# French press method



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)




----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Excellent clip, Mark. Really helpful.


----------



## "coffee 4/1" (Sep 1, 2014)

interesting, great clip must try, off to find my press.


----------



## scottomus (Aug 13, 2014)

Ah so you recommend not plunging at all!?


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

scottomus said:


> Ah so you recommend not plunging at all!?


That's right. A very fine filter like an Espro, should be OK (in fact, very fine filters may stop the flow of liquid, so you may have to pour, press a little, pour a little & so on...try to let the coffee run through the mesh rather than squeeze it through?), but no matter how coarse you grind there will still be some sludge that gets through the mesh when you plunge with regular meshes, so best not to give it the opportunity. Grinding so coarse as to stop sludge, or sieving out the fines is likely to limit extraction. You can use a coarser grinds with a big brew, but the bigger brew will take longer to drop to a good drinking temp, this also gives it time to extract.

The finer grinds sink faster & as long as you don't kick them up, largely stay out of the way. There is always some solids that get though (without paper filtering), it's trying to find a balance between that and stopping too many of them from contributing to a bitter cup.


----------



## scottomus (Aug 13, 2014)

Brilliant, thanks. Something to consider !


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Never really understood the whole "sludge is bad" thing with french press.

Filter is filter, press is press.

Apart from that, good primer on a basic longish extraction press.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Kyle548 said:


> Never really understood the whole "sludge is bad" thing with french press.
> 
> Filter is filter, press is press.
> 
> Apart from that, good primer on a basic longish extraction press.


Cheers. Sludge is only bad if it stops you enjoying the cup (say by surpressing sweetness, or gritty texture). For me personally, I don't really differentiate between brew methods, I expect any method to reflect the tasting notes & produce a sweet, juicy cup. Sure, I'd expect a cleaner cup from a paper filtered brew, but I wouldn't expect a big difference between a cleaner press & say a metal filtered drip brew, in terms of flavour balance & silt....other than in the time they took, of course! ;-)

My idea here was really to aim for a cleaner cup, without the faff off additional filtering etc., using pretty much everyday/easily accessible tools.


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

I'd like to add that while the video tries to keep things simple, there is a lot of scope for personalisation; tracking water temp and by extension insulated presses - there is also ALOT of debate about how to handle the coffee.

For example, water first or coffee first. There's also how much you aggregate the grounds - if you do water first, it's generally recommended to wet the coffee enough to bloom and then only touch once brewed - essentially cupping with a plunger.

Then theres drinking.

Here you are recommended to remove the coffee after the duration has expired; the traditional way to drink french press would be to plunge and then partially fill your cup - from here you too up from the press.

If you are going for the shorter extractions this can be a good way to get a taste of coffee across the ranges.

Basically, the mechanism for brewing French press is the simplest but this means you have the most freedom; in comparison to something like a Hario, which will bite if you don't play by the rules.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

I put the coffee in first in this example, with a NSEW stir on filling, because I have (& do still) add coffee to the water...this tends to slow the extraction (but can give a cleaner still cup), I was looking to keep things short as they needed to be - even if "short" doesn't really describe the method . Also, when the coffee lands on the water, you have a fair bit of scope for variances in the wetting (too little and it's likely to underextract, too much and the grinds can sink early & also stall extraction)...not quite so easy to demonstrate & replicate, compared to the fill & brief stir.

The stir at fill is not commensurate with cupping protocols, but otherwise it borrows certain aspects from some cupping protocols...essentially a strained cupping with no break?

You can leave the coffee longer than the 20min shown, it won't extract significantly beyond this point, it will continue to cool. For the 10g:190g shown, I wouldn't leave it too much longer, but you certainly can for larger brews (e.g. 16g:304g brews were 70C +/-2C at 20mins on the timer, 500g brew water in a steel, double-walled press was 68C at 40mins - but almost all these brews hit the extraction range I was looking for. There are some additional notes in the info on YT.

There are literally hundreds of French press videos recommending short steeps already...none of them gave the same result as this recipe (not 'wrong' in any way, just a different target?). Pouring a significant proportion of the pot early will leave grinds in a smaller mass of slurry, this will cool quicker & the higher concentration may prevent the extraction hit the typical levels that the recipe above will.

This certainly isn't a completely fool-proof recipe, nor will it suit all preferences, but nothing described is accidental...it's pretty much the culmination of 50 odd brews over 3 months (various grinders, coffees & waters). I wasn't happy with the idea of posting a "one-off" brew recipe, or repeating others' recipes that I personally didn't enjoy, or posting something that just hit what I wanted to achieve on one or two occasions & assuming 'job done'. I wanted to be happy that it met my target & was as repeatable as it could be, without overly technical specifications, in the hope that anyone, especially a non-coffee geek (optimistic perhaps given the general public's aversion for brewing with scales), might fancy giving it a go & maybe perceive a difference over the usual routine...

It's not the 'only' way by any means


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Anyway, good to see your still working with longer brews.

Other than here, never really seen anyone seriously play with long brews; the consensus is very much still for short brews.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

I don't look at the time as a particularly important factor in a home brew, there's always espresso, or drip if you're in a hurry. Apart from the brews that preceded this one, I also did press brews & cups all the way down to 1minute, but it seemed a bit pointless as they were too hot to enjoy until several minutes after that. Some coffees do hit the target in 10mins or less, but if it only gave my desired result for some coffees, rather than a majority, I wouldn't have been happy with it as a method.

In experiments carried out by MIT & the CBI, they showed that they were well able to under-extract coffee in 10-20minutes, it's not a new idea...nor was it ever practical for a commercial setting. Getting the flavour balance you want takes as little, or as long, as it takes.


