God Shot

random retrospective

2012-01-01T10:07:00.001-08:00

2011 in coffee... where do i start?

it was an "interesting" year to say the least.

so let's go through the various highlights, lowlights and "odd" lights from the year.

Trends of the Year

1. Light Roasts. Driven by a range of trends (young coffee professionals differentiating themselves from their mentors, re-adoption of brewed coffee among professionals, scandinavian roasters, ExtractMojo, etc.) 2011 was the year of the light roast. The good results are that fewer and fewer coffees taste like ash-trays and that roasters have less ability to hide inferior and defective beans. The bad results are that many roasters don't have the skills required to light roast coffees well and most of all that we are returning to the age when our messaging to consumers is all about roast degree (rather than flavour etc).

2. Business Investments and Scaling. Stumptown takes a huge chunk of cash from a PE firm in order to scale the business. Much back-biting and smack-talking follows. Then it becomes clear that a bunch of the shit-talking competitors have done the same. It is highly likely that 2012 will continue this trend and introduce a round of consolidation as well, where these capitalized larger artisan coffee businesses proceed to acquire smaller competitors to grow inorganically.

Innovations of the Year

1. VST baskets. These baskets introduced basket design as a serious component of espresso to the coffee world. The research done by the VST crew inspires dozens of others to start looking at the differences between baskets and effects on extraction. In 2012 we should see some additional work done that answers some of the now glaring and obvious questions that have been raised as a result. It is highly likely that we will see a far better understanding of espresso come out of this process - and a number of new baskets that give baristas a far better "quiver" to work with (as opposed to the obviously flawed "one size fits all" model we have at present).

2. EP Sproline groupscreen and screw. While everyone in coffee was talking about the VST baskets and (in some cases) were radically overstating the results of them -- no-one was talking about another new product that was equally innovative and effective. These precision parts also improved extraction and dramatically decreased cleaning and contamination challenges.

Lessons of the Year

1. Espresso and brewed coffee are different. We've gone through a series of massive shifts in the way we think of espresso. From a specific flavour profile beverage to just another method of preparing coffee. At this point it seems like the pendulum has swung too far and espressos are starting to taste simply like a heavily concentrated and reduced cupped coffee. As a result, the primary goal of a "good tasting" beverage seems to have been abandoned by the wayside. The two beverages are different, but should both taste good. They do not, however, need to taste "the same" (especially if "the same" in either case means "bad").

2. Working with growers yields great results. The quality of green coffee from top producers continues to improve - but more importantly, more and more producers are taking the leap to "top producer" status (by quality). In a very large percentage of cases, this leap has been fueled by a collaborative relationship between a roaster and a grower. This direct and collaborative relationship is the emerging model for creation of truly world-class coffees. I'm really happy that more and more roasters are investing in these relationships.

3. Online conversations about coffee are frustrating and largely counterproductive. I've walked away from all coffee websites at this point. Being involved in the discussions on these sites has made me incredibly jaded and cynical about all people involved in all parts of the coffee experience. I chose to disengage because I want to continue to love coffee. I would suggest others consider this if they find themselves starting to hate people who are passionate about coffee.

Hopes for Next Year

1. Fewer sour coffees. In 2011 I had three coffees that were entirely green in the center of the bean (literally unroasted). Two of these coffees came from "highly regarded" roasters. The majority of coffees I evaluated from US roasters in 2011 had between noticeable and severe sourness. When cupping with "taste" professionals (sommeliers etc) who are not coffee pros, the biggest complaint in 2011 was sourness in the cup.

2. More honesty in coffee. People in the coffee world need to stop saying that they like competitors' coffees when they actually dislike them. People in the coffee world need to stop keeping their mouths shut about Sumatran coffee and Monsooned coffees etc etc. Consumers take our dishonesty and our silence as truth and when less reputable coffee companies market negatives as positives, the consumers don't know better. Time to call bullshit on the... well.. bullshit.

3. Better customer service. For the fourth year in a row I hope that this year is the year that going to a good coffee bar in the US is a consistently good experience rather than simply a way for hipsters to judge you as lame and undeserving of their artistic and under-appreciated genius (and luxurious facial hair).

Espressos of the Year

1. Tim Wendelboe Honduras Cielito Lindo Espresso. Showing that a very light roast coffee can still be wonderfully balanced, complete, sweet, fully developed and not sour at all. A revelation.

2. Stumptown Guatemala Finca El Injerto Bourbon Espresso. Perfectly nuanced, balanced, flexible and layered. The first single origin espresso in my memory that I would consider replacing a blend with for "each and every day for the rest of my life" purposes.

Fails of the Year

1. Numerous undrinkable shots of espresso from well-regarded coffee bars. I threw out more shots of espresso from top coffee bars in 2011 than any year before. Quality of espresso served in the top coffee bars in the US seemed in my experience to decline from 2010 to 2011.

2. Numerous severely under-developed coffees. In part, the above "bad espresso" fail was due to the severely under-developed coffees that many baristas were having to work with. As the US coffee world adopted lighter roast coffees, many failed to understand that roasting lighter requires a different approach and profile for roasting. A huge percentage of coffees evaluated in 2011 were under-developed in the roast. Where this become seriously problematic was in espressos - where many coffees were actually impossible to prepare well as a result. I'm hoping that I don't taste a single espresso in 2012 that tastes like piping hot cranberry concentrate with a dash of lab grade citric acid as a topper.

3. Restaurant coffee. Another year where restaurant coffee sucked. Another year where I stupidly tried... again and again. Local favorites, Michelin starred places... all the coffee sucked.

integrated thinking

2011-10-04T14:01:00.000-07:00

I recently helped a long-time friend (not in the coffee business) with his initial dive into the world of home espresso.

After taking him through some basic training - he commented to me that he didn't expect making coffee to be such an "intellectual pursuit." I asked him what he meant and he replied (and I'm paraphrasing from flawed memory) something like:

I thought that making espresso would be more like an art - with a lot of self-expression going on. But it's not really like that. It's also not like science - because it's really about producing something that tastes good (an inherently subjective goal). It requires right brain and left brain thinking.

He's an engineer by training - who ended up working in marketing for Apple. It should have been no shock that he was producing decent espresso quite quickly given this and his comment above.

So... the Art v Science argument (schism?) has been a long-standing situation in coffee (pro and amateur). But after talking to my friend, I realized that both are false choices. The reality is that it's neither.

Making great coffee is a craft in the truest sense of the word. Keeping this in mind is likely to be a simple trick for determining what really is important and what is not.

logic

2011-09-23T11:21:00.000-07:00

I love reading people bitching about the poor quality of espresso they get in coffee bars.

I went to one of the top coffee bars in NYC last week and the espresso I got was terrible. I'm no longer going to coffee bars because I can make better coffee at home.

Some simple logic here...

How did you determine that it was one of the "top coffee bars"? Logic would indicate that it might not be. The reality is that massive percentage of "top" coffee business (according to the interwebs) are total crap.

Every barista (no matter how good they are) pulls a crap shot now and then. Did you try a second shot? If not... logic would indicate you should have.

Just because you got a bad coffee (perhaps an anomaly or perhaps it's a bad coffee business) doesn't mean all coffee bars are bad. This isn't even a logic issue. It's a reason issue.

At the end of the day I can't help but wonder if you're going into coffee bars looking for an opportunity to validate your decision to spend thousands of dollars on coffee equipment for your home and/or get a nice ego stroke (rather than looking to learn about coffee).

VST basket clown show

2011-09-20T09:11:00.000-07:00

I'm not going into details.

Feel free to do a search on the internet if you want to understand.

But rather than emailing all sorts of people... I'm just posting this statement here.

I am not interested in talking to you about how these baskets suck and why you are right in your opinion.

I am not interested in talking to you about how these baskets are revolutionary and why you are right in this opinion.

I am most certainly not interested in talking to you about how those who disagree with you are idiots or are slandering you or are mean and unpleasant.

Do not email me about this.

Do not call me about this.

Do not stop me on the street and talk to me about this.

Comments to this post that attempt to engage in discussion about this goat rodeo will be deleted.

Updated: I'm ashamed of some of you.

Stumptown Steps Up

2011-06-20T22:21:00.000-07:00

I wrote a post about the investment that Stumptown recently raised back a week or so ago.

No... that's not the honest truth.

I wrote a post a week or so ago about how the response to the Stumptown news from within the coffee community illustrated perfectly many of the reasons that I no longer worked in coffee - and which in general took the coffee profession to task for its lack of professionalism and seriousness in business.

But that's another whole topic -- cause I decided it was the wrong thing and the wrong point.

So I decided to wait - and to see what shook out from all this.

So now I have an idea of what people are saying, have said (and probably are going to say). I think I see how this has played out. And I'm going to share my thoughts.

I have a somewhat unique perspective on this deal.

I used to work at Stumptown.
I used to work at a Corporate Venture Fund.
I'm a serial entrepreneur who has started multiple (externally funded) companies (two of which were sold to other companies).

So, I think I have a perspective that might be worth hearing.

Now, first, I need to put a few caveats first (just to be clear)...

I am not writing this based on any sort of "insider information" on the deal. My relationship with TSG is purely second hand, and while I'm still a friend of many folks at Stumptown (including Duane) and a fan of the company and its coffee I'm neither involved with the company nor involved in the deal in any way. In fact, my guess is Duane and the Stumptown family are going to probably wish I'd not said anything.
This is purely my opinion based on the points listed above under Perspective. In other words - I'm writing this as pure speculation (like everything else written in this thread -- and for that matter in the various press pieces covering this deal to date).

For me, there are two key things about this deal.

First - this is a huge validation for the high-end sector of the speciality coffee market. The fact that a fund like TSG is making a bet on Stumptown at this time says that they see significant potential for growth in the whole sector. This sector has long been ignored not just in the investment world (of course) but in the larger coffee world as well (the "less than 2% of the market" comment has been made a million times). For the other companies that have also been building the space, and for consumers of high-end coffees, this is great news. Sadly - as far as I know this has not be covered in the press. Given that it should be the main story, that makes me both sad and frustrated.

Second - that being said, there is one group of people out there who should be very nervous about this deal. And no... it's not Stumptown customers or Stumptown employees. It's competitors of Stumptown. In looking at the stated and rumored goals (open more retail locations in NYC, open business in Chicago, open business in SF) you can model this out to mean that (if successful) Stumptown will be at least doubling the volume of green coffee they are buying within 24 months. Where is that coffee going to come from? From other high-end roasters. And who will they be selling the roasted coffee to? That's right - customers of other roasters. And who will be working in these new roasteries and new retail locations? Yeah... you get the idea. Combining Stumptown's brand, relationships and expertise with a whole big stack of new capital... yeah, if I were running a competitor I'd be nervous.

Now... after talking to folks and reading all the crazy shit that's been out there - there are a couple things that I feel like I need to comment on. Again... these are just my opinions. But... well... I think I'm probably more right than most people.

the idea that Duane is going to "cash out" and leave in a year or two is something that only someone who doesn't know him could ever come up with. The man has no hobbies. His entire life is coffee and Stumptown. He truly loves what he does - and he loves Stumptown. In the time I worked at Stumptown he never took a vacation longer than a 3 day weekend that I can remember. There is absolutely no way that he would (or perhaps could) do something else (and that includes not working). As a result, I feel like we can absolutely assume that his motivation was something other than "cashing out" -- which fundamentally changes the structure and tenor of the deal (given that it changes the motivation).
everything I hear says that Stumptown was doing better financially than it ever had before. In other words, financial hardship (another common motivator for capitalization deals like this) was not the driver.
given this, I have to assume that the motivation was in fact capitalization for growth and opportunity. This makes sense to me. Duane used to always say he wanted to bring great coffee to everyone in the world who loved things that taste good.
now, while it's entirely possible that TSG was talking to other roasters in order to pursue a roll-up strategy, it's perhaps more likely that this was simply a pricing and competition exercise for TSG. I know it sounds sleazy but many serious investors do it. I've done it. Yeah... it causes bad feelings if the companies that are not the investment target take things personally and feel like they were either used or jilted in the process. That's life. That's business.
as noted at the start, my relationship with TSG is purely second hand (I have friends who know them, who are at companies that have worked with them or co-invested, etc). That said, once I heard about the deal I asked around and came back with 100% positive responses. And - just to be clear - in the PE world that is not common. In fact, an associate I know at one of the most highly regarded early stage VC funds said that TSG was his dream gig. And the reputation that Alex Panos had amongst these folks was equally impressive.
so... Very good investment firm puts money into thriving growing private company because that company wants to grow rapidly in an expanding new market. Pretty damn common, yeah? And I think we can at this point say that the usual rules, metrics and models of a deal like that probably also apply to this particular deal, okay?

To be frank, I'm kind of shocked that Stumptown was able to scale as it did without investment. As far as I know, they were the largest high-end speciality coffee company that didn't have outside investment. I'm guessing that this exact success was one of the main reasons TSG was so attracted to them.

Of course, the deal is also a validation of Stumptown. And that is an important point. No good investors are going to put money into a company based on its success and then destroy what has made it successful.

The vast majority of people have no idea what Private Equity or Venture Capital are, how they work, what the goals are, what the motivations are, or what the people working in those fields are like. They are sharing opinion based on a combination of ignorance and misinformation. To compound matters... they tend to have an automatic and innate distrust or dislike of these investors and take the results of ignorance and misinformation and filter through this distrust / dislike. Investors like this are professionals. They're not stupid.

Given all that I have walked you through above, I think we can assume that the thinking behind this deal is simple.

At least... that's my perspective and (unfounded and speculative) opinion.

Oh... also... I used to write for the NYTimes.
I believe strongly in journalistic ethics.
Suffice it to say that there are people who have been involved in the coverage of this "story" who should not only be ashamed but should not ever be considered in any way "journalists" of any sort.

new baskets

2011-05-08T09:40:00.000-07:00

So everyone is excited about the news baskets hitting the market, in particular the VST baskets that are coming with the new LM Strada.

I have been testing the various prototypes of this basket as well as the new baskets from Espresso Parts.

I now have production versions and will continue to evaluate.

My first observations are:

- both produce noticeably better clarity in the cup,

- both enable FAR better consistency cup to cup

- the Strada baskets require slight changes to dose and grind size (reducing both) for optimal results

- the EP baskets seem to be better at handling coffees that respond best to updosing (while the Strada baskets seem better with coffees that require down-dosing)

I'm loving both - but am very glad that I have each.

espresso - bastard stepchild of US coffee?

2011-04-11T09:17:00.000-07:00

A quick message to the folks working at and running the high end, quality focused craft coffee companies in the US.

I know that a lot of you think espresso is "over".

I know that the cool new thing is the V60. Or is it the Aeropress? Wait... syphon? Well... let's just say that brewed coffee is the new hotness for you all.

I get it.

But here is the thing...

Your customers still drink espresso.

Some of us (shocking I know) actually prefer espresso to brewed coffee.

So the fact that some of you are either ignoring your espresso or half-assing your espresso pretty much sucks.

It's unprofessional and it is disrespectful of your customers.

We want good espresso.

Espresso in the US has, in my opinion, declined in quality over the last 2 years. There are exceptions, of course, but in general I can conclusively say that the espresso I've tasted over the last 6 months (from many of the "best" roasters in the United States) is worse than it was 2 years ago.

Don't be lazy.

Don't be selfish.

Make good espresso.

first photos

2011-04-06T16:44:00.001-07:00

first day with the GS

2011-04-06T10:13:00.001-07:00

So this morning was my first day with the incredible Espressoparts La Marzocco GS.

After the epic with the electrician, Kyle from Ritual was kind enough to assist with an install last night -- which turned out to be a good thing given some complications in programming the controller.

So this morning I (finally) had a chance to make espresso with the machine. I will write up more complete thoughts next week after I live with the machine a bit more - and have some photos to share - but I thought I'd share initial impressions now.

First -- I truly do have the dream home setup. It's insane and unbelievable and I have to periodically shake my head. My luck... it's ridiculous. I'm undeserving. Truly.

Second -- I'm having to remember how to make espresso on a commercial machine. For all of this being a smaller one-group machine, it's still a true commercial piece of equipment.

Third -- I had one of the best shots of Stumptown Hairbender I've had in a very long time. Incredible coating and viscous mouthfeel, lovely cherry chocolate stonefruit flavours. Stunning finish and aftertaste.

Fourth -- there are some things that the Italians do very well - and this machine demonstrates that. Producing very high quality espresso is dramatically easier than it was with the Monster Mia (which was one of the easier machines to work on already).

Fifth -- there are some things that Italians are mystifyingly bad at. Why the hot water spout is out to the side of the machine (where it doesn't drain into the drip tray) is truly bizarre. And steaming milk with this wand is both challenging and exciting.

Sixth -- goddamn do Terry Z and his Espressoparts crew do a good job. While this GS is an "authentic" piece of gear, it's so cleverly updated and restored that it keeps all this was good and wonderful while modernizing what needs to be improved -- and does so in a manner that is cool, functional and gorgeous all at once.

I think I'm in love.

Oh... It's ON

2011-03-30T17:33:00.000-07:00

Stumptown opens shop in Chicago.

That's right folks... the pride of Portland is going straight into Intelligentsia's backyard.

Who wins?

We do.

That's right... you know that this means Intelli is going to step it up. Their coffee will get better, their green will get better, their roasting will get better... And you have to know that Stumptown is going to be bringing their A game.

I'm so incredibly envious. The coffee lovers in Chicago are going to have it so good! Damn.

Things to ponder:

Will Intelli Chicago be able to keep their best employees?
Will Stumptown's indy punk rock vibe sell in the midwest?
Will Intelli open in Portland?
Will Stumptown go for a beer and wine license?
Will Intelli try to better leverage Ecco now?
Will Stumptown be Stumptown without bike messengers?
Who will Alinea use?

Break out the popcorn.

This is going to be fucking EPIC!!!

it arrives

2011-03-23T17:05:00.000-07:00

I am the luckiest person in the world.

For many reasons.

Today just brought me another reason.

One of the greatest people in the coffee business (Terry Z of Espressoparts) - who also built out the Monster Mia I've been using for the past few years - is world renowned for his work with vintage espresso machines. I've admired these gorgeous restorations and rebuilds for years now.

And now I have one in my kitchen.

I adore everything about this machine.

The classic 70s Italian design... the orange and brown color scheme... the skateboard wheels...

It's one of the greatest espresso machines (the La Marzocco GS), and thanks to Terry and his Merry (mad)Men - this one is comparable to the most modern machines now.

Check out the gorgeous portafilter handle.

drool...

It's a total stunner - and it's actually (reasonably) practical for the home.

I said it had been modernized, right?

Clean and pro...

I've said it before and I'll say it again... Espressoparts does fucking AMAZING work.

The electrician arrives on Saturday.

I cannot WAIT for Sunday morning.

Coffee Common

2011-02-19T09:39:00.000-08:00

This is a hugely important step for the coffee industry and I am so incredibly happy about it happening.

What am I talking about?

Go check out Coffee Common.

Stumptown. Intelligentsia. Square Mile. Counter Culture. George Howell. And on. And on. I mean... just look at that list!

I've long decried the lack of collaboration in the industry. I've pointed out time and time again that a rising sea raises ALL boats. I've tried to explain that a common voice about coffee issues and consumer education would leave the coffee companies that are trying to do the right thing less vulnerable to the misinformation spread by the other (cynical and unethical) coffee companies.

And for the longest time none of the leading companies were willing to even consider the idea. They saw this as a competitive issue.

But now... it's happening.

And I am so incredibly happy about this.

Brent... Tim... Sean... Stephen and Brian. Thank you!

Duane, Doug, James, George, Peter and all the other leaders within the various coffee companies involved. Thank you!

Coffee consumers. Coffee professionals.

Get involved with this. Read it. Explore it.

And celebrate it.

This could be the start of something special.

Bye-bye Anfim

2011-01-31T09:51:00.000-08:00

So, the demo Anfim is boxed up and about to be shipped away.

And this morning was my first morning with the Robur back on the counter.

As a result, this gives me a chance to revisit my Anfim vs Robur at home thoughts.

To sum it up simply... if I had to recommend one of the two to a home barista I would absolutely recommend the Anfim. It's simply easier to work with and wastes far less coffee than the Robur. In fact, the only real negative of the Anfim for the home (as compared to the Robur) is that there are some coffees that I was never able to get optimal shots with. The stepped grinder adjustment meant that there were three times where the ideal extraction fell between steps.

Of course... both of these grinders are obscene overkill for the home. But if you're the kind of person who thinks too much is just the right amount - then I'd seriously suggest the new Anfim over the Robur.

2011

2011-01-03T12:00:00.000-08:00

Rather than doing a retrospective analysis of 2010 (too obvious and there are people better than me at doing this), or doing a set of predictions for 2011 (my ego isn't THAT big) - I'm instead going to share my hopes for coffee in 2011.

I'm going to structure this quite simply...

What I hope happens with coffee in 2011

1 - Better focus on customer experience

2 - A move away from elitism

3 - Better consistency

4 - The pendulum swings on espresso

Customer Experience

If, as a semi-outsider, I were to rank the perceived focus for top US (artisan) coffee companies, it would look something like:

Volume of sales
Green bean purchasing and management
Marketing (coolness, buzz, brand, etc)
Preparing coffee the right way
Roasting

We now have a situation where customer experience is (depending on the company) anywhere from inconsistent to terrible. I've been to retail locations for almost all the top US coffee businesses. I've literally never had a "great" customer experience. In any of them. Ever.

At this point the customer experience almost always lags so far behind the quality of the coffee that it's insulting to the coffee. Seriously.

Folks... we need to fix this. Let's start by trying to understand who our actual customers are. Then we should probably figure out what they want from us. And what kind of experience they hope to have. Then we can determine what kind of experience they're actually getting - where the big gaps and failures (on our part) are - and can take steps to solve the problems.

But, to do so, one thing has to change first. Note the above "... big gaps and failures (on our part)." Right now we blame the customers. Always. And that's fucked up. Until we fix this - we can't fix anything else.

Elitism

Coffee has always had a problem with elitism. It's an industry that - to many - seems driven by not only the need to be considered "elite" but also by the need to constantly redefine the criteria by which one is considered elite. This results in tiers of greater and greater elitism and a junior high school clique behavior that is at best irritating and at worst highly destructive.

This elitism creates some of the customer experience problems that coffee has (similar to the behavior you get from the clerks at a vinyl record store). But it also creates problems within the coffee industry. It's distracting, it creates unneeded conflict. It's just lame. You aren't really that fucking cool.

Consistency

The lack of consistency in coffee is increasingly troubling for me. At this point in time, customers of the best US coffee companies shouldn't be getting dramatically different roasts of the same coffee on subsequent days. Two back to back shots of the same espresso shouldn't taste like completely different coffees. In some ways I think consistency has actually gone down in the last year or two for the top companies.

What I'd really like to see is not the above minimum level of consistency, but actual consistency at a higher level. I'd like to see these coffee companies have consistently good coffee across all coffees and all roasts over time. I'd like to see them buying consistently good green. And I'd like to see coffee prepared to consistent standards and quality (at least within their own business) across all coffees and all staff.

This is where the commodity speciality coffee companies are killing the artisan ones. Sure, Peet's coffee is usually not good. But it is 100% consistent in how it's not good. If you know how you like it - it will always be that way.

Espresso

Life is all about watching the pendulum swing - and go past it's optimal point. By overshooting again and again we get a better idea of accurate targeting.

This is true with coffee as well. And right now, the pendulum has swung too far when it comes to espresso. We can see the obvious drivers (a return to brewed coffee, single origin espresso, better equipment, baristas becoming roasters / green bean buyers, etc) but what's important is to look at the results. I'd honestly say that (for the top coffee companies in the US) the espresso over all has become less pleasurable over the last 2 years. It's become more interesting, for sure, but it's not as enjoyable.

It would be worthwhile I think to start reconsidering desired flavour profile in creating espresso. The current models (particularly the "nothing but sweet and tart" model) seem to rarely produce espresso that is actually something you'd enjoy drinking every day.

So... those are my hopes.

Do I think we're going to do any of them or see any of them being addressed?

I have no idea - but I can dream now can't I.

dirty == chocolate?

2010-12-03T10:47:00.000-08:00

So I've been running a little experiment over here.

You see - due to the combination of thanksgiving chaos and work chaos I screwed up recently and didn't backflush my machine for a couple of days. Those who know me have heard endlessly about the importance of a clean machine - and about how I backflush with detergent daily. In this case, however, I didn't have the chance. Sure, I rinsed - but no full clean.

On the third day, I pulled a shot of Ecco espresso and got a very unusual flavour profile. The shot was incredibly chocolate-dominant. I realized that the shot tasted the way home baristas on the internet keep describing "comfort food espresso" tastes. Various folks have described espressos ranging from the Four Barrel to Stumptown to even Ecco in this manner. I never really got this profile and assumed that it was either due to different prep or just the subjectivity of taste.

Home baristas also seem to clean their machines rarely.

Hmm... I wondered... could there be a causal relationship here?

So I've been experimenting with a dirty machine. And the results are very interesting.

