bX recipe / technical standards collaboration
hey all, i thought it'd be nice to get some discussion going on drink standardization so we can perhaps get a .pdf written up and posted. hopefully good basic recipe standards will help limit the amount of "LOL CAPUCHINO" threads here on barista exchange, as well as providing a platform to eventually implement standards on a larger level than just barista competition.
i suppose we should start with espresso, then, right? thanks chris for posting the espresso italiano standards, which i suppose is a good definition with which to begin. here's what they say:
Necessary portion of ground coffee 7 g ± 0,5
• Exit temperature of water from the unit 88°C ± 2°C
• Temperature of the drink in the cup 67°C ± 3°C
• Entry water pressure 9 bar ± 1
• Percolation time 25 seconds ± 2,5 seconds
• Viscosity at 45°C > 1,5 mPa s
• Total fat > 2 mg/ml
• Caffeine < 100 mg/cup
• Millilitres in the cup (including foam) 25 ml ± 2,5
i would propose a couple modifications to this standard. first, dosage for single should be a range of 7g-11g (so 14-22g for a double, depending on the bean). second, exit temperature of water from the group head should be 88°C-94°C. third, i propose a percolation time range of 20-30 seconds, and fourth, a final volume of 25-35ml including crema. it seems like the italians aren't allowing enough variation in variables for different coffees. perhaps that's because of the way a traditional italian espresso might be blended, i'm not sure. variables like viscosity or fat i don't know much about, so anyone with expertise in that area, speak up.
anyways, let's hammer out the espresso and get some generally agreed upon guidelines before we turn to anything more complicated. cool?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jared Rutledge on
-
except the SCAA has nothing on their website (http://scaa.org/?page=resources) pertaining to espresso as far as i could find. and the WBC has a set of rules that are pretty strictly for competition and not café use. and illy sells ground coffee, so i don't trust their idea of a standard.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike McGinness on
-
If you've read (and re-read and re-read and re-read) Espresso Coffee: The Science of Quality and can honestly say you fully understand this PhD level tome, and can still say Illy has nothing to offer towards understanding espresso I'm flabbergasted...and look forward to your definitive book on espresso being published soon.
The fact that Illy also markets pre-ground coffee to fill the demand for pre-ground coffee does nothing discount their decades long dedication to the art and science of coffee.
Agree that the fact that the SCAA website under Resources: Standards and Protocols has exactly zero brewing standards (except for cupping) is pretty lame.
Jared Rutledge said:except the SCAA has nothing on their website (http://scaa.org/?page=resources) pertaining to espresso as far as i could find. and the WBC has a set of rules that are pretty strictly for competition and not café use. and illy sells ground coffee, so i don't trust their idea of a standard.
-
Permalink Reply by Brady on
-
Brady said:Jared Rutledge said:brady, the scaa didn't seem to have anything regarding espresso in its download section on the site. am i missing something? and the WBC is very close to what i wrote, with the only exception they allowing brewing at up to 96 C. other than that, the standards are the same.
and chris, espresso isn't self explanatory. this site wouldn't exist if it was.
The SCAA Definition of Espresso (from last year's version of Hands On Espresso)
"Espresso is a 25-35ml beverage prepared from 7-9 grams of coffee through which clean water of 195-205 deg-F (92-95C) has been forced at 9-10 atmospheres of pressure, where the grind of the coffee is such that the brewing "flow" time is approximately 20-30 seconds."
"While brewing, the flow of espresso will appear to have the viscosity of warm honey and the resulting beverage will exhibit a thick dark, golden crema. Espresso should be prepared specifically for, and immediately served to its intended consumer."
I believe this definition is being tweaked a bit at present...
For the record, 25-35mL of espresso = 0.8-1.2 fl-oz
Bump. Not sure why this isn't readily available on their website, but this is it.
-
-
right, thanks for repeating that brady, i missed it. but that definition is still too narrow for our purposes, isn't it? we want something that encompasses all of what phil said and more, but allows for people to mess with espresso in an educated manner.
but most of you seem to think this is a dumb idea, so whatever, we'll just keep thwacking away at dumb threads asking the same questions instead of getting something standardized
-
-
Lorenzo Perkins said:Jared Rutledge said:i thought it was a good idea too but it looks like i overestimated the ability of people on this message board to focus and thoughtfully discuss anything.
I think the reason why there aren't many relevant posts on this particular discussion is that "standards" already exist. From the SCAA, the WBC, Illy's "Science of Quality", et. al. What's wrong with trying to champion the ones already in place? Instead of reinventing the wheel, shouldn't we just utilize the resources available? If you want a .pdf file for bX'ers to read and understand what the brewing standards are for espressos, caps, etc., put together a list of what is already available in an easy to read and digest format. Then talk to Matt about creating a page or link to access the information. I guarantee that will be more productive than bashing the baristas who frequent this site.
Lorenzo, I think this approach is quite reasonable. Jared, this would accomplish what you suggested when you said this:
Jared Rutledge said:well it wasn't my intention to develop a global standard, more something that allows people who are new to bX to read in 5 minutes and glean the wisdom of the countless threads we've had on this subject. if that makes sense.
Look... a big hurdle for baristas that are new, that want to learn more, or that think they know everything already is getting their heads around the vast world that is espresso. Even if all we were to do would be assemble a set of snippets and links to external coffee references, it would be a real asset. We wouldn't even have to agree on A standard. It would not change the world, but it would be a starting point for people to begin to understand the various histories and perspectives of drinks.
