coffee-forum.net
Promoting coffee discussion.

Main
Date: 09 Apr 2007 21:15:45
From: Waldo Lydecker
Subject: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
This comes from the Aeropress website(
http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)

Dissect and discuss:

Espresso Machines:

Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
because of the shorter brewing time. However when we ran comparison
taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
European espresso machines -- why? The reason is that the total
immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
temperature -- and lower temperature brew is far less bitter. Home
espresso machines donít allow adjustment of temperature. But even if
they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
at reduced temperature.

In addition to smoother taste, the AEROPRESS has several other
advantages over conventional espresso machines.

Grind is not critical in the AEROPRESS. Grind is so critical in
espresso machines that most grinders cannot produce a grind fine
enough to make a good tasting shot! Special espresso grinders cost
hundreds of dollars and require frequent cleaning.

Espresso experts always adjust the grind when there are changes in
humidity or batches of coffee. They throw away two or three shots
while adjusting the grind in to achieve the desired 25-second shot.

There is no tamping in the AEROPRESS. Books on espresso teach the art
of just the right amount of tamping. They instruct the home barista to
practice on the bathroom scale to learn exactly thirty pounds of
pressure.

There is no pre-warming of the portafilter head. In fact the AEROPRESS
has no portafilter head!

There is no maintenance. Espresso machines require regular cleaning
and descaling with caustic chemicals. They also require disassembly
and cleaning of the showerhead.

There is no need to judge when to stop the pull. This is the most
critical skill in using an espresso machine. As espresso lovers well
know, most would-be baristas in coffee shops, hotels and restaurants
run the pump too long -- extracting sour bitterness from the grounds.

With the AeroPress, the amount of water is predetermined by the user,
who can brew any strength from weak to super-intense just by choosing
the desired amount of water prior to pressing.





 
Date: 18 Apr 2007 18:21:13
From:
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Apr 11, 2:15 pm, "Jack Denver" <nunuv...@netscape.net > wrote:

> Also, some of the others questioned the safety or durability of theaeropressusing water of above 200F. I know that you feel that 175F is
> optimum, but can you confirm to us that this is only a matter of taste and
> that even 212F water will have no impact on either safety (shedding of
> chemicals from press into the coffee) or the durability of the press if
> someone chose to brew using boiling water?

Hi Jack,

In the heat of the espresso debate, I forgot to reply to your question
about temperature. Many AeroPressers already use 212F boiling water
because they never read our instructions. Our materials are all FDA
rated for that. And I personally hereby pledge free replacement for
any part that fails due to boiling water.

With regard to health, polycarbonate is approved by the US FDA and
similar agencies in Europe, Britain, and Japan for cooking food at
boiling temperature. However, there are people who have questioned
this approval.

Here's a pro polycarbonate link:

http://www.bisphenol-a.org/whatsNew/20060505.html?src=goog

Sincerely yours,

Alan



  
Date: 20 Apr 2007 08:23:00
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??


 
Date: 12 Apr 2007 22:26:01
From: nicfortin
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Apr 12, 10:40 am, Randall Nortman <usenet8...@wonderclown.com >
wrote:
> My two cents, largely playing devil's advocate:
>
> On 2007-04-12, Randy G <f...@DESPAMMOcncnet.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > a...@aerobie.com wrote:
>
> >>Greetings All,
>
> >>As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
> >>espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso. I respect that
> >>view, but I hope those same people will find the room to respect views
> >>like those quoted below.
>
> > You could post a thousand quotes from people who say that it makes
> > Boston Cream Pie, but that does not make what it produces pie. The
> > extraction system you have invented does not make espresso. It creates
> > NO crema. The forces and processes that extract and emulsify the
> > elements that create crema in espresso do not exist in the Aeropress.
> > Indeed, only a slight amount of foam is created in the Aeropress. The
> > beverage, although delicious, lacks the deep sweetness, heavy body,
> > and lingering buttery feel of a "real" espresso.
>
> And "boston cream pie" does not mean what the International Cream Pie
> Association says it means -- in practice, it means what the audience
> (whomever that may be) thinks it means, based on what they get when
> they order "boston cream pie" in a restaurant. By this logic,
> "espresso" means what I get when I go into the airport cafe and order
> an espresso, which will not have any of the qualities you describe,
> and will not have tiger lines or any of that other stuff Illy or the
> SCAA says it should have. It will be brewed on an honest to goodness
> commercial espresso machine, using beans freshly ground on an honest
> to goodness espresso grinder, but it will be brewed by somebody who
> received about 15 minutes of training, and it will not be any good to
> drink straight.
>
> Of course, nobody orders straight espresso at a place like that (most
> don't even have it on the menu)-- people order "espresso beverages",
> which contain mostly milk and sometimes sugar or flavorings. The most
> important defining characteristic of espresso in that context is the
> brew strength; i.e., total dissolved solids.
>
> Should we fight the adulteration of word meanings to the public at
> large? Sure. But I think this fight is already lost. In this
> particular case, I do not fault Alan for choosing to use the word
> "espresso" in his marketing. I don't think that alt.coffee readers
> are his primary target market, though I'm sure he values our business.
> His primary market is much larger, and as to those people, the brew
> produced by the Aeropress is espresso because it is strong and you can
> do the same things with it that you can do with espresso, such as add
> milk without ending up with something hopelessly weak (i.e., cafe au
> lait). If he changed his marketing message to "Produces an aqueous
> coffee extraction with total dissolved solids level similar to that
> found in espresso", he wouldn't sell to anybody but coffee geeks. And
> coffee geeks should be happy to have good coffee spread around more
> broadly, because if the larger public raises its expectations of how
> good coffee should be, eventually we'll be able to get a decent cup in
> that airport cafe.
>
> Connoisseurs of any art or craft, not just coffee, have to deal with
> this problem. (Any cheese afficionado will have similar gripes, for
> example.) The strict vocabulary as understood by experts will
> inevitably be distorted by the public at large, especially when it
> comes to marketing products to the general public. You can't stop it,
> so get over it, and appreciate the Aeropress for what it is.
>
> Now removing my devil's advocate hat, I think it's pretty silly for
> anybody to be trying to make the case that the Aeropress produces
> espresso when the audience is people who have had the real thing.
> Instead, highlight the differences between Aeropress and other methods
> of brewing, and its many advantages.
>
> --
> Randall


