Coffee test: burr grinder vs blade grinder

[Jenise]

Filled both hoppers with a new supply of fresh beans. Ground each to medium, or my best guess on medium on the blade grinder. Examined the difference: the burr grinder's raw grounds were flakey and uniform in size, and there were shiny bits glinting back whereas the blade grinder's raw grounds had more variation in size, but absolutely no variation in color--very dull, no shine.

I put one heaping soup spoon of grounds in each of two identical single-serving French Press cups. Filled them with hot water and allowed them to steep five minutes. Deliberately mixed them up so I couldn't tell which was which, except that I put a whole bean into one of the cups to tell them apart afterwards. Filled half each of two identical wide-brimmed coffee mugs with each, and shared with Bob. We smelled and tasted, then compared notes.

Aroma:

Cup #1: Full coffee aroma, rich and winey.
Cup #2: I said "cardboard", Bob said "sawdust".

Taste:

Pretty much followed the smell. Cup #1 tasted better, fuller and yet mellower, seamless, very complete on the palate. Cup #2 was disjointed and angular, with some harsh notes, and it left a stale aftertaste. Bob called it "cheap coffee bean taste". We shared cup #1 and tossed cup #2 out, and then looked for the whole bean. Coffee #1 was the burr grinder.

I'm flabbergasted. I did not expect this much difference. It was night and day. Good vs. poor all the way from the aroma to the finish.

I'm actually so impressed with the difference that I'm actually now prepared to spend more for a better burr grinder. Back to coffeegeek.com to read those reviews again!

Thanks for testing this out! I wouldn't have thought there would be that much difference either! Good to know. Burr grinder is in the mail!

[Jenise]

It's a big difference, Bill. Back to your "yuppie avarice" comparison, the burr grinder produced fine wine and the blade made cheap plonk.

I have both and have never noticed that vast a gulf.

[Jenise]

I have both and have never noticed that vast a gulf.

If you made them at the same time and tasted them side by side, I'm sure you'd notice the same difference I did. Might depend on what type of coffee you like, too. A friend of mine who loved French Roast used to prefer her coffee after it had sat on the burner for awhile. To me, undrinkable.

I've never had decent coffee using a blade grinder, but always good from the burr grinder, even when I had fairly inexpensive Sunbeam grinder. When it gave up the ghost I didn't even consider a blade grinder. I settled on the Capresso after reading a lot of favorable reviews and because of it's lower motor speed, which helps prevent heating the coffee while grinding. This also helps prevent static problems which probably aren't an issue in your climate.

I've never had decent coffee using a blade grinder, but always good from the burr grinder, even when I had fairly inexpensive Sunbeam grinder. When it gave up the ghost I didn't even consider a blade grinder. I settled on the Capresso after reading a lot of favorable reviews and because of it's lower motor speed, which helps prevent heating the coffee while grinding. This also helps prevent static problems which probably aren't an issue in your climate.

My burr is in fact a Capresso. I like it quite a bit.

sorry to be skeptical; but such a big difference just CAN'T be from the grinder alone. the beans are agricultural products and each is different. cup #2 almost certainly contained at least one bad bean. alternately, if the blade was new or had just been washed........ if you clean the grinders and can repeat the test several times and get the same result EACH time, then i'm interested.

[Jenise]

Well, go ahead and be skeptical, David, but I'm sold. I've seen, well, TASTED, remarkable differences between Melitta and drip, between Mr. Coffee flat filter and Bruan cone filter drips, and then drip and French press, so though I was surprised it made as much difference in this case as it did, that there was some noticeable difference was not surprising. All those coffeeheads aren't going on about their burr grinders for nothing. (And no neither of these machines had just been cleaned.)

but there is such a thing as a bad bean. i make my coffee exactly the same way every day. some days it just tastes bad - musty or green or, yes, even cardboard. i'll probably get a burr grinder next and no doubt will love it. my current blade job requires a series of long and short pulses to get a reasonably similar grind; but so...... for me, far and away the most important factor in good flavor is the water. i use only well water.

[Jenise]

but there is such a thing as a bad bean. i make my coffee exactly the same way every day. some days it just tastes bad - musty or green or, yes, even cardboard. i'll probably get a burr grinder next and no doubt will love it. my current blade job requires a series of long and short pulses to get a reasonably similar grind; but so...... for me, far and away the most important factor in good flavor is the water. i use only well water.

