For the record, I don't endeavor to play the role of equipment pimp to the espresso addicts of the web.

However, you would need less than an hour to convince yourself that the Mazzer Mini is nowhere in the same league as the Robur, for example, speaking strictly in terms of the added demand on technique. That is the real secret behind the WDT - it compensates very nicely for grinder shortcomings. I don't have a firm opinion on the flat burr versus conical burr difference, though my brief tour with the Versalab M3 and weekly experience with Mazzer Roburs certainly supports claims by knowledgeable home baristas that the conicals are behind much of the improvement.

Currently I'm informally evaluating the La Marzocco GS3. Counter Culture has welcomed locals into their espresso lab for the past couple years, so I'm fairly familiar with LMs (e.g., Linea 3AV, FB70, and GB5). While upgrading to commercial machines generally reduces the demands on the barista, the opposite is true sometimes, as I've found for the lower "forgiveness factor" of the aforementioned LMs. That said, it's only day two and it's clearly evident the GS3 is in another class compared to its brothers. Whether that incremental improvement in forgiveness (which may be little more than a smaller gicleur and start/stop preinfusion, I honestly don't know) is worth the cost of three semi-commercial E61 rotary espresso machines is a debate between you and your wallet. For the majority, I agree with Chris' recommendations: Spend your money and time elsewhere.

Like the audiophiles' world, the cost increases non-linearly relative to the benefit. The good news is the top end stops much sooner for espresso gear. While you could drop $10K on espresso equipment for your home, few would see any appreciable benefit at less than one-quarter that amount because they are gated by their own skills (The problem is on the handle side of the portafilter is my mini-diatribe on the subject). According to some hardcore audiophiles I know, that same amount would be a nice down-payment on speaker cables.

The thing one must keep in mind is that these high end grinders are designed for high end Barista's. By that, I mean that on my equipment with my modest skills, I may not notice the change. However, in the hands of a world class Barista, with world class equipment, the results will greatly differ.

Unfortunately, most new Home Baristas tend to upgrade their equipment thinking it will produce a better shot. While it usually leads to a slight increase in the cup, there is no substitute for practice and experience. A good Barista can make the most of what they have at hand. One day, I hope to reach the point that my equipment is the limiting factor in my espresso.

But until then, it is just cool to learn how and why things work.

The cynic's observation on expensive equipment is that those who upgrade see a qualitative improvement, while those who don't say it is merely a frill or convenience.

My take, having gone through a lot of upgrades, is that on espresso machines, the biggest objective step is from a Krups level machine to a Silvia or other machine at that level, since this takes you from non-espresso to real espresso with an occasional godshot. Going further adds a lot of consistency to the average one off shot, and a lot of convenience when making multiple ones.

However, on the subjective side, I found my skills didn't really improve until I had the consistent feedback of my Tea. In the mean time, I do as well on my old Solis, when the Tea is disassembled for repair, but there was no way I could without having had the Tea for a few years.

With grinders for espresso, the big step is from home models to commercial models. The added step of commercial conicals is noticeable only over a long series of shots.

But I have a very surprising opinion on drip or press coffee using light roasted beans. There is a **huge** improvement using commercial conicals; the difference between the M3 and the Mini in cupping is much larger and more obvious than the difference between a Solis and a mini. I've done dozens of triangle tests now, and I can easily taste the difference each time.

Fr. John wrote:However, this thread brings up an interesting notion, to me at least, and that is what seems to be an ever increasing "audiophile" syndrome to the world of home prosumer espresso.

While there are many charlatans in the audio world selling first class snake oil, 'audiophile syndrome' might need some more definition. Those that can hear the difference and have the money will make far better choices than those that have the money but can't hear the difference. Those of us that can hear the difference but don't have the money (or would rather drop the twelve grand on espresso kit) can tell the difference between the good stuff and the glitzy crap will buy the stuff after it's 'out of style'. My Magnepans cost me almost nothing, and so did my Mazzer Majors. Both work just fine, and I learned how to lay a 5 foot ribbon driver in the bargain.
I understand what you're thinking, but a bigger motor means that there is more torque, which can drive larger burrs more slowly and still provide the same amount of grounds in a short time period. This also means an almost lifetime of use from just a coupla sets of burrs for most of us (the younger and/or more fanatical ones among us might go through four..) and an almost bulletproof design that will not require attention in most circumstances. Add to that that taking it apart to clean it is part of the design, and it really does make a difference. Plus any side benefits of a more consistent ground, grind, and fines in the cup.
There is a story, however, that a well known audiophile magazine invited the Siskel's and the Ebert's and the Roper's of the home audio world to come and critique some speaker cable. Monster, Decware, Wire World and all the big hitters were tested alongside a 10 gauge 'car audio special' and a 14 ga zipwire from a hardware store. Most could identify the zipwire as needing something, but most could also identify what ended up winning the shootout; it was the jumper cables from the bed of the pick-up truck of one of the techs running the gig.
I haven't seen the slight-of-tech in pro-sumer and high end consumer products in espresso that happens in audio. Pro-sumer, audiophile, or pro.

