Context

These four roasts were part of a focused attempt to understand what the controls on the Gene Café CBR-301 actually do in practice.

The goal was not to optimise flavour, but to isolate behaviour:

  • drum speed (minimum vs maximum)
  • mid-roast temperature adjustment
  • and the effect of starting the roast cold vs warm

All roasts were:

  • 250 g batch size
  • target temperature 250°C baseline
  • total roast time ~13:00
  • same coffee (Honduras, washed)
  • same setup and cooling approach

What was done

  • Roast 80 (cold) — drum speed set to minimum for full roast
  • Roast 82 (cold) — drum speed set to maximum for full roast
  • Roast 81 (warm) — baseline behaviour (no clean mid-roast intervention)
  • Roast 83 (warm) — temperature reduced to 240°C at 06:00, returned to 250°C at 08:00

What was observed

Across all four roasts:

  • Changing drum speed altered how quickly the roast progressed, with higher drum speed consistently reaching milestones later
  • Mid-roast temperature adjustment also altered timing, delaying progression and shifting later-stage behaviour
  • In both cases, the machine’s internal behaviour (including fan transitions) shifted alongside those changes

However:

  • Final weight loss remained effectively unchanged in both tests
    • Drum speed: 14.3% → 14.5%
    • Temperature step: 15.8% → 16.0%

In contrast:

  • The difference between cold and warm starts resulted in a much larger shift
    • ~14.4% (cold average) → ~15.9% (warm average)
  • Warm starts reached all key milestones significantly earlier

Interpretation

The controls on the CBR-301 do have an effect.

They:

  • change the timing of the roast
  • shift when key events occur
  • influence how the machine behaves during the roast

But within this test:

  • those changes did not materially alter the final outcome when total roast time was held constant

The machine responded to input, but still converged toward a similar end point.


What appears to matter more

Within this dataset, the most significant variable was:

  • starting thermal state (cold vs warm)

Compared to:

  • drum speed adjustments
  • mid-roast temperature changes

The starting condition had a substantially larger impact on both:

  • roast progression
  • final development (weight loss)

Where this leaves things

At this point, the working understanding is:

  • user inputs influence the roast
  • but that influence appears bounded within the system
  • and outcome remains strongly anchored to time and starting state

Further testing is needed, particularly around:

  • fan behaviour as an isolated variable
  • whether longer or more aggressive interventions change outcomes
  • and how these effects translate into the cup

Notes

This is not a conclusion about “control” in general.

It is a record of what happened under these specific conditions.

As with all roasts in this project, this will either hold — or be revised — as more evidence builds.