Water's huge. I recall once, when we first moved back to So Cal from Alaska, our tap water (which was awful) was out for some reason and we used bottled water to make coffee. I didn't know there was such a thing as a bad bean--is that kind of like the occasional bad marcona almond?

but there is such a thing as a bad bean. i make my coffee exactly the same way every day. some days it just tastes bad - musty or green or, yes, even cardboard. i'll probably get a burr grinder next and no doubt will love it. my current blade job requires a series of long and short pulses to get a reasonably similar grind; but so...... for me, far and away the most important factor in good flavor is the water. i use only well water.

Water's huge. I recall once, when we first moved back to So Cal from Alaska, our tap water (which was awful) was out for some reason and we used bottled water to make coffee. I didn't know there was such a thing as a bad bean--is that kind of like the occasional bad marcona almond?

Unfortunately, lots of bad beans out there in coffee-land, so the reliability and reputation of your coffee bean supplier is just as important as any other phase that's been discussed, I.jE. grinder, water.
There's just not enough really good coffee to go around for all the companies claiming they sell only the 'best' beans. If you do a little research into the subject, you'll see that this has been going on for years, so guess it can be classified as a 'scam'.
Haven't checked recently, but last time I did, it was estamated that about 8 to 10 times more Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee was sold than was grown!

I didn't know there was such a thing as a bad bean--is that kind of like the occasional bad marcona almond?

Jenise, coffee industry jargon for "bad bean" is apparently "quaker", something I picked up from reading Cook's Illustrated on the subject. Just Google on "coffee bean quaker" and you'll more reading material than you could possibly want. Apparently the presence of just a few (one?) quaker is enough to make a big difference. I'm a burr grinder believer myself but I suspect the criticality of uniform grind varies lot with brewing technique - very important in espresso because the "brewing" time is so short, good for minimizing "mud" in a press, probably somewhat less important in a filter. I have no idea what caused the results in your experiment but like some others I am surprised the differences from just grind would be that striking. In the interest of science, maybe you should repeat it a few times and report back

[Jenise]

Unfortunately, lots of bad beans out there in coffee-land, so the reliability and reputation of your coffee bean supplier is just as important as any other phase that's been discussed, I.jE. grinder, water.
There's just not enough really good coffee to go around for all the companies claiming they sell only the 'best' beans. If you do a little research into the subject, you'll see that this has been going on for years, so guess it can be classified as a 'scam'.
Haven't checked recently, but last time I did, it was estamated that about 8 to 10 times more Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee was sold than was grown!

Oh, I realize not all beans are created equal; I do buy good, locally roasted coffee and am quite picky about freshness and roast. But what David's talking about is something else that I didn't realize existed, the "quakers" Mark describes above.

Mark, interesting. Didn't know about quakers. And I don't doubt their existence but at the same time I would think I'd have occasionally noticed the difference between one cup and the next, though, since my only way of making coffee has for three or four years now been individual cups. And I haven't.

Most intersting, Jenise. I've never used a blade grinder for my coffee (I use one for grinding spices, though), but just to be skeptical: are you sure that it wasn't the whole bean in #1 that made the difference in taste?

Mark Lipton

[Jenise]

Mark: . I'll definitely try this again just to rule out the quaker thing, maybe later this morning since Bob didn't take a cup of coffee to work.

Burr grinder came.

Informal test gave a result of richer more moccha result than blade grinder (both SWMBO and I came to that conclusion).

Intend a more careful test on the weekend.

I notice a large difference between burr and blade grinders but there are other variables that could explain the difference in your test.

1. Water temp. I assume this is not a factor but the water in the second press could be cooler than the first since you poured one then the other and impacted the extraction. I have never noticed a significant difference doing what you did with two french presses but I do notice a real difference between my french press and my drip machine which does not get hot enough.

2. Extraction time. I find 5 minutes to be too long for my taste. I use 3 minutes. The longer extraction time can extract more of the off flavors especially from the pulverized bits that one can get from a blade grinder. The difference may not be as significant for a shorter brew time.

3. Inconsistent roast. This could be quaker beans but it could also be beans that were scorched or somehow else impacted during roasting. While its easy to pick out quaker beans in the lighter roasts its harder to find them in the darker roasts. Scorched beans and other defects are darn near impossible to find if you are not doing the roasting yourself and know that there was a problem with a batch. More of less of these compromised beans will change the cup profile. Also note that quaker beans are not always considered a defect and are actually expected albeit to a hopefully limited degree in most Ethiopian dry processed coffees.