Ethiopian Sidamo and Medium / Medium Dark Roast. 20g, 1.4 turns in Jx Pro, 46.4g out and took a little longer at almost a minute. The group was set 93C and the brew was set at 99C. Took 18s for the first drop into the cup. This is too long. I thought the cup isn’t going to be good. It was so good, I drank straight as an espresso. Fruity citrus and lemon grass for me. It will definitely benefit from loosening the grind. This bag will be very good for brewing for sure, which is what I will do later today. https://imgur.com/a/vTgy8Be

@"LMSC"#p1024 The beans look well roasted for a medium dark roast….who was the roaster?

@"DavecUK"#p1035 Clumsy Goat. They stated both the Peru and this Ethiopian are medium roast. I did not think so. I reckoned the Peru was medium dark / dark. That bag was ok; I was never happy with that Peruvian Bag. This Ethiopian is very good and sweet. I was erring more on the medium dark; I didn’t think it’s a dark roast, looking at the dark yellow / light brown colours at the crevice of the beans; I thought they may have been taken out just before the second crack, not at the second. Obviously, I lack a roasting experience and still learning to differentiate the roasts. 😊 You won’t call it as a dark roast, would you ? Thx

> @"LMSC"#p1039 You won’t call it as a dark roast, would you ? Thx I would call that medium dark…it's about as dark as I like to go, normally I'm in the medium or medium light camps. as my personal preference and that of my roast sharers. That roast was nowhere near 2nd crack and I would guess it's about 30-50 seconds after first…not roasted too fast because I can't see any oil and no charred chaff lines, indicating the burners going off before 1st crack and the roast allowed to coast into it. My guess for what it's worth…anyway, they did a good job.

Crown and canvas - first light Brazilian and colombian blend. Bag states dark chocolate, hazelnut and red berry and I have to say it delivers! Espresso 16g in 32g out: really rich dark chocolate and hazelnut (think greene and blacks) and a gentle acidity to finish. Lovely mouthfeel and long lasting. As a flat white everything’s sweetened up and it really pushes the hazelnut flavour. Delicious. Off to make another 😉

@"Baldrick"#p1770 Hadn't heard of Crown and Canvas before. Having looked at their website and following your positive recommendation I think I will be giving them a try.

@"Dumnorix"#p1793 very popular roaster and some great coffees by all accounts. If you check our commercial directory, you will find some good and reliable companies to use. https://coffeetime.freeflarum.com/d/52-commercial-members-list

@"DavecUK"#p1796 Many thanks for the link.

Origin Colombia Estate Café Granja La Esperanza Farm Potosi Varietal San Juan Process Natural Altitude 1,800-2,000 masl Harvest January - April I got it from my local shop. It's got a really nice sultana smooth taste. Currently brewing it in a Aeropress 1:15 and diluting up to around a 320g cup. Really enjoying it at cooler temps.

Crankhouse, Cordillera de Fuego, anaerobic natural Caturra & Catuai - Initially hesitant & bracing myself due to the pungent, farmyard aroma off the beans, but absolutely delivers in every aspect on the flavour in cup. Complex, good perception of sweetness. Delicious! Like a coffee equivalent to mulled wine. I'm not big fan of naturals, nor Cost a Ricans generally, but I love this. 13\.6g ground at 32 on Wilfa flat, V60 02 with can strainer, 40g every 40s (each pour taking about 13s), 1st 2 pours direct on to the coffee bed, last 3 via can strainer. Dry bed 3:15 for this brew.

Mikari AA (Washed) (Kenya) from Coffee by the Casuals - two ways. Moka Pot - really rich, lots of peach. Very smooth. Pre-boiled water and AP filter, but no 'bloom'. CCD - 18g + 300g - 32 on Niche. Still steeping, but based on brews this week, flavour is more balanced, not as in your face (as expected) - not much pineapple, but more acitidty alongside the peach.

What’s in your cup this morning ?

InfamousTuba

I think it is hard to balance the complexity of tasting notes. Obviously overly niche notes isolate customers, but overly simple notes make it harder to differentiate between coffees especially in such a competitive market. For example if a roaster has 3 coffees all with berry and nutty tasting notes, if they don’t differentiate the tastes how would a customer decide between them?

Does anyone have a roaster that they think has great tasting notes? And maybe why they think they work for them?