Can't do it here... this thread has covered more topics than a newbie would wade through to get to the meat. If anyone's game to try this approach, we could give it a try in another thread...
Thoughts?
-
Permalink Reply by Greg Aliff on
-
Brady I agree - There should be a thread locked by the moderators in the forum that lists all the current "standards" of all the associations that have a set of rules/standards. People could just pick one and run with it. Making changes as they found fit after trial and error.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris on
-
Jared Rutledge said:i thought it was a good idea too but it looks like i overestimated the ability of people on this message board to focus and thoughtfully discuss anything.
I agree with a need for standards, and agree with the espresso 'standards' that have been put forth on this page. But until you can get folk agree on the benefits of standards, they aren't going to contribute to them, and they certainly won't follow them, and as such, they won't be useful.
And the culinary equivalent is, perhaps, 'medium rare'.
While different chefs and artists in the culinary world will prepare a dish very, very differently, when one offers a 'NY Strip' or 'Filet Mignon', that is a standard that has been agreed upon, so that the customer can know what he gets when he orders. And if the customer orders it 'Medium Rare, I don't care who you are or what restaurant you own, if you can't deliver 'medium rare, then you suck. You may be providing the best damned well-done in the country, but you've still disappointed your customer. If you want to provide your own twist on a standard, as an artiste and an innovator, I applaud that. But ya oughta warn a guy that you've deviated from the standard.
Except that we've abdicated the writing of standards to the marketing department of SBUX. How else would we arrive at a twelve ounce cappuccino?
Unless you can convince them that standards are a Good Thing™. Having them decided isn't going to change anything.
-
-
Greg Aliff said:Brady I agree - There should be a thread locked by the moderators in the forum that lists all the current "standards" of all the associations that have a set of rules/standards. People could just pick one and run with it. Making changes as they found fit after trial and error.
Done...
http://www.baristaexchange.com/forum/topics/espresso-and-classic-drink
-
Permalink Reply by Fraser Jamieson on
-
Jared: I think that posted standards are an excellent idea; I also think your idea of a bx list of standards would make a great mail-out for my co-workers.
I've got my nose in two different places: One is a franchised part of a chain; one is an indi place.
The franchise sells 600 ml (20 ounce) cappuccinos. Their idea of a long double is 180 ml (6 ounces).
They need me more than I need them, so at work when customers ask what something is, I give them the correct answer and then I tell them the corporate version of them. Most people like "my way" better.
About the only way I differ from the true standard espresso is that I only use a double basket. I bring my own portafilter to work, and use only it. If you want 30 ml. you'll be pleased, and if you want 90 ml. it isn't really bad at all. If you want 180 ml. then you need a new tongue anyway so I don't care.
-
Permalink Reply by christopher myers on
-
This is a valiant effort, and you should keep trying. Although I don't think there can be a "be all end all" standardization, in the same way that every dictionary varies slightly and has differing philosophies on the subject. As in language, there will always be three camps: the one who wants to have a standard based on tradition that everyone should follow, and one that says "hey man, it all develops organically and is decided by nothing other than how the language is used by people", and then sane people who shuck and jive between the two extremes. You can write an edict that says "a cappuccino is exactly 1/3 espresso, steamed milk, and foam, (must be integrated foam). But most people will still make and order a 12 oz capp. Ask me for a 16 oz capp, and I'll just try to convince you that you really want a latte, but those are just my standards.
Again, it's just like language, hell, it IS a language. With different totally acceptable dialects that develop in different regions. "Starbucks" is just an unfortunate dialect that has developed because of mass marketing. It's important to remember traditional definitions, but also accept that this language is going to evolve and change and be slightly different depending on where you are. For most places around here, a Macchiato is equal parts foam and espresso, I guess the more traditional way is just a touch of foam, and of course (sigh) it's also a big cup of crap with a mermaid on it. But that's reality, more people agree with the last definition than the former, and that democracy makes it real.
I mean, "lattes" didn't even exist a few decades ago, and hardcore traditionalists would probably call them an abomination.
I think if you want to come up with your own american standard, based on a consensus of this 3rd wave barista community, that's great. But there will still be those other "official" standards that will be slightly different, and then there will the equally valid (debatably) standards of big coffee chains, and it's still up to each cafe which standard they choose to follow. The bigger issue is having knowledge of these different definitions and communicating to your customers what they're getting when they order something.
-
Permalink Reply by Logan Demmy on
-
I feel like a lot of the posts before assumed that new barista already knew what the great and trustworthy sources were. This I think is a big assumption to be made of some new coffee shop owners that have never worked in the coffee industry. I feel that BX is pretty easy to find for the random google searcher and it may be the first and only experience that a new owner has with specialty coffee.
Gonna catch flak...
Why not instead of posting a list of standards that we can not even agree if they should exist, but instead a list of good online and print resources. Such as the SCAA website link or wbc or illy coffee?
These are not necessarily ones that I would endorse just picking ones from previous posts.
-
-
Along the lines of the previous thread or did you have something else in mind?
Nobody seemed all that interested in that thread and it died.
If people think it's complete, I can close and feature it to bring it to the top. Kinda wanted a little more info there before that happened though.
What do you guys think?
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Barista Exchange Partners
Barista Exchange Friends
Keep Barista Exchange Free
Are you enjoying Barista Exchange? Is it helping you promote your business and helping you network in this great industry? Donate today to keep it free to all members. Supporters can join the "Supporters Group" with a donation. Thanks!
© 2024 Created by Matt Milletto.
Powered by
