Living with the Robur

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

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

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

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

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

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:

1. Copenhagen and have Klaus Thomsen pull you some shots of espresso from The Coffee Collective, or
2. Portland and have Billy Wilson pull you some shots of espresso from Stumptown or Ecco Caffe, or
3. Oslo and have Tim Wendelboe pull you some shots of espresso from Wendelboe, or
4. London and have James Hoffman pull you some shots of espresso from Square Mile, or
5. 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

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.