Comments for The Other Black Stuff

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Oliver

Oliver — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:31:48 +0000

Super interesting experiment! Bravo I’m left with many more questions though. Would love to see this experimentation go on with a group of cuppers and general coffee drinking public. I wonder how this experiment plays out with taste.

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Hario V60 Handfilter - Kaffee-Netz - Die Community rund ums Thema Kaffee

Hario V60 Handfilter - Kaffee-Netz - Die Community rund ums Thema Kaffee — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:13:06 +0000

[...] [...]

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Dave Hollinden

Dave Hollinden — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:19:20 +0000

We have a gold filter basket that came with our drip coffee maker that has a shape similar to a Mellita cone (conical in the upper portion, but forming a line at the bottom rather than a point). I’ve been setting this basket over a mug, putting in a paper filter, and brewing my coffee essentially the same way I would with a Mellita. I wonder if this might represent another option, with the possibility of the brew leaving the sides as well as the bottom.

a thought…

Dave

Comment on at odds with unevenness by al_bongo

al_bongo — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:38:57 +0000

Great post. Appreciate the attempt to measure the differences in extraction rather than just t theorising.

For me it’s about understanding the process. Once you know what’s happening you can concentrate on the taste. I want to make a great brew every time and it’s this kind of approach that means a good tasting cup more achievable.

Good stuff.

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Kenny Daily

Kenny Daily — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:04:12 +0000

I’ve also toyed with the idea of a tracking system for coffee preparation, and have a working prototype using Django (or TurboGears, I forget). It’s definitely not complete by any means. I’m not in the coffee biz, but fancy it’s use for my personal experimentation, and the ol’ moleskine is getting a little cramped.

Comment on at odds with unevenness by David

David — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:00:30 +0000

1. Initial agitation was until I deemed the slurry equally wetted. Grinding for brewing (ie the 30g) was weighed post grinding on a scales with 1 resolution. Weighing for rebrewing (post drying) was done on a scales with 0.1g resoltuion. The end stir was as per the video, and was only the top layer, I would estimate the spoon went no deeper than 1/3 way below the surface. When topping up the brew, my efforts were to maintain a more or less consistent bed depth, so letting it drain by no more than say 1 cm, before bringing it back up to the high water line. Grind profile was of a Mahlkonig Guatemala with relatively new burrs (except for the Buono repeat at home – which was from a Mahlkonig Tanzania).

2. I agree – I think that is a challenge. French press?

3. There is certainly a tactile quality to the kettle approach. I don’t know if it can achieve what stirring does though.

4. I did. They were relatively consistent between brewers using the same method (20% +/- 1% extraction). The stirred brews all read higher than the unstirred brews though – they were not all more even though.

5. Yes, I think average extraction as we might routinely measure by refractometer cannot be the only consideration.

Good points.

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Rasmus Helgebostad

Rasmus Helgebostad — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:41:47 +0000

Nice work. Some comments:

1) For replication purposes, how documented were the agitation, pouring and grinding? Did you follow a certain protocol? (Stir back and forth only, in 8s, only in the top layer, pour x gs every y seconds, grind profile?)

2) I think my main concern with agitation isn’t weither it can achieve a more even extraction. I’m more worried as to how reproducable your recipe becomes.

3) I think using the buono is the only fair match for the stirring. Straight from the boiler is just too hard to distribute correctly.

4) Did you measure the extraction of the different brews? I would think that a higher extraction would mean a more even extraction.

5) I think there’s an important lesson to learn here when it comes to refractometers as well. Just like when you’re brewing espresso, uneven extraction can yield a good average extraction – but with a completely undrinkable cup as a result. (Think uneven coffee ground distribution/unaligned tamp) Never forget that there are more factors to a brew’s balance than average extraction. Your palette is still your most important brew measuring device.

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Dan Yee

Dan Yee — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 08:35:43 +0000

Thanks for doing the hard yards on this David. Been wanting to do it for ages.

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Jasper

Jasper — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:57:18 +0000

Wonderful read! Reading this makes me question why one should put more effort in V60 techniques when a Melitta produces a more even extracted result with less effort. (apart from the sawdust filters, did you try filtropa white?)

Is this because V60 promises a more “advanced” result because of the theory of ridges?

Is our perception of quality diffused by fancy stuff like V60, Buono kettle, Chemex? Getting all obsessed with technique (“gettin’ all mister miyagi” as Nick called it on coffeed) dreaming of the perfect “10″ result, while ending up with 6’s and 7’s, while a simple device as a one hole dripper or the Clever dripper might give you 8,5’s all the time.

Especially when talking to customers, a relatively simple device with ease of use and repeatable results is necessary.

Comment on at odds with unevenness by Sam

Sam — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:43:59 +0000

Thanks David – a suitably concise response :-) I guess I need to do some more reading around what under/over- extraction means to the experience of drinking coffee.