www.ptscoffee.com: without the love, it's just coffee

Brew pressure profiling update 3

Beginner or pro barista, all are invited to share.

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by gscace on Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:47 pm

Pressure Profiling Update 3

I think I'm homing in on some concrete information about pressure profiling that is worth blabbing on about, so here goes:

First thing is that there seems to be a practical maximum pressure value beyond which things go to hell in a handbasket tastebudswise. I found this out when I was experimenting with pressure profiles that included a high-pressure hump at the beginning of the extraction. Values for the hump were as high as 165 psi (11.3 bar). My thinking was that if sweetness was extracted early in the brewing process, then maybe I could emphasize it by increasing pressure to a high value early on, reducing to more conventional values later. The result was that I extracted crema that was markedly bitter. Bitterness was muted by reducing the magnitude of the hump. Bitterness was removed once the max pressure value was reduced to 9.5 bars at the coffee cake, which adds credence to the conventional 9-bar wisdom. I learned later that Jim Schulman has also observed this effect. I also successfully replicated the effect for Peter Lynagh, of Terroir Coffee, when he came down to visit.

Once I learned that there was a maximum practical brewing pressure, I began to think of pressure profiling in terms of the minimization of undesirable tastes, rather than in terms of super-extracting desired compounds. Taste tests with Nick Cho demonstrated to me that the sweet tastes and mouthfeel are developed early in the brew process, with dilution occurring later. Unfortunately, in the tests mit Cho (gesundheit!) extraction of bitter compounds also occurred during the dilution phase, meaning that a balance needed to be struck between dilution of the drink to a desired volume and introduction of negative taste components. Reducing the brewing pressure as brewing progresses seems to be beneficial in reducing bitter tastes extracted during the dilution phase. Tests with Nick pointed to accentuated sweetness in Counter Culture Toscana, which in retrospect was really a subtraction of bitter components added in the last third of the brew process.

The most successful general profile that I have come up with to date (I've now got an excel file with a bazillion profiles mapped out in it) is a pressure profile in which the pressure rapidly increases from some nominal start value to 9 bars at the group (elapsed time of 1 second from start to full pressure) with a short 9 bar soak, then ramps downward in a slow linear fashion (straight line degradation) to around 7 ½ bar, with a more rapid, second-order (curved downward) slope over the last few seconds to around 6 bar, arriving at 6 bar 30 seconds after initiation of the brew cycle. This general shape can be used with or without a pre-infusion step. The pre-infusion that I've been using is to soak the cake at around 2 - 3 bar for 3 seconds, then quickly ramping to maximum value with an exponentially increasing slope. Full pressure is attained 3 seconds after the end of the low-pressure soak. This combination produces liquid evenly over the bottom of the filter basket almost as soon as the pressure begins its rapid increase. Regardless of whether or not pre-infusion is used, I've been using a very similar profile toward the end of the brewing period. If pre-infusion is not used, I increase the time of the high-pressure soak by a few seconds.

It seems to me that the efficacy of preinfusion is coffee specific. There are three basic coffees that I've inflicted pressure profiling upon and with which I can comment. I've been drinking dry-processed Ethiopian SOs, and Ethiopian-based simple blends that have a lot of mouthfeel and body. My tests with Nick used Counterculture Toscano. I don't really know what is in it, and for the purposes of this discussion I don't think I really need to know. And last weekend, Peter Lynagh and I concentrated on a very lightly roasted Brazil. Here's a link to Terroir's information about the coffee:

http://info.terroircoffee.com/content/view/17/2/

For brewing temps, the Ethipian DP and Toscano seem to like around 201F. The SO Brazil was brewed at 195 F. The blends seem at first blush to benefit from preinfusion. I think that the soak and subsequent rapid pressure ramp may produce more mouthfeel, but I need to revisit this as I haven't been systematic enough, particularly in light of our results with the Brazil. We found that pre-infusion was a waste of extraction time when brewing the SO Brazil. Unlike the blends, the SO Brazil produced two predominate tastes with great clarity - nuts and sweetness reminiscent of dried figs. Both nuttiness and sweetness were enhanced when the pre-infusion step was removed. The clarity of the Brazil made differences between brewing at constant pressure and brewing with profiled pressure easy to discern. Bitter tastes were evident with constant-pressure brewing and demonstrably removed by profiling.

