Blended Coffee Beans vs. 100% Only
A frequently asked question (FAQ) is, “Which is better, blended coffees or 100% beans?” Well that’s like asking, “Which tastes better, the chicken or the egg?” The correct answer, in both cases is, “it depends.”
It depends on what you are trying to accomplish. And you will discover the approach in just a moment. But first, let’s backtrack a bit and look at what, exactly, we are talking about. There are two main varieties of coffee, Arabica (named for the Arabian Peninsula) and Robusta. Of the two Arabica is considered to be of the highest quality and has the preferred taste. Robusta is more hardy and thus grows in harsher regions. It also has more caffeine than its Arabica cousin, but also an inferior taste.
If your goal is better taste then either approach works. Many roasters blend different beans to achieve a consistent, identifiable taste. When this is the goal then the roaster will, typically, use 100% Arabica beans but grown in different regions or altitudes. Since, as Starbucks is fond of saying, “geography is flavor,” the differing regions give the bean a unique flavor. These are roasted and blended to achieve the desired flavor . . . consistently.
The other approach is to use Arabica bean grown exclusively in one world-region and is considered a “100% coffee.” While the beans from the same region may have a consistent flavor, without blending there will be slight variations outside of the roasters control. Weather impacts this the most. Rainfall amounts, the total number of sun days, etc., all play a major role in how a particular crop tastes.
The real slam on blended coffees are when roasted coffee producers blend cheaper (and inferior tasting) coffees, like Robusta, with Arabica to save money (and increase profit) at the sacrifice of taste. No one, including myself can justify this practice from a “quality product” point-of-view. You can remember having awful cubical coffee served “free” by your employer, can you not? These experiences remind that there are two sides to the blended coffee coin.
So, before you let someone convince you that blended coffee is inferior, do yourself a favor and research whether the blended coffee you are considering is blended for taste or cost. You will find the exercise is worth the effort.
Comments
9 Responses to “Blended Coffee Beans vs. 100% Only”
Leave a Reply
Please note: Comment moderation is currently enabled so there will be a delay between when you post your comment and when it shows up. Patience is a virtue; there is no need to re-submit your comment.
I have had both good and bad “office” coffee. We actually had good coffee when they were providing pre-measured Folgers packets. The coffee became really bad when they started providing whole bean coffee for people to grind at the coffee station. Part of the problem is that there were people who like “strong” coffee and didn’t care what it tasted like, so the would grind 2 or 3 times the number of coffee beans really needed.
I don’ know if my favorite coffees are 100% or blended, but I have learned that in most cases, I do not like cheap coffee.
Hello. Your blog about which coffee is better - blended or 100% is informative for a person like me who is new to coffee. I have recently started drinking coffee, and because of your blog, will not readily believe anyone trying to convince me about any pros or cons of blended or 100% coffee. I would rather go by my experience and try both the types to come to a conclusion. I am not so keen on very mild or very strong coffee. I love to have coffee which tastes like coffee but is should not be bitter. Thanks for such an interesting writeup.
Our free office coffee is actually produced by a local roaster that makes “real” coffee, but I’m not sure what kind of beans they use. Anyways, I think that most office coffee tastes really bad because of the coffee maker. Our office coffee maker can probably ruin the finest coffee!
Lately, I have been looking for 100% Arabica beans in the lower cost coffees I buy. I have to agree that those coffees taste a lot better- thanks for the advice!
I think a blend is better. Although the site may say companies do this to save money. I think the blend tastes better because you get a combination. All I know is cheap coffee is bad coffee.
I believe beans do taste and also depends on geography. If you were to check out the old generation in southern India, you can find every one doing the ‘filter coffee’, which is nothing but, make it from the bean (in one form or the other)
This was actually a really interesting article to me. I guess I’ve just not gotten into the coffee world very deeply yet, I hadn’t thought about all of the choices there are. Previously I’ve just been battling with the roasting varieties. I may start experimenting with blends to see the flavor differences, but I’m not sure my palette could tell the difference.
This reminds me of the old saying, “you get what you pay for.” So, blended coffee can be awful if its not the right blend. But, on the other hand, it can be quite tasty if it is.
I’ve never been a fan of cheap coffee. I prefer blended coffees with a robust flavor and strong enough to stand alone. If I need to add syrup to sustain a flavor, the coffee is too weak. I want something superbly exotic and flavorful in my cup. My favorite coffees often become the fundamental foundation of brownies or fondant.
Cream is almost as important as the coffee. Forget the fake creams, I want real half and half in my coffee - steamed please!
I think that taste is such an individual thing even in coffees that everyone is going to have a different opinion. I also think that you get what you pay for as other posters have said already. I agree that, to me, the cream is as important as the coffee, however I’m not a really strong coffee lover.