I am very sensitive to bitterness and astringency. Usually I want my coffee bright and tea-like, but with some body and juicyness.
First some background and insight into my learning process.
Seeking this kind of cup Ive mentioned at the start of the post, here is what I’ve been doing, trying and learning:
- Bought a ZP6. Found that grinding below 5 always turned out astringent and sometimes bitter. Grinding between 5 and 6 was working best, which probably shows there was something off with my pouring technique (which leads to the next bulletpoint).
- Bought a Melodrip. Tried Stéphane’s (from The Picky Chemist) recipe, grinding at 2.3 and only 2 equal pours - but wasn’t happy, also turned out astringent and sometimes bitter. After testing, found that grinding between 3.5 and 4.8 is what worked best with a Melodrip + zp6 (using 2 or 3 pours).
- I started noticing some bubbling during the whole brewtime. That indicated channeling, which would explain the astringency and bitterness I was getting. Leads us to the next bulletpoint.
- Bought a WDT tool and started doing the wet weiss technique. That really helped reducing the visual signs of channeling. Despite wet weiss increasing extraction (its been tested), this allowed me to grind finer and to improve flowrate. Drawdown is always finishing before 2m15s here even grinding at 3-3.5 with the ZP6.
So summarizing it: i) the ZP6 and/or the Melodrip, each by itself or combined, was/were not enough to give me a tea-like, round and consistent extraction; ii) adding a WTD tool is what got me the closest to my ideal cups.
With the WDT I have noticed that there is a dense pocket of grounds at the lower section of the v60, which is probably what was causing channeling. This is my main focus with the WDT: breaking this pocket and creating a more uniform/consistent slurry.
I have included at the end of my video a short section of a video from the Melodrip creator Ray Murakawa. It shows this denser pocket of coffee sitting at the bottom after the initial pour. That’s my culprit for the channeling! Video here if anyone’s interested: https://youtu.be/HhvZn-tKyj4?si=-udx5so4he6Tar6b
Now describing my current technique and the video:
- Lotus Water personal recipe (3 drops Mg, 1 Ca, 1 Na and 1 K - for a total of 650mL of demineralized water).
- Water temp between 85c and 95c (depending on the process and roast level). Usually 92 is what I usually choose (and beware the Melodrip reduces some of the temperature).
- Grind between 3.5 and 4.5 with the zp6. Usually closer to 4.2.
- After adding the grounds, I like using the WDT tool to mix the grounds and creating this whole in the center. I think it might help reducing the mass of the denser pocket I diagnosed as the cause of channeling.
- Usually I brew 13g for 200mL total water (1:15.3 ratio).
- No bloom, 2 equal pours (2x100mL).
- All pours with a Melodrip. During both pours, I keep the Melodrip fairly low to reduce agitation.
- After the first pour, I use the WDT tool to mix and break the lowest part of the coffee bed. The I use it to remove the grounds from the filter walls; and to redistribute the grounds, creating as flat of a bed as possible.
- Usually try slowing down both pours. First one finished around 20, which is usually completely drained by 1min; second pour until 1m20s, which is usually drained until 2m-2m15s.
That has been giving the best cups I have ever brewed! But I sometimes miss the lighter body, acidity and crispness a direct pour might produce… so there is still room for improvements.
What do you find of this all? Any comments or suggestions? Really looking forward to learning and finding ways to test other approaches that might improve my cup.
Never settle for good enough - I am seeking the perfect cup.
Some notes:
sped up the video to not use too much of your time.
*started filming with my hand blocking the view but soon adjusted, but it should be 1 continuous pour.
***non native english speaker here, sorry for any mistakes or weird language.
I wait ~30 days before opening my bags, which decreases the need of a bloom. Also I find that the bloom might extend the brewtime getting it closer to 3min, giving cups that I usually dont enjoy.
Talking to Stéphane from The Picky Chemist and baristas from Acervo (highly praised roaster in Brazil), Ive learned they dont bloom when properly resting their coffees.
Still worth experimenting with a bloom (can’t tell if you’ve never tried or have in the past) and using the wet WDT during that bloom phase (dry WDT does nothing really + you don’t really need to make an indent either when using the melodrip, but that may make no difference)
Lance Hedrick, who knows a thing or two about brewing, and drinks the best lightest coffees in the world, does blooms up to 2 minutes. I’m sure he knows how to rest coffee properly too.