First of all, almost all the espressos I've tasted end up tasting similar. They mostly turn into chocolate dominant shots with very little clarity or separation of flavours. Fruit notes are preserved although often translated into darker (or dried) versions of the same flavour.

Secondly, while I think that in milk drinks this profile is often very nice - I feel like the uniqueness of the espressos is lost (the coffee is "dumbed down" in a sense). I could see how someone coming from a coffee background that is based on roast flavours might like this.

Third, the results are pretty much universal for blends. For single origin shots, however, the results seem to be more positive with some regions (Brazil and Ethiopia for example) and far less positive with others (in particular with more delicate central american coffees).

Finally, this seems to work best with lighter roasted coffees. Darker roasted coffees seem to "foul" the machine more quickly - yielding shots that taste dirty and "fish oil" nasty.

I think this is a good example of needing a similar context and perspective in order to share opinions. I know understand why a lot of home baristas describe some coffees the way they do. I understand why most home baristas feel cleaning daily is a waste of time. I even understand (a bit better) why some coffees are so prized by home baristas.

Personally, I'm glad to have the experiment over. I'm looking forward to a nice, transparent and clean coffee tomorrow.

33 Coffees

2010-11-30T10:46:00.000-08:00

I'm glad to be able to announce that my long dreamed of product is now available.

For those who know me, you've probably been subjected to my excited ramblings about the 33Beers book / journal (and its companion the 33Wines version). Some of you might have heard me say that there should be a coffee version of this lovely and useful tasting notes keeper.

Well... now there is.

Dave (of 33 Books) has done an amazing job creating what I think is the single best tool for tracking and managing your coffee tasting experiences.

For me this is an absolute "must have" item for those who love coffee, taste coffee a lot and who care about coffees.

It's important to note that, while the book would be very valuable for pros, it's designed for consumer use. It's easy to understand and easy to use. It's affordable and fits in your pocket.

Buy it now!!

Full disclosure time: While I am not affiliated with 33Books and have no financial arrangement with or compensation from 33Books or 33Coffees, I did provide advice on the content development for 33Coffees. And Dave is a friend of mine.

Another fun cupping

2010-11-18T12:22:00.000-08:00

Now that was a nice table!

I just had the opportunity to cup a dozen coffees from various roasters - and it was a very good experience.

Inspired by some conversations with Mat Honan - he, Jim Kennedy, Doug Jamison and I got together to compare a whole bunch of coffee from various roasters. The idea was to bring together disperate perspectives and points of view (journalist covering the space, wine and food professional, home coffee fanatic turning pro, pro coffee guy turned home fanatic) and see what we learned.

Coffees cupped were from Intelligentsia, Sightglass, Stumptown, Blue Bottle, Ecco and Four Barrel. This list was not selected for any specific reason - but rather based on roasters we wanted to check out. Cupping was blind, in random order.

I'm sure Mat is going to blog about his experience - but I have to say it was really cool to have another (new) perspective. And - to be honest - it was great to see him soaking up knowledge like a sponge.

In my usual manner I guess I'll start with the good news. It was a great table and there were four coffees on the table that were truly world class and which we were unanimous in our admiration of.

The top four coffees (in no order) were:

Intelligentsia Ethiopia Sidama Homecho Waeno - The shocker of the table. None of us would have identified the coffee as a Sidama. Wonderfully clean sophisticated in the cup. Buddha hand, light dried fruits, crisp tropical citrus and a wonderfully round and almost oily mouthfeel.

Stumptown Kenya Ngunguru - Stunningly sweet and dense, this coffee was another that was top two for all cuppers. Blackberry molasses, kumquat marmalade, tropical fruit and an amazing buttery thick mouthfeel. Layered flavours that keep opening as it cools.

Ecco Kenya Kangocho - A wonderful and complete cup that improved considerably as it cooled and ended up as one of everyone's top two coffees. Nuanced and balanced notes of bitter orange, blackberry, pluot / apricot and light cassis.

Stumptown Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Tumticha - Another cup that improved as it cooled. Tons of jasmine and assam tea melded with sweet berry notes and a crisp grape-like acidity that rounds and mellows as it opens up. A very elegant cup.

All four of these coffees were truly amazing (stopping most of us in our tracks each time while cupping).

For the bad news... every single roaster had a "problem coffee." I guess the good news is that only one of these problem coffees was problematic at a green coffee level - and only two (out of twelve) were what we decided we'd call "objectionable."

The rest were minor or slight roast defect issues that impacted the quality of the cup.

So... what did we learn from this experience?

First - I continue to be impressed by the results from cupping blind with a cross section of divergent perspectives. While this isn't how I'd evaluate coffees in a professional setting, it is an amazingly powerful tool for learning.

Second - related to the first point above... non-coffee people have far more tolerance for scorching, tipping - over-roasting defects you could say - than they do for under-development. A coffee that coffee pros would consider ashy or smoky and thus objectionable isn't seen as that bad - while a coffee that might be slightly under-developed (but still enjoyable) by the pros is seen as "harsh" and "sour" by the non-pros. Given some of the trends in the industry, this could be a growing problem soon.

Third - I wish that more journalists covering coffee were willing to engage and discuss and share the learning process about coffee in a manner like Mat just did. I think it would yield huge dividends (for all of us).

Fourth - Steel Pulse is very good cupping music. Almost on par with Prince.

Good Food Award judging

2010-10-11T11:10:00.000-07:00

As mentioned earlier, I was lucky enough to be selected as one of the judges for the coffee track of the Good Food Awards.

I was honored and flattered by my inclusion - and a bit intimidated by the list of other judges. As a result, I went into the experience looking to learn as much as I could from the opportunity.

In the end - that was a good thing, as there was an enormous amount in the process and experience for me to learn from.

A day later - with marginal time to think and digest I admit - it feels like there are a couple really big take-aways (for me) from this amazing experience.

Taste truly is subjective

I have, for years now, told everyone that taste is subjective and that universal pronouncements about taste are pointless and incorrect and perhaps destructive.

But this event brought home not only how true this really is - but also how little I'd actually accepted the truth of the statement.

It was incredible to see a single coffee get scored 90+ points by one judge and 80 or below by another -- and to have each judge present a compelling, rational and well-reasoned argument for why their scoring was correct. It's amazing to realize that both judges can, in fact, be correct -- despite this enormous disparity in judged value.

It was even more incredible to see these judges make their arguments - while respecting the differing opinions.

This made me realize that while taste is (really and truly) subjective - opinion is not of equal value. Someone presenting a clear and complete and logical argument for why something I hate is actually good results in my respecting their opinion and the truth in their judgement (while not changing my own opinion at all). On the other hand, someone agreeing with me but being unable to give any clear and enunciated explanation for why has little to no validity.

The so-called "under-development epidemic" might be overstated

Development (full, under, "proper") was definitely a topic of discussion - and was a source of enormous controversy at times. But the number of coffees that were severely under-developed (in my opinion) was actually quite small. Out of 51 coffees, there were probably less than 10 that were really under-developed and fewer than 5 were severely so.

Now... what was most interesting is that there was only once coffee (to my recollection) that was under-developed and was an average or inferior green coffee. The under-developed coffees were more likely to be very (very) high quality green. This is (obviously) a concern. But it also points to a possible conclusion - that much of the under-development of these coffees is due to fear or timidity when roasting.

That being said - the controversy around under-development was very real - and there were judges on both sides of the argument.

Technique is objective, style is subjective

Perhaps the single largest challenge of judging this event was figuring out how to approach the stylistic differences issues.

There are styles of coffee that each of us prefer - and styles that each of us doesn't like. I (for example) really don't like dark roast indonesian coffees. That is a stylistic preference.

The problem is that there are those who love that style. So how does one judge a style that you simply don't prefer?

In the end - I had no choice but to try and judge against the style rather than just my preference. In other words, I tried to look at the coffees and evaluate the technique behind the coffee rather than the style of the coffee.

So a well-executed dark roast east african natural (while not to my own taste) would score well if the technique were ideal and the beans well selected (again for that style).

The idea is that the technique of roasting (the craft) should be universal and tangible - while the style of the coffee can be personal and subjective.

This is not the way any of us have been trained to cup - and it's a hard shift to make.

The largest problem in US coffee is old green

It was shocking to me (and I think to many of the judges) to encounter so much past-crop or baggy or just old green coffee. I think I probably cupped more baggy coffee yesterday than I've cupped in the last 2 or 3 years.

The old coffee issue was (for me at least) more of a problem than roast degree and more of a problem than dirty coffees and more of a problem than any stylistic differences.

If I were going to give one single piece of feedback to roasters in the US based on this event it would be, "stop buying / selling old coffee." I don't know if the issue is that roasters are buying more than they can sell before the coffee goes off - or if the roasters are buying old baggy coffee from the importers. But it doesn't really matter in the end. What matters is that the consumer is being sold inferior coffees.

If roasters want to move the needle the most with the least effort - this is where they should focus. Stop selling old coffee.

Finally, a couple side notes.

1 - The judges were amazing. Honestly, it was amazing to cup and have these conversations with such incredible people. I am not worthy. I was probably the least experienced cupper of all the judges. But I was welcomed by all. It was great. Thank you.

2 - I have to give huge props to the folks responsible for this event. To the organizing committee... to the volunteers... you all rock. And big thanks to Peter Guiliano for your fantastic facilitation efforts and to the crew who worked all day Saturday to select the top 50 for us to judge. Most of all, it absolutely could not have happened without the incredible hard work of Brent and Mie. Thank you too so much.

Good Food Awards

2010-10-09T10:32:00.001-07:00

I'm incredibly honored to be judging the coffee category for the Good Food Awards.

But I'm also quite nervous. If you look at the list of people I'm judging with - the bar's being set quite high. I'm confident in my palate as a general rule - but this is a whole different ball game.

On the other hand, it's also a chance for me to learn a ton. Some of the coffee cuppers I most respect in the world will be judging with me - and that's an incredible opportunity for me.

I'm planning on posting some thoughts on the experience, the coffees, etc - probably later this coming week. With luck I'll be able to steal some of Tonx's photos to illustrate....

"An Epidemic of Underdevelopment"

2010-09-27T14:27:00.000-07:00

Anyone who pays attention to coffee will have noticed the (welcome) trend away from darker roasted coffee in the high end ("craft") segment of the speciality market.

It's incredibly nice to be able to taste the coffee - rather than just tasting the roast. It's incredibly nice to be able to experience more of the full range of flavours the coffee can represent (rather than tiny permutations on a roast flavour profile).

But all is not rosy in the world.

I've been quietly talking to various folks in the coffee industry for a bit about some of the negative experiences I've been having with coffee recently. I tweeted about this a little while back when I noted that there seems to be an "epidemic" of underdeveloped coffees.

Now Vince (the genius behind ExtractMojo) has shared his own (scientific) insights into this topic. In this (fantastic) post, Vince clearly illustrates that the (sensory) perception that I (and many others) have noted can be quantified and measured. We now have evidence to back up opinion.

Given this... here are some quick observations and opinions on the topic (in no particular order).

While underdevelopment is in no way tied to light roast degrees, roasting light is harder than roasting dark. I've had underdeveloped coffees roasted to a Full City+ roast degree - and I've had coffees that were roasted to a Cinnamon degree and were wonderfully and fully developed. But it does seem like a lot of the underdeveloped coffees come from folks who are (bluntly) still learning how to roast to a light degree.
That being said, there are even more underdeveloped coffees coming out of roasters who only think in terms of roast degree and have a black and white simplistic view of coffee (light roast degree == good; darker == bad). These roasters do not seem to have "development" on their list of things to care about.
There is a large segment of the coffee industry that follows short-term trends. These folks seem to be following the over-simplified "light roast degree == good" roasters without really thinking about the implications.
A huge challenge is that there is a somewhat large (and vocal) group who are unquestioning cheerleaders of the "light == good" school. I've had folks defend severely underdeveloped coffees with statements like "grassy can be good - like fresh cut lawns" and "well that coffee just tastes like lemon and artificial sweetener."
And of course - perhaps the largest challenge is the (never-ending) culture in speciality coffee of not airing dirty laundry in public (and never speaking ill of your competitors). This lack of honesty continues to do immeasurable damage to the entire industry.

I'm really glad that Vince wrote this piece.

Given the credibility he has in the industry - I honestly believe that the simple "that's just your opinion" knee jerk response can now be dispensed with.

It's time for us to address this issue.

It's a real, legitimate, problem.

And we need to be honest about it.

Sweet Shop

2010-09-14T15:54:00.000-07:00

James from Square Mile sent me some coffee last week.

Now... he's sent coffee before. And I've always liked it. In some cases a lot.

And the coffees of theirs I had in London were excellent.

But seriously. Nothing prepared me for this.

It was called Sweet Shop.

And it was amazing.

Sadly, this was a single batch. From a single day. And there is no more.

Sadly, because it was one of my favorite espressos ever.

It was one of the most heavily fruited espressos I've ever had - and not fruit in the thin sharp green way that you get some times. And not one massive single fruit flavor. No... this was a deep and rich and heavy and ridiculously sweet coffee with layers upon layers of different fruit. From blackberry molasses to cassis jellies. From pear hard candy to butterscotch toffee. From kumquat to raspberry to apricot to melon. It was all there. And all anchored by a spine of red wine and leather with a semi-sweet cocoa finish.

Absolutely stunning.

Not a coffee I'll soon forget.

Portland - Coffee

2010-09-10T10:48:00.001-07:00

While I'm sure that some folks (especially those in Seattle and in Chicago) would argue, I think most of us would agree that Portland has had a special role in the high end of (what I'd call artisan) coffee in the US.

Many of us would argue that Portland was the driving force for artisan coffee over the past 5 or more years.

I've always wondered, "why Portland?"

I mean.... it's kind of weird for such an obscure town to have such an out-of-scale impact.

I've run through all sorts of theories - but in retrospect I think I was simply too close to the situation to see the realities.

Now that I've been gone from Portland and gone from coffee for a while - I think I have more perspective. And a recent trip up there (I think) has kind of proven the point.

I think I'm starting to figure it out.

So... why Portland.

To explain I'm going to tell a couple of stories first.

The first night I was there we were wrapping up late dinner at Biwa and it was suggest we go check out Tommy Habetz' new place Bunk Bar. Tommy is a bad-ass cook and chef who's run a couple of my favorite kitchens in Portland. He's the kind of guy who pretty much could be cooking anywhere and doing anything. When I asked a little more about Bunk Bar I was told that it's a bar where they have a walk up window that sells sandwiches. A little confused but intrigued I said this sounded good and off we went. Late night, bar, waterfront, packed with a mix of hipsters and folks just out drinking... you can imagine the scene. And sure enough, walk up window with a sandwich menu. But OMFG the sandwich. Pork Belly Lettuce and Tomato. The sort of BLT that the gods eat when they're hanging out on Mt Olympus. A sort of Elizabethan ideal of the BLT.

The second day I was there we decided to grab a beer after lunch and went by Apex. Apex is a beer bar. And that's all. It's clean and airy and open. Their beer menu is insane - some sort of madman is curating that list because it's just not normal. Your average person (someone who is not a beer fanatic) would be entirely confused and might not even realize that the place was serving beer. There were beers from everywhere - including a beer from the Bay Area that I can't find on tap here. In San Francisco. The lines were clean, the bartender knowledgable - and the beer was about 2/3 or 1/2 what I'd pay for it here.

These are both successful businesses.

As are other places in Portland like Pok Pok (incredible thai food without the usual standards like Pad Thai and with half the seating outside in a shed) and Le Pigeon (where they're likely to play Ramones in the dining room and serve the best beef bourguignon in the US).

These are places that do things that seem crazy at a business level. That make no sense. That violate some of the things we assume are business rules. And yet they're successful.

It's clear there is a pattern here.

Things are working in Portland that we all think shouldn't work.

So the question becomes... is Portland just different? Do the rules not apply to Portland? Or are we wrong about the rules?

This last trip made me realize something.

Some of these crazy ideas fail - even in Portland.

But Portland is the kind of safe place where you can still try the crazy ideas. Portland is the place that says "rules are bullshit - do what you want to."

The people in Portland don't judge if the idea is crazy - they just try it and see if they like it. They've got a sort of indy / DIY thing going on that's deeply embedded in the culture there.

So there is a kind of "why the fuck not" attitude there that allows (and even encourages) people to try crazy shit.

Plus... it's cheap there so there isn't so much financial risk.

But... none of this says that the rules simply don't apply to Portland.

It's simply that Portland is a really great petri dish.

So from this - it's hard not to conclude that, in fact, the rules do apply to Portland and Portland is where we're figuring out that some of what we think are rules are lies.

And that is why Portland is so important to coffee in the US. Because 10 years ago all of us in coffee were following the rules. And the rules were 75% lies. But we didn't know that. We were blind. But there were some crazy people in Portland who either didn't know the rules or didn't care about the rules. And now we all know that most of those rules were bullshit. And freed from those rules - coffee in the US has exploded.

It's no shock that the paid shills for traditional coffee are out in force saying that what we're all doing is wrong (and evil). Just as it's no shock that we're angry at them for lying to us for so long.

And for that... we own a debt of gratitude not just for all the people who've ignored these rules - but also to that crazy petri dish that we call Portland for allowing us to experiment and discover.

Personally... I can't wait to see what Portland spits out next!!!

Portland (intro)

2010-09-03T18:53:00.000-07:00

I'm just back from Portland OR and it's clear I need to post about it.

Less about the coffee, however, and more about the place / people / culture / market.

I need to formulate my thoughts and then will write something up.

I will - however - say this much (as a teaser)...

Apex is one of my favorite beer bars in the world.

The Pork Belly Lettuce and Tomato Sandwich at Bunk Bar is sick.

To understand why coffee in Portland is what it is, you need to understand the weird mix of DiY/indy and taste/flavor and passion/craziness that drives people who create places like Apex and Bunk Bar (and Pok Pok and Le Pigeon and and and). And you need to understand the people in Portland and why the support these lovely lunatics.

Let me ponder and expect something odd soon.

Anfim (at home - v Robur)

2010-08-31T12:35:00.000-07:00

So... as if it were not absurd enough for me to have done a review of the Robur grinder at home (see here for final conclusions) now I'm going to spend some time sharing thoughts on the Anfim Super Caimano (modified).

This is the new v2.0 modified Super Caimano (digital timer, cooling fan, some changes to things like the number of adjustments available for the grind, slower speed motor, purge button).

I've been using it for about a week now, and have some initial conclusions. I'll break these down into three sections. First - the grinder. Second - the grinder at home. Third - the grinder vs the Robur.

The Grinder

For someone (like me) used to Mazzer grinders, the Anfim takes some getting used to. It's a stepped adjustment grinder. It's much smaller than the Robur. The doser feels "weird" at first. Figuring out the whole digital timer thing seemed fiddly and tweedly at first.

Once you get used to it - you start to see the strong points of the grinder (and the weaknesses start to emerge as well).

The primary weakness of this grinder is stability on the counter. The grinder "walks" across the counter when dosing (and no joke we're talking about something like 6 to 8 inches of travel). This is obviously a major issue. You can work around it by wedging the grinder in place or by extending a finger from the hand holding the portafilter to brace against the fork. Now... all this being said, I'm told that there is a retrofit for the grinder that adds different feet to it and makes it very stable and fixed in place.

The secondary weakness is the stepped adjustment. While there are now a ton of steps, changing from one step to the other is still an est 3s change in a shot. Again, you can work around this by changing dose when you change grind - but I'd love a worm-drive non-stepped adjustment!

The final weakness is the throat from the burrs to the doser. A lot of coffee gets trapped in here. The grinder ships with a small brush to help clean this - and the new purge button allows you to purge stale coffee - but it's still a PITA. Out of curiosity I measured total grinds trapped in the Anfim and compared to the Robur. What is interesting is that they're roughly equal. It's just that you don't see all the grinds with the Robur (whereas you do with the Anfim).

In terms of the strengths of this grinder...

First (and foremost) is the quality of the grind. The Anfim produces a fantastic output. Shots were incredibly transparent and lacked any muddiness. Shots were sweet and very aromatic. The Anfim's grind quality is at least on par with if not better than the Alinox (IMHO).

Second, the Anfim doser is massively superior to other dosers I've used. Drop is clean and centered. Combined with the quality of the grind, this makes distribution ridiculously easy.

Third, once you get the timer dialed in your waste goes down dramatically. I set it to give me a tiny bit more coffee than I need, but that's largely 'cause I'm a control freak. I could see wasting only a tiny amount of coffee if I didn't do this.

The Grinder at Home

It's just a silly idea.

Really.

Between the amount of coffee trapped in the grinder and the challenges of dialing in the dose timer and grind (and their interaction) and the fact that you really cannot use it in a single dose manner this grinder is arguably as poorly suited (if not more poorly suited) for home use than the Robur.

The Grinder vs the Robur

First... this is kind of an unfair comparison as the Robur costs a lot more than the Anfim. And it's kind of a silly comparison because they have such different approaches to solving the problem.

That said... my thoughts...

1. If I were running a high volume coffee bar I'd use the Robur as my workhorse grinder.

2. If I were running a high volume coffee bar with a blend and a single origin espresso, however, I'd use the Anfim for the single origin espresso.

3. The shots from the Anfim to me had better clarity, better sweetness and better aromatics than from the Robur. I'd never really noticed the muddy stuff going on with shots from the Robur before - but now I taste them consistently. The Robur produced shots that had more low end body than the shots from the Anfim showed.

4. If I were running a lower volume, high touch ("luxury") coffee bar - especially if I were serving expensive coffees - I'd use the Anfim.

At the end of the day... I like the taste of the shots from the Anfim more than the shots from the Robur.

Time... perspective

2010-08-29T13:48:00.000-07:00

I should have done this earlier, but before it's too late (I hope) I'm going to take a little time off from participation in the various coffee websites etc.

My frustrations have recently spilled over and been communicated in manners that were not productive and I need to step away to gain some perspective. My hope is this will allow me to re-engage in a manner that is more productive and respectful (for all involved).

the torture never stops

2010-08-25T11:33:00.001-07:00

Really Salon?

Really?!?!?!

I could see The Atlantic falling for this shit - they're practically paid coverage at this point - but honestly I expected better from you.

What "true" Espresso is, and How Americans Ruin It

Rather than going through the two or three dozen specific fails in this piece - I'll simply point the readers to my comments on the two previous pieces in the series (by which I refer to Illy's 2 "paid" pieces in The Atlantic here, and here). And then I'll make two "meta" comments.

First... Salon... you know better. You should have talked to a couple folks on the "other side of the table." This looks like chumming for attention now. Come on. Don't be pathetic.

Second... I guess this means that speciality coffee in the US has grown up. We now have one of the largest espresso companies in the world investing money on a media and PR tour hoping to counter-market against the growth of these new competitors. Congrats. I guess.

Update: If you're interested in this topic, you should read James Hoffman's post on the subject (and participate in the conversation about it).

Abroad

2010-08-22T14:46:00.001-07:00

A few weeks ago I had the chance to spend almost a week abroad - in Paris, London and Amsterdam. While much of the trip was dedicated to vacation activities in general (and eating amazing food in particular), some of the trip was intended to be about experiencing coffee. In particular I was looking forward to hitting up Penny University in London and Stumptown in Amsterdam. In both cases, I was going to be sneaking in under the wire - as both of these businesses were pop-ups (and would be closing soon after my visit).

What I experienced was both very much expected - and yet also a total surprise.

Paris

Rather than going into detail I'll simply sum it up with a heartfelt plea to quality coffee roasters and coffee bars.... Please open a location in Paris. Please for the love of god, give the poor people in Paris decent coffee.

Paris is one of the greatest if not in fact the greatest food city in the world. Paris is a great walking city and the people understand that quality costs money. And yet I've had better coffee in small mountain towns in the US than I've found in Paris. The coffee at the airport in Pisa is better.

Please. Paris deserves better.

London

We took the Eurostar train from Paris to London. In looking at the schedule I'd figured out that would would arrive into London about 1 hour before Penny Lane closed - forever. We were arriving on the last day they served coffee. So the extra 35 minutes spent in the boarding and security process in Paris - resulting in a departure time a half hour late - caused me some stress. After dropping our bags at the hotel, we rushed out, grabbed a cab and literally ducked under the closing garage door into Penny University. Whew...

In talking about Penny University I'm going to divide my thoughts into three different areas. First, I'll share my opinions on the place and the experience. Second, I'll talk about what I think we should learn from Penny University. Third, I'll talk about the coffee (and some implications).

I'd seen pictures. I'd read blog posts. I thought I had the idea. But the reality was different than I'd predicted. First, the neighborhood and the building set the stage far better than expected. There was a sense of seriousness and focus and energy that started before entering the space. Inside it was like some sort of hipster coffee lab spa underground mens club. There was a sense of ceremony and o a sense of reverence that I really liked -- largely because none of the ceremony or reverence was directed at the people who worked there. Instead, it was clear that this was about the customer - and the coffee. About making the introduction, facilitating the discussion but at the end of the day letting the customer and the coffee have the relationship. That's very important and very unique. In talking with Tim and James and everyone, it became clear that working at Penny University had turned out to be incredibly challenging. "Like doing your 15 minute barista competition performance but having to keep doing it all day" as it was expressed to be at one point. Being able to do those introductions and do that facilitation - being able to provide that level of customer service and assistance - and doing so in a manner where you really engage with each customer over a period of time (as opposed to "fake smile is that for here or to go it'll be $3.50 thank you") - is clearly exhausting. I can only barely imagine - and even then it scares me. But as a customer... it was a truly incredible experience.

