*EDIT* PLACES NOW FULL

For a little over 2 months participants in this study have been making and rating coffee beverages, measuring TDS and submitting data online. In that time a couple of hundred samples have been collected. Samples are still being submitted, albeit at a much slower rate than in the beginning.

Participation has until now been limited to individuals with access to a coffee refractometer. In a way this is what makes that study so beautiful, my job is merely to compile the data at the end. The collection is self-sufficient, the only exertion is on the part of the particpants. (more…)

Big thanks to Jessica McDonald from Square Mile on this.

I popped into the Square Mile Roastery a couple of weeks ago, and they had a clipboard with this sheet on it to record all their brews to enter into the research thing we’re doing. It’s a blindingly obvious (why didn’t I think of that) kind of thing, so very closely based on their design – here is a form for anyone else to use…

(just have to remember to enter the data online later!) (more…)

(more…)

The SCAE Gold Cup Research programme, which I have discussed previously, is a timely piece of work, but also a massive pain in the arse. I applaud the SCAE for undertaking this endeavour, as it is an ungainly, painful operation to run. It has been conducted 4 or 5 times at various locations around Europe now, I’ve been involved with 2 of those, and it’s no easy task. You have limited time to dial in, sometimes with unfamiliar equipment. Not to mention the difficulty in deciding on one coffee which should represent all coffee.

The scope of the research is to determine taste preference across 5 different levels of extraction, with strength being constant. That in itself would be good to know. However, it isn’t designed to cover the entire landscape of coffee brewing. It would be utterly impractical to do so, given the limitations of resources and time afforded to the study. (more…)

Lists are great. There should be more lists. Here’s one with a negative tone:

1. The silent dishonesty of working in coffee. It is hard (and not very smart) to be publicly critical of friends,  clients, business partners etc. There is certainly a void in the world of progressive coffee for criticism. It is all over the wine world for example. Bad vintages happen all the time. Bad coffee crops, or below expectation coffee crops are never publicly acknowledged (not to mention poor roasts or brews). It is not an infrequent occurrence for a coffee to arrive at a roastery past its best, or for it to quickly diminish and remain in circulation for some time. It would be of benefit to the coffee industry for a one or (preferably) more independent, authoritative, honest critics to emerge. That way, great coffee which is still in the minority is recognised and is not lost in the sea of “everything is great, hooray for coffee” which seems to prevail. The same goes for the equipment end of the industry (although that seems to be more readily criticised).

2. Sumatra – I did not have any interesting coffee from Asia in 2011. I have low expectations for 2012. If I was a roaster I wouldn’t bother (hint: you don’t need to have a Sumatran on your books). (more…)