I just tested this ‘entry-level' espresso grinder and it's totally transformed my morning coffee routine
Striking in its appearance, and priced at a super attractive price (as espresso grinders go) of $299, the VS3 is a go-to first grinder for many coffee enthusiasts, and often touted as one of the best coffee grinders for beginners.
Despite that, it's no stranger mixed criticism from the coffee community, and yeah, it has its flaws, which I'll soon be covering in my full review.
The Varia VS3 is an 'entry-level' grinder, but don't let that put you off if you're looking for a competent electric grinder for espresso. This grinder performed incredibly well in our uniformity and retention tests, and is ideal for espresso lovers... especially if you're making shots during the early hours!
The thing is, the VS3 has one feature that has totally transformed my morning espresso routine, and has me overlooking its (admittedly pretty minor flaws).
It all comes down to decibels.
There are two main types of grinder: hand and electric. And I'm sure you can guess the difference between the two.
I'm lazy, so in the morning when I shuffle downstairs to make my coffee, I don't want to go straight into an arm workout grinding 20-odd grams of coffee for an espresso. So my preference is always an electric grinder (although I use the 1Zpresso K-Ultra hand grinder while I travel).
I've used a lot of electric espresso grinders in my time — after all, I get to test them for my job. One of the main problems with electrics are the noise. These things get loud.
I'm not talking 100dB, ear-damage-level noise, but the Baratza Encore ESP averaged 82dB in our testing. According to the Hearing Health Foundation, while not a risk to ear health, that's equivalent to being in a noisy restaurant.
My Eureka Mignon Specialita is a "quiet" grinder, but still averages around 75dB of noise, equivalent to hearing someone running landscaping equipment outside your house. Hardly the kind of noise you want to be making at 6am.
If you're a blade grinder owner (which you shouldn't be; they suck), you're likely in an even worse position. My dad's old blade grinder sounded like a turbojet firing up.
By contrast, thanks to its DC power supply (more on this below), the Varia VS3 is one of the quietest electric grinders I've used, running at an average of 67dB. Don't get me wrong, it's obviously far from silent, but that's a hell of a lot quieter. If fact, it took me by (pleasant) surprise, the first time I used the VS3 for a morning brew at home.
See, while the delta between 67dB and 82dB doesn't sound like much, it is. The decibel scale is logarithmic — a 10dB increase means 10x the sound intensity, while a 20dB increase is 100x the sound intensity.
I'm no good at math (so correct me if I'm wrong), but 15dB as I understand it equates to a 30 fold increase in sound intensity. Or to put it another way, the Varia VS3 is, on average, 30 times quieter than the Baratza Encore ESP, and nearly 10 times quieter than my Eureka Mignon Specialita.
That has made a huge difference to my morning routine. No longer am I wincing as I grind my beans. No longer am I waking one of our dogs (a light sleeper), and making her bark, compounding the issue. I can brew in peace.
Yeah, there is a catch. The reason why the Varia VS3 is quiet is because of that DC power I mentioned above.
Fed by DC rather than AC mains, the VS3 only spins at 170RPM. The much louder Baratza Encore ESP runs at 550RPM, meaning it'll get through a dose of coffee much quicker.
Does that really matter, though? We're talking 10-20 seconds difference max for an 18g dose. I'd rather have a longer period at lower volumes than a shorter spike. And I reckon my partner would, too, as that's less likely to wake her.
And at the end of the day, performance has to play a huge part too. The VS3 is an excellent grinder given its entry-level price tag, scoring very highly in our uniformity and retention testing, as you can see in the tables below.
Grind size
300μm
500μm
800μm
1100μm
1400μm
Super fine
20%
90%
95%
100%
100%
Medium fine
5%
95%
100%
100%
100%
Medium
0%
5%
80%
95%
100%
Medium coarse
0%
5%
50%
80%
95%
Coarse
0%
5%
15%
50%
90%
Our first coffee grinder test is always a uniformity test, where we pass batches of ground coffee through Kruve sifters.
