Posted Sat Jul 9, 2011, 7:08pm Subject: Re: Confessions of a Brikka Lover
This time, I tried preheating the water directly from the boiler then immediately putting the basket and screwing the top part. The idea was to prevent as much heat to get to the top part as possible before the coffee starts pouring out. Not sure if it worked but atleast I didn't see any boiling anymore when the initial flow started. The outcome was slightly sour but that maybe because I let the fountain spray to happen instead of regulating the flow.
Haha! Underextraction from a stovetop. That's a new one.
Speaking of flow regulation, I feel like that's something I won't have to do anymore on a Brikka since the valve immediately closes when the flow isn't reaching the required pressure. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
UPDATE:
I made another cup this afternoon. Only difference this time is that I poured just a few millimeters of cold water on the top part before brewing. Similar to preheating directly on the boiler and quickly screwing the whole thing together, the idea was to prevent as much heat from reaching the top part. I guess I got lucky with the water amount because they all evaporated just before the coffee started pouring. Again, I honestly have no way to prove to myself or anyone that all these "techniques" are giving the effect I want. All I can say is that, even though the last 2oz of the brew clogged again (possibly because I overdid the tamping), this was probably the best cup I've had in years. Sweet and tangy with zero bitterness and a clean finish.
Regarding the clog I mentioned, what I did was immediately pour my 2oz cup the moment I noticed the overly stressed bubbling of the spout (having experienced a very bad case of over-extraction just yesterday, I'm scarred enough to know these things by heart already lol :D). Then I cooled the pot down as fast as I could to knock off the gargling and save the gasket.
Underextraction from a stovetop. That's a new one.
Actually, I find about as common as overextraction. But, unlike the Third Wave kind of triple ristretto served as espresso in many places, it’s usually not that pleasing.
Brikka since the valve immediately closes when the flow isn't reaching the required pressure. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
You mean the “top-hat”? It seems to work like the weight on a pressure cooker.
possibly because I overdid the tamping
Yeah… I never tamp, with moka or Brikka. Everything I’ve read or heard about it says that tamping isn’t a good idea, under those conditions.
It really works best with stepped grinders when you're between a clog and a not as ideally restricted extraction. Basically, I force just a bit more grounds in to slow down the flowrate when simply going finer will just clog the whole thing.
Yesterday, it felt as if my grinder's balls just dropped. Even without any tamping involved, my usual 4 clicks which worked great for me in the past is now suddenly clogging up my pot. I'll be using grinds a click coarser in the future and, for the first try, I'll do it without tamping just to observe the flowrate.
UPDATE:
As expected, going just a click coarser and the initial flow was already too fast. It was only until the pot's natural tamping kicked in that the nice crema started coming out and that happened after 4 ounces already got out. All I need to do now is to figure out the right tamp so the puck starts forming sooner during extraction.
Posted Sat Aug 6, 2011, 5:46pm Subject: Re: Confessions of a Brikka Lover
I'm starting to wonder how moka pots became a traditional morning thing in Italy. If I had to guess, it's probably because either working folks back in the old days didn't have weekdays as hectic as it usually gets currently OR there's always someone left at the house with all the time in the world to do the dishes. Why am I mentioning this? It's because the biggest downside I've constantly experienced with my pot since I started using it about a month ago is the cleanup and boy does it take long. As much as I love the darn thing, I always hesitate at first any time I want to use it because I always have to ask myself if I have enough time to clean it up afterwards.
On a different note, I discarded my idea of putting drops of cold water on the top part while the pot is brewing. I noticed that, while it can still get hot enough to boil the coffee sitting in there, the transfer of heat from the bottom to the top is actually pretty slow and weak. I think that a more efficient option would be to pour cold water in the top part and let it sit there while doing brew preparations then simply discard all the water once it's time to assemble it with the bottom part. It should then be cold enough to dampen the heat absorption from the bottom. As always, it's recommended to do this along with preheating the water straight from the bottom part.
Here: Myron Joshua’s The Story of the Bialetti Moka Express should help you. I’d say that there’s a ritual aspect which work well. I’m sure people feel the same way about their favourite method but I do think moka pots are special this way. And the aromas are a big part of it. It can easily fill a kitchen, making the whole place feel like home. Not to mention the physical aspect, even the look of the device.
