151–160 of 179 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By soaking regular ground coffee in water for 12 hours or so.
You may be thinking of cold brew, which is usually more expensive due to the higher coffee-to-water ratio. A standard ‘iced coffee’ at most coffee shops is espresso-based
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably best suited for cold drinks where the heat is just purely wasted against the ice and diluting the drink.
The heat isn't wasted, it has a significant impact on flavor. Extraction of flavor etc from coffee grounds changes based on the water temperature. You can easily experiment with this by taking some coffee grounds and trying to brew with various temperatures, and noticing what flavors you get out. There's a reason cold-brew needs hours and hours to extract a good coffee flavor while regular espresso or pourover is don…
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.
If you don't need to heat the water before cooling it down it would be an enegy savings.
Yeah, if I drink an espresso and it's not hot, I'm fighting the barista.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The heat isn't wasted, it has a significant impact on flavor. Extraction of flavor etc from coffee grounds changes based on the water temperature. You can easily experiment with this by taking some coffee grounds and trying to brew with various temperatures, and noticing what flavors you get out. There's a reason cold-brew needs hours and hours to extract a good coffee flavor while regular espresso or pourover is don…
> For the espresso samples, participants could not reliably tell the traditional and ultrasonic versions apart. There were no significant differences in aroma, flavour, bitterness or overall liking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The heat isn't wasted, it has a significant impact on flavor. Extraction of flavor etc from coffee grounds changes based on the water temperature. You can easily experiment with this by taking some coffee grounds and trying to brew with various temperatures, and noticing what flavors you get out. There's a reason cold-brew needs hours and hours to extract a good coffee flavor while regular espresso or pourover is don…
> For the espresso samples, participants could not reliably tell the traditional and ultrasonic versions apart. There were no significant differences in aroma, flavour, bitterness or overall liking.
Also, please see the community guides. Treat comments in good faith (i.e. the strongest interpretation of their comment) and try to encourage productive conversations. IMO just quoting is degenerative to the conversation. Quote, but say more. Put your actual voice in the comment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
It was a "Keurig", and I had to put a pod in it and wait a few seconds. Is that not espresso? I make espresso at home by grinding/tamping it myself so I admittedly don't know much about the pod version or whether that still counts as espresso.
It's marketed as a coffee machine that makes a single cup with a single pod at a time.
(Apparently you can tweak a Keurig to approach an espresso, but it's not the default).
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…
About 6-7 years ago I bought a machine that prepares single-shot cold brew with ultrasonic cavitation. I like my caffeine potent and chilled, so this has worked out extremely well for me. When I have a guest that wants a hot coffee, I just pour the shot into a mug and top it up with hot water to their taste, which works great. What this isn't is anything new. That doesn't make it bad, but it's not novel.
That's very surprising. What's the model of machine?
https://www.engadget.com/osma-pro-cold-brew-coffee-machine-r...
Sadly, the company that made it flew a bit too close to the sun. I'd be genuinely sad if mine broke.