Updated rosetta video clips

I’ve just added a couple of updated rosetta pours for the latte art info page from July this year, which demonstrate the way I’m currently pouring my single rosettas at the plan. I recently noticed how poor and out-of-date the rosetta in the old video was, and resolved to correct it - job done! These new ones accurately reflect where I am now, and tie in with the most recent pics on the latte art page. The change in the espresso quality is visually evident too!

New stove-top pot …NOT nightmare!

…To follow soon!

So! …What’s the best espresso machine?

Very Exciting Things are afoot at the plan cafe!

In short, It’s no secret anymore that the cafe is considering acquiring a new 2/3 group espresso machine, and that I’m therefore now researching candidates!

Our (very) old existing 2 group semiauto machine is loved and loathed, nurtured and chastised, inspiring and disappointing. It’s faulty, unstable, unfiltered and unfixable. But even though it’s all over the place, I still can’t help defending it – it’s capable of  making very nice espresso, with care (and frequently does so!). But I don’t believe that it can make truly great espresso (a term I don’t use lightly), nor can it even be trusted to make consistently good espresso - and it’s on its last legs. Hence, the plan has decided to put the old dear out to pasture, and the quest is on to find a suitable and worthy replacement. The trick is to find something that can (potentially) guarantee the transition between inconsistently good …and consistently great!

Getting something just because it’s shiny and new with flashing lights, would make the endeavor as pointless as it would be costly, in many ways.

I think the key priorities are:

VERY temperature stable
Easily adjustable, accurate and displayed temperature settings (either for all, or individual groups)
Reliable, consistent, and well built.
Reasonable availability of good service, repair and parts in our area (Cardiff UK)
Cost

Temperature surfing our old HX machine for each coffee is interesting and often successful, but it’s tricky, time consuming and very inaccurate. Having accurate temperature settings might take some of the ‘romance’ out of guessing the heat of the water, but I think it’s much more important to get the best from each coffee as often as possible, and to avoid heat-related extraction disasters. Besides, I think even the most modern, stable machines will need some degree of surfing – but it will be more a case of fine tuning, rather than thrashing about wildly and hoping for the best.

So far, I’ve compiled the following wish-list (in particular no order) of what currently seem to be the very best, most revered and respected commercial espresso machines around that feature adjustable temperature, all of which might be capable of taking things to the next level, and which may or may not meet all the criteria on the above list:

Synesso Cyncra  
La Marzocco FB/80  
La Marzocco GB/5          
Dalla Corte Evolution
Kees Van Der Westen Mirage/Minstral
Nuova Simonelli Aurelia (WBC temp upgraded version)
La Spaziale S5
San Remo Verona TCS
La Marzocco Linea (upgraded with PID?)
La Cimbali M39 Dosatron Thermo Drive

La Spaziale S40
Faema Emblema
Slayer

Astoria Plus 4 You

…And I’m trying to gather as much information, opinion, pricing, comparitive advice, and additions to the list as I can.

Many of the contenders above will definitely be over budget, but it’s important (and fun) to consider them anyway! Others are within it, and some might be within the threshold as semiautomatic models.

A superior semiautomatic machine could certainly be a worthwhile investment over and above an lesser automatic. Semiautomatics demand good practice, attentiveness and skill from the barista – important things to instill in staff if you’re aspiring to produce the best. But they also require a constant monitoring of skills and standards, and an understanding of the techiniques required to prepare espresso properly; so as a long term investment for a cafe, an automatic could perhaps best guarantee consistency. But hey, there are superautos and beantocups for that! It all depends…

Any thoughts, suggestions or preferences anyone?

 

UPDATE:

Ouch!!!!!!!! There’s THIS on the way..!

London and A Taste of Canada

Had a nice trip down to London the other day for Taste of Canada at Square Mile, with Glen and Nick from Black Mountains Coffee Co, and Lobster Bob.

Due to unfeasibly (ridiculously) awful traffic, we arrived at Whitecross St market just as Gwilym’s cart was closing. Gwilym himself was away in Italy (again! – quite rightly living the highlife!), and so I didn’t get to congratulate him in person or try a coffee, but his folks on the cart kindly directed us to Dose, where I had a lush, glittering espresso, courtesy of the combined efforts of James, SqMile blend, and the FB/80 there.

Then we popped over to Square Mile, where James gave us a little insight into the mighty Synesso, which was great, having never seen one of these in the flesh before, let alone it’s internal bits and bobs…

Naturally, there were Scaces, trophies, coffee, and Probats lying around all over the place as well! 

