Coffee Common

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

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

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:

1. Volume of sales
2. Green bean purchasing and management
3. Marketing (coolness, buzz, brand, etc)
4. Preparing coffee the right way
5. 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?

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

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

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

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.