Instant Coffee Beats Drip in Blind Taste Tests (theguardian.com)
- Reference: 0179814764
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/10/17/157201/instant-coffee-beats-drip-in-blind-taste-tests
- Source link: https://www.theguardian.com/global/2025/oct/10/instant-coffee-just-beat-drip-we-were-stunned-too
Deutsch compared the result to iconic products like Heinz ketchup and Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. Upscale interpretations of certain classic items often fail to surpass the originals, he said.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/global/2025/oct/10/instant-coffee-just-beat-drip-we-were-stunned-too
So (Score:5, Insightful)
People prefer bad coffee?
Re: So (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually most people hate coffee. But don't realize it. They want a sugary milk drink they call coffee or they drink Foldgers or 7-11 coffee or some other swill like Starbucks, who admittedly does not make coffee, but milk drinks.
Drip, french press, nespresso or keurig for me only. But I like the taste of coffee.
Re: So (Score:2)
I quite like my aeropress for doing a single cup. It's much easier to clean than a french press.
Re: So (Score:1)
Nice! Christmas wish list item added.
Re: (Score:2)
I usually chuck mine in the dishwasher. Or honestly just rinse it off stove a bit of coffee oil residue doesn't matter between washes.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure for me if it is the taste of the coffee or the brain has connected the caffeine hit with it that makes it taste good. And the brain has figured out espresso has the most bang per sip. I did not start drinking coffee until my first breakfast interview at 22. I thought I had too, and it was awful. Now I crave the stuff. In college if I wanted a rush mountain dew. Some 40 years later I hope I did not give myself cancer with the dew.
Re: (Score:2)
Forget the caffeine, the smell of coffee is just about the greatest thing in the world.
Re: (Score:3)
Coffee is very tasty, I agree. I used to drink ~3 pots a day, black, but couldn't afford all the stomach lining replacements. Now it's just a big cup with half and half in the morning. And I'll burn the world to the ground if anyone gets between it and me.
I don't understand the popularity of Starbucks. The coffee is overpriced, and I think it tastes awful. Which takes me back to a comment I made earlier - I think this study is just capturing the fact that most people have lousy senses of taste and sm
Re: So (Score:1)
Steel moka pot is all I use.
Re: (Score:2)
I was drinking a lot of french press and my cholesterol starting rising fairly dramatically. I've had really good cholesterol numbers my entire life, so this was fairly alarming. I stopped drinking french press and when I had my next test done less than a year later, my cholesterol numbers were back to normal for me. Highly dependent on your individual physiology and the amount of coffee you're drinking, but something to watch out for.
Apparently the paper filters in drip and pour over are effective are effe
Re: (Score:2)
Well it is diluted poison, so arguably all coffee is bad. This makes coffee a quintessential acquired taste, and because of that people will tend to prefer what they're used to.
Think of the kind of person who would participate in a blind taste test at a food testing lab. They mentioned they had 84 participants, but didn't mention how they were selected, so there could be all kinds of self-selection bias on display here.
But so what? The average joe prefers instant coffee, lite beer, and processed cheese. In
Re: (Score:2)
Most people can't tell the difference between cheap and expensive wines.
I think what they're really capturing here is that most people don't have very sensitive chemical senses. The people who do tell everyone else what is good and what should be expensive, but most of the rest don't need to care. Sadly, I do have a sensitive nose and tongue, so I'm very particular about certain things, including coffee. My wife, on the other hand, has no idea that the wine she drinks is complete garbage, which saves
Re: (Score:2)
What they're capturing here is that instant coffee can capture the ideal roast-to-brew timing, then dry it out. Drip coffee has so many factors - when the beans were roasted and ground, what type of grinder was used (burr is usually best), water temperature (200F/93C for brewing, give or take), how long it was sitting on a burner after being brewed, etc. Whole beans are usually best within 3 weeks of roasting, ground beans about 3 days from breaking a flavor seal (vacuum packing helps). Try drip coffee like
Re: (Score:2)
> People prefer bad coffee?
Or - what you consider bad, most people don't.
Blind taste? (Score:5, Insightful)
As in they have no taste? I mean there's a time and place for instant coffee (its super convenient when camping) but its definitely got that......after taste (and fore-taste) that isn't great. Even so-called 'good' instant coffee. If you're going to boil water for instant coffee, why not just make coffee? It takes me literally 120 seconds to make a mokapot on my induction stove. Maybe instant is 30 seconds if you use a microwave.....who did they get to 'blind taste' this anyway, people who don't like coffee or haven't ever tasted good coffee????
