cannonfodder wrote:
It would be curious to find out if your replacement machine has the same 'machined out' drip tray holes. Did I understand your comment correctly; when your steam boiler fills the water tap opens and drains the boiler? The fix was to disconnect it and wait until a programming update is released to fix the bug? It sounds like LM needs to revisit the QC on the GS3 production line.

I do wait in anticipation to see what the holes will be like. I haven't seen any photos from Tokyo.

You did understand correctly with regard the tea tap. Allpress was going to get in touch with Italy but as ithe machine is now being replaced sometime September I'm not sure I'm going to see a fix for it.

Rosemary

Ken Fox wrote:Dave,

You raise some good points. Among them (ok, it is hidden) is an important issue that may merit being split off from this thread: to what extent do we want our espresso machines to be "electronic wonders," and to what extent do we want them to be fairly simply electro-mechanical devices that we can coax good shots out of?

The GS3 strikes me as the current champion electronic marvel. It purports to take a lot of the variability out of shotmaking by controlling shot temperatures and other factors. On the other side are simpler machines that with a bit of effort can produce (presumably) equivalent shots. On the plus side, the GS3 does this sort of stuff for you, and on the minus side it has more fancy stuff inside that can break.

Many owners have modified their machines will all sorts of add on devices that make their shotmaking experience (perhaps) more repeatable. These hackers, of which I am one, are plodding a middle ground between, say, a stock Silvia and a GS3.

Speaking for myself, I prefer the more basic approach, as I know that I can compensate for the deficiencies of the machine myself, and with a simple machine, will have something I can always fix when it breaks and will not be put in a position later with a failing machine needing a $1000 brainboard replacement which will cause me to decide whether or not it is worth repairing my machine; if I am the brainboard, then the machine is always fixable for a reasonable price.

Others may come down on this issue differently, and perhaps it merits further discussion.

ken

Agreed. Flexibility equates to complex. The more 'options' a machine has, the more complicated the design. The more complicated the design the more thing can go wrong. If it is not broke, why fix it. How many times has a new piece of tech come along that was so 'gee whiz cool' that we went looking for a problem to use it on, and then created more problems than we had before.

Don't get me wrong, I like to tinker and like you have made a modification or two on most of my equipment. It is in the nature of a serious hobbyist to push the boundary and try to fix any deficiency in the hobby, be that PID's, pneumatic pumps, preheat coils or preinfusion delay timers. The GS3 is a wonder machine that pushes the envelope of modern espresso tech. Without those innovations, the evolution of our hobby or obsession would stall. Without innovation, we would still be pulling levers to get our espresso (actually, some of us still do).

IMHO, with the GS3 you are paying for convenience, the set it and forget it feature of extraction volume (programmable flow meter) and temperature (PID and saturated group) and the exclusivity and prestige that comes along with being able to say 'I have a LaMarzocco at home'.

I do not think I would be quite so disappointed if the holes had been neatly machined to create oval openings vs. the jagged mess you encountered. Your situation may have been a fluke that made it through the QC process by mistake. It happens now and then.

The tea tap issue is a simple programming bug that can be fixed by flashing the code on a eprom (can you tell I am old school). Who knows, the thing may be running a mini Linux Kernel for all I know, but given your current problem it could be a Microsoft product . It is an interesting problem that I have not heard other accounts of so again, could it simply be a lemon machine that slipped through the cracks? Time will tell. These are the problems faced by many early adopters of technology, what we like to call the bleeding edge in the IT field.

Please update us as your issues are resolved.

Ken Fox wrote:... I prefer the more basic approach ...

Isn't it here the new Speedster comes in

cannonfodder wrote:IMHO, with the GS3 you are paying for convenience, the set it and forget it feature of extraction volume (programmable flow meter) and temperature (PID and saturated group) and the exclusivity and prestige that comes along with being able to say 'I have a LaMarzocco at home'.

None of the professionals who raved about the machine focused on any of those things. They all talked about the improvement in the cup. I already pretty much have set-it-and-forget-it and was influenced by their comments, confirmed by my afternoon with the machine last summer.

Marshall wrote:None of the professionals who raved about the machine focused on any of those things. They all talked about the improvement in the cup. I already pretty much have set-it-and-forget-it and was influenced by their comments, confirmed by my afternoon with the machine last summer.

None of the LM principals I have spoken with about this machine, ever claimed that what was in the cup was "better," rather they have said that it was easier to get better and more consistent results with less effort. These principals would be Kent, Ron, and to a very small extent Bill, although that was a while ago.

I think the GS3 is going to be a fine machine, but I do not believe for an instant that it will produce "better" results than quite a few other machines, given an operator who knows how to use those other machines properly and (perhaps) has made simple modifications such as PID installations.

I would add into this mix that if one doses to a level that espresso machines are actually designed to handle, e.g. 12- ~16g, all good machines become much more consistent, further narrowing any potential differences in shot quality.