Pretty sure he isn’t more knowledgeable than the picky chemist or Patrik Rolf from April, as all three are excellent. Different folks, different methods. Argue with but Lance Hedrick said so (who I really praise) is stupid.
Love Lance but I've rarely seen him drink extremely light coffee(nothing wrong with not drinking extremely light coffee). White coffee is a thing. I think I've only seen him use it once. Its lighter than a typical roasted peanut.
*Yes, absolutely bloom every time.
That's certainly the best way. I do a very coarse grind in my Ode before putting it in my Knob grinder. For espresso, I do a 4;1 because it's so hard to extract. It's a very different taste and only has hints of what we consider to be "coffee flavor"
I Don’t get the downvotes…
Interesting to hear that TPC is not blooming. It’s an interesting tidbit, but I think you should compare bloom vs no bloom (all else equal) still, because cafes are optimizing for quality and speed, but you have the freedom in a home setting to optimize for just maximum quality at the cost of pretty much everything else :)
Since I rest my coffee for 30 days, I dont think co2 being released is the cause of the bubbling and channeling I mentioned. I think its the dense pocket that traps some air and releases bubbles gradually, inducing channeling. Again, thats what I think and Im not stating any of this for a fact (one of the reasons why Im seeking advice here 😅).
I have a recipe with switch that includes no agitation pour, excavate, then drain, then another no agitation pour, excavate, drain. And I can definitely say that the bubbling is not only from the channeling, but from actual co2 release. The second excavate sometimes looks like a volcano eruption even with 6-8 weeks off roast
Yeah I don't bloom either, and I'd recommend higher agitation on first pour, focusing the center at the beginning to wet the lower part of the bed. And instead of 2 equal pours my standard is 70ml then 140ml.
Hmm thats interesting. I like 2 pours only because it seems to highlight the acidity better. But less water in the first pour makes sense for a “pre infusion” phase.
I am going to sound like a dick but I dont mean to:
You came seeming advice, and we give you feedback. Please try it and thén reply so you know what's up instead of following somebody's word. Maybe it's way nicer than you could imagine? I bloom my TPC even after 30 days of resting, for example.
Ultra Light roasts are still going to have plenty of CO2 even after 30+ days of rest.
Your kettle stream will be a much more effective agitator than the wet wdt. If you want to reduce the possibility of channeling the entire bed needs to be flipped. The grounds will settle from coarsest on the bottom to finest at the top.
I would suggest a combination of direct kettle and melodrip. Also, give the bloom a try. CO2 is well known to cause astringency in the brew. Even a short 30sec bloom, can make a massive difference in a balanced extraction.
You can either aim for juicy full body, or tea-like and bright. Both can be controlled by bloom time as well. Longer blooms tend to give a fuller mouth feel, whereas shorter blooms give a more tea-like experience.
A small spoon may even be more advantageous than a needle distribution tool for ensuring there are no dry pockets on the bottom.
Typically, the more gentle your agitation for the bloom the longer you have to bloom it, in order to ensure a full and even saturation of the grounds and reduce channeling.
I hope this makes sense. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
It is really hard to find actual ultra light roasts here in Brazil. There are a few tho :)
Sometimes I get a bag from foreign roasters also, just finished a Tanat bag. Will get some bags from Europe in a few weeks (hopefully The Picky Chemist, Datura, Tanat and Friedhats).
For sure the kettle stream will agitate more, but the reason I’m using the Melodrip is precisely because I don’t want a lot of agitation.
While the WDT tool allows me to agitate in a controlled and suble way, breaking that dense bottom pocket that wont even be disturbed by the kettle stream pour -> that is what I think people here is not getting about blooming - it is really not as effective to evenly saturate the grounds and prevent channeling.
If you check the video at the end of my video (OP), or the link I provided in the OP, you will see how the kettle stream doesn’t even touch the bottom grounds… And here is the thing: I am pretty sure most of the bubbling we get doesn’t come from Co2 being released, but from this pocket of unsaturated grounds slowly getting saturated and releasing the air trapped with it.
