Central America Reviews

Like so many of the coffees in this cupping, a splendid overture in the aroma (nut, vanilla, caramel), then disappointment. A slightly hard, full-bodied but monotonal cup which softens and sweetens only in the finish.

Pleasantly full, rich, low-toned, complete in the bottom registers. Ambiguous grace notes, however: They read as earthy when the coffee is hot, but turn hard and mildly unpleasant as the cup cools. Probably a storage fault. Still, a coffee with power and dimension.

The exhilarating vanilla-nut tones in the aroma together with the heavy, buttery body are the main pleasures here. Otherwise the profile is solid to the point of stolidity. The acidity is pleasant but lacks nuance, the flavor a bit monolithic, and the aftertaste clean but simple.

A low-toned sweetness balances a discreet acidity. Full body, rich spiciness in the cup. The vanilla-nut tones in the aroma resurface fleetingly in the aftertaste. Unfortunately, an additional odd taste also surfaces, particularly when the coffee is cold. This taste, perhaps a mild processing taint, lowered my rating of this otherwise excellent sample.

Bean-size aside, everything in this coffee walks the middle, from the subdued vanilla-nut complex in the aroma, through the clear but unemphatic acidity in the cup, to the clean aftertaste. Unfortunately, no resonance at the bottom of the profile, no shimmers at the top, no development in the finish. Satisfying but limited.

A superbly balanced coffee, with a low-toned, slightly winy acidity, a touch of vanilla in the nose, and a solid, dark-roast bottom with little in the way of carbony distraction.

A tribute to dimension and balance. A complete, classic coffee; medium-bodied, with a discreetly wine-toned acidity and just a touch of darker-roasted pungency. Even displays a hint of carbon in the finish, which I could do without, but which some may take as a sign of completeness.

The high point was the dazzling aroma, full of heady vanilla tones shimmering over a rich pungency. Subsequently, things went downhill. A hardness emerged in the aftertaste, and as the coffee cooled the entire profile stiffened and lost its sweetness. Perhaps the coffee was not sturdy enough to sustain its aromatics in the moderately dark roast style.

A substantial coffee without much in the way of surprise or intrigue. Odd smoky or pruny tones surfaced in the aroma and finish. Displayed enough acidity to avoid flatness but not enough to excite. The absence of sweetness and nuance in the upper ranges more than anything else relegated this coffee to the agreeably ordinary.

A sweet nuttiness dominates here, startling in its clarity. This taste complex, typically a bit player in coffees, takes extravagant control of this one, upstaging everything else. True, a hint of wine made itself heard above the sweetness of the acidity. Perhaps some slightly hard, metallic or tobacco tones flitted across the stage just as the lights went down.

The aroma was curiously flat, the body ordinary, but the acidity splendid: powerful without shrillness, complex, alive with muted wine tones. Smoky hints in the cup turned slightly hard and tobacco-like in the finish, but softened again in the rich aftertaste. .

A complete but rather simple profile; decent acidity balances the pungency of the moderately dark roast. Hints of vanilla intensify and the entire profile sweetens as the coffee cools.

Some attractive grace notes teased their way through the balanced, unassuming profile. I read them as herbal in my notes on aroma and chocolate when I got to the cup. Either way they're on the low-toned, pungent side of the taste ledger rather than the high and sweet.

This coffee could be condemned for its lack of power or admired for its soft refinement and vanilla- and nut-toned sweetness. I bought in on the sweetness side. The vanilla-nut tones displayed remarkable persistence, complicating the aroma and lingering in the aftertaste with surprisingly clarity and richness.

Blind assessment:Scores were solid with almost no complaints, but again, not much was offered in the way of enthusiasm or praise. "Great blender," said one, which led me to think about the difference between a great blender and a good blender. A great blender, it would seem, is a coffee that decisively strengthens or empowers other coffees without imposing itself, like a dinner guest who doesn't have much to say but makes everyone else at the table wittier and more graceful. Perhaps a "good" blender, on the other hand, just sits around amiably without causing problems. Be that as it may, I'm not sure everyone would agree with the "great" adjective either. Two panelists found something a little hard or suspect in the acidity. Only one mentioned a defect, Don Schoenholt, who in a charming and inspired outburst of cupper self-parody wrote: "Slightly soapy aftertaste note sure if it was Dove or Ivory unscented in one of three cups."

A decent coffee ruined by a probably avoidable defect. Parts of the bag from which our samples came apparently picked up moisture during storage. Some individual samples (perhaps from the top part of the bag) cupped cleanly and sweetly, but most displayed either a rope-like taste called baggy (cited by five cuppers) or the moldy-basement taste called musty (two cuppers), both defects typically caused by post-processing moisture. Inspection of this coffee revealed more visual defects than displayed by any of the Itzalco coffees in the cupping, which may indicate something additional went wrong before the coffee went into the bag.

Blind assessment:I found considerable intrigue in this coffee: subtle grace notes and substantial dimension in the upper registers. Only one cupper fully agreed with me, however: "Very interesting coffee." Another admired the cup but took it for granted: "Acceptable standard for Central American cup, nothing to write home about." I would have given this sample my highest score if I hadn't detected something off in one cup. I had company here too: Another panelist encountered one off-cup of three which he characterized as "sour," while another noted something "grassy, twisty" in the aroma. For me the problem was a suspicious lushness in the acidity.

One of the two clear winners in the cupping, this coffee's delicate, sweet top notes and complex aromatics attracted a bouquet of admiring adjectives, including caramelly (the favorite), floral and fruity. "Good blackberry flavor and aroma with complex floral overtones." "Best coffee of the bunch. Very close to outstanding." One admirer felt let down after the aroma, however. First: "Wow! Tangy, floral grace notes." Then: "Not quite as exciting in cup as in nose."

Two contributors admired this coffee for its soft sweetness. Everyone else found it commonplace: "A bit flat, though pleasant and inoffensive"; "Okay, nondescript." The most outspoken condemnation: "Flat, dusty, institutional." Curiously, although most cuppers found the taste flat, several cited piquant nuances: herbal, spicy, etc. Perhaps the piquancy suggests the potential of this coffee and the flatness is a weakness caused by rushed fermentation or errors in handling or storage. Support for the latter hypothesis comes from one very specific assessment: "Slightly musty in the cup."