Jay's blog isn't updated very often, but when he does take the time, there's no skimping on prose. However odd the topic (and yes, the blog is as-advertised - strange), he develops an intriguing rhythm that manages to come off both serious and flip at the same time. I hope he updates it more often, everyone including me can use a good thought-provoking laugh.

Most of the topics are about coffee. Scanning the year's entries, the one excerpted below caught my attention. I won't spoil the punchline by saying why, other than to hint that the espresso equipment selection was "curious" for a five-star restaurant.

The Day I Beat Thomas Keller
by Jay Caragay (Jay's Strange Blog)
...

One of the biggest problems in the American restaurant scene today is the lack of attention to the coffee being served. So many chefs and restaurants go to great lengths preparing their dishes but end on a low note by serving poor examples of coffee and/or espresso-based drinks.

I'm sad to say that Bouchon was no different.

All this work. All this planning. All this anticipation. A wonderful meal. Spoiled by a bitter, lackluster and slightly offensive cappuccino. The portion size was about right. The ratio between coffee, milk and foam was about right. But the flavor was just, well, not so good. Bitter, burnt, bubbles, no sweetness. It was a cappuccino in serious need of the two sugar cubes that came as an accompaniment.

It was no better than my neighborhood Starbucks.

(cont'd)

Blog entry January 25, 2005

In 2005, you couldn't click your mouse more than five times on any coffee forum without tripping over Chris Tacy's words. In 2006, he's all but vanished from the coffee scene. Even Mark Prince -- of all people -- lamented in his podcasts the sudden opinion vacuum Chris' departure created. But HB's former second most frequent poster isn't gone, just refocused on other interests. In his spare time he's now cataloging "sometimes and somewhat random thoughts and experiences from deep in the so-called interactive consulting world" in his new blog.

For reasons unknown to me, Chris rarely mentioned his professional IT career. Googling the man turns up some biography information beyond his effusive interest in the barista's world, if you're willing to page through the predominate coffee stuff.

The blog entry that returns Chris to my favorites list is briefly excerpted below:

Education in America
by Chris Tacy (Consulting... deep in the weeds)

I despair for the future of this country.

Honestly, I had no idea how few people really know how to read. Or, to be more accurate, how to understand what they read.

(cont'd)

Blog entry 13 April 2006

To appreciate the depth of Chris' frustration, you'll have to dedicate 30+ minutes to reading Digg.com followers lambast him for his earlier piece, $10,000 is the magic number. The essential theme of that blog entry is his generalization of the true costs of corporate web development. As a former consultant, I read it as a succinct albeit simplified restatement of a software development fact: It is expensive and there's lots of hidden costs. What provoked his follow-up lament was the failure of his critics to absorb his simple message, choosing instead to focus on one thought: "Huh?!? What does this idiot mean it costs $10,000 a page?"

Ladies and gentlemen, read what the man wrote beyond the title. If it helps, consider it part of your weekly character building exercises.

Damn...
I thought my Clark Kent disguise was complete.

The pace of Daryn's blog updates match his coffee plant's growth. But wait! What's this... ?


From Beans! Beans! A magical fruit

That should hold enraptured readers for another five months.

Matt is an unassuming guy. Although he infrequently posts on HB and needs constant reminders to update Intelligentsia's entries in Marketplace, the company and the man never say 'no' to any reasonable request. "SwagFest prizes of a month's coffee? Sure! What, there'll be five runner ups? That's a lot of coffee Dan, but no problem! ...EspressoFest in Charlotte? Will 10 pounds be enough? Want something special? You bet, it will arrive Friday!"

There's a lot of good reasons to admire the company, employee, and now 2006 USBC champ. But his decision below shows that Matt has as much integrity as skill:

Respect.
by Matt Riddle (barista champ)

So, today I was asked by a local news outlet (I won't mention who) to participate in a blind taste test. Ok, fine. What's it about?

I would be comparing (blindly) Starbucks, McDonald's Premium and Dunkin' Donuts.

Let's pump the brakes for a minute here.
Yes, I'm happy and flattered that they are seeking me out as a reputable source for coffee knowledge to spread to the public. Yes, I'd love to help you out with a story about the Specialty Coffee industry. Do I really want to discuss the finer points of those three companies on television? Not quite 100% about that one.

I realize that I'm now a representative and sort of spokesperson for Specialty Coffee, but is that what I would be supporting or endorsing through this effort? None of those companies participate in or support the Barista Competitions. Yes, one, maybe two (who knows, maybe all three) of them do good work in coffee growing countries, but are they after the same goal as me, my company, or the SCAA/USBC/WBC? Does Intelligentsia get mentioned as a main portion of the story? No? How does that help them?

