Fresq wrote: As for the grinder, I'll be taking my machine to work and playing with the grinder to get it as close as I can and I'll be grinding in batches that will last me no more than a week to 4 days. That's the best I can do and that's what I will be doing.

To be honest, you're going to be extremely limited on a home espresso machine if you don't get a good espresso grinder. Batch grinding won't cut it. Pre-ground coffee and espresso machines are not well suited - you can't produce good espresso with pre-ground coffee, so there is not much "improving" you can do on your espresso technique at home. You'd be better off saving up your money on a good grinder and focus on brewed coffees like Jim said, and then get an espresso machine down the line.

Fresq wrote:What are the main complaints about the barista's actions (aside from butchering names )?

I don't frequent Starbucks and when I do I only drink iced drinks, but my one big complaint would be that Starbucks espresso machines need to be cleaned MUCH more frequently. Do a cleaning cycle on your machine frequently through the day, and if you already do that, double the number of times you clean it. Seriously.

Your employer isn't as omnipresent where I come from, so I won't join any bashing choruses. In fact I use a superauto occasionally for a quick milk-based drink before heading off to work. When I have the time however I enjoy the ritual of home grinding and home espresso brewing knowing I can achieve perhaps a near-perfect cup very occasionally, but still expect far better results. The batch-grinding you intend to do however goes against the very essence of espresso-making: grind and brew to order. The rate at which preground coffee stales has already been addressed. Fresh grind 'n brew is not an optimisation, it's an imperative.

Fresq wrote:The majority of enthusiasts and connoisseurs chase the rich and mature traditions of Italy, Australia, and such. Starbucks does things that disagree with those traditions in many ways; there is no doubt. That being said, Australia and Italy alone have significant regional variation in the way coffee is prepared. Here, oceans away, those divorces have grown to scale. Starbucks peruses and even writes for the much younger tradition of American espresso. It's been said that there are many truths but no truth. Starbucks peruses one of those truths which stands, albeit young, among many others.

Fresq wrote:People pay a good amount for the coffee at SB, and it goes to good places that benefit everyone involved with the beans from farmers to customers. A great deal of care goes into making sure that is the case. It would be wrong of me to throw away all the care and effort put into and around those beans by doing the minimum to prepare them.

All due respect, but if you knew what the majority of enthusiasts and connoisseurs were chasing, you wouldn't be asking about it here. You wove between a good point, though, which is that the "truth" of Starbucks is truly "to scale." That's what they do -- it's big business, they strive for consistency, and they have a bazillion locations in which to maintain it. I can totally understand your need to defend the job and employer that you've chosen and that chose you; it's tough to find work and I think we can all agree that as far as major international chains go, Starbucks is probably one of the best to work for. And it's great that they make an effort to do right by green coffee pricing/sourcing/farmers. They didn't blaze that trail, but they got on board when the volume of certified greens came close enough to meeting their demand, and that's great. The thing is, this is a coffee forum, and Starbucks seems to make more of an effort to do right by people than it does by coffee. Apart from the odd thread here and there, HB'ers aren't really here to talk about people. We're all about the coffee.

Starbucks' products sell very well, so there's no incentive for them to change. And though there's a certain status factor that's a holdover from the '90s, Starbucks' products simply are not the best there is. HB'ers only want, and will only advocate for the best. The best hamburger in America is probably not at Carls Jr. The best bowl of fruit probably isn't an Edible Arrangement. And to say that American espresso enthusiasts are chasing a European ideal is not unlike saying that anyone that wants the best apple pie really just wants a Dutch pastry.

As for what people pay... There's really no accounting for taste or quality when it comes to what people will pay for. In a coffee context, read up on Kopi Luwak for a good example. Taste is subjective, but quality really isn't. There are some pretty intense and detailed metrics and terminologies dedicated to bridging the gaps between the perceptions of experts. Anyone is free to like what they like, and there is no wrong or right about that, but there is an entire industry devoted to determining objective differences in quality. Folk here tend to subscribe to (or actually help define) these standards of quality.

So, anyhoo, this is all just to say --- I agree with everyone else. Grinder is key, Starbucks won't teach you much about great espresso, and it is highly unlikely that you'll be able to rage against that machine enough to improve their offerings in your location. I don't blame the baristas at Starbucks for the quality of the drinks they are trained to serve, using the prescribed equipment and ingredients. I do, however, think it's a disservice to world-class super-talented baristas that they have to share the occupational designation. "Coffee beverage artist," vis a vis Subway, seems more fitting, and I really don't mean that to come across as derogatorily as it does, I'm just laying it out there. At any rate, in my days as a trainer in scrappy but crafty little coffee shop, I helped new hires forget what they learned at Starbucks in the process of learning how to make decent espresso by hand. It's not like I forbid them from using what they'd learned before, it just really didn't come in handy, as their experience was so far removed from what goes on in craft coffee shops.

