It occurred to me as I was sitting alone in my motel room, staring at a single-serving of peanut butter, a stale bagel, a bruised banana, and a three-quarters cup of single-serving Folgers coffee with the non-dairy powdered creamer and sugar packet, that this is what living after the apocalypse will be like. The coffee tasted of burnt toast soaked in whey. And yet I knew that in a future post-apocalyptic wasteland, this meal would be a luxury traded like gold. It felt like peeking behind the curtain to some alternate future where I was blessed with a bounty few could hope for. For a moment, in that cup of coffee, was a vision of a different life. That bagel, a different country to explore. And yet somehow, in every motel with a continental breakfast, that universe still exists, waiting to be visited.
The case for bad coffee (2015)
431–440 of 631 posts
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#432I’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…
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.
Honestly? Hated the coffee in Italy, found it sort of tolerable in Austria. However, that's almost certainly because I have no appreciation for robusta, even in blends. I'm a dark roast fan, even: we all tend to talk past each other because we haven't adequately appreciated just how learned (and ingrained) our preferences are.
(this is really in support of your overall thrust, I suspect)
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#433Earlier 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.
The darkest Italian roast has nothing at all to do with what goes as dark roast - and especially not Italian roast - in the US. The absolute darkest roast I ever saw in Italy was with just a hint of oil showing on the bean, and I only saw that once. They drink a medium roast most of the time, although there are light roasts readily available. I have seen documentaries with Italian roasters from Illy and on down to sm…
turkish coffee is also not only coffee. it's a mix with other flavors. so it's some sort of art. with each family having it's own recipe.
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#434Earlier 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.
I mean a really light roast ends up having little flavor besides sour, if you're talking espresso.
no way! i drink exclusively light roast espresso. yes, the sourness is pretty much always there. but there's blueberry (my personal favorite), red berries, tea, lemon, cinnamon. getting a balanced light roast espresso requires going much higher ratio to get a high enough extraction. try upping the temp to 95*C and go for 1:3 or higher.
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#435Earlier 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.
> But it’s removing the majority of flavor. Removing some flavours and adding others. The fact that you prefer the initial flavours is subjective.
eventually the maillard reactions are no longer developing flavors and are just burning. no different than a bagel, pizza, steak, or chocolate.
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#436I’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 have to drink shit coffee to save money.
But then your choice of coffee would cost me an extra 100€ every month. For me, preparation is more important than the coffee and even roasting date. I prefer cheap-ish (supermarket or slightly above) coffee (usually 6 months+ since roasting) with a French Press over fancy freshly roasted drip/filter coffee.
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#437My brother freezes coffee beans. Is that a good way to preserve the taste?
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#438I’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…
I'm of the same opinion. I can't stand any dark roasts, as they actually upset my stomach.
But ho boy have I tried cheap American coffee. That filter coffee you get in NYC. In 3 separate places including in a 5 star hotel. I've never tasted any coffee that was so horrible.
And I'm brewing with an Aeropress for over 10 years. It's by far the simplest and most lenient way of brewing coffee, and produces excellent results. I just can't be assed to faff around with brewing methods.
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
While my European travels are neither recent nor exhaustive, only in Germany could I get a decent cup of drip coffee. Everywhere else the "cup of coffee" was a really bad Americano.
I doubt many places had a drip machine, most of Europe does espresso coffee. It does really depend but in most places a "cup of coffee" is going to be a bit ambiguous, what kind of coffee? Just a cup of espresso coffee would be pretty full on!
In at least some modern (European) places it's called batch brew. If they don't have that either, your next best option will be a v60.
Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)
#440I’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…
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.
Light roasts have higher caffeine and taste less burnt. It’s just a fact.