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

Going to have to try this, sounds interesting not having to change my grinder setting for espresso


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

Just tried this with some Round Hill Spring, 15g espresso grind > 285g water. Followed the vid to the second (just changed the amount but kept it 1.19).

Poured off the first bit and (mostly) the rest went into my cup. Very little sediment in my cup at the end. I don't know if I didn't pour off enough as the taste was a little bitter (back of mouth like paracetamol) which ruined it slightly. Other than that it was ok (no milk nor sugar added)


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

In the video I pour off a little less than I normally would, usually pour off a shot's worth. If you felt the coffee was warm enough & could stand a little more time (to settle), maybe that's an option, or nudge the grind a shade coarser?

Was the paracetamol taste constant throughout the cup?


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

I'd suggest grinding a little coarser and maybe lowering the temp a little.

Probably start with the temp first.

Your water is going to boil differently than anyone else's - due to altitude and hardness, so you need to find what works for you rather than copying directly.

Ideal brewing temps fall between 90 and 94, with 92 being best for a lot of coffee.

Darker need lower and lighter need higher - as a rule of thumb.


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

MWJB said:


> In the video I pour off a little less than I normally would, usually pour off a shot's worth. If you felt the coffee was warm enough & could stand a little more time (to settle), maybe that's an option, or nudge the grind a shade coarser?
> 
> Was the paracetamol taste constant throughout the cup?


Yes, the taste was constant throughout the cup, the temp in the cup was fine - hot enough not to guzzle it down, cool enough to comfortable drink it (I had my cup full of hot water at 18 minutes to heat it up)

Maybe I should grind it a shade courser and go from there? Will it affect it if I left it, say another five minutes or do you recommend longer?



Kyle548 said:


> I'd suggest grinding a little coarser and maybe lowering the temp a little.
> 
> Probably start with the temp first.
> 
> ...


I have got a temp probe thing that you use for steaming but the dial is a bit loose so turns therefore useless lol.

Would I be better filling a cup from my Classic (with the pf removed)? The water should be ideal brew temp then and I can transfer it to the French press?


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

Rhys said:


> I have got a temp probe thing that you use for steaming but the dial is a bit loose so turns therefore useless lol.
> 
> Would I be better filling a cup from my Classic (with the pf removed)? The water should be ideal brew temp then and I can transfer it to the French press?


The classic won't give you consistently hot water.

The kettle will be the best bet.

Sometimes adding water directly to the coffee can shock it, try pouring into the press rather than the coffee and agitate very little.

This is the remains of a FP I made.

20 min steep time starting at 92 in a thermal FP.

I did water first, put the grounds on top and just very lightly mixed until all the grounds bloomed.

Put the lid on, and didn't touch it until pour time.

I plunged it all the way and used all the water.

Was very bright and not bitterness at all.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Rhys said:


> Yes, the taste was constant throughout the cup, the temp in the cup was fine - hot enough not to guzzle it down, cool enough to comfortable drink it (I had my cup full of hot water at 18 minutes to heat it up)
> 
> Maybe I should grind it a shade courser and go from there? Will it affect it if I left it, say another five minutes or do you recommend longer?


I suspect it's tiny suspended particles, leaving a little longer may give them a better chance to settle, I leave mine up until the coffee in the pot is 55-60C (go by what temp you prefer, I'll often drop a thermometer down the plunger hole while it's steeping)...which can take a little longer than the times in the video. If grinding a little coarser is easy for you without throwing out all your settings, then yes, this is a good plan, you may not need to go massively coarser? Let us know how it goes.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Kyle548 said:


> The classic won't give you consistently hot water.
> 
> The kettle will be the best bet.
> 
> ...


Hey, you could make a video of your recipe? ;-)


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

MWJB said:


> Hey, you could make a video of your recipe? ;-)


Nothing good can come of me and a video camera.


----------



## jlarkin (Apr 26, 2015)

This is really interesting thanks for sharing it! I wish I hadn't drunk so much coffee today I'm already buzzing and want to try these new things straight away!


----------



## JGF (Jan 2, 2015)

@MWJB - many thanks for taking the time to post this - have had some delicious brews whilst away as a result. Ive been leaving much longer with a coarser grind (limited by a hario slim) but have been coming out clean and super sweet and fortunately I prefer it colder anyway.


----------



## krabster (May 29, 2013)

very interesting take! got my sunday morning sorted


----------



## jlarkin (Apr 26, 2015)

Thanks for commenting. It reminded me that I hadn't tried this yet. It does definitely give a very clear cup. I think I needed to grind finer as it was a little lacking in flavour but it was still plenty hot enough after 15 mins.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

jlarkin said:


> I think I needed to grind finer as it was a little lacking in flavour but it was still plenty hot enough after 15 mins.


I use the same philosophy (with a glass, single wall, non-insulated French press - not advised for double-wall & insulated presses!) that some use for milk steaming: if it's too hot to hold, it's too hot to drink.

28 mins and my 16:308g brew is still just too hot to hold for more than a few seconds (~63C)...


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

MWJB said:


> I use the same philosophy (with a glass, single wall, non-insulated French press - *not advised for double-wall & insulated presses*!)


I have to disagree.

One gets a most fabulous cup from insulated presses.


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

Kyle548 said:


> I have to disagree.
> 
> One gets a most fabulous cup from insulated presses.


Think you missed the point


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

jeebsy said:


> Think you missed the point


I'm sure you know me well enough by now that expecting anything less than driving past the point and coming to a full stop all the way in Russia's electoral collage should be a surprise to you.


----------



## jeebsy (May 5, 2013)

At least try and be funny with it then


----------



## Kyle548 (Jan 24, 2013)

jeebsy said:


> At least try and be funny with it then


Now I think you missed the point.


----------

