$$ Machine = Better Shot?

[PaulM]

Better is better, you're looking for nuance where there is none. Otherwise you have no business ever upgrading from that Ibanez, because that will always serve you perfectly no matter how good you get. I mean, if you are right, what is a Seagull ever going to do for you? And come to think of it, if machines can't help you improve no matter your skill level, maybe you should not have even bought the Ibanez.   

Not meaning to be offensive of course, just trying to provide a more personal perspective on what I think you are saying, which I think is misguided.

I mean, are you saying that there is never any benefit to upgrading espresso machines, even if you have the skills to work with them?

 

Edit: Oh, and I totally agree on Neil Peart, but I'll say that this guy was pretty close! Very musical family, and he was their most talented drummer. Not that it matters of course, that was a long time ago...

[Joe]

I'm going to split this topic soon, but to add my opinion, my cousin has a saying that I have adopted as my own: "I buy the best equipment, that way when I suck I know it is because of me, not my tools (surfboard,guitar,etc..)". Sound advise if you ask me.

Joe

[John F]

Not meaning to be offensive of course, just trying to provide a more personal perspective on what I think you are saying, which I think is misguided.

I mean, are you saying that there is never any benefit to upgrading espresso machines, even if you have the skills to work with them?

 

You are not understanding what I'm trying to say.

Because you mention the Ibanez (it is a perfect example of my opinion here) look what I said about it in post #4 from the acoustic thread here is a copy and past from then.


I'm getting a Seagull S6 in 2 months and I picked up an Ibanez for right now.

If I improve and am still playing in a year or 2 I might take another step up from the Seagull but for my skill level and ear the Seagull is a really good fit for me right now.

Of all the $400-$2,000 guitars I played I really like the Seagull the best (right now). I enjoyed playing it more than high end Martins, Taylors, Breedlove, and others.  Undecided

 
And from post #6 same thread

"I should play the Ibanez for at least a year if not 2   :oand than take a close look at Takamine, Martin, and Seagull and decide at that point (the thinking that my playing and ear will be much farther along then and I can make a better decision on my main guitar."


My position is congruent.

I am saying that my current skill level is not enough to exploit all of what the better guitars have to offer so I picked something that was a good match for now. If my skill level improves and I outgrow the Ibanez I said I want to "upgrade" to what I currently thought was the best the Seagull. I even said that it's what I think is best right now recognizing that in the future my improved skill might dictate something else.

See how that's much different than saying there is no reason to ever upgrade from the Ibanez?

Same with espresso machines.

If I would have canceled my vacation plans and picked up the Taylor it would not have made me play like James Taylor.

We can't spend our way to expert finger picking or god shots. 

I'm not trying to make the case that a Carezza is as good as...(well anything) or that the Ibanez is as good as a Martin..or that having better equipment is not preferential. Of course better machines are more desirable than lessor machines I think that is the misunderstanding here...

I'm just trying to put the machine itself like the guitar itself, or the drums proper perspective in the equation. If it's inferior/incapable then that is the end of it. But beyond that it is the tool portion nothing more.

So.... if the only variable your drummer changed was buying a drum set that cost 300% more how much better of a drummer would he be that day?

300% ?

Obviously no.

If his skill was beyond the ability of his old set then he would improve up to the point of his maximum ability because the old set was inadequate and holding him back...but no further...and that is my point.

See what I'm sayin?

John F

[John F]

"I buy the best equipment, that way when I suck I know it is because of me, not my tools (surfboard,guitar,etc..)". Sound advise if you ask me.

In a way I think we are saying the same thing. 

Different approaches but the same intent.

John F

 

[PaulM]

"I buy the best equipment, that way when I suck I know it is because of me, not my tools (surfboard,guitar,etc..)". Sound advise if you ask me.

In a way I think we are saying the same thing. 

Different approaches but the same intent.

John F

 

If I may hitch myself onto that thought, I agree that we are in agreement, at least on all of the important points!

Best,
Paul

[staylor]

Anyway, I think there are two lessons there. First, anyone with real skill can get the most out of even the most mediocre equipment.

Second, anyone with a certain level of skill can get better results with better equipment. I mean, I'm sure my friend's brother would have sounded even better that afternoon with a real hi-hat, rather than that lunchbox full of pennies....

First lesson - agreed.

