# Describing the roast level of beans



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

Something I have been musing on for a while now. We must have all seen the different ways roasters describe the roast level of their beans terms such as: City, Full City, French roast, High Roast, Continental Roast, Nordic Roast, Delicate Roast, Extra Dark, Extra Light as well as the more usual Light, Medium and Dark, plus the many others I have most likely missed out.

My question is, that given we all know, or have heard of, examples where one roaster's Light Roast is another's Medium and one roaster's Dark is another's Medium. Given these differences how meaningful are any of these names? Does a single reference scale, or perhaps more than one as for on screen colour profiles, exist maybe determined by one of the national Speciality Coffee Associations. It seems to me that if there was a reference scale to which the majority of roasters subscribed or used, it would make choosing a bean from a roaster you have never tried before much much easier, not just for us as consumers but also for the coffee shops as well.

*THIS IS NOT, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE, A DISCUSSION ABOUT LIGHT ROAST VS. DARK ROAST SO PLEASE KEEP IT THAT WAY*


----------



## Geordie Boy (Nov 26, 2012)

Personally I go from tasting notes to choose a bean rather than any reference to a roast level


----------



## Xpenno (Nov 12, 2012)

This might help










I have to say though that I'm with Geordie on this one, the roast level is less important if you go off the tasting notes, if the roaster/taster is any good then it should translate in the cup.


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

I also generally go by the tasting notes, it's just one of those things that has been niggling at me a little, particularly as some people do consider roast level when choosing a bean, or in the case of a few roasters they offer 2-3 choices of roast level on the same bean.

That chart (thanks for posting it Spence) kind of demonstrates what I mean as some of these descriptions in the absence of a standardised description can be a little arbitrary. If you take the example of Full City on the above chart, for example, I have had beans that look like that from different roasters and one has been described as medium and the other as dark.

I guess it just seems odd to me that in a world where we go out of our way to keep variables to a minimum, that there is no single detailed way, think Pantone as an example, of defining this.


----------



## aaronb (Nov 16, 2012)

I consider roast level when choosing a bean, and I do feel that one roaster's light is another roasters medium which is annoying but you can see why it happens.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

Geordie Boy said:


> Personally I go from tasting notes to choose a bean rather than any reference to a roast level


Plus one ...........


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

I know this isn't about Dark versus Light, but isn't this suggesting we describe a bean or roaster by a standardised colour somewhere between dark and light ?

If you like chocolate and caramel notes then those tastes can occur in different beans at different roast levels. By adding in a paint chart of roasts to also characterise these , wouldn't it as a result potentially put people off a bean or roaster because it didn't conform to a place in a chart , when actually the taste might be right up their street?


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

There are already the Agtron colour tiles, more recently things like the Tonino roast analyser.

Beyond "suggested for filter/espresso/both" I can't really recall buying beans based on specific roast level.

Also consider if you have beans of very different density, how does that affect how they extract at a comparable roast level?

Ultimately, you are still going to have to dial beans in, so I guess my question is what real world use would this info give, if supplied (other than to identify duff batches of a previously known good roast)?


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

Mrboots2u said:


> I know this isn't about Dark versus Light, but isn't this suggesting we describe a bean or roaster by a standardised colour somewhere between dark and light ?
> 
> If you like chocolate and caramel notes then those tastes can occur in different beans at different roast levels. By adding in a paint chart of roasts to also characterise these , wouldn't it as a result potentially put people off a bean or roaster because it didn't conform to a place in a chart , when actually the taste might be right up their street?


It's nothing to do with describing anything to do with the taste of the bean or the roaster, simply the level of roast, as we should all by now know that one bean will taste differently at different roast levels, as witnessed by buying the same bean from a number of roasters. It is basically about how meaningless any description of roast level can be currently. It would help if you didn't try and think there is an agenda behind the thread Martin, it's more a case of thinking out aloud, not trying to put roasters or tastes into a box. Which is why I had deliberately left the issue of tastes out of my original post.

