# Niche or Monolith



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

I have a Clima Pro that I am quite happy with, and again, I have a Niche that I am quite happy with. But, I quite fancy giving a Monolith Conical a go since my passion is darker roasted beans, but, am I really going to get anything from a Monolith Conical that I do not already get from the Niche. Guess this question is only to Monolith Conical owners


----------



## mmmatron (Jun 28, 2014)

I've haven't used a Niche but the Monolith conical is effortless. Similar to the clima pro you don't really need to do any shot prep (I do though) you just get a big fluffy clump free mound ready to go. Plus the taste in the cup is awesome, brings everything out (even the light stuff). 
I'll bring mine up next time I'm in your neck of the woods and you can have a play.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

mmmatron said:


> I've haven't used a Niche but the Monolith conical is effortless. Similar to the clima pro you don't really need to do any shot prep (I do though) you just get a big fluffy clump free mound ready to go. Plus the taste in the cup is awesome, brings everything out (even the light stuff).
> I'll bring mine up next time I'm in your neck of the woods and you can have a play.


 spoken like a true gentleman......LOL I have moved btw, but not far!


----------



## Carlo (Dec 6, 2019)

Same dilemma here. I have a Niche and I prefer dark roasts. Happy with it (apart from the dosing cup which could be better).

My feel is that the MC3 will be similar in terms of performance, but hopefully stronger, better built and more durable. If the coffee tastes marginally better, that's a bonus.

Anyway, to answer the question I decided to get a MC3 and find out. So I'll get back to you in about June  when I get it delivered.....


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

Good man......thats the spirit! I am not interested in a shoot off which claims one is better than the other. I have a Niche which single doses perfectly well.....so I doubt the workflow for the Monolith can be much better. What really interests me is taste, with the focus being on burr size. Even I can usually detect a difference between say 65mm flats and 83 mm but I do not think the conicals have the same taste experience just because they are slightly bigger


----------



## Carlo (Dec 6, 2019)

No, apparently with conicals the size of the burrs doesn't influence taste as much as with the flats, BUT the Niche runs at more than twice the speed as the MC3 so I guess any difference in taste might come from this


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

Carlo said:


> No, apparently with conicals the size of the burrs doesn't influence taste as much as with the flats, BUT the Niche runs at more than twice the speed as the MC3 so I guess any difference in taste might come from this


 Interesting, but would my taste buds be able to detect the difference?.......loking forward to a potential visit from a kind owner and that might solve the problem!


----------



## M_H_S (Jun 6, 2018)

Carlo said:


> No, apparently with conicals the size of the burrs doesn't influence taste as much as with the flats, BUT the Niche runs at more than twice the speed as the MC3 so I guess any difference in taste might come from this


Do you know the rpm speed of both? What is it? The Kony and Robur are 400+. The Ceado e92 is 270 or so i think.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Carlo (Dec 6, 2019)

Should be 120 rpm for the monolith and 330 for the Niche


----------



## olivier (Jan 4, 2016)

Started doing some comparisons between my Niche and Monolith Flat with RedSpeed SSP burrs this morning.

Main reason for purchasing the Monolith was curiosity. I had stepped up from a Mignon to the Niche a couple of years ago and thought it was night and day. I couldn't help wondering how hard the law of diminishing returns would hit by stepping up. As I wanted doserless, small footprint, and tend to prefer light-to-medium fruity coffees, Monolith Flat seemed to be the next logical step.

I had plugged in the Monolith earlier this week and did my morning coffee with it. Had Crankhouse El Paraiso anaerobic going on so that's what I used. It was my second bag of it, so think I knew it quite well. And my first bag was one of mild disappointment as I never seemed to be able to dial it in perfectly, always oscillating between slightly too bright (if not sour) and too muddled flavours depending on my extraction with the Niche.

First shot with Monolith was a huge mess. Gushing, channeling shot. Couple more tries and I felt I had nailed it, hitting the notes from the roasters, with no unpleasant flavour detectable. However there was a bit of a lingering taste that bothered me slightly. Tried going a tad coarser and wow!

Still thought I was imagining the improvement vs my memory of same bean through Niche, as we all tend to do with shiny new gear, especially when it's expensive. Pulled some shots this morning with my partner, who's quite fond of the Niche. Once both were dialed in to similar extraction levels (or "perceived" extraction levels, as I don't have a refractometer), she tasted both without knowing which was which and looked a bit annoyed. She liked the Monolith much more than the Niche... And indeed, Niche shot was good, but Monolith was close to perfection. All flavours coming through very vividly but with an overall sense of balance. Niche shot on its own was showing the same flavours but not as clearly, and with maybe very tiny off notes.

Tried again the comparison with darker roasted stuff (Caffe Lusso Gran Miscella, provided with the Monolith). Niche was much, much closer on this one, but we still gave the Monolith a slight edge, where once again, overall balance and "clarity" of taste was better. But not 4x better.

All in all, I'm impressed with the Monolith. Didn't think the incremental improvement over the Niche would be that large (and it's not fully seasoned yet). But that improvement is really perceptible on fruitier beans. Without doing a diret A/B comparison on the darker blend, I would not have been able to say that the Monolith was better.

Also did one V60 with Monolith, which was bang on, but further testing will be required.

I'll keep on comparing Niche vs Monolith, but so far the results seem quite clear. That said, I feel like maybe someone more experimented/skilled than me might be able to get to 90% of where the Monolith allows you to go with the Niche, while I'm stuck at maybe 60-75%. Is the price difference worth it? In my mind, yes, because I'm trying to get the best cup of coffee, but to be honest it's all a bit silly.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

You cannot really compare the taste from a flat to a conical......you might as well compare peeling potatoes with a knife and a wooden spoon! If you doubt me, put the same beans through and half decent flat grinder.


----------



## olivier (Jan 4, 2016)

I know that's the consensus, indeed. But I only believe what I see (or taste, in that case!)

A more direct comparison would have been MC3 vs Niche, but my tastes drew me toward Flat. Still thought it was interesting to compare two popular single-dose grinders, especially on a darker-roasted bean.