I fear a lot of people are going to treat the Penny University experience either as a model to strictly follow or some sort of mythical icon to strive for. I think it would be far wiser to simply learn from the experience. Now... to be honest, until James and Tim post up their own learnings from doing this - my comments are only slightly grounded in reality (a couple half drunken exhausted conversations is what this is based on) and are far inferior to anything they might come up with. Given that I'm rarely unwilling to share my opinion.... here goes. There is a segment of the buying public who is dying for an experience like this. The good news is that they are also for the most part the people who not only can pay for such an experience but really don't care that much about the cost. The bad news is that it's a very small segment of the market. That last statement has just slammed the door in the mind of many coffee professionals - who think "if it doesn't have enough volume you can't make money in retail." That's bullshit. This, to me, is the biggest thing to learn from Penny University. As with any other type of business, there are generally two ways to make money in retail coffee. You can sell a whole ton of it and make a little money with each transaction - or you can sell very little of it and make a ton of money on each transaction. The former describes nearly all coffee businesses in the world. The latter was something that existed largely just in theory for me prior to seeing Penny University. This is what we need to learn -- you can make money doing a very high touch experience offered to a small but discriminating customer base when you charge a high premium and plan your operations accordingly. Basically, there is such a thing as luxury coffee. Sure... just like you wouldn't open a Vuitton boutique in Fayetteville, WV there are specific locations and markets that are best suited for a business of this type. The big question for me is.... what form is this luxury coffee going to take? I know all the characteristics of a luxury business, a luxury brand, a luxury experience... but I still can't guess what this is going to end up looking like. What I can say is that Penny University has shown that it is, in fact, possible.

The coffee was beautiful at Penny University. That being said... I love the Square Mile coffees, so this wasn't a huge shock. And the reality is that the Chemex of Tegu I had wasn't objectively better than the same Tegu I'd cupped a couple of weeks prior. But subjectively? Much better. The experience elevated the coffee (or perhaps for the first time the experience didn't damage the perception of the coffee but instead lived up to it). I also realized something interesting about the Square Mile coffees as a result. I've noticed an evolution in the coffees over time - and I don't know if it was conscious or not - but my theory is that Penny University (and in particular the range of brew methods and tight interaction with customers about the coffees) created a beneficial feedback loop which resulted in the changes in these coffees. If this is true - it's got some very interesting implications for roasters who want to emulate this kind of approach.

Thanks to Tim. Thanks to James. Thanks to Tobias. You guys rocked it.

Other than Penny University - the coffee I had in London ranged from mediocre to world class (by my standards). The two worst shots I had were both marginally drinkable (on par with a slightly below average shot from a decent coffee bar in the US). The best shot was served to me by Gwilym. It was at Prufrock @ Present and was a shot of the Square Mile Summer Espresso. It was quite literally breath-taking. In fact... I think I simply wandered somewhat shell-shocked from the business without even commenting to Gwilym (or thanking him). I might still have had the demi in my hand for all I know. It was one of the top 5 shots of espresso in my life. Thank you Gwilym. Thank you Anette. Thank you James. In general, I would say that the coffee is slightly better than the coffee in San Francisco. It seems like the biggest weakness in London is on the roasting side. There were a ton of shops that seemed to know how to pull decent to good shots (far far more than what we have in SF). But the vast majority of these shops serve Square Mile. That's great in the sense that I like their coffee. But it's bad in that there is no range as a result. There is no competitive play. And that hurts coffee in London IMHO.

Amsterdam

I arrived at Stumptown to discover that the espresso machine had broken down just prior to my visit - and to discover that I was hitting the coffee bar on the second to last day. Feeling a bit like some sort of coffee Angel of Death - I tried to help diagnose the problem with the machine. After several experiments we actually managed to get the machine back on line at the right temp. And as a result... my visit to Amsterdam started off with a lovely shot of Hairbender.

After the first couple of hours in Amsterdam the Stumptown pop-up suddenly made sense to me in many new ways - while also clearly not making sense in a few new ways. I'd never spent real time in Amsterdam - especially not in the area Stumptown was located in. That part of Amsterdam on a sunny summer afternoon is stunning and wonderful. Everything - from the design sensibility to the cultural values; from the pace of life to the street culture; from the beer cafes to the coffeeshops -- it all says "a coffee bar like Stumptown will fit RIGHT in here." And then I ate some food. And then I had coffee at a different coffee bar. And then I tried dinner at what was said to be a very good restaurant. And I saw the problem. While Amsterdam is culturally a great fit for a Stumptown location - there is an enormous disconnect under it all. Stumptown is about flavour as well as experience and values. The food and coffee in Amsterdam make it clear that flavour is far far lower in importance.

I think there is something important to learn from this. I think that a coffee business that is about experience and values (and who has a great match-up with Dutch values and culture) would do incredibly well in Amsterdam. But I think a business that is first and foremost about taste is going to struggle.

Summing up

I think we're about to see a radical change in coffee in Europe. It's already started in London - where the coffee has progressed more in the last 5 years than I could have believed possible. I think that it's possible to see the same changes occur in Paris and in numerous other European cities as well. Eventually, cities like Amsterdam will also likely become viable markets for change.

If I were going to start a new coffee business right now - I'd start it in Europe.

Heresy?

2010-08-19T10:46:00.000-07:00

Yes... I admit it. I plead guilty.

I pulled shots of espresso using the Stumptown Panama Esmeralda Especial Mario Carnaval.

And I don't regret it.

Not for one minute.

I can hear you right now... "you pulled shots with a high grown, washed geisha?!?! one that is auction only?!?! and which sells for $75 for 12oz!!!!!!"

Yes.

And it was fucking glorious.

Initial impact is the aromatics. Orange blossom, bergamot, jasmine, grapefruit zest. As you sip there is a rapid double hit of flavours. First you get intense fruit - tangerine and navel orange and mandarin. Then this is followed immediately by intense orange blossom honey that coats the entire palate. The honey softens into papaya with lime and the inimitable moscato d'asti flavours. At the finish a lovely sweet cocoa note appears and the lingering aftertaste is droste orange and champagne and lime blossom.

It's not fair to rank this in terms of espressos I've had.

Instead I'm going to rank it as a coffee experience - against all coffee experiences.

It was in the top 5 coffee experiences in the last year for me (a year with a lot of great coffee experiences) and in the top 10 in my life.

So no... I have to regrets and I offer no remorse.

Should you be tempted to be as crazy / criminal as I may have been - here would be my suggestion for how to prepare this coffee as an espresso:

200f brew temp

19.5g dose (LM or Simonelli double basket)

very slow flow

95% brew ratio

1.25oz volume

29s extraction

Quick Thoughts

2010-08-04T13:31:00.001-07:00

I just returned from a trip to France, England and the Netherlands - and there is a long post coming about my experiences. First, however, there are a couple small thoughts that I wanted to share (springing from discussions had on the trip).

Taste and De-Sensitization

I had a couple of great conversations with Tim and James at the last day of Penny University. One topic that came up was the role that de-sensitization plays in taste and cupping. Put simply, I'm talking about the way that - after repeatedly tasting something - you start to "filter out" certain dominant flavours.

The example James used was very dark roasted coffee. A company like Starbucks that roasts quite dark has numerous employees who cup this coffee. For someone like me, cupping a coffee that darkly roasted would be frustrating at least as all I would be able to taste is the roast. Someone who cups daily at Starbucks, however, is unlikely to even notice the carbon and smoke notes and as a result will be able to "see past them" to other flavours.

Another example would be very light roasted coffee with strong "green" and vegetal / straw notes. Someone who works at a company that roasts to this profile will, over time, start not tasting these notes and instead will be focusing on all the other flavours in the cup.

This can be extended to people who cup a ton of natural processed coffee, or who cup mostly lower grown pulped natural from Brazil... in fact to any type of coffee or roast which has a specific strong flavour element that is outside of the center of the bell curve. In all these cases, the process of being acclimated to this flavour through repetition allows you to taste other things -- while those who have not gone through this process are at least distracted by the dominant flavours.

This makes conversations about these coffees often difficult and in the end turns those conversations into ones of a philosophical and abstract nature quite often.

Espresso and Palette

A coffee being used for espresso (be it a blend or a single origin bean) presents a barista with a palette of potential flavours to work with. The better the barista the more they can manipulate this palette to create a pleasing end product. To me, this is in fact the motivation for becoming better at being a barista - gaining more and more control over what I can do with the palette given me by the coffee.

There are no baristas, however, who can make the coffee taste like something outside of this palette.

I feel like many learning baristas fail to grasp this. Instead of trying to first understand what the palette they have been given offers to them - and then trying to work with this palette to create something they enjoy -- they decide what they enjoy and try to force the coffee to that flavour. When they have a coffee that doesn't give them the flavours they want from this palette, they call it "bad" coffee.

If you have a limited range of espresso flavours (the output in the cup as espresso) that you enjoy you should simply limit the coffees you try to use for espresso. If you're more open-minded about the espresso, then you can try other coffees -- but I suggest first understanding each coffee's unique palette.

Coffee and taste experiences

This trip solidified my belief that people who are truly gifted when it comes to coffee are always (100% of them) crazy about taste experiences. Doesn't matter if it's food or beer or wine... whatever it might be. If you meet someone who is into coffee but isn't into taste in a broader sense... I'd be suspect.

Conversations with coffee people about taste are some of my favorite experiences. Even chefs cannot wax so poetic about the taste of a single bite of some meal they had years before...

Cupping, Home-Barista, Incredible coffees...

2010-07-22T11:04:00.000-07:00

I've managed to finally start to really process the whole Home-Barista.com coffee event. I'm going to write about it over a series of posts (I hope). This is intended to be the first of the series.

I'm going to start with the context and then the conclusions.

Context

On Saturday there was a get-together of non-professional coffee fanatics (organized on Home-Barista-com). The goal was for people to meet each other, learn from each other, share with each other and have a good time. My objective was for people to grow in their understanding of coffee.

Given my objective, I pushed for a structure that started with coffee cupping before moving to espresso technique and tasting. My hope was that cupping in a non-judgmental and low-pressure environment where everyone cupping were peers would enable people to quickly discover how much fun cupping is - and how much you can learn from cupping. My dream was that this would make the discussions about coffee and taste as opposed to gear and technique.

I solicited coffees from a large number of top roasters - and they came through (in spades). The resulting table on Saturday was 22 coffees deep and of extraordinary quality. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the roasters.

Because I knew that I wouldn't really have a chance to taste and consider these coffees in a thoughtful manner (given that I was running this large cupping), I also planned to cup the coffees the following day (on Sunday) with a very small (3 people) group of coffee professionals.

The idea was that this would allow me to really focus on the coffees - but would also give an interesting data point when it came to the expected differences of opinion between the non-professionals and the professionals.

In addition, by taking the input from the first day of cupping, I could adjust the table for the second day (in terms of coffees on the table as well as sequence of coffees).

The coffees cupped over the two days were:

Tim Wendelboe Panama Hacienda La Esmeralda Mario San Jose
Tim Wendelboe Honduras Cielito Lindo (CoE #5)
Tim Wendelboe Brazil Santa Barbara
Ritual Kenya Karimikui
Ritual Colombia La Orquidea
Mecca Kenya Mtaro Estate
Mecca Bolivia Mondo Novo (CoE #7)
Four Barrel Kenya Kangunu
Four Barrel Colombia Cauca Norbey Sancho Microlot
49th Parallel Kenya Handege AA
49th Parallel Costa Rica Finca Roblas Microlot
Ecco Kenya Kiunyu
Ecco Kenya Kangocho
Olympia Costa Rica La Mirella "Honey"
Olympia Colombia Finca La Florida Manuel Antonio Ovies
Barefoot Costa Rica Herbazu Honey
Barefoot Costa Rica Cerro Paldo
Intelligentsia Honduras La Tortuga
Intelligentsia Kenya Thiriku
Square Mile Kenya Tegu Kirimukuyu
Square Mile Ethiopia Yirgacheffe
Stumptown Colombia La Esperanza
Stumptown Kenya Kangunu
Stumptown Guatemala Finca El Injerto Bourbon

Conclusions

In the end the experience (for me) was incredible and very rewarding.

The table was the most incredible cupping table of my life. But that's not what was most rewarding. To me, the truly incredible part was sharing the process of discovering cupping and discovering the relationships between coffees and flavours that most if not all of the non-professionals went through in that 4 hour period.

I've pulled shots with home baristas a number of times. A major frustration for me in the past has been that it's always defaulted to discussions of gear and technique. It's really never been about the coffee. This time was different.

We walked from the cupping into the espresso lab - and the conversations were all as follows

The shot you pulled tasted like this - the one I pulled tasted like that - what do I do to make my shots taste like yours?

The shot of coffee X tasted like this - the shot of coffee Y tasted like that - what caused the difference?

In other words.... the conversations were about taste. And about coffee.

I had the biggest shit-eating grin on my face.

And then we had the door-prizes. And it was clear that the most desired door prizes were not the demitasse sets or the cool t-shirts. They were the cupping spoons.

And my grin got bigger.

After the event was over various people who had been there got in touch with me. Some of the thanks were gratifying, of course. But the most rewarding thing? Almost all of them said, "I'm going to try and cup at least once per week from now on."

I can't stop smiling.

Cupping is great. And coffee is incredible.

Getting people to the point where they are comfortable cupping coffee and exploring it and discussing it... priceless.

On a less selfish note (grin)... I think it was rewarding for the folks there as well. At least, some of them have said it was!

Finally, the opinions of the folks there in terms of the coffee were really interesting. Keep in mind that the cupping was blind.

I think that palate fatigue played a part in the end results (22 coffees is a lot for a seasoned cupper much less a novice one). And I think that such a large table (with so many amazing coffees) tends to skew opinion towards the coffees that really stand-out (the cupping star coffees).

In the end we had a consensus that the top three coffees (in order) were:

Tim Wendelboe Panama Hacienda La Esmeralda Mario San Jose
Tim Wendelboe Honduras Cielito Lindo (CoE #5)
Stumptown Kenya Kangunu

What's really interesting (to me) about this result is that the Wendelboe coffees were very light roast and very bright (the sort of coffees that, in the past, have performed poorly with consumer cuppings). Now... to be fair, I actually considered leaving the Esmeralda off the table given that it will dominate basically any cupping table. It's just such a powerful and unique coffee that it is guaranteed to stand out. Perhaps this is simply an issue of the difference between "consumers" and coffee fanatics? Or perhaps it's the difference between cupping and drinking? Or maybe it's just that these coffees, while light roast, were so good that the roast was irrelevant? Or perhaps the whole "roast degree" thing is over-rated and consumers are, in fact, ready for lighter roast coffees....

The next day (the professionals cup) was an equally incredible experience for me. Cupping that first day was very superficial for me. I didn't really get to dive into the coffees. You cannot imagine how much I was looking forward to really focusing on this incredible table.

And it didn't disappoint.

The coffees were almost all very good or better. The best coffees were truly incredible.

And, again, we came to a consensus on the top three coffees on the table. These were, in order:

Stumptown Kenya Kangunu
Stumptown Guatemala Finca El Injerto Bourbon
Tim Wendelboe Panama Hacienda La Esmeralda Mario San Jose

I think a large part of the difference between the results of the two days had to do with the familiarity (or lack thereof) with the Esmeralda. I can remember the first time I cupped this coffee and how it blew my mind. Now that I've cupped it over a number of years, I'm a little less shocked by it and as a result can put it into better context. Yes. It's a truly glorious coffee. Don't get me wrong. But I understand it a little more.

I think the second largest contributor to the difference was palate fatigue (or the lack thereof). A coffee like the Injerto isn't going to jump out at you on a table like this. As such, if it's later on the table and your palate is starting to go - you're going to have a rough time really appreciating it. I think the pros were able to handle the size of the table far better, and the results show this.

My notes on the top three coffees were as follows:

Stumptown Kenya Kangunu - An incredibly complete coffee. It not only has both of the common Kenya classic flavour profiles - it integrates them. High-end contains lovely clean citrus and cassis acidity and aromatics of black currant, lively berry and lime zest. Middle of the profile is a gorgeous melding of huckleberry compote and cassis syrup and caramelized brown sugar. The low-end is rich with leather and tomato paste and demi-glace. Incredible green coffee, wonderfully roasted. Would be ideal brewed in a Clever brewer or Chemex.

Stumptown Guatemala Finca El Injerto Bourbon - A classic example of the central american bourbon cultivar. Wonderfully balanced and nuanced. High-end contains sweet lime, kumquat and blackberry and has aromatics of jasmine and raspberry jam. The middle of the profile is rich with amaretto and brandied raspberry and nectarine / pluot. The low-end is dense dutch processed cocoa and ganache and hints of macadamia nut. Resembles a chocolate raspberry truffle. A gorgeous, near-perfect roast of a wonderful coffee. Would be great in a Chemex or a Hario brewer.

Tim Wendelboe Panama Hacienda La Esmeralda Mario San Jose - One of the greatest green coffees in the world. A stunning flavour experience that is like no other coffee. Completely unmistakable and amazing. The high-end is incredibly complex and layered with an incredible citrus fruit medley of bergamot and tangerine and papaya and candy sugar and elderflower. Aromatics are of bergamot, jasmine, orange blossom, tangerine, papaya. It's a very sparkling and effervescent coffee on the palate. Middle of the profile is orange marmalade and orange blossom honey and mango and champagne grape. There is little on the low-end other than more sweet citrus (sour orange, sweet palestine lime, buddha hand) and tons of honeyed sugars (reminding me strongly of Moscato d'Asti). One of the greatest coffees ever. Guaranteed to dominate any cupping table. Would be great in an Aeropress or a Hario.

What's crazy about this is that some of the coffees that did not make the top three were truly world-class coffees (the Square Mile Kenya Tegu is a singularly strong example). That's how good this table really was.

To sum up....

This was an amazing experience and I am incredibly humbled by it. I need to thank all the participants (from both days) for sharing with me and for teaching me and for allowing me to be along for the journey. I need to thank Doug from Fullsack Coffee for the use of his space for Saturday's event and to thank Valerie for letting us spend all day Sunday taking over her house for that event. And most of all I want to thank all the roasters for their involvement, their love of the coffee and their commitment to quality - and the growers and producers for all their hard work, their sacrifices, their love for what they do and their dedication to producing the world's greatest coffees. Each of us are just trying to do justice to what you give us.

Thank you.

more H-B.com event stuff (the coffees)

2010-07-17T16:27:00.000-07:00

I'll try to write up cupping notes and thoughts be EOD tomorrow.

In the meantime, here is the list of coffees tasted.

Cupping:

Tim Wendelboe Panama Hacienda La Esmeralda Mario San Jose
Tim Wendelboe Honduras Cielito Lindo (CoE #5)
Tim Wendelboe Brazil Santa Barbara
Ritual Kenya Karimikui
Ritual Colombia La Orquidea
Mecca Kenya Mtaro Estate
Mecca Bolivia Mondo Novo (CoE #7)
Four Barrel Kenya Kangunu
Four Barrel Colombia Cauca Norbey Sancho Microlot
49th Parallel Kenya Handege AA
49th Parallel Costa Rica Finca Roblas Microlot
Ecco Kenya Kiunyu
Ecco Kenya Kangocho
Olympia Cosa Rica La Mirella "Honey"
Olympia Colombia Finca La Florida Manuel Antonio Ovies
Barefoot Costa Rica Herbazu Honey
Barefoot Costa Rica Cerro Paldo
Intelligentsia Honduras La Tortuga
Intelligentsia Kenya Thiriku
Square Mile Kenya Tegu Kirimukuyu
Square Mile Ethiopia Yirgacheffe
Stumptown Colombia La Esperanza
Stumptown Kenya Kangunu

Espresso:

Ritual Lloyd Dobler
Intelligentsia Black Cat
49th Parallel Epic
Ecco Espresso

pics from the H-B.com event

2010-07-17T15:37:00.001-07:00

What an extraordinary experience!!!

I want to thank all the folks who attended. All of you brought open minds and fine palates. Thank you!
And big thanks to Doug for the use of the space, all the hard work, etc. And to Luca for the hard work and assistance.

Most of all - huge thanks to all the roasters. Your generosity is so appreciated, and the quality of the coffees you provided was humbling.

To put it simply... the was the best cupping table of my life.

I'll post more thoughts later.

crappy mobile phone photos

2010-07-16T23:26:00.000-07:00

tomorrow promises to be one of the best cupping tables of my life.

don't believe me?

Home Barista event (more updates)

2010-07-15T08:30:00.000-07:00

The coffees (and gifts) have started to arrive for the Home Barista event.

So far we have:

- Tim Wendelboe (Oslo, NO)

- 49th Parallel (Vancouver, BC)

- Barefoot (Santa Clara, CA)

- Olympia Coffee (Olympia, WA)

- Stumptown (Portland, OR)

- Ritual (SF, CA)

- Intelligentsia (Chicago, IL)

- Mecca (Syndey, AUS)

- Square Mile (London, ENG)

- Ecco (Santa Rosa, CA)

- Four Barrel (SF, CA)

SUPER cool.

2010-07-14T14:06:00.001-07:00

For those who are coming to the H-B.com event, I was asked to provide a picture so people could recognize me.

Voila.

staged photo (still life with coffees)

2010-07-09T16:10:00.000-07:00

(Update) San Francisco Home Barista Get Together

2010-07-01T11:35:00.001-07:00

The ~~tentative~~ list of roasters providing coffee for this event is insane!!

I'm so excited.

~~And the list isn't even complete yet (I'm waiting for responses from 4 other roasters).~~

Update: while I haven't received the coffees, the below is the final list of confirmed roasters.

~~Right now the list looks like~~ The list is:

Four Barrel (SF, CA)

Ecco Caffe (Santa Rosa, CA)

Barefoot (Santa Clara, CA)

Intelligentsia (Chicago and LA)

49th Parallel (Vancouver, BC)

Square Mile (London, UK)

Tim Wendelboe (Oslo, NO)

added: Mecca (Sydney, AUS)

added: Olympia Coffee (Olympia, WA)

added: Stumptown Coffee (Portland, Seattle, NYC)

added: Ritual (San Francisco)

So... if you're in the Bay Area and you're passionate about coffee - you NEED to be attending. This should be a sick cupping table is all I have to say!!!

SF Home-Barista Get Together

2010-06-28T16:54:00.000-07:00

I'm really excited about this.

I'm taking part in planning the first in a planned series of Bay Area Get Togethers for Home Baristas.

This event could be really cool.

And the series could be amazing.

These events are intended to be partially social - partially educational.

It's a chance for consumers who are passionate about coffee to get together, share, learn and meet each other in person.

The first event is going to focus on Tasting and Technique.

By starting off with these fundamentals, I think we'll all start growing together.

Personally... I've long said that the single most valuable thing anyone can do to better develop their understanding of coffee and their palate for coffee is to cup coffee. Regularly. With other people.

So, the Tasting part is going to be mostly about cupping. And I'm really (really) excited about that. I love to cup coffee.

More than that, however, I feel like one of the last remaining really big gaps when it comes to the conversation between professionals and amateurs in the coffee world revolves around cupping. There isn't a serious coffee professional in the world who doesn't cup at least once per week. Many cup every single day. This not only develops palates - it gives everyone a common metaphor and a common platform and a common language for exchanging opinions and making decisions and providing feedback.

Even the most serious consumers are unlikely to cup every week. In fact, many very serious coffee consumers - seriously fanatical coffee enthusiasts in fact - never formally cup coffee. This is not a judgement on these enthusiasts. But it does create a gap between these enthusiasts and the pros. This gap is semantic. It's palate. It's preference. It's philosophical. It's cultural. And it's a values thing.

My hope is that we can do our little tiny part to change this. Given that almost all top coffee companies now offer free public cuppings (many days I think there are at least 2 held here in SF) people have many opportunities to continue to cup and develop their understanding. Even if you live somewhere without these public cuppings, the investment in doing your own cuppings is minimal (especially as compared to the investment required to make espresso at home). Instructions are available all over the internet.

A chance to create even just a little change is priceless. Very cool.

new school / old school

2010-06-07T16:08:00.000-07:00

The Italian Barista Champion Fights Back!!

2010-06-02T17:06:00.000-07:00

A couple weeks ago, The Atlantic Magazine published a (puff) piece by Giorgio Milos (Illy employee and former Italian Barista Champion). This piece was... umm.... insulting to many people in the coffee community. I wrote about it in my Cultural Imperialism bit.

Well.... Giorgio is back.

And this time he's a lot less condescending. Which is nice.

But he's still kind of missing the point.