We ducked out for a while to let the team get ready for the evening, and when we returned, a chatty buzz of coffee folks had already gathered in readiness for the evening’s tasting. James then proceeded to knock out about 200 shots on the Synesso in the next hour or two with a very impressive sense of ease!

What really struck me (perhaps more than the individual coffees themselves) was the amazing quality, clarity and crispness of the espresso. The equipment set-up at Square Mile undoubtedly plays a key role in making this possible. The shot I had at Dose was of a similar stature, from a probably comparable set-up. Exciting stuff! This level of espresso quality is something that is very difficult, even impossible I think, for me to achieve at present, regardless of the coffee and diligence deployed…

As is usually the case for me with these coffee events, I come away with the valuable sense that I know next to nothing compared with some of the many talented coffee people out there, but at the same time, I feel inspired to continue trying to improve what I do. Improving my tasting ability is one key area – any blind tasting of unfamiliar coffees like this helps, but I still struggled to accurately pin-down the coffees’ key characteristics. Judging by the comments board, I was not alone though! I think to some extent, lots of us may have been searching toohard for distinctive or  unusual flavours. I think my favourite was No. 3 (49th Parallel’s Epic).

Managed to catch-up a little with various folks I’ve met in recent times, although sadly there were others I didn’t get chance to. Infact, due to the chatting (and being wired on caffeine), I never thought to buy a bag of Square Mile’s coffee whilst I was there, which I’m a bit annoyed about! Oh well – I guess I’ve already got too much coffee at home…

A lovely evening, place, coffee and people. Thanks to James, Anette and David, etc, at the roastery, and Black Mountains Coffee for inviting me along.

Out with the old…

…Old blades!

Well below par …sorry!

I’d like to apologise (again!) for the particularly poor shot of espresso I served Tristan the other day when he popped into the cafe. Perhaps it’s not something I should really broadcast, but I don’t mind admitting to shortcomings when they occur. If anything I think it’s important to be aware of them, as they can serve as a tool to improve what I do, and understand where improvements can be made (although I will shortly be placing a good portion of the blame at the door of our crazy, ancient machine!).

I had a lovely coffee in the grinder (Tanzania Blackburn Estate AB from Peter James), with which I would ideally serve up a syrupy ristretto double with sweet dark sugar and black fruit notes. Yet, for some reason, it just would not behave! I even remade the shot as the first one looked pretty bad as well, but if anything the second was probably even worse. Whilst I can’t be sure exactly how it was in the cup, judging from the extraction, the visuals, and the feel (way too long and quick, with an insipid cinnamon colour), I just knew it was going to be pretty unpleasant, and nowhere near justice to such a nice coffee. I wouldn’t normally be happy serving that shot to any customer, let alone someone who knows and loves their coffee, but I wasn’t going to make shot after shot all day until it was right (much as I would like to), and so, unwillingly, I served it. Very kindly and graciously, Tristan drank it anyway (you didn’t have to!), and I can only apologise profusely!

It’s always lovely when coffee folks pop in to the cafe (even though it puts the pressure on!), but I can’t help feeling guilty when I know the coffee is not up to scratch …or worse. If  people make a special effort to seek you out, I really want it to be worth their while – not to show off – just because I want them to have the great taste experience they’re seeking, and that you can’t ordinarily get. In this instance though, I fear I failed!

Coffee produced with care on our very old machine ranges from (very occasionally) excellent, through to awful (when it refuses to behave), and tends to live between reasonable-to-good. Sadly this shot, despite my best efforts, was very much towards the lower end of the spectrum. It was below the standard I would normally feel acceptable to serve, and nowhere near ’great’.

Not that I didn’t try. All my standard techniques were adhered to, naturally, and in addition I tried to surf the machine (which had been idle for a while at that point) down to a temp where this particular bean usually seems to thrive, and I tried a couple of things to compensate for neither step on the grinder being anywhere near the ideal grind at that particular point in the day (as I said to Tristan I could do with about 3 extra steps in between the others at times like this! …or stepless). But nothing did the trick. Aside from the grinding issue, I think there must have been some kind of nasty temp fluctuation, etc, with the machine (which is quite common with it) for the shot to extract as it did.

We’re now using some really fantastic coffees for the espresso at the cafe, and with the degree of care I dedicate to my work, the consistency and quality should really be higher. Whilst this shot was particularly below par, it was by no means a one-off: in all honesty it’s actually quite common for our shots to suffer from similar issues, regardless of how diligently and carefully one works. That said, I’d like to stress that the majority of my espressos would normally be at least a bit, or even vastly, better than than this one. And also, to an extent, the sort of discrepancies that really upset me might not even be of any concern to most customers. But I aim to constantly improve what I serve, and I believe that at some point in the future, improvements to our machinery will help not only to near-eradicate more extreme gaffs like this one, but also to raise the overall standard much closer to the great end of the spectrum!

