@@jazzyflymc totally, it's still far less than direct pour though. But I also think it may be doing more harm than good with cooling the water before it hits the grounds... even if it's minimal. It can have a huge effect on a very light roast using this or aeropress cap
We brewed hundreds of brews to test the melodrip. Two of our Brew trainers (both placed between top 12 at World Brewers Cup run the tests). And actually the TDS is way lower then it was when we did brewing without melodrip. Actually it wasnt possible the achieve a proper extraction while using melodrip. Thas was our experience.
Kaffeemacher that’s interesting. I mean I’ve never stepped foot on a competition stage but consistently for me the TDS has been higher using it. The only downside that I see compared to most other methods is temperature stability. Which I think can be fixed by doing a slow constant pour through a Melodrip instead of the pulses. But for me, it’s easy to get bogged down in the numbers but in the end it’s all about the taste, and the taste from the Melodrip was significantly sharper. Really pulled out the subtleties of the Ethiopian Natural.
Old post but if you couldn’t get a proper extraction it’s user error. I’ve been getting fantastic cups with good clarity. Not to mention Martin Wolfl won world brewers cup this year using Melodrip…
Love your video! I bought one last week. Came today. My recipe on the box show 18:300 ratio with 5 60g pours. I think that's their updated recipe. The coffee was delicious, delicate, silky sweet, floral.
@@Sprometheus No prob! If you haven't tossed the vial yet, did you find that the grind size was a good reference or do you prefer a little bit coarser?
Joshua Brunner I’d say it was a pretty good reference now knowing what it was there for. My pours ran exactly on the timeline they laid out in the directions.
what does the melodrip actually do? it i think for most people it will eliminate too much agitation, that they get when they dont pay careful attention to how they do their pours: from what height they pour, with how much speed they pour, what figures (circles/donuts/..) and how fast they do the figure. so maybe herein lies the different experiences that people make. maybe you can get the same results with or without the melodrip changing your pouring-technique.
So you always brewed at 210F? Did you hit the target 4:30 time? Are you using the new or old style v60 filters (heavily affects draw down). Did you experiment with higher batch sizes? I just did my first melodrip brew on a kalita 155 - 18g, not 15g. Brew finished at 3:45 or so... My grind was pretty dang close to the reference grind particle size. Thanks - I'm going to likely try 25g v60 brew tomorrow.
Maksim Agiy yeah I was very skeptical myself. I always feel like things like this are just making something complicated even more complicated. But I was shocked at the results in the cup and on the refractometer.
It really does work, I've been collecting a lot of data from my own tests and it's a loyal companion for sure. I write and publish my own recipes but at early mornings I love me some melodrip haha.
I guess you've tested this more times than here? It seems people are getting the exact opposite results in terms of extraction and TDS. Socraticcoffee made a nice rest with melodrip some time ago as well.
Spathever yeah I did four separate pourovers using and not using the Melodrip. The results were similar every time. In the end though, people can focus on TDS all day but if it doesn’t taste better what’s the point. And to me the Melodrip definitely increased the clarity and sweetness of a coffee I’m very familiar with.
@@Sprometheus I bought one recently and brewed the Drop Coffee Ethiopia. I followed their recipe on my V60. Bloody hell, floral, sweeter, frutier cup. A nice silly delicate taste of acidity. I don't have refractometer to measure but I am thinking if it tasted so good it must be good. Like you have said one can get high tds but if coffee tastes bad it's no point.
Can someone explain the second result? Why would you pour the coffee back through the melodrip? And how is it changing? Unless you're pouring the coffee back through the grinds again?
@@Sprometheus The higher TDS measurement in the second coffee could be caused by remeasuring the blank sample. I have some experience with refractometers in biochemistry. We never reset the zero measurement between samples. The idea is to get an initial blank measurement with the same water used to extract the coffee to tare the refractometer, then compare each sample to that blank. If you remeasure the blank between each sample, you could skew the results. This is because you're not actually comparing all the samples to the same standard, but you're creating a new standard for each sample. For next time I would suggest only measuring the blank once at the start of the experiment. Between samples you can clean the sensor by loading it with the same water as the blank you used, but do not reset the blank measurement. This way you're comparing all the samples to the same standard, improving the reliability of the measurements. Hope that helps!
