The Nespresso CitiZ, or how McDonald’s has become the home espresso of the future
Posted by TheShot on 16 Oct 2009 | Tagged as: Beans, Consumer Trends, Home Brew, Machine
A little over two years ago, we lamented the state of populist retail home espresso by reviewing what we thought was one of the better options at the time, the Nespresso C180 Le Cube: The Home Espresso Machine Blues: Rating today’s state of consumer espresso machines. Besides having a name that sounded regrettably familiar to Renault’s Le Car of the late 1970s, we found the Le Cube to be typical of superautomated, pod-based home espresso machines at the time: the overpackaged, overpriced convenience of consistently stale coffee.
Since then we’ve had a whopper of a global recession — and all the mathematically-precise/psychologically-ignorant cost-savings come-ons for home brewing that have followed. With the Fall 2009 release of Nespresso’s new product line, the CitiZ, we wanted to test if the populist retail home espresso situation had changed through all of that.
It’s not an espresso machine, it’s a lifestyle
We first wrote about the new CitiZ line a few months ago in a critique of Nestlé’s recent environmental chest-beating: Nespresso and the definition of greenwashing. If Nestlé’s primary product line goals were to deliberately maximize materials extraction, manufacturing production, and waste by-products with each coffee serving, it’s hard to imagine the Nespresso coming out much differently than it appears today.
As with the Le Cube, we approached one of these new Nespresso beasts in its native habitat: a mainstream kitchenware retailer. Upon entering the Sur La Table, we were accosted with the massive marketing expense of what looked like a cardboard Playland promoting the new CitiZ line. Nestlé is clearly wheeling up dump trucks full of money for their consumer retail marketing campaign. This flash of cash seems like Nespresso’s attempt to convince consumers of its “upscale” ambitions.
Heading to the back of the store, we opted to test with a Nespresso CitiZ & Milk — which sports a built-in milk frother that we had no intention of using. In case you’re not familiar, Nespresso takes a Jelly-Belly-style approach to the coffee varieties in its capsules. Some of these coffee capsules brandish Nespresso’s new, lofty “Grand Cru” designation. However, for consistency, we opted to stick with the scary “flavor” concept known as a Ristretto capsule.
We inserted the capsule and pushed the “espresso” button (represented with an icon of the smaller of two cups). The extraction started out promising enough: a laminar flow of medium-to-dark brown crema from the get-go. We were honestly impressed at first — maybe things have gotten better?
But then the pour kept coming. And coming. And as it did, the richer brown crema turned into a more turbulent flow of what looked like a milky, splotchy hot chocolate with uneven bubbles. Not exactly appetizing. In just several seconds, the shot rapidly turned into the meager espresso we experienced with our 2007 review of the Le Cube.
The Taste Test
Tasting the shot, it had a much frothier and greater amount of crema than we experienced with the Le Cube. But the crema quality was a bit suspect in taste as well as appearance: thin, one-dimensional, and lacking any flavor richness nor depth. The shot was also too large, resulting in a thinner body and making us wonder what diluted mess the Nespresso would have produced if we pushed the “lungo” button.
The espresso itself had a tepid flavor still on par with an average Starbucks and not much better than a McDonald’s. Like most espresso shots made from stale, pre-ground beans packed for weeks in sealed capsules, it has a narrow flavor profile consisting primarily of some mild spices and pepper. And universally, it tastes like it is “missing something” when compared with the real thing. The company and its advocates like to point out the supposed “high-tech” vacuum-sealed freshness of these capsules, but vacuum-sealing ground coffee is a standard practice the likes of Sanka and Maxwell House have been performing since the 1980s.
Our verdict: more crema, but otherwise very little has changed from the last generation of Nespresso machines we tested. At a 5.80 coffee rating, it’s pretty much even with our last review (a 5.90). We suppose something can be said for consistency. In the meantime, populist retail home espresso still seems stuck in the McDonald’s Dark Ages. (And here the McDonald’s comparison is actually a bit flattering, given that they at least grind to order.)
Read the review of the Nespresso CitiZ & Milk.
