galumay wrote:Sorry, I have to disagree with that sentiment. ...

It looks better and the manual aspect is in harmony with my lever machines.

...

That pretty much sums it up for me and a lot of lever-heads.

The aesthetic is pretty much complete with the lever, hand-grinder, and home roaster.

...design aesthetics were not a consideration with the Pharos.

Wrong. Functionality, bringing a product to market at a price affordable by many, not just a few, sustainability, relationship between form and function, use and availability of materials, as well as appearance were all considerations when we designed and built the Pharos. It looks like what WE wanted it to look like, and it does not look like any other coffee grinder - it is not derivative of anyone else's work except in that it is a coffee grinder, which, of course, have been around since time immemorial. And it works like WE wanted it to work. And it does exactly what we said it would do.

I have no objections to the idea that some people don't like how it looks - it's not a traditional appearing hand grinder, but rather a machine, and it was intended to look like the machine that it is. There are other people who find the looks to be exactly what they prefer to have in their house. But do, please, be clear whether you object to the appearance, or the actual industrial design of the machine - they are not the same thing, and conflating the two may cause confusion.

As you analyze the Pharos design there are things to observe - proportion of height to width, minimal use of materials - nothing extra, as little waste in production as possible, unibody construction - the frame & mechanism are one, not separate componetized structures. The use of repeating elements to the best advantage. There's more... We do feel that if the Pharos was subjected to a panel of design 'experts' it would hold up well to professional critique on its Aesthetic Design merits.

We have intentionally stayed out of discussions about the functionality of the HG-One because we don't own one, have not used one. Design we can talk about - LOL - at length...
Barb & Doug

Doug and Barb, my apologies, I didn't mean to denigrate the Pharos. And to clarify, I was using the term aesthetics purely from a "looks" viewpoint, not an industrial design one. I just view the Pharos as being much stronger in the "function" department (not to mention being an excellent value) than the "form" department.

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but to give you a better idea of what I was referring to, there was a previous post in this thread where someone commented that the Eames chair on the HG One website was a factor in their buying decision. Barb responded "LOL, it was the chair that did it, eh? I hadn't really thought of using photos of our furniture to sell our coffee accessories!" Of course I think that was somewhat in jest, and I don't mean to analyze too much from any offhanded comment. My point is that, from my perspective, yes, I absolutely do want my grinder to go with my furniture, and I think showing how coffee equipment will look in its "natural state" in a home is a good marketing decision.

Again, just my opinion, but if it makes it any better for me, looks is the sole reason I want to replace my cut yogurt cup with an Ipanema funnel

The Pharos is a GREAT looking grinder. I've used it and like it.

It is a modern take on my Zassenhaus, obviously! :wink



And now back to the HG-1 ...

Wait! I have to make two comments on that picture:

1. The Pharos looks Art Deco to me. Very cool. I don't know how you could call it ugly. And where else can you get a grinder with Titan conical burrs for $245? Even more amazing when you consider that HG One charges $200 just for the equivalent burr set.

2. I love my K10, and I think it looks great, but honestly the HG One is the most beautiful grinder I've ever seen -- by far.

JohnB. wrote:As to my K10 routine I control the grinder with a momentary foot switch which greatly simplifies the bump & sweep routine leaving both hands free. If I had to jump back & forth between sweeping & turning the switch off/on I'm sure that I would be less of a fan.

I hear ya. I've been pondering adding a foot switch for some time. There's some complication on how to dress the wire over or under the cabinets, but that's not what's holding me back. I keep thinking if I don't have that pause to switch the brush out of my hand so I can toggle the switch, I'll accidentally start the motor when the brush is deep in the grinder. Been there, done that, and it isn't pretty.

Oops. Hijacked the thread again

My comments about buying the HG-One because of the Eames Chair were in jest. Mostly. If the One was reviewed as a crap product no amount of design credentials would see it in our door other than a curio.

As a dealer in 20th Century Objects my passion lies in Bauhaus and everything that flowed thereafter from that extraordinary design period, including the Eames Chair. I can see that influence in the HG-One.

I also love 20th Century Industria and Brutalist design which I see in the Pharos. Influences I also see in the extraordinary artwork on the OE site. Just Marvelous and I would love to hang one of those works in my gallery.

If I could own both machines I would but not allowed.

Not an HG-One Owner experience - yet, but relevant.

Someone ought to post photos of the Pharos and the HG1 on the HandJive thread, just for posterity.

Hand (grinder) Jive - a photo essay

I personally find certain wooden box and lap mills far more aesthetically pleasing that either. But I appreciate the design of each and certainly wish I had them both sitting on my counter.

PC

Peppersass wrote:Wait! I have to make two comments on that picture:

1. The Pharos looks Art Deco to me. Very cool. I don't know how you could call it ugly. And where else can you get a grinder with Titan conical burrs for $245? Even more amazing when you consider that HG One charges $200 just for the equivalent burr set.

In fairness to the HG One, they do use a different burrset from the Pharos, one that does cost twice as much for them to purchase. The Mazzer 71mm retails for about $200, while the Pharos uses the Rossi 68mm burrset which costs about $100. They are referred to as equivalent but the Mazzer has an inner diameter of 49mm while the Rossi inner burr is 41mm. The outer burr diameter is irrelevant but the inner burrs on the Rossi are a bit smaller as far as I know. The angle of the Rossi burrs are also slightly more severe. Does that make a difference? Not much it seems, at least in terms of comparing the K10 with the Robur, but they are different burrs.

2. I love my K10, and I think it looks great, but honestly the HG One is the most beautiful grinder I've ever seen -- by far.

I like the look of both the Pharos (especially when pimped) and the HG One. To me the Pharos is like a Volvo while the HG One is like a Bentley. The Volvo isn't at all bad looking and is a great car, with just a hint of function over form, while a Bentley is, well... a Bentley.

DJF wrote:My comments about buying the HG-One because of the Eames Chair were in jest. Mostly. If the One was reviewed as a crap product no amount of design credentials would see it in our door other than a curio.

Completely agree. I can't stand it when a product sacrifices function for form, like some horribly-uncomfortable looking modern chairs, or my favorite, Philippe Starck's ridiculous citrus juicer. That is why I am always so impressed when I see a product that performs so well, is well made, looks beautiful, and has great ergonomics. It's why you'll have to pry my Caravel from my cold dead hands and why I like the HG One so much.

Y'all's comments have also changed my opinion of the Pharos' looks a bit. I could definitely see it complementing an Industrial Design space, something like this: http://st.houzz.com/simgs/04b178430f91a ... g-room.jpg.

galumay wrote:Sorry, I have to disagree with that sentiment. I have done exactly that and not only am i happier with the HG-One, so is my wife. The reasons are that it is overall quicker to achieve the end result, the cranking is more than offset by the bump & brush required on the K10.

Great to hear the HG One prep time compares favorably with your K10. Not having dealt with the quirks of a commercial grinder at home, I was mainly thinking in terms of my Baratza Vario. Since my Vario essentially takes 0 time in my prep (I do other things while it's grinding), I was thinking that if my Vario had the grind quality, and more importantly, the grind setting reproducibility, of the HG One, then I would use the Vario on most days. Still, if I'm not in a rush, I don't mind the little extra bit of exercise I get from the HG One.