@@Sprometheus That's basically pointing to inconsistent temperature compensation algorithms in your TDS meter, isn't it? By the way, which TDS meter IS that?
cepwwpec that’s an interesting question. I just tried that to see how it flows. It’s a little faster of a drip, and some of the streams do blend together, which is why they have the spacing on the Melodrip. But it does look similar. That’s a worthy experiment. I didn’t bring my refractometer home from work this weekend. But I’ll try that and get back with the results!
cepwwpec No. Simply because the aero press cap does not isolate outward flow as individual droplets so the exiting water will actually combine and create larger streams of water, which creates streams that actually agitate unevenly compared to the droplets of the MD. Also, MD has localized pouring and variable flow control based on the flow of your kettle. If you observe the output of the aero press cap the droplets are fairly randomized and inaccurate as to where water is being dripped. Of course you may be able to duplicate the results but not with consistency and accuracy.
Jeff absolutely! So I do basically the Scott Rao method. We do a standard bloom, using twice the weight of our coffee, stir the bloom, and then do a slow continuous pour that lasts roughly 2.25-2.5 minutes, a swirl of the V60 to ensure an even bed as the final water drains through the filter.
It would be nice to see if the same results can be achieved with an aeropress cap
Holes are much bigger on aeropress, so the efect is minimised (more agitation is created, which i think melodrip is trying to decrease)
@@jazzyflymc totally, it's still far less than direct pour though. But I also think it may be doing more harm than good with cooling the water before it hits the grounds... even if it's minimal. It can have a huge effect on a very light roast using this or aeropress cap
We brewed hundreds of brews to test the melodrip. Two of our Brew trainers (both placed between top 12 at World Brewers Cup run the tests). And actually the TDS is way lower then it was when we did brewing without melodrip. Actually it wasnt possible the achieve a proper extraction while using melodrip. Thas was our experience.
Kaffeemacher that’s interesting. I mean I’ve never stepped foot on a competition stage but consistently for me the TDS has been higher using it. The only downside that I see compared to most other methods is temperature stability. Which I think can be fixed by doing a slow constant pour through a Melodrip instead of the pulses. But for me, it’s easy to get bogged down in the numbers but in the end it’s all about the taste, and the taste from the Melodrip was significantly sharper. Really pulled out the subtleties of the Ethiopian Natural.
@@Sprometheus Might be late for this question but what style/speed/ of pouring has worked best for your brew trainers?
Old post but if you couldn’t get a proper extraction it’s user error. I’ve been getting fantastic cups with good clarity. Not to mention Martin Wolfl won world brewers cup this year using Melodrip…
The brew poured through the melodrip didn’t gain extraction by being put through the melodrip it had a higher tds anyway
Correct. You’d have to test the TDS before abs after pouring through to be more accurate
Love your video! I bought one last week. Came today. My recipe on the box show 18:300 ratio with 5 60g pours. I think that's their updated recipe. The coffee was delicious, delicate, silky sweet, floral.
The vial of grounds is a reference vial for how fine/coarse your grind should be. That's all
Joshua Brunner that make sense! Thanks for letting me know.
@@Sprometheus No prob! If you haven't tossed the vial yet, did you find that the grind size was a good reference or do you prefer a little bit coarser?
Joshua Brunner I’d say it was a pretty good reference now knowing what it was there for. My pours ran exactly on the timeline they laid out in the directions.
what does the melodrip actually do? it i think for most people it will eliminate too much agitation, that they get when they dont pay careful attention to how they do their pours: from what height they pour, with how much speed they pour, what figures (circles/donuts/..) and how fast they do the figure. so maybe herein lies the different experiences that people make. maybe you can get the same results with or without the melodrip changing your pouring-technique.
Hi. Is the part that you pour water through made of plastic or glass?
Did you grind finer for the melodrip in this comparison?
So you always brewed at 210F? Did you hit the target 4:30 time? Are you using the new or old style v60 filters (heavily affects draw down). Did you experiment with higher batch sizes? I just did my first melodrip brew on a kalita 155 - 18g, not 15g. Brew finished at 3:45 or so... My grind was pretty dang close to the reference grind particle size. Thanks - I'm going to likely try 25g v60 brew tomorrow.
Please compare melodic with hario drip assist and the gabi drip master B.
I didn't think this thing would work to be honest. Suprising results!
