Covfaffe


#623

I have given up on the idea of a temp controlled kettle. I couldn’t justify the cost of a pouring kettle AND a temp controlled one so opted for the former. Most of the temp controlled ones have a couple of settings other than boiling and these aren’t necessarily ideal for infusing coffee (91-96 C). The idea of tipping water that is only just the right temp into a pouring kettle and losing a few degrees is too much for my OCD to take! I bought a Hario stove top kettle and leave it after boiling 45 seconds before I start to pour and I am at least getting consistency. Funnily enough, I ordered a cheapo digital thermometer yesterday so I can check how close I am getting to the target temp. :joy:


#624

It is I think a significant contributory factor, especially if you want some consistency. We were making coffee with water at about 80C. Does then require warmed milk but I do that as standard anyway.


#625

I brew at 80 degrees C. It seems to give a smoother flavour, but the main advantage is that I can drink it sooner!


#626

Yeah, but not sure if all of the essential coffee oils are fully metabolised at that temp…:nerd_face:


#627

I have been making coffee all weekend with this:

Subjectively at least, it has made quite a difference to the taste compared to our tap water. I had thought that my coffee at home tasted different to coffee at work, even with the same grinder, beans and device.

We have a plumbed water filter/dispenser at work with two temps of hot water. The coffee has always tasted less bright compared to at home. So everything else being equal (although water temp is a possible variable, need that thermometer!) pointed to water and that it must make a difference. I then wondered which water would be best , a bit of research turned this up as having the right mineral/ph balance for filter coffee.

The result compared to my water at home ( I dont think the Brita filtered water makes much if any difference compared to our tap water) is a more complex taste and maybe a bit less acidity/better balance I think. I have brought it in to work to see what my colleagues think and to compare to the filtered water here.


#628

The amount and proportion of chemicals extracted will certainly be different at different temperatures. Which is best? Whichever you prefer!

It’s also likely that the aeropress system that I use maintains the temperature better than a pour-over system, as it’s much quicker.


#629

It’s the combination of temp and pressure that makes the difference…

That’s why a good coffee machine will always be bestest…:grinning:


#630

espresso is a different thing entirely…


#631

If you can find me a good coffee machine for £30, then I’m all ears :smiley:

Until then, I think the Aeropress will be the way forward.


#632

We need blind testing at lopwell to sort this out


#633

True, but in my (tasting) experience, using espresso as the base for longer (diluted) drinks is better than making them with other methods that do not involve pressure…


#634

Careful. It nay go the same way as audio testing with all those obvious differences evaporating once the cape is pulled over the eyes. :smile:


#635

not always - depends on the flavour profile you want. Cold brew yields a very different profile to an espresso over ice topped up with water (cold).

Our plumbed in Brita tap yields an espresso which is much less bright than directly from the tap.


#636

It’s about now in a serious coffee thread that some ‘wag’ glibly posts a picture of Camp coffee and then skulks off. :slight_smile:


#637

indeed the ability to maintain a consistent temperature at a consistent pressure is key.


#638

Who has coffee Reel-to-reel dibs here? Ritchie in pole position.


#639

I couldn’t disagree more. I love espresso, but can’t stand it watered down. Aeropress coffee is much better than that.


#640

Refractometer next. :+1:


#641

@ZiggyMarley How are you roasting those beans? I have been reading that you can get good results with a bit of practice using a popcorn roaster.


#642

I started with a popcorn machine but ran out of patience.

Now we use a gene café

It is a bit of a faff to be honest. The batch sizes are smallish - and when we are regularly making cold brew we get through it quickly.

It is a good roaster though for the price, but it can generate a lot of smoke. Spare parts are readily available, I think I have had mine about 6 years and have had to repair it 3 time. If it terminally broke, I don’t think I would replace it. When we started roasting at home there were hardly any artisan and small batch roasters around, but these days there is so much more availability.

We desperately need to replace our ageing Isomac Zaffiro. The pump is on it way out now, and some of the internal group head parts are non-standard. No one will touch it any more and parts are getting harder to find. We were headed towards buying the same machine Jim has (La Spaziale) but having had a play with one, and a Sage Oracle, they both make the same quality espresso, but the Sage takes all the hassle out of texturing milk.