Slashdot Mirror
Maths Zeroes in on Perfect Cup of Coffee (bbc.com)
One coffee drinker's perfect brew may be another drinker's battery acid. For this reason, and presumably others, mathematicians are zeroing in on the equations behind the taste of drip coffee. From a report on BBC:Composed of over 1,800 chemical components, coffee is one of the most widely consumed drinks in the world. The work by Kevin Moroney at the University of Limerick, William Lee at the University of Portsmouth and others offers a better understanding of the parameters that influence the final product. It had previously been known that grinding beans too finely could result in coffee that is over-extracted and very bitter. On the other hand not grinding them enough can make the end result too watery. "What our work has done is take that [observation] and made it quantitative," said Dr Lee. "So now, rather than just saying: 'I need to make [the grains] a bit bigger,' I can say: 'I want this much coffee coming out of the beans, this is exactly the size [of grain] I should aim for." Dr Lee says he sets his grinder to the largest setting. By doing so, he says: "The grains are a bit larger than you get in the standard grind, which makes the coffee less bitter. Partly because it's adjusting that trade-off between the stuff coming out of the surface and stuff coming out of the interior. When things are larger, you're decreasing the overall surface area of the system. "Also, the water flows more quickly through a coffee bed of large grains, because the water's spending less time in contact with the coffee, helping reduce the amount of extraction too. "If it's bitter, it's because you're increasing the amount of surface area in the grains. Also, when the grains are very small, it's hard for the water to slide between them, so the water is spending a lot more time moving through the grains -- giving it more time for the coffee to go out of solution."
Why study taste using the worst preparation method? Drip coffee taste awful.
I mostly work from home and I brew a 6 cup pot of coffee almost every day, I put in two scoops (which are roughly equivalent to 1 heaping tablespoon) and it got me thinking about a month ago what the actual coffee to water ratio was supposed to be.
I found this chart (or one like it) https://blackbearcoffee.com/re...
Tried it out and my god, if that's the actual ratio I'm surprised most people can't see through time. I'll stick with my weak brew... if anything to ensure my particles don't vibrate through the fabric of reality
crazy dynamite monkey
You're welcome. :-)
As an avid home cold brewer (24 hour cold brew steel filter, Tim Hortons Coffee) Why does the perfect cup have to be drip xd
Drip coffee is WAY better.
I like my coffee like I like my women, freshly ground and hard pressed.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Matter of taste. "burnt" is just a darker roast that is preferred in most of the world. Starbucks isn't great coffee but it's not terrible either. All those that call it burnt just like a lighter roast. To me lighter roasts taste sour and disgusting. To each their own.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Arguing how to make the "perfect" cup of coffee is like trying to convince the world what makes up the "perfect" soulmate.
If there's anything to be extracted from Starbucks here, it's that "perfect" coffee is as subjective as the justification behind their insane menu options.
Pointless bullshit surveys are pointless. You probably won't even be able to convince a large enough test group to validate the results anyway, and bringing math into the equation is as useless as bringing math into the bedroom.
You've successfully done the exact same thing that food-scientists have been doing for decades! That or the BBC managed to completely miss the point of the original publication.....Just checked. Yeah, BBC didn't get this at ALL. http://epubs.siam.org/doi/abs/...
I came to say pretty much the same thing. This is completely subjective. :)
Interesting. This is a classic example of Darcy's law (fluid flow in porous media). Coffee is a classic dual-porosity system. First, you have to model the flow through the intra-granular pores in the coffee grounds and the removal of water soluble and hydrophobic compounds (i.e. "oils") from the grain surfaces. Then you also need to model the water imbibition into the grains and the transport of the same compounds to the surface of the grains. What a fun twist on petroleum reservoir simulation. Yeah, I've waited years to geek out on /.
I heard once that Starbucks over-roasted their beans so the flavor would survive transport and storage for longer periods. And then the flavor caught on even without the extra transport and storage time. Kind of like India Pale Ale originally being brewed extra-hoppy so that it would survive the boat trip from the UK to India.
Can anyone confirm this?
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Whatever method you use to brew coffee, if bitterness is a concern, add a dash of salt (of a pinch in a french press) to smooth out the bitterness, a trick that's been around since ancient Egypt times (because they brewed with brackish water most likely).
That is known as Turkish coffee
I actually prefer my Keurig
Confirm an opinion? Yes I can, Charbucks is over roasted, mediocre bean (at best) and insanely priced.
