Does this work with cold water? Because if so, my iced espresso drinks are crying out for it
Where's James Hoffmann when you need him?
Making espresso with ultrasound
41–50 of 94 posts
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#42> Both espresso samples were served at 22 °C to ensure a fair like-for-like comparison […]
> It is noted that espresso is normally consumed hot and has transient sensory attributes that are temperature- and time-dependent. Hence, serving espresso at 22 °C will alter its sensory characteristics.
This is a weird test, coffee get’s so much worse when cold. So people can’t distinguish between two bad coffees.
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#43Someone get James Hoffmann on the line right now.
I will wait for his blind testing before homebrewing this one.
Might be a new meta for iced lattes.
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#44Does this work with cold water? Because if so, my iced espresso drinks are crying out for it Where's James Hoffmann when you need him?
Although, tbf, I forgot he did a video on ultrasonic barrel aging[1]
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#45But people want to drink coffee/espresso hot, not room-temperature. So you have to heat the water afterward anyway. I'm not seeing that much potential for energy savings here, unless you're comparing setups with large boilers inefficiently used for small amounts of coffee.
> But people want to drink coffee/espresso hot
An awful lot of people drink iced espresso drinks these days. Room temperature (or below) brewing would make a big difference to the dilution in those drinks.
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#46What exactly is the innovation here compared to the press release from two years ago?[1] [1]: https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2024/05/Ultrasonic_col...
Different kind of coffee drink being prepared; espresso vs cold brew.
(You might quibble whether it's actually espresso if there's not pressure and it's extracted cold; but it's closer to espresso in strength.)
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure you can. You can absolutely use those 100 participants if your aim is to develop and market a process that can then be used to make a product for those same types of people. Samples generalise if your sample is representative, and in this case, for large commercial coffee extraction companies, third wave coffee aficionados are not in their target audience.
The product is moving into a different territory, though. I doubt these guys even know how to pull a proper espresso shot as a baseline for the test. I'm sure you can grind espresso coffee beans to a powder and just shake it until it achieves a flavor similar to espresso, but that doesn't mean the resulting drink can really compare to something that was brewed at the right temperature and pressure. Technically you ca…
> I doubt these guys even know how to pull a proper espresso shot as a baseline for the test.
You could just read the linked paper?
> Esp was prepared using a Sanremo Cube espresso machine. Brewing parameters were standardised following the supplier's guidelines: extraction time of 35 ± 3 s, pressure of 9 bar, and boiler temperature of 122 °C, with the corresponding group-head temperature of 94 ± 1 °C. A total of 21 g of ground coffee (GS = 2.6 ± 0.1; ∼262 μm) was placed in a ridged coffee basket and tamped using a constant-pressure tamper (MHW Flash Constant Pressure Tamper 2), applying 13.6 kg of force. The BR was reduced from 2 to 1.7 following the recommendations of the coffee roaster for better flavour (1 g of coffee grounds yielding 1.7 g of coffee brew).
1:1.7 is a bit short for my preferences (I like longer shots, usually aim for ~2.5); but otherwise that sure sounds like a pretty good double to me!
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
They explicitly mention large scale producers for mixed drinks as a massive target audience. E.g. iced coffee manufacturing will be heavily impacted, they would normally need to heat the liquid, extract the coffee and then cool it back down.
If I read it correctly, they did espresso and filter taste tests at room temperature (thought they don't state the exact temperature, and how they managed to brew filter coffee with the described setup). Overall the press release is somewhat misleading in what the goal is until the part you mention. If the focus is industrial production of cold, mixed coffee drinks I'd have expected more quantitative measurements ins…
There's plenty of TDS and other extraction charts in the actual paper.
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
The product is moving into a different territory, though. I doubt these guys even know how to pull a proper espresso shot as a baseline for the test. I'm sure you can grind espresso coffee beans to a powder and just shake it until it achieves a flavor similar to espresso, but that doesn't mean the resulting drink can really compare to something that was brewed at the right temperature and pressure. Technically you ca…
> I doubt these guys even know how to pull a proper espresso shot as a baseline for the test. You could just read the linked paper? > Esp was prepared using a Sanremo Cube espresso machine. Brewing parameters were standardised following the supplier's guidelines: extraction time of 35 ± 3 s, pressure of 9 bar, and boiler temperature of 122 °C, with the corresponding group-head temperature of 94 ± 1 °C. A total of 21…
You're right. But I drink my espresso hot, so I don't quite see how it can compare : )
Re: Making espresso with ultrasound
#50What exactly is the innovation here compared to the press release from two years ago?[1] [1]: https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2024/05/Ultrasonic_col...
Different kind of coffee drink being prepared; espresso vs cold brew. (You might quibble whether it's actually espresso if there's not pressure and it's extracted cold; but it's closer to espresso in strength.)
Got it, thanks!