Not your average Japanese iced coffee.

Coffee preparation techniques besides espresso like pourover.
braxtonjens

#1: Post by braxtonjens »

Hi everyone,
Happy summer! I'm experimenting with an iced coffee recipe....
would anyone like to try it and let me know your thoughts?

Please comment your results after giving this recipe a shot (or two!).
Please try, before hating on this, because I know that this might seem ridiculous, and goes against what current specialty coffee circles or professionals say.

It is unconventional I know, but the people I've made this iced coffee for have said that it's really good(or the best they've ever had). A range of Starbucks drinkers to some discerning pallets.

The recipe is a modified Japanese iced coffee method.

The recipe:
• Using a 1:10 ratio (15g coffee to 150ml/g water)
This can be scaled, I've gone up to 35g /350ml using the Hario v60 untabbed filters. More on filters below.

• Grind coffee at an espresso setting. For home users with only a blade grinder I tested this and it works great too! I've used my hand grinder Lido E, La Pavoni Zip (64mm burrs), as well as the Mythos grinder we have at the shop I work at. I brought home grinds from the shop that we were pulling shots with (hologram blend by Counter culture) and it worked great.

• Fill carafe with enough ice to cool the hot brewed coffee.

• Brew water temp is hotter than normal, 205-210F, 97-99 C. This helps the draw down time, as well as brew a very high and even extraction.

• Use Hario v60 to brew, I only have the glass and plastic, so I cannot attest to the ceramic or metal. For those who use a dedicated, or high quality grinder the tabbed v60 white filters work great, as well as the untabbed ones. The untabbed filters have lower chances of clogging and have a faster flow. For those using a blade grinder I recommend using the untabbed filters as they have a faster flow rate and don't clog or stall out very easily.

• When pouring water onto coffee, use a spoon to stir and to break up any clumps of ground coffee.
I usually stir till I hit my target weight in water, too much stirring will slow the brew, and possibly stall it out on the drawdown.

• coffees that work well with this method are nicely roasted coffees that are high quality, lighter brighter, sweet, floral, fruity coffees. Darker roasted coffees have not been tested because i don't have any dark roasted beans to test with, nor do I care for dark roasted coffee. This works great with decafs as well, some grind adjustment may be necessary though, a touch coarser.

•brewing should take less than 3 minutes.

• When done brewing remove v60 and stir coffee and ice to cool the coffee down till it's very cold.

•Serve over ice!

• If coffee tastes bitter or the flavor clarity is low/muddled, try adding some water or more ice to dilute he brew a bit. This can really open up the flavors and clarity.

To me this coffee is super tasty, high & even extraction, clean, bright and incredibly easy to do as well as a very quick brew time.

I would love if anyone would like to give this a shot and let me know your results! It works great for us as home, but want to see if a community of coffee people like it!

To answer a few questions....

Using an espresso grind to make a pour over is weird, and non-conventional. But it works, and delicious, and it's fast.

No the coffee doesn't clog the filter nor does the brew stall out because of the fine grind. This only happens with too much stirring/ agitating. I believe this is the coffee particles do some "self filtering" (I don't know the official phrase or word for this).

This YouTube from BH tells us that finer particles of coffee yield to a better extraction. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI3zOwFG9mg

Here's an article that I drew from as inspiration, talking about grind size and pour overs: (it is VERY dense and nerdy coffee science)
https://coffeeadastra.com/2020/04/02/wh ... pour-over/

Also this recipe from Coffee Ad Astra talking about high extractions and grinding finer.
https://coffeeadastra.com/2019/03/25/a- ... he-siphon/
“Coffee is always a good idea”
LMWDP #617

Espresso Vision: the perfect cup of coffee starts with understanding your roast
Sponsored by Espresso Vision
braxtonjens (original poster)

#2: Post by braxtonjens (original poster) »

Anyone give this a try?
“Coffee is always a good idea”
LMWDP #617

MikeTheBlueCow

#3: Post by MikeTheBlueCow » replying to braxtonjens »

I don't make Japanese-style iced coffee any longer, as I prefer to brew standard strength into a HyperChiller; but, when I used to brew Japanese-style iced coffee, the process you described is more-or-less what I would do. For me it was all about choosing the right strength of the concentrate, using plenty of ice, and then because you are brewing a concentrate you have to grind finer and use hotter water so I would go with water right off of boiling. The only real difference I can see is that you have added a lot more agitation than I normally would, and perhaps you were grinding finer than I used to, but your brew time looks about the same.

braxtonjens (original poster)

#4: Post by braxtonjens (original poster) »

Gotcha.
I don't have a hyper chill.
And I was looking for the best tasting quickest iced coffee I could make.
It's also convenient when I have my hopper on my espresso grinder loaded, so I can just use the same grind setting (typically)
I agree on the ice part, I just add enough to cool it down and it dilutes the concentrate a bit.
Because of the high extraction %, even when the ice does melt and its "weak" I don't feel like it's watery and terrible. The flavor remains intact a lot better than traditional iced coffee methods when they are to the same watered down dilution.
“Coffee is always a good idea”
LMWDP #617

User avatar
yakster
Supporter ♡

#5: Post by yakster »

MikeTheBlueCow wrote:I don't make Japanese-style iced coffee any longer, as I prefer to brew standard strength into a HyperChiller.
Would you recommend the HyperChiller? Does it work well for two back-to-back cold brews like they advertise?
-Chris

LMWDP # 272

Brien

#6: Post by Brien »

I've been doing this after watching hoffmann's video. Cold brew is dead to me.

braxtonjens (original poster)

#7: Post by braxtonjens (original poster) »

I can't remember the last time I had cold brew, much less enjoyed it.

