tyreroller wrote:This is why SCOTT RAO said he stop reading coffee roasting forum.. too much opinion makes misunderstanding.. everyone always feels like have the most right knowledge.. just learn the basic and let the experience makes you better.. without experience, how ever you read the forum does not makes you better..

lets roast..roast..roast..

Every coffee will surely find a connoisseur

It's not clear what "this" refers to.

I agree that roasting experience is paramount, but so is educating yourself to new concepts. Language and technology is all about the transfer of information from person to person so that we don't each have to reinvent the wheel.

So I'd say, read and learn as much as you can and roast, roast, roast.

If a new idea doesn't improve your coffee ... Move on to the next. I filter people's advice based on this principle, also. If you general give accurate advice, I tend to weigh your advice more heavily than people who convey their opinion as fact.

tyreroller wrote:This is why SCOTT RAO said he stop reading coffee roasting forum.. too much opinion makes misunderstanding.. everyone always feels like have the most right knowledge.. just learn the basic and let the experience makes you better.. without experience, how ever you read the forum does not makes you better..

lets roast..roast..roast..

Every coffee will surely find a connoisseur

I don't know what the point of this post is. If it's some fatalistic assertion that forums can ipso facto never be useful, then clearly the people posting here are going to disagree with you. If you're suggesting that we all throw our hands in the air and conclude that the only way to do things is to muddle through everything for ourselves, that seems pretty ridiculous.

All that I'm trying to do in this thread is have us work on specific examples of whether a flavour that people don't like comes from the roast or the green coffee. This isn't an issue of preference or what the coffee should be.

It's sort of like if you have someone that doesn't like acidity in their coffee, so they refuse to score acidity on a score sheet. That doesn't change the amount of acidity that a particular coffee has, and it's not a useful thing to do.

Mbb wrote:And flowers or rotten fruit are both defects in my book.

But some people like them

Novel and good are not the same thing.

OK, for the millionth time, in case it isn't clear, this thread isn't about imposing one person's subjective preferences on anyone else; it's about helping everyone to achieve their own subjective preferences. To do this, people need to understand if what they are getting in the cup is a roast issue (because then they can change the roast) or a green coffee issue (because then they know that time spent changing the roast will be wasted, and that they should look at buying green coffee that's more to their liking).

Flowers and rotten fruit are pretty definitely going to be green coffee issues.

If you don't like these things, one solution may be to roast the coffee really dark or to roast it light for a really long time. It's probably easier to kill the floral aspects; rotten fruit is probably pretty persistent and hard to get rid of with roast. Of course, both of these ways of roasting may be things that you consider defective, in which case the solution is that you need different green.

Fortunately, floral flavours are usually pretty elusive and highly prized, so they are likely to factor into the description of the coffee from any green seller (and probably one of the descriptors I'd anecdotally say are most likely to be fanciful, or at least something that's very hard to roast to preserve and get into the cup) and probably command a premium, so those coffees should be easy for you to avoid buying. Rotten fruit flavours are also likely to get some sort of prominent descriptor and command a price premium, though they will never be out and out described as rotten fruit; usually there's some euphemism for it; for example, some people selling "carbonic maceration" coffees like to describe them by reference to wine, like pinot noir, shiraz, merlot, etc, because carbonic maceration is a technique adapted from the wine industry, so one tip I would have is that if the coffee is a carbonic maceration coffee described by reference to wine, be a little sceptical - more often than not, I find these coffees taste like the sort of ferment you might smell in a trash can, like jackfruit, cocoa and sharpies. I personally hate them, but there's no denying that they are very intensely flavoured and some people like them; if you like darker roasts and like to add milk, for example, these coffees can certainly add some distinctive and unique character to your coffees, and these coffees seem to perform very well in barista and brewers' cup competitions.

All I was saying, is one man's trash is another man's treasure.

Yeah those things are green issues.... because you can avoid them by simply not buying certain coffees.

Believe it or not, there's people who are so used to drinking baked coffee, they prefer baked coffee. It's not a defect to them. Its normal.

My wife prefers 6-month-old stale store coffee made in a hamilton beach percolator. Because that's what coffee is supposed to be... To her. It's supposed to be what her parents drink, and her grandparents drank. (garbage)

but that's also what most of the 20 billion pounds consumed annually around the world......is.

Mbb wrote:All I was saying, is one man's trash is another man's treasure.

Yeah those things are green issues.... because you can avoid them by simply not buying certain coffees.

Believe it or not, there's people who are so used to drinking baked coffee, they prefer baked coffee. It's not a defect to them. Its normal.

That's why it's important to have a reference. In coffee world, such reference would be people or places with good reputation for quality coffee. Even with such experience, it takes time to acquire the taste. This can be viewed negatively due to spoiling factor because good quality coffee has its price. So, once someone is spoiled with higher quality coffee, it would cost more from that point on. How do I know? It happened to me.

Capuchin Monk wrote:it would cost more from that point on. How do I know? It happened to me.

You just described the last 30 years of my life.

Mbb wrote:All I was saying, is one man's trash is another man's treasure.

...

Believe it or not, there's people who are so used to drinking baked coffee, they prefer baked coffee. It's not a defect to them. Its normal.

My wife prefers 6-month-old stale store coffee made in a hamilton beach percolator. Because that's what coffee is supposed to be... To her. It's supposed to be what her parents drink, and her grandparents drank. (garbage)

but that's also what most of the 20 billion pounds consumed annually around the world......is.

I agree with all of this, and certainly baked coffee seems to be commercially very successful in my local market. I've tried to be at pains to have this thread be about getting the results that people want, not telling people what they should want.

But there's an important aspect that we need to acknowledge here - whilst people are, of course, free to like whatever they like, if they post that x or y is "good", without explaining what their preference is, then they can mislead others into getting results they don't like if they don't share the poster's views. That's why you'll see, again and again and again in my posts, that I'm constantly harping on that people need to describe the in cup results that they are trying to achieve in order for posts to be useful for readers.

If we've clarified what you wanted to, great, but if you're suggesting that we do something differently that I haven't cottoned on to, could you please tell us what you want us to do differently. As far as I can tell, you're not actually suggesting that we do anything any differently in this thread from what I've set out to do.

Hi Luca, while your thread is getting plenty of opinions, I wanted to give you mine. 'Enjoying reading.'

My first home roaster was a Gene CBR-101. Where I live, it's not hard to find online roasters who sell specialty single-origin coffees that I like both roasted and as greens. So it was easy to order both types to see if I could duplicate, or at least approach, what the roaster could do with the same green beans. Not only could I not imitate the roaster's results, I couldn't even produce roasts that I wanted to drink. However, I never had to question the greens themselves as I knew what they could produce.

Eventually, I sold the Gene and bought an Ikawa Home (the previous generation to what is available now). With that I could make push-the-button coffees I liked (from Ikawa-supplied beans). I gradually learned (am still learning) to make acceptable (to me) roasts from third-party green sources by using modified Ikawa profiles. I do sometimes decide the original greens are not to my taste: but it doesn't matter to me whether the reason is my profiles or the beans themselves. I just buy something else next time.

I haven't met a coffee, yet I don't like it unless it's baked or smokey and tastes like ash. I also lean towards a cleaner cup these days as my taste buds seemed to have changed as I age. Not too thick, not too thin. No milk or sugar.

Great thread and should be a learning experience. Roasted some Yemen yesterday and I'll post my profiles after they've rested a bit. Hoping they taste like a Yemen.