Recently folks have come up to me on the street, shoving their pudgy fingers in my puny chest, demanding to know that if pressure profiling meant deemphasizing the last portion of the brewing process, why not just stop brewing early? After I imagine breaking their finger with a deft marital arts-type motion, I counter with the argument that early brew termination is different. Compare two shots of the same volume, but with one brewed in the style of brewtus interruptus, and the other brewed to satisfying completion with pressure profiling. If one terminates early, for example at 18 secs in a 27 sec extraction, the volumetric flow rate during the 18 second period is much faster than the flow rate for an extraction taking place over the entire period. The extractions that we are observing with profiled pressure have more or less constant flow rate throughout the entire time period, which means that the volumetric flow rate is less by 50%, but over a longer time period. This changes the taste.

As I try different coffees and gain more experience I'm getting more confident that pressure is worth exploring as a brew parameter. There is still a lot to learn here, but the tests with Terroir indicate that variable pressure is useful when one is brewing clean SO espressos in which one or two tastes are showcased. I'm not sure which cart drives which horse when it comes to blends. I don't know if various widely used pre-infusion schemes were developed because they work with traditional blends, or if blends end up being developed to mask machine deficiencies. My cynical self thinks it's the latter. I have a lot more to learn about this, and it gets more difficult when I'm using coffees I've munged together. I don't feel like I'm a good enough roaster or blending dude to come up with confident conclusions, other than to go back with what I learned about the Brazil SO and see if I can make any hay with the stuff I usually drink. That means I'm not close to closure, which means that if you all don't behave, rather than dislocate your digits I'll spring Pressure Profiling Update 4 on you.
gscace
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Location: Laytonsville MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by jesawdy on Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:52 pm

Greg-

Now that you've been at this awhile longer, I am curious to know your thoughts on whether pressure profiling based on volume rather than time is of more or less interest to you.
Jeff Sawdy
User avatar
jesawdy
 
Posts: 1593
Joined: May 12, 2006
Location: Black Mtn, NC

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by gscace on Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:52 pm

jesawdy wrote:Greg-

Now that you've been at this awhile longer, I am curious to know your thoughts on whether pressure profiling based on volume rather than time is of more or less interest to you.


I would be interested in linking pressure to pulses from flowmeter sensor just to check it out. I can see arguments that extraction is both flow-based and time-based. It's prolly a bit of both. I've got my hands full with time-based profiling and it's interesting enough and works well enough that I'm not planning on fooling with flow-based profiling anytime soon.

-Greg
gscace
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Location: Laytonsville MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by HB on Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:16 pm

gscace wrote:The most successful general profile that I have come up with to date (I've now got an excel file with a bazillion profiles mapped out in it) is a pressure profile in which the pressure rapidly increases from some nominal start value to 9 bars at the group (elapsed time of 1 second from start to full pressure) with a short 9 bar soak, then ramps downward in a slow linear fashion (straight line degradation) to around 7 ½ bar, with a more rapid, second-order (curved downward) slope over the last few seconds to around 6 bar, arriving at 6 bar 30 seconds after initiation of the brew cycle.

Interesting, this sounds like brew pressure profile of a commercial spring-driven lever espresso machine.
Dan Kehn
User avatar
HB
 
Posts: 7560
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Location: Cary, NC

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by another_jim on Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:53 pm

Yeah.

A commercial spring will be 9 to 6 bar, declining linearly by volume (the spring force being determined by the remaining water in the cylinder. Given that the flow is increasing (linearly?), this means the time versus pressure profile is roughly a quadratic curve. It could be quite close to the profile you synthesized, even to the final declining curve.

It may sound like an anticlimax to "reinvent" the lever profile, but it's not. You've been able to explore a lot of possibilities, and do it with far more stable equipment, especially on temperature. It could be that the outcome of the work is not that commercial machines get full profiling motors, but motors with simpler controls that produce the optimal profile you discover, perhaps with a few simple adjustments.
User avatar
another_jim
 
Posts: 2349
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Chicago

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by gscace on Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:11 pm

HB wrote:Interesting, this sounds like brew pressure profile of a commercial spring-driven lever espresso machine.


Actually the profile is continously curved. Lever machines are linear for the most part and look like a sawtooth. Maybe I'll get off my lazy yass and post an excel graph if I can figure out how to make the damn thing a picture for cryin out loud.

-Greg
gscace
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Location: Laytonsville MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by gscace on Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:16 pm

another_jim wrote:Yeah.