I totally agree with Randall
It make really good coffee, I love it for SO.
But calling it's brew espresso is streching it a little. So let's
call it "espresso style". It should calm us coffeegeeks and still
retain much of it's mass market appeal with the word "espresso".
Everybody is happy now? We can close this topic Dave! ;-)

Buy it. Try it. You'll love it. (specially away from home)

nic "the flyin' Barista" fortin



  
Date: 13 Apr 2007 08:35:36
From: Russell Patterson
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On 12 Apr 2007 22:26:01 -0700, "nicfortin" <otorot8@gmail.com > wrote:


>
>
>I totally agree with Randall
>It make really good coffee, I love it for SO.
>But calling it's brew espresso is streching it a little. So let's
>call it "espresso style". It should calm us coffeegeeks and still
>retain much of it's mass market appeal with the word "espresso".
>Everybody is happy now? We can close this topic Dave! ;-)
>
>Buy it. Try it. You'll love it. (specially away from home)
>
I am someone relatively new to alt.coffee and someone who has only
tried espresso for the first time very recently. I have purchased an
Aeropress and yes it does make a good cup of coffee, although it seems
to use a lot more grounds than a drip method. When it comes to
espresso, I can't really say, but there are a lot of people like
myself who are not really into espresso. My feeling is that the
Aeropress should be marketed to people like myself to get a good way
to make coffee and as an introduction to espresso. Maybe it's not the
purest form of espresso, but it will allow someone to sample it
withouit having to risk the embarassment of walking up to a
"Starbucks" type of stand and asking for something they've never tried
before, and not knowing how to drink it, or whether or not it's even
of good quality.
So, Alan, market it as a great brewing system and a great introduction
to espresso. Stop the bickering here.


 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 20:40:47
From:
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
Greetings All,

As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso. I respect that
view, but I hope those same people will find the room to respect views
like those quoted below.

Sincerely yours,

Alan

"I am happy to say that, true to their word, the AeroPress makes a
fine espresso - rich with no bitterness - all in a few minutes, with
limited cleanup."
http://egoventures.blogspot.com/

"A Terrific Espresso Maker!"
http://www.barefeetshop.com/kitchen-289743-B000J17FI0-Aeropress_Espresso_Maker.html

"My search for the perfect cup of coffee and especially for a
delicious shot of espresso has ended with the Aerobie AeroPress.
We've been using it for 2 weeks now and it's wonderful". -- Posted by
Jenny McCarth 02/10/06
http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/ny/021006/guest-posts/guest-post-the-bodum-columbia-coffee-press-006415

"I've never written a product review before but here goes: I've had my
press for 4 days now and what an AMAZING cup of coffee! I have a $3400
super automatic espresso machine that makes a great cup but the
AeroPress is right up there. So smooth and full bodied and simple. It
just blows me away."
http://www.coffeebeancorral.com/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=AEROPRESS

"AeroPress espresso doesn't look like steam-and-pressure cafe
espresso, but it tastes, if anything, better. Short brewing time with
dilution after brewing gives more of the stuff that makes coffee good
and less of the later brew products that make it bitter and acidic.
......Highly recommended."
http://www.dansdata.com/aeropress.htm

"Applause to the inventor of the AeroPress! Yesterday I had my first
AeroPress espresso. WOW! What to do with my old $800 machine that's
taking up so much counter space?" Email from Janine, Palm Desert,
California

"This morning I tasted cappuccinos made from both the Nespresso and
the AeroPress and quite frankly, could not tell enough of a difference
to justify the $245 for the Nespresso."
http://www.singleservecoffeeforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=1573

"Though skeptical at first, after using the Aerobie AeroPress for a
couple weeks I have to say it makes great American coffee and some of
the best espresso I've ever had!"
http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/08/13/aerobie-aeropress-coffee-espresso-maker/







  
Date: 12 Apr 2007 08:17:26
From: Randy G.
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
alan@aerobie.com wrote:

>Greetings All,
>
>As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
>espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso. I respect that
>view, but I hope those same people will find the room to respect views
>like those quoted below.
>

You could post a thousand quotes from people who say that it makes
Boston Cream Pie, but that does not make what it produces pie. The
extraction system you have invented does not make espresso. It creates
NO crema. The forces and processes that extract and emulsify the
elements that create crema in espresso do not exist in the Aeropress.
Indeed, only a slight amount of foam is created in the Aeropress. The
beverage, although delicious, lacks the deep sweetness, heavy body,
and lingering buttery feel of a "real" espresso.

Espresso is art and experience. All the science proving TDS levels
might be a lot of fun, but there is more than science to espresso. A
steak that weighs exactly 8 ounces and has a specific interior
temperature as well as a red color checked by a spectrometer does not
guarantee that it will taste good.

Does the Aeropress make great coffee? Yes. After my espresso machine,
the Aeropress is my favorite method to brew coffee. Does it make
espresso? No. it is easier to use, more forgiving, faster, easier to
clean, more portable, and far more affordable than an espresso
machine, but it isn't an espresso machine and it doesn't make
espresso.

Your persistence in this detracts from what the Aeropress could be in
the market place. Thane could sell the AeroPress as the easiest-to-use
coffee maker that makes a great cup of coffee every time or your money
back. Call them and see if they could sell it as an espresso maker and
see what they say.

IMO, if I had to classify it, I would call it a press pot that filters
out the fines, and it does a great job of that..

BTW- If the plunger had a cap to close it air-tight it would make a
great storage area for pre-ground coffee of beans for travel or
backpacking, and that would be enhanced if the base flange was
removable.

I like you, Alan, and I like the Aeropress- nothing personal here, but
as you can see, I am not the only one here of this opinion.