Until then, Se la vie!

I.M.V – W.O.W!!

 

Bambino Motta!

Watch out single small cappuccinos and macchiatos …the worm has turned!

An ideal texture (thickness) of milk, and an ideal ratio for espresso to milk..?

This is another of those occasional large and rambling posts of mine with a weighty title and subject (from an espresso perspective, anyway!), which tend to raise more questions than they answer (probably because there are very few definitive answers in coffee), and which begin to enter the realms of contradiction and aimlessness (so feel free to give this one a miss!). Nevertheless, these are ideas that have been on my coffee-mind recently, so I want to note them down for my own future reference (as my perception gradually alters over time), and also ‘put them out there’, in case anyone else is in a similar place.

These posts usually also run the risk of being diverted-off in many different directions, due to the nature of the issues raised. As this one is a more likely candidate for this than ever (it could easily become about 10 separate posts or topics), I’m going to preempt this, and suggest that this post could just as easily have been titled:

Down With ‘Cappuccino’ and ‘Latte’ Milk Texture – Is There Only One True Texture..?

Are My Cappuccinos Becoming Too Thin, and My Lattes Too Thick..?

Forget The Rules: Milk Texture is about Mouthfeel and Viscosity!

Foam at 1 – 2cm is Perfection for all Drinks..?

Is It Wrong to Think a 6oz Cappuccino Should Perhaps be made with a Ristretto Double..?

What is the Best Way to Retain True Integrity and Flavour, Considering Varying Cup Sizes, In a Realistic Commercial Setting..?

News Flash! *3rd Wave Barista Promotes Large Coffees in Cafe!?*

Most Long-Winded and Dull Post Ever..?

————————–

That done, maybe I can now look at some of these points without too much fear of  going off-topic. It jumps a bit between the combined issues of texture and ratio/flavour – so apologies for the meandering thread!

Firstly, I’ve been wondering lately if perhaps there might be an ideal texture or thickness of milk when used with espresso. For a long time I have tried to follow, and preach, different texture for each type of drink – Cappuccino texture, Latte texture, etc. By this, many of you will realise that I’m not referring to anything other than microfoam (all drinks should be made with a pourable, microfoamed emulsion, naturally), but instead, to the fact that that this can vary in thickness, depending on the amount of air injected (ranging from just a few millimetres for very ‘hard’ or thin texture, to several centimetres for very thick texture), and that cappuccinos are generally made with thicker microfoam than lattes. But for a long time, and more so recently, I’ve found my cappuccinos tending towards a thinner texture than some would advocate, and my lattes tending towards a thicker ‘head’ than some would expect – therefore running the risk of blurring the dividing line between the two, both in terms of texture, and in terms of taste, if they are the same or a similar size, with latte art. I’ve tried to fight this. I’ve thought *Maybe this is just laziness…*; I’ve tried to force myself to pull it back, and steam thinner for lattes and vise-versa. But now I’m thinking WHY?! That middle texture is maybe where the milk, and the drink, is nicest, and maybe it’s what all drinks should be made with…

I guess this all stems from the fact that when I make myself a 6oz drink with steamed milk at work, I’m not quite sure what it is, in terms of pigeonholing it, but it’s just what I think tastes best, in terms of flavour and mouthfeel (and I mean for that size, when combined with microfoam – I also love espresso, macchiatto, americano, filter, etc). This is also the drink that I tend to make for workmates, and ‘coffee people’ who come in if they want something with steamed milk. …But I’m not sure what to call it. It’s simply a ristretto double shot (1.1-1.6oz I suppose), with foam at roughly (!) 1.6cm, give or take a few ml, in a 6oz (bowl-shaped) cup. I suppose you could refer to it as either a (thick) flat white, or a wet-ish strong cappuccino.

And what’s like texture like? It’s thick enough to be rich, viscous and tactile in the cup and in the mouth, with the sort of tension at the rim that never really runs the risk of the fluid slopping over the side, even when freshly poured (although some customers do manage to whack all the air out of it by whisking-in sugar at a rate of knots, leaving themselves with a pitifully foamless drink – whereas my foam stays right to the bottom of the cup). But it’s also thin or ‘wet’ enough to allow for really nice, quite intricate latte art (but not the most  elaborate though), and with a texture that doesn’t leave itself open to being described as too dry or overstretched. And there is a window here – this is a zone, rather than an exact measurement in ml (which alters significantly with the distribution in different cup types anyway, even with exactly the same texture), and it ranges between 1-2cm, a little towards 2, perhaps!