LeefromFoundryCR

Doram

I don’t know if there is such a thing as a speciality watermelon, but if there is then maybe there is a forum for speciality watermelon fans somewhere having this same discussion right now.

I’m joking of course but maybe it’s more helpful to think of coffee like a melon. Watermelon is one varietal that tends towards a certain flavour profile, whereas a cantaloupe is very different, honeydew different again. You’re right, it would be completely correct to say that they are both melons, but that doesn’t make them the same.

With coffee, we’re not just taking about varietals either, we have to consider processing, terroir, and other factors that will ultimately influence the taste.

LMSC

LeefromFoundryCR

There are no easy fixes to this challenge. As you wrote, experimentation, having an open mind and reverting to your current practice are the key.

The notes on the package is simplified already. They are important; and, so are including those notes that the roasters think are unique or rare to the bag. But certain less obvious notes can be clarified on the website. Example: cherry balsam. This will only improve the customers’ drinking experience and improve the perception of the coffee taste as the coffee was fundamentally very good !
knowledge base of your notes, roast type, process, etc can underpin and serve the customers’ expectations. Those who are keen would definitely look at them.

Examples are :

rare / less obvious flavours and aromas
classification of honey process (white, gold, red, black). Just mentioning a honey process on the website won’t be enough. Very few roasters make an effort to clarify like this.
clarification of fermentation / anaerobic as they do not necessarily mean boozy and fizzy flavours. They may be enriching the flavours , if I am not wrong. A lack of clarity of these may create wrong expectations resulting in customers looking for flavours that are not meant to be there. A lot of examples can be provided.
The package label often contain detailed texts of the farms. These can be summarised to 2-3 lines as the detailed descriptions of the farms can always be had on the website! This releases valuable space on the label!
cup scores are provided by some roasters, but not all of them.

Doram

LeefromFoundryCR I’m joking of course but maybe it’s more helpful to think of coffee like a melon. Watermelon is one varietal that tends towards a certain flavour profile, whereas a cantaloupe is very different, honeydew different again. You’re right, it would be completely correct to say that they are both melons, but that doesn’t make them the same.

Apples. How many different varietal are there? And then they differ on minute things from one apple to another, even the if the same varietal, just like coffee, yet no BS tasting notes as far as I know. I am sure we can start giving tasting notes to apples, but what’s the point (other than marketing)?

We could describe coffees without likening them to bergamot, honeysuckle and strawberry milkshake (how about sweet, strong, fermented, rich, syrupy, watery, aromatic, well balanced, high/low acidity, spicy, light, lingering, bitter etc.). It wouldn’t be as sexy, so harder to charge premium prices for, but with many other foods and drinks (not all, of course) we manage nicely to differentiate between different qualities without the imaginary tasting notes (and we can keep using cup scores to separate the good, the bad and the fantastic coffees).

MWJB

Doram we manage nicely to differentiate between different qualities without the imaginary tasting notes (and we can keep using cup scores to separate the good, the bad and the fantastic coffees).

If tasting notes are imaginary, being derived from tasting the coffee, how are cup scores (derived by tasting, usually not by the brew method used and almost never disclosed to the buyer) not, in a large part, also imaginary? What does 84 taste like?

Tasting notes don’t seem to differentiate “premium” from everything else.

LeefromFoundryCR

Doram Apples. How many different varietal are there? And then they differ on minute things from one apple to another, even the if the same varietal, just like coffee, yet no BS tasting notes as far as I know. I am sure we can start giving tasting notes to apples, but what’s the point (other than marketing)?

Maybe it’s because we don’t tend to spend a lot on ordering apples online? The usual approach would be to buy one for a few pence (low risk) and decide whether you like that varietal or not. I suspect that’s what we’ve all done at some point with apples. A granny smiths apple is always going to taste similar year on year - there just isn’t anywhere near the genetic variation in the fruit that you see in coffee.

Doram We could describe coffees without likening them to bergamot, honeysuckle and strawberry milkshake (how about sweet, strong, fermented, rich, syrupy, watery, aromatic, well balanced, high/low acidity, spicy, light, lingering, bitter etc.).

I agree, all those descriptors can be really useful too, but they have nothing to do with flavour, which is what we’re trying to describe in the flavour notes? - they all describe the nature of the body, finish or acidity.

