another_jim wrote:The reason why many people get better shots from Italian imports is actually kind of obvious in hindsight

Seems that on an espresso machine, well ground coffee that's completely stale still beats fresh poorly ground coffee.

The author of that piece makes several dubious statements. That he prefers using cheap-o low-end machines with canned coffee to freshly roasted freshly ground coffee on a LaPavoni doesn't bring me to suspend my disbelief. And he will use a cheap-o espresso machine but not a cheap-o tamper?

another_jim wrote:The operative words are "poorly ground." Anyone with a bad grinder, or who is clueless, will get better results with a low end machine and canned, preground espresso, nespresso capsules, etc, etc, than with even the best machine and freshest coffee. This is the obvious point the reporter is making.

I don't disagree. I was commenting on the author's unreliability.

I think the reporter is comparing coffee that had been ground for him by coffee shops, which he then took home in a bag, with pre-ground coffee "fresh" from a nitrogen-infused can. Who knows how long the coffee sat in the bag ( a half hour? an hour? a day?) and it was probably dialed-in for the machines in use at those places. So while the reporter does emphasize the "even" grind of the Italian beans, the differences he's detecting may have had as much, if not more, to do with how long the domestic coffee had sat in the bag before being consumed as it did with the unevenness of the grind from his local shops. I'd prefer a freshly opened can of pre-ground Illy over a stale bag of pre-ground artisan-roasted coffee too, not matter how perfectly ground the latter is.

another_jim wrote:Here's the point. Most people who actually drink straight espresso continue and will continue to buy preground Italian espresso, Bustello, nespresso capsules, etc, until they can get something better in an espresso from SCAA roasters without paying $400 for a decent grinder.

The relatively high cost of a quality grinder is an obstacle for many who might want to make high quality espresso at home with artisan-roasted whole beans sourced locally or via mail-order. This segment of the potential market for artisan-roasted whole beans might spend a few hundred dollars for a machine but they won't spend $400+ for a grinder. A basic grinder that is slow and quiet, but micro-adjustable and uniform in quality, is all that is needed for that segment of the market. Are there ways to make grinders dramatically less expensive, without sacrificing granularity quality, by designing them to support a very limited duty cycle and removing all "fancy" features and electronics?

Domestic users don't need to grind beans for more than a couple of drinks at a time. Machines won't overheat in a typical domestic environment (under ~100 grams per hour). And it shouldn't matter to the class of user above that it takes 15 seconds instead of 5, though noise would probably be an issue. Would much less powerful motors bring the cost down significantly? Doserless would also make it less expensive to build. A much smaller hopper would also bring the cost down. How low could the cost of manufacture get if every unnecessary feature were removed? Something like a hand-grinder with good burrs and a motor?
You could make it a little box with smaller burrs, the sort of hopper with a sliding lid that the hand-grinders use (safety-feature: grinder won't grind if the latch is open), and at the bottom, you could either have a drawer or even a bay where the portafilter could be inserted so you could grind straight into the PF.


Perhaps a multi-purpose kitchen device —some sort of transformer gadget — is a possibility? A food-processor that had interchangeable "heads" that would turn the thing from a meat-grinder into a good coffee grinder? Each head would have its own chute so there's no food in the beans and no coffee in the food.

Hi,

I live 100 miles away from Illy roastery and I guess Illy I am getting is fairly fresh.
And I like it. It is a fine coffee. Very balanced, not much acidity.

I also like Lavazza Oro. Unfortunatly Lavazza coffee in bars taste like burnt coffee. They have started to 'upgrade' their espresso blends with 50% of robusta.

If you like italian style espresso, there is article on Sweet Maria, explaining main ingredients. Basically stay clear of over acid, citrus flavoured coffes.

(BTW, there is nothing wrong with acid, citrus or fruity flavoured coffees.)

Nothing comes close to coffee that I am roasting myself at home but coffee, served at gas stations at highways in Italy. Espresso there is out of the planet. The reason is, they have such a big turnover, that their coffee is absolutely fresh.

Key word is fresh.

Whale wrote:... I probably am (one of) the oddball in this forum because I have admitted and even proclaimed my love for a particular brand of Nitrogen Vacuum pack Italian espresso blend. ... (very sweet and chocolaty with a light smell and taste of candy). It is the only imported coffee that I buy and I love it.
... I pitch in my two Canadian cents worth to ensure that some, if not everyone else, keep in mind that it is possible to actually really like the taste of a vacuum pack imported Italian blend for what they are and for what they are not. They all need to be prepared with a very different process but it is possible to make something wonderful with some of them. ...

[I know, late response, but.... ] I agree with Whale. Two of my favorite Italian import blends are Kili Caffe Gold and Attibassi Crema d'Oro. But, I buy these coffees in bean form & grind at home in my Quick Mill 031. My favorite fresh roast blend is Our Coffee Barn's Classic Italian Style. It's very similar in flavor profile to the imports I enjoy. And all of these blends make richer, fuller-flavored espressos than any of the dozen or so local cafes pulling shots with their beloved (but over-hyped) SO beans.

I suspect my preferences are colored not only by the flavors I prefer, but also by the pedestrian capabilities of my Quick Mill grinder and 0930 brewer. As alluded to previously, this equipment is more along the lines of what the typical Euro family would own. The US penchant for over-buying on equipment doesn't fit in with my desire to develop my own techniques. Should I ever choose to spend the $3,000 I've budgeted (current limit) to upgrade my equipment, I'm sure the coffees I'll enjoy then will change.

Izzo from Naples would be worth to try. (If you can get it fresh.) It has an incredible smell like no other coffee.

When I actually find one that has survived at least 3 depressurizations in various planes on its way half way round the world and being in most cases at least 4 weeks (if not 2 months +) old at best in getting here and is actually better than what local roasters or myself can do for a start I might consider trying one again otherwise buy or roast local and fresh.

Without talking down Italian Roasters or blends at all, coffee treated like that and that old will just not really cut it in the cup to be at its best.