I just find it tastes good. Coincidentally, latte art seems to live quite happily in this zone too (although some folks go a lot thinner for intricacy), but, whilst I adore latte art, that’s not what motivates me to build this drink like this. Nor do I think I’m just a caffeine junkie with worn-out tastebuds who drinks so much coffee that I need a bigger hit in a cappuccino, and who can’t taste the coffee without using a double shot – I’m actually quite moderate in my coffee drinking, and don’t really like to have much more than maybe one short double espresso, and one 6oz drink, in any one working day (speaking pleasure-wise). I just think the coffee flavour tastes richer, more satisfying, and truer at this sort of ratio. After all – ‘we’ all like espresso, and we all like macchiatto (probably) – so why do we feel the need to adhere to the (1:5) ratio of a ‘classic’ cappuccino made with a single shot? The 1:3 or 1:4 ratio seems to make more sense, and feels like the logical progression if you’re using great espresso, and still want to retain that richness in a slightly longer drink. In fact – it also makes sense in terms of the classic notion of a cappuccino as a drink of thirds; 1oz (or even less for a ristretto single) is not 1/3rd of 6 ounces! And yet the majority of people would (probably) say a true cappuccino should be made with a single shot.

I know all this is nothing too radical – there are probably many baristas around the world making their drinks with this sort milk texture. You only have to look at the cappuccinos often served in the barista championships; even at the higher levels of competition, they are often served quite thin. Not that there’s anything wrong with that; they’re lovely, and in some cases consist of precisely the texture that I’m talking about – but by many people’s standards (and probably by the standard of many Italians), they are not as thick as they ‘aught’ to be, and can be, even when using microfoam that is not overstretched. The current WBC rules (whilst by no means a definitive benchmark) define acceptable cappuccinos as having “approximately 1cm of foam depth, accessed vertically” – which allows for some potentially very thin cappuccinos (thinner even than I’m talking about). These competition cappuccinos can probably in some cases be closer to what some people would call lattes.

So whilst this notion of thinner cappuccinos is nothing new, the topic of an ‘ideal texture’ still raises lots of questions, and goes against many conventions - and I’m a stickler for trying pin-down what’s really right. As in so many cases with coffee, much of the confusion can simply come down to cultural and regional differences, as well as personal preference. There are few definitive answers – but I can’t help feeling the urge to uncover some sort of more concrete truth amongst all the variations.

A curious and rather guilty result of all this for me is that I have been making something of a point recently of asking customers in the cafe whether they would like a “large or small cappuccino” or latte, whereas previously (like a good third wave, small-cup ideology citizen), I only served a large if someone specifically asked for one. Whilst I still wholeheartedly believe in smaller drinks, I also believe in flavour (which is rather the point of it after all), and in our particular set-up at the cafe, we serve classic 6oz cappuccinos and 7oz lattes with single shots, and we do a large of each (even though it’s not actually printed on the menus) with a double shot in a 10oz cup. You may have guessed where I’m going with this now: Small = 1:5/6 ratio. Large = 1:4 ratio. Therefore large = a better flavour, that more handsomely conveys the flavour characteristics of our lovely espresso coffees. Whilst I also often suggest to interested customers that they can add an extra shot to a small to give a fuller flavour, much of the time that’s just too clunky to do in a busy situation, and can confuse people with what feels like too much information and questioning. 

You’ll have gathered then, that none of our drinks are that large (given that our ‘large’ is smaller, thankfully, than many places serve for a small!), and it’s lovely to work in a cafe where the sizes (whilst not entirely consistent, ratio-wise) are so sensible – which is why I don’t feel too guilty about promoting the larger 10oz, when it actually delivers a better flavour (I feel) than our small …and which is also probably more pleasing for the ‘average customer’ who likes to sit over a coffee for a while, and who is used to larger sizes. But I do still feel uneasy about directing people away from the purist’s ideal of the smaller drink of about 6 ounces. Which leads me once again to the idea that perhaps a ‘traditional’ size cappuccino aught to be made with a short double…

So what would my ideal menu consist of, in order to best promote the flavour of good espresso, whilst having ratio-consistency throughout the sizes, and at the same time that would have integrity from a purist’s perspective, and be able to offer drinks that are large enough to not totally alienate the general public? It’s very tricky. Maybe 6 or 7 ounce cappuccinos made with a ristretto double, and a 12 ounce large made with a triple shot? But even that has its flaws. Maybe a small single shot cappuccino at 5oz, and a large double shot at 10oz could work flavour-wise, but I don’t think the general British public is quite ready for such a small cappuccino.