Note: I am assuming that some editor at The Atlantic actually came up with the title of the piece ("Espresso 101: An Expert Responds to Readers") - but if not then I'll retract my above "less condescending" comment.

Anyway... to the piece and my point...

He starts off with a long bit on his background, his credentials... basically defending himself and establishing that he actually does - in fact - know what he's talking about.

At the center of my 20-plus years of training and knowledge is illycaffè. Certainly my views on coffee have been influenced by the company's scientific environment, created by three generations of chemists; a research and development unit covering agronomy, botany, physics, chemistry, biology, statistics, and computer science; and laboratories dedicated to dedicated to the study of coffee, in areas like sensory perception (not just taste, but aroma as well).

The thing is... none of us were arguing that you don't know a lot about Italian espresso. I mean... come on. Illy is arguably the most respected coffee company in the world when it comes to the science of coffee. And you're the Italian barista champion. So we already knew that - if we had any questions at all about Italian espresso - you're the shit.

The problem is that you still don't seem to get that Italian espresso is not equal to espresso anymore. Espresso is global now. We all have our own styles. We owe a debt to Italy for creating this incredible way to prepare coffee. Thank you. But we're doing our own versions now. And, sadly, it seems that not only are you not an expert in other styles of espresso - you still don't even see that there are (in fact) other styles of espresso.

And so we get to the main points.

But some baristas prefer making double espressos with more than twice the amount of coffee--20 grams, not the 14-18 the SCAA guidelines would suggest--and only the amount of water for a single espresso, one ounce. The idea is a power-packed espresso, with half the one ounce of extraction being crema. It might sound good to espresso fans, but this idea has numerous problems.

Not to be a dick here, but 20 is not twice 14-18. In fact, 20 is only roughly 12% greater than 18 (not 100% greater). So, in fact, if one were to dose 20 grams rather than 18 grams (the upper end of the commonly accepted scale), one would only be increasing dose by roughly 12%.

Now... I agree that a 1oz shot from a 20g dose is unlikely to yield a good flavor experience (not impossible, but unlikely). But let's be realistic here... 1oz doubles are very (very) rare among good coffee bars. What is more common here is the 1.5oz double ristretto from 17.5 to 18.5 grams of coffee. While this is, in fact, slightly outside of your range for both volume and potentially dose - the variance is extremely small.

But anyway, what are these "numerous problems"? Well... it seems like there are two (not exactly "numerous" but whatever).

First... the "too much caffeine" problem.

No matter what you call this concentrate, the caffeine content is much higher than what we have come to expect with a traditional espresso. For years people thought espresso contained more caffeine than brewed coffee. Now, most professionals and coffee lovers know this is not true of Arabica espresso prepared with the traditional formula, which contains 60 to 70 milligrams of caffeine. Overdosing the espresso, even using Arabica beans and not higher-caffeine Robusta, the caffeine content could reach 200 milligrams. As logic would dictate, extraction time--how long coffee and water remain in contact--is a major factor.

As the editor (finally doing his job - thank you) correctly points out - extraction time in fact does not impact caffeine (at least within the range of variance we're talking about).

What the editor fails to point out is yet another math error. So... let's assume the same (gasp horror) 20g dose. This is an increase (as noted) of around 12% over the "accepted" range. The high end of the range he provides for caffeine is 70 milligrams. To get to 200 milligrams of caffeine, we would need to increase dose not by 12% but in fact by almost 300%. In other words, the dose would have to be roughly 50 grams.

Okay, so he's wrong about one of the two "numerous" problems being increased caffeine (or at least increased beyond an additional 12% or so.

What's the other one of these two "numerous" problems then?

For a double espresso, the formula calls for using twice the amount of coffee and twice the water. If the water isn't increased in proportion, the resulting extraction will have too little liquid and too much crema, as in the photo here. The beverage is too concentrated, its aromatic components not optimally released and mixed. Effectively, the aromas overlap with one another, creating issues like an extremely sour taste that can be perceived as salty. With this overconcentration, only a few pleasurable notes can emerge in the cup, masking others produced during roasting like chocolate, toasted bread, cocoa, and caramel. Lost is that ideal balance of bitter and sour.

The above statement is 100% accurate.

If you're using Illy coffee.

The problem is that leading non Italian coffee companies have diverged from the Italian traditions when it comes to the formulation of their espressos. Not only are more and more of these companies working with single origin (not blended) espressos, but the blends are also diverging further and further as well (with a larger and larger percentage of the coffee being washed coffees and fewer and fewer roasters working with lower grown natural and pulped natural coffees from Brazil for these espressos). These coffees are not stored and aged. They're not selected purely for their stability and low acidity.

Because the beans being worked with are so different from what Giorgio is used to - and because the flavor profile of these beans is wildly different -- the method of extraction has to be different.

The result in the cup is - logically - very different from what you would get from Illy. But this is not a barista error. It is the result of a series of conscious decisions (from bean selection, through blending, through roast style, to preparation and drink style) all to get a desired coffee experience.

The result is highly unlikely to taste like Illy.

That doesn't mean it's "wrong".

And it doesn't mean it is not espresso.

EAVB_POTOYUZKLF

Thank you sir may I have another

2010-06-02T08:49:00.000-07:00

Another day.... another chance to beat the snot out of mainstream media...

Today's contestant?

Esquire Magazine.

Actually.... let's be fair here... in this case Esquire is largely the patsy. They're the rube being taken advantage of by the smirking carnie. And that shifty half-assed conman? No other than everyone's favorite has-been coffee guy Todd Carmichael. In case you don't know (and believe me - the fact that you don't know is the big issue for Todd), Todd is the unbearably louche and jaded founder of La Colombe Torrefaction.

La Colombe was once the shit. Like a east coast Torrefazione Italia before Starbucks bought them. Back when everyone still believed that slavish mimicry of Italian traditions was the only possible way to create good coffee - true coffee. But time has passed La Colombe by. Unlike Torrefazione and Seattle's Best - they didn't sell out to Starbucks. And the new breed has left them behind. They're no longer cool. They're no longer the shit. Hell.... they're no longer even good. And Todd... bless his aging hipster little self... Todd is kinda bitter about this.

Todd's now written two "pieces" for Esquire. The first was snide and annoying and self-serving. The second is all that and also bitter and angry -- and wrong.

The problem is that Esquire is the publisher - and conning your publisher always creates problems. The goal of the publisher is NOT just to give you a soapbox. It's also there to make sure you don't make mistakes and don't step off the soapbox and fall off a cliff in the process. To illustrate, I'm going to do what Esquire should have done (if, of course, they hadn't just been your clueless mark).

Listen, the espresso machine was invented for a reason: to be "espress," a.k.a. fast (and, ironically, to replace the siphon and slow-brew.) Listen up, geeks: Drop the slow-brew renaissance and pick up the pace. We have work to get to.

First of all.... you're missing the point here. As mentioned above - time has moved on. As Starbucks has become ubiquitous folks like you (those who serve a quick pharmaceutical product for consumption on the way to work) have ceased to be the cutting edge. There is no point in competing with Starbucks for this market. The cutting edge has moved. You're no longer cool. Convenience espresso is now a commodity.

Beware the presence of the $17,000 coffee machine. It's a lot like the fad of the $100 hamburger: The beef may be good and the press may love it (at least for a day), but if you order it, someone in public relations will be laughing at you. No one was actually supposed to buy it.

An example of how one plays editor... "Todd... what are you trying to say here?" I mean - seriously. Are you saying that you can only get good coffee from cheap espresso machines? So... you spend a lot of time trying to come off like a bargain basement Tony Bourdain. You want to be treated like you're a chef - and spend energy implying that you've got the same sort of chops, approach and cred. So let me ask you a question.... do you think chefs don't care about their tools? Do you think chefs think spending lots of money on the "right" knives, the "right" stoves etc is "a fad?"

Beware the barista who goes techno-nerd on you when describing how he makes coffee: heat-surfing, pre-infusion profiling, tamp-dialing. Seriously, and how would you describe the act of opening a beer, liquid-load pressure breaching?

This is a great analogy - as it gives amazing insight into your mindset Todd. You are, in essence, comparing the skill required to make a good shot of espresso to the skill required to open a beer. A barista - to you - is completely unskilled labor.

I'm not going to defend some of the behavior of current baristas. I, too, rapidly tire of the near total lack of understanding of what a good customer experience is like. I'm bored and annoyed by the lack of professionalism and the record store clerk mentality.

But even the Italians understand that a great espresso is one part machine, one part coffee and one part barista. You've now dissed two out of the three parts. Are you going to go for the trifecta?

Super-geeks love to claim their coffee hails from single-origin Valhalla, unapproachable for any other roaster. Truth is, we live in the computer and commuter age; the world is tiny and coffee only comes from the small band around the middle. We all have access to the same beans.

Yes.... yes you are. So the machine doesn't matter (just a fad - buy something cheap). The barista doesn't matter (if you can use a bottle opener you can make espresso). And coffee is just a commodity that all of us have (and it's all the same). The trifecta. So much for respecting the Italian tradition there my boy.

But more importantly... now this is where you're showing your age there Todd.

Once upon a time, "we" did all have access to the same beans. We'd all call up Royal or Holland America and say "send me the offering sheet." That started really changing about 10 years ago now. At first, only a few smaller niche players were sourcing outside the spot and commodity markets and from outside the traditional exporters. Around 5 years ago - things really took off. Even the big guys started buying outside the markets - auctions become more and more common - and Direct Trade got big. Now - the whole coffee world is centered around the fact that we all do not have access to the same beans. Getting access, locking up sources and production... this is the new name of the game.

Todd... I'll put it bluntly. The coffees you have access are the coffees that everyone else has picked over and passed on. Your coffees are the ones that other roasters have said are not even good enough to put into the house blend.

You can call yourself a "neo-traditionalist" all you want (despite the fact that even a half-wit editor would call semantic bullshit all over you for this description).

Me? I just call you old and washed up.

a dream machine

2010-05-29T22:25:00.000-07:00

49th Parallel

2010-05-27T10:23:00.000-07:00

Just cupped a whole bunch of coffees from 49th Parallel in Vancouver BC.

49th Parallel has been considered among the best if not the best roaster in Canada pretty much since they opened business. Their goals, however, are clearly much bigger than that.

I've cupped coffees from them since the beginning, and have seen them grow as both a roaster and a buyer of green coffee along the way.

This morning I cupped a bunch of their coffees and I have to say I was deeply impressed. They have (in my opinion and to my taste) a very very good North American coffee roaster.

Quick tasting notes:

Colombia Finca Silencio - A lovely coffee. Round, balanced and complete. Gorgeous sugars and fats to fill out the structure provided by the chocolate and tannin notes. As it cooled, tons of fruit emerged (apricot, pluot, tangerine). A really very good coffee. The favorite on the table.

Burundi Kibingo - A unique and fantastic cup. Tons of light fruit to start (cranberry, cassis, kumquat, grape) into a very nice cocoa powder body. The aftertaste, however, is what does it for me with this coffee. Amazing tea-like notes and an exotic almost grenache like flavor. Wonderful. My second favorite - though not a universal choice.

Colombia Finca La Palestina - Great acidity. Tons of citrus (sour orange, ruby grapefruit, bergamot) provide a nice nippy punch of balanced sours and bitters. Very, very clean and crisp. Only critique is that it lacks the sweetness and body to really balance out the citrus. Still a very nice cup.

Tanzania Songea - One of the best coffees I've had from Tanzania. Assam tea, white grape, tangerine zest, sweet marmalade. Aftertaste is incredibly jammy and juicy - causing nearly instant salivation. Becomes a little hollow as it cools.

Between this table - the incredible shots of Hairbender - and the interesting new Black Cat - it's been a NICE coffee week so far!!!

Reviewing Espresso

2010-05-25T12:44:00.001-07:00

I've been involved in a really interesting side project of late - and I'm learning some important things from it.

Over at Home Barista I've been collaborating on a series of peer-reviewed espresso evaluations. The structure of these reviews has been illuminating and the results very interesting.

First - by focusing on private and collaborative peer-reviewing before publishing, the usual "didn't really nail the extraction parameters" problems are being reduced if not eliminated. With a bunch of reviewers all working on their own with the coffees (usually from a common starting point), we've been able to rapidly identify one or two "sweet spots" and then focus on optimization and most of all tasting around those parameter sets. This is yielding reviews that are more focused on "how do you get this espresso to taste good - and what does a good espresso from this coffee taste like" than the usual "here is my numerical score and two sentences of flavor descriptors. In other words - espresso is being treated differently from how coffee would be treated when cupped and the specific barista and equipment issues around espresso are being addressed.

Second - directed peer-reviewing like this does a reasonably good job of adjusting for (and making transparent) personal taste. As I've said many times, "just because you don't like this coffee doesn't mean it's a bad coffee."

Third - the wide spread of perspectives, tastes, experience and equipment among the reviewers actually gives a far better picture of the coffee. By getting all the different data sources and results and the combining and correlating - the big picture really does emerge.

It's been a very good experience - one I've enjoyed immensely. I'm looking forward to the future reviews a ton. So far reviews have been of Counter Culture Toscano and Ecco Espresso - with Intelligentsia Black Cat and Stumptown Hairbender coming up this week I believe.

But more then the enjoyment of the experience - I think there is something important to learn here. I think this sort of approach has some real power and validity and I hope it spreads and I really hope that it is adopted by the professional community. I think that this is where it could do the most good. Yeah... it's good that this is being done in the Home community (especially given that something like 70% of the home enthusiasts say their coffee buying decisions are driven by online reviews). But if the Pros got on board with this approach it could not only improve espresso (IMHO) but also start to create more knowledge sharing and more collaboration within the industry. And god knows we need that.

Reviews here.

Cultural Imperialism

2010-05-14T11:55:00.000-07:00

Sigh... another example of mass media blowing it when it comes to coffee...

But wait... this one is interesting!

Because this time, the article is written by an Italian "espresso expert."

And as well all know.... no-one knows espresso better than the Italians.

Kind of like how no-one knows beer better than the Germans?

Hmmm....

So, wow.

Yeah - the article is largely a promo piece for Illy and the "Illy way."

But none the less... wow.

I'd never really thought about the idea the cultural imperialism could be applied to espresso. I guess I wasn't thinking big enough.

My thoughts (in order and point by point):

Italian espresso (what he calls "traditional" espresso) is different from American espresso.

And to me that's a good thing. Each is its own thing - with its own goals and criteria.

As has been written before, Italian espresso is a cultural product perhaps more than a culinary one. There are rules. It is not a place for experimentation. That's fine.

What is called espresso here sometimes really isn't espresso.

Complaining about the fact that American espresso is different is just silly. It would be like someone from Pilsen complaining about Irish milk stout and saying "it's too dark and too heavy." Yes.... they're both beer. But they are different. And that's fine. They're different kinds of beer.

But what I didn't expect were so many baristas using so many methods to prepare espresso, far from the authentic Italian technique.

The trouble with a piece of food or beverage becoming a cultural artifact is that you end up feeling a sense of "ownership." And you start talking about things like "authentic Italian technique" as if it had some meaning. I'll use food as an example.... If it were not for people who ignored these rules and ignored the "cultural artifact" status quo preservationists, we'd all still be eating Chicken Kiev and Steak Diane. And that would be a travesty.

Yes... here in the US (and big shocker for you - also in places like Australia, Norway, England, Denmark... pretty much everywhere other than Italy in fact) we've been experimenting. We've been breaking the rules. And we've found that there are other options when it comes to espresso - and guess what. We like some of the results better than what you prescribe.

The biggest mistake I've seen is an enormous quantity of coffee being used—way too much. I'm talking about 20 to 25 grams of coffee for a single espresso shot! It is like making a mojito with half a mint leaf, one ice cube, a few grains of sugar, and a gallon of rum. Undrinkable!

Yes... I think we all agree that this is a writing error as I've never (ever) heard of anyone using 20 to 25 grams of coffee from a single shot. But this is the problem with being published when you are not a professional. You miss shit like this - and it destroys the trust in the writer.

Beyond that, I understand the point of hyperbole, but his analogy would only be true if he were talking about making a 5oz cappuccino with 4.5oz of espresso. If he wanted to make the correct analogy, he would talk about the amount of sugar cane used to make the appropriate volume of rum.

More importantly... if the amount of coffee used varies from what Illy prescribes, that is not a "mistake" (unless arguably you're working with Illy's coffee). It's a choice. We're choosing to use more coffee just like we're choosing to not use robusta and we're choosing to experiment with single origin coffees and we're choosing to create blends from 100% washed coffees. It's that that we're unaware of your "rules" - we're just choosing to move past them.

Espresso made this way—well, it's not espresso, but I'll call it that—turns out overly concentrated, and because of that it cannot delight the drinker with the magnificent aromas of toasted bread, chocolate, red fruit, orange, and jasmine flowers that are all present in a high-quality blend.

Three points.

1 - Who the hell is he to tell me what IS espresso and what is not?
2 - If I were to describe the best shot of Illy I've ever had (from Trieste in this case) I would describe it as "caramel, light peanut and marzipan, hints of tangerine zest and light chocolate in the finish." In other words... his own coffee from his own home town fails to meet his "requirements."
3 - On the other hand.... I've had at least 3 espressos in the US that are almost exactly what he describes. One of them was dosed at 17g, one was dosed at 18g and one was dosed at around 19.5g. The flavor has to do with the COFFEE more than the dose.

The beverages I tasted were almost syrups, full-bodied but with a very sour, almost salty taste. I suspect that beans that were roasted too recently played a part. After roasting, beans need a few days to breathe and mature. These too-young beans are a big problem. Also, I've visited too many coffee bars that don't heat cups before serving, and in the process sacrifice flavor and aroma. Or that serve in wet cups, an espresso sin.

And so we get to the point.... Where has he had these coffees? He speaks for ALL american espresso based upon what sample set?

His description (syrup, massively updosed, sour, salty) doesn't sound like the shots from any of the top US coffee bars.

Wow.... beans need to rest?!?!?!?! That must come as a shock to us dumb rubes here in the US.

Listen up buddy.... if you've been getting shots that sound like your description, in unheated cups, from beans that are fresh out of the roaster -- then you've been going to the wrong coffee bars. How would you like it if I went to the coffee bar at the airport in Naples and said "Espresso in Italy sucks."

Oh... and as for your "espresso sins".... yeah... I got your sin right here buddy.

Update: Giorgio has written a new piece responding to the critiques - and I've blogged about it.

Robur at Home - Final Thoughts

2010-04-27T17:22:00.001-07:00

So I've lived with the Robur for a bit. I think I have a pretty good handle on it now. Time for some final thoughts and my conclusion.

Note: These thoughts (and the conclusion) are purely focused on considering the use of a stock Robur (dosered) grinder at home. I'm not taking into account suitability for on-bar work. And I'm not considering how the Robur could be modified in any way, shape, or form.

Pros:

1 - fantastic grind quality. The grind quality is on par with if not better than what I've seen with an Alinox. Far better than any home grinders I've ever seen.

2 - great shot clarity coupled with great shot density. Perhaps largely due to the grind quality, the Robur enables the hard act of producing shots that have both clarity and density. No "home" grinders really do this in my experience.

3 - forgiving on prep. Again, perhaps due to the grind quality (or the grind quality combined with the lack of clumping in the coffee), working with coffee from the Robur allows a certain amount of sloppiness in distribution.

4 - quiet, fast, clean. As compared to almost all grinders the Robur is pretty easy to live with. There are no rattles and minimal grinding or motor noise. Grinding a shot is very (VERY) quick. And it's (reasonably) clean.

Cons:

1 - wastes a lot of coffee. I'm a reasonably efficient barista. But I'm wasting about 1/4lb out of every pound of coffee I use. Between adjusting the grind when changing coffees and the periodic overfill (it's a FAST grinder as I said) and the amount of coffee trapped in the grinder and the issues with minimum volume of beans in the hopper (see below) it's nearly impossible to be truly efficient with your use of coffee.

2 - significant learning curve. For me the learning curve was a couple of days - but that is largely because it consisted of remembering all the stuff I was taught when I worked at Stumptown. From the timing with the grind (reasonably quick to learn) to the amount of coffee required to flush post grind change (slow to get nailed) to tricks for adjusting the grind (hard to learn) and for keeping the grind consistent (very hard to learn) - there are a lot of things about working with the Robur that are challenging. Most of these are minor issues or non-issues on bar as you're just working them into the flow. At home... I'd guess that many baristas learning to use this machine would be pulling a lot of frustrating sub-par shots with wildly varying extractions for quite a while unless they really didn't change coffee.

3 - grind impacted by volume of beans. With a stock Robur you cannot do the home barista trick of weighing a single dose, dropping it in the hopper and grinding. Or, rather, you can do it but it negates the single biggest advantage of the Robur (the grind quality). I found a sweet spot that started at a little less than 1lb in the hopper. Variance in the grind was minor from full hopper down to about 1.25lbs. From 1.25lbs down to a little less than 1lb variance started to increase but was still manageable. Below that minimum (say 0.85lbs) it seemed like I would have to adjust the grind with each shot - endlessly chasing an ever-changing and unpredictable target. Once down below 0.5lbs not only was the grind constantly changing, the grind quality started to degrade.

4 - enormous. It's huge. Massive. I've got a small kitchen but honestly, I can't see this really "fitting in" to even the largest kitchen.

5 - expensive. Sure, if price is no object then this is not a con. But realistically, for most people the price point of the Robur is the biggest negative.

Conclusion

I love having the Robur in my house. My shots are easy to pull and are as good if not better than what I'm used to. The shots are slightly less consistent due to the wandering grind issues with volume changes, but that's just something that requires more discipline. I love the quiet of it. I love the speed of it. I love the simplicity of it.

But.... I pay for a small fraction of the coffee I make espresso from. If I were paying full retail for all the coffee I use - I'd be pretty seriously unhappy about this grinder. Wasting that much coffee.... yeah that would be tough.

And.... I know how to work with this grinder. I've had a few folks over who don't have the same experience and training and their frustration with just trying to get the grind into something close to the sweet spot for a specific coffee was illuminating for me.

In other words -- I love the Robur.

But I'd never suggest that the imaginary "average" home barista buy one.

It's still probably the best bar grinder out there.

But there are far cheaper, far easier to live with and far less demanding grinders for the home.

Living with the Robur

2010-04-24T19:04:00.001-07:00

Some quick update notes....

1 - switching coffees frequently could get really expensive. The amount of coffee being burned to dial in the grind is not insignificant. I'm guessing I'll probably average out right under 1/4lb for each new coffee.

2 - dialing in the grind is not easy unless you're used to the machine. The way the grind "wanders" after a change unless you do the adjustment while the grinder is running is an issue (and unless you know about it, can be disconcerting). And, of course, adjusting while the grinder is running burns more beans. You have to purge a lot of coffee to get consistent grind sizing. Adjusting through light taps seems best for me. If you don't do all of this carefully, you tend to over-adjust a lot and it becomes like uncontrolled fishtailing on ice.

3 - clarity in the cup is excellent - and so is body and density. This combination is very (very) rare. Usually you sacrifice one for the other. The combination is great. A big win.

4 - my sweet spot for amount of coffee in the hopper seems like it's about 1lb. Dropping below that increases inconsistency from what I'm seeing so far.

5 - I am remembering all the quirks and traits of the grinder. It's all coming back to me. And the coffee is getting really good as I remember. I am starting to understand why for so long I felt this was the best on-bar grinder on the market.

6 - as I remember, I'm also rediscovering how easy the grinder makes things on the barista once you get your act together. I can be a lot more sloppy with my distribution and not suffer the consequences for example.

Tomorrow will be some more coffee for more people and should have some good opinions.

Overkill? Robur at Home

2010-04-21T08:46:00.000-07:00

To be honest I've never really understood people buying Roburs for home use.

From my perspective, it always seemed like kind of crazy overkill. When you look at the strengths of the Robur (and there are many) really only one of them (grind quality) matches up well with home use cases.

But people do it. People put down the big $$ for these monster grinders and use them at home.

And finally I get a chance to actually share an opinion on this based on some facts. That's right - I have a Robur at home.

Now... admittedly it's just a loaner. And it's just for a little while. But still... I've got a Robur at home and I'm not afraid to use it.

I'm planning on sharing some thoughts and experiences along the way. Most will be short and sweet. I'm not going to even try to pretend I don't know the machine or am not familiar with it. I've probably pulled thousands of shots from Roburs to date. But they've all been while working the bar. So these thoughts are going to be in two specific areas. First - is a Robur really a realistic grinder for home (why? why not?). Second - what are the major differences between using it at home and on bar?

Today is Day One with the Robur.

First impressions are that this thing is freakin' enormous. I know I have a smallish kitchen (like a lot of ex pro cooks I prefer smaller spaces for cooking) but DAMN. Even stuffed over in the corner it looms over everything like some sort of freaky death-star-monolith-robot.

And it's not just huge - it's REALLY heavy. Moving it around is kind of a struggle.

The good thing about the weight becomes clear once I start using it. It's like it's bolted to the counter. Not only doesn't it move around, it doesn't even wiggle or anything. That's really quite nice!

