Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kruve sifter

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • boren
    replied
    Otago, the new project you referred to in May is probably Kruve's glassware. Interesting product, just like their sifter.

    Leave a comment:


  • Otago
    replied
    Kruve are putting out a teaser for release of a new product. Be interested to see what this is.
    I am still using the Kruve regularly at home (for Aeropress) but don't bother when travelling.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kruve
    replied
    Originally posted by Melbroaster View Post
    Thanks Marek. I enjoy your product. Do you have or plan to have a larger sifter for more coffee? When I make a large French press I need to sift around 100g of coffee and this doesnt work well in the current size Kruve.

    Also, the manual sifting is getting old. Do you have any electrical/battery powered stands at a reasonable cost for the sifter to sit on to vibrate the grinds through?
    Thank you.

    These are two very common questions. The short answer to them is no to the larger version and no to the powered base. We tested different options to automate the process but you need large aggressive motions to make the sifting process work effectively. The shaker would look more like a paint shaker rather than a base you set the product on. As for the larger version, while this isn't out of the picture completely, we will most likely not have a larger version for 2018.

    Leave a comment:


  • Melbroaster
    replied
    Thanks Marek. I enjoy your product. Do you have or plan to have a larger sifter for more coffee? When I make a large French press I need to sift around 100g of coffee and this doesnt work well in the current size Kruve.

    Also, the manual sifting is getting old. Do you have any electrical/battery powered stands at a reasonable cost for the sifter to sit on to vibrate the grinds through?

    Leave a comment:


  • Kruve
    replied
    Hello all,

    This is Marek from KRUVE. I just wanted to say Hi and that I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have regarding the Sifter.

    Cheers

    Marek

    Leave a comment:


  • Magic_Matt
    replied
    Second test: 17g through my new Comandante at medium grind; used 300 and 500 micron filters.

    A tiny dusting of fines came through - more actually gathered in the boulders chamber than the bottom. But still a negligible total.

    Cup was terrific - very clean for a metal filter brew (Able fine Aeropress disc).

    Don't know that I'll be needing the Kruve with my grinder lineup, but I'll keep swapping filters around to get a feel for the grind consistency. Might be interesting to compare in some time to see how burr wear affects it (though with ti burrs in the Titan it might take a while to have any meaningful difference... [emoji848]).

    Leave a comment:


  • Magic_Matt
    replied
    Kruve sifter

    Ok, first test... espresso (simply because I don't have any beans roasted appropriately for anything else).

    Using the 200 and 500 micron filters and shaking for a little over a minute, I lost a total of 2.2g from 24.6. About 0.5g of that was boulders, and under 1/10g was fines, but most was within the limits but adhering to the underside of the top filter that I didn't notice!

    The shot itself was lousy, largely due to underdosing (normal dose is 24g with this basket), poor distribution and uneven tamp [emoji849]

    So there you go. There's no way I'll be using it regularly for espresso, and never intended to, but I might work my way a bit higher on the lower filter to find out just how consistent a grind the ECM throws out.
    Last edited by Magic_Matt; 7 March 2017, 07:12 PM. Reason: Updating with real numbers...

    Leave a comment:


  • Otago
    replied
    As the actress said to the Bishop ( on a dark night)

    Leave a comment:


  • Magic_Matt
    replied
    Originally posted by trentski View Post
    The number of times ive heard that [emoji23]
    [emoji23]

    I walked right into that...

    Leave a comment:


  • trentski
    replied
    Originally posted by Magic_Matt View Post
    First impression: gosh, it's big!
    The number of times ive heard that [emoji23]

    Leave a comment:


  • Magic_Matt
    replied
    First impression: gosh, it's big!

    Leave a comment:


  • Magic_Matt
    replied
    Very interesting write up, thanks cgnome.

    I've picked up the secondhand Kruve in the marketplace, so I'll report back soon! Will primarily use it with my Comandante and Trinity One, but might experiment with how it impacts espresso as well in my setup.

    Leave a comment:


  • roburu
    replied
    Awesome posts ccgnome, best I've read in a while, thanks for taking the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • ccgnome
    replied
    Here are a few observations gleaned from using the Kruve for some weeks with different coffees to make espresso.

    First the general improvement in taste the cup holds up for every coffee I tested though curiously the better coffees such as premium lightly roasted single origins, benefited least while darker roasted blends benefited most.

    Second the degree of improvement is subtle and by way of comparison is dwarfed by differences between different beans.

    Third the "improvement" is more of a change in the taste profile rather than an across-the-board enhancement. Clarity is unquestionably improved, bitterness is diminished somewhat while the acidity is a little fruitier and less aggressive. Overall the coffee taste is more mellow and easier to drink. In fact "mellow" is the word my non coffee-enthusiast friends consistently used to describe the sieved vs unsieved coffee.

    While I understand why you could describe the sieved coffee as mellow it carries a connotation of bland which is unfortunate as it is simply not bland and in some ways the opposite of bland. That's because two things are going on here: one set of changes that make the coffee more bland and others making it less bland. The best way I could describe the taste changes of sieving is by analogy. I apologise in advance for this is inevitably going to sound pretentious but I have no words in the vocabulary of coffee tasting that I can usefully use to describe what I am trying to communicate. OK let's start with a visual analogy. Imagine the kind of changes in a photo if you used an image editor to increase the photo's colour saturation while at the same time reducing its dynamic range. If that doesn't mean anything to you then let's try an audio analogy. Imagine the changes in sound if you increase mid range liquidity while at the same time restricting macro dynamics. If you can relate to either of these analogies then you'll have a good idea why mellow is not quite the right word. If neither of these are helpful to you I apologise again. If so, just go with "mellow but not bland."

    Now whether "mellow" is better, whether "fruity acidity" is better and whether the other changes are better all depends on your taste in coffee. For me I'm happy to say the sieved coffee IS better and so did most of my non-enthusiast friends. But if you dislike brightness in your coffee and/or like strong punchy coffee then you may well find sieving is not for you.
    Last edited by ccgnome; 24 February 2017, 04:43 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • 2muchcoffeeman
    replied
    I'm in the same boat as the others. Using mine (sometimes) for cleaner tasting manual methods as I normally use stainless or mesh filters. Hate paper...

    For espresso, it's too fiddly for me.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X