A commercial spring will be 9 to 6 bar, declining linearly by volume (the spring force being determined by the remaining water in the cylinder. Given that the flow is increasing (linearly?), this means the time versus pressure profile is roughly a quadratic curve. It could be quite close to the profile you synthesized, even to the final declining curve.

It may sound like an anticlimax to "reinvent" the lever profile, but it's not. You've been able to explore a lot of possibilities, and do it with far more stable equipment, especially on temperature. It could be that the outcome of the work is not that commercial machines get full profiling motors, but motors with simpler controls that produce the optimal profile you discover, perhaps with a few simple adjustments.


Actually I don't care what it ends up looking like. If it's like a lever machine then that is what it is, but we learn that there is benefit to it. So it's not anti-climactic at all. Plus in a lever machine you don't get to optimize it.
gscace
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Location: Laytonsville MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by cannonfodder on Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:20 pm

gscace wrote:Actually the profile is continously curved. Lever machines are linear for the most part and look like a sawtooth. Maybe I'll get off my lazy yass and post an excel graph if I can figure out how to make the damn thing a picture for cryin out loud.

-Greg



You essentially do a screen capture, paste it into an editor, crop it down, compress the image to the size you want and save it in the desired format.

Or Email me the spreadsheet and I can convert the graph. It is relatively simple but takes a couple different programs.
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 4083
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by cannonfodder on Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:29 pm

gscace wrote:Recently folks have come up to me on the street, shoving their pudgy fingers in my puny chest, demanding to know that if pressure profiling meant deemphasizing the last portion of the brewing process, why not just stop brewing early? After I imagine breaking their finger with a deft marital arts-type motion...


Smack them in the forehead with a hot portafilter then exclaim 'No Spresso for YOU!'

Your work is appreciated. One interesting observation, for all our advances in technology, it is starting to sound like the ideal extraction profile is that of an old school spring lever machine.
Dave Stephens
User avatar
cannonfodder
 
Posts: 4083
Joined: May 23, 2005
Location: Dayton, Oh

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by hbuchtel on Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:38 am

HB wrote:Interesting, this sounds like brew pressure profile of a commercial spring-driven lever espresso machine.


Part of the spring lever profile is the pre-infusion at boiler pressure, the ramp up to which is determined by the size of the hole where the water comes into the piston-chamber.

Henry
LMWDP #53
User avatar
hbuchtel
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Jun 22, 2005
Location: Changsha, Hunan (or A2, MI, USA)

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by another_jim on Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:48 am

Since you announced this, I've been trying to think of ways that would allow one to characterize more precisely how pressure variations affect taste and mouthfeel. After a lot of thought, I think the best route might be to find a coffee or roast that is undrinkable when done with a straight profile, and tasty when done with the pressure profile you like. If you can find one like that, it would be fairly clear how the profile affected the taste.
User avatar
another_jim
 
Posts: 2349
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Chicago

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by Ken Fox on Sun Apr 01, 2007 6:14 pm

another_jim wrote:Since you announced this, I've been trying to think of ways that would allow one to characterize more precisely how pressure variations affect taste and mouthfeel. After a lot of thought, I think the best route might be to find a coffee or roast that is undrinkable when done with a straight profile, and tasty when done with the pressure profile you like. If you can find one like that, it would be fairly clear how the profile affected the taste.


Jim and I both have some prior experience in doing research in our earlier lives, and frequently discuss innovations and research attempts we see written about here and in other online venues. We are, in fact, planning to do an article sometime soon on the entire topic of performing coffee research at the enthusiast or small entrepreneur level.

A large corporation, like for example a drug company, can afford to hire legions of lower level researchers to do "basic science" research where interesting ideas are played with, without any specific goal, with the hope that they might stumble upon something. Even so, when a company like for example, Pfizer, has problems and they "reorganize," laying off thousands, who do you think are among the first people to be let go? Let me guess . . . . .

As individuals without unlimited time or resources, we are forced to be VERY focused in our work, or, our work will likely come to nothing.

If you look at the stuff that Jim and I have written up over the last few years, the "success" that it has achieved has been due primarily to choosing relatively small questions that can be answered in straightforward ways. I'd of course like to think that we are genuises and that this has allowed us to study rotary pumps and vibe pumps and preinfusion and freezing -- but the truth is that we asked simple questions and studied them in very simple ways. For example, if you take the freezing study, it was designed to prove or disprove the notion that freezing ruins coffee and or does not preserve it. Testing that is a very straightforward proposition, as opposed to testing what impact altering all aspects of the extraction pressure curve might do.

