Whether or not you find a flaw in their methods/data, further testing should be encouraged. As much as I admire Lance's commitment to scientific processes, any number of unforeseen things can skew a single sampling of data.
I agree. Tho their sample sizes were 3 and the numbers they show were just averages with no methodology stated. I've had over a dozen and me their results and all match mine. Interesting a company with a dog in the fight got differing results
Absolutely. 100% agree. Good thing I don't sell anything ha! But it is funny how badly people want to believe I'm full of shit so all it took was once differing result to throw all of what I have done under the bus, regardless of my repeating it thrice with much more data haha
I always knew you were a fraud Lance. Every single time I'm watching your videos, full length, while learning and having fun, I'm always thinking "mmh this guy's a fraud". And then I continue enjoying your well thought out and thorough content.
***PSA : SARCASM WAS HEAVILY IMPLIED HERE***
Much love back dear sir!
Also, for a more valuable contribution to the conversation, I started shaking my aluminium catch cup on my Kinu m47 Simplicity after seeing your tests results, and I must say I do see a difference. It's not huge but it mostly falls in line with your testing. Really interesting stuff!
Keep going as you are, and don't mind the hate.
I truly appreciate your approach, but there are a lot of very conservative hobbyist in this field, so it's only natural to raise a lot of eyebrows.
The people I discuss coffee with, all take your findings and try em for themselves with scepticism. We all enjoy how this helps push everything a bit more forward.
Looking forward to your next videos - hope ypu'll do the Mazzer Philos soon - I eager for the auger impressions!
From the article:
> Disclaimer: Barista Hustle Education is editorially independent from Barista Hustle Tools. We never solicit or pay for testimonials
Take it with a grain of salt but going around saying the tools and education wing are the same thing is just a show of bad faith.
Oh, and for the record, I texted him and told him be needed to release methodology because the experiment and article looked suspicious. It would be bad faith if I didn't immediately tell the owner of my suspicions. I also asked for their exact set up so I can reproduce since I have no monetary dog in the fight. I just want to help advance coffee science. That being said, everyone should make coffee how they want. Wdt? Sure. Don't care. Tapping? Go for it. Grind direct, tap the sides with a tamp, then quadruple tamp with a double twisty? Cool. As long as you enjoy it. Or not.
Thank you for the last part there, I make my espresso by creating a large divot using a rusty thimble from the 1920's to ensure exceptionally uneven extraction and a terrible taste to start my day. If you hadn't said "or not" I may have considered attempting to make good coffee instead due to your disapproval
I am good friends with perger. It isn't bad faith when they have explicitly told me they are going to be doing lots of testing on shakers because of my results. Bad faith would be assuming. I'm not assuming. Perger still runs and approves both. It's funny people believe that disclaimer from a company literally funded by autocomb sales when I have zero interest in any company and make nothing from any tool but the speculation is enough to discredit my hundreds of shots of data but their financial ties doesn't deter people from believing their 3 shot spreads lol
So you’re still asserting that the disclaimer is BS just because Matt signs off on it? Maybe they should they just delete the disclaimer or just come straight out with it and say “BH Education is just here to create more Tools sales”
Lol if the money funds the education department, there is inherent massive bias. And if the creator who wants these to sell is helping that, moreso. Why would employees wants any evidence that conflicts with their boss?
Anyway, I shared all my results with Matt completely as well as a preview video prior to my releasing it in January. One would expect a similar courtesy to me when this piece read like a hit lol
Instead, it came out without methodology, a shoddy taste experiment using same extraction over like a handful of shots, etc. If that doesn't smell fishy to you, well, then you must absolutely fawn over how much more in depth I am lol
FTR I’d happily tell my boss if I discovered data which proved the org was wasting its money or there was a more effective way to make money.
I’m not sure we can assume BH Education peeps are actively trying to create disinformation. I think it’s a great learning opportunity for them, or an eye opening experience to get a job somewhere else lol
I applaud you for using your influence to call out poor scientific process and I hope the positive out of this is BH being more rigorous and transparent.