And compared to my Cimbali the thing is really quite quiet. It's more of a mechanical hum than the collection of grinding and rattling noises that I'm used to from home grinders.

Almost immediately, however, three negatives crop up.

First - the thing is so tall (in all ways) that it really almost requires a lower counter surface. Seeing into the doser requires leaning up on tip-toes.

Second - it burns through coffee. Changing grind and purging isn't the 3gr-4gr process I'm used to. Dialing in a new coffee this AM probably took 1/4lb in total (and I was really close on both grind and temp to start by pure chance).

Third - it seems like grind quality and consistency drops dramatically once you have less than 1/2lb of coffee in the hopper. I think I'd probably be going from getting coffee in 1lb increments to 2lb increments given point 2 above and this issue.

I was working with a new coffee today, so I can't compare the results in the cup. That will have to wait. From first impressions, the flow rate looks fantastic. Consistency looks (and tastes) like it's really good. It seems a little harder to get light (sub 17.5gr) doses (perhaps the grind is a little less fluffy than with the Cimbali).

I'll score a couple pounds of Ecco and a couple pounds of Four Barrel and start doing some comparison testing. After that I might do the same with some Hairbender.

First impressions, to sum up, are that it's going to eat up a lot of coffee, that's it's really easy to use once set up (but hard to set up), that it's not really going to require any changes to my prep, and that the grind quality seems quite high.

Stay tuned.

a prelude and a plea

2010-04-13T12:37:00.000-07:00

It's almost the annual SCAA show. The circus. The event. The mayhem.

As everyone is gathering together and talking smack and catching up in general - I would ask folks to consider the following for conversation at this time.

There are many things about the coffee industry that are not so good. Especially as compared to other industries.

But coffee does have its strengths - it does have its areas where it is better than most other businesses.

There is one that rarely gets mentioned - but recent events have made me feel like I need to bring it to light.

As compared to many other businesses I've worked in - with coffee you generally don't see people taking credit for the hard work of others. People in coffee are usually quite good at giving credit where it is due. Yeah - we've got a ton of big egos in this industry. But usually even the biggest of egos share credit. They point to the farmers, they point to their mentors, they point to employees and bosses and partners and even to competitors.

Coffee has very few "big swinging dicks" running around claiming that their business' success was all because of them. That particular type of megalomania is refreshingly rare in coffee. Believe me... this is not the case in other industries.

And I'd really, really hate to see this change.

I'd hate to see people in coffeee start to behave with the level of disrespect for others that exists in other businesses.

I'd hate to see the sort of offensive behavior - where people lay claim to the results of other people's hard work as their own - spread to coffee.

To be honest - I've recently seen the first signs of this cropping up.

And it makes me sad.

It makes me sad - and it makes me angry.

No-one in coffee is doing this alone. No-one can claim total credit for any success. Each of us owes a debt of gratitude to everyone we work with, everyone we learned from, everyone who came before us, every hand that touches the coffee - and every customer who pays for it.

That's one of the few things I'd like to see never change about coffee.

No More Dirty Coffee

2010-03-21T09:09:00.000-07:00

Please.

Please stop selling dirty coffee.

Please stop putting dirty coffee in your espresso blends.

Please.

I really don't care about the excuses.

I don't care that "it's the cleanest coffee from Yemen this year." If it's dirty - it's dirty.

I don't care about "it having unique, for a Sidamo, flavors of fermented peach and sugarcane." If it's dirty - it's dirty.

And I don't care that you think "we need a Sumatra for body in our espresso." If it's dirty.... well then it's just flat out bad.

No more excuses.

Please.

I don't want to drink your dirty coffee anymore.

Journalist vs Publicist

2010-03-10T08:25:00.000-08:00

To provide context - I was once in the publishing industry. Along the way I was a columnist for the New York Times. To this day I am passionate about media, publishing and perhaps most of all the roles, goals and ethics of journalism.

Perhaps that alone can explain my incredible frustration with media coverage of craft coffee in particular and coffee in general.

And perhaps that explains why I'm less irritated by a ridiculous and non-factual article in some Airline magazine than I am by a far less wrong-headed one in something like the Times.

To explain, I'll use the current fly in my personal ointment - the recent article by Oliver Strand in the NY Times, "New York is Finally Taking it's Coffee Seriously."

I'll get to some specific details in a second, but I'm going to start with the two major meta issues I have.

Meta issue #1 -- the equivalency issue. The article clusters coffee bars in NYC into two groups (Top 10, Top 30). The reality is that the range within the Top 10 is enormous and it does everyone a disservice to treat the best coffee in the city with the 10th best.

Let's be honest.... there is not a single city in the US and perhaps in the world that has 10 truly great coffee bars in it.

Most people would argue that Portland has the best coffee in the US right now (and I would agree). But there are not 10 great coffee bars in Portland - and the difference between even the single best and the fifth best is dramatic.

And New York is not where Portland is.

Meta Issue #2 - the scale issue. If you then look at the top 30 list, there are places on there that just simply should not be listed or suggested. There are places that are simply bad.

There is not a city in the US that has 30 coffee bars that serve drinkable coffee.

When your article is following a premise that is about the increase in quality coffee - you need to only talk about places that serve quality coffee.

Basically - this article does a disservice to the coffee bars that actually are trying to do something special and that actually are serving great coffee. And it does a disservice to consumers by miseducating them.

Here is the thing....

Yes - I'm holding Oliver and the NYTimes to a higher standard than I would (for example) GQ or the American Airlines in-flight magazine.

But that's totally fair.

The NYTimes has built-in trust. It's the tallest pulpit to preach from.

It has power.

And with power comes responsibility.

The responsibility to be more than just a cheerleader. More than just a publicist.

The responsibility to do the right thing and the hard thing.

When people trust you - you have no other choice.

If this article had been "Top 10 Coffee Bars in NYC - and 3 that serve truly great coffee" then I'd be happy.

I'd be happier still if it were "Top 3 Coffee Bars in NYC - and 3 Most Over-rated".

I expect more.

PS. Some detail comments...

For years New Yorkers had to look to places like Stumptown Coffee Roasters in Portland, Ore., or Blue Bottle Coffee in San Francisco for this kind of quality.

Again... an equivalency issue. These two are not the same and no-one (other than those who work at Blue Bottle) would make the argument that they are. Stumptown is in fact synonymous with quality. Blue Bottle is synonymous with customer experience.

The elaborate designs in the cappuccino’s foam at Third Rail Coffee in the West Village aren’t just to show off, but are a sign that the barista properly steamed the milk so that it holds its form.

The "designs" are actually not in the "foam" but actually in the crema.

These shops use only beans that have been roasted in the past 10 days (though some say two weeks is fine), so the flavors are still lively.

The scale issue again. At least some of the coffee companies on the list are looking at a less than one week time-frame (with a few that except espresso blends). Others are looking at two weeks. That's a 100% difference. The difference in flavor experience from a well brewed CoE coffee 2 days post roast and one that is 14 days post roast is quite literally of an order of magnitude.

Baristas at the best places in town, like Bluebird Coffee Shop or Joe, tamp down between 19 and 21 grams. Often the espresso is even more concentrated because it’s pulled “short,” with less water, so that the final volume is a thick 1.5 to 2 ounces.

A higher dose does not equal better espresso. Dose is largely dependent on the specific coffee you're using and the style you're shooting for. A "short" shot is also not inherently better - it again depends on the coffee you're using and the style (personal taste) you shoot for. Also - a 2oz double is not "short".

The Baristas' Espressos

2010-02-22T15:19:00.000-08:00

As I said in my most recent (The Baristas' Baristas) post...

This list does not attempt to judge either the coffee this baristas are using or the quality of the shots they are pulling day to day .... I'm considering how to apply this same approach to coffees...

Obviously, the value of the prior post was compromised by looking purely at the baristas (in the abstract). If the goal really is to give people a direction to go to understand what espresso can and should taste like, then the coffee needs to be considered as well. To answer the question of "what does great espresso taste like" by sending someone to taste great espresso from a great barista - I would need to look at the barista, the coffee - and the combination of the two.

So after some consideration, I went back to the same "panel" of baristas etc and asked them a similar question to last time - but in this case looking at the coffees.

You walk into a very good coffee bar to get an espresso. What espressos would you be most excited to see them working with?

As with the last time, all nominated coffees would require multiple nominations to be added to the list. Unlike last time, with the espressos I asked for folks to rank up to three of them in order. I then used a combination of ranking score and number of nominations to determine the final list.

In the end, the list of espressos that folks would be most excited to see on bar is:

Square Mile -- London, UK

Stumptown -- Portland, OR; Seattle,WA; Brooklyn, NY

The Coffee Collective -- Copenhagen, DEN

Wendelboe -- Oslo, NO

Ecco Caffe -- Santa Rosa, CA

Kaffa -- Oslo, NO

Intelligentsia -- Chicago, IL; LA, CA

Of course, again, the same major caveats apply.

There is massive under-representation from Australia and New Zealand due to low response numbers from that region.

Obscure roasters and roasters not known on the international scene are under-represented.

That means that there are probably some very good coffees being left off this list.

In addition, there are two additional caveats.

First, the people surveyed in general are excited about coffees they cannot get. So a lot of North American folks nominated coffees from Scandinavia. You get the idea. This might skew the results a bit.

Second, this is purely intended to discuss espressos - not all coffees and explicitly not coffees designed for other brew methods.

And the disclaimer.... this is not an attempt to claim these are the "best" roasters in any way shape or form or that these roasters produce the "best" coffee. It's simply looking at the other axis of information to address the original question "how do I know what great espresso tastes like."

So now we have the baristas - and the coffees.

What does this mean (other than suggesting it would be worthwhile to pack 5lbs of Square Mile Winter espresso or Hairbender for a flight to Copenhagen so you can beg Klaus to pull you shots)?

Well... it looks to me like the best options for understanding what espresso can and should taste like would be for you to do something like go to:

Copenhagen and have Klaus Thomsen pull you some shots of espresso from The Coffee Collective, or
Portland and have Billy Wilson pull you some shots of espresso from Stumptown or Ecco Caffe, or
Oslo and have Tim Wendelboe pull you some shots of espresso from Wendelboe, or
London and have James Hoffman pull you some shots of espresso from Square Mile, or
Chicago and have Mike Phillips pull you some shots from Intelligentsia.

Hmmm... I guess I have my vacations planned for the next 2 years!!!

The Baristas' Baristas

2010-02-20T10:02:00.000-08:00

Earlier this week I was asked a pretty classic good question.

How do I know what good espresso should taste like?

As always, my answer was "go have a shot of great coffee pulled by a great barista." In hindsight - this is a somewhat glib response. It was pointed out that, if you don't know what good espresso tastes like you're also unlikely to know what a great coffee is and even more unlikely to know who a great barista is - or how to identify them.

So I started to think about how to address this. If I wanted to make sure that someone were able to taste a shot that gave them an idea about what great espresso was all about - who would I send them to?

I realized that the best solution would be to ask the people that I think are great baristas and great judges of baristas who they thought were great baristas. More than that.... to ask them who they would be excited to get a shot of espresso from - who they would look forward to a shot from.

So I asked this question of 30 people in the business whose opinions on the matter I deeply respect. This was a mix of great baristas, WBC/USBC judges and coffee professionals.

I then took the answers and created a list of the people who had more than one mention from this group (figuring that if two or more people vote for one barista - that's validation). Ironically, almost everyone on this initial list was someone on the "voting panel." In some ways, I think this is a good validation of that panel itself. I then sent the first cut of the list back out to the group along with the list of people who had only one vote - and asked for any suggested corrections. After a bunch of back-and-forth, I arrived at what we all seem to think is a good list.

It's important to note that this is not a list of who we - or I - think are the "best" baristas. This is instead a list of the Baristas' Baristas. These people might not, in fact, pull the absolute best shots in the world - but they are the people who we believe always pull good shots. They're the pros' pros.

In alphabetical order:

Billy Wilson -- Barista, Portland OR

Bronwen Serna -- Hines Public Market - Origins Coffee / Joe Bar, Seattle WA

Chris Baca -- Verve, Santa Cruz CA

James Hoffman -- Square Mile, London UK

Klaus Thomsen -- Coffee Collective, Copenhagen DEN

Mike Phillips -- Intelligentsia, Chicago IL

Scott Lucey -- Alterra, Milwaukee WI

Stephen Morrissey -- Intelligentsia, Chicago IL

Tim Wendelboe -- Tim Wendelboe, Oslo NO

Now... there is one important caveat and one important disclaimer that need to be mentioned.

Caveat - because of the "multiple vote" criteria, this list punishes people who work in remote areas and don't compete in barista competitions. In addition, because I got minimal response from contacts in Australia and New Zealand, it entirely leaves out the great baristas in those countries. Just because a barista working out in the backwoods isn't on here doesn't mean they're not amazing. And just because a barista who works in Sydney (or Christchurch) isn't on here also doesn't mean they're bad. It's a flawed system - what can I say.

Disclaimer - these baristas do the best they can with what they have, but they're only as good as their coffee. This list does not attempt to judge either the coffee these baristas are using or (as a result) the quality of the shots they are pulling day to day. It's simply a list of the baristas that baristas love and respect. I'm considering how to apply this same approach to coffees next. If I can pull it off - that should give a more useful final list.

In the end - however - this list should provide some direction for people who want to taste what espresso should and can taste like. It should help people calibrate.

At least... that's what I hope.

Death to Generic Espresso Blends (and generic thinking)

2010-02-11T08:42:00.000-08:00

So much of coffee (at least at the high end - in the craft / artisan sector) is improving. The old methods and concepts are being re-evaluated, questioned and in many cases rejected. New models and approaches are being explored. And, as a result, coffee in improving.

But there is one thing that we seem to be passing by (or ignoring) for the most part.

Our espresso blends are far too often generic and weak - and our approach to creating espresso blends is dated, flawed and also generic.

It's time to change that.

At present it seems like most of the good coffee companies are trying to address the issues with their espresso blends by ignoring them - by instead introducing single origin espressos as an alternative. This allows them to express seasonality, to produce espressos that are not generic and to continue to progress.

But this is cheating - and is amateur.

Everyone who has cooked professionally knows that any good untrained cook can create great appetizers. You're working in one dimension with one palette. But it's plated entrees that separate the amateur from the pro. Now you have to work with a complex combination of not just ingredients but component dishes. This requires a kind of thinking and approach and palate that few amateurs possess.

Right now all the coffee companies that are offering their "house" blend and then a seasonal single origin are the equivalent of a restaurant offering a bunch of really cool, changing and interesting appetizers and then roast beef with mash and veg. It's weak and its unacceptable.

So what is the problem with these espresso blends?

I feel that it is largely due to the thinking behind them. Most commercial espresso blends are the product of formulaic thinking. It goes a little something like this:

I need to create my house espresso blend
It needs to be something that no-one will dislike
It needs to work in milk and in shots
It can't change in flavour over time
What Brazil can I get right now that is affordable and will provide mid-tones?
What Latin can I get that is affordable and will provide high notes?
What's the least bad Indo I can get right now for the bass?
And what East African can I get to provide fruit and wildness?
Can I get enough of each one to not have to change formulation for a while?

There is literally something wrong with every single step of this.

What I would propose instead is a thought process that is far more simple but far more involved. Something like this:

I need to create a seasonal espresso blend
It needs to be something I like
If it can't work in milk and as straight shots I need to create two or optimize for straight shots
What great coffees are available right now that might work in espresso?
What can I do with these coffees - what can I create?
What do I want this all to taste like?

This is not impossible.

In fact there are companies that are doing this (Square Mile is at least getting close for example).

So why are so many otherwise good companies NOT doing this?

Why do so many espresso blends from decent roasters contain unacceptable indonesian coffees and defect ridden east african beans?

Laziness and fear.

Roasters... I'm calling you out.

Stop ignoring your espresso blend.

Be professional.

It's time to grow a pair.

A Good Day

2010-01-10T17:45:00.001-08:00

There are days where you realize just how lucky you are.

When it comes to coffee.... today was one of those days.

Last week I decided I wanted to do a multi-roaster, blind cupping (as with the State of SF Coffee experiment). This time I wanted it to be some hand-selected roasters from all over; and with a larger group of cuppers. And while I was at it... I wanted to include a bunch of espresso.

In the end... here were the coffees:

4 Barrel Espresso

4 Barrel Costa Rica Cafetin "wee berry"

4 Barrel El Salvador La Montanita

Ecco Caffe Brazil Sertaozinho Reserve Espresso

Ecco Caffe Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op

Ecco Caffe Colombia Loma Redonda

Ritual Kenya Kiambara

Ritual El Salvador Finca Los Andes

Intelligentsia Kenya Gichathaini

Stumptown Hairbender Espresso

Stumptown Ethopia Yirgacheffe La Michella

49th Parallel Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Wondo

49th Parallel El Salvador Los Planes

For consistency's sake, all shots of espresso were pulled by me and experimentation was largely limited to dose, volume and brew temp.

Cuppers consisted of 3 coffee professionals (representing roasters, baristas and green bean buyers) and one food and wine professional (highly respected sommelier and coffee fan). All cupping was the usual blind set up with coffees coded with playing cards.

All three espressos were good to excellent. The Four Barrel Espresso was sweet and heavy, with an interesting savory note in the finish. It has great fruit and a really nice powdery chocolate tone. The Stumptown Hairbender was fabulously balanced, with great sweetness and soft bitter tones in the middle before finishing with fantastically clean fruit notes. The Ecco Sertaozinho Reserve had fantastic honey/caramel and stone fruit with a chocolate/butter finish.

In the end, those tasting the espresso felt the Hairbender was the "preferred" coffee of the three. We felt it managed the unique and challenging task of being familiar and comforting while tasting new and exciting. We loved the rainier cherry notes and the not-cloying sweetness. The finish was incredible and long-lasting. In our opinions, the Hairbender is a great benchmark for American Espresso.

After cupping the remaining coffees, we felt that four of them stood out as the class of the table. These four were all absolutely lovely coffees - and the gap between our favorite of the four and our fourth favorite was 1.5 points (out of 100). The Stumptown Ethopia Yirgacheffe La Michella was outrageously balanced and nuanced, with a beautiful balance of milk-tea and lemon zest with cantalope and apricot flavours. Aromatics of lemon skin, assam tea and jasmine complemented the experience. Just a very elegant cup in all ways. The Intelligentsia Kenya Gichathaini was the complete package, with a solid backbone of dark molasses, leather and pluot/pear supporting fantastic dried blackberry and marmalade high notes. Aromatics were overwhelmingly rich and sweet, with tons of molasses and jam. The Ecco Caffe Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op (a past favorite of course) was wonderfully sweet and balanced - with tons of layered citrus (bergamot, lemon zest, tangerine, sour orange) and a lovely lactic/honey body. Deep layers of honey, lemon, assam tea and sweet fruit aromatics were an elegant and mouthwatering introduction to the cup. The 4 Barrel El Salvador La Montanita was dominated by sweet tangerine-marmalade and persimmon notes and had a lovely, clean finish. Clean and with layers and layers of unfolding citrus, this coffee had a fantastic, deep resinous finish. Aromatics were subtle and soft with a nice savory soy sauce note.

In the end, the differences between these coffees were almost too tight to call - and there were some disagreements in ranking between those cupping - but when push came to shove we were forced to rank as follows:

1 - Intelligentsia Kenya Gichathaini. Clean, sweet, complicated, rich, deep - perfectly roasted.

2 - Stumptown Ethopia Yirgacheffe La Michella. Sophisticated, classic, balanced - wonderful nuance.

3 - Ecco Caffe Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op. Polished, rounded, complex - wonderful structure.

4 - 4 Barrel El Salvador La Montanita. Clean, balanced, rich - deeply satisfying.

It's important to keep in mind that all four of these coffees are fantastic - and that the spread from 1 to 4 is miniscule. Not only that - the difference between 2 and 3 was small enough that they were effectively tied (one cupper in fact had it tied for 1st rank with the Gichathaini).

On the national stage, Intelligentsia and Stumptown have established themselves at the "gold standard" for coffee. The SF roasters should be very proud that they were able to hold their own on this table.

It was a good day indeed.

A Simple Answer

2010-01-01T12:01:00.000-08:00

Any changes to the way you prepare coffee that increase the complexity and / or difficulty of your preparation are almost always due to a problem with your methodology, coffee or equipment (in that order).

balance in espresso

2009-12-23T14:54:00.001-08:00

One of the elusive properties I look for in coffee is balance.

In fact, balance is a positive value in coffee for most people. For me, however, it is of nearly paramount importance. My hierarchy of value when it comes to coffee has changed over time, and at this point I prize balance above almost everything else.

In talking about coffee and writing about coffee, as a result, I mention balance a lot.

But the other day someone said to me, "I don't really understand what you mean by balance."

After a couple discussions with various folks - I realized that what I thought was clear is far, far from it. In fact, what I describe as "balance" is probably wildly different from what others describe and at least slightly different from what almost anyone else means what they use the word.

So... I thought I would take a stab at defining the concept - as I use it.

I view balance as having four dimensions (as is true with any complex system).

If you flatten this into two dimensional models, what you get is one model that shows balance as a sort of "even distribution" of gross level taste components; beneath that one model that then maps that even distribution in terms of synergistic (hopefully) flavour components that combine to create an experience; and then map both these models over time.

So you have Model One - which shows the balance of the traditional Sweet, Sour, Bitter, Umami and Salty tastes; you have Model Two which takes that balance and describes the flavours within the above model and its hopeful completeness; and then you have how those two models combined change and are experienced over time.

I figured I would illustrate this through the analysis of three different types of espresso. So I went with Tonx to three of the leading SF espresso bars and tasted a shot at each. We then discussed the distribution of tastes, mapped the flavours, and then modeled it all over time.

In looking at the above chart (click on it for the full size version) of the results for Model One, you see an interesting and unique "profile" for each shot.

Obviously, for my personal taste (prizing balance) I preferred the shot from Four Barrel. What's interesting is that you can see how someone who strongly dislikes bitter flavors and doesn't prize my definition of "balance" would likely prefer the Ritual shot. In fact, you could see how someone who does not prize balance and has specific tastes they like more or less would likely prefer one of these over the others - and can predict which it would be.

Now let's look at each shot in terms of flavour profile and balance / completeness within the taste style described in the chart (ie Model Two).

Ritual - the combination of tons of fruit and honeyed sweetness yields a very intense tart and syrupy shot that is powerful and interesting. In terms of balance as defined as synergistic completeness, however, the shot is hollow and missing the counterpoint notes to both play off of and complement the strong fruit and citrus and simple syrup notes. It is largely a two note coffee - albeit one where the two notes are not only interesting and flavourful but also played very loud.

Four Barrel - the semi-sweet chocolate body provides the bitterness and some sweetness and is balanced against an interesting pomegranate acidity which provides sour notes. Strong savory flavors that are somewhat reminiscent of cured meat fill in the gaps. This combines counterpoint and unexpectedness into a very complete albeit unusual flavour combination - what I would describe as balance.

Sightglass - perhaps the shop or the barista was having a bad day, but the shot was thin and underextracted and a bit dirty and as a result the flavours were dominated by an astringent turpentine and some resin notes. There was some citric acidity and a woody mushroomy body. In addition to being rather unpleasant, this created a severely incomplete and in-fact clashing rather than synergizing flavour combination.

Finally, we'll look at each shot by mapping the two prior two-dimensional models over time - adding in the fourth dimension.

Ritual - over time the sweetness slowly faded, but the sour acidity did not. This resulted in a concentration of flavour on the center of the palate that seemed to almost intensify as time went by. I would describe this as unbalanced on this last dimension.

Four Barrel - over time the savory notes become stronger and both the umami and the salty flavours intensified. Sweetness and sourness declined and the shot tasted more and more strongly of cured meats and soy sauce. While this was not unpleasant, it was also not balanced as a complete experience.

Sightglass - over time the acidity faded, the residual sugars faded and what was left was a flavour of slightly rancid oil and a strong metallic note. Obviously... neither enjoyable nor complete.

In the end, if I were to score each of these shots for Balance on all four dimensions combined - I would do so as follows:

Ritual - 5/10

Four Barrel - 8/10

Sightglass - 3/10

This does not say I would grade each as an entire experience as such. In fact, I would likely grade Ritual's shot higher than that score due to its positive flavors and Sightglass' lower due to its preparation flaws and the fact that the machine was clearly dirty. I think it's important to understand that modeling balance does not equal grading the shot. You can have a very enjoyable unbalanced shot - just as you can have a poor and / or unenjoyable balanced shot. Nothing is so simple...

As a final point - my concept of "balance" as defined above is largely the result of my working in restaurant kitchens and may not be shared by many (or in fact any) coffee professionals. In talking with some very qualified coffee folks, I've found that some (for example) see no need for any bitterness in an espresso and consider an espresso with zero bitterness to still be "balanced." I'm not arguing that my concept is correct - or that others are wrong. I'm not arguing that "balance" should be the primary desired characteristic for other people. I'm merely illustrating what I mean when I say Balance. And I'm hoping that this will lead other people to evaluate their own values hierarchy and what they mean when they say "balance."

