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

I used sound waves to make espresso

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 179 posts

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#111

Post by aussieguy1234 »

cluckindan wrote: post #100
comrade1234 wrote: post #3

My dad was stationed on a submarine in the navy and he and a few others used to dump their laundry in the ultra-sonic cleaner normally used to clean engine parts. Said it did a great job....

Submarines didn’t always have laundry services. For a 90-day trip, the crew would bring six uniforms and rotate them daily. Shower was one minute of water once a week. Everyone smoked tobacco all the time, everywhere.

Wow. In that environment you'd be getting the equivalent of a pack of cigarettes a day, even as a non smoker

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#112

Post by jhbadger »

maplethorpe wrote: post #94
drawnwren wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of Americans that drink espresso drink it with milk.

Really? The Last time I was in an American office, there didn't seem to be any milk around. They had an unrefrigerated bottle of "creamer" next to the coffee machine, but I was too scared to try it. I'm still not sure what it is, or how I'm supposed to use it.

Office coffee is not what people drink for pleasure -- it's a caffeine delivery device. If you go to a coffeehouse in the US you'll find that people often order drinks called Lattes which is espresso and steamed milk. And the word is Italian like espresso itself, so I think this isn't some weird Americanism but pretty traditional.

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#113

Post by nazgul17 »

hdndjsbbs wrote: post #43
kowalej wrote: post #35

This seems very interesting, at least from a pure coffee nerd standpoint and what it could mean for improving espresso brewing in general. However, I'm going through the research paper, and am a bit skeptical of the energy savings angle, especially considering the many variables with espresso machine in terms of how they heat and brew (single vs dual boilers, heat exchangers vs dippers, spring lever machines vs pump…

"room temperature espresso" was the first thing I thought of - espresso is meant to be drunk hot, right away. If you let a good shot cool off and compare it to a bad shot you're not going to notice the difference as much because you made them both worse by letting them sit and cool. For industrial processes it probably doesn't matter - look at how nescafe is manufactured.

To play the devil's advocate, though, you wouldn't drink espresso at 80 degrees, no? Provided the cup is warm to begin with, you could brew at 50 degrees and still have perfect temperature espresso for drinking? Those 30 degrees are bound to save a bunch of energy, I'd think.

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#114

Post by HWR_14 »

maplethorpe wrote: post #94
drawnwren wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of Americans that drink espresso drink it with milk.

Really? The Last time I was in an American office, there didn't seem to be any milk around. They had an unrefrigerated bottle of "creamer" next to the coffee machine, but I was too scared to try it. I'm still not sure what it is, or how I'm supposed to use it.

Creamer is a liquid made with oil and sweetener that approximates the taste and mouthfeel of milk and sugar. Or really a flavored syrup, not sugar. They often have hazelnut or vanilla flavoring added. You would use it by pouring it in your coffee, at about a 1:1 ratio with how you would use milk.

I'm surprised you associated it with espresso. Creamer and drip coffee machines go together. Milk and espresso machines go together. I've seem drip coffee machines with real milk, but I've never seen an espresso machine with just creamer.

It tends to exist primarily in office environments, because it can stand not to be refrigerated and was the first lactose-free option. Therefore it was easy to buy one bottle and solve the problem of "stuff to add to coffee".

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#116

Post by uberex »

cluckindan wrote: post #100
comrade1234 wrote: post #3

My dad was stationed on a submarine in the navy and he and a few others used to dump their laundry in the ultra-sonic cleaner normally used to clean engine parts. Said it did a great job....

Submarines didn’t always have laundry services. For a 90-day trip, the crew would bring six uniforms and rotate them daily. Shower was one minute of water once a week. Everyone smoked tobacco all the time, everywhere.

Interesting you might only meed 15s of water to shower (assuming you can turn off while soaping) so 5 pause 10, allowing a luxurious 4 showers a week.

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#117

Post by alfiedotwtf »

brian-m wrote: post #29

Very interesting for industrial use, that’s for sure. For domestic use, in the home of somebody whose coffee snobbery is dialled to 11, I need far more information. What beans were they using, freshness, etc? (Edit: Campos coffee… not on my shopping list that’s for sure…) How did they control for extraction method differences to maximise output quality for all brew methods? (Edit: TDS and EY) Were the “regular” coffe…

> Campos coffee… not on my shopping list that’s for sure

I’m from Melbourne, have a Brewtus IV + Mazza Mini, probably have a low user ID on coffeesnobs, hung out every day our Prouds and Patricia’s, and can tell from first sip if the beans are South American, African, or from Sumatra, so you can probably tell I’m anal about my coffee… and all I can say is don’t knock Campos (especially their King Street).

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#118

Post by aaron695 »

kowalej wrote: post #35

This seems very interesting, at least from a pure coffee nerd standpoint and what it could mean for improving espresso brewing in general. However, I'm going through the research paper, and am a bit skeptical of the energy savings angle, especially considering the many variables with espresso machine in terms of how they heat and brew (single vs dual boilers, heat exchangers vs dippers, spring lever machines vs pump…

[dead]

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#119

Post by alfiedotwtf »

criddell wrote: post #47
hylaride wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be a learning experience to find the right settings. Coffee usually goes in two directions. Under-extracted (sour) or over-extracted (bitter). Things that will affect the extraction are temperature (hotter usually means more extraction), time (longer = more), grind size (more surface area in smaller grinds = more), pressure (higher = more) etc. Roast levels also matter.

I often produce espresso that is bitter and sour. The best coffee that I've drank for the past five years have all been pour overs (my favorite was at a place called The Library in Toronto). I sometimes wonder if all the time, effort, and money I've dumped into espresso has been a huge mistake and maybe I should just buy a pour over setup...

Don’t forget that pour overs are usually a lighter roast than espresso. I like a sharper tasting vote and so usually use filter roasts (lighter) for my espressos.

Edit: and if you want a non-bitter coffee, skip the pour over and cold brew, and go straight for the cold drip (one drop every second over 24 hours). And when from the fridge, let it sit to get to room temperature - now you have a non-bitter, flavoursome coffee that has a whiskey mouth feel

Re: I used sound waves to make espresso

#120

Post by embedding-shape »

erikgahner wrote: post #14

This was also discussed on HN a few days ago.[1] [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552440

I guess that might explain why they had it at such a low temperature (way to low I'd say), as they wanted to make a point about the lower energy consumption? If you wanted it hotter, then it might not actually save energy at all potentially?
Post reply on HN