Randy "pressed to the limit" G.
http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com




   
Date: 12 Apr 2007 16:40:31
From: Randall Nortman
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
My two cents, largely playing devil's advocate:

On 2007-04-12, Randy G <frcn@DESPAMMOcncnet.com > wrote:
> alan@aerobie.com wrote:
>
>>Greetings All,
>>
>>As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
>>espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso. I respect that
>>view, but I hope those same people will find the room to respect views
>>like those quoted below.
>>
>
> You could post a thousand quotes from people who say that it makes
> Boston Cream Pie, but that does not make what it produces pie. The
> extraction system you have invented does not make espresso. It creates
> NO crema. The forces and processes that extract and emulsify the
> elements that create crema in espresso do not exist in the Aeropress.
> Indeed, only a slight amount of foam is created in the Aeropress. The
> beverage, although delicious, lacks the deep sweetness, heavy body,
> and lingering buttery feel of a "real" espresso.

And "boston cream pie" does not mean what the International Cream Pie
Association says it means -- in practice, it means what the audience
(whomever that may be) thinks it means, based on what they get when
they order "boston cream pie" in a restaurant. By this logic,
"espresso" means what I get when I go into the airport cafe and order
an espresso, which will not have any of the qualities you describe,
and will not have tiger lines or any of that other stuff Illy or the
SCAA says it should have. It will be brewed on an honest to goodness
commercial espresso machine, using beans freshly ground on an honest
to goodness espresso grinder, but it will be brewed by somebody who
received about 15 minutes of training, and it will not be any good to
drink straight.

Of course, nobody orders straight espresso at a place like that (most
don't even have it on the menu)-- people order "espresso beverages",
which contain mostly milk and sometimes sugar or flavorings. The most
important defining characteristic of espresso in that context is the
brew strength; i.e., total dissolved solids.

Should we fight the adulteration of word meanings to the public at
large? Sure. But I think this fight is already lost. In this
particular case, I do not fault Alan for choosing to use the word
"espresso" in his marketing. I don't think that alt.coffee readers
are his primary target market, though I'm sure he values our business.
His primary market is much larger, and as to those people, the brew
produced by the Aeropress is espresso because it is strong and you can
do the same things with it that you can do with espresso, such as add
milk without ending up with something hopelessly weak (i.e., cafe au
lait). If he changed his marketing message to "Produces an aqueous
coffee extraction with total dissolved solids level similar to that
found in espresso", he wouldn't sell to anybody but coffee geeks. And
coffee geeks should be happy to have good coffee spread around more
broadly, because if the larger public raises its expectations of how
good coffee should be, eventually we'll be able to get a decent cup in
that airport cafe.

Connoisseurs of any art or craft, not just coffee, have to deal with
this problem. (Any cheese afficionado will have similar gripes, for
example.) The strict vocabulary as understood by experts will
inevitably be distorted by the public at large, especially when it
comes to marketing products to the general public. You can't stop it,
so get over it, and appreciate the Aeropress for what it is.

Now removing my devil's advocate hat, I think it's pretty silly for
anybody to be trying to make the case that the Aeropress produces
espresso when the audience is people who have had the real thing.
Instead, highlight the differences between Aeropress and other methods
of brewing, and its many advantages.

--
Randall


   
Date: 12 Apr 2007 16:33:51
From: Marshall
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 08:17:26 -0700, Randy G. <frcn@DESPAMMOcncnet.com >
wrote:

>alan@aerobie.com wrote:
>
>>Greetings All,
>>
>>As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
>>espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso. I respect that
>>view, but I hope those same people will find the room to respect views
>>like those quoted below.
>>
>
>You could post a thousand quotes from people who say that it makes
>Boston Cream Pie, but that does not make what it produces pie.

I think philologists would disagree. That kind of survey result would
demonstrate the definition of "Boston Cream Pie" had evolved to
include Aeropress coffee.

Marshall


    
Date: 12 Apr 2007 09:38:19
From: Randy G.
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
Marshall <mrfuss@ihatespamearthlink.net > wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 08:17:26 -0700, Randy G. <frcn@DESPAMMOcncnet.com>
>wrote:
>
>>alan@aerobie.com wrote:
>>
>>>Greetings All,
>>>
>>>As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
>>>espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso. I respect that
>>>view, but I hope those same people will find the room to respect views
>>>like those quoted below.
>>>
>>
>>You could post a thousand quotes from people who say that it makes
>>Boston Cream Pie, but that does not make what it produces pie.
>
>I think philologists would disagree. That kind of survey result would
>demonstrate the definition of "Boston Cream Pie" had evolved to
>include Aeropress coffee.
>
>Marshall


Not if 10,000 quotes are delivered which state that it is not....
That's one! ;-)


Randy "I'll have another slice of espresso, thank you" G.
http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com




  
Date: 12 Apr 2007 04:01:30
From: Coffee for Connoisseurs
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
>As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
>espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso.

They're right. It can't. I've used the Aeropress, and all things being equal
it makes the equivalent of a strong Vac Pot or Moka pot coffee, but nothing
approaching a true espresso in terms of flavour, mouthfeel and body.
Marketing puff aside, any opinion that is DOES make espresso is bullshit,
yours included. Anyone saying that it makes espresso is either doing it for
money or hasn't tasted real espresso.


--
Alan

alanfrew@coffeeco.com.au
www.coffeeco.com.au




   
Date: 12 Apr 2007 04:13:30
From: Barry Jarrett
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 04:01:30 GMT, "Coffee for Connoisseurs"
<alanfrew@coffeeco.com.au > wrote:

>>As I posted earlier, some people feel that if it's not made in an
>>espresso machine at 9 bars, it's can't be espresso.
>
>They're right. It can't. I've used the Aeropress, and all things being equal
>it makes the equivalent of a strong Vac Pot or Moka pot coffee, but nothing
>approaching a true espresso in terms of flavour, mouthfeel and body.
>Marketing puff aside, any opinion that is DOES make espresso is bullshit,
>yours included. Anyone saying that it makes espresso is either doing it for
>money or hasn't tasted real espresso.


seconded.


it can make great coffee, but that coffee isn't espresso.



--barry "just because it's rose-coloured doesn't make it a rose"



    
Date: 12 Apr 2007 08:13:48
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??


     
Date: 12 Apr 2007 11:23:43
From: Jack Denver
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
Is google a dirty word?