(All photos provided by Tonx - concept of the spider graph for flavours stolen from 33Beers thanks!)

State of SF Coffee (round 3 and final wrap-up)

2009-12-15T13:39:00.000-08:00

(For the story up to now - read Round One and Round Two)

The final round (round 3) of cupping has now been completed.

We have the results - and we have some conclusions.

First the results from Round Three...

To start with - this table was very, very good. Most of the roasters really stepped up their games. The differences were noticeable.

For this third round, coffee selection was Roasters' Choice.

Each roaster was asked to suggest two coffees for the table - and each was informed about what was going on (State of SF Coffee, blog posts, cupping blind, yadda yadda).

The coffees provided were as follows:

Ritual Coffee Roasters:

Kenya Kanyoni (also cupped in Round Two, but according to Ritual now with a different roast profile)

Honduras La Pinona (the controversial "sour" coffee from Round One)

Four Barrel Coffee:

El Salvador Finca Los Alpes (part of the Ground for Health program)

Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Moplaco

Blue Bottle Coffee:

Ethiopia Yirgacheffe YCFCU Co-op

Nicaragua Pueblo Nuevo Co-op

Ecco Caffe:

Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op (the top ranked coffee from Rounds One and Two)

Colombia Loma Rodonda Auction Lot

Equator Coffee and Tea:

Ethiopia Sidamo Amaro Gayo

Kenya Riuki AA

Given the number of coffees from East Africa, I have to assume that some notice had been paid to the performance of the Dama Co-op Yirgacheffe in the first two rounds.

In addition to the coffees from these same five Bay Area roasters - this time there were two "ringer" coffees. In order to enable us to evaluate the State of SF Coffee as compared to coffee elsewhere - two coffees from Intelligentsia were sourced. Intelligentsia is one of the top coffee companies in the US - but more than that they are a very good "control" for this cupping. Pretty much everyone knows Intelligentsia and knows how good their coffees are. By comparing to these other coffees - we can derive an understanding of how SF Coffee in general compares.

The coffees sourced from Intelligentsia were:

Kenya Gichathaini

Colombia Finca Santuario Heliconias Bourbon

As always, the coffees were cupped blind - with no whole beans displayed and the coffees coded based upon playing cards to make sure there were no clues given. Coffees were roughly sequenced from light to dark roast - but with no other form of sequencing or sorting.

As noted at the start - the roasters stepped up their games for this one. There was not a single "failed" coffee on the table. Even the lowest ranked coffee would have been ranked out of the bottom 3 in either other round of cupping. In addition, there really were only a couple coffees that showed "issues" in their roasting - a big change from past rounds.

In the end we had an absolutely clear top coffee, a very tight group of coffees in the 2-7 places, a tight group in the 8-10 places and two nearly tied coffees as 11 and 12. In addition, as in Round One, we had one seriously "controversial" coffee - and this time the controversy did not divide the "coffee people" from the "non coffee people."

In this round, the top coffee was the Ritual Kenya Kanyoni. As noted above, the folks at Ritual said that they had changed the roast on this coffee - and that was very clear in the cup. The coffee was incredibly layered and deep - opening up beautifully as it cooled. It had tons of molasses and spice that revealed wonderful bright lemon rind and candied grapefruit over time. Lovely notes of dried berry throughout. A really wonderful coffee.

The 2nd through 7th coffees were as follows:

Ecco Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op (a clearly different roast of this coffee yielded pomegranate and kiwi acidity with tons of lavender and a nice lemon-verbena oil flavour)

Intelligentsia Kenya Gichathaini (a very unusual coffee. sweet roasted beets, leather, tons of dried stone-fruit, simple citrus acidity, complete but crazy. hints of horse-blanket funk as it cools.)

Four Barrel El Salvador Finca Los Alpes (the "controversial" coffee of the day. tons of berry and ferment that by some was considered to be "too much" and others to be "in control". incredibly sweet with lovely fruit and hard candy high notes like jolly ranchers)

Intelligentsia Colombia Finca Santuario (lots of of dried fruit and tropical spice on a very sweet dark molasses backbone. cherry candy and a little bit of "twig tea" flavour)

Four Barrel Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Moplaco (elegant with interesting Nori-like flavours. lovely lemon acidity and assam tea. hints of celery and scallion as it cools.)

Ecco Colombia Loma Redonda Auction Lot (lovely clean acidity with tons of lime and lemon and some sweet tangerine. a bit thin and some hints of ash.)

In the 8th-10th places we had:

Equator Kenya Riuki AA (very savory, a dense and almost huge coffee that opens up with dried stone fruit and a bit of a roasty toasty finish. kind of flat and gets a bit flabby as it cools.)

Ritual Honduras La Pinona (tons of citrus acidity ranging from grapefruit pith to lemon zest to lime juice. sweet honey in the body. unusual flavours of mirin and bologna as it cools. lost some structure over time)

Blue Bottle Nicaragua Pueblo Nuevo (lots and lots of dried cherry and dried plum. a little roasty tasting and a bit flat and bland as it cooled)

And the 11th and 12th place coffees were:

Blue Bottle Yirgacheffe (initially round and dense and big and bold, as it cooled it became initially flat and then notes of smoke appeared and it became somewhat harsh and unbalanced)

Equator Ethiopia Sidamo Amaro Gayo (tons of blueberry but what were initially hints of inner tube became more and more phenolic over time. a great roast of a poor coffee)

A couple things to note from these results - some "take-aways" so to speak...

Blue Bottle and Ritual stepped up their games. While the Nicaragua from Blue Bottle was not to everyone's taste, it was still a good professional coffee. As compared to the two previous rounds of cupping, this was a big step up. And the difference in the Kenya Kanyoni from Ritual between the previous cupping and this was truly dramatic.

There are a lot of really good coffees available in SF right now. Of the 10 SF sourced coffees on the table, 8 of them are good to excellent. In addition, every one of the 5 roasters produced at least one coffee that was good or better.

In terms of conclusions.... there are again a couple of high level points to be made.

Coffee in SF can be quite good.

The top three roasters are producing coffee that is competitive with coffee from Intelligentsia - a clear measuring stick nationally. This is huge for SF. In many ways at this point, you can argue that coffee lovers are as well off in SF as anywhere in the US (other than perhaps Portland OR).

The top 3 coffee roasters in the SF area are pretty obvious.

In looking at the scores and the rankings across the three rounds - it is quite clear that the top three roasters in SF are Ecco, Four Barrel and Ritual. By both score and rank, Ecco would be #1 with Four Barrel and Ritual #2 and #3 but separated by a difference of less than 5% in total score. Ecco really rode the success of the Dama Co-op Yirgacheffe while Four Barrel showed impressive consistency across rounds and coffees and Ritual just knocked it out of the park with two coffees and had two that didn't show as well.

SF roasters for the most part are roasting to distinct personal styles.

Four of these roasters are roasting in their own style - and are incredibly consistent about doing so. This is a very good thing as it gives consumers a clear choice - allowing them to choose a style of coffee that pleases them and giving them choice within that style. Ecco is consistently round and elegant and balanced. Four Barrel is consistently developed and big and deep and balanced. Ritual is consistently bright and focused and layered. And Blue Bottle is consistently deep and rich and bottom-heavy with little acidity.

I think these results are at this point quite clear.

So rather than beating a dead horse, I'd like to thank some folks for making this happen.

Thanks to Tal, Johnny and Jeremy from Four Barrel for the feedback and the coffees.

Thanks to Ryan and Ben from Ritual for the thoughts, input and coffees.

Thanks to James from Blue Bottle for the feedback and concerns and for making sure I got the coffee I needed.

Thanks to Maria from Equator for the clarifications and help with sourcing the coffee.

Thanks to Andrew, Drew and Gabe from Ecco for the thoughts, feedback and helping me source the coffee.

Special thanks to my fellow cuppers for the time - the focus - the dedication - and the sense of humor. This was really fun.

Thanks to everyone who commented on the blog or who emailed or called me with feedback, support and input.

Most of all thanks to Valerie for keeping me sane.

State of SF Coffee (round 2)

2009-12-03T13:50:00.000-08:00

And so... our second round of cupping coffees from some of the top Bay Area roasters is now complete.

For more information on the idea - the process - and the roasters, please read Part One.

We assembled the same cuppers as in Round One - but this time we (the cuppers) chose the coffees. These coffees were from the same five roasters (Blue Bottle, Ritual, 4 Barrel, Ecco Caffe and Equator). As with Round One - we chose 2 coffees from each roaster. We did, however, run into a snag with one of the roasters. We had hoped to cup Equator's Sumatra Golden Pawani but were unable to lay our hands on any (despite a frantic trek all over San Francisco). This turned out to be a somewhat significant issue as the replacement coffee had some very real issues.

Update: As it turns out, it seems highly probable that the coffee sourced as the replacement for the Equator Sumatra was NOT (as advertised) from Equator. As such, this piece has been re-written to reflect this.

The coffees selected for this round consisted of:

Four Barrel:

El Salvador Siberia Estate Bourbon

Guatemala Finca El Injerto Bourbon

Ritual:

Honduras Finca Fernandez

Kenya Kanyoni

Ecco:

Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op (top ranked coffee from Round One)

Peru Tingo-Maria

Equator:

Ethiopia Harar

Blue Bottle:

Colombia Cauca Tierradentro

Papua New Guinea "Tribal Aromas"

Unknown Roaster:

Peru Organic (replacement for the Sumatra) (SEE UPDATE)

This combination gave us an interesting table - with coffees representing a wide range of cultivars, growing regions, processing methods and roast styles.

It turned out to be both intriguing and challenging. Comparing coffees of such diverse styles forced us to really get away from simply evaluating the green beans and get into the details of the roast in addition to the beans and created amazing conversations about the holistic appeal of each coffee.

In the end we, again, learned a couple interesting things. These can be summed up in (again) three statements.

You cannot always rely upon the staff selling you coffee.

Across the board we agreed that the coffees we had picked out were better than the coffees picked out for us by staff of the various coffee retailers (Round One). In part we can assume this is because we kind of know what we like - and buy what we like. But given that there were four of us making these decisions, personal tastes should have balanced out. None the less... this time we (with one exception) preferred the coffees over what we'd received in Round One. Obviously, this point is heavily influenced by the (poor) suggestions in Round One for Blue Bottle -- and by the "Mystery" coffee from Round Two.

San Francisco has some fantastic green coffee.

The top six coffees on the table were exceptional. They were unique, enjoyable, lovely, intriguing and represented a wide range of taste experiences. All of the top 6 coffees were clearly exceptionally high quality green coffee - something that really pleased us. It is very clear that San Francisco is seeing some green coffee that is on par with what any top roaster anywhere is getting.

San Francisco roasters have to improve.

While the top 6 coffees were all exceptional, we could really only say that 3 of the coffees were (in our opinions) optimally roasted. Out of the ten coffees, in fact, 3 were egregiously poorly roasted. In the case of 2 of the coffees, this went from merely sloppy roasting to truly unprofessional roasting. Compared to top roasters in the established roasting centers, SF roasters still have a long way to go.

From this cupping the results were as follows...

As noted, we had a group of 6 coffees that were all exceptional. We had to resort, in many cases, to using 1/4 points in order to break some of the ties (individually) and still ended up with one (aggregate) tie.

The top ranked coffee was the Ecco Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op -- a repeat from last week. This is a lovely coffee, with notes of lime blossom and grapefruit rind and marmalade with the only critique being that it was a bit thin in the body and lacked some mouthfeel.

Following behind this (in tight formation and in order) were:

Four Barrel Guatemala Finca El Injerto Bourbon (wonderfully balanced, plum, berry, super sweet chocolate, dried fruit)

Ritual Kenya Kanyoni (dried blackberry, tomato broth, wonderful pomegranate / citrus / berry acidity as it cools)

Four Barrel El Salvador Siberia Estate Bourbon (tons of juicy stone fruit, lovely balance, classic profile, dark chocolate bon-bon)

Ecco Peru Tingo-Maria (super juicy, watermelon jolly rancher, white pepper, drying finish)

Ritual Honduras Finca Fernandez (subtle, delicate floral and soft fruit notes, tightly knotted fruit acidity, milk chocolate and caramel, orange pith finish)

All of these coffees were very good - showcasing both the palates and in some cases the roasting skills of the coffee companies in SF.

Following these top 6 came a group of 3 coffees that were mediocre and flawed but still acceptable. These were (in order):

Equator Ethiopia Harar (tons of blueberry, nice kirsch notes, hints of earth, medicinal NyQuil note in the finish, obvious ferment)

Blue Bottle Colombia Cauca Tierradentro (brazil nut, maple butter, dried fruit, hints of vanilla, a little ashy, slightly baggy with wet straw notes)

Blue Bottle Papua New Guinea (earth, mushroom, dried fruit, semi-sweet chocolate, smoke, mold, ash)

Finally, there was one coffee that was simply not acceptable. It was hard to know if this coffee (in green form) was of speciality coffee grade, but our guess is that it was not. In addition, it was catastrophically misroasted.

Unknown Roaster Peru Organic (trash fire, diapers, moldy charcoal briquettes)

Unlike in Round One, we did not have any "controversial" coffees this time. While there were slight differences of opinion on rankings of some coffees there were mostly differences of one place in the ranking ("I have numbers 4 and 5 swapped from where you have them") or differences of less than 1 point in scoring.

We are starting to see some segmentation among the roasters as well. As of right now, we seem to have a group of 3 roasters who are producing consistently excellent coffee, and 2 roasters who are not.

While Blue Bottle's coffees showed far better in this cupping than they did in Round One, they are clearly still underperforming. I'm hoping that they can up their results in the third part of this evaluation. Given that they are considered by many foodies in SF (and outside of SF) to be the "top" coffee company in the Bay Area - their poor performance to date (1 marginal coffee, 1 poor coffee, 2 unacceptable coffees) is both shocking and simply not okay.

I'm a bit disappointed with Equator's coffees as well at this point. I'd like to see them move up into contention with the top three in the final round. They are the reigning "Roaster of the Year" from Roast Magazine -- and as a result a lot more is expected of them from what we've seen so far (1 decent coffee and 2 marginal coffees).

While Ecco has had the top coffee both weeks, over-all they are effectively in a dead heat with Four Barrel and Ritual. Four Barrel's coffees have been as consistent as Ecco's, while Ritual has been hurt first by the "controversial" Honduras La Pinona and this week by the underperformance of their COE Honduras Finca Fernandez (expected by many of us to at least challenge the Ecco Yirgacheffe for top spot).

As an interesting aside - the shock inclusion of this "mystery" unknown roaster coffee has enabled us to compare these "top" roasters against what we could describe as a "generic" roaster. In this comparison - any and all of these roasters come out clearly on top. At the same time, the idea that ANY coffee bars are serving coffee of the quality of that Peru is simply shocking.

In our next (and final) round of cupping we will be soliciting 2 coffees from each of these 5 roaster directly -- allowing them to choose the coffees they would expect to do best under these circumstances. I'm expecting that this will be the strongest showing of all three rounds.

And, again... my thanks to the cuppers working on this. You all rock.

Important Update: In talking with the folks from Equator, it seems HIGHLY likely the Peru that was provided to us was in fact not from Equator. While I'd love to blame the coffee company that sold us this coffee - I have to take at least part of the responsibility myself. I absolutely should have double checked to make sure that this was a coffee on Equator's current roster and accept the blame for not doing so. My apologies to Equator - and to the poor cuppers who had to taste that coffee.

State of SF Coffee

2009-11-24T17:45:00.000-08:00

Well.... step one is now complete. The first of three such cuppings has concluded and results have been tallied. There were some surprises, and some lessons learned.

First... a little set up.

Goal - evaluate the state of high end quality coffee in San Francisco.
Process - three different cupping sessions each with a different selection approach (today was the first of the three).
Protocol - blind cupping with cuppers selected who are independent of any of the roasters and who each represent a different perspective, background and palate.

This first of the three cuppings was of coffees selected as follows:
- an employee of the vendor was asked for recommendations for two coffees to buy. The only constraint was that no blends would be selected and that this was not for espresso. They were not told this would be for cupping or for analysis of any sort. Coffees were paid for and there was no reveal of my role in any of this.

The cuppers were selected to be representative of:
1 - professional coffee cuppers / roasters
2 - serious home (semi-pro) coffee roasters
3 - serious food and wine professional (passionate about coffee)

I cupped as well (mostly for the fun of it).

The hardest part of the process was selecting which roasters to buy from. In the end I made an executive decision and chose what I thought were likely to be the top five roasters in the area (as calculated by average opinions of passionate coffee buyers and professionals). As a result, I left out two roasters who probably deserved to be on the list - which I feel bad about. But I think this is a good representative sampling none the less, and I do feel it's a good "average opinion" list.

The roasters were:

Four Barrel Coffee - San Francisco based roaster and coffee bar. The "newest" of the roasters on this list, Four Barrel has a lot of buzz amongst coffee professionals.

Ritual Coffee Roasters - San Francisco based roaster with three coffee bars. Ritual has a strong presence in San Francisco and has expanded into the Napa region as well.

Ecco Caffe - Santa Rosa based roaster, wholesale only. The smallest of the roasters on this list, Ecco is known for its espresso and its organic coffees.

Equator Estate Coffees - San Rafael based roaster, wholesale only. A well-known coffee brand, Equator won Roast Magazine's 'Roaster of the Year' award for 2010 and is served at The French Laundry.

Blue Bottle Coffee Company - Oakland based roaster with four cafes. One of the hottest coffee brands in the US right now, Blue Bottle is loved by SF foodies and is expanding nationally.

The coffees sourced were as follows:

Four Barrel:
- Costa Rica Cafetin 1900
- El Salvador Kilimanjaro

(It was no shock to me that the coffees selected were both from central america given Four Barrel's focus and their style of roasting.)

Ritual:
- Guatemala Xeucalvitz
- Honduras La Pinona

(Again, these selections were not a shock given the style of coffee that Ritual focuses on.)

Ecco:
- Ethiopia Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op
- Kenya Gichathaini

(While Ecco is well-known for their espresso, I'd ruled espresso out. And the new crop Brazils have not arrived for US roasters yet, so this selection made sense to me.)

Equator:
- Nicaragua Aldea Global
- Costa Rica Montes de Oro

(I was a little surprised that both coffees were from central america given Equator's offering list, but both coffees seemed well chosen none the less.)

Blue Bottle:
- Mexico Chiapas
- Mexico Nayarita

(I was quite surprised by this selection. Suggesting two coffees from Mexico seems a little odd to me. The Nayarita was quite enthusiastically praised and the Chiapas was suggested as a way to compare the Nayarita to a more traditional coffee from Mexico.)

The cupping went very well.
It was informative and fun.
The mix of backgrounds and perspectives created a really interesting dialogue - and in the end there were only 2 coffees that provoked any dispute. And in some ways this dispute was the single most valuable take away from the day.

What we learned can be summed up by three statements.

The very best coffees from San Francisco are very good indeed.

The top four coffees were nearly unanimous, and when scores were averaged the gap between these four and the remaining coffees was quite large. In addition, there was almost no gap between the 2nd, 3rd and 4th coffees (they were effectively a three way tie).

Beyond this, however, these top four coffees were all of exceptional quality. We felt these four coffees could hold their own on nearly any cupping table in the US.

Coffee people like sour coffees - consumers with educated palates do not.

The most controversial coffee was one which was alternately described as "sparkly, tart, with lovely bright acidity" and "sour, painful, harsh and thin."

Our wine and food professional commented of this coffee, "this is the kind of coffee that you coffee people love - but the rest of us hate."

I think this is something that coffee professionals need to be concerned about. I've heard this sort of critique before and it's usually written off as coming from an uneducated consumer palate. In this case, the consumer in question had a palate FAR more educated than any of the coffee palates - so I think we have to pay attention.

The top Bay Area roasters still produce some bad coffee.

While the top coffees would stand on their own on any cupping table, the bottom coffees in our opinion were not of speciality coffee grade.

This is where SF coffee needs to improve the most. As compared to coffee in, for example, Portland - our good is good, but our bad is unacceptable. We need to raise the bar for what minimum quality is - and not sell or serve coffee that doesn't meet this minimal grade. Obviously, if the coffee is not of speciality coffee grade then it should not be used.

From this first cupping... the results were as follows.

The top rated coffee was the Ecco Caffe Yirgacheffe Dama Co-op. This was an absolutely lovely coffee with gorgeous grapefruit zest and a lovely hoppy flavour that reminded us of a pine-less Russian River Pliny the Elder. Wonderfully elegant and sophisticated, we all felt that this coffee was a true stand-out.

Following this were three coffees in a virtual dead heat. These were:
- Four Barrel Costa Rica Cafetin 1900 (wonderful sweet acidity, pluot and cherry notes)
- Ecco Caffe Kenya Gichathaini (juicy jolly rancher sweet fruit leading to robust, savory and fleshy barnyard and broth)
- Ritual Guatemala Xeucelvitz (super crisp lime acidity, mellowing over time to a rounded and full sweet blackberry)

These top four coffees were all considered to be exceptional.

After the top four, there came the controversial, "sour" coffee. This coffee was rated quite highly by two cuppers and very poorly by a third. In this case, we can conclude that the results have more to do with the style of coffee than the coffee itself.
- Ritual Honduras La Pinona (super bright with apricot and green apple and white grape skin in some ways hiding a bottom of cane syrup)

Below this coffee there was a reasonable gap before another group of three coffees. These three were less closely clustered than the top four and ranged in our opinion from good to servicable to acceptable in quality. They were:
- Four Barrel El Salvador Kilimanjaro (tons of midrange with dried fruit, spice and stonefruit and lovely aromatics but diminished acidity)
- Equator Nicaragua Aldea Global (some nice crisp tangerine acidity and hints of milk chocolate and spice but a little flat and slightly toasty tasting)
- Equator Costa Rica Montes de Oro micro-lot (smoky and flat with some decent sweet caramel but also noticeable ash and little to no acidity)

At the very bottom were the two coffees that in our opinion failed to make the speciality coffee grade. We were unanimous with our opinion on these. They were:
- Blue Bottle Chiapas (dirty with strong cardboard and mushroom notes; noticeable ash and hints of fish)
- Blue Bottle Nayarita (severe defect. heavy ferment. very dirty. rotting berries and diapers)

In looking at these coffees, I think that one thing we learned is that a significant part of the results have to do with the selection. I was a bit surprised by the selection from Blue Bottle - especially as there was a Yirgacheffe on the list. And the surprising selection obviously hurt them. I'm looking forward to the next two cupping sessions (where selection will be handled differently) as I'm expecting that Blue Bottle's coffees perform far better than this.

I was also shocked by the Equator Costa Rica. This is a micro-lot coffee that I would have expected to have had far more character and to be honest would have thought would finish ahead of the other Equator coffee. I think this shows just how much variance there is in coffee, and how much of your experience is going to be luck (was the roaster "in the groove" that day, are the beans at or near the end of their lifetime, etc).

But overall - I'm quite proud of these coffees and I think San Francisco has a lot to be proud of.

Thanks to my guest cuppers - you all are the best.

the state of SF coffee

2009-11-23T15:09:00.000-08:00

I'm very excited that this is going to happen!

I think SF is finally to the point where we can really evaluate the state of our coffee.
So... tomorrow I'm going to be facilitating a little cupping experience.

I've recruited some fantastic representative tasters, and have sourced what I hope is a representative sampling of the best coffees being produced from the Bay Area.

Tomorrow - we are going to find out just where Bay Area coffee is at -- and along the way we're going to find out how these coffees (and roasters) stack up against each other.

So... what happens when one (independent) professional coffee roaster, one michelin starred chef, one ex professional barista and one passionate home roaster and barista get their hands on 10 of the "top" coffees in the San Francisco area?

Whose coffee reigns supreme?!?!?!

Learning from Restaurants (and a pet peeve)

2009-11-13T15:40:00.000-08:00

Anyone who has worked with or for me has heard me rant about how they need to learn from the way professional kitchens work.

The efficiency - the focus - the attention to detail - the professionalism....

Perhaps most of all, we need to learn from the intolerance of incompetence. When working the line in a restaurant, you have to know you don't even need to think about (much less worry about) them doing their job well. Everyone on the line has to do their job well - and you have to know that everyone is doing their job well. You have to be able to rely upon all of them - 'cause if even one of them is falling down on the job, you're all in the weeds. Realistically, if you're even wondering about them doing their job well, you're probably about to be screwed.

On a functional line, you're a team. Everyone has each other's backs - all the time. Yeah, people fuck up and you cover for them or bail them out. That's different from simply not being able to do the job (or just failing to do the job well).

Everyone knows this.

So when someone isn't cutting it - they're fired. There is no, "let's try and make it work." It's just business. It's not personal.

And everyone knows that.

So everyone works to have each other's backs - and everyone works hard to do their job as well as they possibly can every single shift. Because the rest of the team is relying upon them.

In coffee we don't have that.

We don't have each other's backs.

And we tolerate incompetence.

We're selfish.

And it's hurting the experience customers have. It's hurting our businesses.

It's hurting coffee.

It's gotta stop.