Doram the imaginary tasting notes

Sounds like you think people are just making this stuff up for marketing purposes, and of course, that logically follows on from you not relating your own sensory experience when drinking coffee to your experiences tasting other things. I think that’s just how it is for some people and I doubt there’s much I can do to convince you otherwise. It’s a reminder of what I was saying in a previous comment, you can’t please everyone. That’s why we end up using lots of different approaches to describing the coffee.

Doram

MWJB If tasting notes are imaginary, being derived from tasting the coffee, how are cup scores (derived by tasting, usually not by the brew method used and almost never disclosed to the buyer) not, in a large part, also imaginary? What does 84 taste like?

Tasting notes don’t seem to differentiate “premium” from everything else.

I agree with all that you say. To clarify, I don’t think all tasting notes are imaginary. I do think many of the more specific ones are personal associations (not meaningful enough for other people) in the best cases, and complete marketing nonsense in the worst cases.

Cup scores I don’t know enough about really. I assume there is a subjective element in what is “good” and what is “bad”. But maybe if many expert agree on a similar score then it means something? Or maybe not?

I know that, for example, film ratings can be very different from one critique to another, as they are so subjective, and even when many experts like a film it doesn’t mean that everyone will enjoy it as well.

We do manage to buy other foods without tasting notes and scores, so maybe we could do the same with coffee? (perhaps recommendations from other people with similar tastes to ours is more helpful?).

LeefromFoundryCR

Doram Cup scores I don’t know enough about really.

The main thing to be aware of there is that flavour is only a small part of the Q cup grading process. There is one domain around flavour itself but the whole point of that process is to look at quality. So graders are looking for consistency and uniformity across different samples of the same coffee. i.e. they will be scoring 5 cups of the same coffee and looking for consistency between them all, which they would say is an indicator of cup quality.

After that, they are looking at structural elements e.g balance between acidity, sweetness and bitterness. They are also looking for things like defects, which you can be trained to taste (I did this as part of the SCA Green Coffee training and it’s fascinating). One of the 10 (I think) domains is a subjective sense from the grader of how good they think the coffee is.

Most grading is done is panels of several people, utilising blind methods etc, although this can vary. People who have done the certifications are required to participate in ‘calibration’ training periodically to try to improve and maintain inter-rater reliability.

InfamousTuba

Cup scores can indicate some things but people can still have a preference. A 92 scoring anaerobic panama geisha isn’t objectively better for everyone than say a 85 scoring washed Colombian, it still comes down to preference and understanding.

We do buy a lot of food without tasting notes, but wine and beer have tasting notes to help people understand the differences. Tasting notes aren’t always that useful for everyone but they do fit a purpose to help convey an idea. If I want to try something new, like say a starfruit, I might not know what it tastes like, but if someone told me it tasted similar kiwi fruit I would have some idea what to expect even if it isn’t exactly the same

LeefromFoundryCR

InfamousTuba Cup scores can indicate some things but people can still have a preference. A 92 scoring anaerobic panama geisha isn’t objectively better for everyone than say a 85 scoring washed Colombian, it still comes down to preference and understanding.

Definitely. Preference is preference. Some people like ‘low quality’ coffee and are less likely to enjoy high scoring coffee for various reasons. Lucky them! - it’s generally cheaper and more widely available.

winterlight

I’ve always been mystified by the scores that HasBean give to their beans. Every set of beans gets a score of 36 for correction (whatever that is) and all the scores appear to be about flavour - I expect that, although the scores closely resemble SCA scores in terms of quality, they aren’t official SCA scores?

As regards tasting notes, I tend to find these helpful (as long as the notes listed are something I have a reference point for). Colonna removed specific tasting notes a while back and I haven’t bought any since as I’ve always been unsure as to whether the beans would be to my liking.

LMSC

Smith Street Colombian Dora Mendez

17.2g, 257.3g, 212.4g liquid and 4.40 mins to dry bed. The cup was clean, smooth and fruity, but none of the flavours or aroma (red grapes, brown sugar and floral) came through. I don’t mind if I can’t relate the coffee to any notes as long as I enjoy drinking the cup. It is far better than Majinja, but I can’t say I liked it or otherwise. A high cup score (88.5) coffee came short on all versions (espresso, clever and V60) for me! I would give it a 5.

https://www.smithstreetcoffeeroasters.co.uk/product-page/dora-mendez

MWJB

LMSC The score of 5 was out of how many? This obviously happens, but how? The objective (sort of) quality score is there, the coffee’s taste notes have been appraised before sale/despatch, so how can it fail to perform to expectation across multiple methods?