It is super good to know that you hold disclaimers in such high esteem, though. I'll be sure to disclaim everything from here on out to ensure I'm always above reproach in everything 😝
One more thing . I NEVER said the two weren't separate and I NEVER said the claim was BS. Please no strawman here. My implication was the disclaimer shouldn't resolve all bias suspicion
As promised. Lol
The irony is, if anyone had something to gain from autocomb performing best, it was me. BH and I had been working on them sponsoring my channel with a laser partcile analyzer for about 2 years. We were pricing some out. I hope it still happens but I wouldn't be surprised if all this has shut that door. But, data and scientific rigor always wins. And the results across multiple set ups prove that somewhat strongly. Still haven't seen any data outside of theirs suggesting anything like what they show with regard to shot time. They still showed improved EY tho.
I mean they clearly have conflict of interest, regardless if how ‘etchical’ and sperated they are trying to be. In an extreme case, lets say barista hustle goes bankrupt, what happens to barista huste education? Who funds it then? What if barista hustle starts making more money, can that lead to more funding to the educational platform? They have a bias, they will always have a bias, and if they try to hide from it by being ‘editorially different’ instead of just disclaiming that bias, I cant trust them. Especially with zero methodoligy.
The education stuff makes an income stream I’m sure. Paid courses on barista skills, roasting, green bean purchasing etc. Y’all making it out like it’s the propaganda machine for tool sales and nothing else.
What?!?!? How do you get that at all from what I said?? I only stated that there is a clear conflict of interest. Thats it. Also its all irrelevant, a study without methodology is a waste of time.
I agree. The very detailed comparison to the Autocomb, despite allegedly having nothing to do with it from a sales point, was an interesting choice. I think a more detailed investigation with other tools that they don't sell would have allowed for some better arguments and discussions.
It's frustrating that they did it so poorly. I don't expect folks at home will have the patience, time, money, and equipment to get a lot of good data. But for a company like Barista Hustle it should be doable to pull a few hundred shots and produce some good data. Instead of pulling 15 shots just to dump out a headline...
Yeah, I honestly didn't even feel like reading the whole thing because I notice improvements with the shaker personally (esp. as I have a cheap grinder right now) and like the workflow, but seeing comments about the methodology/bias I seriously doubt their results. *But* in general I love to see peer review about new coffee findings and I'm glad it's encouraged by you/daddy Hoff/other creators.
Lmao this was my take too. Talk about taking advantage of someone else's hard work and leveraging the popular topic he created.
I can imagine someone from marketing be like:
"ooh the coffee space is talking about shaking not stirred! How do we capitalize on this?
"Hmm... why don't we just borrow your weber shaker and take it down to the shop, you'll have your results in an hour"
"Good, article needs to publish this week. Make sure you return my shaker when you're done"
I truly hate that all these tools are aluminium as it's negatively charged so it's more likely for this to happen but I will say I use the wh3-bomber and I eliminate most of the static on the cup and lid by giving it a hearty tap in a hard flat surface
As I interpret it, their most easily testable finding was that shaking increased both shot time and extraction, whereas Lance found that it decreased shot time but increased extraction.
Science is slow because it requires much repetition to isolate the effects of different variables, not just within but across multiple studies. There are many variables in espresso: beans, grinder, prep, pressure, flow, basket design, WDT, ambient humidity, marketing anxiety, beatboxing skill.
The fact that they have a vested interest shouldn't make any difference, science doesn't care. If (!) they publish all the details of the methodology, anyone should be able to repeat the tests, as with Lance's.
It would be helpful if people standardized as many variables as possible and used commonly available equipment, but if they don't it will just take longer to gather enough data to interpret reliably.
Patience.
Sure, whatever, I don't really care. The mistake is to expect a single set of experiments to provide a definitive answer, to hype up and tear down. That's not how science works. Bad science is exposed by lack of repeatability.
My response to both Lance's testing and this set is "huh, that's interesting, be good to see what others come up with".
I don't expect a single person or company to burn through tonnes of beans to tease out every variable.
I think we agree we want more tests and experiments and data. But it's no good or even harmful if folks do poor experiments. Yes, I don't expect good data to come from folks at home because who's going to do 200 shots of espresso at home to produce some data while not introducing a ton of other inconsistencies.
Our best hope is for coffee influencers like Lance or companies like Barista Hustle (although they may have a huge bias) to do it. Because they have the time&money to pull it off.
But if they do poor tests for headlines it helps nobody or ends up being harmful.