Just focus of milk frothing. If the milk at every Starbucks was microfoam, it would be drinkable/enjoyable most of the time. I mean a double shot in 12 oz of milk is going to taste like much of anything. It just kills me that it's scorched milk with poorly incorporated foam.

So don't overheat, and make sure the milk is micro foam. Should look like wet paint.

Agree with last poster. I only drink lattes. When im trapped on interstate system long drive and need a coffee fix i will occasionally go to starbucks. I would be completely shocked if the milk was properly microfoamed and would drop over dead if there was an attempt at latte art. Alas, always over foamed and in a wax cup with lid.
On the other hand, there is nothing worse than underfoamed, and when you intend a little sip, instead you get a large blast of superheated dense milk that burns your tongue so badly you cant taste anything for 2-3 days. Ive had that happen a few times, but never at SB. Those baristas i want to kill. One time in Ireland had it happen and I didnt leave until after barista became free so i could give her a tutorial. Was that wrong? She didnt appreciate it even though i was trying to be polite. I dont think that I was rude, it was that she didnt want constructive criticism in front of her coworkers. I doubt anything changed.

The OP is asking a lot of management questions, sounds like he might be disguised as a manager looking for feedback here on the website. Limited to the beans from SB, things Barista's do that are worth complaining about...? Idk could be or I'm just being presumptuous.

Chris is right - there was a time when Starbucks was an idealist venture from the early 70s, to put a real Italian coffee shop into your neighborhood. That included real machines, real grinders, and baristas who went through a rigorous training program - and made some great espresso back in the day. The company went public in 1992, and ideals gave way to bottom line and dividends. The real machines gave way to superautos with built-in grinders, and their baristas no longer required skill. Quality went down but they found a market in America's almost insatiable desire for the triple-mocha-frappuccinos and and endless litany of milk drinks. All of this is fine - they are after all a business, and as such are not a coffee-making enterprise, but a money making enterprise - but the persistent pretense to genuine espresso drinks is a bit insincere. Add in the bean issue - clearly roasted well beyond 2nd crack, and very old at time of sale - and you start to appreciate everyone's frustration with the chain. I still love their big mugs - my mug from Qatar has a really cool picture of an Arabian Oryx on it!

Jeremy - If you really want to learn all about coffee and quality, you've found a home. If you stick it out and are able to separate what you learn here from what you must do at your company, and can be a positive force for change in your own store, that's a wonderful thing. You have already been given excellent recommendations regarding grinding and brewing, and I wholeheartedly agree with my colleagues about how to start down the path - posts and FAQs will give you a road map to brilliance. Especially Marshall's point - if you like Starbucks try to jump to one of their new high-end stores, probably give you more freedom to explore quality. Word of caution: If your newly acquired knowledge and skills frustrate you because you can't get to use what you know and explore quality coffee at the shop, don't be surprised, but realize you may need to gravitate elsewhere (meaning a job at another coffee shop) to find what you seek.

Best of luck, and welcome to the forum.

Hey everyone! I've read all your replies and I've really enjoyed the constructive criticism and knowledge being shared. With that advice in mind and my plans to buy a used gaggia classic falling through I decided to get that popular De'Longhi machine and a conical ceramic burr hand grinder. I'm experimenting and failing a lot and it's awesome. I'm not to the point where a short macc tastes brilliant yet, but I can make a few drinks that focus less on the raw espresso that taste pretty great. The grinder isn't super super adjustable, but through some really simple dosing and some consistent tamping it's not so difficult to get an OK shot that blondes out in the 25 to 30 second range. I've been swamped as hell with both my jobs and finals for a little, but I'll be responding more specifically to posts soon. I really appreciate all of you putting up with me and sharing your heaps of knowledge. Thanks again. Espresso is a fun thing to fail at, I guess that makes it a good hobby!

Fresq wrote:I understand your criticism, but I think one's approach to those things he or she cares about is a valuable thing to understand when giving advice on those things. I'm simply trying to answer all those who will say that there's nothing I can do under the regime of a chain to make the coffee better.

Actually it's make it their prescribed way or hit the highway. It's their business not yours. I guarantee if you worked in one of my coffee shops and didn't want to do it our way as taught you'd be out the door.