dfk41 It’s not always clear where the notes originate - from the roaster themselves, or from importer’s notes. Googling any coffee usually pulls up a range of notes, depending on who is roasting it.
Generally, I find the notes do reflect the coffee somewhat, on average (3.9/ 5.0 where 3 is maybe/maybe not, 4 hits at least one stated note, 5 hits two or more stated notes) . If the notes are too specific, then that makes a direct match trickier (especially given different methods/silt content/water). I’ll sometimes get one stated note from a brew, then it will be less evident in the next brew, but I’ll get another more strongly.
I have seen notes for the same lot of coffee change significantly from one roaster, over the period of sale.
I’m always a bit perplexed by notes that cite foods/drinks no one typically consumes.
A few coffees don’t seem to reflect the notes at all, if they are still enjoyable, or the notes kind of convey the gist of the profile, then I’m happy enough.
Simple notes don’t seem to be any easier to decipher either. If it says, “chocolate”, well Galaxy & Lindt 90% are very different. Likewise, “nuts” - macadamias taste like chewy air to me, hazlenuts are totally different to each other depending on roast level. A ripe, fresh fig tastes very different to an unripe fig, a dried fig tastes nothing like either.
Taith, Zennor have good strike rates on notes, though quite a few roasters are in the ball-park some of the time, everyone seems to have the odd miss. The macerated fruit fermentations seem to help hit the mark, but then I guess they would.
Do people find coffee notes harder than wine, beer, crisps etc?