<< Home || Projects || Events ||
Subscribe ||
||
Friday, December 15, 2006
Espresso: Blends are a compromise
A blend is a compromise. An alchemist's approach to coffee in many cases. Taking parts, that alone can be quite inferior which equal something greater as a whole. Lead into gold, not quite, but close.
Of course I am pitching the extreme to prove a point here.
Espresso blends are historically composed of some of the lowest grade coffees available. Robusta, monsooned malabar, and low grade indonesians are the backbone of the traditional generic milk espresso blend.
What if you took a wine approach to blending? Two or three high grade varietals blended together for something even more complex. Instead of putting together inferior parts, use components that were great as separate pieces.
What if we took only amazing high grade coffees and were to blend them? Not to suddenly abandon the terroir view of micro lots and soil quality, but to add this blending on top of the great single origins/green quality concepts with one caveat to give the farmer due credit:
What if blends came to market that were transparent and labeled the contents and percentages proudly on the bag?
Abandoning the black box approach to espresso and stating what was contained inside for the consumer.
What if?
It's been done with percentages and all by the Danes.
A blend is a compromise. An alchemist's approach to coffee in many cases. Taking parts, that alone can be quite inferior which equal something greater as a whole. Lead into gold, not quite, but close.
Of course I am pitching the extreme to prove a point here.
Espresso blends are historically composed of some of the lowest grade coffees available. Robusta, monsooned malabar, and low grade indonesians are the backbone of the traditional generic milk espresso blend.
What if you took a wine approach to blending? Two or three high grade varietals blended together for something even more complex. Instead of putting together inferior parts, use components that were great as separate pieces.
What if we took only amazing high grade coffees and were to blend them? Not to suddenly abandon the terroir view of micro lots and soil quality, but to add this blending on top of the great single origins/green quality concepts with one caveat to give the farmer due credit:
What if blends came to market that were transparent and labeled the contents and percentages proudly on the bag?
Abandoning the black box approach to espresso and stating what was contained inside for the consumer.
What if?
It's been done with percentages and all by the Danes.
Labels: article, blending, espresso
¶ Jaime van Schyndel 7:38 PM
Comments:
<< Home
Blends are a weird one as there are so many different reasons for creating them. Usually the tail is wagging the dog, no one creates a blend and then decides what it might be good for.
In my previous (and small) experiences of blending I've had fewer limitations than many commercial roasters because it was all done for competition. Which meant:
No need to worry about stock levels and availability of components
It was going to be drunk as an espresso or 5oz capp.
Only 4 people had to like (excluding myself)
Consistency wasn't an issue
Price wasn't an issue
I can see how difficult it can be once you start worrying about those things. I strongly believe there is an art to it. I also have campaigned and harassed people for a while to publish the contents of their blends (I usually post mine up somewhere online after I've used it in a comp). Kontra are not alone in being very open about their blend - there are now two or three places in the UK that I know about that do it as well. About which I am delighted.
I really feel that if a roaster is proud of their quality, sourcing of green and especially their skill as roasters then their blend should be "uncopiable" even if you know the contents. But then there is more to supplying coffee than just having a good blend which is a different debate entirely.
In my previous (and small) experiences of blending I've had fewer limitations than many commercial roasters because it was all done for competition. Which meant:
No need to worry about stock levels and availability of components
It was going to be drunk as an espresso or 5oz capp.
Only 4 people had to like (excluding myself)
Consistency wasn't an issue
Price wasn't an issue
I can see how difficult it can be once you start worrying about those things. I strongly believe there is an art to it. I also have campaigned and harassed people for a while to publish the contents of their blends (I usually post mine up somewhere online after I've used it in a comp). Kontra are not alone in being very open about their blend - there are now two or three places in the UK that I know about that do it as well. About which I am delighted.
I really feel that if a roaster is proud of their quality, sourcing of green and especially their skill as roasters then their blend should be "uncopiable" even if you know the contents. But then there is more to supplying coffee than just having a good blend which is a different debate entirely.
I have to admit largely to pondering the perfect cafe espresso in a shop where you could dedicate one grinder to straight shots, machiattos, and even cappas. Day dreaming about a blend like Thoreson's Crescendo which we will get some more of soon... Not thinking so much of the classic roaster/cafe scene where you had one espresso for everything.
You have to admit seeing the portions and names on the bag is pretty ballsy.
You have to admit seeing the portions and names on the bag is pretty ballsy.
I agree it is ballsy, and there are disreputable companies that will try and rip off blends, and undercut the good guys and once again force substandard product onto the masses.
Thoreson's espresso is great, best shot I had in Oslo - though not sure which blend it was.
