Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Making espresso with ultrasound

unsw.edu.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#61

Post by cush »

jurf wrote: post #42

> Both espresso samples were served at 22 °C to ensure a fair like-for-like comparison […] > It is noted that espresso is normally consumed hot and has transient sensory attributes that are temperature- and time-dependent. Hence, serving espresso at 22 °C will alter its sensory characteristics. This is a weird test, coffee get’s so much worse when cold. So people can’t distinguish between two bad coffees.

> coffee get’s so much worse when cold

This is a myth. Bad coffee tastes better when hot because your sense of taste is dulled - reducing bitterness. Also, at higher temperatures, aromatics and volatile compounds are more airborne, improving the smell of coffee. Good coffee is better enjoyed around 60-70C

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#63

Post by duped »

supertroop wrote: post #52

This sounds awful. I’m an espresso snob and caffeine isn’t even on my list of why I love it. It’s like they complete ignored what makes a good shot and focused on one element.

I'm also an espresso snob and got the complete opposite take. The idea of decoupling grind size and brew time from yield is super interesting. The only other device I'm aware of that does this is a pressurized portafilter basket but that's only there for people that don't have good enough grinders.

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#64

Post by wuliwong »

slwvx wrote: post #55
supertroop wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regular coffee drinkers vs snobs are two vastly different categories. In the guy that ruins your fun. ;)

I grow my own beans and harvest rain water from my roof to use in my coffee ritual and ... am happy to let others do their own thing

I actually capture free hydrogen and oxygen and make my own water.

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#65

Post by supertroop »

slwvx wrote: post #55
supertroop wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regular coffee drinkers vs snobs are two vastly different categories. In the guy that ruins your fun. ;)

I grow my own beans and harvest rain water from my roof to use in my coffee ritual and ... am happy to let others do their own thing

I literally have a friend that roasts their own and has a rainwater collection system.

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#66

Post by jurf »

nickff wrote: post #51
jurf wrote: post #42

> Both espresso samples were served at 22 °C to ensure a fair like-for-like comparison […] > It is noted that espresso is normally consumed hot and has transient sensory attributes that are temperature- and time-dependent. Hence, serving espresso at 22 °C will alter its sensory characteristics. This is a weird test, coffee get’s so much worse when cold. So people can’t distinguish between two bad coffees.

"Good" (well-extracted) coffee is still relatively good when warm, especially compared to "bad" (over-extracted, or under-extracted) coffee. That said, many believe that the optimal temperature for serving coffee is 50-60 degrees celsius (122-140 degrees fahrenheit).

Yes, but the test was at 22°C, which I wouldn’t consider warm. And it’s too cold for the differences to be even perceptible well, making the test flawed. Disregarding the fact that it’s also much colder than people use to drink coffee, making it even harder to distinguish for non-experts.

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#67

Post by jurf »

cush wrote: post #61
jurf wrote: post #42

> Both espresso samples were served at 22 °C to ensure a fair like-for-like comparison […] > It is noted that espresso is normally consumed hot and has transient sensory attributes that are temperature- and time-dependent. Hence, serving espresso at 22 °C will alter its sensory characteristics. This is a weird test, coffee get’s so much worse when cold. So people can’t distinguish between two bad coffees.

> coffee get’s so much worse when cold This is a myth. Bad coffee tastes better when hot because your sense of taste is dulled - reducing bitterness. Also, at higher temperatures, aromatics and volatile compounds are more airborne, improving the smell of coffee. Good coffee is better enjoyed around 60-70C

I don’t understand, you say it’s a myth and then said it’s better when warm?

Regardless, I would say it’s an objective fact that good coffee is ruined at room temperature. It still tastes fine, but no where near as good.

What especially irks me is that they could have just heated the stuff in a microwave [1] to 50°C and have a much better test.

[1] https://youtu.be/yqgKlqAUM9g

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#68

Post by jurf »

hylaride wrote: post #59
jurf wrote: post #42

> Both espresso samples were served at 22 °C to ensure a fair like-for-like comparison […] > It is noted that espresso is normally consumed hot and has transient sensory attributes that are temperature- and time-dependent. Hence, serving espresso at 22 °C will alter its sensory characteristics. This is a weird test, coffee get’s so much worse when cold. So people can’t distinguish between two bad coffees.

> coffee get’s so much worse when cold Coldbrew is a thing and done right it brings out a refreshing sweetness. Also iced coffee. Bad coffee is bad hot or cold.

I love coffee on ice in summer, but I think that’s a different category, like ice cream.

I would rather have room temperature coffee than a cold brew usually though. I just did not have good luck with it so far

Re: Making espresso with ultrasound

#70

Post by cush »

abujazar wrote: post #5

The crema looks like terrible, more like Nespresso, and having the coffee warm is kinda important. But perhaps this can be used in the instant coffee industry or something.

It's funny people associate crema with good tasting espresso given the crema is the worst tasting part of an espresso
Post reply on HN