9 Comments »
on 16 Oct 2009 at 9:02 am +00:00T 1.Skip said …
5.8 is higher than I would have expected and should be good enough for just about anyone thinking of buying this machine. People who can taste the difference already know better.
on 16 Oct 2009 at 9:05 am +00:00T 2.espressophile said …
Nespresso does have a couple of manual machines (did I just admit to knowing that?), which means you can stop the pour at a more reasonable volume. Not that I’d expect it to be any good even so.
on 16 Oct 2009 at 9:08 am +00:00T 3.TheShot said …
These aren’t bad machines by any stretch of the word. They’re definitely a step above the Krups Dark Ages of the 1990s.
But for a product line to market themselves as a luxury brand, to command subscribers, and to rent retail real estate in some of the world’s most expensive city districts, you honestly have to do better than a meager McDonald’s push-button squirt-in-a-cup.
on 21 Oct 2009 at 11:00 am +00:00T 4.Meghan said …
Please note that the CitiZ does allow you to adjust the amount of water that runs through the brew head for both standard and lungo shots. This is done by holding down the applicable button as the machine brews, then releasing the button when the desired amount of water is reached. This obviously will not improve the overall flavor of the brew, but I noticed that they key complaint was that the pour was too long, destroying otherwise decent crema and water-logging the shot.
I own a CitiZ, and after some adjustments, I find that as a purely automatic capsule-based machine, it’s excellent. Just my two-cents.
on 21 Oct 2009 at 3:44 pm +00:00T 5.TheShot said …
This feature is a nice addition. A big problem with these superautomated machines is that they typically make adequacy routine to a fault.
on 25 Oct 2009 at 5:20 am +00:00T 6.Peter said …
If the CitiZ isn’t good enough, then what machine for the home should I buy? I just bought the citiZ yesterday at Macy’s one day sale at a 40% discount, but have not opened the box, so I can return it if there is a machine that is recommended as much better. Many thanks in advance for any suggestions you may have.
on 25 Oct 2009 at 10:06 am +00:00T 7.TheShot said …
Suggestion-wise, I think you have to start with Skip’s initial comment here: it depends on whether you can taste the difference or not.
These machines offer a great amount of convenience. And a 40% discount sounds like you got a really good deal. However, these machines can be a little like the razor/razor-blades analogy. Meaning: give away the razor for free, and charge for the blades. It’s this exact pricing strategy that is at work with the many Illy deals for discounted machines with coffee subscriptions you might find in magazines, etc.
The problem for many home machine enthusiasts is that we can spend a lot of money in “step-up” mode. If you’re happy with the espresso quality from the CitiZ, then that sounds like a fine purchase. But if you can taste the difference and are looking for something with a darker, richer crema, freshly ground coffee, etc., you might otherwise end up pawning off the Nespresso for something else in short time.
What you might pawn it off for is an open question, as it depends on your tolerance for your own time and skill investment — plus budget constraints. The problem is there is no single answer as to what is someone’s ideal home espresso machine setup, just as there’s no one right answer for the right car for someone. It really depends on what you’re looking for and your budget.
on 24 Jan 2010 at 5:52 am +00:00T 8.Paul McClean said …
If it’s good enough for The Fat Duck, a restaurant with 3 Michelin stars, it’s good enough for me!
on 24 Jan 2010 at 4:54 pm +00:00T 9.TheShot said …
The Fat Duck is a perfect example of an elite restaurant that is either clueless or has given up on making quality espresso. We’ve written a series of posts concerning the sorry state of espresso at high-end restaurants. Unfortunately, it is still exceedingly rare to see the quality of a fine restaurant meal translate all the way to the coffee to finish it.
The Fat Duck thinks it is acceptable to serve its guests pre-ground coffee left oxidizing for weeks after roasting by the world’s largest industrial food processing company. It is unimaginable to think the Fat Duck would accept the same type of sourcing and handling for any of their food items, let alone their wines. Thus the Fat Duck’s use of Nespresso — the boxed wine of the coffee world — is both a cop-out and a double-standard for their customers, given the expectations they otherwise set.