Here is an example of where a standardised roast level descriptor would help: you like a certain bean from one roaster, and it has been something you decide on as your "house" bean, then for whatever reason the roaster you have been ordering from stops selling that bean, you then look online for an alternative supplier and find one that has very similar tasting notes to your original supplier but described the roast as dark, but your general preference if for medium to light roasts. A good example here is the F30 blend origin supplied as a "dark" roast for one months DSOL bean, yet even though they considered it to be a "dark" roast none of the DSOL members, including you and I, saw it as a "dark" roast.


----------



## Xpenno (Nov 12, 2012)

Charliej said:


> I also generally go by the tasting notes, it's just one of those things that has been niggling at me a little, particularly as some people do consider roast level when choosing a bean, or in the case of a few roasters they offer 2-3 choices of roast level on the same bean.
> 
> That chart (thanks for posting it Spence) kind of demonstrates what I mean as some of these descriptions in the absence of a standardised description can be a little arbitrary. If you take the example of Full City on the above chart, for example, I have had beans that look like that from different roasters and one has been described as medium and the other as dark.
> 
> I guess it just seems odd to me that in a world where we go out of our way to keep variables to a minimum, that there is no single detailed way, think Pantone as an example, of defining this.


I guess the roast level (final bean colour) can't really define a beans taste character as this comes from the entire roast profile which is complex and can't (IMHO) be simplified down to the colour of the bean at the end of the process. Some beans will start off at different colours, some beans will darken more quickly, some beans flavour will develop differently at different temperatures.

I think that many of the roasters that I tend to prefer seem to not have a specific roast level per say, they roast for each bean and to get the most out of it and the flavour.


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

MWJB said:


> There are already the Agtron colour tiles, more recently things like the Tonino roast analyser.
> 
> Beyond "suggested for filter/espresso/both" I can't really recall buying beans based on specific roast level.
> 
> ...


Where would I find these colour tiles or a chart with them on Mark? As I have suggested some people do take roast level into consideration when buying a bean, just because neither you or I do doesn't invalidate the idea. For examples of where this would be useful see my post above.

Other than this it is simply a case of wondering why this isn't a standardised thing when so much about making coffee "properly" is about standardising things, or keeping the variables to a minimum.


----------



## Xpenno (Nov 12, 2012)

Charliej said:


> Where would I find these colour tiles or a chart with them on Mark?


There are quite a few different images if you search google. Not sure about the official chart though.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

The SCAA store would be a good bet?

I think the problem with standardising roast, solely, is that it pertains to the beans, not the beverage directly, and I feel it's more informative to standardise the result in the cup, which we actually taste.


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

MWJB said:


> The SCAA store would be a good bet?
> 
> I think the problem with standardising roast, solely, is that it pertains to the beans, not the beverage directly, and I feel it's more informative to standardise the result in the cup, which we actually taste.


I guess that is a whole different can of worms Mark as not that many people want to spend as much time on the numbers and maths related to making coffee as you do and seem to enjoy as well, and once again most people don't particularly want or can't afford to spend the amount that an Extract Mojo and the software cost either.

When you consider how difficult it is at times to get newbies to abandon the notion of using volume to "measure" their espresso rather than weight and brew ratios, and even this can seem a step too far for some people. Most people seem to want to be able to make the best coffee they can manage with the least hassle possible as they enjoy the end product more than the making of it.

My question about standardising how roast level is described, which like it or not does play a part in the way some people pick a coffee to try, and given the current ambiguity of the way things are described it is pretty much meaningless at the moment. That said if as some roasters do, differing roast levels are offered for the same bean it would be nice to have a definitive way to know what is meant and to actually have some meaning along with the tasting notes, after all if proper cupping notes are given they take the same format no matter which roaster they are from.