The more uniform, technically speaking, the better. What we want to see here is large swings in variance, from 5% up to 95%. This means very few grounds pass through one sieve, but most pass through the next, showing low variance. The grinder is essentially doing a good job at smushing coffee beans into evenly-sized grounds.
The VS3 performs very strongly in the mid range at medium and medium-fine grinds. At the finest end of the VS3 adjustment range, we see a slight step up in variance, with a 20-90% jump between the finest sifters.
Overall, though, this level of uniformity is very high, which makes the VS3 an excellent grinder for espresso. Coarser grounds are a little less uniform, so if you're looking to make a variety of drinks, including pour overs, it maybe isn't the one. But I'm an espresso drinker first and foremost, so that's what matters to me.
Coffee in
Grounds out
Retention test 1
20.0g
19.8g
Retention test 2
20.0g
19.8g
Retention test 3
20.0g
19.9g
Retention test 4
20.0g
19.9g
Arguably the most prominent of the VS3's physical features is its 76.5-degree sloping metal body. This isn't just for style. The pitch of the grinder helps grounds fall from the burrs and through the chute more easily, lowering retention. And it works.
As you can see in the table above, the Varia VS3 averaged 0.15g retention per dose over four 20g doses. That's 0.75% retention. Not bad at all.
As I mentioned up top, I'll be covering the VS3 fully very soon in a standalone review. This grinder has its flaws (mostly relating to that DC power supply), but for under $300, this is a seriously good espresso grinder.
The Varia VS3 is an 'entry-level' grinder, but don't let that put you off if you're looking for a competent electric grinder for espresso. This grinder performed incredibly well in our uniformity and retention tests, and is ideal for espresso lovers... especially if you're making shots during the early hours!
Sometimes, though, a single feature can make all the difference. And as someone who gets up at 5.45am to head into the office, that feature in my grinders is noise.
I've never owned a properly quiet espresso grinder before, but now that I have, there's no going back.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tom's Guide
a day ago
- Tom's Guide
Hurry! This espresso machine restored my faith in cheap coffee gear, and now it's $60 off
If you're an espresso lover (nerd) like me, you'll have no doubt been a little put off by the price demanded for many of the best espresso machines. Thankfully, there are some decent machines out there for those on a budget, like the Casabrews Ultra, which is currently $60 off at Amazon. While budget espresso machines (this one included) always come with some compromises, when we tested the Casabrews Ultra we were impressed with its premium features, including a PID temperature controller and shot time. We deemed it a solid little machine for the money and that's truer than ever with this deal, which knocks nearly a quarter off the MSRP. When we tested the Casabrews Ultra, we were impressed by the espresso it produced, and its array of premium features, including a PID temperature controller and shot timer. It was already a sound deal at the full MSRP, so with $60 knocked off, this is a great offer for espresso enthusiasts on a budget. As I mentioned above, cheap espresso machines usually come with compromises. And in our Casabrews Ultra review we found that applied to this machine, too. However, none of its shortcomings are too drastic, and are to be expected in this price range anyway. "One of the cheapest ways to get decent espresso," as we said in our review. The Casabrews Ultra made very tasty espresso. I wasn't the tester of this machine, but we had it set up in our test kitchen for several days. Not only did I pull shots on it and make milks drinks with it myself, but I was also one of the samplers of the coffee our reviewer Erin Bashford made on the machine. See, when we test machines, we always make drinks for each other in the office to get a balance of opinions on the results. The Casabrews Ultra pulls at up to 20 bars, so it's more than capable of the 9-bar pressures required to extract proper espresso. It also has a PID temperature controller to ensure temperature stability and improve shot-to-shot consistency. The temperature can also be controlled and set manually so you can ensure the machine is at optimum brew temps. More expensive machines like the Gaggia Classic and Rancilio Silvia don't have PIDs. The Ultra also includes a shot timer, so if you don't have a one of the best coffee scales with a timer, you can still assess your flow rate. The flaws? Well, the steam wand isn't particularly powerful, so you'll need to be steaming for a while and it can be difficult to nail the right milk texture. I would advise steaming before brewing your shot (with the PID, that should be no issue) so your espresso isn't losing crema while you steam. It also takes a while to switch between espresso and steam modes. For $189 though, those are not very serious complaints. Follow Tom's Guide on Google News to get our up-to-date news, how-tos, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.