There are lots of such "IFs" - in Yiddish you say "IF my grandmother had a
beard, she'd be my grandfather." In good old English, you say "IF the Queen
had balls, she'd be the King."


I guess IF Aeropress had crema and tiger stripes, it would be espresso. But
it doesn't, so it ain't (or maybe it's "espresso" in the same sense that
moka pot coffee is "espresso" to some people).

I really wish Alan would take the hint - most people here who have tried it
seem to like his device but he only undermines his credibility with the
continued insistence on calling it "espresso". Infomercial style
endorsements from various ignorant people off the street only undermine his
cause in a specialized forum such as this. I don't know why Alan doesn't
"get it" - he seems to be an otherwise intelligent fellow but he has this
blind spot that leaves him impervious to reason on this point. I don't think
it's merely a matter of his having a pecuniary interest but somehow goes
further.




"D. Ross" <ross@math.hawaii.NOSPAM.edu > wrote in message
news:461de86e.22678009@localhost...
>


 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 19:21:30
From: cpaullie
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Apr 11, 2:05 pm, old_...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Apr 11, 2:18 pm, a...@aerobie.com wrote:
>
> > But the list doesn't end there. Every week we receive emails and read
> > public blog postings from coffee lovers who like AeroPress brew better
> > than espresso.
>
> > But I can assure you that there are a
> > lot of people who prefer AeroPress brew over espresso
>
> These statements do NOT make it espresso.
> I can grind up tenderloin to make a hamburger, but I would not then
> call it a filet mignon (or even a steak), it would be a hamburger.
> This doesn't mean that the hamburger is not good, but I would call it
> what it is. The same is true for coffee. Just say that it makes a
> damn good cup of coffee and leave it at that.
>
> Kurt



Amen and very well-stated...which sage said that "wishing doesn't make
it so?"



 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 14:19:51
From: shane
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
Thanks, Alan! It is interesting to learn about the history of the
AeroPress development.
I also have not yet tried AeroPress brew myself. From what has been
described in this thread it seems that the AeroPress is a unique way
of brewing coffee.
>From what I have heard about it over the past couple of years, IMHO
the AeroPress brewing style should be refered to as AeroPress. It
could be called an "espresso style" but due to the lack of a tamped
puck, different water temp, different grind requirement and not a 9
bar brewing pressure used, it is not a true espresso.
Sound like it is a good coffee.

Shane

On Apr 11, 1:18 pm, a...@aerobie.com wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I hope you'll take the following, not as a rebuttal or debate, but
> simply as the history of how we came to this place.
>
> While developing the AeroPress, I engaged a number of professional
> cuppers to conduct blind tastings and tell me what brew temperature
> was best for the AeroPress. The first of these sessions was in
> Kenneth Davids' Berkeley coffee lab. The tasters were Ken and his
> associate Mathew Hill. They used freshly roasted beans from a blend
> that Ken had recently developed for a client.
>
> They both repeatedly chose 175F as their preferred brewing
> temperature. Ken then asked me if I wanted any other tests. I asked,
> "Can we call this espresso?" He suggested that we compare AeroPress
> brew to the output of his Saeco espresso machine. In the cupping, he
> and Mathew both strongly preferred the AeroPress brew over the Saeco.
> Then Ken suggested that they compare AeroPfress to his Gaggia
> machine. He and Mathew spent about twenty minutes cleaning it. When
> they did the comparison tasting Ken said (of the Gaggia espresso),
> "It's no threat to you Alan". Ken subsequently sent an email to a
> number of key people in the coffee world which I quote from below,
>
> "When used properly, AeroPress produces a remarkably good straight
> espresso and an excellent Americano-style taller cup. In fact, it
> produces a better espresso shot than many home machines that cost
> twenty or thirty times as much."
>
> Months later Ken generously granted us permission to quote him on our
> package and promotional materials. After the AeroPress had been out
> for about a half-year, Ken received a few complaints from people about
> his calling it espresso. At his request, we changed the quote to
> "espresso style". That change is still working its way into the
> distribution channels.
>
> Shortly after the Berkeley lab tests, I conducted blind tastings in
> the homes of two other knowledgeable espresso lovers:
>
> Tom Osborne compared AeroPress brew to the espresso from his $1,500
> Pasquini Riviera. He and his wife spend two months every year in
> Italy and are experts in Italian cuisine. Like everyone else, he
> preferred 175F brewing temperature and later posted this on the
> localsonlycoffee.com website,
>
> "A couple of years ago I bought a $1500 espresso machine. It works
> well - but it doesn't turn out the consistent quality of the
> AeroPress. Now I use the AeroPress for ALL brewing and only use my
> expensive Italian machine for heating the AeroPress water and for
> foaming milk for my cappuccino."
>
> Next after Osborne, I tested in the kitchen of Dr. David Weinberg. He
> compared AeroPress brew to the espresso from his cherished Italian
> lever machine. He was so excited that when his wife telephoned him
> during our tests, he regaled here with comments about how delicious
> AeroPress coffee tasted.
>
> But the list doesn't end there. Every week we receive emails and read
> public blog postings from coffee lovers who like AeroPress brew better
> than espresso. If you wish, I can post them all on this forum.
>
> I know that there are espresso lovers out there who don't agree. They
> are, of course, free to choose. But I can assure you that there are a
> lot of people who prefer AeroPress brew over espresso and their
> preference had absolutely nothing to do with my personal wishes or
> marketing plans. And even if we censored every such comment from our
> own materials, what could we do about the comments from people we've
> never even met?
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
> Alan




 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 13:30:41
From:
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
Hi Ryan,

If your travels ever bring you to California, I'd like to brew you a
cup of AeroPress. You will always be welcome at our office in Palo
Alto.

Also, I'll be brewing in the Baratza booth at the SCAA Convention in
Long Beach, Calif. May 5-7. Just in case you plan to attend.

I think if you taste AeroPress brew, you'll understand why people
compare it to espresso. You'll also see why these same folks do not
compare drip or French press brew to espresso.

The brew strength of drip and French press coffee ranges from about 1%
to 2% TDS (total dissolved solids).

The brew strength of espresso ranges from about 5% to 20%. The brew
strength of AeroPress covers this same range.