----------



## Xpenno (Nov 12, 2012)

Charliej said:


> I guess that is a whole different can of worms Mark as not that many people want to spend as much time on the numbers and maths related to making coffee as you do and seem to enjoy as well, and once again most people don't particularly want or can't afford to spend the amount that an Extract Mojo and the software cost either.
> 
> When you consider how difficult it is at times to get newbies to abandon the notion of using volume to "measure" their espresso rather than weight and brew ratios, and even this can seem a step too far for some people. Most people seem to want to be able to make the best coffee they can manage with the least hassle possible as they enjoy the end product more than the making of it.
> 
> My question about standardising how roast level is described, which like it or not does play a part in the way some people pick a coffee to try, and given the current ambiguity of the way things are described it is pretty much meaningless at the moment. That said if as some roasters do, differing roast levels are offered for the same bean it would be nice to have a definitive way to know what is meant and to actually have some meaning along with the tasting notes, after all if proper cupping notes are given they take the same format no matter which roaster they are from.


But you are trying to quantify the end result by the colour of the bean, which IMHO is flawed. Some websites might add info like "we took this bean a little further into second crack to reduce the acidity" that might be interesting info to note but not I roasted it to a 5.2 roasterons  (...I just made that up))


----------



## Xpenno (Nov 12, 2012)

Interesting post here.

http://www.sweetmarias.com/library/content/using-sight-determine-degree-roast


----------



## ronsil (Mar 8, 2012)

Those SM 'bean colours' work very well made up as laminated tiles to compare with own roasts.

The colour is only one thing in assessing roast level. Smell & profile speed also play a big part but in the end its the taste when 'cupping' that counts.

The SM descriptors are generally accepted as standard. I use them but have expanded levels a little. e.g. I use FC1 - FC2 - FC3 as additional full city levels


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Charliej said:


> not that many people want to spend as much time on the numbers and maths related to making coffee as you do and seem to enjoy as well, and once again most people don't particularly want or can't afford to spend the amount that an Extract Mojo and the software cost either.


Doesn't take long to measure the TDS in brewed coffee, Charlie. I routinely decant a small amount from each brew for measurement after I've drunk my coffee. Espresso is more challenging as you have to filter the espresso to remove any residue before measuring. Extract Mojo is the software by the way not the refractometer. It is a shame though that such a valuable tool is expensive.


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

Xpenno said:


> But you are trying to quantify the end result by the colour of the bean, which IMHO is flawed. Some websites might add info like "we took this bean a little further into second crack to reduce the acidity" that might be interesting info to note but not I roasted it to a 5.2 roasterons  (...I just made that up))


I think you've got the wrong end of the stick here Spence I'm talking about actually making the roast level into something that actually means something not trying to pigeon-hole the end result into a roast colour box/tile/whatever. I.E " we roasted the bean to emphasise x,y and z notes and it turned out to be roast level x when our desired results were achieved" .

Currently any roast level such as light or medium doesn't really mean anything as there is no reference point e.g as a colour charcoal is lighter than black but in relation to white it's still a very dark colour.

Thanks for that about the SM descriptors I guess it would just be nice if everyone used the same terminology.

So what's the actual refractometer itself called Patrick? What I meant in that post was that as well as the cost, not everyone wants to add those extra steps into their coffee making routine, or be as scientific in their approach to making coffee, the same way making chips the same way as Heston Blumethal recommends isn't for everyone. They just want to make a tasty cup of coffee and enjoy drinking it. It takes some people long enough to accept that a £5 pair of scales is a necessity, and some people having bought them rarely use them, I can't imagine reactions to saying that a £500 or so investment is needed to get the best out of their coffee making equipment.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

I personally have no interest in the roast level, I place trust in the roaster to handle those greens with love and deliver me yummy sounding tasting notes on the bag which I can hopefully find in the cup.


