NWR: coffee, roasting and terroir

M

MLipton

Mark Lipton
As I ponder my morning cup of coffee, I am considering the current trend among coffee shops to offer a lighter roast. For years I've derided Starbucks for the overroasted character of their coffees which, to my tastes, obscures any sense of place in their single-source coffees. Now, so-called "third wave" roasters have adopted a lighter roast with the express purpose of bringing out those notes of "terroir" in coffee, although they now flirt with failing to bring out the full character of the beans. I am struck by the parallels to winemaking, where surmaturité masks the character of the grapes and one has to harvest less ripe grapes to get true "goût de terroir" in the wine.

Do others see this parallel? And is there a Disorderly palate for coffee?

Mark Lipton

p.s. Perhaps all this introspection is merely the afterglow of a transcendentally good bottle of '61 Beychevelle on Sunday.
 
I can see more of a parallel with using less toast on one's barrels so as not to mask terroir as akin to roasting the beans less. It's not like they're picking the beans less ripe.

Of course by the time I get done chapetilizing and adding milk, my coffe is spoof city.
 
i'm old school (or just old)--to me the taste of coffee is the roast. it's hopeless. light roasted coffees taste to me too much like steeped popsickle sticks. see what i mean?
 
Robert... Yes, I've tasted that. I never associated it with the roast, though. I just assumed it was a poor grade of coffee (too much robusta?).

Arjun... Costa Rican peaberry, ftw. (ETA: Great site! Great glossary.)

Brad... Agreed.

Mark... I'm quite cynical about Starbucks and its imitators. Here's my reasoning: Before the Great Seattle Awakening, the world produced and consumed X tons of coffee. After the GSA, the world is producing about the same but drinking a lot more. I assume that the best beans are still going to the people who have always bought them, so this newly-discovered Y hectoliters of coffee is being made from middle-to-low quality beans. That's why you need a dark roast on them: they'd have no character otherwise. The third wave roasts are merely an economic response to "Charbucks" and other complaints; I doubt it's driven by taste in any way.
 
originally posted by John Roberts:
I consider Stumptown pretty disorderly.
Click to expand...

+1 on that front - my go too coffee, but then I can get it fresh locally within a few days of roasting.

For those without a competent local roaster, George Howell was my previous go to source.

Light roast is the carbonic maceration of the coffee world.
 
originally posted by Cory Cartwright:
Light roast is the carbonic maceration of the coffee world? I'm not sure that makes sense.
Click to expand...

You are right - The exact opposite is true. Too dark a roast, i.e. Starbucks, does it's best to obscure and homogenize the flavor of the brewed coffee - effectively erasing and signature of terroir. That said - this applies to brewed coffee - and the lovely practice of cupping. Espresso is another animal that needs/benefits from a darker roast.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:

Mark... I'm quite cynical about Starbucks and its imitators. Here's my reasoning: Before the Great Seattle Awakening, the world produced and consumed X tons of coffee. After the GSA, the world is producing about the same but drinking a lot more. I assume that the best beans are still going to the people who have always bought them, so this newly-discovered Y hectoliters of coffee is being made from middle-to-low quality beans. That's why you need a dark roast on them: they'd have no character otherwise. The third wave roasts are merely an economic response to "Charbucks" and other complaints; I doubt it's driven by taste in any way.
Click to expand...

That's not quite true, Jeff. I take my timeline a bit earlier than you, since I was a customer of Peet's from, as TomHill would put it "the very start." In the '60s the majority of Americans drank coffee made from Robusta beans. With the growing "coffee culture" in the US, a greater emphasis was placed on Arabica coffees, with the result that growers began growing more Arabica beans. That in itself is no guarantee of quality, but since the '90s a greater emphasis has been placed on shade-grown Arabica beans from recognized regions (the Premier Cru and Grand Cru sites of the coffee world) with an increase in the prices paid. So, while the overall amount of coffee grown may not have changed, the number of quality beans grown has increased substantially. It's a lot like the shift in wine production in California: though the tonnage figures haven't moved much since the '60s, there's a lot less Thompson Seedless grown in the Central Valley that goes into wine now than formerly.