RaptorHornet Said:
If I had to guess, it's probably because either working folks back in the old days didn't have weekdays as hectic as it usually gets currently
Quite likely. Hectic weekdays are an unusual phenomenon, in so many ways. Even Italians have them, I’m sure. And much of it comes with “lifestyle choices”. But it’s far from universal, though we can easily get caught in it to think that it’s “natural” and “normal”, not to mention unavoidable.
RaptorHornet Said:
there's always someone left at the house with all the time in the world to do the dishes.
Well, that’s one method. I’m not knocking it but I do find it overly involved, for very limited benefits. To each their own.
Hadn’t seen your previous post. Strange that you should find such a narrow range of grind sizes which work in your case. I never tamp and I use a fairly wide range of grind sizes in my moka pots. Contrary to espresso, I don’t find grind level to be that much of a factor. Fines might be a bigger factor and what makes it difficult to troubleshoot is that they seem to stick in the pot for several batches. Had issues with that, in the past, on occasion.
Having a cup of moka pot coffee, right now. It’s a really nice Chiapas I homeroasted the day before yesterday. It’s a slightly darker roast than I want (still tweaking my roasting profiles, after scoring a large quantity of green beans). But it’s fully developed and, really, quite pleasing. Complex, full of stonefruit aroma and taste, a bit savoury/umami (tomato/broth), with just a hint of woodiness and bitterness. Probably because I’ve had cardamom tea earlier tonight, I’m getting some spiciness, in there. Actually, it’s reminiscent of coffee I’ve had at an Ethiopian restaurant. Rich and full-bodied. Still, it’d probably go well with milk. It’s a washed coffee but was introduced to me as close to a natural. As a fan of naturals, I’d agree.
Since I use a hand grinder and everything I have is always kept in shelves, setup and brewing can take from 10 minutes at best to 15 minutes at worst. Cleanup, which consists of washing and meticulous wiping with a cloth towel each and every part of the pot, can also take from 10 to 15 minutes, including the cleanup and storage of my hand grinder.
All in all, the whole ritual can last up to 30 minutes not counting the actual drinking of the coffee and eating of breakfast. Since everyone in the house only has an hour to do everything before heading to their work, the moka pot just doesn't cut it for me as a morning thing to do during those days. It's great on lazy weekends though and even the other members of the family are starting to warm up to it. I've sort of became the family barista because of it.
Enkerli Said:
Well, that’s one method. I’m not knocking it but I do find it overly involved, for very limited benefits. To each their own.
It's pretty simple actually since the bottom part of the pot heats up water really fast. So once the whole thing gets assembled after preheating, the actual travel of water from bottom to top literally starts a second after I turn on the stove. This has an added benefit of significantly lesser heat being transfered to the top part during brewing, hence a lesser chance of buring the coffee.
Cooling of the top part pre-brewing is also very simple since you're just putting cold water there and leaving it someplace while you do something else. It's like doing grind preparations while waiting for the water to boil when doing a pour-over or syphon brew method.
Enkerli Said:
Hadn’t seen your previous post. Strange that you should find such a narrow range of grind sizes which work in your case. I never tamp and I use a fairly wide range of grind sizes in my moka pots. Contrary to espresso, I don’t find grind level to be that much of a factor. Fines might be a bigger factor and what makes it difficult to troubleshoot is that they seem to stick in the pot for several batches. Had issues with that, in the past, on occasion.
In a way, I managed to fix those problems I mentioned in my earlier posts. I once did a "mock brew" using an empty basket and timed the point from where the water started coming out of the spout until all the water has reached the top part. Taking into account(read: guessing) the time that the water traveled from the bottom of the basket to the spout of the top part, I estimated that the brewing process took between 1min and 1min10sec from start to finish. Since my pour-overs always take 1min30sec, I simply use a grind size for my moka pot that's a knob or two finer than what I use for my pour-overs. It might sound like very strange logic to some but, basically, the idea is that I adjust for a grind size that has an optimum extraction time of 1 minute and the pour-over method helps because that's what I use whenever I'm redialing my grinder for every new batch I buy.
About the tamping. Before, I used it to apply resistance to the water flow. That was bad. From what I do now though, I don't even know if I could still call it tamping anymore. These days, I'm basically putting inside the basket as much grounds as I can with barely any force exerted. There will always be a lot of air pockets left if I just pour in the grounds so I give the mound a little press to see if there are still spaces that need filling. In my opinion, what I do now is simply proper distribution of grounds to avoid channeling.