I didn't comment on that, but it didn't seem like the mouthfeel was thinner on the Flat than on the Niche, and that was one of my worries with going to flat burrs.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

olivier said:


> I know that's the consensus, indeed. But I only believe what I see (or taste, in that case!)
> 
> A more direct comparison would have been MC3 vs Niche, but my tastes drew me toward Flat. Still thought it was interesting to compare two popular single-dose grinders, especially on a darker-roasted bean.
> 
> I didn't comment on that, but it didn't seem like the mouthfeel was thinner on the Flat than on the Niche, and that was one of my worries with going to flat burrs.


 You need to blind taste test for it to be honest ( if you aren't already doing it )


----------



## olivier (Jan 4, 2016)

Mrboots2u said:


> You need to blind taste test for it to be honest ( if you aren't already doing it )


 I didn't fully do it, as on first sips on each cup on knew which was which. But did blind after that to confirm that it was not pure imagination. My partner did it truly blind, and if anything she has a better nose/palate than mine, so I reckon it's not just confirmation bias.

To be clear, my opinion stated a few posts above shouldn't be taken as a definitive statement on the topic. It's just my coffee, my preparation skills, my machine, and my tastes! YMMV.


----------



## Rob1 (Apr 9, 2015)

olivier said:


> I know that's the consensus, indeed. But I only believe what I see (or taste, in that case!)
> 
> A more direct comparison would have been MC3 vs Niche, but my tastes drew me toward Flat. Still thought it was interesting to compare two popular single-dose grinders, especially on a darker-roasted bean.
> 
> I didn't comment on that, but it didn't seem like the mouthfeel was thinner on the Flat than on the Niche, and that was one of my worries with going to flat burrs.


 Was a little confused by the differences you were noting until I read back and saw you were comparing a conical to a flat.

It's very difficult to compare grinders anyway without being willing to throw a lot of coffee away. You'd need to try a variety of doses, brew ratios and grind settings. Of course two grinders using the same dose and ratio can be compared (you come to the conclusion that at x dose and x ratio with this coffee, grinder 1 is superior to grinder 2) but I question how useful that is as nobody makes coffee in such a rigid way.

A direct comparison would be Mazzer Kony vs Niche as it uses the same burr set but still the above would apply. Particle size analysis would be interesting.


----------



## DavecUK (Aug 6, 2013)

I think it's extraordinary that people are comparing a £500 grinder with a Monolith flat costing 4x more. I think it shows what a good job Martin did with the Niche. Good quality grinding, affordable, compact, easy to use, seemingly reliable and almost free of exchange (retention).


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

PPapa said:


> Except people spend £2k on a machine and pair it with... a wooden spoon.
> 
> All to their own of course. Your money your decisions.


 I am not knocking the Monolith......you cannot compare a flat with a conical in any sort of test, other than to say you prefer the taste of one over the other


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

DavecUK said:


> I think it's extraordinary that people are comparing a £500 grinder with a Monolith flat costing 4x more. I think it shows what a good job Martin did with the Niche. Good quality grinding, affordable, compact, easy to use, seemingly reliable and almost free of exchange (retention).


 Agreed, bur people throwing 2k plus into a grinder, naturally want it to be the best out there. That is fair enough. To compare a Monolith conical with a Niche would be closer, but tbh, if the Monlith did not win hands down, then the laws of nature are malfunctioning


----------



## PPapa (Oct 24, 2015)

DavecUK said:


> I think it's extraordinary that people are comparing a £500 grinder with a Monolith flat costing 4x more. I think it shows what a good job Martin did with the Niche. Good quality grinding, affordable, compact, easy to use, seemingly reliable and almost free of exchange (retention).


They are being compared, but they are not comparable. Otherwise, why would someone spend 4 times more for marginal gains if it did just as good job?


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

PPapa said:


> They are being compared, but they are not comparable. Otherwise, why would someone spend 4 times more for marginal gains if it did just as good job?


 Just because one forum member decides to effect a comparison of an apple to a grapefruit does not set a logic or a bench mark


----------



## The Systemic Kid (Nov 23, 2012)

Have compared shots produced through a Niche with a big flat - results were interesting. Beans used included a pretty funky medium to light offering - think it may have been a natural? @Fez ? Niche held up better than I expected but could not match the clarity the big flat produced or the sweetness. For what it is, Niche offers plenty if your preference is medium to darker roasts. As regards the pursuit of the God shot, it's surprising how much more you have to pay, grinder-wise, to see any marked difference in the cup. The relationship between incremental increases, taste-wise, and price of grinder is, like HiFi, logarithmic.


----------



## struttura.originaria (Nov 20, 2019)

Monolith Flat vs Niche = potatoes vs carrots.



olivier said:


> A more direct comparison would have been MC3 vs Niche


 I don't agree here too. A real comparison should be MC3 vs a conical with the same speed. For people who don't believe that different rpms make a huge difference, please, try different rpms and see !


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

olivier said:


> I didn't fully do it, as on first sips on each cup on knew which was which. But did blind after that to confirm that it was not pure imagination. My partner did it truly blind, and if anything she has a better nose/palate than mine, so I reckon it's not just confirmation bias.
> 
> To be clear, my opinion stated a few posts above shouldn't be taken as a definitive statement on the topic. It's just my coffee, my preparation skills, my machine, and my tastes! YMMV.


 And your money .

glad you are enjoying your new purchase .


----------



## Rob1 (Apr 9, 2015)

PPapa said:


> They are being compared, but they are not comparable. Otherwise, why would someone spend 4 times more for marginal gains if it did just as good job?


 You could make the same argument about a number of things.

Golf clubs.

Cars.

Shoes.

Designer clothing vs high street.

Specific to coffee you've got:

VST and IMS baskets Vs stock baskets (approx £5 vs £25) Ditto for shower screens.
-------Then the various coatings of IMS vs 'Stock' IMS.

A Torr 58.55 sharp edge titanium Vs a Motta 58.5, or Push 58.55 vs a Chinese clone.

An OCD vs a Chinese clone.

A set of Acaia scales Vs Felicita Vs Brewista Vs £10 jeweller scales.

Then you've got coffee machines themselves. Not multiples more expensive but an ECM Mechanica Slim Vs Expobar Office Leva HX or Minima or Mara X. A bit more extreme you've got La Marzocco LM to compares against any non-profiling DB E61 machine. Is the coffee from the LM superior?