I can also point to facts, Charbucks was caught buying _Robusta_. They thought they were being discrete, buying Robusta from India. But India thought it meant they had 'arrived' as a coffee growing region and crowed to the world about it.
You might as well drink 'Folger's'.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Tastes like plastic to me.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Drip coffee lacks the grit that you get in an espresso. The texture of drip is as boring as tea, it comes out as brown hot water.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Usually turkish coffee is made with the sugar heated while in the pot. It's not usually bitter because most people seem to take it with sugar. (medium sugar being the most common)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
brew a cup that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike coffee
Either a percolator or a moka pot is my preference over drip. I would be interested in finding the ideal parameters for that. Temperature (boiling at my altitude is about the only option), time, grind, etc.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Use a metal filter in the drip maker.
It's still not great, but most of the oils you are missing are trapped by the paper filter more than just 'floating on top'.
There are people who hate the bitter and add paper to press like methods. You can also get wimpy coffee out of a press by cutting the steep time. A 90 second steep and the coffee might as well be decaf.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Coffee and beer are two of the most vile things I've ever tried. I just have no taste for bitterness I guess. At best, I've found a couple of beers that I can tolerate, and one that was actually kind of agreeable, but it had an IBU rating of 17, so that kind of makes sense. I still keep trying though, I'm somewhat convinced that most of my problem is that I don't even know where to start.
Central Ohio Home Theater Installation - The Theater People
is wrong with people who are incapable of using American orthography on an an American site. Oh wait...it's msmash.
Could be urban legend, like the IPA myth. http://allaboutbeer.com/article/mythbusting-the-ipa/
Loose leaf tea gets you more texture/sediment than bagged.
15g coffee per cup, 190F water, stir, press. Enjoy. Repeat as desired.
Why are they making the distinction between the exterior of the grain and interior? The exterior was interior just prior to meeting the grinder... That is silly Math Profs or not.
You are try to find the golden zone
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files...
K-cups
In an age where we're trying to promote reusability and recycling and reduce waste, Your K-cups are a throwback, they're a waste of money, and you have little control over how your coffee is made.
I have a drip coffee maker in it's box in the closet that came with a metal filter. Still inferior to the press method IMNSHO.
Pointless bullshit surveys are pointless.
Are you talking about TFA at all? There was no "survey" here. And, as usual, the media headline exaggerates the research and distorts it. The original paper makes no claim about the "perfect" coffee, only modeling some of the extraction rates and coffee concentration (which they claim is related to "quality" but they don't describe that any further or specify which is "better").
You probably won't even be able to convince a large enough test group to validate the results anyway, and bringing math into the equation is as useless as bringing math into the bedroom.
I already linked the original article above and discussed it a bit. Frankly, this "study" sounds like what would happen if you took a couple beginning grad students in chemical engineering and put them in a room where they were so tired and caffeine deprived they started applying their diffusion models and mass transfer to coffee... and then a math grad student walked in and said, "Hey -- let's not use the numerical approximations... I can do some fancier symbolic stuff and get some cooler equations."
And suddenly you have 10 pages of complex equations to tell you that big grains don't extract as much coffee.
Composed of over 1,800 chemical components, coffee is one of the most widely consumed psychoactive drugs in the world
Who doesn't know that you need to have the right grind size for your brewing method? The physics and chemistry of brewing of course is complex, but from a user standpoint for any given variety of coffee you only have two to four parameters to vary: the size of the grounds, the amount of coffee grounds per cup, (sometimes) the temperature of the water, and (sometimes) the brewing time. Since you judge the results subjectively, you just have to experiment a bit and find what you like.
Now here's something you might not actually know: the consistency of granules in a grind is critical. So much so that the coffee grinder may be the single most important piece of equipment in the process.
To see why, imagine the worst case: one of those whirling blade countertop coffee grinders. They give you a broad range of ground sizes from very fine powder to big chunks of bean. When you expose what comes out of these things to hot water the fine powdery granules over-extract long before the big chunks have contributed anything. So you end up with a cup of what tastes like diluted oven cleaner.
Your best bet is to buy smallish amounts of whole bean coffee at a specialty store and have them grind it for the method you intend to use. If it's an automatic drip machine then you've done everything you can to get the best results; all you have to do is try using a little more or less coffee than recommended.
