2014 and 2015 Dayi Jia Ji sheng tuocha, and 2012 Xiaguan

they look similar enough separated out

This comparison theme really started with a tea friend passing on a fourth Xiaguan mini-tuo recently, a tablet-sized version, one each of sheng and shu.  It reminded me that I bought a set of 5 2015 Dayi / Taetea Jia Ji tuochas from Yunnan Sourcing earlier in the year, and hadn't tried one yet.  I've tried a Xiaguan 2012 sheng tuocha I had around before but seem to have never mentioned that here (from a local Bangkok store, Jip Eu, that one I keep mentioning).

A 2014 Dayi (Taetea) Jia Ji tuocha I've reviewed initially (three years ago; a good time-frame), and re-tried a couple of times, but I wasn't rushing to finish it to see how it changes over time.  That works better with a set of 5; then you don't run out right when it's most drinkable.

I didn't remember the value was that good

The Xiaguan I could do more research on to identify a specific version; that is a bit broad, just calling it by a producer name, since they make lots of versions.  The problem would be that it wouldn't likely tie to a good description anywhere even if I did.  Sales pricing would imply quality level and that would probably be about it.  Even if I could turn up an online review I wouldn't know about that person's judgement, or storage conditions, etc.  Aging potential is probably as much or more a concern as how that drinks now, and no one would be bold enough to describe what a tea will be like in a half dozen years in the future, factoring in storage as an input and guessing likely changes.

I had considered trying all four together, including the one Ralph passed on (that friend), but trying four teas is too much.  Three is a bit much, and I can relate to people thinking that tasting two teas together is already way too much.  I could ramble on more about other examples or storage conditions issues but as well to get on with it.  I'll mention the Yunnan Sourcing listing first:


Jia Ji Tuo (甲级沱茶 Special Grade Bird's Nest ) is a high quality blend with that characteristic heavy Menghai area qi!  Good mouth-feel and huigan this is a great choice for aging.  Affordable, but packs a punch!

Net Weight: 500 grams per bag (5 tuos at 100 grams each)

Batch: 1501


That 2014 version I bought really did need some aging as of three years ago, also related to that comment about the 2015 versions, and has much improved since.  The packs of 5 tuos are sold out already there; isn't that always the way?  Single tuos are still available but probably not for long.  I just bought a few more of each of my favorites from a Chawang Shop order from around this same time-frame, to avoid experiencing that when trying to reorder later on instead.

Review:

Dayi 2015 left, 2014 middle, 2012 Xiaguan right (in all photos)

2015 Dayi Jia Ji:  this tea version is notably greener than the other two, and the third might be slightly darker than the second (2012 Xiaguan versus 2014 Dayi).  Normal enough, for the year less aging and being in a dryer environment in Kunming.

Lots of astringent green wood stands out right away.  The 2014 Dayi tuo had been more like that earlier on, as I recall, but won't be similar now.  Although they're only a year apart in age Bangkok's hot and humid climate changes tea fast; you can tell a lot of difference over the course of a year.  It's hard to be certain what kind of judge of aging potential I am for young sheng, that could use some transition, but this seems promising.  It has good sweetness, and already leans a bit towards dried fruit.  It's quite clean; there might be a faint hint of smoke but no mustiness, no rough earthiness, and the mineral effect is clean.

I'm not sure how positive it will become over later transitions this time, beyond softening just a little, but at a guess in a couple of years this should be ok, and in another half dozen probably very nice.  I'd think in 8-10 more years it will be much better yet; we'll see.

2014 Dayi Jia Ji:  the difference is really significant, but the commonality--shared range--makes that more interesting.  I don't intend to claim these must have been identical at time of production; of course the opposite could as easily be true, that they might've been quite different.  I'd guess similar:  this product version is intended to represent a distinct style, per my understanding, or at the least match a quality level.  They can use blending to help them adjust character, so smoothing out some differences should have been at least partly possible, heading towards a similar end point.