Why spend 4x more if they do a comparable job? Small improvements, that you can afford to pay for and are justified by the overall expense so far. When you spend over £1k on a machine it's logical to spend an extra £20 on a small improvement to the coffee, or even an extra £100 for a slightly better fitting tamper. To make these luxury items more appealing you've got the build quality and aesthetics to gain too. The Monolith isn't 4x more expensive because it produces a vastly superior grind, it's 4x more expensive because of the build quality, the commercial components, but the biggest factor is you're paying a guy to build it by hand in the USA. An antique table, handmade by a skilled carpenter with quality materials will be vastly more expensive than a table from Ikea, but they'll do the same job. The Monolith isn't just a grinder it's a centrepiece, a work of art (if you like it), and if you want, the last grinder you'll ever own. All of those things can't be quantified but still add value for people. The MC3 has bigger burrs (71mm vs 63mm) so you'd expect grind quality to be better but it's not down to the fact you've paid somebody to build it by hand.


----------



## Fez (Dec 31, 2018)

The Systemic Kid said:


> Have compared shots produced through a Niche with a big flat - results were interesting. Beans used included a pretty funky medium to light offering - think it may have been a natural? @Fez ?  Niche held up better than I expected but could not match the clarity the big flat produced or the sweetness. For what it is, Niche offers plenty if your preference is medium to darker roasts. As regards the pursuit of the God shot, it's surprising how much more you have to pay, grinder-wise, to see any marked difference in the cup. The relationship between incremental increases, taste-wise, and price of grinder is, like HiFi, logarithmic.


 I think it was a natural yes. That was my first experience with a big flat. I remember it like it was yesterday, both shots tasted good but where the niche left a lingering acidity, the ek had the same acidity on first sip but that disappeared after a second leaving the rest of the flavours to come through.

I can say for certain the difference between the Niche and the ZM is huge too but again so is the price difference.

For a £500 brand new single doser, I'd definitely buy it again if those were my requirements. However if you can afford to spend much more money, then you'll definitely get significantly better results


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

Fez said:


> . However if you can afford to spend much more money, then you'll definitely get significantly better results


 You cannot subjectively compare flats to conical. You might spend and buy Monolith conical then draw a different conclusion All you have discovered is that you now own a Monolith and prefer flat burrs


----------



## PPapa (Oct 24, 2015)

dfk41 said:


> You cannot subjectively compare flats to conical. You might spend and buy Monolith conical then draw a different conclusion All you have discovered is that you now own a Monolith and prefer flat burrs


Does your machine or taste buds care how the coffee was ground? I don't get "you can't compare flats vs conicals". Of course you can.

My taste buds can tell the difference in the cup and that's all I'm going to care.


----------



## Drewster (Dec 1, 2013)

dfk41 said:


> You cannot subjectively compare flats to conical. You might spend and buy Monolith conical then draw a different conclusion All you have discovered is that you now own a Monolith and prefer flat burrs


 <pedant alert>

You can *subjectively* compare anything you want to anything else.....

Arguably it is more difficult to *objectively* compare two "different" things...

Subjective comparison = opinion/feeling

Objective comparison = Empirical/measured/repeatable/"provable"

I prefer a fine Armagnac to a Hot Dog! I'd be hard pushed to argue that objectively!


----------



## MediumRoastSteam (Jul 7, 2015)

Drewster said:


> <pedant alert>
> You can *subjectively* compare anything you want to anything else.....
> Arguably it is more difficult to *objectively* compare two "different" things...
> Subjective comparison = opinion/feeling
> ...


This ^^^^^


----------



## Apr1985 (Apr 18, 2020)

olivier said:


> To be clear, my opinion stated a few posts above shouldn't be taken as a definitive statement on the topic. It's just my coffee, my preparation skills, my machine, and my tastes! YMMV.


 The chap has said this is his opinion and it clearly is a subjective review as there is no evidence or data or anything. 
Not sure why people are being so argumentative and tearing him down for saying what grinder he like the taste from most. 😕

I compare my Ferrari and my Range Rover all the all the time. They both get me from A to B but the experience is different and worth comparing 😛


----------



## Border_all (Dec 19, 2019)

Apr1985 said:


> I compare my Ferrari and my Range Rover all the all the time. They both get me from A to B but the experience is different and worth comparing 😛


 I find the most difference is i can get in and out of my range rover my ferrari i need a hoist for getting back up after i fall out.... ground height is my winner 🤣😂🤣


----------



## MediumRoastSteam (Jul 7, 2015)

I agree. I find Oliviers feedback very good from a taste point of view. I don't think there's harm or issues in comparing the Niche to a Monotith, as far as taste is concerned. Same machine, same beans, different grinders, he prefers the Monolith to the Niche.

Can't I compare a La Pavoni to a MaraX, as far as taste in the cup is concerned? Of course I can. And they are very different, in so many ways!

I prefer wine to beer. Can't I compare that, taste wise? Of course I can!

Also, taste wise, I'd rather have carrots to potatoes. They are not the same, I get it (well, they both grow underneath the soil). But if someone asks me "what would you like on the side? Toasted Potatoes or roasted carrots? I'd go for the carrots. Just my personal taste.


----------



## Rob1 (Apr 9, 2015)

Apr1985 said:


> Not sure why people are being so argumentative and tearing him down for saying what grinder he like the taste from most. 😕


 Who's 'tearing him down'?

The OP (DFK) asked for a comparison to a Monolith Conical.

Olivier compares to the Monolith flat.

Not the same thing.

The only thing anyone has mentioned is the comparison he made is between flats and conicals. Pretty much everything observed (greater clarity, accentuated fruit flavours, loss of body) is seen in any good large flat vs large conical comparison so it doesn't really relate to the point of the thread. As DFK says, the comparison could well have been made between a Monolith Conical and Monolith flat, or the Niche and another large flat grinder....which isn't the point of the thread. So as well articulated as Olivier's observations are they aren't really relevant in this particular thread.

Having said that the thread died on March 5th so it's not like that fact it has been derailed completely and turned into a flat vs conic debate (with a high vs low cost subplot) is such a big deal.


----------



## 7493 (May 29, 2014)

I'd love to see a comparison between Monolith flat and Monolith Conical. I'd also love to see a comparison between monolith conical and Niche. As others have said comparing a flat with another make conical, whilst interesting, is comparing apples with tomatoes.


----------



## Apr1985 (Apr 18, 2020)

Rob1 said:


> Who's 'tearing him down'?
> 
> The OP (DFK) asked for a comparison to a Monolith Conical.
> 
> ...


