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

The case for bad coffee (2015)

seriouseats.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 631 posts

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#181

Post by ryanSrich »

Scarbutt wrote: post #150
ryanSrich wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point still stands. Doing a pour over or drip is low fuss. You could argue grinding your own beans isn’t low fuss, but most grinders have a preset with a hopper, so it’s still pretty quick and easy to grind your own beans. As for recommendations, I always say go local, and make sure it’s been roasted recently. As for what’s near me (Portland OR) I have quiet a few — Case Study, Coava, Heart, and Never are my curre…

Getting "roasted recently coffee" sounds like a problem, how do you make sure of it? Also, have you try nespresso(machines and coffee)? I find their coffee really good and can't stand anything else, easy to make and not expensive.

All quality roasters will put a roast date on the bag. Call them ahead of time and ask when they stock each roast, and just go at that time to get it essentially straight from the roaster.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#182

Post by ryanSrich »

compiler-guy wrote: post #151
ryanSrich wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point still stands. Doing a pour over or drip is low fuss. You could argue grinding your own beans isn’t low fuss, but most grinders have a preset with a hopper, so it’s still pretty quick and easy to grind your own beans. As for recommendations, I always say go local, and make sure it’s been roasted recently. As for what’s near me (Portland OR) I have quiet a few — Case Study, Coava, Heart, and Never are my curre…

Still more work than instant maxwell house, and still missing the point about the article. It isn’t about the coffee, it’s about the experience and the people you drink it with. Frou-frou coffee has a way of making the experience about the coffee, rather than about the company and environs. At least that is the author’s point. And I say this as someone who grinds their own beans every day.

I’d be too distracted by the horrible instant coffee to enjoy any conversation or environment.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#183

Post by crowbahr »

ryanSrich wrote: post #139
staticautomatic wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t directed at you/OP, but the anti dark roast thing seems to me to be a distinctively American coffee snob hipster thing. Many places in the world have wonderful dark roast coffee. Honestly, are these people just wandering around Austria, Italy, Vietnam, Cuba, or Turkey complaining about bad the coffee is? Give me a break.

I mean people can drink coffee however they want, but dark roasting beans absolutely destroys the majority of flavors within the bean. There’s no denying that. It’s similar to eating a steak well done. People do it, and it’s even very common in certain countries. But it’s removing the majority of flavor. I don’t see how anyone could deny that.

I mean a really light roast ends up having little flavor besides sour, if you're talking espresso.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#184

Post by projektfu »

Scarbutt wrote: post #150
ryanSrich wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point still stands. Doing a pour over or drip is low fuss. You could argue grinding your own beans isn’t low fuss, but most grinders have a preset with a hopper, so it’s still pretty quick and easy to grind your own beans. As for recommendations, I always say go local, and make sure it’s been roasted recently. As for what’s near me (Portland OR) I have quiet a few — Case Study, Coava, Heart, and Never are my curre…

Getting "roasted recently coffee" sounds like a problem, how do you make sure of it? Also, have you try nespresso(machines and coffee)? I find their coffee really good and can't stand anything else, easy to make and not expensive.

You can ask what day they roasted it? Sometimes they write that on the bag. If it's a place with good turnover it's probably recent.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#185

Post by MAGZine »

hanklazard wrote: post #34

This was a really beautiful post. As for coffee, like many other parts of life (movies, food, and music especially), I find that I like it very good or very bad—as long as it’s not down the middle, I can find a time/place to enjoy it. I have a fairly expensive Rocket Espresso machine, I’ve learned some latte art. I have every coffee making contraption out there. And I enjoy all of it, at times. When I’m in a hurry I’…

starbucks can be good, the trick is to order:

1. espresso drinks

2. order one shot extra (starbucks will only put 1 shot of espresso in an 12oz tall--so you should order AT LEAST one extra shot).

3. ask for blonde roast, which is actually not half bad. pike place/standard is a disaster.

it will not parallel any craft coffee shop, but this actually makes for drinkable coffee, which is convenient since there are starbucks literally everywhere.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#186

Post by reddog »

WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #146
majormajor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly do you mean by "pay so much"? E.g. I could buy a KG of single origin that I'd call "fairly good" for about $33 bucks - which recently would've been like 28 Euros though it's about 1-to-1 now - is that what you mean? Or are you meaning much more than that? Like comparing to retail "fancy coffee shop" US drink price? (There's a lot of range in what one person might call fairly good compared to the next, to…

The price you are giving me is indeed between 30% and 50% above the one I pay and the 22€ is post-taxes while I suspect you are giving me a pre-taxes price in the USA. My understanding from reading Reddit was that 40$ a kilo was not uncommon.

Whole or ground coffee is not subject to sales tax anywhere in the US that I know of since coffee is a grocery. Although a prepared cup of coffee (from Starbucks for example) is taxed.

Two weeks ago I paid $9 for a pound of whole bean coffee from a good local roaster. That may be a bit below average but $11/lb is easy to find if your not living in a high-dollar, high-status coastal city.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#187

Post by LesZedCB »

ryanSrich wrote: post #105

I’ve gone through several coffee phases, some bordering on extreme — extremely sensitive weighing, timing, $2,000 grinders, $10k espresso machine, etc. My happy medium is just doing basic pour overs, but with really good locally roasted coffee. To me, this is the cheapest and best approach. In fact, even if pour overs require too much work (weighing, timing), then just do drip. But do it with quality coffee. Quality…

currently my local roaster is in my kitchen!

i use a hottop 2k roaster, got it for $600 on craigslist, and get green coffee from sweet marias.

so far it's the best cost/return i've gotten yet!

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#188

Post by melissalobos »

b3morales wrote: post #144
cercatrova wrote: post #108

I bought a very expensive espresso machine thinking I'd cut down on my coffee shop visits. Turns out, I use the machine maybe a few times a month and I go even more frequently to coffee shops. I realized I don't go to coffee shops for the coffee itself, I go because I want to get out of the house, take a walk, sip good coffee and enjoy the ambiance of the world.

Your username is very appropriate for this comment :D

"seek and ye shall find"? I mean they didn't exactly try to find out why they were drinking so much coffee, they were more trying to save money(I think).

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#190

Post by lisper »

LesZedCB wrote: post #180
lisper wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just because you can't doesn't mean the differences aren't there But that's the point: we could tell the difference. We just all preferred the Barefoot when we didn't know what we were drinking. Nowadays my tastes have evolved beyond Barefoot. But there isn't anything wrong with you if you just happen not to like Chateau Petrus.

right, and i completely agree on that point. the counter-point is that everybody uses the "taste is subjective" as a bludgeon for there being not quantifiable difference in quality between offerings.

Of course there are differences. But, with a very few exceptions, none of those differences make one product objectively better than the others.
Post reply on HN