If you take temperature stability, another topic that has been debated A LOT, it has now been achieved to one degree or another on a number of different machines, either factory (Aurelia; maybe GS3) or with mods (Greg's modified Linea, my Juniors), yet no one has tested in a convincing way what impact the shape of the temperature profile has on espresso shot taste, or whether the whole exercise has much merit beyond knowing one has less variable brew temperatures.

As to pressure, I would submit that what you are trying to test, Greg, is an order of magnitude, maybe two, more complex, and it suffers from the problems in tasting temperature cure importance, in addition. As a result, unless your work becomes VERY focused, I think it is going to be very hard for you to conclude much of anything.

Adjusting and calibrating things like temperature and pressure are interesting, and they should be important, however they are coming at espresso making much in the way that basic science drug research comes at solving medical problems. You don't have enough time, enough lives, enough other people to do this stuff with, enough physical and monetary resources, to do enough testing with the variables you are presenting yourself with to have much hope of getting anywhere other than to say, "I changed this and that and the other thing and so and so was over and we both thought the shots were better." I hope I am wrong, but I don't see that sort of work going very far.

My suggestion would be to start with some very specific issue in espresso extraction, a problem, something you think can be fixed with one significant change in pressure profiling, then test that. I think this latter approach has the chance of bearing some fruit.

Good luck.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1127
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by SL28ave on Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:03 pm

I think what I got out of my visit with Greg was that a curved profile was better than flat, at least with the given beans, equipment and technique. We tasted using a flat profile, where I think the pump pressure was constant, which to some extent - strength irrelevent - left an acridic aftertaste. The curved profile didn't have this aftertaste.
-Peter Lynagh
SL28ave
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Dec 19, 2005
Location: Rockville, MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by gscace on Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:41 pm

Ken Fox wrote:
another_jim wrote:Since you announced this, I've been trying to think of ways that would allow one to characterize more precisely how pressure variations affect taste and mouthfeel. After a lot of thought, I think the best route might be to find a coffee or roast that is undrinkable when done with a straight profile, and tasty when done with the pressure profile you like. If you can find one like that, it would be fairly clear how the profile affected the taste.


Jim and I both have some prior experience in doing research in our earlier lives, and frequently discuss innovations and research attempts we see written about here and in other online venues. We are, in fact, planning to do an article sometime soon on the entire topic of performing coffee research at the enthusiast or small entrepreneur level.

A large corporation, like for example a drug company, can afford to hire legions of lower level researchers to do "basic science" research where interesting ideas are played with, without any specific goal, with the hope that they might stumble upon something. Even so, when a company like for example, Pfizer, has problems and they "reorganize," laying off thousands, who do you think are among the first people to be let go? Let me guess . . . . .

As individuals without unlimited time or resources, we are forced to be VERY focused in our work, or, our work will likely come to nothing.

If you look at the stuff that Jim and I have written up over the last few years, the "success" that it has achieved has been due primarily to choosing relatively small questions that can be answered in straightforward ways. I'd of course like to think that we are genuises and that this has allowed us to study rotary pumps and vibe pumps and preinfusion and freezing -- but the truth is that we asked simple questions and studied them in very simple ways. For example, if you take the freezing study, it was designed to prove or disprove the notion that freezing ruins coffee and or does not preserve it. Testing that is a very straightforward proposition, as opposed to testing what impact altering all aspects of the extraction pressure curve might do.

If you take temperature stability, another topic that has been debated A LOT, it has now been achieved to one degree or another on a number of different machines, either factory (Aurelia; maybe GS3) or with mods (Greg's modified Linea, my Juniors), yet no one has tested in a convincing way what impact the shape of the temperature profile has on espresso shot taste, or whether the whole exercise has much merit beyond knowing one has less variable brew temperatures.

As to pressure, I would submit that what you are trying to test, Greg, is an order of magnitude, maybe two, more complex, and it suffers from the problems in tasting temperature cure importance, in addition. As a result, unless your work becomes VERY focused, I think it is going to be very hard for you to conclude much of anything.

Adjusting and calibrating things like temperature and pressure are interesting, and they should be important, however they are coming at espresso making much in the way that basic science drug research comes at solving medical problems. You don't have enough time, enough lives, enough other people to do this stuff with, enough physical and monetary resources, to do enough testing with the variables you are presenting yourself with to have much hope of getting anywhere other than to say, "I changed this and that and the other thing and so and so was over and we both thought the shots were better." I hope I am wrong, but I don't see that sort of work going very far.