Re: (Score:3)
But then you get savaged for not freshly grinding your own beans.
Maybe it's different in the US, but in Europe the most common way of heating water to boiling point is with an electric kettle.
Crappy instant coffee is crappy, but there are some good ones out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Electric kettles aren't common in the US, while they exist I don't think I know anyone who owns one for instance. I was just watching a youtube show partially about this done by an expat Brit living in Chicago which is how I'm even aware electric kettles are common over there as that isn't exactly something you notice when you visit a country :)
Re: (Score:2)
I seem to recall that Technology Connections did a video about them for Americans. They are handy and safe, although the limited power output of US outlets does limit them a little. 230V FTW.
Re: (Score:2)
I own an electric kettle because I like tea with my breakfast. Always toyed with the idea of buying a 240V kettle but that would require running a new line from the breaker box and then I'd have to put my own 240V US style plug on the kettle to meet the electrical codes.
Not until later on at work do I make myself a coffee.
Re: (Score:2)
> although the limited power output of US outlets does limit them a little. 230V FTW.
We can have 220/240V outlets in the USA. We have standards for them at a variety of current carrying capacities. I've installed the 240V@20A outlets (on new circuits from a subpanel) before. Then we could slap a US style plug on one of your kettles and run it just fine.
However, my inverter microwave does a fine job of heating water, to boiling if I want. Also, an espresso machine is available for $100 (from DeLonghi) and produces a better result.
Re: (Score:3)
Inverter microwaves aren't any better at heating water to boiling than the regular kind. What they are better at is lower power levels.
Also unless you have an epically huge microwave, then a kettle is faster. My 3kW kettle does beat or my pretty huge 1800W industrial microwave. Unfortunately they don't make that model with an inverter for some reason, their only comparable one has an opaque door for some reason. My one quibble is the duty cycle is a bit long for really got low power performance.
I would also
Re: (Score:2)
> Inverter microwaves aren't any better at heating water to boiling than the regular kind. What they are better at is lower power levels.
More of the power put in goes into the food, so watt for watt, they are better at heating everything .
> Also unless you have an epically huge microwave, then a kettle is faster.
I don't disagree, I'm just not in so much hurry that I can't wait another minute.
Re: (Score:2)
You're both right and wrong. It looks like Panasonic now make an upgraded version with an inverter. It is a little more efficient, 2650W Vs 2830W, but they both have an output power of 1800W, so it's still no faster. Microwaves are generally limited by the output power of the magnetrons, so they're rated by that, not the input power. Still there's not a lot in it by the looks of it.
As for fast kettles, well I'm British. I drink a lot of tea.
Re: (Score:2)
I think their virtues are enhanced a bit for folks living in a country that's big on tea drinking. In regards to myself, I have a stovetop kettle that I barely use so I don't think an electric one would be a strong purchase for me.
Re: (Score:3)
I live in Colorado and I bought one by mail order five or six years ago. It works really great, and doesn't have problems with the fact that I live at 6100' so that water boils at about 192F, or 89C.
Re: (Score:2)
[looks at my electric kettle on my desk at work, same brand/model kettle at home]
Been using an electric kettle since moving out on my own at 17 and renting a garage room near college (no kitchen stuff). Lived off of raman and frozen burritos (once I got a mini fridge and a small microwave). This was in '80s Florida and current New Mexico.
Re: (Score:3)
The little two-shot moka pots are great for camping too.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people can't taste the subtleties that make the difference. It's the same thing with wine - most people can't taste the difference between a great wine and a bottle of turds. And more power to them - they can save a lot of money.
Re: (Score:2)
> It takes me literally 120 seconds to make a mokapot on my induction stove. Maybe instant is 30 seconds if you use a microwave.....who did they get to 'blind taste' this anyway, people who don't like coffee or haven't ever tasted good coffee????
The test was instant coffee compared to drip. If you prefer a stronger "espresso-like" coffee taste, it might be very well better to go instant compared to drip as drip coffee tends to be pretty bland.
Doing a comparison to moka it should be a different story, but to be fair there are some quite good instant coffee brands nowadays.
There's no reason why instant has to suck (Score:4, Insightful)
It just does. It's predominantly sold in America for convenience not taste. So they use lower quality coffee. But at the end of the day it's just freeze dried coffee. If you use good coffee and do a good job freeze drying it then it tastes pretty much the same as when you brewed it.
