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

The case for bad coffee (2015)

seriouseats.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 631 posts

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#591

Post by bee_rider »

doublepg23 wrote: post #585
bee_rider wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the bourbons I've tried were too sweet, I didn't get into them. Although I guess it could be the case that, since I didn't like them at first, I never got to the good ones. So, I will be the likely ignorant gatekeeper and say, "yeah, I couldn't imagine being elitist about that weird syrup liquor."

That’s interesting. What kind of selection do you have? There’s a pretty big craze over the Buffalo Trace distillery lately. Their normal bottle - just called Buffalo Trace - is the most bourbon bourbon ever, and what I recommend as a benchmark (even if there are plenty of ‘better’ ones).

I don't remember, to be honest -- definitely something super mass market that I just picked up randomly. I'll check that one out, thanks.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#592

Post by astrange »

kortilla wrote: post #295
astrange wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australians I’ve met all seem to think they invented something they call “coffee culture” (or at least that Melbourne did). I don’t know why they think this because it seems to be exactly the same as Seattle in the 2000s.

Perhaps because it’s older? Coffee culture took off post WW2 in Australia with an influx in Italians but it didn’t start to catch on in the US until the 90s.

The US has had Italians for just as long, and unlike Australia didn't let the mafia corner the produce industry.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#593

Post by acchow »

CptFribble wrote: post #4

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…

> and I've settled on a simple over-the-mug pour-over cone

This is how I do it too. I highly recommend trying out a V60 (which is only $9.20) and trying the techniques in this video :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI4ynXzkSQo

You may find your coffee suddenly tasting significantly better

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#594

Post by Kirby64 »

spudlyo wrote: post #199
ryanSrich wrote: post #139

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.

To me, light roasts taste like somebody squeezed half a lemon into my cup of coffee. That bright floral/citrus flavor is something I absolutely do not want in my morning brew. I crave that slightly bitter, heavy body, chocolate/nutty flavor that I associate with dark roasts.

There's degrees between lightest roast possible and dark roast. Also, bean origin has such a huge impact on taste, you don't need to have floral or citrus flavors even if it is on the lighter side.

I roast some coffee that could be considered to be 'light' from a color/roast temp perspective but has absolutely none of the floral/citrus notes that you talk about. It depends so much on the beans. It ends up chocolatey and vanilla, with a medium body. Very little acidic taste. On the other hand, there's plenty of coffee that is just a punch of acid.

As others have stated, you lose so much bean origin character the further into the roast you get and lose what makes the bean itself special.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#595

Post by valarauko »

acchow wrote: post #215
ryanSrich wrote: post #105

I’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 want old coffee (anything older than a few weeks isn’t good) I find pourovers extremely sensitive to timing. For an espresso, 1-2 weeks old is totally fine (even preferred?), but for pourovers the flavor is totally different even just 8-9 days after roasting. Is there any way around this?

> For an espresso, 1-2 weeks old is totally fine (even preferred?), but for pourovers the flavor is totally different even just 8-9 days after roasting.

Most sources suggest that the optimum flavor profile develops about a week after roasting, and drinking coffee brewed from freshly roasted beans to be comparatively flat tasting. Blind taste tests have also suggested that contrary to the popular belief, beans don't go stale after two weeks, but retain the same taste profile almost out to 6 months (assuming proper storage). The key difference is that older beans are completely degassed, and pourover techniques and drawdown times as well as grind size should be adjusted accordingly, something hard to do in most espresso machines but easy with pourover. An immersion brewing method is also less sensitive to degassing.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#596

Post by sizzle »

mrguyorama wrote: post #581
sizzle wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Portland is the first and only place in the world where I was able to order a “lemonade coffee” and it was super unique and the flavors worked well together. They really get my respect for creativity alone, I like trying new things and changing my perception of what coffee is!

My friend once asked the workers at ColdStone to mix some lasagna into an ice cream. It was disgusting. Not directed at you, more at the zeitgeist of boutique places mixing seemingly absurd things: Putting random shit together doesn't make you "unique" or "special" or "creative", sometimes it just means you didn't put much thought into something.

Yeah trust me I agree, novelty without mastery is not pushing the envelope at all. The place I had this drink you can tell they were masters of the art of crafting coffee, they taught brewing masterclasses and had awesome coffee brewing/roasting equipment. The passion + appreciation for the art of the craft + experimentation + sufficient iterations leads to true innovation

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#597

Post by eurasiantiger »

slothtrop wrote: post #588
eurasiantiger wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all prefer the concept of free will, but the science is consistent: we tend to grow neurons to like the taste of things that increase dopaminergic neurotransmission in the frontal cortex, even if our first taste experience of them is downright awful. Many things affect that, though. Someone in a constant state of anxiety and stress is running on adrenergic circuits instead of dopaminergic, and thus will probably l…

> we tend to grow neurons to like the taste of things that increase dopaminergic neurotransmission in the frontal cortex, even if our first taste experience of them is downright awful. High caffeine intake (more represented in medium roast) increases dopamine response in the first place. Notwithstanding that a jolt doesn't make one incapable of judging taste. I've experienced different roasts consistently over differ…

I’m not projecting; you’re uninformed. Caffeine is only responsible for a part of the effects of coffee. There are dozens if not hundreds of other psychoactive substances there, all acting in unison.

Your preference towards darker roasts suggests the presence of high-activity MAOA/B gene variants in your genome. This hypothesis is, fortunately, easy to validate.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#598

Post by telchior »

nibbleshifter wrote: post #542
telchior wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't "hot and brown" a mainstay of British cuisine in general?

Only according to Americans, tbh, and often ones who have never visited. Ones who have visited the UK, when asked where they ate, often ate at hellish tourist traps or absolute shit tier chain pubs like Wetherspoons or Greene King.

I'm an American who has lived in the UK. I can report back that we're definitely not the ones who invented the term "eating beige".

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#599

Post by valarauko »

slothtrop wrote: post #193
ryanSrich wrote: post #105

I’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…

Clever Dripper is idiot-proof and brews a full body. But it can be a tad oily. Sometimes I prefer drip tbh, but from a decent machine. Disagree on roast, I've had great dark roasts. Even for espresso, I'd say full-city / medium-dark is preferable. However, I've had more bad dark roasts than bad mediums.

Wait, how are you getting oily coffee from a Clever dripper? If anything the paper filter should be largely eliminating oils.

Re: The case for bad coffee (2015)

#600

Post by Existenceblinks »

xioxox wrote: post #25

I certainly like instant coffee and prefer it over many other types I have tried. It took a few tries to find a good one, however. Perhaps it's because I mostly like coffee quite milky, which might cover over any quality issues. Developing a taste for good coffee (or wine, etc) doesn't seem attractive to me. You end up needing more and more equipment. You need expensive high quality beans. It's typically messy, time…

Same, it's the same virtue signal as other fields like audiophile. Good smell is pretty wide range. "Ok" sometimes is actually "good".

There is a cappuccino chocolate milk in my local 7-11 (asia) that is about 50 cent. When I walked pass someone who drank it, i was accidentally breathing smell from their exhalation and surprised its smell is so good.

I feel fresh coffee beans is as good as ok-ish product in different way (excluding healthy ingredient aspect).

Post reply on HN