Obviously there are many other, more intricate factors to consider in terms of what constitutes the best flavour and ratio in any given circumstance, like the type of milk used, the temperature of the milk, the dose, and the specific coffee being used for the espresso – but one needs to have some sound basic framework to work from for a menu.

Importantly perhaps, I guess the darker roasts that prevail and pervade more generally in the world, cut through 5 - 6 ounces (or much more) of milk more easily, whereas the lighter, more artisan roasts which carefully retain the coffees’ individual characteristics, whilst full of flavour, maybe struggle a little more to come through the milk successfully – and if it’s lovely coffee being used, masking its flavour with too much milk, even in a small drink, is a risk, and a shame.

And what about that texture issue? I used to believe that a cappuccino and a latte could both be made in exactly the same type and size of cup – and that the differentiation should come from the milk texture. Now perhaps I’m leaning more towards a school of thought where both can have the same thickness of milk, but that a latte should be a rather bigger, milder drink (perhaps, referring to the afore mentioned menu, with a small latte being made with a ristretto double in an 8 or 9 ounce cup). Although the large would then be a gross size… But that might work, as the cappuccinos would then rightly remain in the domain of having true integrity for the real coffee lovers, and the large latte would be for those who simply want a vat of something that still tastes quite nice…

…But then there’s the worry that my 1.5oz double in a 6oz cup would just be too strong for most people! Maybe my tastebuds are knackered …or at least, too honed towards the intensity of the espresso experience. To be honest, sometimes it is too strong like this (especially if it’s not made just right), and most customers seem happy enough with the single shot cappuccinos. But I really want to allow the flavour of good coffee to come through the milk for people, and think that (especially with chocolate on top as well!), it gets too lost with a single shot. Essentially; I’d like to be in the position of feeling proud to offer customers something that reflects the flavour of the espresso properly, and which I myself would like to drink - whereas I think the small cappuccinos that I generally serve are a little wishy-washy and under-inspiring!

In Italy (and some other parts of Europe), there is what the Italians would call the wet or ‘white’ cappuccino chiaro,  and the dry or ‘dark’ cappuccino scuro. And I guess the traditional ‘classic’ version would lean more towards the latter. The wetter end of the scale (with a single shot) is probably where the WBC definition sits. The drier end is too thick for most latte art (excepting soft hearts perhaps), and unless really well made can get into the territory of the overstretched. I think I’m somewhere in the middle at the moment, towards the wetter end, with the style of drink I’m talking about.

This wetness or ‘whiteness’ issue, combined with roast-type, probably comes closest to providing some sort of answer to one part of all this nonsense. A thick, dry, traditional cappuccino with a single shot of dark-roast espresso in a 5oz cup probably tastes fine – hence dark. But the wetter, more Western, latte-art-style made with a more subtle, sympathetic roast, probably tastes a bit bland to a coffee lover – because it becomes quite white; the ratio and flavour has changed. Therefore, I feel it does make sense, if your style is a wetter cappuccino, to use a short double to really pull that flavour right back, and show the beauty of the roast.

But don’t worry, if you come to the plan, I will still be serving the small cappuccinos with a single shot, and (a little) thicker than my lattes …probably!

Certainly this is all very much a work-in-progress, as my ideas and understanding of this subtly complex cuisine (where ‘facts’ are ever elusive) continues to evolve… The more you learn, the less you know!

Congratulations (again!) to Gwilym!!

Gwilym Davies of the UK has won finals of the World Barista Championships in Atlanta! This is especially amazing news, as this is the third year running that London-based Square Mile Coffee Roasters have roasted the winning blend; giving two wins for the UK, and one for Ireland.

Gwilym’s set (seems to take a while to load …be patient!).

This can only be a good thing for coffee in our part of the world. Given that this is all part of a relatively small, but growing, movement of people passionate about great coffee in the UK, it should help to sustain and further promote the cuisine. It’s great to think the UK is able to be at the forefront of developing this, and it’s really inspiring, optimistic news for all of us who strive to produce the very best coffee we can day-in, day-out. Hopefully this news will also continue to filter down not just to those in the speciality coffee world, but to (normal!) people on the street - helping to make them increasingly aware of what a delicious, diverse and  magical thing coffee can actually be, and of the skill and devotion that can be involved in bringing the best from plant to cup..!