Live data from Hacker News

The case for bad coffee (2015)

seriouseats.com

411–420 of 631 posts

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#411

Great coffee is one of those things that doesn't scale. It requires labor at every stage. Expensive and slow. Getting OK coffee scales wonderfully. Easy and cheap. You can still get tired of great coffee, or at least start to feel like it's routine rather than pleasant. I just feel like there are vetter things to spend time on that are more intellectually rewarding. Learning an old craft, or music, or reading a book.…

Great coffee can be commonly had, just probably not provided by a single vertically integrated entity. Here in Australia, we have hundreds of independent roasters, each supplying anything from a handful to hundreds of independent cafes each.

It works well - you don’t go to a chain here expecting good coffee, if you’re somewhere you’re not familiar with, you just jump in Google Maps or something to find a decently rated cafe nearby and you should get good coffee.

In terms of home prep, when many cafes are selling great beans all around the place, you can easily always have great coffee. Once my machine is warm it takes something like two or three minutes from bean to cup, including grinding, steaming milk, etc… I’ve only been doing it for 15 years but don’t see myself getting tired of it anytime soon. I enjoy the tactility, the smell, the feel, and of course the end result. It’s a nice break from mentally taxing work!

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#413
I turn on the news, and inevitably an ad appears. On one side of a split screen, a hipster-looking guy in an apron with a deep look of stress on his face is agonizingly bungling an attempt to measure coffee beans out into some kind of overly complicated apparatus. On the other side, a serene looking woman is pouring some powder into a mug and adding water. "Here you go honey". She passes him a cup. "Nescafe. What else?"

I'm starting to think some kind of viral marketing campaign run by instant coffee makers is being waged here...

We live in a world where fast food and TV diners are doing their level best to extinguish the homemade meal. Cooking is hard and time consuming. Why not do things the easy way? It would appear that instant coffee manufacturers are now trying to repeat this operation the simple cup of joe.

Here's the thing. Making good coffee isn't time consuming, expensive, or hard. Sure, lots of people do go through "The Quest" stage when learning how to do something that's new to them. You strive for the best cup of coffee that human hands can make and go to increasingly exotic and difficult ends to achieve that end. It's like how, when cooking, you might keep chasing Michelin star worthy fare every night and just burn out.

Embrace the quest for what it's worth. You learn a lot in its punishing tutelage, but there comes a time to settle for what is merely good. The quest begins with rapid advance up an logistic curve of quality vs time and effort, but the perfect result requires infinite effort. Pick a spot before the slope of that curve levels off too much and you can get great results with comparatively little effort.

Recognize that the results axis of this curve are personal and subjective. One person may indeed decide to jump off the curve at the level of instant brew, while another will jump off with an espresso machine in their kitchen. You don't need articles like this to tell you where to jump off. Learn how to make coffee that's good enough for you with just enough time and effort to be worth it, and then be happy with that.

I'm not trying to tell you where to abandon The Quest and jump off the curve. I'm just saying that, for most people, that point will probably be a little bit beyond instant coffee.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#414

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…

> I don't even know what "correct" pour-over technique is, so I'm basically making bog-standard single-serving drip coffee with store-brand beans, and I couldn't be happier with it.

The correct technique is the technique that consistently makes you the coffee you like.

> Ultimately I think fancy coffee is the same as fancy beer - it's not about the quality of taste of the thing, but rather it's about tribal membership and signaling.

Most people aren't usually looking for novelty in their daily coffee, which is why they are often loyal to a particular coffee shop or method of preparation. This is true whether its Folgers instant coffee or shade grown Ethiopian.

If one is a daily beer drinker, then sure, the very experimental and unique flavored ones can be too much. But for me, beer isn't a daily beverage. It's a weekend or special occasion thing, like a cocktail, and for that, I'd rather have a more unique flavor.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#416
> Cheap coffee is one of America's most unsung comfort foods.

I wish more post would come with a tag line like this, straight to the point “this is where I am, what I strive for, read this piece in this frame of mind”

Half of the article doesn’t make any sense without this framing.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Last time I was in Oregon I tried to go into a coffee place and get a cup of coffee. Now, I'm admittedly not a big fancy coffee guy, usually drinking whatever Dunkin Donuts or McDonald's swill I can get, but I couldn't for the life of me figure out what the hell I was supposed to order. It was all fancy names on the menu and nothing that was just "coffee". I finally just said, "I want, like, normal, I don't know, Eas…

Go to a McDonald's next time. Would you ask for the Applebee special at a fancy steakhouse?

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean people can drink coffee however they want, but dark roasting beans absolutely destroys the majority of flavors within the bean. There’s no denying that. It’s similar to eating a steak well done. People do it, and it’s even very common in certain countries. But it’s removing the majority of flavor. I don’t see how anyone could deny that.

> absolutely destroys the majority of flavors Notwithstanding that this isn't measured whatsoever, it also develops flavor. It's just that it becomes more one-note. You won't taste fruitiness or other delicate things, but I don't want my coffee to taste like fruity tea. Neither do most people.

And that is because the harsh taste is a proxy for how much psychoactive MAO-A-inhibiting beta-carbolines the brew contains.

You like it because it gets you more high.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'd legitimately rather drink Starbucks than Stumptown for all of the reasons mentioned above. Starbucks is 'meh' but at least it doesn't have that sour, floral taste.

As a melburnian used to espresso, American Starbucks just tastes like milk to me. I try to order the smallest, strongest thing I can find and it's still just...milk.
Post reply on HN