Have you tried Klatch's WBC blend? Not a lightnroast, but shows characteristics of lighter roasts with some nice fruit notes, without sacrificing body/mouthfeel or deeper chocolate notes. But I guess this is off topic now, although was this thread really ever on topic?

max wrote:Are you trying to yourself understand the spectrum or to reach a definition?
For the former, I would just suggest trying the various beans suggested in this thread. The latter is probably a more difficult venture.

As far as I'm concerned, the SCAA definition of light is applicable. I'd say 90% of what I drink is by definition, light roast.

This all grew out of a discussion about grinders and what I believe to be nothing more than internet lore. It quickly veered into "that's not really a light roast" and fuzzy definitions that can't be pinned down to anything objective.

I've had Yemeni coffee, which like has been said, is more of a tea, complete with spices. Can't really say I cared much for it.

Some of the lightest coffee I've run as espresso was from Chromatic Coffee Roasters, in their "Radio" line. It was designed by the roaster to be prepared with very low TDS water and it was a remarkably light roast.

So getting back to espresso and light roasts, I will look into some of the suggested beans from this thread that are obtainable in the US.

I'll grind them with a conical grinder and prepare them with the Linea Mini, which of course, internet lore tells me is impossible and will tear a hole in the fabric of space and time.

I've been very happy with Augie's here in Los Angeles. They do very impressive light roasts. And even won "best espresso" at the Coffee fest LA in 2018. I've got a Kenyan Natural from them right now, which I imagine was dropped at first crack. I've been very happy with anything Kenyan or Ethiopian from from and are worth checking out. My local shop carries them so I always have good frame of reference to try and achieve.

I'd side on overly bright than anything chocolate - if you're interested in my taste profile.

I'm sure it is great coffee, I may try some.

In the context of the thread, here, who knows what it is? You say it is light roast, I might agree, someone will tell you it is basically charcoal.

Without some sort of objective measure, it is really hard to define what it is.

Not picking on you, it's just how the nature of the discussion has gone. "Here's a light roast espresso." "No, that's way past light." and back and forth, with pictures and everything.

Even with the corresponding Agtron reading, there'd still be disagreement.

Like I joked earlier, maybe I just need some unripened coffee cherries.

this has been a rather humorous couple of threads over the past few days

course of events:


1. a couple people saying it is impossible to pull good light roast espresso with equipment that doesn't allow preinfusion and isn't a large flat burr grinder.

2. you saying it is possible, i do it every day. everything you think is true is made up in your head.

3. those couple people saying yea well that's because you're not using very very very light roast beans

4. you saying well what is a very very very light roast bean

5. chaos.


For the record, I don't agree with you that it's made up in our head, but I also don't agree with the people who say it's impossible to make good espresso with light roast coffees on a conical and non PI machine.

I though what people were saying is that it is impossible to say two things:
1. What is the color of the outside of the bean from a photo.
2. What is the color of the inside of a bean from a photo. Especially a photo of the outside of the bean.

A particular note was made regarding that it isn't the fault of the roasters, or the roasting apparatus (fluid bed or drum). Or even the coffee itself which is as dark or light inside and out as it was roasted.

The blame was put at photography's doorstep. Namely lighting and white balance.

Whereas objectivity on the palate (organoleptic quality) cannot be had, at least roast color can be determined with a color meter and therefore shouldn't be a point of argument.

If anything thie attempt to assign organoleptic qualities to white balance is quite amusing. I am sure some CCD sensor engineers (actiually CMOS nowadays for most cameras) are chuckling now...

RyanP wrote:this has been a rather humorous couple of threads over the past few days

course of events:

1. a couple people saying it is impossible to pull good light roast espresso with equipment that doesn't allow preinfusion and isn't a large flat burr grinder.

2. you saying it is possible, i do it every day. everything you think is true is made up in your head.

3. those couple people saying yea well that's because you're not using very very very light roast beans

4. you saying well what is a very very very light roast bean

5. chaos.

For the record, I don't agree with you that it's made up in our head, but I also don't agree with the people who say it's impossible to make good espresso with light roast coffees on a conical and non PI machine.

I have no idea what the bolded part is about. I haven't said anything like that at all. I'm not sure if you're accusing me of saying that, or accusing me of saying things that are only in my head.

At least per the SCAA definition, I do indeed, pull wonderful light roast espresso shots from the equipment I have, every day.

No one seems to be able to objectively define #4, other than whatever someone happens to have, it isn't very light.

I think at this point, it is all a lot of internet nonsense.

I'm willing to be proven wrong, but so far, no one can define WTF a "light" roast is so I can go buy some and see.

nuketopia wrote:I have no idea what the bolded part is about. I haven't said anything like that at all ...

I think at this point, it is all a lot of internet nonsense.

There is a large contingent of us on this forum who believe that utilizing well-aligned large flat burr grinders and espresso machines with some level of preinfusion capability can greatly increase the ease of pulling a great espresso with light roast coffee and will also generally pull a better espresso with light roast coffee then can be acheived with a conical grinder and a machine that doesn't have PI capability.

You have said in many instances now that it is "internet nonsense", "internet lore", "internet hooyie". That to me is the same thing as telling us that it's just in our heads, that what we believe to be true is not. Perhaps not what you mean, but maybe you can see why it comes off that way.

At any rate, I was just trying to be light-hearted in the previous post. Definitely not trying to attack. If what I said was inaccurate to what you are suggesting, my apologies, and maybe you can clarify.

And, only speaking for myself, I don't at all doubt that you 100% enjoy the espresso you make with your equipment. Like I said, I don't agree that it's not possible to pull good light roast espresso with a conical/non PI setup. I also don't think that the benefits some of us experience with large flat/PI setups is just "nonsense" and "lore".

AssafL wrote: The blame was put at photography's doorstep. Namely lighting and white balance.

Whereas objectivity on the palate (organoleptic quality) cannot be had, at least roast color can be determined with a color meter and therefore shouldn't be a point of argument.

If anything thie attempt to assign organoleptic qualities to white balance is quite amusing. I am sure some CCD sensor engineers (actiually CMOS nowadays for most cameras) are chuckling now...

Photos are obviously not accurate, due to white balance, different exposure and color profile tweaks in camera. However, there are some phone apps that can measure color (obviously not as accurate as professional gear but better than estimating from photos). I just installed this one, will try it on coffee when back home from work. As far as I can see, it can return L*a*b color value

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... r&hl=en_US