peacecup wrote:I've seen you suggest this before Jim, but were the origins really such poor-quality beans?

We know the beans -- Arabicas and Robustas from Brazils, Sumatras, India, plus a dash of Centrals; we know the processing -- basic dry processing for the mass beans, early wet processing for the boutique beans; we know the transport -- tropical warehouses and freighters over a period of three to six months. When we replciate these beans and prep modes, we get coffees that wouldn;t even be commodity grade. They would be the same quality as Folgers.

But ...

Even at these quality levels, coffee was not cheap; it was an affordable treat, costing about as much as a shot of whiskey or a glass of wine. American roasters used these coffees to create a mass market of home coffee drinkers. Italian roasters used the same coffees to create blends for bars that served espresso during the day alongside wine and spirits during the afternoon and evening. They used these coffees to make very tasty espresso much like potters used clay to make vases -- it took a lot of processing, and very little "terroir."

Interesting. Of course if the product was expensive it would be considered a type of luxury even if it needed a healthy dose of sugar. Even bad espresso blends, properly brewed, are quite pleasant with sugar. In that case the whole experience would be espresso, including the social component. I guess that my justify all that chrome they used to use.

At some point the Italians got into specialty beans - the websites I look at now all highlight the quality of the beans. These may be 2nd or 3rd rate compared to the N. American roaster's beans.

But all those years of squeezing the best out of bad beans may be what led the Italians to be such great roasters. Most of the different Italian blends I've tried are really great if obtained properly sealed.