BLONDE roast?

[Jenise]

Starbucks is advertising a 'blonde' roast. As a shareholder I wish them every success but as a coffee drinker I don't quite get it. The advertisements don't suggest why we should like this. I know a number of you roast your own beans, so tell us all more about this. I have to gues that 'blonde' means barely roasted (a picture in the ads of a clear mug full looks like tea) vs. the half or all the way of a medium or dark roast. What would that taste like? Does less roasted mean less acidity?

Jenise,
For the sake of science, I did try the blonde roast. I would describe it as "tepid". Not exactly my cuppa.
-Shaji

I think I've only been to Starbucks once or twice in my life, so I can only speculate that it is a lightly roasted coffee. Here is an independent review in which he compares it to the coffee in the waiting room at the Jiffy Lube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohfX66to-qE&feature=fvsr. One of the things I've learned about coffee is that it can be as varied as wine. The less you roast it, the more the coffee exhibits the quality of the beans and their place of origin. Only really good coffee beans can make really good coffee that have a light roast. The more you roast them, the darker the beans get and instead of the quality of the beans dominating, the roasting process dominates and it can get to the point that all beans roasted to the point that the oils burn and the beans become black and shiny (think French Roast) tend to taste alike, regardless of the quality or origin. I have developed a strong liking for Ethiopian Sidomo, with a medium-light roast, but I do like some full roast also.

Here is an independent review in which he compares it to the coffee in the waiting room at the Jiffy Lube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohfX66to-qE&feature=fvsr.

Ouch!

I apologize in advance, I do see that it is probably ill advised to post this here.

BUT when I looked up "blonde coffee" -- this is what I found.

A blonde grabbed a large thermos and hurried to a nearby coffee shop.
She held up the thermos and the coffee shop worker quickly came over to take her order.
"Is this big enough to hold six cups of coffee?" the blonde asked.
The coffee shop worker looked at the thermos, hesitated a few seconds, then finally replied, "Yeah. It looks like about six cups to me."
"Oh good!" the blonde sighed in relief. "Then give me two regular, two black, and two decaf."

I saw this at my last visit to buy beans - they had some of the blonde roast beans in paper cups for sniffing. None of them passed the stiff test for me.

I think that this move is best understood as a response to the long-standing derision of Starbucks as "Charbucks." As someone whose tastes were formed by Mr. Peet of Peet's Coffee fame, I can say that I find that the Starbucks Roast™ strips the single source beans of most of their character, leaving them all tasting more or less the same. (For this same reason, I long ago lost my taste for French Roast, Italian Roast and their ilk, though I've been known to get espresso when other options looked more dire) So, a Blonde Roast might be a concession to folks like me, though from the sound of it the pendulum has swung a bit too far in the opposite direction.

Mark Lipton

Mark, I think you are almost certainly right about why Starbucks mgmt is pushing a light roast now.

The problem is that they are really only addressing the symptom and not the illness: The reason that Starbucks (and others) go for serious char is that the world has only so many good beans and yet, somehow, every year, they sell more and more coffee.

Actually, at the office, I have been living on the Starbuck's Medium Colombian whole bean coffee (mixed with fresh roasted beans from Maria's when I have those) for a couple of years. If it says French roast or dark roast, you know just what you will get from Starbucks. But their Medium stuff doesn't taste like burned toast, not by a long shot, and it's not wimpy like the new blonde stuff either. SO they are capable of producing delicious coffee, at least to my palate. You just have to buy the right stuff.

There was a Wall Street Journal article on this recently, complete with color photos. Mark is on the right track, although it sounds like it's more a matter of selling more coffee to the masses than it is to satisfy geeks who object to a loss of terroir from over-roasting.

After their debut of that godawful instant coffee, I figure they're willing to try anything.

After their debut of that godawful instant coffee, I figure they're willing to try anything.

Hey, even if you didn't admire their original style of roasting, it's sad to see such a once proud quality brand become just another corporate shell.

I only tasted their instant coffee once. I didn't think it was so bad... for instant.