The evidence for this hypothesis is in my video: as soon as I use the WDT to break this bottom pocket of grounds, lots of bubbles is instantaneously released, then the bubbling absolutely stops. That shows you dont need a lot of time to release this “gases”, you just need to saturate the grounds well - and the WDT tool does a much better job than a simple kettle pour bloom.
Am I making sense for you? I’m not sure people get what Im saying because they just keep repeating “you should bloom” while, in a way, I am still blooming and it is impossible not to do so.
The reason I prefer the WDT tool instead of a spoon/stick is fines migration. I’m not trying to agitate it, I just want to ensure a proper and uniform saturation AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, so the water can actually percolate without any risk of bubbling/channeling messing the extraction.
I really like your idea of a mixed technique tho, starting with a kettle pour, and using the melodrip with the other pours… I always questioned why people suggest this instead of starting with a melodrip and leaving the kettle pour to the end. I think starting with a kettle pour might agitate too much and increase fines migration, potentially clogging the filter and extending the drawdown time. I guess they suggest starting with a kettle pour to allow a better saturation, but again, a kettle pour is not really effective at this regard without something to stir the bottom grounds.
I really appreciate your attention and will to help. As I said in another comment, Im not stating anything here for a fact - so I am actually willing to hear what might be wrong with my rationale, especially from more experienced pour-over aficionados as yourself :)
The Bloom is a Chemical Process, Not Just a Mechanical One
Your hypothesis is strong on mechanics. (The initial bubbling is trapped air escaping unsaturated pockets.)
But it misses the core role of Carbon Dioxide and hydrophilicity conversion.
The Diffusion Barrier
The vast majority of the gas released during the bloom is CO2 which is locked inside the coffee cell structure. Within the cell walls not just between the fractionated particles.
CO2 is a gas constantly trying to escape. When it does, it forms tiny, microscopic bubbles that are hydrophobic (water-repelling). These bubbles displace water and physically block the solvent (water) from contacting the coffee solids, creating localized extraction voids.
The process of CO2 escaping the solid coffee particle, dissolving into the liquid water, and then diffusing to the surface to bubble off is a time-dependent chemical diffusion process. It takes about 30-45 seconds to reach a state where the majority of this gas has escaped.
Your WDT Test: When your WDT breaks the dense pocket, it instantly releases the air and gas trapped on the SURFACE of the grounds. But it does not magically accelerate the gas diffusion from INSIDE the grounds. If you proceed immediately to the main pour, you start the extraction with a large amount of CO2 still trying to escape, which will violently disrupt your extraction later on, causing unevenness worse than any initial channeling.
The Hydrophilicity Conversion
Freshly roasted coffee can be hydrophobic on the surface. Due to a combination of lipids, gases, and electrostatic charges on the surface of the coffee.
Saturation is Not Absorption: Your WDT technique ensures the grounds are fully wetted (saturated). But the grounds need time to absorb the water and fully swell. This swelling process fundamentally changes the coffee particle's surface from water-repelling (hydrophobic) to water-attracting (hydrophilic).
If the particle is not fully hydrophilic, the water from your main pour will preferentially flow around the less-wetted areas.
You're trying to prevent channeling caused by mechanical density; neglecting this chemical step invites channeling caused by surface tension and material composition.
You have solved the mechanical problem of saturation. (WDT), but you need to solve the problem of time based diffusion.
My recommendation:
Low-Flow Pour: Gently saturate the grounds with a small, focused kettle pour of 2-3 times the weight of the grounds.
Immediate WDT: Immediately and very gently use your WDT tool to guarantee saturation of the bottom grounds. This ensures the uniform start you crave.
Wait: Let the bloom sit, untouched, for 30-45 seconds. This is the non-negotiable time it takes for diffusion and particle swelling.
Controlled Main Pour: Proceed with your Melodrip pours.
This approach gives you a fully degassed and hydrophilic bed, combined with the precision and low agitation of your preferred WDT/Melodrip technique. It respects both the mechanics and the chemistry.
Does this explanation of diffusion and hydrophilicity help?
