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

381–390 of 631 posts

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#381

Post by pentagrama »

ceedan wrote: post #360
jhbadger wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also like coffee mixed with chicory in the New Orleans style for that bitter kick. The New Orleans Cafe du Monde (besides brewing it on site) also sells the mixture in some supermarkets for brewing at home.

I also like cafe du monde. I just had some pecan praline coffee that was amazing. Bottom shelf of the grocery store. I only got it because nothing else was on sale... It might be my new go-to for a while. Give it a shot if you can find it

Sorry everyone but this thread is starting to sound like this https://youtu.be/4ZK8Z8hulFg

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#382

Post by dsr_ »

jimmaswell wrote: post #211
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 i…

That's not a percolator, that's a moka pot. There are many people who will rave about that.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#383

Post by jen20 »

brunoqc wrote: post #372
jen20 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best thing about Starbucks from my perspective is it gives you somewhere in most cities/towns where you can order tea that isn’t horrible.

Any good kind of tea to try in particular from them?

I just do the English Breakfast, but have heard good things about some of the herbal teas.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#384

Post by deepsquirrelnet »

acchow wrote: post #215
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?

Not in my experience. I find some dippers to be more consistent process-wise than others, but to my palate, age of the roast is still the most important variable.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#385

Post by malaki01 »

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.

Live in Portland. Can confirm there are places that lack a simple dark roast / house coffee option. Portland literally encourages a "keep it weird" ethos that imo just results in folks trying too hard, as in banana-rosemary-licorice blends ...

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#386

Post by throwaway_4ever »

mcronce wrote: post #347

Honestly, as somebody who does pourovers that take like fifteen minutes between grinding the beans, heating the kettle, pouring, and finally drinking...sometimes I do yearn for just a Keurig-like fast-shitty-cup-of-coffee experience without all the plastic waste.

I used to do pourovers for two people but also found they took too long, and after 15 mins already lost some of the heat so the coffee wouldn't stay hot as long.

Much preferring just a standard pot of coffee now.[0] Takes 30 seconds of work.

[0] https://www.amazon.com/BLACK-DECKER-Programmable-Coffeemaker...

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#387

Post by telchior »

zeta0134 wrote: post #326
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 think a lot of this sentiment comes from one dark roast in particular: whatever Starbucks brews has the nastiest, most bitter after taste. It's probably the perfect blend to compliment their sugary concoctions, since there's no mistaking the strong flavor it adds, but it's (subjectively) quite awful on its own. I find dark roasts from nearly any other brand to be more tolerable, with all sorts of interesting flavor…

Starbucks' roasters are extremely proud of their techniques, too. They're all mysterious and secretive about how they do it, or at least one of their VPs was when I talked to him about it a decade ago. I think they're aware that coffee enthusiasts generally find it to be bad but didn't find that to be a negative to their business. You're probably right that it's because that bitterness goes well with sugar.

That actually holds true for coffee in parts of Asia, too. If you buy from a street vendor in Vietnam or Singapore, to name two, you get some cheap-ass Robusta mix that was roasted to hell, brewed for hours (or days) and then fixed with a big dollop of condensed milk. My wife describes the flavor as burnt tires and old motor oil. But personally, I love it.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#388

Post by wenc »

I'm into Folgers instant coffee these days. I'll flirt with Nescafe instant coffees, but Folgers is my thing. I stay away from the Costco Kirkland stuff.

I visited Italy during grad school and was enamored of moka pots. I got a Bialetti and started experimenting. I moved on to French presses. I would've gotten an espresso machine if I had the cash. (but as a grad student, I didn't)

Yet I went back to liking brew coffee. You know what the problem was with all the above? They all just took too darned long. I just want my coffee in the morning with minimum fuss.

Instant coffees aren't good but they're good enough.

(though I will say, Swedish coffees like Gevalia that are made from Arabica beans are smooth and pleasant and much better than Folgers -- unfortunately they don't sell the instant versions in the US)

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#389

Post by LesZedCB »

ETH_start wrote: post #370
LesZedCB wrote: post #157

commodity coffee is bad - for the farmers and workers (low, inconsistent pay) - for the environment (mono-cropping) - for the roaster (inconsistent quality and needs to be over-roasted to equalize) - in the cup (tastes over-roasted) sorry. just because we have all gotten used to commodity coffee pricing "for your daily fix" doesn't mean it's good or acceptable. it's inextricable from it's history in colonialism.

You're implying the farmers and workers would be better off if those low-paying jobs didn't exist, which is obviously not the case, as the fact that they took those jobs indicates it was better than the next best job available to them. This same fallacy applies to criticisms of FoxConn factory jobs in China or construction jobs by imported labor in Dubai. To you, the jobs are terrible, but to the people who get them,…

coffee wasn't from those countries where commodity coffee mostly comes from.

it was brought by colonists.

and if your whole argument is essentially reagan-era, neoliberal "a rising tide raises all ships" globalist economics, i have waterfront property to sell yah

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#390

Post by discardable_dan »

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’…

> 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 agree, but I think it's slightly more! The author doesn't like coffee, they understand the intimate knowledge of every aspect. And in doing so, they come to appreciate the interesting parts of the worst entries in the field. And the experiences those entries mean.

To give another data point, I really like pocket knives. I've been collecting them for nearly twenty years. I have some very expensive ones. My daily carries are usually around $200 or so. I seldom use them, however, and never heavily. And I often trade them away for other people's pocket knives. I love those $40 beaters that have seen a life of real and heavy use.

Those knives exist in a state of their own, just like bad coffee: they weren't created to be perfect, and nobody involved took as much care as they should. But the flaws make the end result more-valuable, in an important way."Wabi-sabi" might truly be the meaning of existence.

Post reply on HN