In 2006 HB wrote:I'm surprised how little that I was surprised; if anything, I'm a little disappointed. Although the machine met all the performance claims I've read, the same feeling one experiences after having seen a critically acclaimed film befell me, the feeling that anything less than absolutely mindbogglingly fantastic misses the mark. Most assuredly I cast an eye about the kitchen and listened carefully. Never did I hear a chorus of angels heralding the birth of a new espresso from the GS3's grouphead, nor did I see a heavenly glow envelop the room. That's the risk of unnaturally heightened expectations -- specifically my expectation that the exceptional espresso "ceiling" would rise under the mystical powers of the GS3.

A couple weeks ago Sean Lennon and I talked about his modifications to the Brewtus. He remarked that none of the modifications he made fundamentally changed the espresso machine's maximum potential, rather they increased the frequency of superior results. That was the impression that lasted with me throughout the week with the GS3. It was easy to pull good espressos on day 1 and very good espressos every day thereafter. Once or twice I thought the ceiling might move upward. Looking back on it, more realistically it was a case of the serendipitous "once a month" near godshot arriving, arguably with the aid of the GS3's predictable, solid performance.

Re-reading Chris' conclusion, I'm impressed how balanced it is despite his clearly effusive enthusiasm. His advice about who should and who shouldn't consider the pricey GS3 resonated with me. Interpreting the results of the poll What does your typical espresso rate? suggests that nearly half of the HB membership thinks their daily espressos are at least "very good." Arguments about the accuracy of self-evaluations and meaningfulness of numerical designations aside for a moment, the poll shows that the majority are pleased with their results. It begs the question: How much more would they be pleased with the results if a brand-new GS3 arrived in their kitchen, and would they agree the incremental improvement was worth the sticker price? Would a consistent improvement of one-half point (from midway between good/very good to a solid "very good") be worth more than four grand? Or would an increased frequency of the higher portion of the spectrum they already know today be enough?

Jim commented offline his often-repeated observation is that there is no jump from an E61 box to something better that will be nearly as dramatic as going from a Silvia to an E61 box.

My gut reaction is that his observation holds true in the GS3's case too, despite my agreement that the GS3 tops every performance-related category noted in a Buyer's Guide conclusion (Exceptional Espresso, Morning After, Cappuccino Lover's). Then again, my viewpoint may be constrained by having only one week to experiment. Given a few months' time, perhaps I would have "unlocked new understandings about espresso" as Chris did, thanks to the GS3's temperature accuracy and precision.

In contrast, I didn't share Chris' enthusiasm for the GS3's usability. Perhaps, as Greg mentioned earlier, it may take "some getting used to", though I've used plenty of espresso machines that seemed well adapted to how I like to work, not vice-verse. Subsequently I would dock its Convenience / Features score due to the ungainly layout of the steam arm / steam arm toggle / brew button array. I'm hopeful that a smart product ergonomics design engineer will revisit the prototype control panel layout too. It's bank of same-sized buttons offer poor visual clues and no tactical clues to their different purposes. I was almost ready to place a big piece of masking tape near the correct button (if you look closely at the extraction videos, you'll notice that I hesitate for an instant as I confirmed which button to press ). I have a nagging feeling that the focus on performance and reusing existing components trumped refinements one would have expected in a groundbreaking home espresso machine. Then again, it's a prototype, it may change in the final version, right?

Do I plan to add myself to the waiting list? Despite some quibbling above, it's really, really tempting. The forgiveness factor is very good. The beast clearly intends to kick butt in the WBC temperature torture test. You can tweak brew temperature with confidence and speed. It's a cappuccino loving locomotive and the velocity / volume of the steam balance is a true joy. And the compactness? Heck, I've reviewed prosumer espresso machines that would seem cramped in the same quarters the GS3 calls comfy. Were that not enough, the wife even gave me the green light to build an espresso bar in the rec room ("Don't complain if the kids bust one of your precious cups!").

So what's my answer? No thanks.

HB wrote:...I've used the "brew pressure surfing" technique on my Strada for the last couple years and find that it boosts the machine's forgiveness factor (0 bar -> 6 -> 9 -> 6 bar is my preferred profile, the 6 bar being the "surf" of the preinfusion/full pressure crossover point). If it's plumbed in, the stock GS/3 can mimic this profile with line pressure to a certain degree, of course limited to typical mains pressure of ~60 PSI / 4 bar (thus 0-4-9-4 bar).