Tom's Guide
3 days ago
- Tom's Guide
I spent a week with the Nutribullet Ultra 1200 blender — can it beat the original?
Price: $164Dimensions: 5"D x 4.75"W x 7.9"HWeight: 10.24lbsCord length: 29.5"Capacity: 32oz Cup, 24oz CupWattage: 1200 wattsNoise level: 87dBMaterials: Tritan Renew blending cups Nutribullet is a legend of the blender game. My parents bought theirs when I was a kid, and they still use it today. Despite how many blenders I've offered them over the years, they're perfectly happy with their Nutribullet 900, which also sits in the third spot of my best blender guide. So while I've got a lot of time for the Nutribullet brand, I was curious to see if the Nutribullet Ultra 1200, the most powerful single-serve blender Nutribullet offers, could outperform my old faithful. Here's my verdict after spending a week with the Nutribullet Ultra. At $164 / £129, the Nutribullet Ultra 1200 is quite expensive for a personal blender. But at time of writing, I saw it reduced to $129 / £109 everywhere I looked. For context, the Nutribullet 600, which we've not tested, is $79 / £69, and the Nutribullet 900, which we gave a 4.5-star review, is $109 / £89. You may have noticed the eye-catching papaya trim on the model I tested. That's because it's from Nutribullet's collaboration with McLaren F1. Under the hood, it's the same as the regular Ultra. One regional difference I should address is that the U.K. version of the blender, which I tested, came with two blending cups. In the U.S., you get three, one of which includes a handle. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. The main distinguishing factor between the Ultra and other Nutribullet models is the addition of pre-set controls. My old faithful Nutribullet 900 turns on automatically when you lock the blending cup into place, but the Ultra features a pre-set blending mode and a pulse button. The buttons are touch-controlled, which feels sleek and makes cleaning easy. They're also backlit, meaning they only light up once your blending cup is secured into the base. As mentioned, the model I tested came with two blending cups: a 32oz cup and a 24oz cup. If you're in the U.S., you'll also get a 24oz handled cup. There was also two screw-on to-go lids included with the blender, meaning myself and my partner could each make a morning smoothie and take it into work. I used these lids a lot on my commute, and (thankfully for my laptop) I never had a spill. The Ultra 1200 is named after the wattage of the base, which comes with suction cups on the base to prevent it slipping around your kitchen counter. A 1200-watt blender is decent, but in my experience, a higher wattage isn't always synonymous with higher performance. When blending single servings, most sub-1000-watt blenders shouldn't feel lacking in power. Cleaning this blender proved very easy. I never put the blades through the dishwasher (as with any blade, they can be dulled when you do this) but I put the Tritan Renewed blending cups through many times, and they always came out spotless. Cleaning with a sponge was also straightforward thanks to the crevice-free interior of the blending cups. More on the blades: Nutribullet calls these the Rapid Extractor Blade, and it's got a stainless-steel platform and titanium coating which is designed to increase longevity and reduce blending time. Each blade comes with a 5-year limited warranty, which is good for a blender of this price. I've gone from being a protein shake hater to a full-on convert recently. My personal favorite is a blueberry cheesecake flavor shake with some frozen blueberries, ice and milk thrown in. I like to use a blender when making my shake, which prevents any nasty powder clumps and liquifies my ice cubes and blueberries into a delicious, weirdly blue drink. I was expecting this to be the easiest task for the Nutribullet to handle. As a single-serve blender, it should be the sort of morning task the Ultra was engineered to handle. But while some of my shakes came out perfectly, I also encountered lumps of half-blended blueberries in a couple of the shakes I made throughout the week I spent with the NutriBullet Ultra. It's really not pleasant to encounter an unexpected berry in what should be an entirely clump-free drink, and I was surprised that the Nutribullet missed a few. They were frozen, but they're hardly the trickiest thing I blended throughout the week. Even in the lump-free