer 3000 with a Aero S Feeder from Malvern Instruments if that helps ;)

These guys set off to conduct very extensive tests of different coffee grinders - worth following! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zEI6z1-ZE-Y.html

I have a 2 stage brewing roller mill and have wondered forever if it would grind decent coffee. I've never bothered to try it out, but maybe I will now

Do they allow for differing speeds of each roller? "Achieving a narrow particle size distribution and more spherical particles requires cutting forces (shear) rather than crushing the bean (compression). If the rolls move at the same speed, the particles are crushed as they are drawn into the narrowing gap between the rollers, creating a wide range of particle sizes as the beans shatter."

@Pilisa Ela mother looking

I agree with James’ linear analogy. The Svart is way way better than the Krups GVX I used to use but it took a couple of years pallet training to explain how and why it is better.

Having just watched the new James Bond flick, that scene and accompanying British accent certainly made me for a second think this was gonna be a James Bond ‘Villain’s Lair” parody!

I suspect they would not handle beans well in 1 pass, hence the commercial machines needing several stages to get there

Since I do have a commercial grade multi-step nut flour roller mill I feel challenged here... Now I just need a 25kg bag of coffee (minimum load) and I can test it. :)

@@carlrehnberg4581 I shudder to think of the cleaning process to be able to mill flour in it again after running coffee.

Do they allow for differing speeds of each roller? "Achieving a narrow particle size distribution and more spherical particles requires cutting forces (shear) rather than crushing the bean (compression). If the rolls move at the same speed, the particles are crushed as they are drawn into the narrowing gap between the rollers, creating a wide range of particle sizes as the beans shatter."

@@JP_43 We do that every time we switch between peanuts and other nuts, and also every single time we switch from conventional to Organic nuts... It is hell, but we are used to it.

That's actually a VERY good idea for a video! I'd love to see James attempt that. He could also compare a few different grinders to show if some improve more with sieving than others, since there are other variables introduced in grinding besides just particle size(s).

I tried this with a cheap Bodum grinder, but did it slightly differently. I ground course, sifted out the fines and used a larger sieve to separate particles of my target size, then reground the boulders to my target size. I ended up with like 30% or more fines. The brewed cup was not nearly good enough to justify wasting 30% of my beans.

He's done a review on sieves and the theory doesn't hold up. Sieves don't account for the surface area of a particle. So that would only hold up if every particle was a perfect sphere.

@@jackfranks7160 I haven't seen his video on using the sieve. My first thought on "it doesn't work" would be "did he use a perfectly sized sieve?" Because in this video, they show clearly that there are two distinct peaks in the particle sizes, with a deep valley between them. A sieve size that splits that valley should make a huge difference.

Fines are for all practical purposes unavoidable, due to the basic physics of brittle facture, at least at the particle sizes we care about for coffee. In theory if you had some way to plasticize coffee beans (please no, science!) then you could produce completely consistent particles

Too many fines can be unpleasant, but they are essential to the texture of a coffee, even a light roast. Because the fines extract fully, you get compounds that contribute to texture which in large quantity would ruin the flavor of the brew. In addition you may be grinding for espresso, the fines are important to build up pressure in the brewing chamber.

They could, apparently, get rid of most of the fines but the price of their coffee would hardly be competitive. There would be enough pressure without the fines, at least if one adds more ground coffee and one could also use a finer grind (with a shorter extraction time) if it were necessary. Though I would like to hear James's opinion.

@@SamStinson I like this idea form industrial point of view but I hate it as a coffee lover. :-D

@@SamStinson Surely you could just sieve them out after grinding?

It had ground maybe 6 or 7 30g batches before filming. The smell lingered but good to know it goes away!

I thought the motor might have cooled, because James didn't mention it during the speed test. But manufacturing residue is a very valid point.

I had the same experience with my Sboly. It's a standard thing with any electrical motor based product and if it doesn't happen then you you know you've paid extra for it.

yo Victor I have the same grinder. Was just about to smash it to bits and figured I would take it apart instead. Turns out you can adjust the inner burr on this so that it grinds finer than the extra fine setting. I'm not sure if it was intented by design but you can wind the whole show down lower so the gap is more suited to espresso grind. the Sboly lives!

@@nicholasm2239 is there a video showing the sboly mod you're referencing?

Classy I just chew mine

😄😄

Wow that's expensive. That's 2 years salary for Charlie Brown.

Look at you mr la di da with TWO whole rocks

Mongo only pawn in game of coffee

Yeah, we need one that can grind as small as 30 grams, or even less. It probably wouldn't have to be several thousand dollars. It could be a cascading set of three roller mills, and probably under $3000 for very high quality.