co-ferment vs natural process: the pro- counter that needs to be talked about is more honest
co-ferment, in this context, is fermentation with additional substrates from the outside like fruit, spices, or commercial microbes. The results can be very distorted. From COE Colombia data 2023, 5 of the top 10 lot are co-fermented or experimental processing with doctorated substitution. That's not a number to ignore.
natural process Traditionally: cherry left to dry at Zraised bed or patio. fermentation happens naturally from yeast and bacteria that exist in cherry and the environment. The results depend on many variables: weather, aliases, varieties, control when drying. UFLA studies (Universidade de Lavras Brazil) documenting that it's natural with Zfermentation controlled rate 1.2-2.4 points higher than natural process without monitoring.
The ones that are often missing from this argument: both can be good and both can be bad depending on execution. It's more reliable than the average co-ferment. The Recipient Zco-ferment has been proven and done with precision can be consistent outstanding.
what I want to hear from the practitioner: is there a more substantial argument other than a flavor preference or a belief in 'natural coffee is better'? Or are they both valid in the field depending on market targets?