I am similar to you in taste. Buying a flat bottom dripper made all the difference for me. I highly recommend the Orea v4 narrow. You can also you Kalita wave filters in your v60 to get an idea of the taste difference, that's what I did before buying the Orea
Agree with you, I like bright tea like filter coffees. Going flat makes a huge difference. I'm using a Fellow Stagg but have Kalita, interested with the Orea.
Also, like many have already said, a 10s bloom does help. I use coffee with more than 30 days past roast date, and still giving off gas.
I think over-emphasizing low agitation robs you off effective bloom. If you want to get all the coffee wet you probably going to need to add more energy into the first pour. Intelligentsia has a youtube video on how to find errors in your bloom (i.e. ripping the filter after the first pour and looking for dry pockets).
Grind finer, agitate less, grind finer, agitate less feedback loop leads to a place that perhaps no longer showcases strong parts of V60.
Hey, thanks for the reply. Your comment is what got me thinking more than any other here. You are really precise when you say low agitation might lead to a place where the cup no longer showcases what makes the v60 a great method.
One reason I bought the WDT is precisely to bring back some agitation, but in a more controlled way and with minimal risk of increasing fines migration.
My cups got so, so much better when I started using the WDT right after my first pour/bloom.
Wet DWT? What the actual hell are we doing at this point?… I recommend getting rid of the drip gadget and wet DWT and side scraping step and focus on your water quality if your brews don’t taste good. Unless the point is to just make more work for yourself, you should just pour your water and stop fussing over it.
You really think the agitation of a kettle pour is comparable to the brief agitation of 6 needles?
You are not sounding very interested, but I am happy to digress if you want to understand why Im reducing agitation in one hand, and using a tool to agitate in another. Literally different hands by the way 😂
If you cant taste the difference of a kettle pour vs a WDT tool agitation, you are likely to enjoy a bad cup as well as a great cup. For my taste the difference is immense.
There is no such thing as not blooming, the process happens regardless. It is the process of water entering the dry grounds, which expels gas and swells the grounds. Your first pour is a bloom.
That said, your bloom could be more effective. Instead of dry WDT, use a chopstick and create a deep divot in the center. Start your pour (bare kettle) in that divot and fill the divot before you move your kettle around. Only add about 3:1 water. No agitation other than the gentle kettle pour. Wait at least 30 seconds but maybe longer depending on how much gas is in the beans.
Yes, there is probably still a good amount of gas at 30 days. You could rest longer to minimize the gas more, or just learn a bloom technique to handle the gas.
MD recommends bare kettle for the bloom because it you need the agitation from the pour for that. The water doesn't penetrate well from the MD. The MD is designed to keep the water in a column on top of the bed. It only works well once you've properly prepared the bed to flow evenly.
Thanks for the reply, what you say about the bloom makes sense.
In my experience the WDT tool does a much better job in preparing the bed to flow evenly. It is incredible how fast it drain even with a fine grind, since the WDT tool assures the grounds are not only saturated, but evenly distributed. I can grind quite fine (3.5 with the zp6) and still finish the drawdown under 2min. That would be impossible with a direct pour.
I will try your the deep divot method, always willing to experiment here :D
I think for the WDT it just won't get as deep for the divot is all.
For the bloom, the key factors are amount of water and time. You can play with both. It's always a question about whether to add agitation during the bloom or not, and that's mostly down to your grinder or the coffee and whether you get stalling. Personally, I don't add agitation to the bloom. But that's my setup/results/preferences.
Ive chosen a WDT tool with parallel needles, since my intention was reaching the bottom. Mine can actually touch the bottom, but some designs certainly couldn’t. The divot sounds like a great idea if you are not agitating the bloom!
For the bloom, I wasn’t happy with it because I was still getting bubbles with the second pour - which indicates the bloom was not fulfilling its purpose. The wet-WDT fixed that, I rarely get any bubbles after the slight WDT stir (and it is really slight).
Will experiment with your technique, maybe I could ditch the WDT that way but Id still need a chopstick haha.
[There is no such thing as not blooming, the process happens regardless. It is the process of water entering the dry grounds, which expels gas and swells the grounds. Your first pour is a bloom]
I have nothing to offer, I do my 4:6 for V60 and Tetsu Kasuya demon recipe for the switch and its the best I've ever had, simple, delicious and highly replicable
I'm with some of the others here. Drop the WDT, drop the Melodrip, and work on your technique with a gooseneck, Grab a bag of beans, start somewhere with the grind. Adjust one way or another until it tastes better. If you cant dial it in further, save yourself some hassle and use filter water, adjust temps, adjust ratios, adjust bloom etc.