Don't get me wrong; LM is a stand up company run by stand up people. They are more responsive to the consumer, to people like us, than all the other companies combined. I admire what they do and have great respect for them. If I didn't already own too much equipment that works well, I'd seriously consider buying a GS3. That all having been said, I don't care what this or that "professional" or "barista" may or may not have said about how the GS3 "improves" the cup, which I believe is and will remain, unprovable.

ken

Ken Fox wrote:None of the LM principals I have spoken with about this machine, ever claimed that what was in the cup was "better," rather they have said that it was easier to get better and more consistent results with less effort.

How about Chris Tacy on the prototype in "La Marzocco GS3 - A Pro's Perspective":
I can hear the screams already. Some may accuse me of going overboard or hyping the GS3. Honestly, these are the results as I see them. When it comes to the quality of espresso being produced, the GS3 is superior to any of the commercial machines I have extensive experience with including the temperature-stabilized Mistral. The perfect score on Ease of Use is what put it over the top, but even so it's a huge accomplishment.

In my humble opinion, when it comes to producing high-quality espresso the GS3 is the current state-of-the-art.

Jacob wrote:How about Chris Tacy on the prototype in "La Marzocco GS3 - A Pro's Perspective":
I can hear the screams already. Some may accuse me of going overboard or hyping the GS3. Honestly, these are the results as I see them. When it comes to the quality of espresso being produced, the GS3 is superior to any of the commercial machines I have extensive experience with including the temperature-stabilized Mistral. The perfect score on Ease of Use is what put it over the top, but even so it's a huge accomplishment.

In my humble opinion, when it comes to producing high-quality espresso the GS3 is the current state-of-the-art.

From my post:

"That all having been said, I don't care what this or that "professional" or "barista" may or may not have said about how the GS3 "improves" the cup, which I believe is and will remain, unprovable. "

If you are going to convince me of this you are going to have to do it with blind tasting experimentation. I would rate the probability of proving this via blind tasting at between slim and none.

ken

Ken Fox wrote:If you are going to convince me of this you are going to ...

He he, except from the importance of a good grinder, I can't think of any coffee related truth that I would try to convince you or anybody else about.

Back then, over a year ago, it were statements like Chris Tacy's that Marshall and most other people had to rely on when placing early orders.

With my limited experience, I have to rely on an 'expert' from time to time. Just a few weeks before the Titan-project was launched, I trusted Greg Scace's experience and found myself a used Robur - pretty pleased with that!

Jacob wrote:He he, except from the importance of a good grinder, I can't think of any coffee related truth that I would try to convince you or anybody else about.

Back then, over a year ago, it were statements like Chris Tacy's that Marshall and most other people had to rely on when placing early orders.

With my limited experience, I have to rely on an 'expert' from time to time. Just a few weeks before the Titan-project was launched, I trusted Greg Scace's experience and found myself a used Robur - pretty pleased with that!

The world is full of "experts," and one has to decide what to do with what they say. Without a doubt, if one knows nothing or next to nothing about a subject, it is more difficult. The more one knows about a subject, the more one can evaluate what "the experts" say.

Let me give you an example from outside the world of coffee. Robert Parker is a well known authority on wine. He produces a newsletter on wines, and either he or other members of his staff evaluate a fairly large percentage of the wines that are exported throughout the world. Like any human being, he has his own set of likes and dislikes, about which (I believe) he has been relatively consistent, which is to say that the man has a "track record." Do I blindly follow his recommendations, purchasing only wines he recommends and avoiding those he does not? No, I don't. I tend to find his recommendations on red Bordeaux and red Southern Rhone wines to be useful, and his evaluations of wines from other regions less similar to my own taste (and hence, less useful to me). This is because I've had the opportunity to compare his views on a given wine with my own. Another example more relevant to coffee would be that I've found, over time, that when Jim Schulman recommends a particular coffee to me, that I will like it and will be glad later that I bought it. This has been proven to me a number of times.

Before I am going to accord "expert" status, or more specifically, "expert status" that I'm going to follow, I need to convince myself that what this person finds to be "true" matches my own overall view of reality. As anyone who has read many of my postings can attest, I tend to be fairly skeptical about claims that appear "unsupportable." I have, myself, conducted a number of blind tasting experiments because I KNOW how easy it is to convince one's self of things that later prove to be incorrect.

For example, I have trouble believing that anyone can detect differences in the taste of espressos that are brewed at temperatures differing by 0.1 degree Fahrenheit, and that liquid dish soap leaves a tastable residue on glassware and portafilters regardless of how much you try to wash it off. Both of these are claims that have been made in the past by the individual that you reference. I should add that the accuracy of the temperature probe used by the GS3 does not even have a stated accuracy of anywhere close to 0.1 degree F, putting further into doubt anyone's claims that they can taste differences in coffee brewed to temperatures differing by such a small amount.

Most people whose taste and recommendations I value tend to be rather circumspect about their own judgments and they constantly question them, always considering the possibility that they might have made an error. I have not observed that sort of behavior in the person that you reference.

Therefore, I believe that what he has written about the GS3 is unlikely to accord very well with what I would observe for myself, were I to have the opportunity to test the machine, myself, over an extended period of time. I should add that any short term evaluation of this or any other machine could and probably would be misleading, given the variability inherent in espresso production, when one is comparing to another machine with which one has long term experience.

ken