If you want to try to improve your results, I recommend getting a $29 Aeropress, an electric water kettle and an instant read thermometer. The usual grind is a little finer for Aeropress than drip, but you can use drip grind. If your coffee comes out overextracted, shorten the brew time or adjust the water temperature and see if it approves. If you drink a lot of coffee you'll get really good at making coffee you like, and fast.
Finally I do not recommend buying a coffee grinder unless you're willing to spend over $200 for a conical burr machine. You're much better off using the coffee store's grinder and buying in small quantities than you would be using a cheap grinder. The main advantage of a home grinder is it lets you use a variety of brewing methods. You can grind for an Aeropress for your personal use, a French press for two people, or a big coffee urn for a party. The only decent cheap grinder I know of is those $33 Hario manual grinders, which actually work better than a $250 conical grinder but take over a minute to crank out enough coffee for a single cup.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
depends on how you filter the loose leaf tea. I definitely get almost zero sediment with a high quality whole leaf such as white silver needle tea (Bai Hao Yinzhen White Tea). Tea that is cut or broken would leave more sediment in there, and a pot with a traditional filter would allow some smaller pieces through. I typically brew in a pot with a stainless steel wire filter, and I would not normally pour the sediment into a person's cup.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
You can also get wimpy coffee out of a press by cutting the steep time.
No kidding, that's why I said 8 minutes steep time. Any more than that does you no good, any less than that and you're not getting the most out of the grounds.
There are people who hate the bitter and add paper to press like methods.
Those are people who probably don't really like coffee that much in the first place. They should stick to light roast, or just make tea. Keep in mind the average person doesn't know really good coffee from a hole in the ground, they only notice when it's really, really bad; the average person also drinks a 'coffee-like beverage' that is little more than brown water that someone gently whispered the word 'coffee' at to flavor it. Furthermore the average person thinks the syrupy 'drinks' they sell at Starbucks, that are maybe 10% coffee and 90% sugar and other things are 'coffee'; they're more like 'diabetes precursors'.
depends on how you filter the loose leaf tea.
Depends more on the tea. If you're using fannings or broken leaves, then sure, you'll get sediment. If you're using whole-leaf, not as much, though the tendency for breakage depends on processing and drying.
I definitely get almost zero sediment with a high quality whole leaf such as white silver needle tea (Bai Hao Yinzhen White Tea).
Yeah, when you're using a style of tea that's minimally processed and dried directly (white tea) and specifically hand-plucked for large whole leaves (silver needle), then yeah, you won't get sediment. If you have a more heavily processed whole-leaf tea (e.g., most black teas) that go through a lot more oxidation and other chemical processes before drying, they'll be more fragile, and you'll likely end up with some sediment even from high quality teas unless you're careful to shake off the broken bits before brewing.
Try this http://www.dictionary.com/brow...
Click the little speaker icon next to the word "maths"
It will, as if my magic, pronounce the word for you.
Mojo Coffee is great coffee.
A couple years ago (2012 or 13), I was gifted a bag of Starbucks "Christmas Roast". I came home, ground some and made a drip. It was very bitter, but I just laced it with cream and sugar until it was ok. Then my GF came home, came straight to my study and asked, "have you lost your fucking mind? why were you smoking in the kitchen?" She thought I'd been smoking cigarettes in the there.
Can we all admit that coffee tastes awful?
Except that most people will have certain things they want and others that they don't want. For example you may have a high tolerance for astringency as long as the coffee is strong; or you may not mind burnt notes as long as it has caramelized sweetness. But if you don't handle the coffee carefully you'll get a mish-mash of flavor notes that's bound to have something you don't like: burnt AND watery for example. Those don't normally go together, but it's certainly possible to produce a cup of coffee that expresses both those characteristics.
On the flip side there are certain characteristics that nearly everyone likes. Roasty sweetness; full mouth feel; flavor notes like berry or cocoa; a coffee flavor finish that outlasts the initial acidity or astringency. By handling the coffee in a specific way you can maximize the expression of these popular characteristics. Is such a cup of coffee objectively better? No. You can't tell someone who likes the taste of flat, watery battery acid they're wrong to "under-extract" their coffee. But a cup of coffee that has these characteristics is certainly statistically more pleasing.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
But it's usually just brown water with sediment, not a thick sludge like coffee.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
It's called many names but it's all the same. I have middle eastern friends that make it and it tastes the same as my Albanian friends that make it. They both call it something different, but both taste the same.
Given: A mathematician is a machine for converting coffee into theorems.
We have now demonstrated: A mathematician is a machine for converting theorems into coffee.