Second lesson - partially agree - depending on how you are defining "better equipment". And to me that is probably part of the problem in this discussion. If the better equipment is an industry recognized and peer reviewed improvement machine that is considered to be best in class at a particular price point, then yes, from the lesser machine to the better machine there should be a noticeable improvement in shot qualities. I want to say that now is not the time to discuss whether that "improvement" is the correct direction for the coffee... anyway... If the better equipment provides for a tighter temp and pressure band, less intra and inter shot flux, consistently delivers more repeatable results regardless of external effects (machine surface temps, humidity, whatever) in short is truly an improved isolated platform then chances are the same resources, same barista and same understanding and identical application of variables will produce a more desirable shot. Now that desirable part may not be understood or even desired so much in the beginning as the palate adjusts to the newer bigger, better, faster race car-ish machine; perhaps more intensity, flavors, smells may be a bit off-putting initially but in time it may be recognized as an improvement - maybe. And that's the beauty of espresso, upgrades aren't always upgrades, spending lots of cash doesn't guarantee phenomenal espresso and commercial machines aren't the end-state. Maybe I like the tinkle of pennies in a lunch box but find the sizzle of a Top Hat to be distracting. In a year that might be reversed as I learn to drum, in the end it doesn't matter. A happy espresso dude is a happy espresso dude.

I guess the only reason I continue to type paragraphs on this matter is because I believe there are some important subtleties to this discussion, I've tried to bring some of that forth, hopefully there's enough here for contemplation.

Once again, I'm fu'd out and ducking out of here for some easier threads, like bugging Joe about latte art. ;-)

[thejavaman]

...A happy espresso dude is a happy espresso dude...

That about sums it up..... 

[PaulM]

Now that desirable part may not be understood or even desired so much in the beginning as the palate adjusts to the newer bigger, better, faster race car-ish machine; perhaps more intensity, flavors, smells may be a bit off-putting initially but in time it may be recognized as an improvement - maybe. And that's the beauty of espresso, upgrades aren't always upgrades, spending lots of cash doesn't guarantee phenomenal espresso and commercial machines aren't the end-state. Maybe I like the tinkle of pennies in a lunch box but find the sizzle of a Top Hat to be distracting. In a year that might be reversed as I learn to drum, in the end it doesn't matter. A happy espresso dude is a happy espresso dude.

Oh, I totally agree.

I guess the only reason I continue to type paragraphs on this matter is because I believe there are some important subtleties to this discussion, I've tried to bring some of that forth, hopefully there's enough here for contemplation.

Once again, I'm fu'd out and ducking out of here for some easier threads, like bugging Joe about latte art. ;-)

Shaun, your fu even in its weakened state is still very powerful. Just one point on those subtleties you mention: you seem to take for a given that flat brew temps are more desirable than other profiles, like say a humped profile like Faema and all of their engineers have championed for over forty years, and maybe 30 years before Schomer came along. I would respectfully call you out and demand proof for your (assumed) assertion that they have been wrong for all these years, but as Joe hinted already, that is a subject for another thread!

 

Best,
Paul

[mp]

Wow ... I can't believe how the discussion has blossomed.  I don't know if it matters now but I owned the Carezza from Dec '06 and gently put it aside in Dec '07 when the Precisia came into play.  Happy with the temperature stability and very happy with the steaming ability I was not impressed with the overall build quality of the machine and decided to skip a category or two and move up to the HX machine.  This happened Feb '08.

I use a FreshRoast Plus 8 roaster, & La Cimbali Junior stepless dozer Grinder.  These I've had from the beginning.

I do think that what Shaun says about always getting better and acquiring more knowledge to be true.  I don't know however that in this little time period I improved that much.  The only area that I am frustrated with at this time is the steaming.  Both the Carezza and the Precisia produced great micro foam.  The Precisia did it in less than half the time.  I did notice that they both have a single hole steam tip so I've put in an order with Wholelattelove for a 1 hole Expobar steam tip to see if this will solve the riddle.  The espresso's now are so good that my wife and I seem to be exclusively drinking just them.  I am not getting a chance to steam anymore because of this.  Once the 1 hole steam tip comes I will resume my persuit of fine micro foam on the Tea ll.

[staylor]

Now that desirable part may not be understood or even desired so much in the beginning as the palate adjusts to the newer bigger, better, faster race car-ish machine; perhaps more intensity, flavors, smells may be a bit off-putting initially but in time it may be recognized as an improvement - maybe. And that's the beauty of espresso, upgrades aren't always upgrades, spending lots of cash doesn't guarantee phenomenal espresso and commercial machines aren't the end-state. Maybe I like the tinkle of pennies in a lunch box but find the sizzle of a Top Hat to be distracting. In a year that might be reversed as I learn to drum, in the end it doesn't matter. A happy espresso dude is a happy espresso dude.