The green wood bitterness and astringency is there, along with a lot of much warmer tone.  It's a bit medicinal, the rest, kind of hard to describe.  Some is in the mineral range, like a very warm, rich version of rock, or even corroded metal.  Or aged, partly fermented tree bark, like a fallen tree smells.  It's probably closest to birch or aspen, even though those have a much brighter, more mineral intensive (flinty) smell when live or freshly cut.  Maybe I'm mixing the parts I'm describing, the mineral and earthy ranges.

2012 Xiaguan:  way different, of course.  The distinctive green wood taste has a related counterpart but it's not the same at all, and to the extent that probably had been present it has transitioned.  It has a dry edge to it, a completely different feel.  It's not quite as clean; the warm mineral content has a bit of roughness or murkiness to it, not so much like tasting of overly damp storage, but that could be part of what led to the effect.  There's one primary aspect I'm not doing justice to, a sweet, rich flavor in between a spice and dried fruit, out towards a bark spice (just not necessarily cinnamon) or dried persimmon, or maybe that's date / jujube (Chinese date).  It should be easier to sort it out in the second round.

Second infusion:

I've kept this infusion relatively short but for preparing three at the same time it stretched out towards 10 seconds.  It seems likely the results this round will have me try to dial that back on the next, to speed it up.

2015 Dayi Jia Ji:  this transitioned more than I expected, even though it's not completely different.  That astringency edge and bitterness settled out, definitely not entirely, but a decent amount.  That kind of early round transition will probably take another round or two to play out.  This really isn't undrinkable now; it has aspect range that's pleasant.  It is on the bitter and astringent side, as young sheng can go.  It would just depend on preference whether that current aspect balance is very enjoyable, a bit neutral, balanced between what works well and doesn't, or not pleasant at all.  Personally I'd taste this tea once a year and probably enjoy it more later on.

The green wood flavor range has moved on towards something closer to tobacco, how I'd imagine tobacco that's partly through a curing phase to be, but still with some warmth and richness.  It's clean; there had been a hint of smoke but that's essentially faded already.  The hint towards medicinal or light dried fruit range is promising.  Sweetness level is good, pleasant; feel is fine, and aftertaste is positive.  Even though higher quality sheng versions have a rich, full feel to them that this doesn't match it's still pleasant.

2014 Dayi Jia Ji:  this has shifted too; green wood is still present, again at a much lower level of proportion of that input, but other range has picked up.  A pronounced pine / rosemary aspect is dominant.  There's still enough astringency and bitterness in this that it's not a soft, smooth tea but it's all clean in effect, with no negative musty, murky, or "off" mineral range affecting that.  The warm and rich range reminds me of well-aged sawdust, tying to that brighter (but still warm) pine and rosemary range.

As a child we would go play on a sawdust pile located on our property, a remnant of an earlier lumber mill operation based there; it's a little like that smell.  Right, I had an unusual childhood.  I have no idea why my parents were ok with us kids off roaming woods, or me climbing trees at a very young age, granting me the nickname "chipmunk" from my grandfather.

2012 Xiaguan:  completely different, as one might expect.  Two aspect ranges hit you right away:  a dryness in feel, seeming paired with warm mineral range, and rich, sweet, complex higher tone.  It's so sweet and leaning towards earthy range that although standard descriptions like leather might apply it tastes a little like a sweeter, lighter tisane too.  It's like  the bael fruit tisane that's common here, or maybe even roselle (which is totally different, so odd that I'd be connecting the two).  It spans range; I think that's it.  Even the sub-themes, the richer mineral, warmer earthier tones, the brighter and sweeter parts towards a rich dried fruit all span range of their own.  It's much cleaner than on the first infusion; it will be interesting to see how that carries forward.

This really could use even more aging time, for sure, but it has interesting promise, of a different sort than the other two.  It's more intense, more complex, and shifted in aspect range.  The other two seem more promising related to covering a specific, more limited aspect range, this for having more depth and for covering more scope.  It's just as intense as the other two in spite of being 2-3 years younger and spending time in Bangkok; it might well have been somewhat challenging that 2 to 3 years ago.  I probably first tried it at least a year and a half ago and I think that was my impression; best to set it aside and suspend judgement for awhile.

I will try to move towards a fast infusion third round to see how that goes, even though intensity wasn't a problem for these on this round.