Well, that's been my story lately and I've been making consistently great tasting cups ever since I changed "principles". I wish I can roast my own beans like you though. Too bad there aren't any local sellers of green beans here. I don't even care that I only have a wok and a stove to work with. I just long for the day that I can finally stop worrying about Roasted On dates.
Jaulk Senior Member Joined: 23 Apr 2011 Posts: 28 Location: NJ Expertise: Just starting
Posted Sun Aug 7, 2011, 1:13pm Subject: Re: Confessions of a Brikka Lover
Clean up is the fastest part for me. About 2 minutes tops. I rinse everything with cold water and rinse any residue out, wipe everything down with a paper towel, and that's it.
I do not meticulously clean my hand grinder every time. I shake and tap on it to get coffee dust out, blow onto some parts gently, and occasionally wipe the inside of the hopper with a paper towel, but nothing very involved, and I almost ALWAYS do this while the coffee is brewing to save time...
The actual brewing does take a bit of time, but any worthwhile coffee set up usually does, unless you make espresso with very expensive, fully automatic machines and grinders.
I preheat to save time. I pour cold water up to the line and let it sit on the stove on high for 5 minutes, and while this is happening, grind the coffee. Once the 5 min is up, I pour the coffee in the basket, carefully screw everything together, then let it brew again on very low for 4-6 minutes.
From beginning to end, including drink time, yes, it does take about 20-25 min. About 12 min to brew. But that's why there are faster methods of coffee that are either more expensive or not as good.
Enkerli Senior Member Joined: 1 Aug 2004 Posts: 711 Location: Montreal, Qc Expertise: I love coffee
Espresso: (At cafés, not at home) Grinder: Hario hand grinders Vac Pot: (Moka Pot) Bialetti Brikka Drip: Steep and release pour-over Roaster: iRoast-2
Posted Sun Aug 7, 2011, 2:10pm Subject: Re: Confessions of a Brikka Lover
RaptorHornet Said:
Since I use a hand grinder and everything I have is always kept in shelves, setup and brewing can take from 10 minutes at best to 15 minutes at worst. Cleanup, which consists of washing and meticulous wiping with a cloth towel each and every part of the pot, can also take from 10 to 15 minutes, including the cleanup and storage of my hand grinder.
Initial setup (bringing moka pot, beans, grinder, and spray bottle from storage to kitchen): less than 1 minute.
Grinding 20g of coffee (this one can vary quite a bit based on grind level): precisely 2 minutes, this time around.
Late setup stage (turning heat on, unscrewing the pot, taking basket out, rinsing the pot, pouring water in the bottom section, putting basket back, adding grounds, spraying the grounds, putting top back on): less than 2 minutes, and I lost some seconds getting around somebody else in the kitchen.
Heating time (before the coffee starts to flow): just under 6 minutes.
Flow time: 1:15
Pour time (bringing pot from stove to counter, pouring completely, being a bit distracted in the process): 0:13. So, 12:15 from start to finish. Half prep, half brewing time. Sounds similar to your average. Of course, those six minutes before coffee starts flowing is part of my morning routine. It can be shorter or longer but it’s the time during which I do some other things, such as preparing breakfast. Or, if it’s not my first cup of coffee in the morning, it might be time during which I do something else like check RSS feeds and email. It’s “given time”, in some ways. In fact, the whole process has such a ritual aspect that it’s almost like meditation, for me. If I’m with someone else, we might chat during that time. It’s mindless enough a process that I can do it half-asleep.
Then the coffee itself is very rewarding. Not only “what’s in the cup”, but the aroma filling the kitchen.
As for cleanup: 1 minute of actual cleanup and 1 minute of drying time. I usually wait until the pot is cool (after I’m done with my coffee) though I can cool the pot down with cold water. I used to leave the pot there until the next batch so cleanup was part of the latter stage in setup. Basically, I just dump the grounds in the compost bin, swipe the counter and stove, and rinse the pot’s parts (along with my mug). I then leave the rinsed parts on a rack and put the pot back together once it’s dry. If the pot’s not dry when I need to put it away, I just shake off excess water. I sometimes leave the pot’s parts to dry until the next batch. If I’m not going to use the pot for a few days (say, with my Brikka), I do wipe the three parts with a paper towel. It adds an extra minute to the cleanup time but it also means that I’m not waiting for it to dry. Sometimes, I leave the pot’s two main parts to soak for a little while before I turn them over to dry, usually when I’m doing something else.