And an (unrelated) pet peeve...

I live in San Francisco. It's a great food city - and it's becoming a very good coffee city.

But visitors to San Francisco often end up being steered to mediocre (over-rated) restaurants. We all know Zuni is coasting - but tourists are always sent there. The tragedy is that they have limited meals, and instead of going somewhere great - they're going somewhere mediocre.

This has always bothered me.

And now it's repeating itself in coffee. These days I constantly read about coffee enthusiasts who visit San Francisco, go to Blue Bottle and return home saying "San Francisco coffee ain't all that."

Wrong.

Blue Bottle ain't all that.

But it's your fault that you only visited the 5th best coffee place in SF.

San Francisco coffee really is all that. Yeah... it's no Portland. But it's getting better every day.

beating up on Coffee Review

2009-05-08T08:21:00.000-07:00

So... yeah... it's good that you (finally) provided transparency on preparation of espresso.
And it's good you used a professional barista to pull shots.

But...

Nuova Simonelli barista competition brew baskets, 18-gram dose, 28-second extraction, 2-ounce double split into two 1-ounce singles; water temperature 200F.

See here is the thing....
I can name TONS of truly great espresso that is going to taste like ASS when extracted as described above.
Does that mean it's bad espresso?
No. It means you don't understand espresso.

You need to learn to prepare espresso in an appropriate manner for each coffee - it's a matter of respect (pure and simple).

And the results are freakin' predictable.

Paradise Espresso Classico has a "thin body"? Yeah... that coffee prep (per the roaster) is FAR from what you're using.
Kaldi Competition scores really high? No shock given that your machine set up is WBC spec and the blend was created for USBC competition.
Olympia Big Truck is "astringent"? Uhhh... try the shot as ristretto (1.75oz not 2oz).

Out of curiosity... what about the other 25+ coffees you tasted?
I'd LOVE to see those reviews.
I'm guessing there are a number of famous coffees that are "sour" (brew temp too low) and some that are "thin and bitter" (brew temp to high) and some that are "muddy" (dose too high) and some that are "unbalanced and not sweet" (dose too low) etc etc.

And, beyond that, the fact that Ken uses the descriptor "musty" in several of his high rated coffees disturbs me - especially as I would agree in the cases where I've tasted these coffees, and it's why I think the espresso is bad. It's hard to imagine scoring a "musty" coffee in the 90s.

Finally... Ken... if you want to make this more relevant you need to not do an aggregate score. Taking the score for a straight shot and averaging it with the score for a latte makes no sense.

Given all the above... is it shocking to ANYONE that Intelli, Stumptown and Terroir ALL opted out of this review? And honestly... how relevant is a review of "boutique" American Espresso that leaves out all three of these roasters?

Sorry... epic fail.

Monster Mia (update)

2009-04-15T15:23:00.000-07:00

As was pointed out to me... I failed to put a price or a way to contact me on my "Monster Mia for sale" post.

yeah... pretty stupid!!!

After checking around, it looks like it would run you at least $2500 to rebuild the Monster Mia (without the additional little bits of equipment etc).

So I'm going to ask $2k for it. And rather than going "highest bid" I'm simply going to sell it to the first person who comes to me with the money.

Pics here.

Reach me at malachi AT gmail DOT com

Monster Mia is for Sale

2009-04-14T10:18:00.001-07:00

Yes... it's true.
I'm selling the infamous "Monster Mia".
It's not an easy decision - but I have the chance to purchase an incredible (dream) machine and I need capital to make it happen.

The Monster Mia has been a great experience for me - and along with the GS3 has convinced me that home espresso doesn't have to be a frustrating battle against arbitrary constraints (or require sacrificing white chickens).

For those of you who don't know the story behind this machine and haven't had the chance to either play with it or taste shots from it....

This machine started off its life as a stock Grimac Mia. It was, in fact, the machine I tested for the Home-Barista.com review. After testing was complete, it went back to Espresso Parts NW and I moved on. The Briccoletta followed it, and then the GS3. After the GS3, Terry Z suggested we take the Bricc and "mod" it into the "Monster Bricc". As those of you who read this blog know - this took a long time and resulted in an explosion in my place in Portland. In the end it was decided that the Bricc was a poor choice for the sort of aggressive modifications we were looking to do. The Espresso Parts NW boyz had already done a bunch of mods to the Mia by this time and were using it as their office machine. Terry suggested that this could become the "Monster" project base - and eventually it came to me.

When I first started using it I referred to it as a "poor man's GS3" for its combination of ease of use and suitability for espresso experimentation. Since then I've both discovered more great things about it as well as discovered some of the things that are not so great (as compared to the GS3 for example). It's a wonderful machine - and under normal circumstanced I'd never be letting it go.

Some details on the machine.
- Grimac Mia case/body
- Reservoir and vibe pump removed (replaced with a nice Procon rotary pump and plumbed in)
- Modified to take a long thermoprobe into the boiler (and the requisite electronics including front mounted PID controller)
- Some tweaks and tricks to the internal plumbing to enable better stability
- All crazy work performed by the guys at Espresso Parts NW under the guidance of madman Terry Z.

The machine is incredibly easy to use.
You basically set the brew temp (calculating temp offset from boiler to group), let it stabilize and then go.
To pull a shot, you don't have to go through any crazy flushing routines. I literally just do a quick "rinsing" flush (like I would on a commercial La Marzocco) to get any grounds off the screen and pull the shot.
Changing temp consists of pushing the button on the PID controller until you get the desired temp.
Inter-shot stability is very high.
Intra-shot profile shows a hybrid map (like a flattened version of the HX hump - with less hump and a similar ramp down).

The machine runs at a lower boiler pressure than normal (of course - and dependent upon brew temp). At brew temps above 200f it's fine to steam even for 12oz lattes. It's fine for capps down to around 198f. Below that it takes some nursing.
It's probably not the machine for someone who wants to make a lot of big milk drinks.
On the other hand - if you want to explore espresso and easily make straight shots and short milk drinks (no muss no fuss) it's a dream.
It really is an easy machine to work with. VERY easy.

I find that the espresso consistently has excellent mouthfeel and great clarity and reproduction of flavours. It holds its own against commercial machines in this area.

The machine will include a whole bunch of portafilters (old style rubber handled LM spouted, new style plastic handled LM bottomless, VBM for backflushing) and a whole bunch of baskets (LM OEM doubles, LM triple, Synesso triple, Faema double, Faema single, LM single, blanks).

If you're in the Bay Area... I'll throw in help with the set up and some training on using it.

You want a famous, easy to use and truly unique espresso machine?

2009-04-04T22:19:00.001-07:00

hahahahahahahaha

gasp

oh my god this is funny

How To

2009-02-15T13:36:00.000-08:00

I've taken a stab at describing how I go about "dialing in" an espresso at various points in time and in various venues.

As time has gone by - I've refined my methodology and practice.

For what it's worth - here is my current model.

The idea: you have a coffee that is new to you, and you want to figure out the extraction parameters for this coffee that give you the best results (for your tastes).

The caveats: some of the stuff in here is specific for my own taste/perception/expectation of espresso. In particular, my concept of espresso is that it is a unique and different way of preparing coffee. In other words - I'm not trying to re-create the flavour of the coffee when cupped or brewed as drip or press-pot or something. I'm also not trying to create something that (as D Schomer put it - "tastes like ground coffee smells"). And I'm not trying to create some sort of HeMan beverage that "puts hair on your chest." For me - I'm trying to extract a balanced and complete mix of clearly defined and differentatiated flavours -- a round balance of sweet, sour, bitter -- that expresses the unique flavours and aromatics of the coffee. In addition, I pay for a small percentage of my beans and can thus afford to "waste" a lot of coffee. And finally, I work on equipment that is easy to "tune" and change quickly.

The process:

I try to start with some constants that are as likely as possible to be accurate for the majority of coffees. In this case, I start with an LM ridged double basket and a target volume of between 1.75 and 2.0 oz with a moderate flow rate (somewhere around 25 seconds for that volume, though I evaluate by flow not time).

I'll also try and understand up front the "signature taste" of the coffee.
The "signature taste" requires some knowledge of the roaster's style and the desired flavour profile of the coffee. Is the person roasting this coffee a fan of low acidity espresso? Are they a "chocolate bomb" aficionado? If you know what they like out of their espresso you can do minor adjustments to your dose. In many cases (these days) you can use the interwebs to research and find out what the roaster looks for. Otherwise, go by the retail location of the roaster and taste the shots.
This allows me to understand what I'm "shooting for" in the cup.

Once I have this information, I'll start making some guesses on the primary variables.

My initial goal is to make a quick estimate of likely dose volume.
I do this based upon the coffee (the bean/blend composition.)
If the coffee seems likely to have low pH (has robusta or aged coffees or a lot of naturals) I'll start with a down dose. If it seems likely to have a moderate pH (pulped naturals, a mix of naturals and washed coffees) I'll go with a moderate dose. If the coffee is high pH (mostly high-grown washed arabica) I'll up-dose.
This baseline is then slightly impacted by degree of roast (for a darker roast I'll drop the roast a percentage, for a lighter roast I'll up it).

On a side note - this focus on pH of coffee is new to me and is the result of reading the results of a research study done by Nestle Labs. This study found that coffee compaction in espresso brewing is dependent upon pH of brew water and pH of coffee. Coffee compacts under brew pressure - but according to this study, how much it compacts depends upon pH. Low pH coffees (robusta and aged or monsooned coffees at the extreme) compact the least and high pH coffees (high-grown washed arabicas) compact the most. Focusing on the pH of the coffee seems to have enabled me to more quickly estimate dose volume -- and this (so far) seems to my taste to be a very consistent system.

Anyway... once I have a starting point for dose, I'll try to come up with a starting point for brew temp.
I'll evaluate the coffee for two characteristics. First - roast degree and second - bean composition.
With the former, I tend to make some quick rough decisions. If the roast is light, I tend to start with a baseline temp of 202F. If medium, I will stick with 200F. If dark, I'll drop it down to 197F.
Now... I'll also adjust this based on the bean composition. If, for example, I'm working with high-grown washed arabica I'm going to reduce the brew temp. If I'm working with aged or monsooned coffees I will up the brew temp (both from the baseline above).
So a light roasted coffee with monsooned beans will move up to 203F as a starting point.

Once I've got temp and dose I dial in the grind and then I'll start experimenting.
I always start by re-evaluating temp. So I'll pull a shot and evaluate it for brew temp. Is it alkaloid? Is it thin? Is it sour or bitter? Astringent or burnt? Does it taste ashy or like fish oil? Based on the taste, I will alter the temp by small degrees to find the sweet spot. If it's sour - I'll take the temp up. If it's ashy, I'll take it down. If it's thin and lacks sweetness and fruit, I'll take it down. Etc. It's basic pattern recognition.
I'm not looking for a great shot here -- I'm just looking for the right brew temp. The idea is to get the balance of sweet, sour and bitter. If any of these dominate too much, I need to change brew temp.

Once I've found what I feel is the brew temp sweet spot, I'll start working on dose.
The way I tend to do this is focus on two things. First - clarity of flavour and second - roundness and balance.
If the cup is "muddied" I'll reduce the dose. If the cup isn't fully developed and sweet and rich I'll up the dose. Mouthfeel is one of the critical attributes I'm looking at here - as is sweetness and definition. If I need a "denser" cup I'll up the dose. If I need more sweetness, the dose goes up. If there is a lack of clarity in the cup, or it's out of balance (with the low end dominating and limited aromatics and high end) then I'll reduce the dose.

This is usually enough. It usually gets me to the point where I have a shot that I feel matches well with the signature profile and optimizes the coffee.
Now... that doesn't mean I like the shot. There are coffees that I just don't like. It means that I feel like I have a cup profile that fits the coffee.

From here I can "tune" with small changes in flow rate, volume of shot, etc.
This allows me to then tune the extraction for what I really want out of the coffee -- to force it a bit in my desired direction.

And that covers all but the edge cases.

But there are exceptions. There are these edge cases where all the above doesn't get me to where I want to be with the coffee.
It's usually only at this point that I start looking at changes to extraction volume and basket size.

For example, I've found that some lighter roasted delicate coffees tend to end up poorly developed no matter what I do - especially when they are pulped naturals. But if I then swap to a triple basket and deliberately down-dose (19 grams) I "open up" the coffee and it becomes more defined and clear. Or with monsooned coffee I find that the only way I can get the desired sweetness without getting a "wet cardboard" aftertaste is by going with a triple basket, normal dose and then pulling a ristretto shot. Sometimes I find that some high-grown washed coffees are best pulled very short and slow. The same is true of some Indonesians.
You get the idea.

I know that some people are simply not into this sort of fiddling.
And others find the lack of "science" associated with this approach to be problematic.
For me - however - this process and approach is not only successful, but quite enjoyable.

And most importantly, by making it entirely taste based - I learn from each and every coffee and each and every change. By not tying it to measurement and machinery but instead to what I taste in the cup - I learn.

we need a legit espresso review resource

2009-01-21T20:21:00.001-08:00

I've thought (for a long time) that we really need a legitimate resource for reviews of espressos that is both unbiased and (perhaps more important) skilled and accurate.

Today - the critical nature of this belief became terrifyingly clear to me.

Coffee Review's review of Pod espressos...

Nespresso Ristreto Capsules - 91 points
Island Joe ESE Pod - 90 points

To compare, here are some espressos that many of us would consider to be "leading lights" of the industry...

Stumptown Hairbender - 90 points
Ecco Caffe Reserve - 90 points
Intelligentsia Black Cat - 88 points

So - what we have here is a clear indication that consumers should not be buying coffees from these pesky "boutique craft coffee companies" and shouldn't bother with things like freshness but instead should just buy cheap pod machines and bulk produced "generic" coffee in pre-ground packaging.
Right?

So what's wrong here?

For a simple illustration - let's look at the review of the Hairbender (simply because it's a coffee I know very well).

Smoke, toast and a hint of flowers in the aroma. In the small cup medium-bodied and smooth in mouthfeel, balanced, rich, simple, with hints of cedar, dark chocolate and toast. Sweet finish. In milk lean-bodied but lush, dominated by a smoky semi-sweet chocolate.

This doesn't sound like Hairbender, right?
Well.... actually, if you were to give some Hairbender to a marginally trained barista and have the pull shots with the "wrong" parameters you could easily replicate this. Say you were to set the machine at a little over 201F. Now dose around 15 grams in a double basket. Pull a 1.75 oz double in around 29 seconds.
The problem is that Hairbender is actually best at around 198f (a full 3f colder). And it's best at around 19 grams in a double basket (more than 25% more coffee). And while a 1.75 oz double is about right - you'd want to do it in around 27 seconds. And, of course, most of all you want this done by a trained barista. Of course... if you had a trained barista - they wouldn't have pulled the shot with the wrong settings.

So what do these odd and seemingly shocking review results really tell us?
Should we really all just switch to pods?

Well... if you're the kind of person who likes coffee but can't be bothered to be a barista or learn about things like brew temp and extraction parameters then yes.
But that's pretty damn obvious.

On the other hand... this really (really) clearly indicates that Coffee Review is not a viable or appropriate resource for espresso reviews.
And we don't have anything else.

So someone... please...
Start a legit espresso review magazine or website or service.
Seriously.

Slow Food Nation

2008-08-31T15:29:00.000-07:00

It's going to take me a lot of thinking to be able to comment with any sort of clarity on my experiences at Slow Food Nation.

Suffice it to say that it was a truly incredible experience - and an important one as well. Less so about coffee per se and more about something bigger that coffee is a part of.

And, beyond that, it was great to catch up with so many friends and meet so many cool people.

4 barrel

2008-08-28T14:01:00.000-07:00

Caffe d'Bolla Screen Door espresso

2008-08-26T08:09:00.000-07:00

I'm very confident about the future of great coffee in the US.

I know that sounds like something I would never say.
But it's the truth.

And it's not because of Stumptown or Intelligentsia or 4 Barrel or Ecco or any of the other folks who are pushing (and have pushed) coffee forward.

It's because of the small companies in places you'd never expect.
It's because of Black Sheep in Bishop CA.
And it's because of Caffe d'Bolla in Salt Lake City.

You'd probably never associate great espresso with Salt Lake.
So you can imagine what I thought when I received a "care package" from John from Caffe d'Bolla.

But I have to say that I'm impressed by this coffee.
Really.

It's an espresso that I can drink quite happily.

As a straight shot it has tons of molasses and some really nice stone fruit and dried fruit notes on top of a rich buttery nutty base. Good texture, good body.
To me, however, it is a little "toasty" and "roasty" (which killed the aromatics that I know should be in there).

It seems very consistent shot to shot.
I found it best in short milk drinks where the "roasty" notes were muted and the chocolate brought out in its place.

My biggest criticism is that it's a bit "flat".
I'm a big fan of coffees that have a signature flavour. This doesn't really have that. It is almost a "base" blend for use in an espresso (and thus missing that "twist" that makes is stand out).

Really easy to use - with one exception. Does not respond well to being pulled ristretto (again, in my opinion). While the molasses really comes out, so does the roast. I ended up with a sweet spot at 18grams in an LM ridged double running at around 198.0F. Pulled at 1.8oz in around 27 seconds.

new WBC rules

2008-08-21T11:50:00.000-07:00

Wow.

first look is incredibly positive.
Not only getting rid of the "must serve all 4 drinks at once" rule - but more importantly the seemingly massive swing of weighting to sensory!!!

Very cool.

Drew at Method

2008-07-30T12:29:00.001-07:00

The wonderful collision of my various professional instantiations...

Drew Cattlin (formerly of Ritual, now at Ecco Caffe, well known USBC competitor and all around good guy) was pulling shots this morning at Method (where I work).

Some photos...

goodbye

2008-06-15T11:56:00.000-07:00

This is my goodbye to Coffeed.
Many know the reasons so I won't go into it.
It's sad. I was involved in Coffeed from the beginning. There are so many great memories for me tied up in the site and the people involved. I hope that someone creates a new place and a new voice to counter the "establishment" within coffee.

I wish the best to Alistair and hope that he ends up with the community that he wants and that Coffeed can at the same time continue to be a voice for "doing the right thing" in coffee.

the good thing about coffee...

2008-06-11T16:24:00.000-07:00

I've said it before - the best thing about coffee is the wonderful people in the industry.

Had a fantastic experience on Sunday.
Tasted espresso and cupped coffees from a whole range of folks - with good friends Andrew, Drew and Gabe.

The coffees were amazing (you can read Gabe's account above for more information) but it really was the company and the experience that made is so special.

The experience also allowed me to crystalize something I've been trying to clearly explain for awhile. I have this belief that there are coffee roasters/buyers who are producing coffees that are more than just a "signature flavour" but are in fact a true representation of their own vision and identity and even personality. Duane from Stumptown is one such person. And Andrew Barnett from Ecco is another.

Tasting the Experimental Espresso #3 that Andrew was so kind to share made me realize that it was a near perfect expression of who he is - his values, his taste, his goals and beliefs.

That's such a cool thing.

And in general Andrew really is on top of his game right now. I tasted a gorgeous Yirgacheffe he shared with me this morning. It was roasted for espresso and was fucking godlike. Not just in the flavour and the mouthfeel and the aromatics (though damn was it good on all those). It was also one of those rare coffees that tasted fantastic at 201F, and equally fantastic (but entirely different) at 200F, and still just as fantastic (and different again) at 199F. Stunning.

Ecco Coromandel

2008-05-21T18:26:00.000-07:00

Brazil - Cerrado Minas Gerais
Fazenda Sao Joao, Geginaldo Silvoni
Heirloom Bourbon
2007 Harvest

Another lovely brazil single origin espresso from Andrew Barnett at Ecco Caffe.

First impressions were of smoothness and polish. This is a highly "finished" espresso.
Initial tastes are of caramel, cashew butter and an interesting cherry/tangelo flavour.
It's quite subtle and very, very balanced. It's not a big espresso by any means.
As it cools, the fruits become more dominant - but without becoming sour or overly acidic. A lovely light molasses note appears as well.

In short milk drinks, the coffee comes across well - with the fats in the milk complementing the buttery nut notes and balancing the fruits.
It is, of course, rather lost in tall milk drinks.
Best use, without a doubt, is as a straight shot.

I found it responded well to a very slight updose in a double basket - with a midpoint brew temp and a slightly short shot volume. It also tasted quite good downdosed in a synesso triple basket and pulled ristretto.

Probably not everyone's cup of tea. There are those who will find it "boring" or not quite "intense" enough. For me... it's a lovely "everyday" espresso.

Ecco Caffe ("Taste of the Harvest")

2008-05-19T21:34:00.000-07:00

Brazil Fazenda Cahoeira de Gramma from the Carvalho Diases.
Heirloom Yellow Bourbon, natural, raised screen bed.
2007 Harvest.

Another winner from Andrew Barnett at Ecco Caffe.

A simply lovely coffee, in all ways.
As espresso it's clean, sweet, elegant and polished. Extremely light on the palate with a wonderful soft and almost "fluffy" mouthfeel. Honey, some caramelized nectarine, a light filbert note. Wonderful tropical spice and floral aromas.
This is not an espresso for people who like "strong" coffee - but rather for those who appreciate flavour and balance. It's not idiosyncratic or "different."
It's just "right."

Be careful about pulling this coffee too hot. It takes a lower brew temp than you might expect. At even a single degree too high you'll lose the fruit and the floral notes and instead will end up with a coffee that is flat with noticeable "toast" flavours. Be brave... go cold.

Seems to respond best to mid-point doses (not too up... not too down).

It's very good in short milk drinks as well - but gets lost in tall ones.
Best, IMHO, as a straight shot where it really shines.

Nice one!!

Sweet Tooth

2008-05-15T14:36:00.000-07:00

Ritual's new espresso (Sweet Tooth) has settled in.
I've run through a couple pounds of it now.

Overall thoughts...

1 - This is a true "signature espresso" in the sense that it is a unique and personal espresso the represents the values, taste and goals of Ritual. That's something special - and something all coffee roasters should shoot for.

2 - It's not an espresso everyone is going to love.

3 - It's reasonably easy to work with - though I think home baristas with non-stabilized HX machines might struggle.

It's a very (very) well named coffee. First sips are dominated by intense sweetness (cane sugar, light, processed molasses, honey, touches of caramel) and floral notes (jasmine, rose). As the coffee cools it becomes quite tart and bright, with strong flavours of pomelo, green grape and persimmon. The sweetness continues, but the cup becomes dominated by the acidic fruit. In the end of the cup a nice pomegranate note emerges (though I do get some hints of astringency as well).
It does seem a little hollow however. It hits the center of the palate almost exclusively and there is a "hole" in the middle of the profile.
This hollowness become more noticeable when combined with milk - where the lack of the deeper darker tones results in "simplistic" profiles.
I found it best quite significantly updosed - and at a higher brew temp than I'd expected. Shot volume was good - and the shots look gorgeous in the cup.

Because of the tartness - I think home machines that have a declining brew temp could prove challenging. Shots could come out as noticeably sour in some cases. I'd suggest pulling shots quite short in this case.

Overall... a good espresso and a big step forward for Ritual.

New Harvest Competition Blend

2008-05-13T17:42:00.000-07:00

I received a pound of the New Harvest Coffee Roaster's Competition Blend last week. Oddly enough, my cousin works there - and thought to send me some of the coffee. They're a little coffee roaster in Rhode Island.

I'm assuming that this is a sort of "one-off" espresso as it's not on their site.

Working with, and drinking, this espresso was a really interesting experience for me.
I've been spending a lot of time recently drinking coffees that strive for the sort of balance, finesse and sweet acidity that seems to be the emerging standard among a certain group of roasters. From the Hairbender through the various Ecco Caffe espressos to the Ritual Sweet Tooth to the random other coffees - there is a common thread here.
In addition, I've been drinking more and more espressos that, if not actually single origin, are at least made of very few beans.

As a result, I'd lost sight of the fact that there are other styles and approaches to espresso.

This Competition Blend is a representative of another type.
Instead of going for balance and finesse - it goes for flavour and "big-ness." It's definitely a "more is more" approach. It's all over the place - with bright berry notes and dried fruit; with bakers' chocolate and leather; toast and tobacco. If it were a beer it would be one of those Stone experimental Imperial Ales.
In milk, this approach worked out very well - with drinks that were dominated by the toast and chocolate notes and a nice sweet fruit note riding along the top. Even tall milk drinks still tasted of coffee. Nice.
As a straight shot, however, this was a bit of a palate hammer. The shear profusion of flavours was a bit much for me. Beyond that, however, hidden beneath all these flavours were some not so nice notes. There was an ashy and acrid note that lurked beneath the tobacco flavours - and a hint of mushroom emerged now and then.
That being said - honestly, this was a totally serviceable espresso in many ways. I drank it happily in short milk drinks. And saying "it's no Hairbender as a straight shot" is kind of unfair.
It was very easy to work with - and really tolerant of changes to extraction parameters.
It looked absolutely gorgeous in the cup.

More than that - it was really cool to be reminded that there are a lot of ways to skin this particular cat; that there are a ton of different ideas of what espresso is and should be.
And at the end of the day - it's all what you like.

