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

A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

seriouseats.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 57 posts

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#41

Post by charlie0 »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #2

In my own attempt to bloom coffee in an Aeropress, the result is, strangely, that it takes much longer to extract the coffee to 'full strength' if I bloom it, compared to not blooming it. If I bloom the coffee, then fill up with water and stir, the result is under-extracted unless I brew for longer. If I just fill up the water immediately and then stir, it takes much less long to brew to the same 'strength'. This is…

Are you using the same amount of water in both cases? I sometimes overdilute the coffee because letting it bloom lets the current water drain away.

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#42

Post by kitotik »

romafirst3 wrote: post #27
kitotik wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But maybe the CO2 removal stuff really is a big deal. It’s definitely a thing. There are some super light roasts that if you try to brew them without enough resting time, you can sort of cheat by just grinding the coffee about 30mins before you brew for a hacky quick degas. It really helps get rid of that grassy vegetal taste.

There should be no grassy taste, that’s a roast defect and comes from inconsistent roasting. You should find a better roaster. You can roast really light and not get that taste, but you need to be consistent.

Maybe grassy wasn’t the right term. I don’t mean under developed, it’s kinda bitter and sharp without any sweetness. I’ve experienced this with pretty legit roasters like apollons gold. It seems like the lighter the roast, the more time it needs to degas before it hits the sweet spot.

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#43

Post by strogonoff »

decafninja wrote: post #18

I went through my coffee hipster phase. But I eventually came to the conclusion that my palate is just too unsophisticated to tell the difference between supposed “hints of blueberry and molasses” in third wave hipster coffee from a boutique roaster versus the cheap coffee that my local newsstand brews every morning. Now my only concession to coffee is brewing a cup on a Technivorm. Also Hawaiian coffee is super smoo…

Regular filter coffee at a café, cheapest store-bought Segafredo powder in a moka pot—I still like that more than almost any expensive coffee (as far as black coffee goes, at least), but there is perhaps one particular hand drip the taste of which beats everything. It’s hard to come by and I do not know how to describe it except that it is not sour at all and is diametrically opposite to what many coffee hipsters want (“what is your sourest bean?” is something I overheard once or twice).

I got the beans, same beans roasted and ground in the same way in the same shop where I found my desired taste recently, and after making it a couple of times learned that too many things affect the taste. The first time it was good, the second time it was too sour. It is “fun” trying to diff the culprit: water temperature? way of pouring water? psychosomatic factors?

A fun fact I re-learned recently and was able to replicate for myself for coffee: there are different sensors in different parts of your tongue that taste different aspects; sides taste sour more so even the shape of your cup affects the result (wider cup may taste more sour with the same coffee).

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#44

Post by spdif899 »

strogonoff wrote: post #43
decafninja wrote: post #18

I went through my coffee hipster phase. But I eventually came to the conclusion that my palate is just too unsophisticated to tell the difference between supposed “hints of blueberry and molasses” in third wave hipster coffee from a boutique roaster versus the cheap coffee that my local newsstand brews every morning. Now my only concession to coffee is brewing a cup on a Technivorm. Also Hawaiian coffee is super smoo…

Regular filter coffee at a café, cheapest store-bought Segafredo powder in a moka pot—I still like that more than almost any expensive coffee (as far as black coffee goes, at least), but there is perhaps one particular hand drip the taste of which beats everything. It’s hard to come by and I do not know how to describe it except that it is not sour at all and is diametrically opposite to what many coffee hipsters wan…

The tongue map is debunked: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/neat-and-tidy-...

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#45

Post by strogonoff »

spdif899 wrote: post #44
strogonoff wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regular filter coffee at a café, cheapest store-bought Segafredo powder in a moka pot—I still like that more than almost any expensive coffee (as far as black coffee goes, at least), but there is perhaps one particular hand drip the taste of which beats everything. It’s hard to come by and I do not know how to describe it except that it is not sour at all and is diametrically opposite to what many coffee hipsters wan…

The tongue map is debunked: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/neat-and-tidy-...

