Author Topic: French Press vs. Pourover  (Read 4775 times)

iluvpop15

  • Guest
French Press vs. Pourover
« on: March 12, 2015, 01:11:09 PM »
The title says it all, which is best and why?  I enjoy both methods very much, there is no right answer but Im interested in hearing what you guys have to say.

Offline John F

  • White Rabbit
  • Retired Old Goats
  • **
  • Posts: 14237
  • Coffee elitist
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2015, 01:14:01 PM »
Pourover.

Somebody lock the thread now.   ;D
"At no point should you be in condition white unless you are in your bed sleeping with your doors locked."

Lee Morrison

Offline whattodo

  • Standard User
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • Coffee tastes & Taste in the mug
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2015, 01:37:20 PM »
French Press. Easy brewing. No filter. You have all coffee oil in your mug.
Roaster: Quest M3/Bullet R1
Grinder: Two Sage Smart, Two Harios
Brewing: Brazen Plus, Thermos Nissan, Bodum Cold Brewer, Chemex 8 Cup, Yama Vacuum 8 Cup & 5 Cup, Vev Vigano Carioca Nero, Bonavita Porcelain Immersion Coffee Dripper, Aeropress, Saeco Espresso, Beko Turkish Coffee Brewer

Offline peter

  • The Warden - Now Retired
  • Retired Old Goats
  • **
  • Posts: 14519
  • Monkey Club Cupper
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2015, 01:50:29 PM »
I agree with John, except for one thing...   He's the one who should lock the thread. 

 ;D
Quote of the Day; \"...yet you refuse to come to Me that you

ButtWhiskers

  • Guest
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2015, 02:35:50 PM »
Pourover most of the time, and preferentially for lighter roasts.  Press for darker roasts. 

French Press. Easy brewing. No filter. You have all coffee oil in your mug.
Swiss gold works great in a pourover.  You get even fewer fines than with a press, but all the oil.  I'm usually too lazy, though.  Mine are boxed up somewhere...

Offline peter

  • The Warden - Now Retired
  • Retired Old Goats
  • **
  • Posts: 14519
  • Monkey Club Cupper
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2015, 03:06:10 PM »
Swiss gold works great in a pourover.  You get even fewer fines than with a press, but all the oil.  I'm usually too lazy, though.  Mine are boxed up somewhere...

That's my current a.m. setup; a Freiling Gold #4, and a Clever Dripper.
Quote of the Day; \"...yet you refuse to come to Me that you

jspain

  • Guest
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2015, 03:38:55 PM »
I like the vac pot the best!

However if the boss (Patti) is gone I'll get out the 4 cup chemex and gold filter for a pourover. I prefer the pourover rather than a French pressfor the same reasons given by Peter and Buttwhiskers. I also believe the pourover brings out more brightness in the cup. The Sulawesi I offered a month or so back SHINES in a pourover!

Offline whattodo

  • Standard User
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • Coffee tastes & Taste in the mug
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2015, 12:53:11 AM »
Pourover most of the time, and preferentially for lighter roasts.  Press for darker roasts. 

French Press. Easy brewing. No filter. You have all coffee oil in your mug.
Swiss gold works great in a pourover.  You get even fewer fines than with a press, but all the oil.  I'm usually too lazy, though.  Mine are boxed up somewhere...

If you don't mind, may you give more details (grinding size, water temperature, water/coffee ratio) how you prepare your pourover? Maybe with this information, I could be capable to brew delicious pourover.
Roaster: Quest M3/Bullet R1
Grinder: Two Sage Smart, Two Harios
Brewing: Brazen Plus, Thermos Nissan, Bodum Cold Brewer, Chemex 8 Cup, Yama Vacuum 8 Cup & 5 Cup, Vev Vigano Carioca Nero, Bonavita Porcelain Immersion Coffee Dripper, Aeropress, Saeco Espresso, Beko Turkish Coffee Brewer

Offline John F

  • White Rabbit
  • Retired Old Goats
  • **
  • Posts: 14237
  • Coffee elitist
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2015, 08:24:04 AM »
My opinion is that in the art/science balance of coffee pourover is weighted heavily towards the art side.

As long as you have a reasonable grind/temp the rest becomes very difficult to explain on paper. A capable pouring kettle gives you a lot of control and you need to feel how you are pouring and learn from experimenting.

So I say start with a grind you think is right,  off boil water, a capable pouring device and let the art part take hold.
"At no point should you be in condition white unless you are in your bed sleeping with your doors locked."

Lee Morrison

Offline ScareYourPassenger

  • Standard User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
  • lever lover
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2015, 08:37:29 AM »
Question, are the other methods allowing the same amount of oil to transfer to the results as a french press? Oil is lighter than the water and french press is the only method that promote the results to the top versus pressing or dripping out through the bottom.

Fat or oils can change the taste dramatically by blocking taste. Try having some olive oil or butter before wine for example.

ButtWhiskers

  • Guest
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2015, 01:46:46 PM »
My opinion is that in the art/science balance of coffee pourover is weighted heavily towards the art side.

As long as you have a reasonable grind/temp the rest becomes very difficult to explain on paper. A capable pouring kettle gives you a lot of control and you need to feel how you are pouring and learn from experimenting.

So I say start with a grind you think is right,  off boil water, a capable pouring device and let the art part take hold.

