HomeRoast Digest


Topic: The Cathy and Deward show, continued (it's all in fun, (43 lines)
1) From: dewardh
Cathy:
<Snip>
But I have no way of knowing *your* results . . .
<Snip>
And no way of duplicating your "process".
<Snip>
independently.
But you can't even tell me the endpoint . . . except perhaps for some seriously 
imprecise "color" description, where I can at least tell you at what 
temperature a particular roast was stopped.
<Snip>
evaluators'
reports.  They have no idea "what happened".  They just taste the coffee.
And I could just as easily fry up some beans until they smoke, and then compare 
the "result" with a carefully controlled roast in a Rosto, and get just the 
opposite "evaluators' reports".  What would that prove?  More to the point, I 
can give my "numbers" to anyone with a similarly instrumented Rosto and they 
can reasonably closely reproduce my process and my results wherever they are . 
.. . how is anyone to know if they have duplicated *your* "process" in *their* 
kitchen ? ? ?  How can you even compare one roast (of yours) to the next, when 
you have no way to demonstrate, let alone to insure, that there is any 
consistency in the "process" from one roast to the next (it all sounds so 
"subjective")?
<Snip>
or inclination, is to have someone else do it for them.  Or, for those
who enjoy spending money on multiple generations of gadgets, a steady
stream of expensive toys.
That's a rather callous dismissal of a whole lot of people who just want to 
roast coffee for their "gadgets" (like grinders, and espresso machines, and 
other "expensive toys") without smoking up the kitchen.  Is it safe to assume 
that you don't wear cloths made from machine woven cloth, and have a similar 
disdain for those of us who do ? ? ? 
Deward
homeroast mailing listhttp://lists.sweetmarias.com/mailman/listinfo/homeroast


HomeRoast Digest