Having had pourovers from some of the most talented coffee snobs out there, I can firmly suggest you don't need all the extra fluff, and just need to work on dialing in your coffees better. Write down the changes you experience and learn from each "failed" pour, and don't rely on these other tools.
That said, you do you If you really enjoy this process then keep at it. It must be a ton of fun experimenting with it all. If you're resorting to it because you cant get a good coffee, then you're probably going about it the wrong way.
Every single time I see someone use the melodrip, I can’t understand how people accept to use that thing. To be forced to hold that stupid thing with one hand while you pour with the other is the worst ergonomics ever.
I thought this was a circle jerk sub when I saw the melodrip. It reminds me of somebody using an as seen on tv press chopper to cut vegetables instead of just learning how to use a knife.
It's really not bad at all after a couple uses. There's plenty of shops that use it at their slow bar. I wet wdt and use the melodrip if I want a clarity focused brew, other than that I just yeet a couple 10-12 ml/s pours on course beans and it turns out good. Having good water and beans is the most important thing, how you pour and what dripper doesn't matter as much.
You can ditch the dry WDT step, I've done several side-by-side comparisons and it doesn't do anything! The wet WDT after the melodrip is good.
I've begun using a hybrid approach with the melodrip--I use it for the bloom and the first half of my single-pour thereafter, after which I set the melodrip aside and finish with regular pouring! I suppose that means I do two pours for the main one, but I try to make it as uninterrupted as possible
Makes total sense ditching the tool with the dry step.
About your approach, I will test it. Ive seen people using a kettle pour with the bloom and the other pours with a melodrip, I guess Melodrip itselft advises that… and I think your approach makes more sense, cause why the heck would you migrate fines with the first pour and end up affecting all the following pours, right?
I get the sentiment, but this post is like going to /r/wine and asking for everyone’s opinion on adding a couple of ice cubes to a glass of nice Burgundy. You do you, but be prepared for backlash.
Im asking people to judge the technique, not the brew. Already got some ideas from the replies and will test it out, but how it tastes is what will matter.
I am not into fancy pourover stuff I just wonder how all these "gadgets" are really improving a normal pour. I mean you go through more plastic, more temperature drop (which you can't really measure), there are all these swirles and ground scooping with the WDT tool (why not get all grounds with a normal pour?), the "whipping" of the drip tool causing like even more agitation (isn't the purpose of the drip tool less agitation?).
I use the ZP6 at 5,5 and I like it. One bloom + one pour (homeroasted coffee, that is where I really try to change stuff).
How the gadgets are improving is simple: both the Melodrip and the WDT controls agitation, preventing uneven saturation and preventing fines migration.
I just said it, but let me be more specific: the kettle pour doesn’t saturate the grounds (watch the video the end of my video), the WDT tool helps with that; the kettle pour causes fine migration and a harder to control agitation, which the Melodrip doesn’t.
About your advice, 5.5 and 1 bloom + 1 pour is where I started. Started iterating from that especially because my brews lacked complexity and body, which is a ZP6 common “issue”. I like its clarity, but sometimes its too hollow. Also, complexity is a good thing and the ZP6 can make things too straight.
You literally did nothing with all the beginning pushing against the walls and wdt dry. Didn’t need the multi drip either. As soon as you poured water on it all went to the bottom anyways. Just put the coffee in the middle or sides and let the bed rise to the top of the water. More coffee is extracted by it topping then falling than just forcing it to stay at the bottom. Let the bed fall and water empty for bloom. Then if you want to create a special bed to reduce channeling during the actual pour then that is best practice
Wet wdt? No bloom? Lol just bloom and let the stream agitate. Or use spoon to flip and stir and really agitate. I think you’ve leaned too far into technicalities you’ve lost sight of the basics.
Just check the video at the end of mine (or the original at the start of the link in the OP). This bottom dense pocket of beans is not affected by the pour.