I couldn't agree more.  I used to get all ANALytical about brewing (and roasting for that matter), and have spent years trying to cultivate a more intuitive sensory-based approach.  There are enough variables in play that when I get wrapped up trying to precisely control a few of them, I risk missing the forest for the trees.  This is probably the most objective description of what I do:

Water: Filtered, mine is fairly soft and has rested for about a day after filtration.  I'd estimate 80mg/L (ppm) hardness, based on back when I used to measure it.  It works fine, so I don't futz with it. 
Grind: Based on the roast level, finer for lighter, coarser for darker, burrs exclusively.  Sometimes through the Jolly, sometimes through the Bunn commercial, depending on what else is going on. 
Temperature: Electric kettle to boil, wet filter with a splash allowing that rinsate to dribble out, set cone on the insulated pot, add grounds, wet grounds about 15 seconds off the boil, allow to moisten up/bloom for 10 seconds or so.  I gradually pour until cone is full (takes about a minute), then I reheat the water to a boil (takes maybe 10-15 seconds), cut power, refilling the cone and keeping 80% full until water used up.  This process was established when I measured temperature, with a goal of a 198-203°F extraction environment, but what I do now without even really thinking about it is close enough.
Pour: Turbulence seems to be the key with a pourover, try side by side extractions with a constant pour vs. "all at once" and you'll see over double the extraction in a constant pour.  I often use a spoon and do a little stir if I am lazy on the pour to effect the proper extraction.   
Ratio: Typically ~80g in a #4 metal or #6 paper cone for a 1.7L ~56oz insulated pot.  This is entirely estimated these days, but I bet if I weighed it would be well within 10% I have done it so much.  This is below 'gold cup' standard, but usually makes the best (sweetest, that is) coffee IMO.  [If I do a single cup pourover, the ratio is often much larger, typically 2.5-3g per ounce of water instead of about 1.5, since the extraction is rarely as efficient and is quicker]
Time: Averages 4 minutes, again, I roll with it.

I usually drink less than half of what is brewed before my next brew (dump the excess), but my process is fairly routine since there is often someone else sharing, in which case it will get used within 15 minutes or so.  I have a large excess of coffee so I'm not going to be frugal about it.  If I didn't wind up giving away 5#+ a week, I might be tempted to be more thrifty with my coffee, but tossing several half-pots a day is in the noise around here.


Offline whattodo

  • Standard User
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • Coffee tastes & Taste in the mug
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #11 on: March 14, 2015, 11:28:18 AM »
ButtWhiskers,

Great summary and details. I will try pourover by following your explanation.

Thanks
Roaster: Quest M3/Bullet R1
Grinder: Two Sage Smart, Two Harios
Brewing: Brazen Plus, Thermos Nissan, Bodum Cold Brewer, Chemex 8 Cup, Yama Vacuum 8 Cup & 5 Cup, Vev Vigano Carioca Nero, Bonavita Porcelain Immersion Coffee Dripper, Aeropress, Saeco Espresso, Beko Turkish Coffee Brewer

kaotep

  • Guest
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #12 on: March 17, 2015, 03:22:07 AM »
i have both and i don't really care :D i use the press at the office because I have to share my coffee. Pourover at home when I'm to lazy to fire up the lever machine.

iluvpop15

  • Guest
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2015, 08:57:51 AM »

Temperature: Electric kettle to boil, wet filter with a splash allowing that rinsate to dribble out, set cone on the insulated pot, add grounds, wet grounds about 15 seconds off the boil, allow to moisten up/bloom for 10 seconds or so.  I gradually pour until cone is full (takes about a minute), then I reheat the water to a boil (takes maybe 10-15 seconds), cut power, refilling the cone and keeping 80% full until water used up.  This process was established when I measured temperature, with a goal of a 198-203°F extraction environment, but what I do now without even really thinking about it is close enough.
Pour: Turbulence seems to be the key with a pourover, try side by side extractions with a constant pour vs. "all at once" and you'll see over double the extraction in a constant pour.  I often use a spoon and do a little stir if I am lazy on the pour to effect the proper extraction.   

Why do you let the coffee bloom for only 10 seconds?  I have have heard that 20-30 seconds works best.  What difference does  a longer bloom have on the coffee?  I always figured that by removing more of the CO2 from the beans it allows for a more full extraction, but that is only speculation.

ButtWhiskers

  • Guest
Re: French Press vs. Pourover
« Reply #14 on: March 18, 2015, 10:11:32 AM »
Why do you let the coffee bloom for only 10 seconds?  I have have heard that 20-30 seconds works best.  What difference does  a longer bloom have on the coffee?  I always figured that by removing more of the CO2 from the beans it allows for a more full extraction, but that is only speculation.

I would agree - removing CO2 is the goal.  My reasoning is that after about 10 seconds of moistening/blooming (following the actual addition of the water to do that, which takes a few seconds as well), the grounds tend to form their own little bubbles and dry pockets where there is insufficient moistening, and hence, less degassing.  Getting the agitation going again seems to effect the desired outcome of degassing and moistening.  This agitation is done with a spoon or a stirrer by some, prior to the pour, and if you try this after about 10 seconds you will see that the grounds are not always homogeneously wet.  My goal is to get the grounds wet, hot, and liberating their essence without cooling back down - the CO2 is driven off by the heat, as well, so I try to use the water column to do this.  We could debate and speculate on what is "ideal", but this is what works for me, and is the culmination of many years of pourover as my primary brewing method.   Undoubtedly there are more skilled brewers of coffee with prestigious pedigree that would freak out on my barbaric practices, but my ritual is quite adequate to get the job done for me.   ;)