Metal vs. Paper... and the winner is...

Submitted by Kirk on Mon, 01/18/2010 - 15:18

If I understand my shallow knowledge of brewing correctly, the French press is the highly favored method for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that it preserves the natural oils of the coffee in the drink thereby preserving much of the original flavor. I have heard that a metal filter in a coffee machine has a similar effect on preserving much of the oil from the beans. If this is true, why are paper filters used so predominately? In fact, in the long run, it seems that it would be much cheaper to go paperless since one does not have to buy the filters or worry about disposing of them.... all for a better taste. Is this a logical assumption? Are most machines still predominately paper simply because the general public is used to that, or is there an indistinguishable difference between the two and I am making a mountain out of a molehill? Obviously, if one has the time, a press is the route to go; but for those quick cups in the morning before work, a metal filter seems to be the route to go. I would be curious to know if you all agree that there is a difference and if there is, why more machines aren't going paperless.

aha *a dim bulb lightens*

Interesting, that makes a lot more sense. Just for clarity, I was not suggesting that the brewing in coffee shops/convenience stores/McDonald's/homes go strictly to presses (which would require the need to hire a "babysitter") but merely that more machines use metal filters (such as my Delonghi at home) as opposed to paper filters. Of course, this point is now somewhat moot since you demonstrated that a paper filter has it's own pros (as well as cons).

Thanks for enlightening me. Just curious to know if the "rumor" I'd heard was true... not surprisingly, it was not. There should be some sort of coffee police that arrests people (or at the very least, roughs them up a bit) for spreading falsely malicious and/or ignorant rumors about coffee. It would make understanding the complicated world of coffee so much easier...

"Is this a logical

"Is this a logical assumption?" In a word, no.

Allow me to explain.

The press method does allow oils to go through and add to the flavor experience found in a cup of coffee. It also allows for what would be known as "fines": the tiny particles of ground coffee that pass through the much larger holes in a metal filter. While these fines add perceived body and mouth-feel to a cup of coffee, they also can detract from the perceived clarity and "brightness" that a particular coffee offers. Paper -- as well as cloth -- filters take away these fines, thereby giving a cleaner, sometimes less muted cup of coffee. Furthermore, some coffee aficionados would say that a paper and cloth filter that takes away a portion of those oils are actually doing some good by doing so, as that process may aid in allowing other delicate but still highly-desirable characteristics to shine through. Both a press and a paper/cloth filter method can brew a wonderful cup of coffee, but both methods still have some sort of inherent weakness. There is also a great deal to consider when it comes to the size consistency of your coffee grounds.

As for the argument that an all-metal filter practice would be cheaper, I would say that that depends on who is doing your brewing. Many paper filters are used in settings where massive amounts of coffee are required in a very short period of time; presses and such would require a lot of dish washing and babysitting, whereas a paper filter offers a very quick cleanup. What costs more, a handful of paper filters, or paying an extra staff member to babysit the presses during peak hours?

For the record, there are shops that use paper filters for small-batch filtered brewing, but they tend do to so for taste and freshness purposes, and not necessarily convenience. The methods they use include the Chemex and the Hario V60.