This debate focusses on flavor nuances that espresso lovers feel are
important.
But this debate also addresses the way the coffee is brewed. To many
folks, if 9 bars of pressure wasn't there, it's simply not espresso.
To others, if it tastes the same, or even better, it doesn't matter
how it was brewed. I try to be respectful of all viewpoints.

Sincerely yours,

Alan




 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 13:28:34
From: daveb
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??

> These statements do NOT make it espresso.
> I can grind up tenderloin to make a hamburger, but I would not then
> call it a filet mignon (or even a steak), it would be a hamburger.
> This doesn't mean that the hamburger is not good, but I would call it
> what it is. The same is true for coffee. Just say that it makes a
> damn good cup of coffee and leave it at that.
>
> Kurt

Now that is a reasonable suggestion!

let's dispense with the hype.

dave



 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 13:05:08
From:
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Apr 11, 2:18 pm, a...@aerobie.com wrote:

> But the list doesn't end there. Every week we receive emails and read
> public blog postings from coffee lovers who like AeroPress brew better
> than espresso.
>
> But I can assure you that there are a
> lot of people who prefer AeroPress brew over espresso


These statements do NOT make it espresso.
I can grind up tenderloin to make a hamburger, but I would not then
call it a filet mignon (or even a steak), it would be a hamburger.
This doesn't mean that the hamburger is not good, but I would call it
what it is. The same is true for coffee. Just say that it makes a
damn good cup of coffee and leave it at that.

Kurt



 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 13:03:05
From: diab0lus
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Apr 11, 2:18 pm, a...@aerobie.com wrote:
> I know that there are espresso lovers out there who don't agree. They

IMO, calling the output of the AeroPress 'espresso' is like calling
Tofurkey 'turkey'. They aren't the same thing, but maybe in the right
dish someone might believe that the Tofurkey they are actually eating
is turkey.

I haven't tried your product, but would refer to the output as
filtered press pot coffee, not espresso. The established press pot
manufacturers like Bodum don't claim that their press pot output is
espresso or espresso style. I think that it makes good sense for
AeroPress to remove "espresso" from their literature and focus on
competing with the likes of Bodum and other press pot manufacturers.

Ryan



 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 11:18:07
From:
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
Hi All,

I hope you'll take the following, not as a rebuttal or debate, but
simply as the history of how we came to this place.

While developing the AeroPress, I engaged a number of professional
cuppers to conduct blind tastings and tell me what brew temperature
was best for the AeroPress. The first of these sessions was in
Kenneth Davids' Berkeley coffee lab. The tasters were Ken and his
associate Mathew Hill. They used freshly roasted beans from a blend
that Ken had recently developed for a client.

They both repeatedly chose 175F as their preferred brewing
temperature. Ken then asked me if I wanted any other tests. I asked,
"Can we call this espresso?" He suggested that we compare AeroPress
brew to the output of his Saeco espresso machine. In the cupping, he
and Mathew both strongly preferred the AeroPress brew over the Saeco.
Then Ken suggested that they compare AeroPfress to his Gaggia
machine. He and Mathew spent about twenty minutes cleaning it. When
they did the comparison tasting Ken said (of the Gaggia espresso),
"It's no threat to you Alan". Ken subsequently sent an email to a
number of key people in the coffee world which I quote from below,

"When used properly, AeroPress produces a remarkably good straight
espresso and an excellent Americano-style taller cup. In fact, it
produces a better espresso shot than many home machines that cost
twenty or thirty times as much."

Months later Ken generously granted us permission to quote him on our
package and promotional materials. After the AeroPress had been out
for about a half-year, Ken received a few complaints from people about
his calling it espresso. At his request, we changed the quote to
"espresso style". That change is still working its way into the
distribution channels.

Shortly after the Berkeley lab tests, I conducted blind tastings in
the homes of two other knowledgeable espresso lovers:

Tom Osborne compared AeroPress brew to the espresso from his $1,500
Pasquini Riviera. He and his wife spend two months every year in
Italy and are experts in Italian cuisine. Like everyone else, he
preferred 175F brewing temperature and later posted this on the
localsonlycoffee.com website,

"A couple of years ago I bought a $1500 espresso machine. It works
well - but it doesn't turn out the consistent quality of the
AeroPress. Now I use the AeroPress for ALL brewing and only use my
expensive Italian machine for heating the AeroPress water and for
foaming milk for my cappuccino."

Next after Osborne, I tested in the kitchen of Dr. David Weinberg. He
compared AeroPress brew to the espresso from his cherished Italian
lever machine. He was so excited that when his wife telephoned him
during our tests, he regaled here with comments about how delicious
AeroPress coffee tasted.

But the list doesn't end there. Every week we receive emails and read
public blog postings from coffee lovers who like AeroPress brew better
than espresso. If you wish, I can post them all on this forum.

I know that there are espresso lovers out there who don't agree. They
are, of course, free to choose. But I can assure you that there are a
lot of people who prefer AeroPress brew over espresso and their
preference had absolutely nothing to do with my personal wishes or
marketing plans. And even if we censored every such comment from our
own materials, what could we do about the comments from people we've
never even met?

Sincerely yours,

Alan



  
Date: 11 Apr 2007 17:15:22
From: Jack Denver
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
It's one thing to say that aeropress coffee "tastes better than espresso" -
this is a matter of opinion and opinions can vary. If you would leave it at
that, no one would have anything to say against you.


It's another to say "aeropress IS espresso". There is an accepted definition
of espresso, for example there is Dr. Illy's definition from The Chemistry
of Coffee:

Italian espresso is a polyphasic beverage, prepared from roast and ground
coffee and water alone, constituted by a foam layer of small bubbles with a
particular tiger-tail pattern, on top of an emulsion of microscopic oil
droplets in an aqueous solution of sugars, acids, protein-like material and
caffeine, with dispersed gas bubbles and solids.



You state that Aeropress has a similar level of dissolved solids to espresso
but this does not by itself make it espresso. Moka coffee also has a
similar dissolved solids level. So does instant if you make it using little
enough water.