The YouTuber technology connections has a pretty good video on a expensive freeze dryer and he made his own coffee with it. He also made the point that you do not want to buy a freeze dryer because they are a huge pain in the ass and I definitely agree.
Re: (Score:3)
Dunno about other countries, but in Peru at least Nescafe is made with local Peruvian beans so it's definitely better than in the US.
Not sure why this is on slashdot, but... (Score:2)
Drip coffee tends to be terrible unless you have a good coffemaker. Still better than percolators, but meh. Instant coffee has also drastically improved over the past few decades. This is not surprising. This is like that guy that posted his ai-generated blog post to HN that ultimately had the conclusion that things that fit in cache are faster.
Re: (Score:2)
I had a mediocre drip maker from Proctor Silex, it made okay coffee but the carafe could only be poured at a very narrow range of speeds or it would piss all over the table.
It died, but it lasted OK before that, so I bought another one. They managed to make it even shittier. They "fixed" the pouring problem so it would pour okay at low to medium speeds, which actually was an improvement. But the new unit could only be filled with water through a hatch, and you could only fill it very slowly. And then the wa
If it was instant vs percolator (Score:2)
If it was a taste test between percolated coffee and instant, maybe instant is in the running. Maybe. Every instant coffee I've had is a step below "survival food" quality. At best, it provides a coffee-coloured liquid that has faint aromatics reminiscent of bad coffee, hidden below layers of strong off-tastes.
What I've noticed about instant (Score:2)
Is that it's much much weaker in the caffeine department at least here in America.
For the longest time I couldn't touch caffeinated coffee without getting heart palpitations. For whatever reason that's gotten a bit better and I've been able to drink some caffeinated coffee.
I bought some bagged stuff, cheap flavored hazelnut coffee that should have been pretty weak because you normally want it to be a pretty light roast so that it doesn't overwhelm the added flavoring. Why yes I am a wussy why do yo
/. needs a lameness filter ... (Score:3)
... for submissions as well as for content.
Then again, I clicked and I'm commenting, which counts as "engagement," so maybe I'm the bad guy.
Love the comments (Score:4, Insightful)
I love the comments here. Any other /. story: "Follow the science!" This story offers a scientific study and conclusion: "that can't be right!" You guys are not super-smart nerds... you're humans with the same monkey brains susceptible to confirmation bias that everyone else has.
Re: (Score:2)
One thing about coffee taste is temperature. If you fill 6 little plastic cups with an ounce or two of liquid and then sip through them, the temperature of the first one is much higher than the temperature of the last one. Did they control for temperature? Did they control order of tasting?
Maybe this is just a flawed study.
Re: (Score:2)
> One thing about coffee taste is temperature. If you fill 6 little plastic cups with an ounce or two of liquid and then sip through them, the temperature of the first one is much higher than the temperature of the last one. Did they control for temperature? Did they control order of tasting?
> Maybe this is just a flawed study.
Also, (a) many of the aromatic compounds in coffee are volatile and evaporate relatively quickly; which is why brewing into a (basically) sealed carafe is better than into an open pot; and (b) there are chemical processes that degrade the flavor of coffee that start just after brewing, which can't be mitigated. It's unclear if sampling re-constituting freeze-dried coffee vs sampling a series of cups of recently brewed coffee is comparable - even noting that some of the noted processes may have occurred be
Re: (Score:3)
Like others have pointed out it means that drip coffee is terrible.
I don't think that's the bias problem here (Score:1)
I think most of us are American and in America instant coffee is pretty crappy.
If you look at the taste test they compared pretty pricey instant coffee to moderately priced drip coffee. So it's not really a surprise that drip coffee came out ahead.
I don't think it's completely an apples to oranges comparison because the price points weren't that far off but it was enough to be noticeable as somebody who has been drinking instantly and his passed up the brands they used for the taste test because of
Re: (Score:2)
The science is right, it turns out that the tastiest piece of shit tastes slightly less shitty than the nastiest piece of shit. Most of the comments here are talking about drinking something other than shit.
Drip coffee makes me barf. Instant is no better. Somehow this is an American comparison, but then I also understand why you guys love your Starbucks... when it's the best thing you can get...
Vindicated! (Score:3)
I honestly prefer instant coffee to most other kinds of coffee. I bought a Nespresso machine with high hopes, and it's terrible . Way too bitter for me.
But you have to use the right instant coffee. [1]This stuff [madewithnestle.ca] is head and shoulders above any other instant coffee and better than most other types of coffee.