I fear that participating in this would accomplish one of two things:

1. The United States Champion likes McDonald's (or other) coffee. How does this reflect on the USBC or small batch roasters or other such supporters of great coffee?
2. I don't have anything positive or constructive to say, and it's spun as me being a coffee snob because the "everyman's coffee" isn't good enough for me.

Neither of those options are a good idea for me, and are highly possible scenarios to be portrayed in the segment.

Respectfully, I will be declining.

Blog entry 5.02.2006

It's deja-vu all over again. My thread Do you handicap your single-origin espresso evaluations? echoed Andy's commentary made over five months ago. Oh well, I did note that I was late on the single-origin bandwagon.

SOS taste recalibration?
by Andy Schecter (portafilter.net)

Do you make a conscious or unconscious taste adjustment when you drink single origin shots? I think I do. For instance, if I'm pulling shots with a Harrar that has great blueberries, I tend to be so psyched about tasting the blueberries that I ignore other things that may be taste flaws. It might be sour, or need more body, but I get a tunnel vision effect, and I just concentrate on the flavor that I'm seeking. The shot will be exciting for me, but maybe other folks, being more objective, would find it flawed.

It's not just blueberries, of course. The same thing can happen when I taste great orange-fruity flavors in a Rwandan or even just a classic earthy Sumatra.

Tonight I chatted on the phone with Kevin C about this issue. He talked how the origin flavors could come through with much greater clarity than they could in a blend. As he said this, I flashed on how an SOS was like an expert soloist performing on their instrument; you could hear every nuance of style and interpretation. An espresso blend, on the other hand, was like a chamber group, with harmony and complexity being more important than solo virtuosity.

One of my goals as a barista, although I'm only an amateur, is to make single origin shots joyously expressive of their uniqueness, while remaining finely balanced. The Harrar shot that Kevin prepared last week did this pretty darn well. On a forty-year-old espresso machine!

Blog entry Sunday, February 05, 2006

PheasantCreek wrote:...... There is a huge difference in social culture between Europe and the US. In Europe......

In US they love useless numbers (quantified quality).

Or that was what came to mind when I saw this: What does your typical espresso rate?


I just have had an five starred espresso

Andy is really on a blog roll. You owe it to yourself to check out his entries on portafilter.net. Below is just a small biscuit of common sense to nibble on.

Take the dogma out for a walk
by Andy Schecter (portafilter.net)

...
In my opinion, the flat temperature theory, like the flat earth theory from centuries ago, doesn't bear close inspection. Here's why:

Coffee in the portafilter starts out slightly warmer than room temperature (it picks up a little heat in the grinding process). Even if you force water through it that is absolutely stable in temperature, the coffee in the middle and bottom of the puck gradually rises in temperature as the shot proceeds. It gets close to the temperature of the brew water, but never reaches it.

In other words, ESPRESSO IS NEVER EXTRACTED AT A STABLE TEMPERATURE, no matter what the brew water temperature does.

That's why insisting on ruler flat brew water temperature seems like a very peculiar requirement to make the finest espresso.

(cont'd)

Blog entry Monday, January 01, 2007

HB wrote:Andy is really on a blog roll. You owe it to yourself to check out his entries on portafilter.net

Blogs must have some redeeming value to justify the time spent reading them. There are two very general things that I find redeeming: Sheer amusement /curiosity value, and education. When it comes to education, I look for something new, something I did not know that makes a difference, something that will make espresso better. Sad truth is that I often feel like a prospector in the old west. All the innovations, the techniques, the ins & outs of improving espresso, the research, the reviews in the past five years have come from the home enthusiasts community, not the professionals. It is a back breaking job to go through so much dribble and pointless arguments in those blogs. This is not a criticism of Andy's post, his are actually the nuggets. But all the bickering that goes on and on on portafilter.net is just tiring. I read those blogs very selectively, and for the most part skip the commentary.

That is exactly what I was trying to discuss in a thread a few months ago. I was contemplating the A3 vs a GS3 and giving temperature stability a long hard thought.

My question was given the delta between the top and bottom of the puck, how flat of a temperature profile do you need. To my mind, if you have a delta of 3 or 4 degrees between the top and bottom of the puck than having a machine that holds a .5 inshot temperature is pointless. At what point do we reach a point of diminished returns and the obsessing on stability turns into an exercise in futility.

In the end, I got the A3 could not be happier.