# Pouring method comparison...



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

So you have weighed & ground your beans, waiting for the water temp to hit your target, you think, "what pour method" shall I try today? Fill & drain, or pulse pours?"...

Too late! If you were aiming for a specific yield and output, the pourover method you use was pretty much decided when you ground the beans.








[/url]

20.1g of coffee, same grind/brewer/paper/temp for the blue & brown lines.

The green line was a tentative attempt to bring the pulse pour (started off at 50g/pour, then with juggling cups & changing weights on the scales I aimed to keep a constant water level) more in line with ~1.30%TDS/19% yield...it didn't work, I'd have had to have gone much, much coarser than shifting from 12.5 on the Rocky to 30, as I did in this case.

Each brew was divided up into 6 portions, apart from the brown line which was 7 (hence we meet this brew at 14% output & the other two at 17%). Each portion was tasted, TDS'd then accumulated with the previous one & tasted again.

As it was, the pulse pours hit 19-20% between 140g & 186g output, at 2.62%TDS & 2.09%TDS average, respectively for fine & medium grinds. Average TDS and yields for the whole of the output were 1.67%TDS @ 24.2% and 1.63%TDS at 23.5% for brown & green lines respectively.

The pulse pours start out stronger and dilute more aggressively as the pour progresses, ending up very much weaker in the final stages, than the average TDS of the cup.

The fill & drain (blue line) starts out more diluted as more water is present in the brewer, dilutes quite a bit early on then levels off, staying around a constant TDS as you get into the ideal range (After this, as you get into the mid 20%'s it'll drop sharply, like the pulse pour lines). To get the blue line into the 1.30%TDS/19% range, I'd just have to have put another 20g or so through the bed. I actually averaged 1.30%TDS at 18.2% yield.

Despite the higher TDS and yield, the fine pulse pour (brown) was quite palatable, if not ideal/great...a little over, sure, but perhaps the weakening beverage lessens the effect in the cup a little? The medium grind pulse pour (green line) was weaker on average & less extracted by a nearly a %, but the final output was a shade stronger...and positively vile (my notes say "tastes like terrapins/how pet shops smell"). So I drank that brew at 22% in the cup (leaving out the last sixth of output), I did taste it at 20% (2/3 output) & found it on the bright side...somewhere between the two would have been ideal?

This isn't meant to suggest that one method is better than the other, both have their merits, just to show that hopping from one to the other, without serious dialing in, can end up like a "scattergun" approach.

The thing that struck me most, whilst tasting was that all 3 brews were sweet, juicy (though strong), with the least "off" flavours at between 11% & 13% yields! Much after this point, the later portions of the output didn't taste great by themselves, though they often certainly served to balance & improve the cup overall. There may be more than "two humps"...? David Walsh also identified something along these lines in his Phase 1 preference study (12.5% to 14%), I always wondered how some of the drip pot recipes at over 200g/l & a course grind managed to hit gold cup range extractions, perhaps they just don't?


----------



## Earlepap (Jan 8, 2012)

I do find your graphs beautiful. Thank you.


----------