[1] https://www.madewithnestle.ca/nescafe/nescafe-gold-espresso-instant-coffee-0.html
Re: (Score:2)
You illustrate a valid point. Did a majority of the participants usually drink instant or drip ? If you usually drink instant, then drip will taste different - not as good, and vice versa. I used to only drink Tasters Choice and thought that it was at least as good as drip. Since I retired and have more time in the morning I only drink drip. I was short of time a few months ago and had a cup of instant. I thought it tasted gawd awful.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're right; I became acclimatized to instant. However, sometimes I go to local coffee shops that make espresso or cappucinos and I prefer those to my instant. Maybe it's just the home espresso machines I dislike.
Re: (Score:2)
If you find that the Nespresso's coffee is too bitter for you, add a pinch of salt to it. This trick even makes Starbucks' over-roasted, burnt and bitter swill palatable when I have no other choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I'll try it. Yes, anything that can rehabilitate Starbucks' noxious brew is worth looking into!
mine with warm wap water, no sugar, no milk please (Score:1)
it's coffee not a fucking gourmet meal
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait until climate change finishes fucking the coffee growing industry.
Re: (Score:2)
>> it's coffee not a fucking gourmet meal
> Just wait until climate change finishes fucking the coffee growing industry.
Or tariffs here in the U.S. for purchasing coffee, for now anyway.
Noting that, like bananas, very, very little coffee is grown in the U.S.
Re: (Score:2)
People add the weirdest shit to their coffee: olive oil, butter, coconut oil, egg yolk, cheese, salt, hot pepper, lemon, peanut butter, turmeric, etc.
I can get on board with some things, especially if the coffee is more of a desert or treat in the afternoon or evening. Like hazelnut extract, cardamom, cinnamon, nutmeg, etc. Sure, it's going to start tasting like a spiced cake if you add any of that, but with little to no sugar or flour, it's less caloric.
Information (Score:2)
This has to have some caveats. I'm sure some version of instant coffee can beat some version of drip coffee, but there's no way that instant Folgers is gonna beat a decent quality drip coffee.
I'm not even a coffee snob - I typically drink something relatively cheap (eg Cafe Bustelo) with plenty of cream and sugar, but instant just doesn't taste right.
Amateurs (Score:3)
I prefer my caffeine intranasal, transcutaneous, or in the form of concentrated 300mg cans that I can chug.
Re: (Score:3)
> I prefer my caffeine intranasal, transcutaneous, or in the form of concentrated 300mg cans that I can chug.
I'll use [1]this product [amazon.co.uk] as an (incredibly overpriced) example of a 'better' way of getting a quick caffeine fix.
Personal opinion, but when half a kilo costs ~£5 (at my local GrapeTree) it's hard to say "no"...
[1] https://www.amazon.co.uk/Carol-Anne-Chocolate-Covered-Coffee/dp/B07TZ1BPVZ/ref=asc_df_B07TZ1BPVZ?th=1
Old news (Score:3)
Folger's Crystals already did this experiment this back in the 1980s. Then they publicized the results ad nauseam.
Missing some of the best instant coffee brands (Score:2)
UCC has some of the best instant coffee on the market. Widely available is Blend 117 and Blend 114, and both are excellent. I'm not a fan of their Blue Mountain Blend. It's also my go-to for a quick iced coffee because you can make it stronger than usual without being overwhelmingly bitter.
Generally Japanese style charcoal roasted coffee holds up better to the dehydration process than a French roast. As some of the flavor that is lost in the process is at least replaced with a pleasant smokiness, making sur
Instant coffee was always fairly good ..... (Score:3)
.... for the first day after opening the jar. After that, the taste rapidly deteriorates.
What qualifies as 'drip'? (Score:3)
The story isn't clear and I haven't been able to find a link to the actual study yet.
If 'drip' is really just coffee from a coffee machine, this is easy to believe, since coffee made for most coffee machines is going to be cheap garbage. Does it include Nespresso machines and the like?
I assume they're not talking about espresso or Americanos, nor pourovers or French Presses. The language is too vague here.
If I grind fresh beans and put them in a high-end drip coffee maker, like a Technivorm, I'm pretty sure people will be able to tell the difference between that and instant, and I'd be able to find something that they enjoy.
So yeah, garbage coffee compared to a different way to brew garbage coffee isn't really revealing much.