shakes, I found that the blueberry skin and seeds were present in the texture of the drink. This might be because I used the blender's pre-set mode to make my drink, which lasts for 30 seconds. Things would likely have been fine if I'd run the setting twice, but at that point, what's the purpose of a pre-set mode? We crush ice in every blender test. It's a good way to gauge how powerful a blender really is, and whether it's capable of breaking through firmer ingredients. I decided to pulse my ice cubes for this test, and found that this setting is a little sluggish. It's still better than pulsing in the original Nutribullet, which requires you to lock the cup in and out of the base, but the blades were a little slow to respond when I pressed the button. Despite that, the Ultra made light work of my ice. I was left with a snow-like consistency after just a few pulses, and I didn't need to shake or stir to evenly integrate all my ice cubes. To push the Nutribullet Ultra further, I made a quick guacamole. Single-serve blenders always struggle with more solid ingredients. The blending cup design is best suited to liquid bases, which can more easily integrate ingredients by creating a vortex that sucks everything in. So again, I decided to make use of the blender's pulse setting to see if it could tackle cilantro, onion, lime juice, chili and avocado. It took a few pulses and a bit of tapping on top of the blending cup, but everything was integrated into a relatively smooth (and very tasty) dip after around a minute in the Nutribullet. After the middling performance on smoothies, I was surprised at how impressive the blender was at mixing tougher recipes. There were no lumps of onion or cilantro, just a smooth dip that I achieved without even having to open up the blending cup and stir the ingredients. You're not supposed to blend hot ingredients in the Nutribullet, and the brand also recommends that you don't blend for three minutes at a time. But I always make a savory recipe when testing a blender, usually a soup of some kind, so I roasted my tomatoes as usual and then left them to cool completely before putting them in the blender. I blended this mix for three consecutive 30-second cycles and was left with a smooth and thick consistency. Tomato seeds are usually a nuisance to blend unless have an all-singing, all-dancing model like the Vitamix, but I was pretty happy with the texture of my sauce. It was about the same consistency that I'm able to achieve with an immersion blender. Nutribullet claims that this is its quietest blender, thanks to "a specialized design that produces lower-frequency sound," according to the company. I tracked the blender throughout my tests, and it consistently hit 87dB. Yes, that's loud. But it's a little quieter than the 92dB we hit in our Nutribullet Pro 900W review. The Nutribullet Ultra 1200 is just as good as the Pro 900. It's certainly more convenient to use, on account of the useful pre-set mode and pulse button. But this improvement comes at a cost, and this increased price doesn't necessarily equate to an increase in blending performance. If you're a smoothie drinker or milkshake maker, I think you'll get on just as well with the Pro 900, at a much lower cost. For a similar price, you could also buy the Nutribullet Smart Touch, which comes with four auto blend modes, three power levels and pulse settings, a jug, and a single-serve cup. That's a lot more value for money, if you can spare the space. The Nutribullet Ultra 1200 is a good blender. It's just that Nutribullet makes a lot of great blenders, and almost all of them offer better value for money than the Ultra. I love the smart and sleek design, and the inclusion of backlit touch controls is a great improvement on the original Nutribullet. The Ultra's pulse button was effective at making crushed ice and guacamole, and while it took a few 30-second cycles, the blender did a decent job of making a (cold) sauce for some pasta. But in terms of blending performance, the elevated wattage didn't result in a better finished product. There's one user who I think should opt for the Ultra over other Nutribullet models: if you're short on storage and kitchen space but want a powerful and capable single-serve blender, the Ultra would be a good choice. It's especially suited to someone who wants some help in the kitchen but doesn't want to splash out on a food processor.