Because cleanup is something I do just before I leave (if I have to leave right away), it’s part of my last minute check that I didn’t forget anything.
If I’m to brew two pots in a row (splitting each, if it’s for two people), I cool down the pot with cold water and rinse it once before adding the water and coffee. Since it takes so little time, I usually leave the stove on. And since the stove is at right temperature, the second batch takes less brewing time (I think I’ve timed it at around 3 minutes, at some point). Haven’t done it like this since I started handgrinding but I’d probably grind for the second batch while the first batch is brewing. Won’t try it today but I think I can brew two batches in 20 minutes.
As for preheating the boiler (the “Hoffmann Method”), it sounds like it’s motivated by a fear of burning the coffee. While I understand that fear, it doesn’t affect me. After finding the “sweet spot” for heat level on a given stove, I never get burnt coffee. I do know what it tastes like and I know it’s been part of the moka pot’s reputation. But I’m simply not getting burnt coffee. You might think that I was just so used to the taste that I don’t notice it, or some such. But I really don’t think it’s the case. I have a friend in the coffee biz who occasionally brews moka pot coffee at home using the Hoffmann Method, because he hasn’t been able to brew properly using the standard method. I brewed coffee at his place, using my 6c Moka Express on his gas stove and he couldn’t discern any burnt taste, even while searching for it quite carefully.
Been doing the standard method almost every day for over 20 years. I did change my method a bit, in the past two years (preheating the stove, measuring the beans, handgrinding, rinsing the pot right away…) but it’s been part of my ritual for all this time. As I’m not that change-averse, I can adapt new habits as part of the whole process, if I find the need to do so. But I rarely do. Switching to the Hoffmann Method would have no significant benefit, for me, and I perceive it as having some significant disadvantages. One is that it is in fact more involved. Those few minutes of brewing time are surprisingly important, to me, especially in the morning. Having to spend them close to the stove to check on the water and go through the equivalent of the “late setup stage” (putting the pot together, adding the grounds…) wouldn’t be an improvement, in my life. Also, I perceive a significant risk of burning myself. Every time I tried it, I was already fully awake. But I did burn myself a bit, even while being quite careful. Knowing myself, doing it while being only half-awake would make it rather risky. I don’t particularly like getting burnt. In fact, I’d rather have burnt coffee than a burnt hand. And I’m getting neither, which is quite neat. So, even if I did notice an improvement in taste with the Hoffmann Method, I probably wouldn’t use it. A basic way to put it is that the Moka Express was never designed for this and, as a hack, it’s best left as a “proof of concept”. Someone could probably design a coffee brewing device which works on the Moka Express principle but keeps the coffee grounds away from the heat, as the water is preheating. But I don’t perceive the Hoffmann Method as an appropriate way to use a moka pot.
Now… There’s a kind of hybrid method which makes a bit more sense, to me. Instead of preheating water in the moka pot’s boiler, you actually boil it in an electric kettle. You then add the water to the boiler, put the basket with grounds in there, screw the top part on (using an oven mitt, as the boiler is quite hot), and put the moka pot on a preheated stove. Less involved and less dangerous than the Hoffmann Method. Probably less preheat time, because kettles are more efficient than the moka pot boiler. Probably about a minute longer of a brewtime than the Hoffmann Method, once the moka pot is on the heat. Less involving, as you don’t have to check the water. And, in my experience, producing the exact same results as the Hoffmann Method… or the standard method. I perceive no significant different in taste between the three methods (standard, Hoffmann, and hybrid). The hybrid method would be somewhat easy to integrate in my routine. I just have to boil water in a kettle as I’m grinding the beans. Chances are that the water will boil at the time I finish grinding and since I don’t have to check on the water, that fits in my overall routine. The key difference, here, is that a kettle is meant to boil water on its own and you don’t have to check it. Not that it’s so difficult to check water in the moka pot’s water, but it does “mess up” the whole process. There’s no “flow”. Thing is, though, it’s still some extra steps. And I’ve yet to notice any improvement in the flavour profile. So even the hybrid method is a no-go, for me.