 Saying that he should have done the tests blind to be valid, saying if one forum member chooses to compare apples to grapefruits etc etc to me don't really go with the obvious opinion that Oliver gave.

However... I didn't read right back to the original post asking for comments on The conical version. So I guess in theory Oliver should have started a new thread. So point taken on onboard!

But I did find Oliver's comments interesting 😀


----------



## olivier (Jan 4, 2016)

Ha, came back to the forum 24h later to see how much debate my comments generated, quite surprised to be honest!

I didn't read the first post of the topic well enough and should probably have posted elsewhere, if a mod wants to split the topic, fine with me.

And once again my comments was just about a fun little experiment I did. I had never done such a side by side comparison, be it flat vs conical, flat vs flat or conical vs conical. I happen to have two grinders on my counter right now and one is a big flat, the other a conical.

I guess the main conclusion of my test is what Dave mentioned: putting aside technical differences between the two machines, the Niche seems to hold up very well against a much more expensive gronder.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk


----------



## Rhys (Dec 21, 2014)

I did a side by side comparison of a Niche, an EK43 and a Versalab M3. All have different burrs and i got nice coffee from all of them, which was my objective.


----------



## Rob1 (Apr 9, 2015)

olivier said:


> Ha, came back to the forum 24h later to see how much debate my comments generated, quite surprised to be honest!
> 
> I didn't read the first post of the topic well enough and should probably have posted elsewhere, if a mod wants to split the topic, fine with me.
> 
> ...


 You seemed quite successful in attempts to objectively assess them -- and by that I mean you didn't seem to let the fact you'd paid for them both cloud your subjective judgement. It would be interesting to see more conicals compared to flats. It's generally considered apples to oranges but it would be interesting to see if there are any conicals out there that beat flats for clarity (and I don't mean large conic vs small flat). What brew ratios & times did you try? You mentioned some flavours I easily associate with conical grinders that are grinding very fine to produce a shorter ratio. I've found I get much cleaner and more balanced shots adjusting coarser and pulling longer ratios than I could with a large flat. The pucks seemed to hold together better for longer ratios using conicals. This is going back a few years though so my experience might be very different now.


----------



## lucasd (Feb 24, 2015)

The size of niche burr is exactly between Feldgrind burrs (38mm) and compak/ robur/ monolith burrs/ pharos.

As I don't have niche, I can only say that on Feldgrind I could get high extractions but coffee was very bitter vs balanced on Pharos (nordic omni-roasted coffee).

I except the Niche will give better results but still below monolith


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

lucasd said:


> The size of niche burr is exactly between Feldgrind burrs (38mm) and compak/ robur/ monolith burrs/ pharos.
> 
> As I don't have niche, I can only say that on Feldgrind I could get high extractions but coffee was very bitter vs balanced on Pharos (nordic omni-roasted coffee).
> 
> I except the Niche will give better results but still below monolith


 Do you have a monolith ?


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

lucasd said:


> The size of niche burr is exactly between Feldgrind burrs (38mm) and compak/ robur/ monolith burrs/ pharos.
> 
> As I don't have niche, I can only say that on Feldgrind I could get high extractions but coffee was very bitter vs balanced on Pharos (nordic omni-roasted coffee).
> 
> I except the Niche will give better results but still below monolith


 do you still have your data?


----------



## Stevebee (Jul 21, 2015)

lucasd said:


> The size of niche burr is exactly between Feldgrind burrs (38mm) and compak/ robur/ monolith burrs/ pharos.
> 
> As I don't have niche, I can only say that on Feldgrind I could get high extractions but coffee was very bitter vs balanced on Pharos (nordic omni-roasted coffee).
> 
> I except the Niche will give better results but still below monolith


 I thought the Niche were 64mm with the Robur / Pharos 68mm ( or 71mm depending on where on the burr you measure).

The Feld is, as you say, 38mm - maths is not my strong point but doesn't seem exactly half way to me.

I have a Niche, Feld, Pharos and Compak E10 so can see the difference.


----------



## Boxerman33 (Jul 2, 2019)

dfk41 said:


> I have a Clima Pro that I am quite happy with, and again, I have a Niche that I am quite happy with. But, I quite fancy giving a Monolith Conical a go since my passion is darker roasted beans, but, am I really going to get anything from a Monolith Conical that I do not already get from the Niche. Guess this question is only to Monolith Conical owners


 If you do buy the Monolith, can i have first dibs on the Niche please 😉


----------



## lucasd (Feb 24, 2015)

Stevebee said:


> I thought the Niche were 64mm with the Robur / Pharos 68mm ( or 71mm depending on where on the burr you measure).
> 
> The Feld is, as you say, 38mm - maths is not my strong point but doesn't seem exactly half way to me.
> 
> I have a Niche, Feld, Pharos and Compak E10 so can see the difference.


 One problem of comparison is that you need compare the internal burr not mounting diameter.

for example compak and robur has virtually the same internal burr but mounting is 68 vs 71. There is even bigger robur version (8xmm) but I heard there were not a lot of difference compared to normal robur (maybe geometry is the same, just faster grinding).

Kony has very big mounting outside diameter (kinda like M47 and 38). Below is a list of internal burrs.

Aerogrind M38 -> 30mm
Kinu M47 -> 32mm
Niche M63-> 40mm
Kinu M68 -> 49 mm



Mrboots2u said:


> Do you have a monolith ?


 Pharos - monolith should be more consistent and better aligned, but similar taste profile



MWJB said:


> do you still have your data?


 To just show TDS and extraction yield is not everything. For example:

Feldgrind (quite bitter) - but the optimal spot is very narrow



coffee name

weight in [g]

weight out[g]

Brix

TDS [%]

ratio 1:to

Yield

grind setting 




Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

32.29

12.50%

10.6%

1.8

19.60%

F1.05

Lizardo Herrera tabi La cabra

17.5

38.7

10.80%

9.2%

2.2

20.29%

F1.1


Pharos (no bitterness) quite big adjustment range to get good flow



Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

30

13.90%

11.8%

1.7

20.25%

250

Lizardo Herrera tabi La cabra

17.5

31.16

12.60%

10.7%

1.8

19.06%

240


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

lucasd said:


> extraction yield is not everything. For example:
> 
> Feldgrind (quite bitter) - but the optimal spot is very narrow
> 
> ...