Illy lists the other attributes of espresso above (which AFAIK can only be
achieve by high pressure (circa 9 bar) extraction:

1. The Tiger stripe pattern on the surface and

2. Most importantly, the crema layer.

Do you claim that aeropress IS espresso according to the above definition?

Also, some of the others questioned the safety or durability of the
aeropress using water of above 200F. I know that you feel that 175F is
optimum, but can you confirm to us that this is only a matter of taste and
that even 212F water will have no impact on either safety (shedding of
chemicals from press into the coffee) or the durability of the press if
someone chose to brew using boiling water?




<alan@aerobie.com > wrote in message
news:1176315487.151134.117380@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi All,
>
> I hope you'll take the following, not as a rebuttal or debate, but
> simply as the history of how we came to this place.
>
> While developing the AeroPress, I engaged a number of professional
> cuppers to conduct blind tastings and tell me what brew temperature
> was best for the AeroPress. The first of these sessions was in
> Kenneth Davids' Berkeley coffee lab. The tasters were Ken and his
> associate Mathew Hill. They used freshly roasted beans from a blend
> that Ken had recently developed for a client.
>
> They both repeatedly chose 175F as their preferred brewing
> temperature. Ken then asked me if I wanted any other tests. I asked,
> "Can we call this espresso?" He suggested that we compare AeroPress
> brew to the output of his Saeco espresso machine. In the cupping, he
> and Mathew both strongly preferred the AeroPress brew over the Saeco.
> Then Ken suggested that they compare AeroPfress to his Gaggia
> machine. He and Mathew spent about twenty minutes cleaning it. When
> they did the comparison tasting Ken said (of the Gaggia espresso),
> "It's no threat to you Alan". Ken subsequently sent an email to a
> number of key people in the coffee world which I quote from below,
>
> "When used properly, AeroPress produces a remarkably good straight
> espresso and an excellent Americano-style taller cup. In fact, it
> produces a better espresso shot than many home machines that cost
> twenty or thirty times as much."
>
> Months later Ken generously granted us permission to quote him on our
> package and promotional materials. After the AeroPress had been out
> for about a half-year, Ken received a few complaints from people about
> his calling it espresso. At his request, we changed the quote to
> "espresso style". That change is still working its way into the
> distribution channels.
>
> Shortly after the Berkeley lab tests, I conducted blind tastings in
> the homes of two other knowledgeable espresso lovers:
>
> Tom Osborne compared AeroPress brew to the espresso from his $1,500
> Pasquini Riviera. He and his wife spend two months every year in
> Italy and are experts in Italian cuisine. Like everyone else, he
> preferred 175F brewing temperature and later posted this on the
> localsonlycoffee.com website,
>
> "A couple of years ago I bought a $1500 espresso machine. It works
> well - but it doesn't turn out the consistent quality of the
> AeroPress. Now I use the AeroPress for ALL brewing and only use my
> expensive Italian machine for heating the AeroPress water and for
> foaming milk for my cappuccino."
>
> Next after Osborne, I tested in the kitchen of Dr. David Weinberg. He
> compared AeroPress brew to the espresso from his cherished Italian
> lever machine. He was so excited that when his wife telephoned him
> during our tests, he regaled here with comments about how delicious
> AeroPress coffee tasted.
>
> But the list doesn't end there. Every week we receive emails and read
> public blog postings from coffee lovers who like AeroPress brew better
> than espresso. If you wish, I can post them all on this forum.
>
> I know that there are espresso lovers out there who don't agree. They
> are, of course, free to choose. But I can assure you that there are a
> lot of people who prefer AeroPress brew over espresso and their
> preference had absolutely nothing to do with my personal wishes or
> marketing plans. And even if we censored every such comment from our
> own materials, what could we do about the comments from people we've
> never even met?
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
> Alan
>




 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 07:07:13
From: daveb
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??


Just a load of crap -- crafted to elicit an angry response.

and rg?

No UNMODIFIED home espressp machine (under $1500) permit temperature
adjustment.

put that in your blog.

Dave



  
Date: 12 Apr 2007 03:20:04
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??


 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 06:53:07
From: shane
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
>From what I have observed in my lifelong use and observation of
plastics.. all clear plastic cookware eventually breaks down and
deforms with heat.
It may survive several hundered uses, but eventually it starts to
deform its shape a bit.

My suspiscion is that is why Alan Adler insists upon a low brew temp
for the Aeropress, lengthens the time before it starts to fail.

If there was a truly "high temp" plastic, you would see frying pans
made out of the stuff.... just my observation.

Shane


On Apr 11, 8:16 am, "Rob Yokom" <r.yo...@mchsi.com > wrote:
> "Travesso" <cpaso...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1176288756.656557.5620@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 9, 9:15 pm, Waldo Lydecker <ferrante276-
> > waldolydec...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> This comes from the Aeropress
> >> website(http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)
>
> >> Dissect and discuss:
>
> >> Espresso Machines:
>
> >> Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
> >> because of the shorter brewing time. However when we ran comparison
> >> taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
> >> AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
> >> European espresso machines -- why? The reason is that the total
> >> immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
> >> temperature -- and lower temperature brew is far less bitter. Home
> >> espresso machines don't allow adjustment of temperature. But even if
> >> they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
> >> at reduced temperature.
>
> > IMO this might be because their unit is plastic. I think most plastic
> > breaks down after 180 deg F. Their statement sounds better than
> > warning you that your coffee will taste like a chemical spill if you
> > put 203 degree water in it.
>
> > I do own an Aeropress. My complaint is in all the parts.
>
> Where did you hear that most plastic breaks down at 180 degrees? Most
> plastics can withstand temperatures much higher than that. All of this
> paranoia is astounding. Plastic is perfectly safe to cook with and around.
> Now if it was a low temperature thermalforming plastic I could see your
> point, but the plastics used for cooking are high temp thermalforming or are
> thermalset plastics.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -




  
Date: 13 Apr 2007 10:38:56
From:
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
Hi All,

To those who've said "Alan doesn't get it". I humbly suggest, "Alan
does get it, but his viewpoint (and that of hundreds of other
AeroPressers) is different from mine".