I wrote that I have personally observed it. One cannot debunk a factual data point.

Even if one could, the article you linked does not even attempt to do that:

> Hänig found that there was some variation around the tongue in how much stimulus it took for a taste to register. Hänig’s hypothesis generally holds up. Different parts of the tongue do have a lower threshold for perceiving certain tastes, but these differences are rather minute.

Within the category of “coffee”, all differences are minute. The whole point of coffee hipstertude is enhancing individual sensitivity to those minute differences in taste in order to pointlessly argue and express sophisticated preferences about such.

(It took me years of drinking single origin hand drip to just start noticing a difference between light and dark roast, and believe it or not there are people who have much more narrowly defined tastes.)

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#46

Post by mikestew »

jcdavis wrote: post #38
mikestew wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aeropress should make this acessory standard-issue with their coffee makers, so that we don’t have to rely on other methods to reduce drip-through: https://aeropress.com/products/aeropress-flow-control-filter...

The inverted method is an even easier way to achieve this :)

You still have to screw a lid on it, how is it any easier than simply screwing on a different lid? Or perhaps you meant “cheaper” instead of “easier”. :-)

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#47

Post by romafirst3 »

kitotik wrote: post #42
romafirst3 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should be no grassy taste, that’s a roast defect and comes from inconsistent roasting. You should find a better roaster. You can roast really light and not get that taste, but you need to be consistent.

Maybe grassy wasn’t the right term. I don’t mean under developed, it’s kinda bitter and sharp without any sweetness. I’ve experienced this with pretty legit roasters like apollons gold. It seems like the lighter the roast, the more time it needs to degas before it hits the sweet spot.

I've found that lighter roasts don't degas/bloom anywhere near as much as coffees that are taken even a little more darker (like talking about the difference between super light and light). I think this continues up to second crack. I'd guess that the breaking down of the cell walls in the bean has something to do with it, more roast more breakdown = more C02. I actually think the C02 is just probably not even created in lighter roasts.

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#48

Post by globular-toast »

decafninja wrote: post #18

I went through my coffee hipster phase. But I eventually came to the conclusion that my palate is just too unsophisticated to tell the difference between supposed “hints of blueberry and molasses” in third wave hipster coffee from a boutique roaster versus the cheap coffee that my local newsstand brews every morning. Now my only concession to coffee is brewing a cup on a Technivorm. Also Hawaiian coffee is super smoo…

Me too. I went from using various pieces of equipment and freshly grinding it every day to simple cafetiere coffee using pre-ground coffee.

Then I got into coffee again and wondered what the hell was wrong with me. Life is too short for bad coffee. If something is forcing me to make such sacrifices in things like coffee and food I fix the thing.

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#49

Post by zikduruqe »

decafninja wrote: post #18

I went through my coffee hipster phase. But I eventually came to the conclusion that my palate is just too unsophisticated to tell the difference between supposed “hints of blueberry and molasses” in third wave hipster coffee from a boutique roaster versus the cheap coffee that my local newsstand brews every morning. Now my only concession to coffee is brewing a cup on a Technivorm. Also Hawaiian coffee is super smoo…

Same here. I tried coffee subscriptions to see if I was missing something by trying different roasters. Nope, it just tasted like coffee. I've tried Aeropresses and other doo-dads, and still, coffee tastes like coffee.

I will say that I just bought a used Bonavita BV1800TH for $9 from a Goodwill store, and all the sudden my 3lb $17 bag of Costco ground coffee tastes significantly better in the Bonavita. Although I'd love a Technivorm one day.

I might have to revisit some different beans again, now that I have a decent machine.

Re: A scientific run-down of coffee blooming

#50

Post by ailurooo »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #24

One coffee phenomenon I'm curious about: why does old coffee get cloudy? On the day I brew it, it's a dark brown translucent. But if I leave it in the pot overnight, it's definitely more opaque. My wife claims it tastes the same as the day before.

fresh coffee has a distinct taste. Maybe your wife is just used to day old coffee lol
Post reply on HN