Prototype La Marzocco GS3 - A Pro's Perspective

[malachi]

The prototype La Marzocco GS3 espresso machine has been long anticipated as a breakthrough combination of compact size and phenomenal temperature stability. It's a grueling review in the third Pro's Perspective.

Read more...

[malachi]

If you've got feedback on the article - please feel free to post here.
For more background on the machine and the process behind the review, check out the relevant thread in The Bench.

[Meerschaum]

An impressively written review that clearly conveyed a considerable amount of technical detail as well as your obvious enthusiasm for the machine. Well done.

[Ken Fox]

Well-written review that shows a lot of work; congratulations!

I remain somewhat skeptical of certain claims made for both the importance of and the achievement of reliable and reproducible shot temperature control on any espresso machine, this one included. To the extent that this matters, I think that no one, and no defined test sequence described heretofore, definitively shows that when you dial in a certain desired shot temperature that this is the temperature you will get after varying idle intervals and at varying desired temperatures. Greg's graphs, which you reference in the "crib sheet" and which Greg has previously posted, do not come close to addressing this issue. If one defines the range of desired shot temperatures as roughly 196-204F, I would be amazed, beyond amazed, if you could walk up to this machine at any time, punch in 203.5F or 201 or 196.7F and actually get all those temperatures within any sort of tight tolerance over a range of idle intervals.

To the extent that one believes this is important, this needs to be tested and has not been tested. Posting a selected shot temp profile or a test sequence of 14 shots as proscribed by the WBC protocol doesn't come close to testing this. Since tight temperature control is one of the "raison d'etres" of this piece of equipment, it will have to be tested over a range of temperatures to show exactly how good this very nice machine is at accomplishing this sort of temperature stability, which happens to be the only real sort of temperature stability that would be important to a typical "home user" ready to fork over serious cash for a GS3 (note: this review was posted on "HOME-BARISTA.com")

None of these comments detract from the hard work you have put into this review and for which we all thank you.


Best,

ken

[zin1953]

Great review, and thank you very much for making me lust after yet another machine I can't afford!

[wogaut]

Great article, Chris!

...but when, when, when, will it be available for purchase?!

Wolfgang
(who can't wait to own that machine)

[malachi]

Thanks for the kind words.

Wogaut - I've asked Bill for information on price and release date, but as of right now it seems neither are set. I'll let folks know as soon as I hear. The best piece of advice I can give would be to call either ESI in Seattle (La Marzocco distributor) or La Marzocco themselves in Seattle and ask.

Zin - You know, before this machine the idea of spending thousands of dollars on an espresso machine for my home seemed just silly. Now I've started trying to work out a budget for it.

Ken - There is a reason behind my putting the temp stability data in the appendix. All that matters is what is in the cup - and I trust those results.

[Ken Fox]

Thanks for the kind words.

(snippage)

Ken - There is a reason behind my putting the temp stability data in the appendix. All that matters is what is in the cup - and I trust those results.

Chris,

While I agree the taste in the cup is the primary consideration, certain claims are made for this machine (among others including the Synesso) that cannot be accepted on face value without substantiation, if these claims are to be used in consideration of a purchase by "Home Baristas" with their typically low volume production demands.

For example, here are a couple of quotations from your excellent review:

"More importantly, the GS3 also has great stability of brew temperature shot-to-shot (commonly called either reproducibility or inter-shot stability). The value of the latter type of stability does not seem to be a point of contention and, in fact, for many people in the commercial world it is a sort of 'Holy Grail' of espresso machines."

and:

"As with all my other reviews, I tested espresso by pulling numerous shots in different preps, temperatures, baskets and extraction times. With the GS3, however, this process finally became more structured and organized. With each coffee I would initially dial in the brew temperature (easy with this machine) down to 0.3F (the current minimum)."

and:

"I've covered the temperature stability earlier in the review and will provide more detail in the cribsheet, but suffice it to stay that I know of no stock machine that has independently confirmed and verified temperature stability which is superior to the GS3."

There are other such quotes in the article and cribsheet but I think these are enough to illustrate my point. I have seen no proof in any of the beta testers' posts that one can walk up to a GS3 at any time, key in a brew temperature value, and get that temperature repeatedly in a shot. If, for example, you were to decide that one of Schomer's coffees was indeed better at 203.2F rather than his previously stated 203.5F, and you keyed in 203.2F, which you then pronounced to be superior, you have not proven to us that you are in fact getting a shot brewed at 203.2F. In fact, you might get 201.9F one time and 204.2 another time. In order to taste this you need an entirely redesigned test protocol.