----------



## Tiny tamper (May 23, 2014)

ok now i know very little here and this is just a thought nothing more but..... what if maybe if it was changed to time instead of light-dark could that help ?


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

stupid laptop. hadnt finished typing.

Its a valid point around difficulties in communicating roast though - end colour alone wont fully express the level of development or describe the sequence/curve of temperature application - was it a rapid rise to first pops of 1st crack?

Best to just taste it


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Charliej said:


> I guess that is a whole different can of worms Mark as not that many people want to spend as much time on the numbers and maths related to making coffee as you do and seem to enjoy as well, and once again most people don't particularly want or can't afford to spend the amount that an Extract Mojo and the software cost either.
> 
> When you consider how difficult it is at times to get newbies to abandon the notion of using volume to "measure" their espresso rather than weight and brew ratios, and even this can seem a step too far for some people. Most people seem to want to be able to make the best coffee they can manage with the least hassle possible as they enjoy the end product more than the making of it.


Indeed Charlie, valid points. I think with newbies specifically, there is an element of expecting the machine to make the coffee, akin to a vending machine? They expect to fill the PF, tamp, throw a switch and 30seconds later have delicious espresso, after all that's why they bought a 'machine', to do the job of a human. I don't think that the degree of user input/prep that is required is typically in line with novice expectation. I can certainly remember a time when I didn't see any point/benefit to differentiating between volume & mass, but when you do look at the numbers in the cold light of day, it can be surprising to see what a narrow margin you can be working with?

If someone really doesn't want to weigh everything, then there is always the French press/cupping...I always measure dose (haven't done it in recent memory, but wouldn't rule out scoop for grinds), but don't always measure water (I certainly don't measure extraction every day, sometimes not even weekly), if you can find a physical reference point, weigh brew water once & make a note, then 'fill to line' on subsequent brews. Before making espresso with a bean, steep brew it first to see what flavours are potentially available. If you aren't getting anything to write home about here, why would you expect to 'parachute on to a panda bear in the wild' with espresso?

Making coffee to me is actually a chore, to be honest I'm not even sure that I enjoy it - I do it diligently only in anticipation of the result...I like figuring things out but when that's done, the "making" simply becomes a set of tasks that you have to undertake to get the delicious beverage at the end...that's what it's all about. Whether you invest in the tools to identify numbers, or not, attempting to understand the drivers of extraction & the reasoning behind methods & ratios* can be tangibly beneficial in improving results in the cup. Whatever beans I buy, however much the process may interest me, if I don't like the resulting drink (which obviously happens from time to time) I feel short changed & that I have wasted beans & my time.

Whilst I understand the philosophies & intentions of certain roasting styles, I don't hold strictly to any one. I have & acknowledge preferences, but as long as the beans fall between "mildly incinerated" and "nominally extractable", I see it as my task to get the best out of them, taking them on their individual merits. In a few days the bag will be empty, move on. This is partly why I think standardising/narrowing down roast descriptions is not "the answer", it's more eliminating a variable from the consciousness, than eliminating the variable as an actual variable...the physical properties of the matter involved will still possibly behave in a unique way, whether we acknowledge it, or not? Then how do we move forward if we are subsequently looking in the wrong place for remedial action?

*The concept of the brew ratio strikes me as a mechanism to provide a fixed parameter by which hitting a target is more likely, via tweaks in grind vs taste, for those who don't have access to accurate analysis.


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

garydyke1 said:


> stupid laptop. hadnt finished typing.
> 
> Its a valid point around difficulties in communicating roast though - end colour alone wont fully express the level of development or describe the sequence/curve of temperature application - was it a rapid rise to first pops of 1st crack?
> 
> Best to just taste it


Whether the heat source used in roasting is principally convection, conduction or a mix of both will impact on the beans' flavour characteristics in conjunction with degree or roast. There are plenty of other variables at play during the actual roasting process which will also impact on the beans' ultimate flavour characteristics. The skill of the roaster is to fine tune his/her roast profiles including degree of roast in order to bring out/accentuate the beans' unique character. Degree of roast judged by colour provides some info in how far the roast was taken in relation to 1st and 2nd crack but cupping is the only reliable way of checking what the roasted beans will taste like as the brewed/espressed article.