RaptorHornet Said:
Cooling of the top part pre-brewing is also very simple since you're just putting cold water there and leaving it someplace while you do something else.
Sure. That, I might try. In fact, I could probably put water in the fridge and use that instead of rinsing with tap water. Though, again, I’m skeptical that it’ll significantly improve my coffee. But it’s easy enough an experiment.
Something I might also try is spraying the inside of the top chamber with cold water. Spraying the grounds has been one of the things where I did notice an improvement and it’s easy to do. Since I have a spray bottle handy, it’d be trivial to spray the top chamber before the coffee starts flowing. Although, it does mean that I have to check on the pot, which is a more significant change in my routine than spraying the grounds.
Speaking of brewing methods… Just did myself a “steep-and-release pour-over drip” amd timed the process (after bringing equipment to the kitchen, having ground beans from the same batch, using the same grind level). Boiling: 5:00 Rinsing: 0:26 Pouring: 0:58 Steep: 2:00 Drip: 1:39
As for grind size, I’m surprised to hear about it being measured the same way we measure espresso but using values from drip. Again, I’m not knocking it but I fail to understand how extraction time is that significant a factor in determining grind size. As is often the case, the proof is in the cup. There are some rules of thumb for espresso, developed from years of practice and some extraction measurements (formerly with TDS meters, nowadays with calibrated refractometers). But, with moka pot, I’d be surprised if the extraction time were that directly correlated with extraction, not to mention with taste.
In fact, while I understand the importance of extraction rate as a measure in the brewing process, I think it can distract us from other factors which affect the quality of the brew, not to mention the enjoyment of the process. Don’t get me wrong. I can get all-out geeky about moka pot brewing and I did take (uncalibrated) refractometer readings for a number of months. For a café, I can understand that it’s important to control that “extract ratio” variable along with all the other variables. The “Extract Mojo” has a role to play in a café, especially when diagnosing issues, dialing in a grind, or making sure different baristas produce similar results. I have no problem with that. As long as it doesn’t distract us from the other variables. Coffee isn’t just complicated. It]s truly complex. Tricky interactions between diverse variables mean that it’s very difficult if not impossible to really isolate extract ratio as a single variable. It might be possible to analyze coffee beans the way maltsters analyze malt and, from there, determine something about the brewing process. I really don’t think coffee is even close to this, yet, but it’s conceivable that this might be done at some point in the future. Then, it might be possible to correlate something about the beans with the appropriate grind level to produce a certain extract ratio given a standardized brewing method. But, even then, the “standard brew” (similar to the ASBC laboratory mash, in malt analysis) is no guarantee of results. In fact, for malt, a lab mash is likely to produce something utterly unpalatable. So, a complete bean analysis could be an interesting indicator (though coffee beans probably vary more than barley kernels). But it would be very difficult to apply directly to coffee brewing.
The basic point, here, is that there’s a hierarchy of factors. The key thing to evaluate is the quality of the brewed coffee. For a given bean using a given brewing method, a difference in extract ratio is likely to correlate to a difference in quality. But the reverse isn’t that clear: a consistent extract ratio is unlikely to correlate that precisely with a consistent quality, even with the same beans using the same methods. Other factors are involved and some of them matter more. It’s fun to experiment with this and we might learn a lot about coffee by doing those experiments. But I really don’t think it’s an efficient way to get “the best results”.
In fact, I think it may easily distract us from “the most enjoyable coffee experience possible, under the conditions”. I make no secret that I’m a hedonist. With coffee, it’s especially important. With moka pot coffee, it‘s key.
In a way, moka pot coffee isn’t the ideal brewing method while controling variables. It’s not laboratory equipment to do a coffee bean analysis. It’s a «caffetiera». VacPots look more like lab equipment and, in a way, would probably be better at the task of distinguishing diverse parameters affecting extract rate, and such. For one thing, the heat level is easier to control (though the actual water temperature isn’t). The Technivorm looks like a 1970’s movie version of lab equipment and it’s probably decent at separating variables. The Clover looks like an industrial device and it’s meant as a way to control variables. While the AeroPress, Press Pot, and Abid-style “steep-and-release pour over drip” don’t really look like lab equipment, they could probably be useful in experiments. For one thing, with most of these methods, you can precisely control temperature and steep time (for the AeroPress, you need to use it upside-down, but it works quite well). But, with all of these methods, it’s as possible to make lousy coffee while being as unbelievably precise about every single parameter as possible, as it is to make amazing coffee without being that precise. In other words, all of these methods are “better” than the moka pot in terms of laboratory-like precision (though I’d still say they’re far from lab-grade equipment). But it doesn’t mean it’s easier to produce consistently amazing results with any of them than with the moka pot.