 Indeed, extraction is not everything. It's a guide to efficiency & consistency when you have a big enough sample. You changed just about everything with every shot, so effects aren't clear.

Your Feld extraction on the Lizardo was significantly higher & had bigger output, so difficult to compare as you clearly had room to go coarser with Feld. Nzove extractions aren't significantly different.

That said, I don't doubt the Pharos shots are preferable, just not sold on the idea of the Feld making higher, good tasting (that's the only reason to go higher) extractions.


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

@lucasd

Im not trying to be pedantic for the sake of it , but what you are saying is that you think grinder A, monolith which you don't own compares to grinder B , niche , which you also don't own ...... in a certain way based on two other grinders you have owned which are both hand grinders .


----------



## lucasd (Feb 24, 2015)

MWJB said:


> Indeed, extraction is not everything. It's a guide to efficiency & consistency when you have a big enough sample. You changed just about everything with every shot, so effects aren't clear.
> 
> Your Feld extraction on the Lizardo was significantly higher & had bigger output, so difficult to compare as you clearly had room to go coarser with Feld. Nzove extractions aren't significantly different.
> 
> That said, I don't doubt the Pharos shots are preferable, just not sold on the idea of the Feld making higher, good tasting (that's the only reason to go higher) extractions.


 I have several hundreds of shots analysis. It was just a sample. Also by going over optimal extraction point extraction yield does not significantly change (e.g. like here order of 1%).

BTW compare nzove in this are both shots are comparable and Pharos makes higher extraction.

My point is given similar parameters the same coffee tasted bitter vs balanced.


----------



## lucasd (Feb 24, 2015)

Mrboots2u said:


> @lucasd
> 
> Im not trying to be pedantic for the sake of it , but what you are saying is that you think grinder A, monolith which you don't own compares to grinder B , niche , which you also don't own ...... in a certain way based on two other grinders you have owned which are both hand grinders .


 Which I clearly stated. However intrinsic burr characteristics remain the same. I cannot compare EK43 burr vs M68, but in comparison to 65mm burr (Quamar m80) pharos wins in output.

I can only add that a friend had niche, hedon (liked it quite well, motorized conical burr) and currently is on Etzimiger (mostly cost saving).


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

lucasd said:


> Which I clearly stated. However intrinsic burr characteristics remain the same. I cannot compare EK43 burr vs M68, but in comparison to 65mm burr (Quamar m80) pharos wins in output.
> 
> I can only add that a friend had niche, hedon (liked it quite well, motorized conical burr) and currently is on Etzimiger (mostly cost saving).


 For me , There is motor speed, hand speed, alignment, that all factor in how effective a grinder is and what results you get from it,


----------



## 7493 (May 29, 2014)

FWIW The Niche is now my goto grinder and has been since it arrived. I still use the Zenith with beans I'm not that keen on and the Pharos when I want the best result possible. Purely subjective results but the Niche shots please me more than the Zenith and the Pharos shots (when I can be bothered to put the effort in) please me even more.


----------



## viveur (Oct 22, 2017)

Rob666 said:


> I'd love to see a comparison between Monolith flat and Monolith Conical. I'd also love to see a comparison between monolith conical and Niche. As others have said comparing a flat with another make conical, whilst interesting, is comparing apples with tomatoes.


 I believe there have been some comparisons between the various Monoliths (possibly deep in a very long thread over on HB). The summary seemed to be something like Conical has more body, Flat has more clarity. Particularly for light roasts, putting SSP burrs in the flat helped get the best flavour, and the Max was a touch better than Flat with SSP at clarity (whereas the Flat without SSP burs was closer to the Conical). For darker roasts, differences were less noticeable or negligible. Don't quote me on it though:🙂

I myself have a Pharos, and just got a Max. And I think I'm seeing similar results to that thread: my most recent shots on the Max do let me taste more of the flavours (same coffees as previously used with the Pharos). However the Pharos also produced delicious espresso - just different. I can't say I have enough experience to say that I'm maximising the results of the Max yet (and my grinder is barely seasoned), right now I wouldn't say it's miles better than the Pharos - but it does certainly seem to reveal more of my coffee.

And of course, the big advantage vs the Pharos is its much easier to use  - light roasts and a Pharos can be tough work. Which also leads me to what is my main worry about using a grinder like the Niche - it sounds like its comparable to the Pharos and Monolith Conical in taste, but the advantage of the Monoliths is in the robustness.


----------



## Rob1 (Apr 9, 2015)

Interesting, I've found the Niche gives better results than the Pharos, though only marginally. Perfectly possible the Pharos could do with new burrs. Alignment on the Pharos is very good to perfect.

The main problem I've got with grinder head to heads is they tend to be a bit bias e.g. they have a Vario and dial a coffee in perfectly on it, then get their hands on another grinder and just make it produce a shot to the same parameters as a means of comparison.


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

lucasd said:


> I have several hundreds of shots analysis. It was just a sample. Also by going over optimal extraction point extraction yield does not significantly change (e.g. like here order of 1%).
> 
> BTW compare nzove in this are both shots are comparable and Pharos makes higher extraction.
> 
> My point is given similar parameters the same coffee tasted bitter vs balanced.


 What is your stdev over those hundreds of shots?

You said that the Feld was more bitter in flavour, but you extracted substantially more & you could have extracted less...so it is not clear that the bitterness is extraction related.

The Nzove readings are not different at a span of 0.6%EY, allowing for natural variation (+/-0.4%EY would be reasonable for same grinder & same setting, over 10 shots) & noise (all samples filtered?), over just 2 shots from different grinders & settings.

I take your point that the Feld may produce more bitter shots, at similar ratio, but unless you can identify the point where the Feld makes equivalent tasty shots & show that is a different extraction, there is no evidence a difference (not shown to exist here) is extraction related at all. Could be that the the Feld makes more silt in comparison to the Pharos at the ratio/setting you brew at. You might find you prefer the Pharos whatever the extraction, but the better Feld shots exist in the same EY range as the better Pharos shots. You could be conflating to largely unrelated factors.

Drawing conclusions from a single shot, per condition is not possible & not a useful way to use EY measurement, it's the big data that tells you stuff.