Do you do this recipe/style I shared in the original post?
If so what were your results?
“Coffee is always a good idea”
LMWDP #617

Weber Workshops: tools for building better coffee
Sponsored by Weber Workshops
User avatar
LBIespresso
Supporter ❤

#8: Post by LBIespresso »

yakster wrote:Would you recommend the HyperChiller? Does it work well for two back-to-back cold brews like they advertise?
+1 on this question. I just tried a pour-over into a french press glass seated in a pot of ice water and then poured that into a chilled glass water carafe in another bucket of ice. Really just to test the concept. I used a Yirgacheffe that I roasted pretty light and...oh my...I have a new summer drink.

So this hyperchiller seems like a waaaaay more efficient process if it works.
LMWDP #580

DamianWarS
Supporter ♡

#9: Post by DamianWarS »

braxtonjens wrote: Using an espresso grind to make a pour over is weird, and non-conventional. But it works, and delicious, and it's fast.

No the coffee doesn't clog the filter nor does the brew stall out because of the fine grind. This only happens with too much stirring/ agitating. I believe this is the coffee particles do some "self filtering" (I don't know the official phrase or word for this).
cake filtration is what you're referring to. the coffee itself will act as a filter and can help to capture the fines that you don't want to clog the filter.

Perger et al does advocate for a finer grind saying the extract is higher and quicker which of course makes sense he also says the most amount of extraction occurs in the first minute of the brew and after that, it continues to extract but with diminishing returns. This also is banking on similar research he has done that indicates water is able to penetrate coffee only 100um deep so coffee particles over 100um their cores won't get extracted. As an idea of how many microns typical, pour-over is my kruve sifter says pourover should be between 400-800um. Perger is quoted "for every particle above 100um, there are 100,000,000 below that" and will say that the extraction is an average of all the larger and small particles mixed together but most of that extraction is made up of the fines. so the argument is... fines are better. Gagne takes a look at this deeper in a blog he titles Why Can't we Grind Coffee Finer for Pour Over? which is released to the public now beyond his Patreon subscribers which I would suggest reading it as well.

your brew seems to take advantage of this quicker extraction in the first minute and because it utilizes a finer grinder then the extraction is high, and while you are filling water you are agitating so the water gets mixed with the coffee continually until you stop the agitation and let the drawdown begin. but it is also important to understand the fluid dynamics of the brew to know what's happening. I would suggest when the drawdown happens most of your coffee is extracted and the fluid is exiting between the walls of the brewer and the filter called bypass. it is doing this because this path is easier than a direct path through the coffee bed itself. if you have a clear plastic/glass brewer watch between the filter and the walls of the brewer and I'll bet you will see water flowing down this path. this is why your brews are 3 min and not 10 min. try doing the same thing in an Aeropress and just use it as a gravity dripper, the brew would probably take over 10 min or even longer with that fine of grind. because in an Aeropress (that you don't press) there is no bypass and all the water must pass through all the coffee. so if your brew takes 3 min, and an estimate Aeropress used as a gravity dripper takes 10 min then the conclusion your brew is quicker because it is bypassing the coffee bed. Gagne also talks about this in a blog called The Four Rules of Optimal Coffee Percolation. Gagne seems drawn to bypass free brewing as well as an advocate for longer brew times so his information may help you understand what's happening.

With that all in mind, the final judge is the taste, not the method. You may have hit a balance of just enough extraction time (90% of it probably is happening during your dilution/agitation phase) and allowing the coffee to take the quickest path out. think of it like the clever dripper, steep until the dripper is full then release it. I think you're essentially doing the same thing. If you have an aeropress try the same recipe out on it but don't plunge and let all the coffee drip out. The coffee will be much more intense and the brew will be much longer (because there is no bypass). because it's a slow drawdown it might work well for an iced drink.

braxtonjens (original poster)

#10: Post by braxtonjens (original poster) »

I agree with you on those points.
I also read and follow Gagne and really enjoy his scientific approach to coffee.
Bypass should be avoided.
Yes.
In this instance I think it could be a good thing. The quick extraction happening in mostly the first minute, then after that, that brew water takes the easy way out and bypasses out the side of the filter is fine with me since it already did alot of the work of the extraction.
The remaining non by-pass will cake filter though the grounds and do a bit more, yet diminishing extraction.

And yes I agree again, how the Final brew tastes that's what matters most. And I've done ALOT of Japanese iced coffee, with v60, kalita, AeroPress, chemex, making very good coffee.
The flavor jump I get with this is like going from 720p to 1080p.

I'll do some testing with some gravity brews in the AP this week. And report some of my findings.
“Coffee is always a good idea”
LMWDP #617