My suggestion would be to start with some very specific issue in espresso extraction, a problem, something you think can be fixed with one significant change in pressure profiling, then test that. I think this latter approach has the chance of bearing some fruit.

Good luck.

ken


Well Ken I have to say that it's tough to prove almost anything in coffee it seems. I mentioned Jim and your work on the freezing thing to a coffee pro and got an answer that it was somewhat arrogant to say that across the board there would be no affect on coffee taste from freezing, and that the results would be more believable if someone whose palate had very proven credentials had done the blind tasting. So you see how it goes. If you're an amateur researcher in coffee you're always gonna have folks who try to poke holes in your work. It's prolly best to have a thick skin about it, because you can do the work, see a gain and then rant until your blue in the face and some folks won't get it. I'm cool with that.

Take temperature for instance, since you brought it up. We still don't know if a flat line profile is the best one. One can theorize convincingly that it ain't by invoking just a bit of heat transfer theory, but we aren't gonna know until someone builds a test machine that allows reproducible testing. And then there are still gonna be people that won't believe what you come up with. I think enough noise has been made about it so that we at least got folks building machines that have the ability to reproduce the same thing two time in a row. That at least makes it so that things are more consistent.

I suspect the same thing is true of pressure. We haven't investigated it much. Folks who have fooled with it see something to it, and people who have come to my house have seen something from it, although my attempt at blind testing failed miserably because my methodology was pretty piss poor. At any rate, if enough people see some benefit to it, and a couple of forward-thinking machine manufacturers investigate it, maybe we'll see it in machines of the future.

Regarding your last paragraph, I think I'm learning what can be improved by the profiling scheme. When I get more time, I'll see if I can't make a test that satisfies a fraction of the folks who care.

-Greg
gscace
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Aug 12, 2005
Location: Laytonsville MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by Ken Fox on Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:50 pm

gscace wrote:Well Ken I have to say that it's tough to prove almost anything in coffee it seems. I mentioned Jim and your work on the freezing thing to a coffee pro and got an answer that it was somewhat arrogant to say that across the board there would be no affect on coffee taste from freezing, and that the results would be more believable if someone whose palate had very proven credentials had done the blind tasting. So you see how it goes. If you're an amateur researcher in coffee you're always gonna have folks who try to poke holes in your work. It's prolly best to have a thick skin about it, because you can do the work, see a gain and then rant until your blue in the face and some folks won't get it. I'm cool with that.

Take temperature for instance, since you brought it up. We still don't know if a flat line profile is the best one. One can theorize convincingly that it ain't by invoking just a bit of heat transfer theory, but we aren't gonna know until someone builds a test machine that allows reproducible testing. And then there are still gonna be people that won't believe what you come up with. I think enough noise has been made about it so that we at least got folks building machines that have the ability to reproduce the same thing two time in a row. That at least makes it so that things are more consistent.

I suspect the same thing is true of pressure. We haven't investigated it much. Folks who have fooled with it see something to it, and people who have come to my house have seen something from it, although my attempt at blind testing failed miserably because my methodology was pretty piss poor. At any rate, if enough people see some benefit to it, and a couple of forward-thinking machine manufacturers investigate it, maybe we'll see it in machines of the future.

Regarding your last paragraph, I think I'm learning what can be improved by the profiling scheme. When I get more time, I'll see if I can't make a test that satisfies a fraction of the folks who care.

-Greg


Hi Greg,

Anyone reading the "freezing article" carefully would see that there were enough qualifications given on the conclusions to fill a couple of warehouses. It would not surprise me in the least that if you assembled 100 of the best coffee palates out there, and did 5000 paired shots, under somewhat different conditions, that a difference would have been found between never frozen and previously frozen "fresh" coffee. Finding THAT SORT of a difference was never the intent of the study. Most of us are not blessed with one of the best 100 coffee palates, and most of us don't live across the street from one of the world's best artisan roasters, offering up absolutely fresh coffee anytime that we would like to purchase it.

Coffee on a home enthusiast level (for most of us) is all about compromises. It is like the decision I made a few years back that there were damn few wines worth $100, at least not to me. So I'm drinking Savigny les Beaune and not La Tache. So what? My neighbors are drinking Gallo Hearty Burgundy, and I'm happy with being up near the top if not AT the top.

If you can limit what you are studying to your 1 or 2 best ideas, you have a real chance of finding something, that will be not only meaningful but useful to the large group of us who watch your every move. If you find something useful in the first study, then there will be time for another, and so forth.