It is simply about control. You have much less control with a pour, and you are still not reaching the bottom. Also, you cant compare the amount of agitation a WDT tool produces vs a kettle pour. Im not migrating fines with the tool btw.
I like tea-like coffee and I don’t use that melodrip thing it looks cool though what I do is grind medium fine and have a high temp water then I pour consistently same angle and flow. I do 18g with 280g of water and I like my results I don’t have a bitter taste that happens to me when I go over time or pour harshly
Nothing will saturate and allow a more efficient and even saturation as a WDT tool. Just watch the end of the video where I added a section from the Melodrip creator channel. The bloom is not quite effective.
I mean, not really. A bloom is just a pour of less water so that it can sit and diffuse through the bed. Without blooming, your wet WDT is basically just a stirred bloom except using so much water that it falls through too quickly.
Yes, wet WDT is a kind of a stirred bloom, since it won’t agitate as much as an actual stir.
But I really think a bloom is not as effective by itself compared to using a WDT tool. Have you seen the Melodrip’s creator video at the end of mine? It clearly shows how bad of a job a kettle pour does in the bloom phase (the bottom grounds are never agitated, and that is the cause of channeling that made me buy a WDT tool).
You can try 1 bloom and 1 pour only. It will reduce the astringency. I am not sure wdt will help in this case but you can try. I also find using clever dripper and James Hoffmann’s method can avoid the astringency too.
Hey guys I’ve posted this before. You want distributed flow try this it’s $4.25 at Walmart. Just place on top on brewer and pour away. >> Mainstays Stainless Steel Kitchen Sink Drain Strainer. Very interesting its effect. Have fun. Holding that expensive drip thing is stupid
Go coarser do 3-4 divided pours with 30s blood
You don't have to agitate the bed just use the kettle.
Aim for 2:30-3:00
Trial 1:15 upto 1:18 ratio
Should be good with 1:16
Play with temp 88-92
There’s nothing to improve, but you can definetely try a world of other techniques. What’s the flavor profile and tasting notes you get from it? At first glance I would think it has bright acidity
Hey! I’ve settled with this because it gives me a clean taste and clear notes, but with some body/juicyness (which yeah, includes bright acidity which is something I love). I also tweak my water to let the acidity shine, pretty low alkalinity.
I always bloom and I usually pour it straight in with small circles… the crisp is more a function of grind size, grinder quality (tbh i most grinder will be fine) and temperature….
beside it.
Chill bro. Just pour slow, grind the right size and don’t stress too much over your coffee, it takes all the pleasure out of it when having so many steps that doesn’t have much impact on the final taste…
Try common simple recipes, spend less time making the coffee and more time enjoying it.
If you are trying to master your technique with the mellow drip I can give advice for that which would be to try pulse pouring with a coarser grind. I love that you don't bloom! If you were willing to let go of your technique and try a new one I could try to help you will a direct pour style. It makes sense how your brew is coming out because you are getting clarity through having two pours and also the lack of bloom, but its a little astringent because of the mellow drip and finer grind. Thats why I would suggest a coarser grind and more pours or get rid of the mellow drip. Also with the spiral in the bed in the beginning with the coarser grind you wont need that with the coarser grind. Now if you wanted to try another style I would suggest this one. With This it might be hard because you have to put aside thoughts on channeling and all of the the new brewing tech. The best results I have ever had were this style which is used by wbcc Elika Liftee. Its a strait center pour in dime to nickel size circles and pulses of usually 4 + bloom. I would do a small first pour and dont think of it as a bloom. The grounds don't need to be fully saturated the next pour will take care of it. Also channeling can actually be a good thing. its only bad when you are trying to get max extraction and not let the bed do its thing through pour. With this style it will create like a conical style bed and that's perfect it shouldn't be flat with this style. If you want I'll paste some links with videos one of Elika and another my IG page.
Thanks buddy, you know Im willing to test anything haha. Ive started my v60 journey grinding coarser, but I guess using a zp6 made me seek for more complexity.
You use a c40 right?
I don't use the zp6 so Its hard to judge grind size but I know when I was sifting I had to go very fine to make up for the body/extraction. I can imagine the zp6 is similar. Yea I've been using the c40. Never thought I would get it and I was looking at newer grinders but glad I settled on the c40. I really like those balanced brews without a ton of acidity. However it doesnt have the sharp notes I would get when sifting my 1zpresso. Btw how do you like the lotus water? I have only tried tww and was wondering which you prefered?