What is especially easy, with the moka pot, is to have a very pleasant coffee experience. As many of us have been saying all along, it’s a very forgiving method. I sincerely think that, “once you get the hang of it, it’s difficult to screw up”. Sure, there’s a way to burn coffee with it. And I know that burnt coffee experiences have been a major hindrance, when people have picked up moka pot brewing from scratch. Yet I haven’t had burnt coffee in years, using my main moka pot. And once you’re past the burnt coffee stage, you can easily get a vary pleasant moka pot brewing experience, without overthinking it.
That’s probably why it’s been so popular in so many homes in Italy and elsewhere. ;-)
Posted Sun Aug 7, 2011, 5:36pm Subject: Re: Confessions of a Brikka Lover
The hybrid method is actually the first one I used when I bought my pot new. I once did a comparison though and I found out that the moka pot heated water to boiling faster than my electric kettle. Mostly probably, it was because the pot required heating significantly less water than the kettle (the heating coil of my kettle sits to the side instead of the bottom so I have to pour in a plenty amount of water to avoid burning it out). It's a fine method since it's a great balance between safety and efficiency. I did try the standard method a good number of times too with great results most of the time except during those days I screw up the grind for the sake of experimentation. I simply prefer the Hoffmann since it starts the actual brewing process the quickest of the three methods. It also heats up the top part the least so there's less probability of error once the brewing starts.
I like your idea of using a spray to cool down the top part. I cerntainly see it as a better way to distribute coolness on the surfaces.
Enkerli Said:
As for grind size, I’m surprised to hear about it being measured the same way we measure espresso but using values from drip. Again, I’m not knocking it but I fail to understand how extraction time is that significant a factor in determining grind size. As is often the case, the proof is in the cup. There are some rules of thumb for espresso, developed from years of practice and some extraction measurements (formerly with TDS meters, nowadays with calibrated refractometers). But, with moka pot, I’d be surprised if the extraction time were that directly correlated with extraction, not to mention with taste.
In fact, while I understand the importance of extraction rate as a measure in the brewing process, I think it can distract us from other factors which affect the quality of the brew, not to mention the enjoyment of the process. Don’t get me wrong. I can get all-out geeky about moka pot brewing and I did take (uncalibrated) refractometer readings for a number of months. For a café, I can understand that it’s important to control that “extract ratio” variable along with all the other variables. The “Extract Mojo” has a role to play in a café, especially when diagnosing issues, dialing in a grind, or making sure different baristas produce similar results. I have no problem with that. As long as it doesn’t distract us from the other variables. Coffee isn’t just complicated. It]s truly complex. Tricky interactions between diverse variables mean that it’s very difficult if not impossible to really isolate extract ratio as a single variable. It might be possible to analyze coffee beans the way maltsters analyze malt and, from there, determine something about the brewing process. I really don’t think coffee is even close to this, yet, but it’s conceivable that this might be done at some point in the future. Then, it might be possible to correlate something about the beans with the appropriate grind level to produce a certain extract ratio given a standardized brewing method. But, even then, the “standard brew” (similar to the ASBC laboratory mash, in malt analysis) is no guarantee of results. In fact, for malt, a lab mash is likely to produce something utterly unpalatable. So, a complete bean analysis could be an interesting indicator (though coffee beans probably vary more than barley kernels). But it would be very difficult to apply directly to coffee brewing.
The basic point, here, is that there’s a hierarchy of factors. The key thing to evaluate is the quality of the brewed coffee. For a given bean using a given brewing method, a difference in extract ratio is likely to correlate to a difference in quality. But the reverse isn’t that clear: a consistent extract ratio is unlikely to correlate that precisely with a consistent quality, even with the same beans using the same methods. Other factors are involved and some of them matter more. It’s fun to experiment with this and we might learn a lot about coffee by doing those experiments. But I really don’t think it’s an efficient way to get “the best results”.
