The problem here is that we do not know. This is why in both replies I have said it could be, and the first reply would be an experiment. Hat, Vin and myself have been discussing this at length about the use of sieves in the process. It is very complex.
Either way you approach this could be better than the other - this is what we have since learnt - but you would have done no harm in counting the beads before this. If counting the same amount of beads has worked for you in the past, the stay with this - but you could try not counting and due to the variance in bead size and coating, there may be no difference.
Poor Vin is down to 2 beads and trying to get just these 2 beads to have the same content - he is also that sensitive. We have concluded that, like the situation here, is not possible to be 100% sure.
I am truly sorry if I have confused you, but both Hat and myself are constantly learning about this stuff for the benefit of everyone else. So what I said in first reply still may be right, but then the sieves they use may be well calibrated and the weights might be very close indeed, but this is impossible to tell. All we know is that it has to be within 10%. So you can try either method, but in both cases, they will be an experiment.