at Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:41:06 GMT in
<[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (PENMART01) wrote :
Quoted message said:(Alex Rast)
Quoted message said:The finest grind setting is coarser than what I would like ideally. I'd like to be able to grind
down to the consistency of ultra-fine pastry flour for certain spices...
No burr grinder is capable of so fine a grind, certainly not with high quality peppercorns
(too oily).
Not for pepper, but for other (less oily) spices. I don't quite see why it would be impossible to
manufacture a grinder with that level of possible grind. But it would require extreme precision. I
suspect all the parts would need to be mounted on precision bearings to permit the kind of fine
tolerances one would require. As I said, these are quibbles. I don't seriously expect a company
would manufacture such a grinder, but in an ideal world, they would.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:The actual mechanism is difficult to clean. I'd prefer something you could disassemble quickly
right down to the grinding buhrs, so that you could give them a thorough clean when using them for
multiple spices.
I've been using mine for 5-6 years, many tmes each day, needs no cleaning.
If you're using it only for pepper, probably no cleaning required. But I like to use mine for many
different spices, e.g. cinnamon, cumin, cardamom, pepper, etc... For that case I'd like to be able
to clean it out between different spices so as not to mix the flavour of one for the other. As it
is, the only thing I can really do is grind a certain amount of the new spice, throw that portion
out, then grind the stuff I'm actually going to use.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:It would also be nice to have a hard ceramic buhr available for more resilient items. That would
also provide a longer life, IMHO.
No comment.
What are you signifying? Do you really have nothing to say on this? Do you think there's some self-
evidently obvious reason that ceramic would be a bad choice? Do you think this is getting overly
obsessive? Sorry if I'm sounding obtuse but I would appreciate some clarification.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:It's really big for table use. This isn't a major quibble, because I use it for cooking, where a
smaller one would be impractical, and I think it's silly to get 2, one for cooking and one for
the table.
Why? Do you have only one spoon?
Because a grinder is a semi-major mechanical apparatus. As such, as long as one can do the job,
there shouldn't really be a need for others. Spoons, I might have more than one, because I would
expect more than one person might wish to use a spoon at the same time, but do I have more than one
of each type of spoon that typically no more than one person would wish to use simultaneously? No.
So, I have one large wooden spoon, one stirring spoon, one slotted spoon, etc. I prefer not to have
duplicates of items performing essentially the same function.
--
Alex Rast [email hidden] (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)