----------



## CallumT (Aug 23, 2013)

There's so much more to roasting than roast colour, and the reality of it is most roasters goal is to achieve optimum solubility for the ways they brew coffee while making things difficult to over extract or to allow any bi product flavours to be developed from the roasting process and not the coffee itself. Green coffee is expensive it has been cupped and chosen to be bought due to it's taste, roasters goal is to consistently and transparently roast the coffee to allow it to show why the roaster purchased X amount of green.

As spencer mentioned earlier most websites talk about how the beans are roasted (HasBean , Rave)

But all in all having a dulux colour chart for roasting would not solve anything, and the points made about tasting notes make more sense of what your trying to achieve.

Edit: continued...

And to comments made about people not wanting to use scales, I wouldn't bake a cake without a set; don't see why espresso is any different. The reality of it is expectation vs reality. And the expectation is that coffee at home should be easy, the reality is it is, and the tools to help you do this are scales timers ect.

Tried to draw a straight line without a circle. Ect ect ect.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

garydyke1 said:


> I personally have no interest in the roast level, I place trust in the roaster to handle those greens with love and deliver me yummy sounding tasting notes on the bag which I can hopefully find in the cup.


what he said..


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

CallumT said:


> Tried to draw a straight line without a circle. Ect ect ect.


Reminds me, Giotto could draw a perfect circle freehand. But he knew diddly squat about roast profiles.


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

garydyke1 said:


> stupid laptop. hadnt finished typing.
> 
> Its a valid point around difficulties in communicating roast though - end colour alone wont fully express the level of development or describe the sequence/curve of temperature application - was it a rapid rise to first pops of 1st crack?
> 
> Best to just taste it


Gary has actually managed to say here what was in my thought process when raising this, as we so often see Roaster X generally roast to a lighter degree or roaster z roasts to a darker style. Where as there is no real standard these terms are actually pretty meaningless , yet seem to crop up in discussions around recommendations of beans and/or roasters quite frequently. I just think that maybe with some sort of standardised reference it could actually give some meaning, particularly in comparative discussions i.e. when saying a "lighter" or "darker" roast than whoever or whatever else it gives you a point of reference particularly for newbies when it come to describing their tastes, as asking if they have a preference for dark or light seems to be a frequently asked question in relation to recommending a bean or a roaster. My thoughts were that it could be an additional point of information, not a way to solely describe a bean.

Ron when you say about the SM colour swatches being accepted do you mean among home roasters?


----------



## ronsil (Mar 8, 2012)

> SM colour swatches being accepted do you mean among home roasters?


Yes - the SM terms City - Full City etc have been accepted among home roasters as a degree of roast colour easily recognised.

We are talking only about colour & has no reference to taste.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

This discussion although elliticing a livley debate and exchange of opinions is largely irrelevant unless someone creates a standardised chart that the major roasters see a value in and will use. You seem quite keen on this Charlie so perhaps you can take this on board as your project .


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

ronsil said:


> We are talking only about colour & has no reference to taste.


So not much point then.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

Roast colour wont tell you how developed the coffee is. Iv'e had coffee which looked barely past green and yet was sweet and balanced when properly extracted , conversely had pretty dark looking beans which were not quite developed enough and couldnt enough out of them no matter how hard I tried..


----------



## ronsil (Mar 8, 2012)

I regard the SM reference points as a useful aid & in no way the 'be all' & 'end all' when roasting.

However find a profile that works for a bean with the correct RoR & drying period then the SM references work well on subsequent roasts.