Debate asside, I'd like to invite everyone (especially my staunchest
detractors) to visit me for some tasting and conversation at the SCAA
Convention, May 5th to May 7th in Long Beach Calif

If I'm not burned at stake for espresso heresy between now and then,
I'll be happily AeroPressing in the Baratza booth.

I hope you can make it.

Alan



  
Date: 13 Apr 2007 06:23:04
From: daveb
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??

> So, Alan, market it as a great brewing system and a great introduction
> to espresso. Stop the bickering here.


An introduction to COFFEE -- not espresso coffee!


on and on

:-)



  
Date: 11 Apr 2007 11:02:13
From: Jack Denver
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
There are now silicone rubber baking pans that go in the oven and lots of
plastic stuff recommended for the microwave. And of course non-stick frying
pans are lined with a type of plastic (PTFE).

In order to withstand boiling water, you only have to be safe to 212F which
is only a few degrees above the recommended aeropress temp - it would be a
strange coincidence if the critical temp for this plastic was somewhere in
that narrow band - safe at 180, melts at 212.

A frying pan is heated dry or with minimal oil and can have a temperature
of 350F or more.

"shane" <shane.olson@juno.com > wrote in message
news:1176299587.387304.242370@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> If there was a truly "high temp" plastic, you would see frying pans
> made out of the stuff.... just my observation.
>
> Shane
>
>
> On Apr 11, 8:16 am, "Rob Yokom" <r.yo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> "Travesso" <cpaso...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1176288756.656557.5620@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 9, 9:15 pm, Waldo Lydecker <ferrante276-
>> > waldolydec...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> This comes from the Aeropress
>> >> website(http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)
>>
>> >> Dissect and discuss:
>>
>> >> Espresso Machines:
>>
>> >> Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
>> >> because of the shorter brewing time. However when we ran comparison
>> >> taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
>> >> AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
>> >> European espresso machines -- why? The reason is that the total
>> >> immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
>> >> temperature -- and lower temperature brew is far less bitter. Home
>> >> espresso machines don't allow adjustment of temperature. But even if
>> >> they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
>> >> at reduced temperature.
>>
>> > IMO this might be because their unit is plastic. I think most plastic
>> > breaks down after 180 deg F. Their statement sounds better than
>> > warning you that your coffee will taste like a chemical spill if you
>> > put 203 degree water in it.
>>
>> > I do own an Aeropress. My complaint is in all the parts.
>>
>> Where did you hear that most plastic breaks down at 180 degrees? Most
>> plastics can withstand temperatures much higher than that. All of this
>> paranoia is astounding. Plastic is perfectly safe to cook with and
>> around.
>> Now if it was a low temperature thermalforming plastic I could see your
>> point, but the plastics used for cooking are high temp thermalforming or
>> are
>> thermalset plastics.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>




 
Date: 11 Apr 2007 03:52:36
From: Travesso
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Apr 9, 9:15 pm, Waldo Lydecker <ferrante276-
waldolydec...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> This comes from the Aeropress website(http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)
>
> Dissect and discuss:
>
> Espresso Machines:
>
> Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
> because of the shorter brewing time. However when we ran comparison
> taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
> AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
> European espresso machines -- why? The reason is that the total
> immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
> temperature -- and lower temperature brew is far less bitter. Home
> espresso machines don't allow adjustment of temperature. But even if
> they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
> at reduced temperature.

IMO this might be because their unit is plastic. I think most plastic
breaks down after 180 deg F. Their statement sounds better than
warning you that your coffee will taste like a chemical spill if you
put 203 degree water in it.

I do own an Aeropress. My complaint is in all the parts.



  
Date: 11 Apr 2007 13:16:43
From: Rob Yokom
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??

"Travesso" <cpasoren@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1176288756.656557.5620@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 9, 9:15 pm, Waldo Lydecker <ferrante276-
> waldolydec...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> This comes from the Aeropress
>> website(http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)
>>
>> Dissect and discuss:
>>
>> Espresso Machines:
>>
>> Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
>> because of the shorter brewing time. However when we ran comparison
>> taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
>> AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
>> European espresso machines -- why? The reason is that the total
>> immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
>> temperature -- and lower temperature brew is far less bitter. Home
>> espresso machines don't allow adjustment of temperature. But even if
>> they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
>> at reduced temperature.
>
> IMO this might be because their unit is plastic. I think most plastic
> breaks down after 180 deg F. Their statement sounds better than
> warning you that your coffee will taste like a chemical spill if you
> put 203 degree water in it.
>
> I do own an Aeropress. My complaint is in all the parts.
>

Where did you hear that most plastic breaks down at 180 degrees? Most
plastics can withstand temperatures much higher than that. All of this
paranoia is astounding. Plastic is perfectly safe to cook with and around.
Now if it was a low temperature thermalforming plastic I could see your
point, but the plastics used for cooking are high temp thermalforming or are
thermalset plastics.




   
Date: 12 Apr 2007 14:59:00
From: daveb
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??


WHO knew this topic would go on this long

[sound of dead horse being flogged ]



  
Date: 11 Apr 2007 12:06:23
From: Sonny L
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
My only complaint with the Aeropress is the huge amount of coffee needed to
make a shot. It can get expensive.

Other than that it's a fine device. Nice for camping, at the office, etc.




"Travesso" <cpasoren@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1176288756.656557.5620@w1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 9, 9:15 pm, Waldo Lydecker <ferrante276-
> waldolydec...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> This comes from the Aeropress
>> website(http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)
>>
>> Dissect and discuss:
>>
>> Espresso Machines:
>>
>> Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
>> because of the shorter brewing time. However when we ran comparison
>> taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
>> AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
>> European espresso machines -- why? The reason is that the total
>> immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
>> temperature -- and lower temperature brew is far less bitter. Home
>> espresso machines don't allow adjustment of temperature. But even if
>> they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
>> at reduced temperature.
>
> IMO this might be because their unit is plastic. I think most plastic
> breaks down after 180 deg F. Their statement sounds better than
> warning you that your coffee will taste like a chemical spill if you
> put 203 degree water in it.
>
> I do own an Aeropress. My complaint is in all the parts.
>




 
Date: 10 Apr 2007 09:08:44
From: Jack Denver
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
I think Randy sums it up pretty well. It's a shame that Alan makes some of
these outrageous statements because it prevents the coffee community from
getting behind his product fully. Not just alt.coffee people, but the
equipment vendors, etc. - they could be selling the Aeropress as a travel
devices or adjunct to an espresso setup, but Alan is telling the consumer
"throw away that expensive espresso machine, don't buy that costly grinder",
so if it's your business to sell these things you surely wouldn't want to
have anything to do with him. I haven't got one (I've got enough coffee
brewing devices for now) but everyone who has tried it generally has very
nice things to say about it. What they say about Alan's ad copy claims are
something else. I guess this is a case where the inventor sees his product
as his "baby" and is a little too overenthusiastic about the baby's
abilities. Ignore the exaggerated claims and focus on the product.


