Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The 5M's Redux

While roasting away the hours there is a period of time after the next roast is loaded and ready, and before first crack, when I can divert my thoughts to things that interest me.  After I completed and published my last post I contemplated the limitations of my binary declaration that each of the 5 M's plus Water be declared as either acceptable/unacceptable.  As I described in my previous post, this yields the equation 2^6=64 different possibilities each time a barista approaches the espresso machine.

Upon further reflection I've decided that declaring something as acceptable/unacceptable is not appropriate since:

  • acceptable does not adequately describe perfection in any or all elements
  • the spectrum of acceptable may be mathematically described by a differential equation and therefore assigning even 2 extra descriptors to each of the 5 M's plus Water is not unreasonable.
  • unacceptable is clearly definable, and once the threshold is crossed, the degrees of unacceptability is moot.  
Therefore, what I am proposing is to assign two further designations to each of the 5 M's plus Water that reflect acceptable faults which individually do not fatally flaw the espresso.

For example:

  • Grind
  1. Perfect
  2. Too course but acceptable
  3. Too fine but acceptable
  4. unacceptable
  • Water
  1. Perfect
  2. Too Soft but acceptable
  3. Too Hard but acceptable
  4. unacceptable
  • Blend
  1. Perfect
  2. Too fruity but acceptable
  3. Too flat but acceptable
  4. unacceptable
The others can be fleshed out and debated as to what would adequately describe acceptable opposing variables, but I believe including two extra designations is a better reflection of the possible outcomes when a barista attempts to make an espresso.

If the inclusion of two extra descriptors are accepted then the new equation becomes:

4^6= 4096 
This means there are 4096 possible outcomes each time a barista attempts to make an espresso.

This greatly increases the number of possibilities for espresso outcomes but I think is helpful to put in perspective how difficult it is to make a perfect espresso, and even how unlikely it is that one ever gets made.  While this statement is no doubt going to raise some eyebrows, remember, that if even one of the variables is less than perfect, then necessarily the beverage is not perfect.

I'm curious to see what others think of this description of espresso and whether it is productive to think of it in these terms.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

5M's: The Odds Are Against You


  1. Mano dell'operatore (the hand) 
  2. Miscela (the blend) 
  3. Macinadosatore (the grinder) 
  4. Macchina Espresso (the espresso machine) 
  5. Manutenzione (maintenance) 
  6. Aqua (Water: upside down M) 
2^6=64 

     One of the time tested axioms of espresso is the 5 M’s (plus Water) which each contribute to the creation of a perfect espresso. It is understood that a fatal fault in any of the 6 contributing factors necessarily leads to a flawed beverage. Treating each factor as a binary, and declaring it as either acceptable or unacceptable, we can confidently identify through simple mathematics that there are 64 possible unique results each time a barista attempts to make an espresso. 

2 represents the binary (acceptable/unacceptable) 
6 represents the 5 M’s plus Water 
2^6=64

 The perfect shot occurs when each of the 6 variables are determined to be acceptable. Any determination that one or more of the factors is unacceptable automatically makes the beverage fall somewhere on a scale from less than perfect (1 factor unacceptable) to horrible (all 6 factors unacceptable). It is understood that assigning a grade of acceptable/unacceptable is decidedly diplomatic in an industry replete with specialty coffee partisans, however it is productive and helpful to know how badly the odds are stacked against you when you approach the machine and how hopelessly unfair they are if your equipment and materials are sub par.