For example, you'd have to select various temperatures throughout the desired espresso making range (?196-204F?) and walk up to the machine with your Scace device and pull shot series of onesies, twosies, threesies, have varying idle periods, and then tell us that when one punches 203.2F on the keypad one gets a range of temps from ___ to ____. If in fact that range were, say, 202.4 to 204.7, I would then feel fully justified in regarding your claims that 0.3F temperature differences were discernable as optimistic thinking on your part and that maybe you and your guests were a bit suggestible.

Neither you nor Greg nor any of the other Beta testers have shown me how reproducible these small temperature variations are and therefore one has to regard conclusions based on the idea that these temperature variations were ACTUALLY OBTAINED as interesting but unproven.

Am I making sense?

Still a nice article, thanks for writing it.

ken

[malachi]

I'm sure that Greg has that data. I know others do. Suggest you mention your desire for it to be shared in the appropriate thread in The Bench. I would guess people would be perfectly willing to share it with you.

Personally, I understand that people obsess about this sort of thing - I am just not one of them. I've see results from a reasonable bracket (197.9F, 200.0F and 203.0F) and confirmed the results myself as well as in collaboration with other testers. That's enough for me.

[malachi]

Interesting "protocol for home machines" sub-thread split off to Knockbox Thread

[IMAWriter]

Chris...I can't begin to understand all the ramifications of your testing, but I can say that your LOVE for the ART of espresso shines through all the technical conversation. A most thoughtful and entertaining overview/review.
While I believe I understand Ken's questioning of temp stability from idle, or shot to shot, valid as it may be ( I deal with temperature issues as an Anita owner) I appreciate your answer that "what's in the cup" is, for YOU (and me) the final word. If we take it to it's conclusion, my guess is that if the 1st pull from, say 1-2 hours idle...the normal amount of "rest' between pulls for us home espresso folk...is as good as the 2nd pull, then it would make sense that indeed the GS3 is maintaining a solid temp as seen on the read-out...+ or- the stated limits.
If I could justify the $$$ right now (I need another #1 song!...at least...) I'd buy the GS3, AND follow your advice to get some professional training...Schomer, et al....though you and others here, on CG and alt.coffee have given me so much FREE help I feel guilty....sort of....
The pleasure I get when a friend tastes a particularly well pulled shot and goes WOW....priceless

[Ken Fox]

(snippage)

While I believe I understand Ken's questioning of temp stability from idle, or shot to shot, valid as it may be ( I deal with temperature issues as an Anita owner) I appreciate your answer that "what's in the cup" is, for YOU (and me) the final word. If we take it to it's conclusion, my guess is that if the 1st pull from, say 1-2 hours idle...the normal amount of "rest' between pulls for us home espresso folk...is as good as the 2nd pull, then it would make sense that indeed the GS3 is maintaining a solid temp as seen on the read-out...+ or- the stated limits.

Rob,

I just want to clarify, for the umpteenth time, that I'm not speaking as someone who is convinced that tight temperature control is essential to great shotmaking. This is a VERY OPEN question to me at this point in time. I personally think that you probably can make great shots without tight temperature control, but then what do I know?

The point that I am making is that claims are being made for this machine and others that assume that tight temperature control is being obtained. By tight temperature control I am not addressing whether this machine can settle down into some stable repeatable shot profile and temperature during a long shot run. What I am addressing is whether you can walk up to this machine after a random idle period and get a shot at the temperature you are asking the machine to make the shot at. Can you then bump the intended shot temp up by 0.3 degrees F, and reasonably expect that the shot will in fact be delivered to you at a temperature of 0.3 degrees F higher than before? What is the error band in shot temps that are delivered vs. what is requested on the input panel? If the error is ± 0.7 degrees F and you ask for 0.3F more or less, then what exactly are you actually getting in your cup?

If one is making claims about tasting minor brew temp differences based on simply telling the machine to change the shot temperature by these tiny increments, but has not tested whether the machine CAN REALLY DO THIS, than it is really not proven that your observations are due to actual small delivered shot temperature differences because you don't know if the machine is really delivering the ordered shot temps.

Does any of this make sense? Am I just spewing out hot air that no one else thinks is worth considering?

ken

[IMAWriter]

Rob,

I just want to clarify, for the umpteenth time, that I'm not speaking as someone who is convinced that tight temperature control is essential to great shotmaking. This is a VERY OPEN question to me at this point in time. I personally think that you probably can make great shots without tight temperature control, but then what do I know?

