Optimal Brew Time - Page 2

Coffee preparation techniques besides espresso like pourover.
User avatar
ex trahere
Posts: 130
Joined: 13 years ago

#11: Post by ex trahere »

I personally think ~2 minute V60s can be amazing, and that is my standard brew time.

I use 16 grams of coffee to yield 240 grams of beverage. I bloom for 20 seconds, pour for 80, and drain for 20. I also utilize a continuous pour, which means my flow rate from kettle (post bloom) is 187.5 ml/min.

With my kettle output rate being relatively slow in comparison to practically every hand pour I have been served, I am keeping my water hotter by being in the kettle longer as oppose to filling up the brew vessel and rapidly losing heat to ambient temp. I believe this increases rate of extraction, thus allowing a short brew that still has sweetness and complexity.

Honestly, I don't even understand how one can brew less than 8 ounces in 4-5 minutes unless you are pulse pouring every 30 seconds or the grind is excessively fine.
A posse ad esse
______________

dustin360 (original poster)
Posts: 825
Joined: 13 years ago

#12: Post by dustin360 (original poster) »

Im not sure if its an equipment/water thing, but it seems brews under 3 mins vary more often too. Results seem harder to repeat. But I suppose as you shorten the brew time every second becomes more important.

One of the reasons coffees are sweeter post 3 mins is the hydrolyzed(aka breaks down in water) hemicellulose. Hemicellulose is present along with cellulose in almost all plant cell walls. The difference is 1/14th of the Hemicellulose can break down in hot water over time. And the exciteing thing is that it breaks down into sugars(glucose, xylose, mannose, galactose, rhamnose, and arabinose).

But regardless of all that, I think the best proof is in the cup.

(oh, and I dont seem to have an issue brewing with 200 grams of water in 4 to 5 mins with a coarser grind on the kalita and a finer grind on the v60 w/bonomac filters. Just pulse pour when needed.)

Also I would genuinely like to hear everyone's "go to" times for coffees. Or maybe a better question, is "image your top 5 cups of coffee ever. How long were they brewed for?"

Sam21
Posts: 400
Joined: 12 years ago

#13: Post by Sam21 »

When you say 4-5min with 200ml in a Kalita and a course grind, are you letting the bed drain completely? Just curious.

Netphilosopher
Posts: 108
Joined: 13 years ago

#14: Post by Netphilosopher »

dustin360 wrote:Im not sure if its an equipment/water thing, but it seems brews under 3 mins vary more often too. Results seem harder to repeat. But I suppose as you shorten the brew time every second becomes more important.

One of the reasons coffees are sweeter post 3 mins is the hydrolyzed(aka breaks down in water) hemicellulose. Hemicellulose is present along with cellulose in almost all plant cell walls. The difference is 1/14th of the Hemicellulose can break down in hot water over time. And the exciteing thing is that it breaks down into sugars(glucose, xylose, mannose, galactose, rhamnose, and arabinose).

But regardless of all that, I think the best proof is in the cup.

(oh, and I dont see to have an issue brewing with 200 grams of water in 4 to 5 mins with a coarser grind on the kalita and a finer grind on the v60 w/bonomac filters. Just pulse pour when needed.)

Also I would genuinely like to hear everyones "go to" times for coffees. Or maybe a better question, is "image your top 5 cups of coffee ever. How long were they brewed for?"
Absolutely true about hydrolysis of hemicellulose, but also becomes a balancing act with hydrolysis of chlorogenic acid into quinnic and caffeic acid (which are tasted as more bitter than cga). It's why I keep the strike (initial) temperature lower than 205degF, and don't worry about dissipating heat.

dustin360 (original poster)
Posts: 825
Joined: 13 years ago

#15: Post by dustin360 (original poster) »

Sam21 wrote:When you say 4-5min with 200ml in a Kalita and a course grind, are you letting the bed drain completely? Just curious.
Like between pours? No, i keep the bed submerged the whole time. With a brand new coffee I will aim for around 4 mins and go from there. The flow rate slows the longer you brew because of particle migration(and probably a dozen other things im not aware of), so often the brews will be some what longer than 4 mins. And Im not grinding excessively course, just coarser than I do for v 60's

dustin360 (original poster)
Posts: 825
Joined: 13 years ago

#16: Post by dustin360 (original poster) »

Buttercup wrote:
THEN, to mess all of our understanding up, we have the low(er) temperature fine ground AeroPress recipe. Fine ground (even down to turkish), 175degF strike temperature. ~13.5g coffee to 125g water.

Pour water into coffee, stir for 10 seconds, begin pressing very gently (over the next 45 seconds to 1 minute, press very gently, allow the grounds to filter out fines - the more patient you are the more clarified the result).

Before rejecting the recipe outright, try it. Strength and extraction (immersion calculation) will be the same but the flavors are very sensitive to strike temp. In general, it is achieving near-maximum dissolution in a very short time. Lower temps tend to have little to no bitterness, and will have a tendency toward some sweetness, but not the same as a 6 minute decent press pot.

By the numbers - we're talking 25% extraction or more - what should taste completely unacceptably bitter and astringent is actually not too bad.

Doing an auto drip that achieved that type of extraction over 6, 8 or more minutes? Yuck!
I love screwing understanding up!(thats why Im a member here). But seriously, I love doing things that on paper shouldnt work but in real life they are awesome(like shots that are minutes long, and not just seconds). I really dont use my areopress much, but Ill dust her off and try this. Been meaning to try the MJA again, as my first attempt didnt work so well. Do you prefer it over a more traditional areopress recipe?

varnex
Posts: 36
Joined: 12 years ago

#17: Post by varnex »

I find the low temperature aeropress recipe a great life-saver when I have to use to store-bought beans. It honestly makes anything drinkable, since I find that it makes cups with less bitterness. With properly roasted fresh beans, however, it makes a good but not great cup. (I find that there's less complexity)

On a more relevant note: I find that cups with a gentler extraction (read: 3+ mins) are inherently better because coarser grinds also have better particle size distribution.

dustin360 (original poster)
Posts: 825
Joined: 13 years ago

#18: Post by dustin360 (original poster) »

So I tried the Turkish fine grind and a little over a min steep with a ratio of about 1/11, water temp around 185. And It was quite interesting to play with. The coffee seemed to mimic a shot of espresso where the drinking temp really affects the taste. Some of the cups stated a little bitter and then changed into something pleasant. The best cup was an Ethiopia Kochoha brewed for 1:20 with an extraction percentage of 28 percent! It tasted alot like my kalita cups but more intense(basically like tangerine juice). The longer I work in/play with coffee, the more I wonder how there are any guidelines for anything...


(it did seem that once the cups cooled to room temp they were not nearly as good)

User avatar
happycat
Posts: 1464
Joined: 11 years ago

#19: Post by happycat »

Siphon really took off for me this week after plenty of struggles. I believe these are the keys:

- metal mesh filter replacing fabric one
- roasting my coffee lighter
- grinds just above espresso level on my Encore
- maybe no stirring (with the metal filter, I get a lot more bubbling in the top chamber which mixes the coffee)

Brew time before removing from heat and using wet cloth on the carafe... About 80 seconds

A Brazil from Sweet Marias has been a nice chocolate IPA and the lingering sweetness really amazes me.

It seems all the issues I had went away with the metal filter and most importantly a lighter roast.
LMWDP #603