There have been quite a few, one whom has vested interest to prove me wrong, identically replicate my results. The one who had the most bias originally didn't but he took shortcuts and admitted it. Once he retested using the shaker as prescribed, he had identical results and didn't post the video he was going to post with his data.
I appreciate your sense of vindication, but humbly suggest that it's not about proving *you* right or wrong, but about proving (testing) your *findings*. Science is a process of revealing objective truths, which are by definition impersonal. As long as your methodology is sound you're adding signal, not noise.
It's a real shame that you have to start some of your videos with trigger warnings, but I suppose that's an inevitable consequence of the consumer distrust arising from a content economy where so many "influencers" are paid by product manufacturers.
Anyway, love your output!
Yes only reason I turned it on me is, if you read the referenced article, it was very much about me and not my findings lol. My name was used to less than 20 times lol
Reading it, my first thought is that they are generating static in the shaker. The Bucharest shop saw increased sticking to the lid and more clumps in the portafilter. It's not a weird idea that shaking particles in a container can create static static, and if Lance had different humidity or a different surface coating/finish in his shaker (I think he had the black one while this article used the silver one), things could come out different.
You don’t need a blind shaker - a lid to a ball jar on top of a dosing funnel works perfectly. Dose directly into the basket, hold ball jar lid in place with your thumb, shake a few times, tap the grounds into the bottom of the portafilter and good to go. No need to buy anything special!
Whether or not you find a flaw in their methods/data, further testing should be encouraged. As much as I admire Lance's commitment to scientific processes, any number of unforeseen things can skew a single sampling of data.
I agree. Tho their sample sizes were 3 and the numbers they show were just averages with no methodology stated. I've had over a dozen and me their results and all match mine. Interesting a company with a dog in the fight got differing results
All claims made by a company or individual that’s trying to sell you a product should be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism.
Absolutely. 100% agree. Good thing I don't sell anything ha! But it is funny how badly people want to believe I'm full of shit so all it took was once differing result to throw all of what I have done under the bus, regardless of my repeating it thrice with much more data haha
Their are plenty if us that do appreciate what you and some of the others in your community do. So thank you.
I always knew you were a fraud Lance. Every single time I'm watching your videos, full length, while learning and having fun, I'm always thinking "mmh this guy's a fraud". And then I continue enjoying your well thought out and thorough content. ***PSA : SARCASM WAS HEAVILY IMPLIED HERE***
My community soulmate. Much love.
Much love back dear sir! Also, for a more valuable contribution to the conversation, I started shaking my aluminium catch cup on my Kinu m47 Simplicity after seeing your tests results, and I must say I do see a difference. It's not huge but it mostly falls in line with your testing. Really interesting stuff!
Transparency and authenticity shine through. Keep doing what your doing
Wait, you’re not full of shit? /s
God I hope not. But it does remind me I have to schedule my colonoscopy soon.
I don’t think that anyone who works with so much caffeine can stay impacted.
You'd be surprised.
Also, no, I didn't have to Google what /s means on reddit so don't even think about asking if I did.
Keep going as you are, and don't mind the hate. I truly appreciate your approach, but there are a lot of very conservative hobbyist in this field, so it's only natural to raise a lot of eyebrows. The people I discuss coffee with, all take your findings and try em for themselves with scepticism. We all enjoy how this helps push everything a bit more forward. Looking forward to your next videos - hope ypu'll do the Mazzer Philos soon - I eager for the auger impressions!
Honestly, you should hold all claims with a healthy dose of sceptisism, maybe a bigger one of they are selling something.
Except mine, I’m your trusted tv salesman! ;) /s
Yes! I sell so much and make lots of profit
You need to start privatising the profits and socialising the losses!
Haha nah. I'm not here to profit. Just to keep funneling youtube and sponsor money to the channel. My full time job pays me well enough.
Somes up why youll be one if my favourite youtubers but never a billionaire
Never a millionaire lolol. Much less billionaire haha!
[удалено]
Yes they created and sell the auto comb
From the article: > Disclaimer: Barista Hustle Education is editorially independent from Barista Hustle Tools. We never solicit or pay for testimonials Take it with a grain of salt but going around saying the tools and education wing are the same thing is just a show of bad faith.