Mark Lipton
 
Interesting history lesson, thanks Mark!

Starbucks has certainly had a huge influence on both quality and price of the coffee in the NYC area. While I don't like their coffee there is much better coffee available than in the pre-S era. Of course it's also a lot more expensive.

I'll also say that knowledge of good coffee preparation is also much more widespread. Anyone else grow up with percolators and freeze dried?
 
I think Peet's totally overroasts their beans, even more so than Starbucks. I'm in the medium roast camp. I go to a place in downtown San Carlos, Plantation Coffee Roastery, that roasts their beans on the premises.
 
In the US I roast my own, usually central American from Sweet Marias. I opt for a lightish roast but am not always sufficiently attentive and so the roast varies a bit but then again different coffees taste very differently at different roasts. Given that I roast a few days before the coffee is brewed there is a lengthy feedback loop but buying five pounds at a time allows me to fine tune a bit. I modestly spooofulate with 1/2 and 1/2.

In Italy I increasingly search out the few really good bars that make a great cup (such as Torrefazione Ambrosiano) but most of what I drink is at decent but not really good bars that are more convenient. I am a bit concerned about what appears to be the decline of the local bar that now seem to be owned by Asian immigrants who can operate the machinery and sell bus tickets but make mediocre coffee. But then again I spoof by usually getting a macchiato and adding some cane sugar.

As for SB I feel they are sort of Gallo or McDonalds, a mass market product that rendered a variable product more or less understandable with little variation. Not very good, but reliable in its way.
 
originally posted by Larry Stein:
I spoof my coffee with unsweetened 2% evaporated milk (can't stand sugar in my coffee). Black coffee messes with my stomach.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it *really* counts as spoof unless you're using fat-free "half and half". I think it's the difference between irrigation and spinning cones.
 
Whenever I visit some parts of Europe, Switzerland for example, I love the aroma of freshly-roasted coffee when shopping in various stores. I have never experienced this here in Alberta!! Oh, miss the pastry/chocolate shops too plus the delis.
 
originally posted by Larry Stein:
I think Peet's totally overroasts their beans, even more so than Starbucks. I'm in the medium roast camp. I go to a place in downtown San Carlos, Plantation Coffee Roastery, that roasts their beans on the premises.
Click to expand...

Larry,
I don't know if Peet's overroasts more than Starbucks these days, but the roasting there has changed dramatically since the days of Mr. Peet. These days, I try to get my coffee from Intelligentsia in Chicago whenever I can.

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by MLipton:
That's not quite true, Jeff. I take my timeline a bit earlier than you, since I was a customer of Peet's from, as TomHill would put it "the very start." In the '60s the majority of Americans drank coffee made from Robusta beans. With the growing "coffee culture" in the US, a greater emphasis was placed on Arabica coffees, with the result that growers began growing more Arabica beans. That in itself is no guarantee of quality, but since the '90s a greater emphasis has been placed on shade-grown Arabica beans from recognized regions (the Premier Cru and Grand Cru sites of the coffee world) with an increase in the prices paid. So, while the overall amount of coffee grown may not have changed, the number of quality beans grown has increased substantially.
Click to expand...
I'm not persuaded yet.

For one thing, everyone everywhere says that robusta only accounts for 20% of the global bean harvest. That means there is no marked shift to arabica (it's already got 4/5 of the market!) except perhaps in blending.

Second, while I am a fan of the Fair Trade movement, and its ilk, these farms are tiny compared to the big plantations. I'd guess those nice (and pricey) beans are just a drop in the bucket. Anybody got some data?

Third, I'm not sure if you are aware of Peet's legacy: his claim to fame is that he used a dark roast at a time when everyone else did only light or medium.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top