Re: (Score:2)
TFA links to the Guardian's summary article, which itself links to a fuller article. I spotted the problem of their methodology: "We brewed each coffee exactly as the package directed." Most pre-ground drip coffee features instructions that are intended to maximize the amount of coffee that can be made per container (per the marketers). This ends up making watered down coffee that tastes bad (even to a person like me who isn't really a fan of coffee to begin with). Good drip coffee usually requires more sco
Re: (Score:2)
> Does it include Nespresso machines and the like?
It does not. Drip coffee is what it says on the box, water dripped through coffee. It's commonly called filter coffee as well since you need a filter to separate it. While nespresso in general is trash it at least is a pressurised puck and thus has more in common with an espresso than anything else.
The other poster said something about good drip coffee, I'll take their word for it but with a grain of salt. I've never achieved "good" drip coffee, and I spent a good several months where that was my only optio
Same reason children prefer margarine? (Score:2)
They tested cookies made with butter vs cookies made with margarine, to see if children could tell the difference. Children could tell the difference, and preferred margarine. They believe the reason is: children are used to margarine, so butter tastes odd.
My guess is: if people are not used to drip coffee, it's not going to taste right.
Depends... (Score:2)
If american ground coffee is the alternative, luke warm piss would pass the test. Actually I'd prefer instant coffee to that horror brew. Not even British coffee is that bad.
Uhh (Score:2, Insightful)
Drip coffee is terrible and anybody who doesn't agree is an idiot. Pull shots and cut it with water, savages.
Re: (Score:1)
Technology connections enters the room.
Re: (Score:2)
> Technology connections enters the room.
Or James Hoffman
Re:Uhh (Score:4, Insightful)
Give me a moka pot (une cafetiere italienne pour mes amis francais) any day for taste, convenience, and price. I've never had very good espresso from a cheap espresso maker.
Re: (Score:2)
> I've never had very good espresso from a cheap espresso maker.
Most cheap espresso makers aren't really espresso makers. They don't make enough pressure for full extraction. However, there is now a ~$100 DeLonghi pumped unit which does a fine job. Sadly it has a stupid milk steamer, but it's otherwise pretty good.
Re: (Score:2)
Poster name fits.
Re: (Score:2)
> Most cheap espresso makers aren't really espresso makers. They don't make enough pressure for full extraction.
Most expensive ones aren't either, that includes plenty of commercial ones. The world has moved on from the Italian definition of "espresso" to the point where high end coffee shops will give you a different product if you order an Italian espresso vs just an espresso. The idea of blasting 9 bar hot water through 7g of coffee in 23 seconds really is a relic in modern times, or something almost deserving of Designation of Origin protection.
My local coffee shop draws espresso at 7 bar from their hyper fancy m
Re: (Score:1)
I am replying to this whilst drinking this mornings lovely brew from my well used Bialetti.
Re:Uhh (Score:5, Informative)
Did they also do a round to determine the best drip coffee? And the best drip coffee maker .
I mean, really, if you compare the best instant against the worst drip, made in a decade old Mr. Coffee that's never been cleaned, or even had the mold scraped out, yeah, the drip will win just for not being . . . lumpy.
(Not that I care about toxic bean waste to begin with. All coffee tastes like ass. I'll never understand how anything that smells that good can taste that bad .)
Re: (Score:2)
Here in the survey article they simply describe it as "a commercial brewer" and it seems like this was tested in the USA so I would have to assume it's your classic Bunn brewer you see everywhere.
[1]https://www.theguardian.com/th... [theguardian.com]
I do agree that there are lot's of variables like even here drip machines are probably less popular today then in the past. French press, pour over, Aeropress, cold brew and then you open the the can of espresso after that.
Maybe that's what this study is getting at, instant coffee
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/thefilter-us/2025/oct/06/instant-drip-coffee-taste-test
Re: (Score:2)
Filter paper types can also impact coffee flavor.
One of the reasons I prefer Chemex pour-over is the thick filters remove a lot of the acid/sour taste from coffee.
But then fresh ground beans in a Chemex was the first type of coffee I ever had. By the time I was 10 years old Mom had me making the coffee in the mourning so she could get ready for work.
Still, might give the instant they say is best tasting a try.
Re: (Score:2)
Chemex are really nice and I loved mine until I broke it. Also loved my Aeropress until I managed to break that as well. I have an all stainless french press now and when I manage to break that it'll be instant coffee from here on out.
Re: (Score:3)
It was done by a professional lab, not a journalist, so I'm going to assume they at least cleaned the mould out.
