My 'Decaf Project' Results
Recently, I had the privilege of being able to obtain one of the tasting kits for The Decaf Project (2024), which is a large live/recorded tasting event, organized by James Hoffmann, a popular Youtuber and coffee 'expert', where thousands of people all obtain the coffee kits from various roasters across the world and join in a simultaneous (or, if watching the recorded stream, slightly asynchronous) session and record and share their results.
The kits come with a four bags of coffee beans. They contain the same base coffee, one of which is caffeinated and the rest are decaffeinated one of three different ways prior to getting in the roasters' hands:
- CR3 - Carbonic Natural CO2 Process - Hoffmann's video
- Ethyl Acetate / “Sugar Cane Process” - Hoffmann's video
- Swiss Water® Process - Hoffmann's video
The roaster then roasts these according to their taste and desired profile, which means they may not roast all four the same exact way, but instead try to roast each to give the best result possible. I won't belabor re-explaining the entire project, as you can visit the project's site to get more details and links to Hoffmann's videos. So, the following are my parameters and results from the tasting.
My coffee came from Anthology Roasting - Detroit, MI
Parameters:
- Water just off a boil
- Kingrinder K6 set to 75 clicks grind size (medium-fine)
- Four cups, each filled with 6g of ground coffee and then 100ml of water (this can be scaled as desired, with 50ml per 3g)
Process:
- Put the grounds directly in the cups, then put in the hot water
- Let the grounds slowly brew/immerse over four minutes.
- After about four minutes, scoop off any foam or remaining 'crust'
- Wait some additional time for the coffees to cool, as lower (read: not hot) temperatures are better for comparisons and bring out the differences more
- Sip/slurp each coffee back to back and take notes, focusing in various areas
- I did a separate back-to-back smelling/sipping A through D for each of the parameters
Scoring:
Rated 1-5 (quantity/strength) and 1-5 (quality) and may also provide optional comments: Aroma, Acidity, Sweetness, Body, Finish
The following are given only comments: Flavor
Then each coffee is given a overall rating out of 10.
Results
| Aroma | Acidity | Sweetness | Body | Finish | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantity/5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 |
| Quality/5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 |
| Aroma | Balanced, butter, nuts, roasty, chocolate |
| Body | Buttery, silky |
| Flavor | Nuts, butter, milk chocolate |
| Overall | 8/10 |
| Aroma | Acidity | Sweetness | Body | Finish | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantity/5 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Quality/5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Aroma | Less roasty, mostly sweet, darker, muted. Faint berry sweetness |
| Finish | Lingering sweetness |
| Flavor | Brighter than the aroma, citrus/lemon, berries |
| Overall | 7/10 |
| Aroma | Acidity | Sweetness | Body | Finish | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantity/5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
| Quality/5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 |
| Aroma | Cinnamon, sharp, acrid, citrus, nuts, pungent |
| Finish | Quite dry, heavy minerals |
| Flavor | Banana, roasted veggies, wildly different, something "off" |
| Overall | 5/10 |
| Aroma | Acidity | Sweetness | Body | Finish | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantity/5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 3 |
| Quality/5 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Aroma | Roast-heavy, fire, ashy, baked goods, brown sugar |
| Finish | 2nd driest, but not overly dry |
| Flavor | Cherry, bread, baked goods, brown sugar |
| Overall | 7/10 |
Conclusion
While I am careful not to draw too strong of conclusions from the results, given that there are so many factors involved (bias, roast, roaster, etc), I did find the comparison interesting. According to Hoffmann, who was able to try samples from multiple roasters, he found more differences between roasters than between decaffeination methods.
I was surprised to find differences myself between the processes, though to me they were pronounced enough to detect between all four, though the differences weren't as significant between the three non-EA coffees. The EA-processed coffee was notably worse in aroma and flavor to me. It was dry, thin, and ashy and had some flavors that just tasted a bit 'off'. I'm curious to find out later if others' experiences match this, and if it's down to the process, or if it's my particular roaster's choices in the process (almost seems over-roasted), and if something imparted by the EA process influenced the roaster's decisions leading to this result.
That said, this is not enough information to immediately deem any EA-processed coffees as bad or subpar, given all the factors involved, so I wouldn't use these results or even your own testing to make any grand absolutist conclusions, instead view it as a single point of data.
In this very small, non-conclusive sample tasting, the caffeinated coffee came out on top, and the C02 and Swiss Water coffees came in a close second-place tie- showing it is possible to get quite good decaf coffee if it's from a roaster who has taken care in their process of supplying and roasting the coffee. The EA stood out as a distant last place, though it's hard to know exactly why it came out that way.
Since the kit included 60g of each coffee, I still have a lot left to do further comparisons, and just regular daily brews. I'm curious to see if on its own, the EA is fine, especially when brewed and filtered normally and maybe just fell short specifically in the comparison. If I find anything significant, expect a follow-up post at some point.
This page was last edited 9 months, 1 week ago