You know plenty...I always enjoy your lazer-like wit and wisdom ;>D

The point that I am making is that claims are being made for this machine and others that assume that tight temperature control is being obtained. By tight temperature control I am not addressing whether this machine can settle down into some stable repeatable shot profile and temperature during a long shot run. What I am addressing is whether you can walk up to this machine after a random idle period and get a shot at the temperature you are asking the machine to make the shot at. Can you then bump the intended shot temp up by 0.3 degrees F, and reasonably expect that the shot will in fact be delivered to you at a temperature of 0.3 degrees F higher than before? What is the error band in shot temps that are delivered vs. what is requested on the input panel? If the error is ± 0.7 degrees F and you ask for 0.3F more or less, then what exactly are you actually getting in your cup?

According to Chris, an uncommonly good shot of espresso


Does any of this make sense?

Yes

Am I just spewing out hot air that no one else thinks is worth considering?

Yes, in making your point you make perfect sense. However, there are times, and this may be one of those times, that making sense, i.e. using 'empirical" data/logic, etc may just have to be set aside, as the human equation takes over....according to Chris and his accomplices, the GS3 just makes dern fine espresso, pretty much every time. If, in fact La Maz has to "tone down' claims of temperature invincibility, so be it. I don't believe it will make any difference to those who wish to own it.
by the way, this is the first time I've had a chance to go "mano a mano" with you...as usual, you are a gentleman.
And Dan K/Chris T, if you're reading this, a belated Happy New Year!

[Dogshot]

If one is making claims about tasting minor brew temp differences based on simply telling the machine to change the shot temperature by these tiny increments, but has not tested whether the machine CAN REALLY DO THIS, than it is really not proven that your observations are due to actual small delivered shot temperature differences because you don't know if the machine is really delivering the ordered shot temps.

Does any of this make sense? Am I just spewing out hot air that no one else thinks is worth considering?

ken

There is a lot of common sense that supports your suggestion that minute temp differences are not all that critical. For example, until quite recently, a good Barista could expect to hit the same shot starting temp within 1-1.5 deg F. If a .3 deg difference in start temp makes a dramatic change in taste, then what does this say about the quality and consistency of the results the rest of the (non GS3 and temp stabilized uber-machine owning) world is achieving? Maybe we are all deluding ourselves about how good our espresso is and we are all on the brink of a whole new era of quality, as Chris T. suggests.


Mark

[Nick]

I just want to clarify, for the umpteenth time, that I'm not speaking as someone who is convinced that tight temperature control is essential to great shotmaking.

The key part of your statement here is "great shotmaking." What's "great?" It all hangs on the answer to that question, doesn't it?

[Ken Fox]

The key part of your statement here is "great shotmaking." What's "great?" It all hangs on the answer to that question, doesn't it?

I guess everyone has his own definition. For me, it would be a shot that grabbed my attention, something that was absolutely phenomenal, in the same league as one of the best wines you've ever drunk, or like a terrific shot you remember from an outstanding cafe. I've been privileged to have a few remarkable shots in my life, and a lot of good and ordinary ones (and sink shots) as well.

What's yours?

ken

[IMAWriter]

I guess everyone has his own definition. For me, it would be a shot that grabbed my attention, something that was absolutely phenomenal, in the same league as one of the best wines you've ever drunk, or like a terrific shot you remember from an outstanding cafe.

What's yours?

ken

The benchmark for me was the shot prepared for me last summer at Murky (DC)...though my shots are flavorful, I've not approached the mouth feel of that shot...as I understand it, though, a $1000 HX(run by a competant person, will still have a harder time getting that "texture thing" than the same person pulling a shot on a La Marzocco....at least that's what I like telling myself! ;>D

[malachi]

(Posts about commercial espresso being subpar to undrinkable split to Sad State of Commercial Espresso thread)

[Ranger144]

I believe Ken's point is being misunderstood.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Ken, but it appears that he is simply stating that, independent of the validity of the CONCEPT of micro-adjustments of brew temperature and their effects on the quality of the shot, there are very large claims being made by the manufacturer about the ability to dial in such micro-adjustments. Given these claims and given a reviewer/tester who has the equipment, willingness, and most importantly free time (if one such exists), it would be appropriate and relevant to independently evaluate the ability of the machine to produce targeted brew temperatures in situations that do not involve near-continuous use. It seems entirely relevant to the home user (me) to know if the machine can hit its targets after idle periods of various lengths between shots. Again, the test is not of the validity of the concept of small differences in brew temp affecting the resultant quality in the cup, but is simply of the validity of the manufacturer's claims of hyper-precision in temperature control.

I, too, would like to commend the time and hard work put into the original review. Thank you!

Ranger144

[malachi]

To the best of my knowledge, the manufacturer has made no claims about the performance of this machine. All the claims have been made by folks like myself or Greg or Andy or Mark after independently testing the machine in question.