Oh, I totally agree.

I guess the only reason I continue to type paragraphs on this matter is because I believe there are some important subtleties to this discussion, I've tried to bring some of that forth, hopefully there's enough here for contemplation.

Once again, I'm fu'd out and ducking out of here for some easier threads, like bugging Joe about latte art. ;-)

Shaun, your fu even in its weakened state is still very powerful. Just one point on those subtleties you mention: you seem to take for a given that flat brew temps are more desirable than other profiles, like say a humped profile like Faema and all of their engineers have championed for over forty years, and maybe 30 years before Schomer came along. I would respectfully call you out and demand proof for your (assumed) assertion that they have been wrong for all these years, but as Joe hinted already, that is a subject for another thread!

 

Best,
Paul

Mmmmm, I'm not sure I said anywhere that a flat brew temp is the way to go (though it may be but I don't really have enough comparative experience in lab head to head fashion to even begin to intelligently guess)  but something I must have said made you think that, sorry about that. Maybe my opinion that a shot should show good inter and intra shot stability? By that I mean from shot to shot things should be repeatedly stable (very little flux) and within the shot from start of pre-infusion to shot kill again it should be repeatedly stable.

Whether profile of the shot should be flat or humped has been debated, a lot, on other forums by sharper cats than I. I see the advantages to both, flat or humped, that said neither is any good if either profile is unpredictable from shot to shot. I can speak intelligently about my machine and my observation would be that it gives good inter and intra, predictable enough that subtle variable tweaks are reflected in the shot results. I enjoy espresso on many different levels and one of them is the geeky espresso side of things, my machine allows me within a certain budget to employ it as a reliable tool to test against. Looking at a different kind of machine - a budget commercial HX machine - with a wide temp band from shot to shot, employing temp-surfing requirements pre-shot with an estimation of when the temp "is right, I think" isn't my style of espresso at the moment. I am enjoying a certain style of precision (precise within the budget) but a few years ago I enjoyed the romance of the temp-surf.

And just so I don't come off like an espresso scientist with a PF in one hand and a calculator in the other, sometimes I just pull based on gut instinct. Within a month there will be times when I don't weigh, I shift up my tamp and distribution technique in a new and obscure pattern and generally throw precision out the door and just listen to the espresso a bit. I'm sure JohnF must shake his head at times. I morph my style. It usually works but I know I will pull a handful of bad shots within a month and sometimes I can't blame it on my blending, roasting or too fresh of a coffee, sometimes it's just a bad decision on a dose, the grind, poor focus or a multitude of things. Sometimes I'll pour a really nasty shot because I like pushing the envelope, it happens, but before I shut the machine off for the day I usually sort things out for the better.

[John F]

I know I will pull a handful of bad shots within a month and sometimes I can't blame it on my blending, roasting or too fresh of a coffee, sometimes it's just a bad decision on a dose, the grind, poor focus or a multitude of things.

Time to upgrade? 


 


John F

[staylor]

I know I will pull a handful of bad shots within a month and sometimes I can't blame it on my blending, roasting or too fresh of a coffee, sometimes it's just a bad decision on a dose, the grind, poor focus or a multitude of things.

Time to upgrade? 


 


John F

Nah, I just need to find someone who likes nasty shots. ;-)

[John F]

Nah, I just need to find someone who likes nasty shots. ;-)

Let's not do anything hasty now.   

[staylor]

Nah, I just need to find someone who likes nasty shots. ;-)

Let's not do anything hasty now.   

In the immortal words of a not-so-successful coffee entrepreneur "I'll just put these in the fridge for later, maybe an iced drink".

;-)

[mp]

Maybe I'm just lucky on the Tea ll but I just don't remember pulling a bad shot on it unless we are talking about the first 4 or 5 shots I ever took with it.  It has a 1400 watt heating element and a 1.4 liter boiler ... boiler is small to commercial units but huge to sub $950.00 machines.  This seems to keep the machine running hot.  After the initial warm up of 20 minutes (manual says 15 but I want to be sure) I'm off to espresso heaven.

I'm curious Shaun ... if money was not an object ... which machine would you choose to have sitting in your abode to satisfy your espresso-fu?