Have gnu, will travel.
The TL;DR of coffee:
Brewing: Use a water with a minimum mineral content of 150-200 ppm (250-300 ppm is my preference).
Espresso: Use R.O. water or distilled water.
As always the bean and roast is part of the interaction as well so your mineral content and roast level are not completely independant.
http://www.thecoffeebrewers.co...
FYI: Starbucks uses purified water for both espresso and drip in order to control for flavor. So when at Starbucks, avoid the drip and get an Americano if you normally prefer dark coffee.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Indian coffee has seen a big jump in quality since the gov't liberalized the sector in the 1990s. When I was living in India in the mid 1980s, the bad robusta was being sold to the Russians. In N. India, the only coffee I could find was freeze dried instant Nescafe. In S India, coffee was typically sold by a street vendor with two big pots: one full of hot milk and sugar and the other full of boiled coffee. The vendor would fill your cup by grabbing a ladle full from each pot. You could find Euro style coffee at the coffee house on MG Rd in Bangalore, IIRC. But today, Starbucks is selling small batch specialty coffee from India, not the bad robusta. And in my last trip there, decent coffee could be found even in N India.
Starbucks, BTW, sells everything from light roasts to dark espresso roasts. One of my favorites used to be the Starbucks dark roast Yemen Mocha & Sumatra blend which has unfortunately been unavailable for a decade.
https://youtu.be/YnKJjxF-n6A
I love Chemex pour overs and I like to experiment with different ratio to ground coffee. Check out James O'Rear
Coffee in India might be getting better.
But I've never seen Indian beans anywhere labeled as such.
I did once buy a bottle of Indian wine. Really opened up the sluice gates at both ends, worse than Mad Dog 20/20 (yes I tasted MD 30 years ago).
As to charbucks, spit.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Have you ever actually TASTED that foam floating on top? It tastes like motor oil.
try an Aeropress... great coffee
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
It's all about balance. Look for Dogfishhead 120 IPA. Three digit IBU rating, and smooth as butter.
Right, but the summary says they are doing the math to figure out how each person should cut their beans.
That is, I like my coffee at strength X, so I should grind the beans to Y granularity.
Gee, that's nice. How quaint. They're going to tell me how I should cut my beans. Should we initiate the flame war on what kind of coffee bean should be used, or are we still chopping heads off over the different methods of brewing?
Coffee taste, strength, brewing style, temperature, bean preference, how many other variables should we add here when it is ALL subjective? Pointless tests are pointless.
Robusta doesn't necessarily mean bad coffee though. Italians love it.
For you average cup of joe it makes an inferior drink, however if you're making an espresso it adds to the crema. Depends on what type of coffee you're making and what you're expecting.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Frankly, this "study" sounds like what would happen if you took a couple beginning grad students in chemical engineering and put them in a room where they were so tired and caffeine deprived they started applying their diffusion models and mass transfer to coffee... and then a math grad student walked in and said, "Hey -- let's not use the numerical approximations... I can do some fancier symbolic stuff and get some cooler equations."
Frankly, this sounds like a couple of bean suckers got higher than giraffe pussy one afternoon, and came up with this brain-baked nonsense to waste a few hours.
I heard once that Starbucks over-roasted their beans so the flavor would survive transport and storage for longer periods.
Dark roast coffees maintain a more consistent flavor between batches and different bean types. Lighter roast coffee can be very inconsistent. If you're trying to maintain a consistent "brand" it's much easier to do with a darker roast.
And again... "over-roasted" is subjective. Many people around the world (and even in parts of the US) prefer a darker roast to your typical new-England single-crack roasts.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I was at a clients a couple of years ago and they had an espresso machine. I was so impressed with the ease of use/quality I ordered one. I threw out my drip machine a week or so later as I could not go back. The prices on the machines have come down so while I still view it as a luxury, its not that much of a luxury. I think 500 buys the non-fancy version of the one I got. There are a plethora of models.
Yes, drip coffee soaks up some of those all-important oils but instead you drink press coffee?? Heretic! Persecute the unbeliever!
Press plungers leave far too much fine sediment in your cup. Always tastes dusty to me. The only way to get pure, complete, well-extracted coffee is with a decent espresso machine. With the right grind and tamping you get zero sediment, maximised essential oils, and minimal bitterness. Drink the shot straight, with steamed milk, or even with added water if you really want to dilute your experience, but a shot of espresso is the only way to start.
