If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Originally posted by 57134556230 link=1251866329/0#0 date=1251866329
Looked around cs and had a quick google but i cant find anywhere that explains the ranking or different kinds of coffee grades that are used on coffeesnobs,
for example in beanbay you will find
AA
A
premium
cup of excellence
Grade 1
and alot of unmarked beans.
Im guessing that theres more then one rating system in the world but can anyone explain what they are and how they compare to each other?
thx
hey tofu, its something Ive wondered about myself. To be honest though, I dont pay all that much attention to it. CoE is a particular competition/auction process, but to me, all the others are just part of the name of the coffee. Like Finca or SHB or SHG. I guess what I mean is that while i know they mean something im more interested by whats in the cup than what suffixes are on the coffee name.
Again, speaking only for me, I just have it lumped into the bucket of things that are interesting about coffee but dont mean all that much
According to my Collins English Dictionary, foetid or fetid are both acceptable spellings (neither is American). The meaning is given as " adj. having a stale nauseating smell, as of decay". If one has a cold, it is often impossible to "taste" anything apart from salt, sugar, bitter or sour. Our sense of smell is impaired.
trust me, foetid is usually an odour, but can be a taste - mushroom-tasting often offers us a perfect example of smells foetid, tastes foetid
@michelle - didnt you forget umami? Beloya definitely has umami in it ;D
oh by the way dennis - as a pom, I say "foetid". if you want to use american english, be my guest 8-)
Leave a comment:
Guest replied
Re: Coffee Grading
Originally posted by 537279797E64170 link=1251866329/22#22 date=1252235099
Originally posted by 012C2D263C213C31480 link=1251866329/21#21 date=1252233777
Taste splits into subjective (eg. nasty) and objective (eg. foetid) descriptors
Now Im really confused. Or am I? I thought "foetid" (or fetid) was to do with odour (or odor), not taste.
And therein lies a whole other kettle of fish. What is taste, and what is aroma? At the most basic level, we could say that the only tastes are salty, sour, sweet and bitter, and therefore one does not taste aforementioned blueberries at all.
H2O tastes like water, sure, but H2O is also water and objectively identifiable as such by a tastebud (or group thereof). If youre tasting blueberries on a hararr, its because after tasting (and more to the point, smelling) blueberries on a repeated basis has led you to have an objective correlation between the smell of blueberries in coffee and the smell of blueberries. the taste to you isnt taste to me argument is in fact fairly void - inaccurate descriptors can be a problem, but if my wife and I taste blueberries, they may have a differing olfactory experience for each of us, but when we have the same olfactory experience in coffee, it correlates to the same descriptor. Im not sure why so many people are missing this, when its stated so clearly above. Most great cup-tasters would tell the difference between at least 3 species of blueberries, for that matter.
Thus, TG introduced it :
Taste splits into subjective (eg. nasty) and objective (eg. foetid) descriptors, and for those tasters I respect (Michelle and Luca are two of them), if they say "nasty" Ill take it as "subjective" and if they say "foetid" Ill take it as objective.
I have no problem with Q-graded cuppers cupping coffee based on taste - if youre familiar with the program and the examiners, youll know theyve earned the right to give a verdict!
Originally posted by 5B425456370 link=1251866329/12#12 date=1252071352
Presume that Coffee A and Coffee B taste identical, except that coffee B is really bitter, quite musty and has a really strong chemical taste to it.
Originally posted by 015E46505B505C555556565E525D330 link=1251866329/13#13 date=1252071966
Wanna reword that one Luca? Next thing youll want to tell me that red and blue look the same but not really
Originally posted by 475E484A2B0 link=1251866329/17#17 date=1252209307
Oh, come on, Chris.I know that I can get wordy, but that one was pretty straightforward.One coffee tastes good, another tastes bad. Should we grade one higher than the other on that basis?
Ahh...Now I get it Luca...What you mean is that they taste identical but they taste different...Sorta like non-identical twins are the same...but not really :
Time to put you on a 100 word limit I reckon...That way you wont get confused :P
For whatever reason, I have done a horrible job of getting my message across on this thread and I agree with your sentiment above, which you have expressed much more clearly than I managed to. The whole subjective/objective thing was introduced by TG and what I was trying to say was that its not something that we should get hung up on. I think that most of us are in agreement that some form of grading based on taste wouldnt be undesirable. And, yes, I have heard of "calibration" - we have done it in every barista competition that I have judged and I had actually just come from doing the coffeelab course, a large part of which was calibration, when we met at SCAA this year.
Originally posted by 065941575C575B5252515159555A340 link=1251866329/13#13 date=1252071966
Originally posted by 322B3D3F5E0 link=1251866329/12#12 date=1252071352
Presume that Coffee A and Coffee B taste identical, except that coffee B is really bitter, quite musty and has a really strong chemical taste to it.
Wanna reword that one Luca? :-? Next thing youll want to tell me that red and blue look the same but not really
Oh, come on, Chris. I know that I can get wordy, but that one was pretty straightforward. One coffee tastes good, another tastes bad. Should we grade one higher than the other on that basis?
(This was my attempt to move the conversation away from the futility and philosophy of talking about what is objective and what is subjective and to move it towards talking about what coffee tastes like.)
Originally posted by 18475F494249454C4C4F4F474B442A0 link=1251866329/13#13 date=1252071966
Wanna reword that one Luca? :-? Next thing youll want to tell me that red and blue look the same but not really
No, no 2mcm, its merely a subjective thing. ;D
Originally posted by 465F494B2A0 link=1251866329/11#11 date=1252070901
It is also mental masturbation to say that all matters of taste are subjective and therefore we shouldnt grade coffee based on taste attributes.
Originally posted by 604B5C4B5A4243464F2A0 link=1251866329/9#9 date=1252051385
Using a system of purely subjective standards is good for little else other than philosophical discussions and mental masturbation.
No mental masturbation here. Note the use of the term purely in that quote.
Taste can and is objectified by graders/cuppers. You may have heard of the process, its commonly called (a) calibration (round) by cuppers. The whole point of which is to objectify their tastes as much as possible and bring an objective group standard to the individually subjective area of taste.
Java "Opening a new package of Mental Floss" phile
Well graded beans are easier to get good roast results, so something that is size graded and has most of the defects removed is more likely to have a consistant flavour profile too.
...but yes, the question that you pose "do they taste good?" is the most important.
Leave a comment:
Guest replied
Re: Coffee Grading
You mean look identical, right?
I know nothing about grading other than what Ive read in Illy and Viani, but am I right in remembering that some defects are not visible? If I am, I can not comprehend how a visual grading alone is much use. Objective or not, I dont care how pretty the coffee beans are - do they taste good?
Leave a comment: