another_jim wrote: Seems the SO people have an impurity model of what makes coffees bad; while the blend people have an absence model.

Maybe there's a third model, where you don't have to fit into the other two models, it requires liking coffee for what's in the cup rather than who's decreeing that one thing is better than the other.

This morning I pulled an SO of Amaro Gayo Natural and then an SO of Panama Elida Natural, my third shot was a blend of the Amaro and Elida - all good shots in their own unique way.

What a long strange thread it's been. There seem to be at least three main topics: SOs vs blends, the meaning of the term Single Origin, and economic conditions for farmers. I know I'm in trouble when I see a Tuck study cited. And I should know (click and scroll down.) Seriously, the research is probably excellent, but sometimes conclusions drawn by MBA candidates need a little review (ahem.)

The only things I've learned from this thread are 1) the term Single Origin isn't as strictly defined as I thought it was, and 2) more SOs are available in green form than in roasted form (well, according to Ken, well-roasted form.) Too bad, as I don't home roast. But this is the first indication I've seen that there may be a reason to home roast other than to learn more about coffee. If Ken is right, this is an area where I may be able to do better than master roasters. Don't all chime in at once with what you think of that .

So far, SOs have offered more of what I'm looking for in straight espresso shots than do blends. I can go either way with milk drinks. That said, I don't think I've sampled anywhere enough of either to make statements that anyone should take seriously.

Oh yeah. I've also leaned that either Ken's feet are really hurting or he's doing wimpy hikes. Come try the terrain in the White Mountains, my friend. And you're really missing some good stuff by ignoring California wine.

another_jim wrote:How is this relevant? Presumably, if you like what's in the cup, you don;t need to fix it. My post is about the remedies people propose when they dislike the coffee.

I'll assume you were talking to me, if not just let me know.

I figured my comment was relevant because the thread title is 'Espresso Blends; Why Bother?' which seemed to indicate something like - pick a side, SO or blend.

I don't see a need to pick a side, but if my opinion isn't the same as yours feel free to let me know why it isn't relevant.

another_jim wrote:Nicely toned. Do I detect some HDR processing?

It's basically "unprocessed," except whatever the camera did inside of itself in making the jpg. I shoot in the RAW + JPG mode on my Panasonic GF1 interchangeable lens micro 4/3rds camera. When it comes time to post process any images that might deserve that much effort, I'll work on the RAW files, but just to look at them I look at the jpgs. This was a jpg that I hastily cropped and then reduced in size in order to post, and did nothing else to it.

It was shot with a very wide angle zoom (equivalent of 14-28mm in reference to 35mm film lens sizes), and my experience is that the wider you go the more "blue" one sees in the images.

ken

Right now a local roaster, Barismo, has amongst their espresso offerings an SO from El Salvador (single estate I believe), and a 2 bean blend of the same beans with a Brazilian (also another single estate). I've been drinking the SO (Las Nubes) all this week, and just tried the blend (the Villain) this morning - and it makes a great case for bothering with blends.

This is the first time when I've been able to try the same bean as an SO and in a blend, and since it's only a two bean blend it's relatively easy to see the contribution each makes. The El Salvador was a little fruity with a great mouthfeel, and made for a good macchiato and an interesting straight shot. The Brazil brings in classic chocolate and hazelnut. I'm guessing it would be a little boring by itself, but it fills in the middle flavors very nicely and makes for a nice balance with good aftertaste, that's good as a straight shot or with a little milk.

It's kind of a classic case for blends, two beans that both have a few good flavors paired together fill out the spectrum and make a good espresso. If all I'd ever tried was SOs, this kind of range of flavors in a shot would be quite a treat.

Single origins are in the zeitgeist even more than I had realized. Saw a "non-commercial" commercial on an upmarket cable channel (IFC) last night for gin. It was part of a new campaign for Bombay Sapphire called, you guessed it, "Origins." They went out to Tuscany to show that all of their juniper berries came from a single region of Italy.

Its actually part of a whole series they are doing in a joint promotion. Here's their mission statement with language that makes it crystal clear they are jumping on a trend:

Quality.

It's hard to define, but you know when you experience it. From seminal independent films to the burgeoning artisanal movement in food and cocktails, to the very best in handcrafted clothes and chocolate, quality is a force to be reckoned with and seldom understood.

IFC and BOMBAY SAPPHIRE® Gin are joining together to discover just what makes quality tick, and we want you to join us in our quest.

http://www.ifc.com/origins/

Ken Fox wrote:In order to appreciate the subtle characteristics of the sort of SO bean that I like, I believe it requires a different set of taste expectations on the part of the consumer, than the expectations they may have when they drink their favored blends. That's tough to do, from my own personal experience. As someone who drinks almost exclusively French wines, especially from Burgundy, the Rhone Valley, and Bordeaux, I have great difficulty with California wines and when given a choice, I avoid them.

Living in California, many of us have developed "direct trade" relationships with our favorite vineyards, visiting them on weekends to explore their reserve and other limited offerings in detail. But, unlike direct trade coffee, you often get a better price on their standard offerings from a retailer!

This may be a question from lack of experience or understanding. With high end, why do SOs seem to dominate brewed coffee and blends in espresso? I'm often hearing of balancing, filling in. tweaking etc. in espresso yet find that not so considered in brewed?

farmroast wrote:This may be a question from lack of experience or understanding.

Now that you mention it, I share your puzzlement . . .

farmroast wrote:With high end, why do SOs seem to dominate brewed coffee and blends in espresso? I'm often hearing of balancing, filling in etc. in espresso yet find that not so considered in brewed?

Let's blame it on "Juan Valdez" and his burro, stalking the aisles of American supermarkets!

Seriously, I think it's a very good question, and -- sadly -- it's difficult to take the marketing aspect of it out of the equation (a bit like "unringing a bell). Let's ignore the question of what -- actually -- is a single origin coffee for a moment. For the purposes of this post, and this post only, let's limit "origin" to country (i.e.: Colombia, Indonesia, Ethiopia, etc.). Going "way back" into the 1960s, I remember MJB coffee being 100% Colombian . . . let alone Señor Valdez . . . .

Let's take the "Espresso Italiano" organization's definition:

Espresso Italiano is obtained, by definition and by tradition, through an expert blend of coffees of different origin. This is the only way to obtain the pleasant and rich aroma and the important and velvet body. The difference between an Espresso Italiano and a preparation obtained with the same methods but from one single coffee is similar to the difference to be found, in music, between a symphony and a solo performance: the more pleasant one cannot be established in advance, but they are certainly different.

"By tradition" . . . does that include Robusta? It should, shouldn't it? And yet . . . .

I know that part of the enjoyment of brewed coffee for me is the different origins. OTOH, for espresso, I have found that -- most of the time -- I prefer the blends from various roasters (e.g.: Red Bird, Vivace, Caffè Fresco, Metropolis, etc.) rather than SO's . . . but I don't know why.

Cheers,
Jason