HomeRoast Digest

Topic: labels vs reviews (17 msgs / 285 lines)
1) From: Vicki Smith
I'm writing this post because I finally figured something out and 
thought that it might be helpful to folks just beginning to order from 
SM. I just received an order which included some of Tom's Dry Process 
Sidamo. I saw that on the label, it talked about the characteristics of 
the bean at City+. In the dark recesses of my brain, it registered that 
this was probably NOT the way to roast this bean, so I went up to the 
site, and saw that he recommended FC+ for it.
Duh, he cups at city+, and it appears that the cupping results are on 
the labels, but the reviews are where we can find his opinion on the 
best roast for a given bean. I then looked through the other new bags 
and saw the same thing. Now, I have not been roasting everything to 
city+ based on the labels, and some labels do mention different roast 
levels, but I had been wondering why my taste and his are so far off and 
thinking that given time, I would probably see the error of my ways.
If everyone already knew this shtuff, just mark me down as a roasting fool.

2) From: Ross
Thanks for that, I have always looked at the labels for my first roast.

3) From: Vicki Smith
I'm just glad to know that I was not the only one for whom this was 
unclear. If I ruled the world, the labels would consistently have the 
recommended roast level on them. I'd still experiment, but starting with 
Tom's recommendation is a good way to go.
Ross wrote:

4) From: Larry Williams
Not everyone figured it out.   You are very kind and bright. 
Vicki Smith wrote:
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.412 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/699 - Release Date: 2/23/2007

5) From: Carole Zatz
I don't think you're alone on this. I had noticed the discrepancy but
thought that it was just a fluke (as you said, sometimes it is right).
It didn't dawn on me that the reason was the cupping results.
I'm going to start saving a copy of the web page of each bean as I
order it. I've been meaning to do that for a while and this'll give me
a push to do it.
On 2/24/07, Vicki Smith  wrote:

6) From: Vicki Smith
I generally print out the review when I order, and keep them in my 
roasting log, Carole. For some reason though, I don't always look at 
them before I roast (my bad). And since I sometimes attach the bag 
labels to my cloth bags, well...
I am not positive that the reason he lists city+ is related to his 
cupping. He does though tend to cup at that roast level, and it is 
somewhat rare to find a label that does not talk about the results at 
that level.
If you forget to save the review, and the coffee is gone from current 
offerings, remember the archived reviews!!
Carole Zatz wrote:

7) From: Carole Zatz
Hi Vicki,
I used to be pretty thorough with comments about my roasts  at least
I was when I was using the iR2 all the time. Now with the bread
machine method, I just roast and mark down the final roast level (not
how long it took, etc.).
Didn't realize there were archived reviews! I'll definitely look at
them, just never checked before. I used to print them and keep them in
a drawer but in a mad, insane fit of clearing out, they got pitched.
Soon I'll need to devote a cookbook shelf :) just to coffee.
On 2/24/07, Vicki Smith  wrote:
ribes) go tohttp://sweetmarias.com/maillistinfo.html#personalsettings<Snip>

8) From: Vicki Smith
Well, at the bottom of each of the green coffee pages, there are links 
to the bean review archives. Very early beans are by years, more recent 
ones are arranged alphabetically.
Carole Zatz wrote:

9) From: Laura Micucci
I had noticed this occasional difference between the label and the online
review of the bean.  I have not found that the labels mostly say city+
though. I just roasted 3 different kinds of beans and two said FC+ (Costa
Rica Pulp natural-La Candelilla and Sumatra 19+ TP Lake Tawar) and one said
C+ (Guatemala Quiche - La Perla Estate).  If fact I just looked at all my
coffees and out of 10 all but 2 said FC+.  Of the two one had a suggestion
and flavors you would achieve for C+ *and* FC+ and the other one had a range
of C+ to FC+.
This being said I usually do read Tom's review and the label and decided
from there where I want to go with the roast.  I noticed on the Guatemala
Quiche that the label did quote his review for the C+ but then in the review
he goes on to say why he likes it better at a FC+.
So taking this all into considerations I have no idea why the two sometimes
are different.  Perhaps Tom will chime in and let us know...
On 2/24/07, Vicki Smith  wrote:
Laura Micucci

10) From: Scott Marquardt
I do, do, do, do wish Tom would switch to a database-driven method,
where all of these could merely be queried by customers. It'd be
easier for Tom AND everyone else.
The "seek, click and scroll" method leaves much to be desired --
especially when things Tom quantifies for each bean could be
On 2/24/07, Vicki Smith  wrote:

11) From: Sam Tregar
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Scott Marquardt wrote:
Hmmmm, could be a fun little project to scrape the site and build a DB
with a query interface.  I'll play around with it and post when I've
got something.  (Of course, if this bothers anyone at SM, just say the
word and I'll keep it private.)

12) From: Floyd Lozano
The worst is when I order a coffee and then goto read the review to see how
i should roast it and OH NO it's been pulled!  Is there an archive of every
coffee ever offerred (or barring that, the ones I've bought? ;) )
On 2/25/07, Sam Tregar  wrote:

13) From: Eddie Dove
Yes. Follow this link.
Scroll to the bottom, then select the appropriate archive.  Invaluable!
On 2/25/07, Floyd Lozano  wrote:

14) From: Vicki Smith
It's probably a good idea to send a note to SM and ask them before 
starting something like this. Tom reads the list, but he might just miss 
this post.
Sam Tregar wrote:

15) From: Scott Marquardt
Actually, I believe Tom once mentioned (perhaps I actually asked him
-- don't remember) that this was driven off a database. But it seems
to result in static tabular information. That's truly evil, and since
Tom's not evil I can only conclude that some demon has inhabited his
We must liberate him!
On 2/25/07, Vicki Smith  wrote:

16) From: Sam Tregar
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Vicki Smith wrote:
Not a bad idea.  I'll wait till I've got something to show, I think.
If the result is cool enough it might sway them more than the
unelaborated prospect of having another site publishing their data!
Perhaps the result will be so awesome that SM will decide to
incorporate it into the site.  One can dream...

17) From: Scott Marquardt
Although if he DOES have it databased and, using whatever drugs
inspire such folly, uses said database to create static html he then
archives as such . . . well, contacting him to get a dump of the db
would save you some scrape time.
I want some of those drugs. With my luck, it'll turn out just to be
his cupping brews.
- Scott
On 2/25/07, Sam Tregar  wrote:

HomeRoast Digest