Best,

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1127
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho
www.paradiseroasters.com: passion for coffees of distinction and quality
www.paradiseroasters.com: passion for coffees of distinction and quality

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by SL28ave on Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:35 pm

Ken Fox wrote:La Tache


*drool*, will I ever the chance? I do very often wonder what kind of shot it would taste like; probably doesn't exist yet... Jim, I just bought an intense CnDP Reserve Sixtine if we can manage to fit it in the midst of all the coffee we'll be drinking later this month :wink:
-Peter Lynagh
SL28ave
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Dec 19, 2005
Location: Rockville, MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by Ken Fox on Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:12 pm

SL28ave wrote:*drool*, will I ever the chance? I do very often wonder what kind of shot it would taste like; probably doesn't exist yet... Jim, I just bought an intense CnDP Reserve Sixtine if we can manage to fit it in the midst of all the coffee we'll be drinking later this month :wink:


Hi Peter,

I've been fortunate enough to have a wine cellar, or at least some place I could cellar wines in good conditions, for around 25 years. There were times during this period when wines now considered unobtainable were available for purchase at very reasonable prices. I still have a few bottles of Pichon Lalande with $13.95 price stickers on them, and remember buying first growth Bordeaux for around $50. I also remember buying the "mixed case" Domaine de la Romanee Conti for about a thousand dollars, which includes such things as a bottle of Romanee Conti which must sell, these days, for more than the price I paid for the entire case.

The bottom line on all of this, if you buy this stuff and age it under good conditions is that it is a pure crap shoot. Sure, I've had the odd bottle that was very expensive way back when and would blow your socks off now, but the truth is that most of these vaunted bottles turn out to be huge disappointments after you have aged them and waited for them over a decade or two or three. They simply cannot live up to their hype.

Nowadays, I'd much rather buy some under-the-radar bottle for $15 or $20 or $25 and lose it in my cellar and stumble back onto it 10 years later and find that it hugely exceeds my expectations. Now that is a great experience. To have paid $20 for something and to open it 10 years later and have it taste as good as La Tache.

It has happened to me, and it has happened more often than for those expensive bottles to meet the expectations that one could reasonably have for them.

So, I've just stopped buying the pricey ones.

ken
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1127
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by SL28ave on Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:32 pm

Thanks, Ken. I will hold your word dear.

But when I see for the first time "ginger" in a wine description, from some Australian retailer-fanatic, I still wanna give this wine a go: "2004 La Tache: Floral, ginger, anise and red currents on the nose. In the mouth it is a silk cloth with floral print. Terrific shape, good volume and great cut on the finish.".... like a silk cloth with floral print! Wha? If I ever have the chance for a teaspoon of this wine, hopefully it'll be at the most delicate and perceptive moment of my life. :cry:

Sorry for the drift, Mr Scace. Back on topic.
-Peter Lynagh
SL28ave
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Dec 19, 2005
Location: Rockville, MD

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by Ken Fox on Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

SL28ave wrote:Thanks, Ken. I will hold your word dear.

But when I see for the first time "ginger" in a wine description, from some Australian retailer-fanatic, I still wanna give this wine a go: "2004 La Tache: Floral, ginger, anise and red currents on the nose. In the mouth it is a silk cloth with floral print. Terrific shape, good volume and great cut on the finish.".... like a silk cloth with floral print! Wha? If I ever have the chance for a teaspoon of this wine, hopefully it'll be at the most delicate and perceptive moment of my life. :cry:

Sorry for the drift, Mr Scace. Back on topic.


Peter,

The problem is that this guy's "ginger" might just be your "soiled undergarments."

ken
p.s. not kidding
What, me worry?

Alfred E. Neuman, 1955
Ken Fox
 
Posts: 1127
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Idaho

Link to "Brew pressure profiling update 3"by SL28ave on Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:10 pm

Ken Fox wrote:Peter,

The problem is that this guy's "ginger" might just be your "soiled undergarments."

ken
p.s. not kidding


I wanted to take your comment about my soiled undergarments smelling like ginger as a compliment, but I didn't even soil my undergarments as a baby :lol:. I think I get what you're saying, though... Good thing I had already tasted the Reserve Sixtine before deciding to serve it. So, we'll see :)
-Peter Lynagh
SL28ave
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Dec 19, 2005
Location: Rockville, MD

Next

Return to Tips and Techniques

cron