I never understood why this was still debated in America. In Australia and most of Europe, the question was settled long ago: Espresso, or go back to tea.
You're not supposed to put the cup into your grinder.
Oswald McWeany opined:
Matter of taste. "burnt" is just a darker roast that is preferred in most of the world.
Sorry, but you're wrong.
Back in the 1990's, on vacation in the Big Island of Hawaii, my wife and I got caught in a genuinely torrential downpour while driving on a narrow, two-lane road on the Kona coast. Rain so intense that I literally couldn't see more than five feet beyond the hood of our rental car. Scary, actual, given the winding road. So I pulled off into the first space we saw (at about 5 MPH) - which turned out to be the Kona Coffee Growers Co-op's storefront/roasting facility. After ten minutes of sitting in the downpour, with the windshield fogging over, I said, "The Hell with this,", and we made a dash from the car to the front door of the Co-op.
Inside the store, it turned out they had a little museum exhibit, with displays on growing and processing, along with plenty of merchandise. And coffee, of course. We browsed the museum and checked out the merch, and, pretty soon, we'd exhausted the entertainment potential of the place, while, outside, the rain continued to hammer down relentlessly. So, out of boredom as much as curiosity, I asked at the counter if the Co-op's roastmaster was available to chat. As it turned out, he was.
Nice guy. Friendly, intelligent, and, as you might expect, tremendously knowledgeable about all aspects of coffee production. We chatted about growing conditions and the rarity of what's called "peabody beans" (double-centered coffee beans that produce especially smooth and flavorful coffee, and which are around twice the price of the already quite pricey regular Kona stuff) how the coffee *quot;cherries" are fermented, lightly mashed, and the fruit is separated from the pit of the cherry (the pits being what we call coffee beans), dried, then roasted. All quite interesting. Eventually, the subject got around to varous roasts, and I mentioned to him that French roast had always tasted burnt to me.
"That's because it is,quot; he responded. "The difference between medium and dark roast is only 17 seconds in the roaster, but, in that 17 seconds, the outer skin of the bean actually begins to carbonize. The longer it stays in the roaster from there, the more the skin burns, and the darker the roast becomes." He also told me that he, personally, preferred a medium roast - and that a light roast, while it produces fairly weak-flavored coffee, retains considerably more caffeine than darker roasts. (The darker the roast, the less caffeine in the brew.) Thus, the lighter the roast, the bigger the kick.
So, no. I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Dark roasted coffee is produced by actually, physicallly burning the skin of the coffee bean. roast (Starbucks' default roast) is produced by allowing the beans to remain in the roaster until the skin burns away and the outside of the inner bean itself carbonizes.
In other words, the characteristic taste of French roast is due to the fact that the beans it's made from are half charcoal.
Check out my novel.
starbucks french roast, ground fine, filtered water, slow brewing. yammv.
I've never liked Starbucks...as others have mentioned it often tastes kinda burnt and/or bitter to me. Tullys is okay but nothing special.
I find I get the best results for my taste by blending and grinding my own. Sumatran, Guatemalan, and Peaberry, ground large, one cup at a time. It makes Starbucks taste like reconstituted monkey piss.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Press plungers leave far too much fine sediment in your cup.
Funny, I've never had that problem, but then again I grind the beans correctly -- that being, as coarse as possible. Hence the 8 minute steep time when brewing it, to allow proper extraction.
Also, I don't have hundreds of dollars for an espresso machine. A press is the best of all possible worlds, requires no electricity, I can make coffee anywhere, so long as I can get hot water to make it.
No, Italians combine it in small amounts with Arabica to create espresso blend. They use it judiciously, which is not the same as "love it".
I'm going to say thanks... This way I get an internet achievement of success and gratitude, which I shall put above my mantle and reminisce about.
Starbucks....ewwwww. There are lots of better alternatives. My wife and I sample a lot of different coffees and sometimes make our own blends. One prepackaged that we do buy again and again is "Jack's Jammin' Java Juice", available on eBay. It comes and goes but if it's available it's well worth the cost.
Also, I have to say that the Costco Guatemalan coffee is pretty good, especially if you kick it up by adding a little French Roast to it. Yum.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Yes, brewing coffee is far more involved than just the size of the particles. I can think of - country of origin, altitude where the coffee is grown, kind of soil the plants are grown in, variety of the plant, how the beans are processed, water temperature, water quality, roast, size of the coffee grains, and the time it take for the water to go through the coffee.