Now, coffee, that might be another story. There are beans that goe for 55 a pound, and the variations of the words 'Jamaica', 'Blue' and 'Mountain' that I've seen would make an audio huckster blush. And the guy that figures out how to sell all the finest coffee cherries that the catlike animals swiped and defecated all over his plantation, that guy is the king of all hucksters, I expect he's taken his fortune and is now selling high-end stereo (or more likely '7 point 1') in the upper west side...

another_jim wrote:With grinders for espresso, the big step is from home models to commercial models. The added step of commercial conicals is noticeable only over a long series of shots.

But I have a very surprising opinion on drip or press coffee using light roasted beans. There is a **huge** improvement using commercial conicals; the difference between the M3 and the Mini in cupping is much larger and more obvious than the difference between a Solis and a mini. I've done dozens of triangle tests now, and I can easily taste the difference each time.

Interesting. So would upgrading from a Mazzer Mini or Cimbali Jr to a conical yield a bigger bang for the buck than an espresso machine upgrade?

cannonfodder wrote:Interesting. So would upgrading from a Mazzer Mini or Cimbali Jr to a conical yield a bigger bang for the buck than an espresso machine upgrade?

Hard to say. The step from an E61 box to a top machine is small, so is the one from a commercial flat to a commercial conical. My sense of the best Synesso and LM shots is that they don't taste better than mine, but that they have better mouthfeel and body; my sense of the difference in flats to conicals is that it improves the taste without affecting the mouthfeel. So the two changes would be complementary and expensive. Since grinders cost less, the bigger bang for the unproportional buck, as always, remains with the grinder upgrade.

cannonfodder wrote:Interesting. So would upgrading from a Mazzer Mini or Cimbali Jr to a conical yield a bigger bang for the buck than an espresso machine upgrade?

Having done precisely that upgrade over the last several years I can tell you that the answer to your question is yes. There's not much difference between a mini and a cimbali jr except in terms of grinds speed and doser cleanliness. There's a big and stark difference in taste between either the Cimbali, or a Mazzer Super Jolly for that matter to a Mazzer Kony, which is a rather slow conical that takes about 15 secs to grind 20 gm of coffee. The cost of a Mazzer Kony is about 2.5 times the cost of a Cimbali Jr. That puts the cost about the same as any number of prosumer e-61 machines. The difference between the Cimbali and the Kony is much more IMO than the difference between a PID Silvia and an e-61. The differences between the Cimbali and the Kony are in the taste of the coffee. I find that the conicals accentuate brightness compared to flat-burr grinders, which produce coffee that taste more muted to me. Ask me what i mean by muted and I prolly will ham and haw a bit. But I had a Kony and a Cimbali Jr. side by side in my house for a while and I definitely preferred the range of tastes provided by the Kony. I have a Robur now, with the Kony at work. The Robur grinds 20 gm of coffee in 6 seconds. Taste is identical to the Kony's.

The same folks who are inclined to visit me and pull shots on my frankenLinea are welcome to perform back to back comparisons between a mini-e and a Robur in order to satisfy themselves that there is a discernible difference. You might want to ask Nick Cho about this as well, since I think he has replaced his Super Jollys with at least one Robur at Murky Coffee.

In my opinion, grinders are viewed as less sexy that the device from which the coffee spews. People seem much less inclined to spend money on them. But I think there is a lot of benefit to be obtained from using conicals, provided that one's coffee is fresh and of good quality.

-Greg

cannonfodder wrote:Interesting. So would upgrading from a Mazzer Mini or Cimbali Jr to a conical yield a bigger bang for the buck than an espresso machine upgrade?

Yes, yes, yes!

I have upgraded recently from a M4 to a Kony. From the difference between my Innova and my Macap, I expected a lot from that upgrade, but the experience so far even exceeded my expectations. Right now I'm into re-exploring my SOs...

this past year I've noticed a lot of threads where people are really splitting hairs. It seems like many forget about the skill and the bean and get into debates about machines and money.

I tend to agree with Fr John's post on this and I will add my own opinion that a lot of the "improvements" in the more expensive equipment are all in the head of the buyer because they want it to improve their shot so badly and have spent so much money.

I dunno, I enjoy a bit of hairsplitting, and that's not a recent development.

I agree there's diminishing returns as the prices climb skyward. In espresso machines, you're paying for a lot of C's at the high end, e.g., capacity, consistency, and convenience. Sean Lennon called this evening and we were talking about this. He pointed out that the modifications he's made to his Brewtus (double PID, rotary pump, others that I cannot recall) increased the frequency of good shots but didn't "raise the bar" for the best one. I would think that the conical versus flat burrs debate would be a little easier to resolve, i.e., a few blind tests should indicate if there's a significant difference or not.