Tom's Guide
06-08-2025
- Tom's Guide
Samsung renaming Galaxy S26 the Galaxy S26 Pro is a terrible idea — here's why
Last week we heard rumors that Samsung is going to change up the way it sells phones — starting with the Galaxy S26 series. Not only is the S26 Plus potentially being canned, in favor of the skinny Galaxy S26 Edge, word is that there may not be a standard Galaxy S26 either. According to claims, Samsung is going to release a Galaxy S26 Pro instead. But rather than being a brand new kind of phone, reports claim that the only change here will be the name. So the device will be the regular Galaxy S26, but with a fluffed up name. If true, this is clearly an idea cooked up by the marketing department in an attempt to sell more phones. But anyone with an ounce of common sense will know that this is would be a spectacularly boneheaded move. Over the years we've seen plenty of examples of phone companies adding suffixes and titles to their phones in an attempt to differentiate them all. There's Plus, Max, Ultra and Pro, to name a few of the options utilized on the flagship level. If what we've heard is true, there will be no Galaxy S26, only the Pro, Edge and Ultra. Which feels like a decision specifically made for maximum deviousness, and to try and confuse the consumer about which phone is the right one. Most of the time these terms are actually pretty meaningless. Sometimes they're used to help differentiate between different sizes, like Plus or mini, all of which are fairly self explanatory. For the most part these names are meant to show which phones are the more advanced options. In Samsung's case it does this with the Ultra name. So you can tell at a glance that the Galaxy S25 Ultra is a better phone than the Galaxy S25 — which has no special title. The problem is that there's no consistency between phone companies. While Samsung chose Ultra, the likes of Apple and Google chose Pro. It doesn't make a lot of difference which names they picked, because at this stage consumers have come to realize what these terms mean — and that they are mostly just meaningless marketing speak for "good." It's rare that phone companies opt for both, because at this stage doing so might just end up confusing people. Admittedly it's long been rumored that Apple could do this, rebranding the Pro Max iPhone as the Ultra. But at least in this instance the general makeup of the iPhone launch slate won't be that different. Even if it means buyers need to do a little more research, there's still that entry-level standard iPhone to compare the more premium models to. In Samsung's case, all that goes out of the window. If what we've heard is true, there will be no Galaxy S26, only the Pro, Edge and Ultra. Which feels like a decision specifically made for maximum deviousness, and to try and confuse the consumer about which phone is the right one. One argument that can be made about this change is that calling a phone "Pro" is meaningless if there isn't a base model to compare it to. I made that same argument after rumors hit the web claiming the iPhone 18 might arrive several months after iPhone 18 Pro. But crucially, in this case it feels as though Samsung is doing this to try and sell more phones. The GSMA database entry that spawned this rumor features the same SM-S942 product code for both the S26 and S26 Pro — suggesting that they are the same device. Which essentially feels like this change may end up misleading potential customers by marketing the S26 as something better than it is. The marketing department will likely argue that the entry-level S26 is advanced enough to get a more premium-sounding name. I understand that to a degree, especially if the S26 Pro ends up getting some of the upgrades the likes of the S25 have been missing — like faster charging speeds. But it still strikes me as a disingenuous change. Everyone knows that Galaxy phones are some of the best phones around, in the same way that iPhones are. It doesn't matter if the entry level models lack a special title, or get held back without key upgrades that Pro or Ultra models receive. You know you're going to get a great phone when you hand over your money. Trying to make people believe they're getting something better than it is, just to try and sell more phones, is pretty nefarious. Particularly since it's behaving as though consumers are idiots, and can't see through the ruse. We all know there are plenty of people out there who impulsively buy stuff without thinking too hard about what they're doing. But I'd also wager that those people are in the minority, especially when the scheme is this transparent. Unless Samsung can offer some substance to the name change, I have a strong feeling making the "Pro" move will backfire. If Samsung wants to release a Samsung Galaxy S26 Pro alongside the Ultra, then so be it. But it needs to make sure that name is warranted, which in this case means not simply slapping a Pro label onto the S26 and hoping nobody asks too many questions.