"Waldo Lydecker" <ferrante276-waldolydecker@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:i6pl13thfkstv4vdhgrmshc61n41sp0brf@4ax.com...
> This comes from the Aeropress website(
> http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)
>
> Dissect and discuss:
>
> Espresso Machines:
>
> Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
> because of the shorter brewing time. However when we ran comparison
> taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
> AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
> European espresso machines -- why? The reason is that the total
> immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
> temperature -- and lower temperature brew is far less bitter. Home
> espresso machines don't allow adjustment of temperature. But even if
> they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
> at reduced temperature.
>
> In addition to smoother taste, the AEROPRESS has several other
> advantages over conventional espresso machines.
>
> Grind is not critical in the AEROPRESS. Grind is so critical in
> espresso machines that most grinders cannot produce a grind fine
> enough to make a good tasting shot! Special espresso grinders cost
> hundreds of dollars and require frequent cleaning.
>
> Espresso experts always adjust the grind when there are changes in
> humidity or batches of coffee. They throw away two or three shots
> while adjusting the grind in to achieve the desired 25-second shot.
>
> There is no tamping in the AEROPRESS. Books on espresso teach the art
> of just the right amount of tamping. They instruct the home barista to
> practice on the bathroom scale to learn exactly thirty pounds of
> pressure.
>
> There is no pre-warming of the portafilter head. In fact the AEROPRESS
> has no portafilter head!
>
> There is no maintenance. Espresso machines require regular cleaning
> and descaling with caustic chemicals. They also require disassembly
> and cleaning of the showerhead.
>
> There is no need to judge when to stop the pull. This is the most
> critical skill in using an espresso machine. As espresso lovers well
> know, most would-be baristas in coffee shops, hotels and restaurants
> run the pump too long -- extracting sour bitterness from the grounds.
>
> With the AeroPress, the amount of water is predetermined by the user,
> who can brew any strength from weak to super-intense just by choosing
> the desired amount of water prior to pressing.
>




 
Date: 09 Apr 2007 21:11:27
From: Randy G.
Subject: Re: Aeropress better than espresso machines??
On Apr 9, 6:15 pm, Waldo Lydecker <ferrante276-
waldolydec...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> This comes from the Aeropress website(http://aerobie.com/Products/aeropress_story.htm)
>

You are not the first to bring this up (the general subject- not the
specific page you quoted). I (among others) have had the specific
conversation with Alan (the inventor), and I have told him that it
does, indeed, make a delicious, rich cup of coffee, but that it is NOT
espresso. If by no other definition than the beverage it makes lacks
"real" crema. My comment to him was that it was far closer to a rich
presspot than espresso. IMO, the page is advertising hype that belongs
on the Home Shopping Network or in a Thane infomercial. Sad really,
because it is an excellent device.

> Dissect and discuss:
>
> Espresso Machines:
>
> Most coffee lovers agree that espresso is less bitter than drip brew
> because of the shorter brewing time.
>
HUH?! Most coffee lovers I talk to tell me that they never tasted
espresso because (they have heard or believe that) it is so bitter.

>However when we ran comparison
> taste-tests in the homes of espresso lovers, they all agreed that
> AEROPRESS espresso tasted better than the brew from their high-priced
> European espresso machines -- why?
>
Because they don't know how to use an espresso machine? Because they
buy crappy beans that are stale and over roasted? because they use a
whirley-blade grinder? Becasue they use the plastic tamper that came
with the Espresso machine?

>The reason is that the total
> immersion brewing of the AEROPRESS yields a robust flavor at lower
> temperature --
>
So it makes coffee just like a press pot...?


> Home
> espresso machines don't allow adjustment of temperature.
>
Mine does. How about yours?

> But even if
> they did, their lack of total immersion would not yield robust flavor
> at reduced temperature.
>
Alan's insistence that he can brew coffee at a lower temperature than
every other expert in the world is interesting to say the least.

> .......Special espresso grinders cost
> hundreds of dollars and require frequent cleaning.
>
And other grinders do not require cleaning, because......?

> There is no tamping in the AEROPRESS. Books on espresso teach the art
> of just the right amount of tamping. They instruct the home barista to
> practice on the bathroom scale to learn exactly thirty pounds of
> pressure.
>
If there is anything that causes more discussion and controversy than
Alan's claims, it is how much tamping force to use. There has been a
good amount of evidence to shaw that a wide range of tamping force
results in good espresso.

> There is no pre-warming of the portafilter head. In fact the AEROPRESS
> has no portafilter head!
>
No, but it is made of plastic, a substance that many people prefer not
to use when preparing a hot food product. And you DO need to wait for
the water to heat up to use an Aeropress.

> There is no need to judge when to stop the pull. This is the most
> critical skill in using an espresso machine.
>
Knowing when to switch the button off is the MOST CRITICAL skill!?!?!?
geeze- could have saved a LOT of chapters on my website!

I wish that Alan would have marketed the Aeropress as the world's
best, easiest, simplest, coffee brewer. It is so good that he could
have sold it with a money back guarantee if it didn't make the best
cup of coffee you ever had, or some such claim. His insistence on
calling the coffee it produces "Espresso" has detracted from the
Aeropress' strengths (IMO). I do not know how he got started calling
the coffee it produces espresso, but, IMO, it is a shame.

Randy "I got one. I like it. It isn't espresso" G.
www.EspressoMyEspresso.com