Green Reviews

A sweet, voluptuous, full-bodied coffee, though almost aggressively neutral. Consensus found the acidity soft, the aroma caramelly, the body creamy or buttery. I found no nuance and little dimension, but some on the panel detected a hint of India: “spicy, A traditionally wet-processed or “washed” coffee grown under shade at elevations of over 4,000 feet. […]

Is the fruit character of this coffee ripely spicy or disturbingly overripe? Panelists apparently admired the complex lushness of this organically grown coffee, but were put off by a whiff of slightly bitterish ferment A traditionally wet-processed or “washed” coffee grown under shade and certified organically grown. Nuggets Extra Bold is a meticulously sorted super […]

I found this coffee pleasantly sweet but flat to a fault. Other panelists complained of a subdued but clear defect, mustiness perhaps. One complainant found this shadow defect ambiguously interesting: "harmonic earthy & aromatic woods?" he asked himself.

When hot, this cup impressed many of the panel with its light-footed, teasing nuance of lemon, flowers and cocoa. Complex in the nose, but as the cup cooled it flattened disappointingly.

This coffee attracted a split vote; some found it impressive: low key but smooth, cleanly floral and citrusy, discreetly acidy, with a fresh, fruit-toned finish. Others found it complex and interesting, but marred by sour, medicinal tones. Impossible to tell late in the game whether the coffee was inconsistent or we were.

Clear, dry fruit that reads pleasingly as cocoa graces this agreeable but understated coffee. Some panelists praised its gentle complexity; others found the cup too gentle.

Panelists found this coffee interesting but ambiguous. They were attracted by its combination of nuanced, caramelly softness and bright, aggressive acidity; put off by a smoky, slightly bitter pungency that hinted at a drying fault.

A luxuriously sweet, full, suavely rounded cup enlivened by nut and spice tones and a tickle of flowers. "Rich, saturated butter," exclaimed one panelist. Slightly sharp when hot, but as the cup cools the bitter edge swoons into the enveloping sweetness.

Winner in the 2000 Specialty Coffee Association of Panama Cupping Event. Gently lively acidity rides a full, buttery body toward a splendid, complex, wine-toned finish.

An intensely contradictory coffee. On one hand: full, smooth body, expressively and deeply sweet, long, vibrant finish. On the downside: grassy undertones and an odd edginess to the fruit that grew more obvious as the cup cooled. Some panelists went exclusively with the upside, others only with the down, while a few celebrated the paradox, sometimes in rather unconventional language: "bold, rough, strong -- Neanderthal ancestors," wrote one. One thing is certain: This coffee is considerably more interesting than its rating suggests.

Soft, sweetly brisk, balanced, but edging on bland. "No flaws, but not many grace notes. Good, inoffensive cup," wrote one panelist. "Nice combo of sweet & floral ... just missing intensity," offered another.

The panel put this light-bodied coffee somewhere between bland and defective. Four panelists reported at least one cup of the several they sampled displayed defective aromatics, their descriptions ranging from soapy to beefy to sour. Apparently I was lucky: all of my cups were light-footed but sweetly acidy and agreeable.

Soft, low-key coffee with a twisty undercurrent of dark vegetative notes: wood or grass at worst; at best spice, tobacco or smoke. I found that, as the cup cooled, these notes sweetened pleasantly toward cocoa and cedar.

"Very pleasant, sweet, solid cup -- milk chocolate," reported one panelist. Another pursued the same theme with more enthusiasm: "sweet; soft, creamy, beautiful to behold, subtle yet complete, ... understated." Apparently too understated for the majority of the panelists, who felt the virtues of this coffee stopped with the impressive sweetness.

A paradoxical coffee: A slight bitter edge (drying fault?) led two panelists to dismiss this coffee; the majority praised its sweetness and depth and either overlooked the shadow bitterness or read it as an agreeable pungency.

A splendidly smooth Harrar with persistent, understated power. There is plenty going on in the nose, particularly fruit, but the real strength of this coffee is its smooth, supple presence, particularly as it cools. "It is what it says it is -- friendly, honest, easy to read, pleasant & enjoyable, [though] not sophisticated," concluded one panelist. I loved this coffee, and found its resonant roundness sufficiently sophisticated, even elegant.

Complex and alive with nuance: twisty dried fruit tones ("dried apricot" specified one panelist; "prune" suggested another), spice, chocolate, berries. Sweet, rich, and utterly engrossing in its teasing labyrinth of aromatics.

A flawed coffee, but complex and intriguing in its faults. Every panelist except one cited defects, but the intrigue of the defects inspired them to refined description. "Potatoey, soapy," said one; "Old, wood-pulp flavor," another. I suspect that this pleasantly sweet, light coffee attracted some serious mustiness or mould during drying.

This rather wild coffee attracted a split vote. The chocolate-toned aroma impressed some panelists, but the cup turned rather rough and harsh as it cooled. Positive descriptions of aromatics ranged from fruit to chocolate. Negative or neutral: earthy, tobaccoey, "beef broth."

A complexly imbalanced cup. Virtually everyone agreed the aroma was pleasantly floral and fruity ("melon" one panelist specified) and the body robust, but the eccentric sensations that emerged in the cup as it cooled attracted a variety of vegetable and largely negative adjectives, among them grassy, herbal, wheaty, and tobaccoey.