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 C180 Le Cube 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.
21 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.
on 23 Feb 2010 at 8:50 pm +00:00T 10.Aussie said …
Pretentious? Moi??!!!
Get over yourself.
on 23 Feb 2010 at 10:56 pm +00:00T 11.TheShot said …
Aussie -
Why the hate against pretension? After all, pretension is what keeps us humans from eating our own feces — unlike dogs.
It’s a gift. Don’t squander it on the same corporation that brought us Taster’s Choice.
on 22 Mar 2010 at 1:55 pm +00:00T 12.Tiffany said …
It’s hard to get past the overwhelming condescension in this post. Honestly, it’s beyond obnoxious.
on 29 Mar 2010 at 9:23 pm +00:00T 13.Terence said …
Why would some ppl think that the capsules are not fresh coffee? They are sealed in the capsules obviously to seal its freshness.
I have this machine and it is very easy to use and clean up. However the capsules are too small therefore I can only make a small cup per capsule.
This is a good machine for ppl who dont want messy high-end espresso machine, ppl who cant finish their beans within a mth and thus stuck with that 1 whole packet before they can try new flavors.
on 29 Mar 2010 at 9:48 pm +00:00T 14.TheShot said …
“Why would some ppl think that the capsules are not fresh coffee?”
Well, Terence, because fresh-roasted coffee is like fresh-baked bread. Fresh-baked bread goes stale in a couple days. Fresh-roasted whole bean coffee goes stale within a couple weeks. And ground coffee, as it is stored in these capsules, exposes as much surface area and oils in the coffee as possible to degrade its freshness as fast as possible: it goes stale like bread, or within a couple days after it is ground.
You know why people don’t buy fresh-baked, pre-sliced, hermetically sealed bread imported from fancy French bakeries? Because it goes stale. Just as pre-ground, imported coffee packaged in capsules goes stale — especially after the weeks (if not months) that the capsules have been sitting on warehouse and store shelves, in transit over long distances from remote Nestlé factories.
And these capsules seal in freshness no better than those vacuum-packed cans of pre-ground, tastes-like-dirt Maxwell House Coffee you could buy on supermarket shelves since the 1980s. Once roasted, and particularly once ground, there’s nothing you can do to stop the coffee from going stale. At best you can slow it down a little.
Just compare the color of the espresso in the two photos shown at the bottom of this Nespresso C180 review:
http://theshot.coffeeratings.com/2007/05/nespresso-c180-review/
Can you guess which one came from a Nespresso capsule and which was produced from coffee roasted fresh by a local roaster and ground to order?
on 12 May 2010 at 5:33 am +00:00T 15.Julien said …
I appreciate that you have a finer taste in coffee than most, and yes, I have heard many times that Nespresso will never be good enough if you are used to real espresso, but the attitude in your writing makes it impossible for me to take you seriously. You’re obnoxious writing is the exact same as an extra-cheery review filled with obvious corporate jargon; it stinks, and it’s painful to read.
I was searching for serious reviews about this product and had a hard time finding negative ones. I was hoping I finally had found one, but after reading this I would prefer to hear from people who don’t have such issues and prejudices that they seem to be unable to hide in their writing of an “objective” article. This is the worst kind of amateur journalism, and as a potential website-viewer, you’ve really turned me—and others, it seems—off of your site.
on 12 May 2010 at 7:29 am +00:00T 16.TheShot said …
You’re welcome, Julien.
Actually, I suggest you just look at the scores with the link at the bottom of this post. And if the obnoxious part came across in our post here, well, I guess we’ve succeeded.
Because it’s one thing for a company to make rather average, un-noteworthy espresso for the home. It’s another obnoxious thing when that company — a company that has made billions of dollars off of Taster’s Choice and Nestlé instant coffee over the years — tries to deceive consumers into believing their pedestrian espresso is God’s gift to coffee, charging premium prices in the process. That kind of fraud pisses us off — and it’s admittedly hard for us to hide it.
on 05 Jul 2010 at 7:46 am +00:00T 17.Millerkidz said …
If this machine doesn’t do the job which one would you recommend? You have doe far more research than I! Thanks
on 06 Jul 2010 at 1:24 am +00:00T 18.TheShot said …
I wouldn’t say that it doesn’t do the job. It depends on what you like. A lot of people turn to home espresso because, for many years, they can produce better espresso at home than in most retail cafés. Others are fine with the espresso standards in the big coffee chains — in which case these machines aren’t any better nor worse.
on 09 Jul 2010 at 7:47 am +00:00T 19.jim duncan said …
Well, my wife just bought a Nespresso, and I have to admit I enjoy the ease of use and cleanup. Absolutely love the frother. And it’s certainly not any worse than what I get at the local Starbucks. The espressos came out looking more like the good picture than the bad one you posted there. While it’s not fresh ground, which would certainly be the best, compared to what you can get for under $200 (it was on sale), I don’t have any major complaints for what you get. Only annoyance is that you have to order the coffee.
on 24 Jul 2010 at 7:15 pm +00:00T 20.Rosscoepcoltrane said …
Just wondering what kind of car you drive? If this is how important coffee is in your life one can only imagine the quality you must demand in an automobile.
on 25 Jul 2010 at 5:11 am +00:00T 21.TheShot said …
@Sheriff Coltrane: I really don’t like cars, so it’s not really a question that carries over from one personal interest to another. To me they are necessary evils. I own a ‘92 Nissan Sentra with under 86k miles on it, and I’m adding to it at a rate of about 2k miles/year now. Not exactly deeeeluxe, eh?