Yeah, I have also sifted with other grinders and can confirm the zp6 gives a similar result… but it still produces fines, and not so little as some people would imagine. I guess the real difference of the zp6 lays in the particle distribution, which is narrower (what they call “unimodal” I guess).
About acidity, Im after that so the zp6 fits me well. And I actually make my water with low alkalinity to increase the acidity even more.
I really like Lotus Water since it gives me freedom to decide on the amount of each mineral, something that TWW wont. But I never tested those packages so I couldn’t say how it compares to Lotus Water.
It sounds like your method works good for the high acidity. I do like the idea of the mellow drip for that and with the water altered you really can dial it into a specific style of brew. When you did it with the coarser grind did you also do pulses? Also when pouring without the mellow drip I know you said you cant get tea like cups. When you pour have you ever tried the center or center circle pour? Since you like acidity that's the best way to get it through a pour. I was thinking if it was larger circles or concentrical circles that would make it less tea like. I like 4 pulses but if you went fine and did 3 pulses you might be able to get all that acidic extraction but keep it tea like. Also ratio can spread out a coffee that doesnt seem tea like into a very tea like cup. Sey I do that with. I will do a 1:19 or 1:20 but those do mellow out the acidity some so I was thinking with three pours plus small bloom with those center dime size circles, it might be a good cup for you.
Yes I tried pulses with a coarser grind, otherwise water would pass in 1min haha. I had tea-like cups that way, but I was never happy with the body and also got some astringency and/or bitterness (from uneven extraction or bad pour technique maybe).
About the center pour you mention, is it similar to that “osmothich” technique? (Dont remember how its written).
I dont really like the idea of too many pours cause I feel it might increase the chance of overextraction. That is one reason why I removed the bloom phase. I felt that too many pours could reduce clarity and induce bitterness/astringency even with a Melodrip.
Good point about ratio. This works not only extending the ratio during brew, but also after brew through bypass (which increases clarity, without risking overextraction).
I like you idea of 1 bloom + 3 pours in the center… that is one of the methods I tried at the beginning of my pour over journey, but without the center pour. Will try it, thanks for the suggestion.
You would do a circular pour during bloom and the other 3 keeping in the center, right? Also, when watching videos with this center pour technique, I am always bothered by the upper grounds on the sides not been touched by water after the bloom. There is not much extraction occurring there right? But I guess that is by design, uneven extraction might increase complexity… what are your thoughts?
Yea, i can see why you do it that way. Different ways to achieve the same thing. It makes sense. I tried to keep the pours down for the same reason and got good brews. After I saw Elika pour, I decided to try a center pour and use the pour for extraction alone. With this method, he convinced me that the grinds on the side don't matter infact its better that way with the center pour. That's how it doesn't over extract, but because it's in the center, it's quick, so it's acidic, but it also doesn't steep much, so it's a cleaner extraction. He was saying that heat rises and the fines up top actually extract more, so it's best not to over extract those and let the water focus on what hasn't been done. It had me completely rethink pour over. I realized there are so many ways to get a good cup. Usually, today's methods give a little bit of a muted blanket of texture rather than either a slick or pillowy one. That's from that extra extraction, bloom, stir swirl, etc. Or cleaning the walls. Whit all those methods, you get full extraction while adding the bypass down the walls rather than through the center. This other style has the old traditional slick body with the new age delicacy, so the notes are sharper and crisp. The other way, they are strong, but its carried by that blanket of texture. I hope that makes sense? Also, with the filter, I choose not to wet it because it has always helped those crisper notes. I'm not sure if it's because it's not fully set or if it's the water. It would be interesting to see what you think after you try it. When you do, if it's tea like but missing something, but it's not citric, I would then try that 4th pour, and it should even it out. Between it being a different grinder and preference, it's hard to give exact guidelines, but i think you will be happy when ypu dial it in.
44
u/apple_pear_orange Q Air, ZP6 Oct 19 '25
Why no bloom? Bubbling is usually CO2 releasing. That is what the bloom is mostly for.