logoalt Hacker News

FrustratedMonkytoday at 1:10 PM3 repliesview on HN

Yeah.

"most reproducible" -> Does not mean good.

A lot of generic weak coffee is 'consistent', but not 'good'.


Replies

mr_mitmtoday at 1:20 PM

Sorry, maybe I should have quoted the next line as well:

> Pabst echoes that advice: “My recommendation for people at home, without knowing anything they are doing, 90% chance that if you use less coffee and grind a little coarser [your coffee] will actually taste better.”

So it's not just about consistency, but also quality.

show 1 reply
canes123456today at 2:17 PM

Reproducible is necessary but not sufficient for consistently good coffee. If you can’t reproducible what you did, you aren’t able to make changes to improve over time.

This is why I think the Aiden is underrated. It way more consistent than I was when doing pour over but still lets me tweak variables.

roflyeartoday at 2:20 PM

Good is totally up to the person's tastes, anyway. Turbo style shots are the end-all-be-all for a lot of people who enjoy espresso. For other people, they hate it, for a multitude of reasons.

A pet peeve of mine is when people mention "weak" coffee. What does this mean?