In fact, I think it may easily distract us from “the most enjoyable coffee experience possible, under the conditions”. I make no secret that I’m a hedonist. With coffee, it’s especially important. With moka pot coffee, it‘s key.
In a way, moka pot coffee isn’t the ideal brewing method while controling variables. It’s not laboratory equipment to do a coffee bean analysis. It’s a «caffetiera». VacPots look more like lab equipment and, in a way, would probably be better at the task of distinguishing diverse parameters affecting extract rate, and such. For one thing, the heat level is easier to control (though the actual water temperature isn’t). The Technivorm looks like a 1970’s movie version of lab equipment and it’s probably decent at separating variables. The Clover looks like an industrial device and it’s meant as a way to control variables. While the AeroPress, Press Pot, and Abid-style “steep-and-release pour over drip” don’t really look like lab equipment, they could probably be useful in experiments. For one thing, with most of these methods, you can precisely control temperature and steep time (for the AeroPress, you need to use it upside-down, but it works quite well). But, with all of these methods, it’s as possible to make lousy coffee while being as unbelievably precise about every single parameter as possible, as it is to make amazing coffee without being that precise. In other words, all of these methods are “better” than the moka pot in terms of laboratory-like precision (though I’d still say they’re far from lab-grade equipment). But it doesn’t mean it’s easier to produce consistently amazing results with any of them than with the moka pot.
I'm being meticulous about my methods because that's how I enjoy my coffee experience. It also helps me understand things better instead of simply leaving everything to chance. I treat my moka pot like an espresso machine because it limits the same variables an espresso machine does, which are water temprature and extraction time. I noticed that people tend to get the wrong impresson from what I say so to keep it short: The approach is very methodical and objective but the end result is still evaluated from taste. In a way, being observant and scientific is how I got to know my moka pot better (along with all my other equipment) in a short amount of time.
Enkerli Said:
. As many of us have been saying all along, it’s a very forgiving method.
Oh yes. Very true indeed. The margin of error is so big that cups I expected to be decent turned out great and the ones I expected to bad still turned out halfway decent. It really is a great device to use when you are half asleep and not thinking very clearly. I just wish it took me lesser time to do things. To be honest, I've been considering getting myself a bigger table to put all my stuff on. The one I have now is still a bit too small so there are still some things that I have to store in other places.
Oh and yes, the cups I expected to turn out best have been the greatest ones I've ever had.
EDIT:
Lately, I've been thinking of using my 1min30sec pour-over grind for my moka pot. Reason being that these things tend to release water at a higher temperature than what is normally used for brewing so I'm thinking of using coarser grinds to cope with the increase in temprature. Maybe tomorrow morning I'll test it out and see how it tastes.
Posted Sun Aug 14, 2011, 5:40am Subject: Re: Confessions of a Brikka Lover
I've noticed these stovetops popping up in a lot of stores recently and considering how cheap these things are, I might finally be able to skimp a bit on the cleanup for a change and not having to worry about finding a store to buy a replacement if mine malfunctions/rusts/whatever.
Oh the luxuries of easy access. It feels very liberating.
Although, in reality, Bialetti is still a very "underground" brand here just like Hario. Finding a store with a full line-up of products is still pretty much a long shot in this part of the world. Like I always say, "We make do with what we get". ;-)
Anyway, atleast I'll be having hassle-free experiences with my pot from here onwards.
Symbols: = New Posts since your last visit = No New Posts since last visit = Newest post
Forum Rules: No profanity, illegal acts or personal attacks will be tolerated in these discussion boards. No commercial posting of any nature will be tolerated; only private sales by private individuals, in the "Buy and Sell" forum. No cross posting allowed - do not post your topic to more than one forum, nor repost a topic to the same forum. Who Can Read The Forum? Anyone can read posts in these discussion boards. Who Can Post New Topics? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post new topics. Who Can Post Replies? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post replies. Can Photos be posted? Anyone can post photos in their new topics or replies. Who can change or delete posts? Any CoffeeGeek member can edit their own posts. Only moderators can delete posts. Probationary Period: If you are a new signup for CoffeeGeek, you cannot promote, endorse, criticise or otherwise post an unsolicited endorsement for any company, product or service in your first five postings.
= No New Posts since last visit 