Tasting... coffee...

2008-05-06T19:55:00.000-07:00

I've been remiss.
I've failed to paste tasting notes for, oh... let's just say a long (long) time.

I'm going to try and start being more responsible about this.

To make me more conscientious about it... I've decided that from now on whenever folks send me coffee samples (solicited or unsolicited) I'm going to post tasting notes.

So if you send me coffee - you'll get notes. And so will the rest of the world.

-c

PS. Congrats to Kyle Glanville. Nice work. And a big shout out to my boys Chris and Drew. Way to represent SF.

4 barrel

2008-03-21T11:32:00.000-07:00

9-5
in the Caledonia Alley (parallel to and between Valencia and Mission, between 14th and 15th).

hell yeah.

Ecco Experimental Espresso Batch #1

2008-02-09T09:44:00.000-08:00

Andrew from Ecco Caffe kindly sent me some of the first batch from his "Experimental Espresso Program."

This was a 50/50 blend of two gorgeous Brazil CoE coffees.

The 2006 Fazenda Serra do Bone from Carlos Sergio Sanglard is one of my favorite SO espressos. This is a Catuai varietal from Matas de Minas - and took 4th in the Brazil CoE with a score of 91.93 points. As an SO shot is has incredible body and a lovely honey/caramel finish.

The 2006 Fazenda Pedra Preta from Guilherme Dias De Castro is a Yellow Bourbon from Carmo de Minas. It took 3rd in the Brazil CoE with a score of 92.24. As an SO shot this combined a lovely sweetness with intense floral/citrus high notes.

It took an enormous amount of courage (IMHO) for Andrew to create this blend. These are expensive and valuable CoE coffees and are very limited in supply.

Andrew's brewing instructions were very clear... 19grams in an LM double basket; 1.75oz double at 201.5F in 24-28 seconds.

I started by following these instructions and found that it produced a very dense shot with strong chocolate and burnt honey notes and a rich nutty, syrupy body. This was really pretty stunning in short milk drinks - but I felt that I could probably create an espresso that was more to my (personal) taste by tweaking these parameters a bit.

Initially I started by changing dose and brew temp, looking to coax out some of the high notes. With some experimentation, I found that a brew temp of a little over 200F and a dose of 17.5grams produced a shot that I found really lovely as a straight espresso. It had great sweet pink grapefruit high notes and a body of honey roasted pecan, powdered dutch cocoa and a lovely vanilla tone that reminds me of aged Flor de Cana rum. This extraction wasn't ideal with milk - but as a straight shot.... stunning.

I figured that there had to be a way to get the rich, syrup and caramel body of the first extraction with the sweet citrus and Flor de Cana notes. After a fair amount of trial and error - I discovered that going with the Synesso triple basket (with its rounded side walls); slightly down-dosed; and a brew temp of 200.5F yielded a 2.75oz shot that was - to put it bluntly - fucking glorious. Rich, dense, clean, transparent, sweet tangerine, candied nut, burnt honey, bittersweet chocolate, tropical flowers... and that lovely Flor de Cana finish. Lovely as a straight shot - with near perfect balance - and equally awesome as a cappuccino.

Life is good!

coffee fun

2007-12-23T21:30:00.000-08:00

Had way too much fun today.

Drew Catlin and Ben Kaminsky were by. Had some lovely coffee from Ecco Caffe, a bunch of really nice coffees from Ritual... in general had way too many shots of espresso!

I have to say, however, that it was a really good experience. We spent hours and spent almost no time talking about espresso machines. We briefly talked about the Anfim grinder - but perhaps for 1 minute. We talked some smack about the industry and people/companies. But mostly we talked about coffee.

If this is what the new crop of baristas is going to turn out like... I'm happy.

In fact, we even talked a little around the whole issue of dogma and "rules" of espresso and I got the feeling that there is some open-mindedness and flexibility.

All about the coffee... willing to question beliefs and dogma...
Whew... maybe the coffee industry isn't fucked after all.

And for what it's worth... the monster Mia held up really well. I didn't hear any whining about the machine, didn't have to do any juggling - nor did anyone else. Just pulled shots. And if a couple pro baristas (and one has-been pro) can spend a couple hours pulling shots on a home machine and not bitch about it... well then that's one bad-ass home machine.

2007-12-08T22:18:00.000-08:00

Mia Photos

2007-11-18T16:33:00.001-08:00

more monster mia

2007-11-09T10:32:00.000-08:00

As mentioned, I'm moving.

Well... the Mia is now set up in the new place.
Been a bit epic, but it's working.

I've got two more days of experimentation under my belt.
I'll take pics this weekend.

In the meantime... what can I say?
Terry and the boys at Espresso Parts NW have done good.
I've now tested three different espressos.
This thing really is as close to a (espresso only) GS3 as one can get.
Shot pulling process is:
1) build shot.
2) quick rinse flush (no need to time or measure)
3) insert portafilter
4) pull shot

Adjusting temp consists of:
1) up/down on controller to right set temp
2) wait about 60 seconds
3) proceed

Downsides noted so far...

1) the stupid cup tray still sucks
2) steaming milk is between challenging and very frustrating
3) cups rattle a lot when pulling shots (rotary pump seems to really vibrate the body)

Monster Mia

2007-10-30T14:12:00.000-07:00

OK.

So in the middle of relocating from Portland to SF... and in the middle of starting a new job... and in the middle of some triage on an old project... I still got some time to play with the new baby.

I have no photos yet (my cameras are packed already). Those will come later.

Some background on the Monster Mia as follows:
- Reservoir and vibe pump removed (now plumbed in with a nice Procon rotary pump)
- Modified to take a long thermoprobe into the boiler (and the requisite electronics including front mounted PID controller)
- Some tweaks and tricks to the internal plumbing
- All crazy work performed by the guys at Espresso Parts NW under the guidance of madman Terry Z.

The machine runs at a far lower boiler pressure than normal (of course). There is still sufficient pressure to steam (for example) two 5oz cappuccinos in succession. But it's not a machine for someone drinking long milk drinks.
It's pretty much a machine for me - and someone like me. I drink espresso, Valerie drinks macchiattos and the odd morning cappuccino.

So far I've worked with the Olympia Roasting Big Train espresso and Stumptown Hairbender.

First thoughts are that this is an easy machine to work with. VERY easy.
It's like working on a Mistral when making espresso in that you do a quick pulse flush and then just go. Temp is quite stable and predictable.
Because of the front mounted controller and the small boiler, changes in brew temp are very quick and easy.
Both espressos extracted beautifully. I've been swapping back and forth between an LM stock portafilter (with plating removed and a ridged double basket) and a crotchless (with either an LM ridged double or a triple basket).
In both cases I'm getting excellent mouthfeel and great clarity and reproduction of flavours. I've been running over to the Belmont Stumptown periodically to compare shots against the 5 group Mistral and I have to say this little machine is actually holding its own!!

Small amounts of milk in a small pitcher steam reasonably well. It's not the same as on a dual boiler machine. You can't apply as much energy to the milk before it starts to cook and as a result both sweetness and consistency are slightly impaired. I'm using one of the early EPNW dual hole tips on it.

I need to spend some time with the Scace to evaluate the offset from the display to the actual brew temp. I'm starting to think it might not be strictly linear.

It's in a box now heading to SF -- and I can't wait to unpack it.
I'm starting to call it "the poor man's GS3".
Grin.

Photos and notes to come...

Machine Swap, more

2007-10-03T16:41:00.000-07:00

So the Monster Briccoletta is back to the shop. The 'explosion' was fixed, but then I started having odd, unfixable problems with the modified thermosyphon. After fiddling and diagnosis, it was determined that it needs to go somewhere with more sophisticated equipment.

And now, in its place, a new test machine.

The Grimac Mia I reviewed a couple years ago is back on the bench... albeit in much modified form. It's now a plumbed, PID'ed, rotary pumped, modified thermosyphon monster.
It's going to be really interesting to check it out and compare it to the stock Mia.

Also, I just returned from Sydney, Australia.
Had some gorgeous espresso drinks from Paul Geshos and the fine folks at Mecca. An absolutely top-notch, world class espresso bar.

retro

2007-09-08T21:29:00.000-07:00

Back when I used to live and die with coffee (no... seriously), I spent a lot of time writing for this blog, posting on coffee sites, writing for Barista Magazine, etc.

The other day someone asked me what the best thing I ever wrote was. My first choice was my last article for Barista Magazine - my piece on CoE Brazil and Espresso. As I have been told, however, that this is "my Valis"... I figure I might not have great perspective on it.

So I remembered that I was asked (on Home Barista.com) "how do you explore the extraction space" with espresso? And I remembered that my response was seen by folks as pretty good. So I went back and re-read it. And, to be honest, I thought it was pretty good indeed. It seems to have become buried in that site - so I figure I'll re-post it here from it's original thread.

------------------------------------------

To be honest, it's largely trial and error leading to some vague understandings of general rules. I wish I were better at it or it were more scientific.

I tend to follow a pretty clear process and will happily describe this if it will help.

If I have a new coffee I tend to always start with the LM ridged double basket and a target extraction volume of between 1.75 and 2.0 oz.

First I'll establish a brew temp starting point.
I'll evaluate the coffee for two characteristics. First - roast degree and second - bean composition.
With the former, I tend to make some quick rough decisions. If the roast is light, I tend to start with a baseline temp of 202F. If medium, I will stick with 200F. If dark, I'll drop it down to 197F.
Now... I'll also adjust this based on the bean composition. If, for example, I'm working with high-grown washed arabica I'm going to reduce the brew temp. If I'm working with aged or monsooned coffees I will up the brew temp (both from the baseline above).
So a light roasted coffee with monsooned beans will move up to 203F as a starting point.

Once I have a temp starting point I'll establish a dose starting point.
For this I'll look at two aspects - the bean composition again and then the "signature taste."
If the coffee has a lot of naturals or pulped naturals I'll go with a lighter dose. If the coffee is mostly high-grown arabica I'll up the dose.
So, for example, with the Terroir Daterra Reserve I'd go with a 17.5 gram dose. But with the Stumptown Hairbender I'd go with a 20 gram dose.
The "signature taste" is a harder one and requires some knowledge of the roaster. Is the person roasting this coffee a fan of low acidity espresso? Are they a "chocolate bomb" aficionado? If you know what they like out of their espresso you can do minor adjustments to your dose. So, for example, based on this I would actually drop the Terroir Daterra down to a 17 gram dose but would up the Stumptown Hairbender to a 20.5 gram dose.

Once I've got temp and dose I'll start experimenting.
I always start by re-evaluating temp. So I'll pull a shot and evaluate it for brew temp. Is it alkaloid? Is it thin? Is it sour? Astringent? Based on the taste, I will alter the temp by small degrees to find the sweet spot.

Once I've found what I feel is the brew temp sweet spot, I'll start working on dose.
The way I tend to do this is focus on two things. First - clarity of flavour and second - roundness and balance.
If the cup is "muddied" I'll reduce the dose. If the cup isn't fully developed and sweet and rich I'll up the dose.

With many coffees this will get me to the point where I'll have a cup profile I really like.
But there are exceptions. There are times when I won't be able to get to where I want to be with just these factors.
It's usually only at this point that I start looking at changes to extraction volume and basket size.

For example, I've found that some lighter roasted delicate coffees tend to end up poorly developed no matter what I do - especially when they are pulped naturals. But if I then swap to a triple basket and deliberately down-dose (19 grams) I "open up" the coffee and it becomes more defined and clear. Or with monsooned coffee I find that the only way I can get the desired sweetness without getting a "wet cardboard" aftertaste is by going with a triple basket, normal dose and then pulling a ristretto shot.

A lot of the time I'll find a "sweet spot" that I like but then start wondering about what a coffee would taste like when pulled differently.

To be honest... I'm incredibly lucky. Most of the coffee I experiment with is free to me. If I were roasting my own, especially in small batches, I don't know if my approach would work at all. And if I were paying retail... I don't know if I could force myself to throw away so much money.

crap

2007-04-27T22:38:00.001-07:00

o-ring failure.

waiting on replacement to resume testing.

Innards

2007-04-22T12:13:00.000-07:00

OK.
Yeah... I know that I haven't written up something that is complete and final yet. Sorry - but I've got stuff going on. Be patient.
And no, I'm not going to be posting schematics and diagrams and final part lists.

Finally, yes... it would be deeply ironic if I (who has talked so many times about the dubious value of using a PID on a single boiler dual use machine) had PID'ed this machine. But that display you see is just that... a display. There is no controller.

And now, without further ado and based on your requests... some photos of the guts of the new Bricc (as with previous pics, if you click on these you'll get a larger version).

finally

2007-04-21T16:11:00.000-07:00

The plumbing arrived (via Utah and Colorado -- don't get me started).
Install is complete.

Testing is underway. Results on way.

But first... some photos.

The Bricc... ready to go

Hmmm.... what is that odd pink/red glow?

Moving in a little closer for more detail.

It's starting to become more clear...

The only visible sign of anything different about this Briccoletta becomes obvious.

So... as I've mentioned in the past, there were a lot of things I really liked about the Briccoletta. But there were some things that made it "impractical" for use for novices or in "recreational" use. The primary challenge was brew temp management.
With sufficient practice/training/insight it is possible to manage your brew temp with a fair amount of accuracy and consistency -- but learning to do this is non-trivial and doing it in practice requires a lot of attention and focus (not the easiest thing at 5am).

When the Monster Briccoletta project began - the idea was to turn the base machine into something closer to a commercial machine. The idea was to make repeatable brew temp significantly easier and to reduce the "art" of barista brew temp management to something closer to a science. In addition, a few of the missing elements of a commercial machine needed to be added (in particular, the ability to pre-infuse with line pressure was highly desirable).

There were a huge number of options pursued for how this all would be handled.
The obvious directions were pursued and discarded for various reasons. It became clear that a couple additional issues were going to need to be addressed. The combination of a horizontal boiler and horizontal heating element in an HX machine created some constraints. The semi non functional thermosyphon added its own issues. In then end, the thermosyphon simply had to be redone -- but replacing the boiler was deemed impractical (grin).

In the next post I'll add some thoughts on the actual solution to the problem -- and with luck will have some additional commentary on the topic from Terry Z (the madman behind the mods). For right now... some initial thoughts on how successful this has been.

Well... first thoughts are pretty clear.

1 - It's nearly braindead easy to manage brew temp on this machine. Seriously. Not only is there little to no "hoop jumping" in the process -- but the machine is pretty forgiving when it comes to how accurately you flush.

2 - The machine is very consistent shot to shot as a result.

3 - The potential range of brew temps (once set up) is very narrow (unless you do something really crazy like flush 8oz of water). How narrow? I'd say a couple degrees in total. I'll have more accurate numbers soon.

4 - All of this has the obvious pros... but also some less obvious cons. I'm guessing the "make it like a commercial machine" goals are going to be comprehensively met. One of the downsides of a commercial machine is that you really don't get to "play" with the brew temp. It's "set and forget" for the most part. As a result, I'm guessing that this machine is going to be the sort of thing that is VERY easy to live with -- but it's not really going to be a "lab" machine at all.

As noted earlier... coming soon:
- technical details (hopefully with commentary from Terry Z)
- coffee tasting results (all that really matters)
- more pictures
- measurements (sigh)

i hate UPS

2007-04-10T20:29:00.000-07:00

So the plumbing part I'm waiting for to begin real testing of the 'Monster Briccoletta' didn't show up. UPS decided that this was something that required in person, adult signature. Of course... it was shipped to my house and between paddling and work I'm only here (on average) from around 9pm to around 7am most days.

It's being re-shipped (to the Stumptown Annex).

As soon as I get it, I'll start testing in earnest.

I'm going to run through a range of coffees so that I have a chance to deal with a wide range of brew parameters. I will, of course, post results and pictures here.

Monster Briccoletta

2007-04-01T21:59:00.000-07:00

It's alive...

Details to follow.

Revolutionary

2006-08-02T22:48:00.000-07:00

Stumptown Coffee Pairing Menu at Navarre
1 August, 2006
Portland OR

Panama Esmerelda Reserve
Pan D'Epice with Goose Rillettes

Ethiopia Yirgacheffe
Foie Gras and Serrano Ham Terrine with Mizuna
2005 Lambrusco, San Prospero, Ca de Medici

Rwanda Karaba
Eggs in Meurette Nests
NV Vouvray, Francois Pinon, Brut

Kenya Gethumbwini
Chicken Galantine with a Million Herbs Corn Sauce and Farro Salad with Mint
2005 Moscato d'Asti, Vigneto Biancospino

Panama Carmen Estate
Taleggio with Honey
Blanquette de Limoux, Method Ancestrale, Vergnes

Nicaragua Los Delirios
Candied Beets and Cherries with Polenta and Pickled Porcini
2005 Brachetto D'Acqui, Pineto, Morenco

Ethiopia Sidamo
Hickory Smoked Chocolate Mousse with Yogurt Jello
Homemade Walnut Liquour

2006-04-21T21:28:00.000-07:00

I ran into Tonx and Kyle the other day. Very fun. Got a chance to catch up, talk about Greece, theories on various aspects of espresso, our shared hatred for Monsooned Malabar, the fun times in Charlotte, IP thieves, Belgian Ale and the future.
It sounds as if things are very exciting for those boys. I'm sure we'll all be interested to see what the future holds.

I also (finally) wrapped up my article for Barista Magazine. It was a struggle. As Andrew Barnett said, "you're trying to turn a 300 page book that you care passionately about into a single magazine article." I worry that people might not get it. I worry that it might seem bizarre or obvious or obscure or just poorly written.
I guess I always kind of feel this way once done.

And I've been cupping some lovely coffees recently. Too much fun!

USBC Champs

2006-04-10T12:50:00.000-07:00

1. Matt Riddle (Intelligentsia)
2. Billy Wilson (Albina Press)
3. Amber Sather (Intelligentsia)

Nicely done Matt!!
Well done all!

Interesting trend... seems like the days of the dark horse contender may be fading. Some serious experience, practice and backing for all the above.

The Good, the Bad... the Ugly (Pt 1)

2006-04-09T10:31:00.000-07:00

It's taken my leaving coffee - and being away for quite some time - to give me the perspective and the objectivity to look back and see the industry for what it is.

There are a lot of things (pros and cons) that we all understand and that, in many cases, are simply obvious. But there are also a whole lot of positive and negative attributes that one either doesn't notice or hides from while head down behind the bar.

I think it's about time to detail some of these. I think that people can (or perhaps should) learn from this. In some cases - this may well be obvious. But it's good to get stuff out in the open.

The People

Everyone knows that the reason that many of us stay in the industry is because of the coffee. The good folks in this business are truly passionate about coffee. Up until a couple of years ago, this may have been less clear to many - but over the last few years it has become the drumbeat pushing us forward. "It's all about the coffee." That passion is what allowed for the sacrifices and what enables people to keep fighting and stay focused.

But few talk about the other great reason for putting up with all the compromises of a job in coffee. The people.

The specialty coffee industry attracts some of the most amazing, wonderful, engaging, smart, passionate, interesting and just plain cool people. Being around this people is, truly, addictive.

Now that I'm out of the industry I find that I miss a number of things. Some I expected (pulling shots behind the bar, cupping coffees all the time). But others came as a shock. How much I miss the people... well, this is the painful thing. I have so many friends in the coffee world and I knew that would be an issue. But it's not just the friends that I'm missing. I'm missing the community... I'm missing the people who were not even my friends but rather just cool people.

The good people in this industry are amazing - and too few of them get the notice and respect that the deserve. Folks like Jay Caragay, Ellie, Klaus, Tonx, Billy, Gabe, Vince, Brent Fortune, Barry, Peter, Troels, Phuong, George, James, Marcus... the list could go on for ever and ever. These are the people who live and die with coffee. They bleed coffee, they breathe coffee. Without them there simply would be no specialty coffee industry.

I left out the Stumptown folks from this list because they are, to me, a special case. On a daily basis I feel like I've lost a limb when I think about Stumptown. The physical pain that I feel when I think about not being a part of the Stumptown family anymore cannot be described. Joel, Lizz, Jim, Kyle, Stephen, Jana, Tim, Kate, Dave, Andrew, Todd, Blake, Autumn, Sarah, Wendy, Hutch, Dana, Steve, Liam, April, Ellen, Alex, Corey, Daniel, Nicholas, Sierra, Matt... I'm sure I'm forgetting folks and that is unforgivable but seriously... you all are why I stayed in coffee and you are why I'm no longer in coffee. You're an impossible act to follow.

Finally, there are the real heros of the coffee world. These folks are the people who in my opinion simply cannot get enough recognition.

Duane Sorenson. You taught me more that I can describe. I owe you more than you know.
David Schomer. Without you this never would have happened for me.
Doug Zell. Each and every day you demonstrate that you can run a coffee company as a business while also maintaining vision and standards.
Terry. I see the sacrifices you have made and continue to make even if others do not.
Kent. Each and every one of us owe almost everything to your committment and persistence.
Tim Wendelboe. You're the model. You've shown us where we need to go.
Bronwen. You're my hero. You live life the way it should be done. You are a barista.
Andrew Barnett. You are the cult figure for everyone - even if you don't know it. Your palate and your passion is what we strive for.
Sarah Allen. The courage it took you to step out and follow your dream astonishes me. We all owe you drinks on the house forever.

Now... before you think this is some sort of love-fest alone, the truth is that the speciality coffee industry is very immature. One of the ways in which this manifests itself is in the people it attracts. The insular and community focused nature of this industry combines with the immaturity to create a situation where the fools, the pretenders, the crooks and the monsters are hidden from view and/or ignored. And this industry has attracted more than its fair share of the above.

As many know, I have the opinion that the SCAA is the primary magnet for these bad people. Because of the structure and role of the SCAA, it seems to present a powerful pull for people who are in coffee for the "wrong" reasons. These people covet the perceived power and the sense of insider status. They see the opportunity for personal enrichment in the SCAA and see that their lack of ethics or values will allow them to exploit the trust relationships and escape any notice or censure do to the "ostrich" mentality of the industry. They thrive on the conflicts of interest inherent in the situation. And these people are the dominant players in the "old guard" within the SCAA.

They exist as consultants - exploiting their connections and committee relationships to double and even triple bill clients for services of limited to no value.
They exist as paid experts - representing institutions and industries whose very values and missions are antithetical to quality coffee while passing themselves off as friends of ours.
They exist as pundits - pursuing ego gratification through the exageration of abilities and a sort of "networked bullying" and a bully pulpit.
They exist in the media - running magazines dedicated to ad space above quality, ethics or values.
They exist as business owners - lining their own pockets at the expense of their employees; claiming specialty coffee status is owed to them through simple dues paying.
Most of all... they exist within the SCAA. Parasites spending the hard-earned profits of their constituents without providing value to anyone but themselves.

Sadly, these people are not merely limited to the "old guard." The new generation is starting to spawn their fair share of these individuals... these frauds and fakers and fast talking intimidators. They're moving from the Internet to the back room and soon to the board room. This is our chance to stop it... and it's going fast.

Personally, I think nothing could be better for the speciality coffee industry that a "zero tolerance" attitude. I hoped that the financial crimes at the SCAA would serve as a catalyst for this - and was deeply, deeply frustrated to see that, instead, the usual "close the doors and hide the dirty laundry" mentality simply became stronger as a result. I cannot see what anyone gains from this. It's time to call folks on their shit - and let everyone know. Each time you turn your back as another overpriced, underqualified consultant takes some poor coffee entrepreneur for their precious startup cash and then walks away to let them fail... we all are damaged.

The next time you go to an espresso lab and hear someone spreading the same old tired lies and misconception to the gullible - call them on it.

The next time you taste a coffee that is misroasted; the next time you see defect being passed off as character; the next time someone tries to bully and intimidate their way to personal gain; the next time a barista is underpaid... call people on their shit.

Zero Tolerance.

(More to follow)

2006-04-03T13:28:00.000-07:00

oh...
everyone has been asking what i'm doing.
here you go.

what? you thought i'd shut up?

2006-04-01T17:29:00.000-08:00

i have not forsaken you...

i'm just a bit busy.

fwiw:

a) the Hairbender is completely brilliant right now. at lower temps it is really sweet, with tons of molasses and ever-lasting crema. there are great aromatics and a lovely up-front meyer lemon brightness. at higher temps it becomes less sweet, but a really nice dutch processed cocoa note appears and the meyer lemon turns to apricot.

b) i've moved and am one block from the Stumptown Annex. i'm in love with the Clover all over again. there is a clarity of reproduction that is wonderful when configured correctly and the process of discovering the configuration is intellectually stimulating.

c) top shots of espresso lately have been from Wendy (Stumptown Belmont) and Billy (Albina Press).

d) i've been traveling a lot and oh my god have i been drinking a lot of bad coffee!! i'm so glad i live in Portland. if i lived in (for example) Tempe AZ or Indianapolis IN or Las Vegas NV (to pick three recent destinations) i would be angry more often than i am right now.

e) the new Barista Magazine is out and is even better than the last.

f) i miss the GS3.