Re: Uhh (Score:2)
That depends who was paying.
Re: (Score:2)
You know what they say about assuming . . .
Plus, assuming isn't science.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the point being missed here is that stuff touted as better is often too fancy for people's taste.
Like I can tell the difference between an expensive high end brand of chocolate and a regular chocolate bar because the regular bar is cut with more sugar and American chocolate has a distinctly "rancid" taste to it.
But that doesn't mean I'm going to buy a $20 dark chocolate Lindt chocolate bar. I'm perfectly happy going to the baking aisle and buying a bag of chocolate chips if I want to eat chocolate a
Re: (Score:3)
I'll give up my drip coffee right after I stop microwaving my tea.
I'm drinking drip coffee right now (Score:3)
It's far easier to make a terrible pot of coffee with a drip than a good pot. It is possible to have decent drip coffee, but it almost is never is any good. It's super cheap though, I paid $16 for my drip machine (Mr. Coffee). And if I put expensive pre-ground coffee into it, it's pretty good (Lion). But where the cheap drip machine really shines is that I can throw half a stick of cinnamon in with the coffee and have the next 2 pots smelling like Christmas. I also grind my own beans, because I have a decen
Re: (Score:2)
With almost 50 years of grinding coffee beans every morning (starting with a blade grinder in the late '70s), I've gone through a fair number of grinders. Finally found one that has lasted almost 10 years: Capresso grinder. It is electric but the grind time dial is a just a spring loaded rheostat. There's no sensors or buttons to stop working. Reminds me of the old washing machines in the '70s; just a spring loaded dial controlling things.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually agree with this. I bought one of those in anger - totally was not paying attention to the brand, just needed a grinder, and that was there. But now I've had it for, I think, five or six years, and it is still a great grinder.
(Stupid story, I had a house guest who stole a weird assortment of stuff, including my coffee grinder.)
Re: (Score:2)
I mainly got the Baratza because they have an extensive catalog of replacement parts and have YouTube videos on how to install them. The insides are simple, although there are pros and cons to each model which is a shame they couldn't get it all right in a single model.
Re: (Score:3)
My wife is Peruvian and we fill our suitcases with coffee from Cusco and Quillabamba on the way back. The way to make coffee there is they have a small pot with what looks like a small tin can on the top with holes in the bottom. Fill the can halfway with coffee, pour boiling water over it, and let it drip into the little pot. Do that two or three times, depending on how strong you want and how much you filled the can. Now put hot water in your cup and pour the coffee concentrate you've extracted into i
Re: (Score:3)
> I also grind my own beans [...] To my tastes at least, better than drip coffee is a percolator.
You can get that same 'charred coffee' flavor with a drip machine by simply leaving a pot on the warmer for a few hours. It takes a bit longer than a percolator, but you can vary the strength by 'burning' the pot for different lengths of time. You turn the lightest roast into a rich dark this way.
My personal go-to is a freeze-dried blend of Arabica and Robusta, medium-roasted by the Maxwell House, that I brewed via a 77c hot-stir dissolution in an 8.5cm open-top ceramic. I bring it down to 60c via a shor
Re: (Score:2)
I alternate between a French press and using a pour over depending on the mood.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh gods no. Drip coffee beats americano any day of the week. Yech. I avoid americano like the plague.
We finally got a drip coffee machine in addition to the espresso machine at work. If I want espresso - I'll have that. If I want a nice "regular black coffee" - drip coffee any day.
Re: (Score:2)
Coffee is merely a medication for me. I want it in the easiest and most cost effective method. Instant coffee is expensive per dose compared to cheap drip coffee, which is what I use.
Re: (Score:2)
War declared.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think drip coffee is bad, let me introduce you to instant coffe.
Also this: The Case for Bad Coffee [1]https://www.seriouseats.com/th... [seriouseats.com]
[1] https://www.seriouseats.com/the-case-for-bad-coffee
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah.
Most Australians would have never seen a drip coffee machine, and rarely instant coffee.
Everything here is high pressure expresso machines, or pod machines if you don’t care so much.
Nobody uses sugar either, because our coffee quality is usually excellent with no bitterness.
Re: (Score:1)
I have a cafetiere (plunger for my fellow Australians), espresso machine, pod machine and instant coffee. I've no plans to consider drip coffee. I don't have any statistical evidence but I've never known anyone in Aus to have drip coffee.
I don't live in Melbourne where they consider themselves coffee snobs; I'd be interested in Melburnians opinions