----------



## lucasd (Feb 24, 2015)

MWJB said:


> What is your stdev over those hundreds of shots?
> 
> You said that the Feld was more bitter in flavour, but you extracted substantially more & you could have extracted less...so it is not clear that the bitterness is extraction related.
> 
> ...


 I know very well about std, testing, blind AB etc. I just wanted to tell that even given good extractions, I got bitter shots from Feldgrind.

I did not wish to pursue the experiment longer as I did not liked coffee. I did analysis for myself and it should be treated as such.

But just for you (extract of all samples from feldgrind plus following Pharos, but I also had other compounding factors there, so you cannot compare one for one every of those. I did not include them in discussion for clarity sake, as I know the effect of those).



Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

35.86

12.60%

10.7%

2.0

21.90%

F1.0

Lizardo Herrera pink La cabra

17.4

32.4

13.50%

11.5%

1.9

21.37%



Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.6

33.89

12.00%

10.2%

1.9

19.67%

F1.1

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.72

12.70%

10.8%

1.8

19.60%

F1.05

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.83

13.20%

11.2%

1.8

20.41%

F1

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

30.44

13.30%

11.3%

1.7

19.65%



Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

33.45

12.20%

10.4%

1.9

19.82%

F1.05

Lizardo Herrera tabi La cabra

17.5

36

11.10%

9.4%

2.1

19.40%

F1.1

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

32.29

12.50%

10.6%

1.8

19.60%

F1.05

Lizardo Herrera tabi La cabra

17.5

38.7

10.80%

9.2%

2.2

20.29%

F1.1

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

49

9.10%

7.7%

2.8

21.67%

F1.15

Lizardo Herrera tabi La cabra

17.5

31.78

12.00%

10.2%

1.8

18.49%

F1.0

Lizardo Herrera tabi La cabra

17.6

35.49

11.30%

9.6%

2.0

19.37%

F1.05

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

30.14

14.00%

11.9%

1.7

20.45%

220

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

30.75

13.00%

11.1%

1.8

19.39%

230

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.7

13.20%

11.2%

1.8

20.32%

235

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.8

13.40%

11.4%

1.8

20.69%

230

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31

13.60%

11.6%

1.8

20.49%

240

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.47

12.80%

10.9%

1.8

19.58%

250

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.68

13.80%

11.7%

1.8

21.23%

230

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

30.43

13.10%

11.1%

1.7

19.36%

250

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.39

13.80%

11.7%

1.8

21.03%

250

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

31.26

12.90%

11.0%

1.8

19.56%

260

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

30.7

13.20%

11.2%

1.8

19.66%

260

Nzove Burundi La cabra

17.5

30.7

13.20%

11.2%

1.8

19.66%

270


----------



## MWJB (Feb 28, 2012)

lucasd said:


> I know very well about std, testing, blind AB etc. I just wanted to tell that even given good extractions, I got bitter shots from Feldgrind.
> 
> I did not wish to pursue the experiment longer as I did not liked coffee. I did analysis for myself and it should be treated as such.
> 
> But just for you (extract of all samples from feldgrind plus following Pharos, but I also had other compounding factors there, so you cannot compare one for one every of those. I did not include them in discussion for clarity sake, as I know the effect of those).


 Cheers. Think about adding a numerical subjective taste score?

I tend to look at stuff like this as day to day data rather than experiment, so lab type controls aren't really necessary, as in the real world grind, coffee (this is the biggest factor in EY, all else being equal) are going to change some. Blind A/B isn't practical for day to day brewing.


----------



## lucasd (Feb 24, 2015)

MWJB said:


> Cheers. Think about adding a numerical subjective taste score?
> 
> I tend to look at stuff like this as day to day data rather than experiment, so lab type controls aren't really necessary, as in the real world grind, coffee (this is the biggest factor in EY, all else being equal) are going to change some. Blind A/B isn't practical for day to day brewing.


 I don't usually mark taste as a score, sometimes I add remarks but without specific consistency so I excluded those.

The story behind it is: One week I was forced to use Feldgrind, as I had to avoid Pharos grinding force. In pure filter setting, I give Pharos slight edge in cupping, but for simplicity I use feldgrind. It is fast, gives good result, etc.

But in espresso setting, Feldgrind takes quite some time to grind with some effort. Your hand feels little numb. In addition adjustment range is quite small (around 1 digit on the scale) and quite easy to get a gusher.

What I found strange that even though extraction looks ok, extraction is high enough I got quite bitter coffee I did not enjoy. Normally I would expect under extraction and sourness. To my surprise Pharos shot were not bitter. So in the end I won't continue experimenting with Feldgrind, but feel free to make comparison...


----------



## lucasd (Feb 24, 2015)

For size difference in kony vs monolith see here

https://www.coffeeforums.co.uk/topic/17305-burrs-comparison-pics/?do=embed

at bottom the difference is huge


----------



## Nightrider_1uk (Apr 26, 2020)

PPapa said:


> They are being compared, but they are not comparable. Otherwise, why would someone spend 4 times more for marginal gains if it did just as good job?


 Thats the point though, In the world of Hi-Fi there is the law of diminishing returns, where your can pay a lot more money for a small but desernable difference, and of course because those differnaces are there, there are people who have to have them, 4x the price or not.


----------



## Drewster (Dec 1, 2013)

Nightrider_1uk said:


> Thats the point though, In the world of Hi-Fi there is the law of diminishing returns, where your can pay a lot more money for a small but desernable difference, and of course because those differnaces are there, there are people who have to have them, 4x the price or not.


 I am fairly sure that both in HiFi & coffee (and no doubt many other fields) that the X times the price option really doesn't deliver any discernible difference and is much more vanity based (or willy waving).

Even when there might be a discernible difference the "pose value" (for want of a better term) is actually the driver....


----------



## Drewster (Dec 1, 2013)

Drewster said:


> Even when there might be a discernible difference the "pose value" (for want of a better term) is actually the driver....


 per example (mentioned previously)... paying many £££ for snake oil and moonshine (directional speaker cable) ie Really no difference discernible or not......


----------



## viveur (Oct 22, 2017)

PPapa said:


> They are being compared, but they are not comparable. Otherwise, why would someone spend 4 times more for marginal gains if it did just as good job?


