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

211–220 of 631 posts

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#211

Post by jimmaswell »

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…

Apparently coffee enthusiasts hate me for this - I enjoy using a little single serving percolator on the stovetop. It's the kind that only sends the water through the grounds once, from the bottom up through the grounds then into the top. If you leave it on too long it'll "burn" but if you pour it out as soon as it's done it's fine.

I tried a recirculating one a while ago and I actually liked it a lot, I just broke it and haven't replaced it. It didn't seem to make a "burned" taste either.

Maybe the finer points of coffee are beyond the granularity of my relevant tastebuds or something, because from what coffee people say I'm allegedly drinking toxic sludge.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#212

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

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…

I like dark roast coffee, ice cubes in my scotch, and my steak well done and I'm tried of people telling me I'm wrong. Let me like the things I like.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#213

Post by jimmaswell »

CptFribble wrote: post #4

Like most things, coffee is subject to diminishing returns. I have also owned nearly every device invented to make coffee - as I'm sure many others here have - and I've settled on a simple over-the-mug pour-over cone, but mainly because there's no moving parts or tubes to worry about cleaning. I don't even know what "correct" pour-over technique is, so I'm basically making bog-standard single-serving drip coffee with…

Have you tried the little single-serving one-pass stovetop percolators?

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#214

Post by robbrown451 »

luma wrote: post #143
robbrown451 wrote: post #137

I'm an advocate for the middle ground. I get store brand whole bean coffee (1) , and grind it and use a Mr. Coffee. Then put sugar and milk in because black coffee is nasty. I see no value to obsessing over perfect coffee. I have friends who do and love to talk endlessly about it. Holy crap how boring. Nor am I going to drink Maxwell house unless I have no other reasonable option. 1: typically light or medium roast..…

You advocate for not buying high quality coffee and then follow it with: > Then put sugar and milk in because black coffee is nasty. If you think your coffee is nasty, maybe it's the coffee?

Maybe, but I just don't like black coffee, and I'm pretty sure I've had "good" black coffee. Too acidic and bitter.

I guess you could say I "just don't like coffee," but I do like it with cream and sugar, so.... I mean, whatever. That's what I like.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#215

Post by acchow »

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…

> You don’t want old coffee (anything older than a few weeks isn’t good)

I find pourovers extremely sensitive to timing. For an espresso, 1-2 weeks old is totally fine (even preferred?), but for pourovers the flavor is totally different even just 8-9 days after roasting. Is there any way around this?

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#216

Post by staticautomatic »

zwieback wrote: post #201
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.

Agree, I don't even order coffee in Portland anymore because everything is "delicate, fruity, floral" light roast aka. tastes like goddam vinegar.

Have you tried Spella?

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#217

Post by acchow »

staticautomatic wrote: post #125
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…

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.

> a distinctively American coffee snob hipster thing

Didn't it start in Northern Europe and flourish in Australia?

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#218

Post by rubyist5eva »

Something about bad “rusty spoon” diner coffee just tickles my fancy. It’s usually burnt, is technically not pleasant at all, and yet I can’t get enough of it. Probably more nostalgia for all of the friendships and conversations had over it over the years than the coffee itself. For all it’s flaws the human condition can be wonderful sometimes…

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#219

Post by sakras »

This reminds me of that Order of the Stick strip about bad coffee:

Xykon: Hell no, it's the most disgusting sludge I've put in my stomach in years. But you see, nothing really compares to a cup of truly awful coffee.

Right-Eye: Uh, how about a cup of really good coffee?

Xykon: Not the same thing at all. When you drink a cup of really good coffee, you try to immerse yourself in that cup. You focus all your senses on what you're drinking. How it smells, how it tastes, how it feels on your tongue. You savor the experience. But when you drink a cup of absolutely horrid coffee, you do everything possible to NOT immerse yourself in it. You try to shut out your senses from what you're drinking. Inevitably, you try to stave off the assault on your poor innocent tongue by mentally comparing it to all the better coffee you've had in your life, reliving each cup in comparison to the godforsaken sludge you're pouring down your gullet right now. So when you drink a good cup of coffee, you're only drinking that one cup... but when you drink a bad cup of coffee, you remember every good cup you ever drank. And at my advanced age, that's a helluva lot of good coffee.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#220

Post by scoot »

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…

"Bordering on the extreme"?!

You are the marketer's ideal mark. $2K for a $20 grinder? $10K for a $100 coffee machine? And that's before rip-off beans...

Post reply on HN