Time, temperature, turbulence. The three-T's. There's no A (for aeration) .
Point is, you can't raise the temps to shorten time... that's something everyone can agree on. Perhaps more controversial would be that I don't think that you can just grind finer to shorten the brew time... some would disagree.
... it's super-hard to create a consistent amount of turbulence by manual stirring.
John P wrote:RE: Time ... To anyone brewing a four minute Siphon... WTF? Remind me so I can go elsewhere for coffee.
phaelon56 wrote:My four minutes is the elapsed time from when a bit of liquid appears in the upper vessel until the coffee has finished going back south. Dunno about the total time up top as I have not measured but I'll guess at about two minutes. I just started making vac pot coffee again after not having done so for several years. Obviously you're targeting a much shorter brew time.
phaelon56 wrote:Back to the Trifecta.... should I assume that it's like Clover in that it requires an inordinate charge weight of coffee to the amount of water? (relative to other brewing methods)
nick wrote:Strange that there doesn't seem to be consensus on this... seems obvious that you'd want to time the total water-coffee contact time.
nick wrote:Owen, "liquid appears in the upper vessel?" Let that water git all the way up there and then throw them coffee grounds in!
nick wrote:Jim Saborio: what's wrong with your water tower?
Reggie wrote:There is a surprising rush to judgment in this thread by so-called professionals who have not even seen the machine first hand, or tasted what it can produce. Give it time.
terry wrote:I really was hoping for advancement in brewing technology....Blue lights and bubbling chambers appear to only offer an wiz bang effect rather than brewing technology
nick wrote:Why so much hate for a machine that it sounds like you've never actually encountered?
Brett Hanson wrote:I have no hate for this device. I just don't see how it can augment the coffee program of anyone here....It doesn't support customer engagement or interaction, likely costs too much (relative to benefit), and doesn't appear to pay attention to the current trends in delivering quality coffee.
Andy Schecter wrote:I don't think you're really talking about DELIVERING quality coffee. I believe what you actually have in mind are current trends in SELLING "quality" coffee:
nick wrote:On the most part, be it a Hario V60, Chemex, siphon, Beehouse, etc., I hate them all. Most of them can indeed make kick-butt coffee, but they're often too much trouble and/or there's too much room for error.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests