HomeRoast Digest


Topic: Judging the Roast by Temperature [was RE: Re: +Judging the roast] (70 lines)
1) From: Mark A. Chalkley
Rick,
On Wednesday, September 18, 2002, 1:55:12 AM, you wrote:
RF> Would those be the "naysayers" with about 20 years more experience
RF> than you, Mark?  :-)
I'm sure some of them are, but it only reinforces my point:  I'm not
trying to accomplish the same thing they are.  When I get a Hottop or
something like it (and I will), temps, times, etc. are going to become
more important to me because I'll have more control over that.  Right
now, with the HWP, I'm concerned primarily with the end result.
Lighting and color dissertations aside (which I did read, BTW) I
haven't been further "educated" by anything that's been said in this
discussion.  I already knew that it matters how long it takes to get
to first crack, second crack, etc.  I already knew that different
beans respond differently to the same degree and length of heat
applied.  I already knew that different beans have different colors at
the same degree of roast.  It's not because I naturally knew most of
those things and figured them out for myself.  It's because I've been
reading the list for a while.  Because I've read all the web sites I
could find.  I've read, or am reading, in some cases for the second
time, several books on coffee, one dedicated to roasting.
I haven't disagreed with a single thing that's been said by anybody
here yet, except for one:  I'm not trying to accomplish anything quite
so elaborate as some of you are.  Do I realize the advantages of
elaborateness?  Sure.  Do you realize the advantages of starting
somewhere and soon, whether or not it's a perfect start?  I'm not an
advocate of the "let's do something, even if it's wrong" school of
thinking.  It just that my objective was not to establish an
Underwriter's Laboratory for roasted coffee (to re-open another can of
worms).  My objective is to start a process, to make the comparison of
roasts a bit easier than it is now. Could it be refined?  I hope so.
Would it be stage 1 of many? Sure, but whoever wants to can get off
the train wherever they want to, recognizing that the further down the
road they go, the better their results will be. That's not a new
concept.  With almost anything, the more effort you put into it, the
more you get out of it, but everyone has their own point of
diminishing return.  The great thing about life is that everybody gets
to set their own, for better or worse, of course.
<Snip>
RF> Personally, I'm leaning towards temperature.  It took me several weeks to
RF> get my temperature measuring methodology working correctly, but now that I
RF> have, I find it quite a bit more accurate than anything else I've tried.
RF> Like color, all temperature measurements will vary, due to differing
RF> measurement methods and equipment.  It is fairly easy to calibrate, though,
RF> by saying something like this:  "I was roasting some of Tom's Nicaragua
RF> 'Sabor de Segovia,' and in my setup I was seeing first crack at about 415,
RF> and second at about 445.  I found that if I roasted it to 440, it had much
RF> body and still quite a bit of varietal character."
RF> If you want to replicate my roast, then you simply run a batch through,
RF> noting where first and second occur, and then interpolate.  For instance, if
RF> you found out that on your setup, (with the same coffee) first crack was at
RF> 400 and second at 425, then you could be pretty sure that if you roasted
RF> to 420, you'd have about the same roast.
Ok, so let's discuss your idea being stage 2 in the Perfect Coffee
Roast Comparison Methodology (PCRCM)...
Mark C.
homeroast mailing listhttp://lists.sweetmarias.com/mailman/listinfo/homeroast


HomeRoast Digest