He buys great green, roasts well, hires and trains good staff and puts them all in a lovely space to buy and drink coffee. He deserves to be very succesful.
Thoreson's espresso is great, best shot I had in Oslo - though not sure which blend it was.
He buys great green, roasts well, hires and trains good staff and puts them all in a lovely space to buy and drink coffee. He deserves to be very succesful.
Roasters that put out high quality product do not wish to be seen as copy cats, and would rather be identified by thier own espresso blends, as far as I can tell. My exposure to blends has been from the artisan perspective, and I may have just assumed that roasters were trying to weave complex tapestries of flavor experience, not blend out inferior stock to be homogenized with other elements. But I can see how that would happen as well.
With the cutting edge philosophies being carved out with an ethical code of transparency, I can see how the need to be ballsy will simply be replaced by a nessecity to operate on the up and up, and put out the blend components to the public.
I also have only blended for competition, and although that meant using all great S.O.'s, I just thought that would be the goal for anyone blending. The inevidability is that some of the beans will never come back quite like they were this year. That makes this type of blending even more valuable, since these are only a fleeting glimps into the ever changing crop characteristics.
I can't help but wonder if the sigle origin shot popularity comes more from the home barista, who is not stading in front of 15 different origins at a time. The professional has the luxury of tasting so many beans in close juxtaposition that it becomes easy to dismiss some S.O. shots simply because there may be a better flavor at arm's lenth. I think that I hear professionals speak less of great S.O espresso experiences.
With the cutting edge philosophies being carved out with an ethical code of transparency, I can see how the need to be ballsy will simply be replaced by a nessecity to operate on the up and up, and put out the blend components to the public.
I also have only blended for competition, and although that meant using all great S.O.'s, I just thought that would be the goal for anyone blending. The inevidability is that some of the beans will never come back quite like they were this year. That makes this type of blending even more valuable, since these are only a fleeting glimps into the ever changing crop characteristics.
I can't help but wonder if the sigle origin shot popularity comes more from the home barista, who is not stading in front of 15 different origins at a time. The professional has the luxury of tasting so many beans in close juxtaposition that it becomes easy to dismiss some S.O. shots simply because there may be a better flavor at arm's lenth. I think that I hear professionals speak less of great S.O espresso experiences.
Re: listing bean orgin on the bag. It might not as "ballsy" as you think, especially when you are the only one in town who has access to that particular lot of greens.
Even if your competitor were to try copying the blend by substituting similiar beans (maybe same farm/region), it will never come out quite the same as each lot can differ from the next quite a bit.
Even if your competitor were to try copying the blend by substituting similiar beans (maybe same farm/region), it will never come out quite the same as each lot can differ from the next quite a bit.
Phil said - "an ethical code of transparency"
That's what I want to see. The farmers geting their due. That's one huge fault in blends that should be addressed.
and BTW
"What if you took a wine approach to blending? Two or three high grade varietals blended together for something even more complex."
It's all been done. Like Klaus' blend at the WBC. These are just things that need to take hold on a bigger stage than the competitions.
That's what I want to see. The farmers geting their due. That's one huge fault in blends that should be addressed.
and BTW
"What if you took a wine approach to blending? Two or three high grade varietals blended together for something even more complex."
It's all been done. Like Klaus' blend at the WBC. These are just things that need to take hold on a bigger stage than the competitions.
We had a local roaster come into our shop, buy some Black Cat. Couple weeks later, same roaster came back with a sample of a "new" blend he wanted us to try.
Tasted pretty close to Black Cat. And he could sell it to me for $3 less a pound.
99% of Pittsburgh espresso drinkers would have no idea it wasn't Black Cat since 99% of Pittsburgh baristas couldn't pull a good straight shot. And an "off" shot of BC can be just a vile as an "off" shot of most anything else. But people would feel good because they got Black Cat at a discount instead of having to go to "that place in the suburbs that costs a dime more."
I can't speak to the business ethics of Danish roaters. But around here, much as we're for transparency, I'd be very, very careful.
Post a Comment
Tasted pretty close to Black Cat. And he could sell it to me for $3 less a pound.
99% of Pittsburgh espresso drinkers would have no idea it wasn't Black Cat since 99% of Pittsburgh baristas couldn't pull a good straight shot. And an "off" shot of BC can be just a vile as an "off" shot of most anything else. But people would feel good because they got Black Cat at a discount instead of having to go to "that place in the suburbs that costs a dime more."
I can't speak to the business ethics of Danish roaters. But around here, much as we're for transparency, I'd be very, very careful.
<< Home