Maksim Agiy yeah I was very skeptical myself. I always feel like things like this are just making something complicated even more complicated. But I was shocked at the results in the cup and on the refractometer.
It really does work, I've been collecting a lot of data from my own tests and it's a loyal companion for sure. I write and publish my own recipes but at early mornings I love me some melodrip haha.
For the second cup here did the extra coffee come from?? It is just not mixed well. you need to do it more than once to get a real results.
I love to have this one
I guess you've tested this more times than here? It seems people are getting the exact opposite results in terms of extraction and TDS. Socraticcoffee made a nice rest with melodrip some time ago as well.
Spathever yeah I did four separate pourovers using and not using the Melodrip. The results were similar every time. In the end though, people can focus on TDS all day but if it doesn’t taste better what’s the point. And to me the Melodrip definitely increased the clarity and sweetness of a coffee I’m very familiar with.
@@Sprometheus I bought one recently and brewed the Drop Coffee Ethiopia. I followed their recipe on my V60. Bloody hell, floral, sweeter, frutier cup. A nice silly delicate taste of acidity. I don't have refractometer to measure but I am thinking if it tasted so good it must be good. Like you have said one can get high tds but if coffee tastes bad it's no point.
Can someone explain the second result? Why would you pour the coffee back through the melodrip? And how is it changing? Unless you're pouring the coffee back through the grinds again?
I don’t really have an explanation other than sample temperature possibly being the variable there. Cooler samples tend to read higher.
@@Sprometheus The higher TDS measurement in the second coffee could be caused by remeasuring the blank sample. I have some experience with refractometers in biochemistry. We never reset the zero measurement between samples. The idea is to get an initial blank measurement with the same water used to extract the coffee to tare the refractometer, then compare each sample to that blank. If you remeasure the blank between each sample, you could skew the results. This is because you're not actually comparing all the samples to the same standard, but you're creating a new standard for each sample.
For next time I would suggest only measuring the blank once at the start of the experiment. Between samples you can clean the sensor by loading it with the same water as the blank you used, but do not reset the blank measurement. This way you're comparing all the samples to the same standard, improving the reliability of the measurements. Hope that helps!
@@Sprometheus That's basically pointing to inconsistent temperature compensation algorithms in your TDS meter, isn't it? By the way, which TDS meter IS that?
Do you think an empty Aeropress would accomplish the same thing with one filter loaded?
cepwwpec that’s an interesting question. I just tried that to see how it flows. It’s a little faster of a drip, and some of the streams do blend together, which is why they have the spacing on the Melodrip. But it does look similar. That’s a worthy experiment. I didn’t bring my refractometer home from work this weekend. But I’ll try that and get back with the results!
cepwwpec No. Simply because the aero press cap does not isolate outward flow as individual droplets so the exiting water will actually combine and create larger streams of water, which creates streams that actually agitate unevenly compared to the droplets of the MD. Also, MD has localized pouring and variable flow control based on the flow of your kettle. If you observe the output of the aero press cap the droplets are fairly randomized and inaccurate as to where water is being dripped. Of course you may be able to duplicate the results but not with consistency and accuracy.
How is aesthetic a bad thing?
Sweet video, do you still use and/recommend the Melodrip? Thank you
Have you heard of the Pureover kickstarter?
I have, I reached out to them and they’ve showed interest in sending me a unit for review. But they said they didn’t have any extras at the moment.
Please review different brewers, like the Origami, Fellow Stagg, and April Brewer
Working on it for sure!
Great video! :D
Clarke Surrey thanks my friend!
Could you please elaborate on how you brew a normal v60? Do you pulse or dump all the water at once? Thanks! :)
Jeff absolutely! So I do basically the Scott Rao method. We do a standard bloom, using twice the weight of our coffee, stir the bloom, and then do a slow continuous pour that lasts roughly 2.25-2.5 minutes, a swirl of the V60 to ensure an even bed as the final water drains through the filter.
@@Sprometheus Ah okay! Thanks so much! :)
Trypophobia alert :/
I only knew that because of Sarah Paulson's bit about it on talk shows! That is on point illustration!
This is quite possibly the most pretentious coffee product so far. Just pour the water on your coffee lol. This is not aimed toward sprometheus
How you pour/agitation/flow rate matters. To say otherwise is nonsense.
@@davidlogan2682 And a kettle does all of those things just fine
@@badnews7801 it can in SOME hands