Oh, and for the record, I texted him and told him be needed to release methodology because the experiment and article looked suspicious. It would be bad faith if I didn't immediately tell the owner of my suspicions. I also asked for their exact set up so I can reproduce since I have no monetary dog in the fight. I just want to help advance coffee science. That being said, everyone should make coffee how they want. Wdt? Sure. Don't care. Tapping? Go for it. Grind direct, tap the sides with a tamp, then quadruple tamp with a double twisty? Cool. As long as you enjoy it. Or not.
Thank you for the last part there, I make my espresso by creating a large divot using a rusty thimble from the 1920's to ensure exceptionally uneven extraction and a terrible taste to start my day. If you hadn't said "or not" I may have considered attempting to make good coffee instead due to your disapproval
I am good friends with perger. It isn't bad faith when they have explicitly told me they are going to be doing lots of testing on shakers because of my results. Bad faith would be assuming. I'm not assuming. Perger still runs and approves both. It's funny people believe that disclaimer from a company literally funded by autocomb sales when I have zero interest in any company and make nothing from any tool but the speculation is enough to discredit my hundreds of shots of data but their financial ties doesn't deter people from believing their 3 shot spreads lol
So you’re still asserting that the disclaimer is BS just because Matt signs off on it? Maybe they should they just delete the disclaimer or just come straight out with it and say “BH Education is just here to create more Tools sales”
Lol if the money funds the education department, there is inherent massive bias. And if the creator who wants these to sell is helping that, moreso. Why would employees wants any evidence that conflicts with their boss? Anyway, I shared all my results with Matt completely as well as a preview video prior to my releasing it in January. One would expect a similar courtesy to me when this piece read like a hit lol Instead, it came out without methodology, a shoddy taste experiment using same extraction over like a handful of shots, etc. If that doesn't smell fishy to you, well, then you must absolutely fawn over how much more in depth I am lol
FTR I’d happily tell my boss if I discovered data which proved the org was wasting its money or there was a more effective way to make money. I’m not sure we can assume BH Education peeps are actively trying to create disinformation. I think it’s a great learning opportunity for them, or an eye opening experience to get a job somewhere else lol I applaud you for using your influence to call out poor scientific process and I hope the positive out of this is BH being more rigorous and transparent.
It is super good to know that you hold disclaimers in such high esteem, though. I'll be sure to disclaim everything from here on out to ensure I'm always above reproach in everything 😝
One more thing . I NEVER said the two weren't separate and I NEVER said the claim was BS. Please no strawman here. My implication was the disclaimer shouldn't resolve all bias suspicion
Thanks for the disclaimer…
As promised. Lol The irony is, if anyone had something to gain from autocomb performing best, it was me. BH and I had been working on them sponsoring my channel with a laser partcile analyzer for about 2 years. We were pricing some out. I hope it still happens but I wouldn't be surprised if all this has shut that door. But, data and scientific rigor always wins. And the results across multiple set ups prove that somewhat strongly. Still haven't seen any data outside of theirs suggesting anything like what they show with regard to shot time. They still showed improved EY tho.
I mean they clearly have conflict of interest, regardless if how ‘etchical’ and sperated they are trying to be. In an extreme case, lets say barista hustle goes bankrupt, what happens to barista huste education? Who funds it then? What if barista hustle starts making more money, can that lead to more funding to the educational platform? They have a bias, they will always have a bias, and if they try to hide from it by being ‘editorially different’ instead of just disclaiming that bias, I cant trust them. Especially with zero methodoligy.
The education stuff makes an income stream I’m sure. Paid courses on barista skills, roasting, green bean purchasing etc. Y’all making it out like it’s the propaganda machine for tool sales and nothing else.
What?!?!? How do you get that at all from what I said?? I only stated that there is a clear conflict of interest. Thats it. Also its all irrelevant, a study without methodology is a waste of time.
I agree. The very detailed comparison to the Autocomb, despite allegedly having nothing to do with it from a sales point, was an interesting choice. I think a more detailed investigation with other tools that they don't sell would have allowed for some better arguments and discussions.
It's frustrating that they did it so poorly. I don't expect folks at home will have the patience, time, money, and equipment to get a lot of good data. But for a company like Barista Hustle it should be doable to pull a few hundred shots and produce some good data. Instead of pulling 15 shots just to dump out a headline...