Charbucks ain't perfect coffee by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe perfect for those who are willing to pay too much for a cup of swill, but nowhere close to what you can get if you roast your own beans at home.
And for the coffee gods' sake, stay away from Keurig.
Once you go Aeropress, you'll never settle for less
You should be able to post a link to someone, somewhere selling Indian coffee. Do it.
If I ran a coffee shop and had limited shelf space, there is no way in hell I'd bump any reputable coffee for Indian.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Quality beans that are properly roasted should never result in bitter coffee, regardless of the grain size. If your coffee is bitter it's because it's poor quality or burnt.
This seems to consider all beans — and all consumers — are equal. Some people feel bitter less than others...
Coffee used to be one of my 3 major food groups. About 2 months ago I got food poisoning and spent 10 days with diarrhea. After several rounds of tests and delays, I tested positive for blastocystis. The first antibiotic was a joke. I eventually ended up on Metronidazole; another antibiotic but a real kick-ass. Since I got off that (2 wks ago) the smell and taste of coffee is different and frankly, bad. I think whatever made me sick, or maybe the antibiotic, messed up my gut microbiome and altered my sense of taste and smell. Coffee is the most obvious change, but I've also developed a powerful craving for ginger ale. Effing weird.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
Have you ever just eaten a mouth full of salt? Taking a flavour in isolation to determine if it is a good component of a final product is just utterly stupid.
None of that says I am wrong. "Burnt" is subjective. Just like with toast, some would say that toast is burnt the moment it gets dark brown crust on the outside of it (carbonization), others say it is when it turns black and it's best when it is dark brown and crunchy. Just because some Hawaiian barista likes medium roast doesn't make dark roast "wrong" or "bad". In much of the world a medium-dark to dark roast is the preferred amount of roasting.
If you want truly "burnt" that would be a Spanish roast when the beans are literally blackened.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
You could say Americans love bacon- but it doesn't make up the majority of our diet.
A true Espresso is not espresso to an Italian without a certain amount of Robusta. It's not just Espresso either, numerous dark roasts in that country (and other countries) contain some Robusta, it adds an earthy flavor that some find appealing. Certain countries have an aversion to robusta that others don't... and it's because most robusta out there IS nasty, but not all of it.
Even the nasty bitter taste associated with Robusta can be avoided with some high quality Robusta beans. (sounds an oxymoron, but there is such thing as high quality, well washed, robusta).
Robusta isn't my cup of tea (or coffee), but to many robusta isn't quite the enemy it is in other countries. (it's also healthier, more economical to grow, and causes less waste).
We're probably all going to be drinking more Robusta in a few decades if the plants producing Arabica die off.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
You might as well drink 'Folger's'.
This is in fact what I do because I'm cheap and it's good enough in my opinion.
I used to buy coffee beans from Starbuck's clones (there are plenty of smaller regional ones) but why pay that much when I just want to make a strong caffeine drink at home?
Classic illness-induced food aversion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Oswald McWeany insisted:
None of that says I am wrong. "Burnt" is subjective. Just like with toast, some would say that toast is burnt the moment it gets dark brown crust on the outside of it (carbonization), others say it is when it turns black and it's best when it is dark brown and crunchy. Just because some Hawaiian barista likes medium roast doesn't make dark roast "wrong" or "bad". In much of the world a medium-dark to dark roast is the preferred amount of roasting.
If you want truly "burnt" that would be a Spanish roast when the beans are literally blackened.
Either you're being purposely obtuse, or you're functionally illiterate.
The expert with whom I talked was the Kona Coffee Growers Co-op roastmaster. His job is to supervise the roasting of TONS of Kona coffee per day, prior to it being bagged and shipped to customers of the growers' co-op. There was a barista in the shop - but he wasn't it. He was a technical supervisor of a factory operation. And, when HE said that dark roast coffee burns the skin off the bean (and French roast burns the bean itself) he meant exactly that: not "turns it dark brown", but actually BURNS IT.
Check out my novel.
Sensory Lab in Melbourne.
Let me guess, you voted for Trump.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Not on a shot of espresso. The stuff that floats on top of the water in the filter when brewing drip coffee.
Oswald McWeany sneered:
Let me guess, you voted for Trump.
No, genius. I did not.
I'm not insane, I base my beliefs on scientific facts - and, absent specific technical expertise of my own, I place considerably greater confidence in the opinions and analysis of actual experts in a given field than I do on those of Internet trolls with no such credentials.
Check out my novel.