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

Mrboots2u said:


> This discussion although elliticing a livley debate and exchange of opinions is largely irrelevant unless someone creates a standardised chart that the major roasters see a value in and will use. You seem quite keen on this Charlie so perhaps you can take this on board as your project .


I wouldn't even know where to start Martin having no direct experience of roasting myself.



garydyke1 said:


> Roast colour wont tell you how developed the coffee is. Iv'e had coffee which looked barely past green and yet was sweet and balanced when properly extracted , conversely had pretty dark looking beans which were not quite developed enough and couldnt enough out of them no matter how hard I tried..


Maybe as you alluded to earlier on the whole way in roasts are described needs some looking at to establish common frames of reference. You only need to read back through some of the posts in the beans subforum to see how many people initially ask about the roast level or colour in terms of light and dark. I just thought that it would make an interesting discussion as so much else works on standardised ideas or elements and precision and repeatability.


----------



## Geordie Boy (Nov 26, 2012)

Charliej said:


> You only need to read back through some of the posts in the beans subforum to see how many people initially ask about the roast level or colour in terms of light and dark.


But have you wondered why someone is initially asking this question?

Is that because these people are used to buying/seeing coffee in a supermarket where roast level is suggested on the coffee packaging by a number between 1 and 5 (although it's generally described as strength but then considered to be roast level). Therefore it stands to reason that they consider roast level their initial factor when buying beans (lets be honest it's hard to taste much flavour from supermarket stuff).

I've noticed that packaging is changing though with much more focus now on the beans flavour description than ever before, therefore these initial questions may change


----------



## ShortShots (Oct 2, 2013)

If we used colourtrack or agtron measurements would it really help? How many people own a machine that can track these, or even the colour tiles?


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

Mrboots2u said:


> This discussion although elliticing a livley debate and exchange of opinions is largely irrelevant unless someone creates a standardised chart that the major roasters see a value in and will use. You seem quite keen on this Charlie so perhaps you can take this on board as your project .





garydyke1 said:


> Roast colour wont tell you how developed the coffee is. Iv'e had coffee which looked barely past green and yet was sweet and balanced when properly extracted , conversely had pretty dark looking beans which were not quite developed enough and couldnt enough out of them no matter how hard I tried..





ShortShots said:


> If we used colourtrack or agtron measurements would it really help? How many people own a machine that can track these, or even the colour tiles?


As the discussion has progressed I've kind of re-evaluated where I'm going/ what I'm trying to ask with this. I'm trying to work out why there is no standardised way of describing not just the roast level of the coffee but the roast process of a specific bean as well in a way that is easy for the consumer to use as a piece of information when making a choice about a purchase. If we take a real example here, when yourselves at Rave ran out of the rather popular Java Jampit bean one or two other places were and are still offering it, if an easy to understand way of being able to make a comparison between the version they previously were buying i.e from Rave and from one of the alternative suppliers. Here are links to some of these where it is easy to see that they all described the flavours more or less the same way, yet they differ in how they say it is roasted:

http://coffeespotroasters.co.uk/coffeeroaster/products-page/green-coffee-beans/java-jampit-estate-2/

http://www.coffeecompass.co.uk/shop/roasted-origin-coffee/java-jampit-estate-500g.html

http://www.caerurfacoffee.co.uk/stock_indonesia_java_jampit-19_.aspx

http://www.kopi.co.uk/jan2013


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

....which all goes to show??


----------



## ShortShots (Oct 2, 2013)

well colour only tells you so much, it doesnt tell you airflow or speed of roast. But as a baseline Agtron is the industry standard for assessing degree of roast


----------



## ShortShots (Oct 2, 2013)

not that I think its a comprehensive way of covering it, but as a base guideline that everyone could 'potentially' agree on its a start, but really it all depends on who's asking and for what purpose. I'm not even going to get started on 3 dimensional roasting concepts as that will certainly muddy the waters...