 Hmm. Isn't the main value prop for Monolith Conical that it's got bombproof construction? I can easily imagine Niche Zero and Monolith Conical being similar (as long as they're both well aligned - which they seem to be - and have similar burrs, which they do), the cost difference is due to materials and design. The Monolith might last 4 times as long as the Niche Zero, at which point costs even out again. In my view (and I'm a Monolith owner - albeit of the Max variety), it's legit to compare them. Just take into account where that price difference is coming from (mostly not stuff that affects taste in cup).

Although with the next generation of the conical, there is the additional advantage of dual burrs, at which point there will be an advantage (even if it's not going to be huge).


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

One thought would be, _the the Niche is within grasp of a large proportion of the market, whereas the Monolith products are not._

_Also, the old adage, 'You might have a Porsche son, but it does not make you a racing driver'. By that I mean, the grinder is just one part of the coffee making process. Assuming you get all of the other constituent parts spot on, you then have to deal with your own tastebuds. Lastly there's a difference between being able to discern a good shot, and hoping wanting to_


----------



## Ozzyjohn (May 31, 2020)

viveur said:


> Hmm. Isn't the main value prop for Monolith Conical that it's got bombproof construction? I can easily imagine Niche Zero and Monolith Conical being similar (as long as they're both well aligned - which they seem to be - and have similar burrs, which they do), the cost difference is due to materials and design. The Monolith might last 4 times as long as the Niche Zero, at which point costs even out again. In my view (and I'm a Monolith owner - albeit of the Max variety), it's legit to compare them. Just take into account where that price difference is coming from (mostly not stuff that affects taste in cup).
> 
> Although with the next generation of the conical, there is the additional advantage of dual burrs, at which point there will be an advantage (even if it's not going to be huge).


 But does the average home user actually need bomb proof construction in a home environment?
It's great that it might last four times as long, but the chances of keeping it that long are lowered by the fact that something newer and shinier and even more bomb proof will come along after a few years. Sure, it will retain value, I suppose, but it will always be at the mercy of future innovation.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

Ozzyjohn said:


> But does the average home user actually need bomb proof construction in a home environment?
> It's great that it might last four times as long, but the chances of keeping it that long are lowered by the fact that something newer and shinier and even more bomb proof will come along after a few years. Sure, it will retain value, I suppose, but it will always be at the mercy of future innovation.


 Which brings us back full circle to the willy wagglers! I cannot comment as I used to be as bad as the worst of the worst, but there is nothing more pious than a reformed smoker......


----------



## Mrboots2u (May 10, 2013)

viveur said:


> Hmm. Isn't the main value prop for Monolith Conical that it's got bombproof construction? I can easily imagine Niche Zero and Monolith Conical being similar (as long as they're both well aligned - which they seem to be - and have similar burrs, which they do), the cost difference is due to materials and design. The Monolith might last 4 times as long as the Niche Zero, at which point costs even out again. In my view (and I'm a Monolith owner - albeit of the Max variety), it's legit to compare them. Just take into account where that price difference is coming from (mostly not stuff that affects taste in cup).
> 
> Although with the next generation of the conical, there is the additional advantage of dual burrs, at which point there will be an advantage (even if it's not going to be huge).


 I would suggest the monolith sells itself on handmade and tested to achieve peek performance , as a result it it made from different parts .

I posted this on another thread somewhere, but the criticism that the niche doesn't look like our feel like a commercial piece of proper kit is a little askew.

It's designed to hit a price point for a home appliance, designed by someone with home appliance experience , to fit into the home kitchen unobtrusively. There will obviously be compromises doing that versus a commercial coffee shop grinder or a boutique hand made one to different tolerances.

I would suggest that it seems to already have better reliability than the sette or vario which are made by a reputable grinder manufacturer. I have seen other boutique grinders and higher price points with under powered motors that break , and even some commercial grinders that are plagues by stalling too ( costing 4 to 5 times as much )

Again if you are drinking predominantly milk drinks of some variants the niche will cope with pretty much anything you throw at it to an acceptable level.

Ill add my normal caveat , there are different ,, more expensive grinders available , marginal gains of course can be had by spending more on commercial grinders, there worth is entirely down to the purchasers .

Different work flows can be achieved and marginal gains had by buying similar priced 2nd hand grinders, but they will not be as kitchen friendly and wil hog more space .

If someone came up with a flat burrs grinder with 64m plus bespoke SSP like flats that single doses , fits under a cabinet and is under £1000 then the niche would have some competition from part of the niches audience , not all as some will never spend up to £999 on a grinder. The fact that one doesn't exist yet , tells you how hard this is to do.

If nothing else it means that perhaps solemn manufactures may see the size of the prix earlier in the home market and try and bring something different or better to compete against the Niche, which would be win , win for the home user.


----------



## mctrials23 (May 8, 2017)

Mrboots2u said:


> If someone came up with a flat burrs grinder with 64m plus bespoke SSP like flats that single doses , fits under a cabinet and is under £1000 then the niche would have some competition from part of the niches audience , not all as some will never spend up to £999 on a grinder. The fact that one doesn't exist yet , tells you how hard this is to do.


 Is it that hard to do? I don't get the impression that the niche is a technical marvel or pushing boundaries in any meaningful way.

I would suggest that its just come out at the right time and for the right price. Most other cheap/mid-range grinders are designed with the casual barista in mind. The person who either uses something like a sage DTP or some other mid range machine and doesn't care that the coffee in the hopper has been there for days.

The next step up has been the commercial grade grinders which a lot of people on here have and what seemed to be the standard for a long time. An old Mazzer super jolly or something. At the price you could get those for and the quality of grind, they were hard to beat.

I think the market has just matured enough that there is a high demand for the features that the Niche exposes and at the price point it sits at.

Like you have said, a <£1000 flat burr, well aligned SD grinder could make a killing.

Thats certainly what I would like. I have a massive mythos sitting in the kitchen which means a lot of stale coffee and its overkill for what I use it for. I am tempted to go back to the Niche but I want to stick with flat burrs. I was interested in the Lagom p64 but its a bit outside the range I want to pay for a grinder. Otherwise, that is the sort of thing I want.


----------



## Jony (Sep 8, 2017)

Bentwood maybe of Macap Chamy.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

@mctrials23

The Niche is not aimed at the casual barista though. It was 5 years in design, and not because they only worked at it in the evenings! It is a serious bit of kit. You suggest it was fortuitous to come out at the right time and price......err no! The only fortuitous part was Dave Corbey being introduced into the equation


----------



## jaffro (Oct 6, 2015)

Jony said:


> Bentwood maybe of Macap Chamy.