LMSC

MWJB That’s your scale; out of 9.

Even if we are able to pick a note or two regularly on coffee bags, we can fail to pick up at times, can we not ? Some just can’t, while others can.

I have pulled a few shots, which I mostly drink as a black. It’s cuts ok with milk, which I don’t drink that often.

Re-brews, I have brewed them a couple of times on each method. The strength is just right for me. May be, I will grind a little coarser and see if it improves.

The notes state “RED GRAPE LIGHT BROWN SUGAR FLORAL”. .The description is “Enjoy a myriad of floral notes, balanced and sweet, caramelised sugars throughout”.

They are a good roaster and I have liked some of their bags. It is possible the grapes and the brown sugar flavours put together are clouding my sensory!

Edit :

It’s a mixed anerobic fermentation!

MWJB

LMSC Picking up the notes isn’t really the main issue (this will vary for a number of reasons), even though at least one of the notes should be detectable. The liking score (quartermaster’s hedonic scale, in use for 70 odd years) is just that, how much you like it, rather than, ‘does it taste like x,y,z.’, I often have coffees I really enjoy that don’t match the notes.

Really, what I’m getting at is the coffee is scored at 89, it is sweet, but only achieves a neutral (50%) score in the cup, with someone who likes coffee and should be getting something above a neutral score.

Not a criticism of you or of Smith St, as I have had the same from plenty of other roasters, maybe at least 1 bag from all roasters that I have tried. It just makes me wonder…

LMSC

MWJB Picking up the notes isn’t really the main issue

Exactly! I have not factored the notes to score the cup. That’s why I wrote I don’t mind if I can’t pick the notes; because, as you correctly stated, it is about how much we like / enjoy the coffee.

I am pleased you take time to comment, which aims to help us access what went right, wrong and what needs to be done to improve the likability of the coffee we brew.

I do wonder why this coffee seen so sweet with a very good cup score gives me a neutral view. I have had time to review my logs.

4 of the 7 bags from SS are Anaerobically processed. Except this (Dora Mendez) bag, I have managed to trace one or two note(s) written on the tin on 3 of them; two were very nice, Dora was neutral and Chazez, which I opened a couple of days ago is above neutral (decent as black, but very nice as a flat white).
Perhaps, I have started felling that all bags taste similar, given I that I have had too many from them. If correct, this doesn’t do justice for the coffee.

In short, I don’t have an answer to why? 😊

InfamousTuba

LMSC

Have you tried cupping it? It might not be the best way to enjoy it but it could help you see if there is anything wrong with the roast. It could be a problem with the roast or maybe the coffee didn’t perform as well as the sample they got. We have had lots with high scores that arrive and maybe aren’t as good as the scores suggest

LMSC

InfamousTuba Have you tried cupping it?

Never tried cupping! It is a good idea. I need to watch a few on the how before I try myself. Thx

Cuprajake

Must admit I’m losing intrest in the really bright stuff, some are so prominent.

LMSC

Cuprajake losing intrest in the really bright stuff, some are so prominent.

Hmm. Did you feel the same when you had the Bianca. I think Denis had a view that grinders with bigger burr sets are likely to require lower temp on the Evo. What sort of temps do you set for the light/medium light stuffs?

He gave something like the following, which you may try.

Dark 90-92/98-100
Medium Dark - 2C < Dark
Medium 2C < dark
Medium Light - 3C < dark
Light - 4C < dark

MWJB

LMSC Never tried cupping! It is a good idea. I need to watch a few on the how before I try myself. Thx

This won’t be as easy as anticipated, not many seem to follow the same protocol, I have never had any roaster give me a good idea as to what grind they use. Break at 3-5 min and start tasting at 8-10min will usually result in a low extraction and a very different result to V60. It’s practical as a diagnostic, when comparing multiple samples and looking for defects, but it’s not going to be better than your typical, dialled in brew method.

« Previous Page Next Page »