Cultural Imperialism

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

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

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".