 I've been keeping an eye on these but still very little info, particularly on price. Hard to gauge where these will sit in the current line-up of available grinders!

Bentwood is also pretty chunky going by the pictures on their Instagram. Not sure about the Macap!

I'm sure I'd happily own either... But I'd struggle to get sign-off from the Mrs on anything bigger than the Niche haha.


----------



## mctrials23 (May 8, 2017)

dfk41 said:


> @mctrials23
> 
> The Niche is not aimed at the casual barista though. It was 5 years in design, and not because they only worked at it in the evenings! It is a serious bit of kit. You suggest it was fortuitous to come out at the right time and price......err no! The only fortuitous part was Dave Corbey being introduced into the equation


 I'm not saying it is but there is a growing community of people willing to drop £500 on a grinder. I don't think that the Niche would have been a success 10 years ago. Do you?

I do think it came out at the right time and price. Filling a perceived gap in the market usually requires a leap of faith and some luck.

I'm not suggesting that its a tonka toy but if you can explain to me the feats of engineering that went into the Niche I am happy to hear them. Its a great grinder and does its job well. Designing any product that works really well requires skill and aptitude in various fields.


----------



## 4085 (Nov 23, 2012)

mctrials23 said:


> I'm not saying it is but there is a growing community of people willing to drop £500 on a grinder. I don't think that the Niche would have been a success 10 years ago. Do you?
> 
> I do think it came out at the right time and price. Filling a perceived gap in the market usually requires a leap of faith and some luck.
> 
> I'm not suggesting that its a tonka toy but if you can explain to me the feats of engineering that went into the Niche I am happy to hear them. Its a great grinder and does its job well. Designing any product that works really well requires skill and aptitude in various fields.


 10 years ago, allowing for inflation it would not have been £500........I agree though, there is a plethora of folks willing to shell out vast sums of money these days whereas in days gone by, the Gaggia Classic/Super Jolly was standard kit. I would have thought that zero retention would demonstrate an engineering feat. I certainly cannot think of any grinder near to it in price that manages that. Do I need to list more? (!)


----------



## mctrials23 (May 8, 2017)

dfk41 said:


> I would have thought that zero retention would demonstrate an engineering feat. I certainly cannot think of any grinder near to it in price that manages that. Do I need to list more? (!)


 I don't know honestly. Zero retention isn't a consideration with an on demand grinder and that's what 95%+ of grinders are (in some form). Most people would say that single dosing was a massive downside to the grinder. There are just enough of us that feel its an upside!

If we had a plethora of single dose grinders on the market that struggled with retention I would probably agree but we don't. There still aren't that many and single dosing has been gaining popularity for a few years now. The big difference I see in the Niche from what others have offered is almost entirely the price. They have gone for "good enough" instead of "we are charging a huge amount for this and need to justify that cost".

I don't feel like the Niche is under-engineered in any area but compared to the grinders costing 3-5x more, it has sacrificed a fair amount. I wouldn't say that what it has sacrificed is important functionality or output wise but its plastic where possible, doesn't have an overspecced motor or crazy alignment.

I think we just feel differently about this grinder. I would say its akin to a Dacia vs a BMW. The Dacia is a car stripped back to the basics of what its trying to do and the price reflects that. It does what its supposed to do very well but most people wouldn't claim its an engineering marvel.


----------



## viveur (Oct 22, 2017)

Ozzyjohn said:


> But does the average home user actually need bomb proof construction in a home environment?
> It's great that it might last four times as long, but the chances of keeping it that long are lowered by the fact that something newer and shinier and even more bomb proof will come along after a few years. Sure, it will retain value, I suppose, but it will always be at the mercy of future innovation.


 I'm not convinced by the obsolescence argument. How many real grinder innovations do we see - and are they really going to put conicals at risk? You are right - something new could come along, but the biggest novelties were:

- DRM grinders, which seem to be a niche product.

- Flat grinders, which only really help for light roast drinkers. And getting a well aligned flat puts you in Monolith cost territory anyway (let's not bring up the Vario here: it's possible to align it well with some effort, but I'm speaking from experience when I say it does not cope well with light roast Espresso). Even then, flat's are not worlds better most of the time.

- Perhaps things like weighing, or heating/cooling in commercial grinders, but those don't help taste in the cup for home brewers.

- Perhaps the dual-burr setup coming to the next Monolith Conical (which to be fair can be easily copied IIUC), even according to the maker it's a marginal improvement.

Someone who buys a Monolith Conical is either going to be able to keep using it for 40 years - and history suggests there won't be any groundbreaking innovations in that time (beyond marginal improvements). And it's satisfying to have that quality of engineering in your kitchen. Or they can resell it for what they paid if they get bored of it a few years in (mostly thanks to scarcity but that's a story of its own - but they have a reputation for a reason).

But you are right: no one *needs *a Monolith. That's not to say the conical is not the optimal grinder for some people, nevertheless the Niche will indeed be a better option for most.


----------



## JohnC56 (Oct 17, 2020)

Like my niche. Do people pay 2k+ for a grinder? Thought niche was steep


----------



## mctrials23 (May 8, 2017)

JohnC56 said:


> Like my niche. Do people pay 2k+ for a grinder? Thought niche was steep


 Getting a monolith is really hard. Their pre-orders sell out within minutes usually.

Its like any hobby, some people consider £500 for a bike expensive and some people consider £6k reasonable. Some people spend £4k on their car and others spend £40k to do exactly the same thing.


----------



## JohnC56 (Oct 17, 2020)

mctrials23 said:


> Getting a monolith is really hard. Their pre-orders sell out within minutes usually.
> 
> Its like any hobby, some people consider £500 for a bike expensive and some people consider £6k reasonable. Some people spend £4k on their car and others spend £40k to do exactly the same thing.


 True true. I'm an old dog but I'm learning some new tricks here


----------



## mctrials23 (May 8, 2017)

JohnC56 said:


> True true. I'm an old dog but I'm learning some new tricks here


 Its too much money for me but £2k on a mountain bike... maybe thats OK...


----------



## JohnC56 (Oct 17, 2020)

There will always something!


----------