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

ShortShots said:


> not that I think its a comprehensive way of covering it, but as a base guideline that everyone could 'potentially' agree on its a start, but really it all depends on who's asking and for what purpose. I'm not even going to get started on 3 dimensional roasting concepts as that will certainly muddy the waters...


I guess what I'm kind of grappling with is the idea of something that could be a standard frame of reference that is easily understood by the consumer, maybe something along the lines of how cupping notes are, although there are still a lot of roasters that don't even include that on their websites.

It would also enable the consumer when trying a new roaster out to be able to say I've had x bean roasted in y way with z results for the roaster to be able to offer more accurate advice about which of their coffees may suit.


----------



## garydyke1 (Mar 9, 2011)

...but time spent on putting this together could be used drinking delicious coffee instead : )


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

Charliej said:


> I guess what I'm kind of grappling with is the idea of something that could be a standard frame of reference that is easily understood by the consumer, maybe something along the lines of how cupping notes are, although there are still a lot of roasters that don't even include that on their websites.
> 
> It would also enable the consumer when trying a new roaster out to be able to say I've had x bean roasted in y way with z results for the roaster to be able to offer more accurate advice about which of their coffees may suit.


But the "z" result will then become the variable (which it was to begin with) and we're not really any farther along or better informed...we still need to brew, taste, adjust grind, repeat?


----------



## Charliej (Feb 25, 2012)

garydyke1 said:


> ...but time spent on putting this together could be used drinking delicious coffee instead : )


It's something to mull over whilst drinking said delicious coffee, although it's time for my 1st cascara brew ever shortly.


----------



## valerist (Sep 18, 2015)

Xpenno said:


> This might help
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hello, in Italy often the coffee is Full city / dark. We have to convince italian baristas to use bettter beans .... and this is not so easy . But is improving . Ciao Ciao


----------



## cold war kid (Mar 12, 2010)

Wow. Just read that thread for the first time. Some of charliej's posts seem very defensive and confrontational. I remember when he first joined and I was thinking of getting a new grinder he offered for me to go around to his house and spend a bit of time with his as he lives not far from me. He seemed like a top guy. What's all that thief and fraudster stuff about?


----------



## cold war kid (Mar 12, 2010)

valerist said:


> Hello, in Italy often the coffee is Full city / dark. We have to convince italian baristas to use bettter beans .... and this is not so easy . But is improving . Ciao Ciao


Am I not right in thinking that the Italians are, and have been for decades, hampered by the price they can charge for espresso? You're never going to be able to turn a profit by buying gourmet beans and charging less than a euro a shot, so cheap and over roasted it has to be. Couple this with the fact that most Italian espresso bars loan machines and then are tied in to buying the beans from the loan company and I'm afraid that most people outside Italy feel that they got left behind a long time ago when it comes to speciality/gourmet coffee. I think they are the best in the world at making consistently drinkable espresso from one café to another but it's never great and there doesn't to be any sort of willingness to experiment or change.


----------



## cold war kid (Mar 12, 2010)

Welcome to the forum by the way.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

This thread is notable only for the term " rosterons " that @Xpenno coined . Personally i always wanted to know how many Jeals a bean was in the Jealous scale


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

valerist said:


> Hello, in Italy often the coffee is Full city / dark. We have to convince italian baristas to use bettter beans .... and this is not so easy . But is improving . Ciao Ciao


Gardelli roasters are Italian - they seem to be doing something other different


----------



## ShortShots (Oct 2, 2013)

Had some delicious coffee from them at FCP a couple of weeks ago, definitely not dark at all


----------



## Vieux Clou (Oct 22, 2014)

Dunno if it's been mentioned but the colour of the light illuminating the beans is critical. In general, the bluer the light (higher colour temperature) the darker the beans will appear. Colour charts on computer screens will be similarly affected.

A while back I did a couple of roasts out of doors and was surprised how quickly they reached "done". Then I took them indoors and found that they were much lighter than I wanted.


----------

