roblumba wrote:Staling is such a negative word, loaded with negative connotations. If the coffee flavor peaks on day 4, then it has aged to its peak.

does that mean on day 5 it has begun to stale?


a friend once told us of when he worked at KFC, and they had different terms for "grease" depending upon where it was found. if it was in the fryer, it was "fry media"; if it was on the finished chicken, it was "flavor juices"; if it was on the floor, it was "grease". same thing, different words.


sorry, i try to avoid language inflation. i read edwin newman too long ago.



--barry "incentivize"

I suppose some of how an individual views whether there is "staling or resting" is the coffee and some of it individual taste. Following is a quote from Caffe Fresco about their beans from their website.

* Our Gentle, Slow Roasting Style Ideally Requires Our Espresso To Have A Min. Of 5 days Of Rest After Roast. Coffee, 3 Days After Roast. Day 8 Is When The Degassing Completely Subsides. For The Sake Of Freshness It's Best To Let The Beans Degas In Their Heat-Sealed, One-Way Valved Bags.

* The Prime Flavor Window Coincides With The Rest And Degassing. Our Espresso Begins To Come Into The Window At Day 5, And The Optimum Days Are 7 Through 14.

They at least think their coffee should "rest" before drinking, and indeed, not be really their best until 7 days from roast. For my taste, at least, their instructions are authenticated in the cup.

I don't think it language inflation. It's just effective use of words to describe something. If the "rest" or "aging" period is good for the flavor, then it's just inappropriate to use a negative word "staling" because it doesn't accurately describe reality. Staling is a process which we consider something to become to a less desirable state. However, in this case, the resting or aging of the beans brings it to an improved state.

Additionally, the beans are not simply left out in open air, in the sun during this period. In my opinion, the ideal aging process should be in an air tight container, in a dark place with a stable, preferably slightly cool temperature, allowing for the beans to release their gas.

The exact opposite would be to pregrind them, put them in an open container next to a sunny window in a humid hot environment. This would definitely turn the "aging" into "staling".

Connotation can be both a wonderful and a horrible thing. Martha Stewart makes a living off of connotation. I saw a show she did on eggs. Hard boiled, scrambled, etc. It would seem like a fairly mundane subject. But she uses all these words that sound so good. I mean, the way she talks is really a good thing and it's quite wonderful. I really very much like the way she talks. It's just excellent and perfect.

roblumba wrote:I don't think it language inflation. It's just effective use of words to describe something. If the "rest" or "aging" period is good for the flavor, then it's just inappropriate to use a negative word "staling" because it doesn't accurately describe reality.

given that the first stage of staling is generally recognized to be the loss of volatile aromatics during the degassing phase, then yes, that "rest" period is a staling period. i'm certainly not going to protest that many people may prefer coffee which has partially staled, as that is a matter of taste. there are far more people who prefer coffee which is substantially more stale, as the dominance of completely degassed coffee in cans is good evidence. maybe folgers is just "well aged".

fwiw, i'm not against the whole "resting" concept, and i will agree that some coffees taste better after they've been sitting for a few days. lasagna or spaghetti often tastes better the next day, too. i just wouldn't call it "fresh" lasagna; i would call it "leftovers". if one is going to let one's coffee sit around for up to a week or so before use, then i think one is on very slippery ground in any discussion advocating "fresh" coffee.

--barry

btw, some people freak when i describe the Swiss Water Process decaf method as a "direct contact chemical process", and yet that is what it is.

given that the first stage of staling is generally recognized to be the loss of volatile aromatics during the degassing phase

So it sounds more like there's an aroma vs. taste compromise here. I would venture to guess that there are some aroma components that disappear in the aging of grapes too. That fresh grape smell probably disappears.

Seems like a tough call. Aromatics vs taste. How can we optimize both of them? Are there some blends that optimize these. The northern italian espresso from Ecco Caffe had a wonderful smell the first few days. I enjoyed the smell for sure. However, the taste really didn't "wow" me until a few days later. Perhaps it's just the life of a bean to be enjoyed. It's really very good and perfect.

roblumba wrote:The northern italian espresso from Ecco Caffe had a wonderful smell the first few days. I enjoyed the smell for sure. However, the taste really didn't "wow" me until a few days later. Perhaps it's just the life of a bean to be enjoyed. It's really very good and perfect.

as i've said before: i enjoy coffee from the moment it is roasted until the moment i don't.

i'm actually testing a batch of coffee right now. it's been sealed up since roasting last monday, and i'm going to make espresso with it tomorrow morning. because i haven't been tasting it from day 1, if it "peaked" sometime this week, i will have missed it and will never know what it could have tasted like.

i think we have to acknowledge that virtually all espresso blends are intended for consumption several days after roasting. it is one of those rough facts of commercial coffee roasting: very rarely is the coffee able to be used right away. it does not surprise me that blends which are developed using several day old coffee will taste better several days after roasting. maybe in the next couple of months i'll work up a blend which tastes best in the first couple of days after roasting, and then fades as it is "rested".

barry wrote:it does not surprise me that blends which are developed using several day old coffee will taste better several days after roasting.

Though I have no way of proving it, I've felt the same way about the flat versus humped temperature profile debate. If you carefully develop a blend on a certain type of equipment, surprise surprise, there's a good chance that equipment designed along the same trajectory will outperform espresso machines having "non-compliant" designs. Maybe there is thee best temperature profile, pressure profile, or whatever measure you choose, but somehow I doubt that Nature's way is so convenient. Like developing blends that tolerate staling well, roasters consciously (or not?) develop blends that perform well on their clients' predominant equipment supplier.

Thanks Barry for sharing your thought-provoking point of view. I look forward to sampling your "gotta drink it NOW!" espresso blend someday, though I don't look forward to paying the overnight shipping fee.

HB wrote:If you carefully develop a blend on a certain type of equipment, surprise surprise, there's a good chance that equipment designed along the same trajectory will outperform espresso machines having "non-compliant" designs.

greg and i have discussed this several times, too.