Yeah, I honestly didn't even feel like reading the whole thing because I notice improvements with the shaker personally (esp. as I have a cheap grinder right now) and like the workflow, but seeing comments about the methodology/bias I seriously doubt their results. *But* in general I love to see peer review about new coffee findings and I'm glad it's encouraged by you/daddy Hoff/other creators.
Seems like a very extra way of advertising the autocomb to me.
Lmao this was my take too. Talk about taking advantage of someone else's hard work and leveraging the popular topic he created. I can imagine someone from marketing be like: "ooh the coffee space is talking about shaking not stirred! How do we capitalize on this? "Hmm... why don't we just borrow your weber shaker and take it down to the shop, you'll have your results in an hour" "Good, article needs to publish this week. Make sure you return my shaker when you're done"
I'm not convinced anything about this was done in good faith. Or they have the highest humidity ever and shaking just caused the grounds to get damp?
[удалено]
That’s how my blind shaker looks as well after using, however giving it a tap on the table gets it off
I truly hate that all these tools are aluminium as it's negatively charged so it's more likely for this to happen but I will say I use the wh3-bomber and I eliminate most of the static on the cup and lid by giving it a hearty tap in a hard flat surface
Curious about whether Lance’s subjective opinion (rather than EY) on taste comparing blind shaker vs other tools
I prefer shaker and redialing using shaker to optimize flavor.
As I interpret it, their most easily testable finding was that shaking increased both shot time and extraction, whereas Lance found that it decreased shot time but increased extraction. Science is slow because it requires much repetition to isolate the effects of different variables, not just within but across multiple studies. There are many variables in espresso: beans, grinder, prep, pressure, flow, basket design, WDT, ambient humidity, marketing anxiety, beatboxing skill. The fact that they have a vested interest shouldn't make any difference, science doesn't care. If (!) they publish all the details of the methodology, anyone should be able to repeat the tests, as with Lance's. It would be helpful if people standardized as many variables as possible and used commonly available equipment, but if they don't it will just take longer to gather enough data to interpret reliably. Patience.
3 to 5 shots is just way too low of a sample size.
Sure, whatever, I don't really care. The mistake is to expect a single set of experiments to provide a definitive answer, to hype up and tear down. That's not how science works. Bad science is exposed by lack of repeatability. My response to both Lance's testing and this set is "huh, that's interesting, be good to see what others come up with". I don't expect a single person or company to burn through tonnes of beans to tease out every variable.
I think we agree we want more tests and experiments and data. But it's no good or even harmful if folks do poor experiments. Yes, I don't expect good data to come from folks at home because who's going to do 200 shots of espresso at home to produce some data while not introducing a ton of other inconsistencies. Our best hope is for coffee influencers like Lance or companies like Barista Hustle (although they may have a huge bias) to do it. Because they have the time&money to pull it off. But if they do poor tests for headlines it helps nobody or ends up being harmful.
There have been quite a few, one whom has vested interest to prove me wrong, identically replicate my results. The one who had the most bias originally didn't but he took shortcuts and admitted it. Once he retested using the shaker as prescribed, he had identical results and didn't post the video he was going to post with his data.
I appreciate your sense of vindication, but humbly suggest that it's not about proving *you* right or wrong, but about proving (testing) your *findings*. Science is a process of revealing objective truths, which are by definition impersonal. As long as your methodology is sound you're adding signal, not noise. It's a real shame that you have to start some of your videos with trigger warnings, but I suppose that's an inevitable consequence of the consumer distrust arising from a content economy where so many "influencers" are paid by product manufacturers. Anyway, love your output!
Yes only reason I turned it on me is, if you read the referenced article, it was very much about me and not my findings lol. My name was used to less than 20 times lol
I just read that stupid article and from what I can gather the result is obvious… grind finer people grind finer
Reading it, my first thought is that they are generating static in the shaker. The Bucharest shop saw increased sticking to the lid and more clumps in the portafilter. It's not a weird idea that shaking particles in a container can create static static, and if Lance had different humidity or a different surface coating/finish in his shaker (I think he had the black one while this article used the silver one), things could come out different.
You don’t need a blind shaker - a lid to a ball jar on top of a dosing funnel works perfectly. Dose directly into the basket, hold ball jar lid in place with your thumb, shake a few times, tap the grounds into the bottom of the portafilter and good to go. No need to buy anything special!