41–50 of 124 posts
I have found my AeroPress coffee to be lacking body. I returned to pour-overs and French presses. Having read this, I feel I must again tinker with the Aeropress. Likely case of "Doing it wrong."
I use my AeroPress twice a day, every day and love it. But the article is mistaken in calling it espresso. It's not even close, although someone has rigged one to produce espresso[1]. And don't let the article fool you, there are really only three important factors: water temperature, grind size, and steep time. Varying these can get different characteristics from a particular roast, and it's fun to experiment! What…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I take my coffee seriously and I'm willing to spend some time (and money) making it. Even for me, that looks a bit more involved than I'd like.
The inverted method essentially involves waiting for 45-90 seconds and then pressing. It's not going to leak or anything when you flip it unless you go absolutely wild. It's no harder than making a non-inverted aeropress or a pourover. Or if you accidentally put the plunger in the wrong side and don't notice before you fill it up. I did that once :)
Motion seconded. I used to think inverted seemed complicated as well, but once you've done it, it's pretty darn straightforward.
So it's a french press made of plastic?
Take a French press. Replace the fine metal mesh with paper (so no grit gets thru). Use a much finer grind (French press requires coarse grind). Finer grind means much shorter steep time (30 seconds instead of 4 minutes). Put the filter on the bottom of the container, replace the filter plunger with a rubber plunger (so instead of pushing all the grounds to the bottom then pouring coffee out, it's more like a pressure-assisted syringe-shaped drip).
Idea is paper gets all the grounds out (no grit in cup), fine grind minimizes brew time, short brew time makes sweeter results, syringe style is accidentally self-cleaning.
How complicated it has become to drink coffee ;-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I take my coffee seriously and I'm willing to spend some time (and money) making it. Even for me, that looks a bit more involved than I'd like.
The inverted method essentially involves waiting for 45-90 seconds and then pressing. It's not going to leak or anything when you flip it unless you go absolutely wild. It's no harder than making a non-inverted aeropress or a pourover. Or if you accidentally put the plunger in the wrong side and don't notice before you fill it up. I did that once :)
Still, I hesitate to recommend it to some people, not because it's difficult, but because I know they might use boiling hot water straight from the kettle and risk injury. Under the right conditions, it can separate when screwing on the filter cap, due to the steam pressure.
I have found my AeroPress coffee to be lacking body. I returned to pour-overs and French presses. Having read this, I feel I must again tinker with the Aeropress. Likely case of "Doing it wrong."
I use my AeroPress twice a day, every day and love it. But the article is mistaken in calling it espresso. It's not even close, although someone has rigged one to produce espresso[1]. And don't let the article fool you, there are really only three important factors: water temperature, grind size, and steep time. Varying these can get different characteristics from a particular roast, and it's fun to experiment! What…
Absolutely agree on the three important factors. But I'd say the fourth is bean quality. Makes all the difference.
I always wind up making a mess everywhere with mine