Third infusion:

older Xiaguan (right) slightly darker but that's about it

2015 Dayi Jia Ji tuocha:  slightly warmer, rich, sweet, and complex.  A "darker," towards-spice aspect is picking up a bit, along the lines of sassafrass (root beer), but warmer in tone than that typically is.  It's still a little woody too but now in a warmer tropical dark wood range, mahogany or something such.

2014 Dayi Jia Ji:  there are comparable aspects to all that set, just warmer and sweeter in tone.  The spice like range is out towards bark spice instead, and the woody tone more towards some form of well-cured wood.  Aftertaste stands out a lot more; I'm not sure if that relates to varying tea quality or just that these particular flavors tend to carry over more.  The latter seems to be the case, especially since that has shifted since the last round (as I interpret it, anyway; there is no objective, 100% accurate take on a tea to be had, it's just not all subjective guess-work either).  Intensity for both is good, and character is pleasant.  Pine / rosemary is still present but no longer a dominant aspect, now just part of a set.

2012 Xiaguan:  it's interesting how tasting those two first linked teas is such a different experience than switching over to this one.  It's warmer than the 2104 Dayi, not quite as clean but not murky or off in any way.  It's both more intense and more complex, and in a different flavor range.  A bit of dryness is still present but it has softened a good bit through transitions.  All that going on about fruit and aged wood in the last round still applies, in only a slightly altered form, so I'll skip running back through it.

It was definitely the right call to not add a fourth tea to this tasting.  I can probably make it through two more rounds, to see more transitions, but nine small cups of these teas is already quite a bit.  It would have made sense to scale back quantity and stretch infusion time just a little, to get farther and to brew less.  I'd been considering that, especially related to potential to add that mini-tuo tablet to the mix, but ended up using a default quantity instead.  I'm brewing these as I'm most accustomed to, using a high proportion of tea, which isn't ideal for tasting three versions together.

Fourth infusion:

2015 Dayi:  I'm noticing a bit more smoke this round; odd that it would drop back and then pick back up.  Tone is shifting towards a petroleum like range that's more common in young shu, versions that haven't settled from fermentation (wet-piling processing) yet.  There is still woody flavor, and strong underlying mineral, but a heavier other tones are picking up.  One interpretation would be that it's medicinal; that works about as well as any other.  It's still relatively clean, even though it might not sound it from that description.  Tasting a little more like slate, warm mineral, is probably a more relatable description, and not really wrong; that is part of it.

2014 Dayi:  the prior description works; it didn't really shift.  It's still in the range of warm, complex wood tone, pine / rosemary, and strong underlying mineral.  Aftertaste is stronger in this than in the first but I think that may have picked up a little with the flavor-range shift in the first version.  Or maybe not; maybe I imagine that, from expecting it.  It's nice how clean this comes across, and how the flavor and other complexity (sweetness, feel, and aftertaste) all work well together.

2012 Xiaguan:  a bit of warm, dark wood-tone in this draws closer to part of the effect of the second.  It's piney too, but more like the scent of pine cones lying on the ground, slightly cured versions of those, with the 2104 Dayi closer to pine wood or dried needle.  A hint of dryness keeps fading but may never really completely drop out.  The range seems a bit narrower, maybe related from using a relatively fast infusion time (those would vary, based on a lack of careful control).

I think this seems less "clean" related to the other two being notable for that effect.  I bet if tasted alongside the Xiaguan version I bought from Chawang Shop this year it would seem quite clean, since that had a bit of mushroom earthiness to it.  That's an unreliable guess though, based on memory of trying a tea version months ago.

wet leaves don't look all that different

Fifth infusion:

This will probably be it, related both to me needing to go do something and 15 small cups of these teas being plenty for me.  If I get time in the afternoon it will be interesting to do a number of additional rounds but it's too much to keep making notes of that, adding a second page of text to this review.  Typically adding some general impression is plenty.

It goes without saying that I've been using drinking water to clear my palate between trying these teas; the carry-over would make picking up flavors and other range impossible otherwise.  Ordinarily, when drinking just one tea version, it can be nice how the flavor and other experience is continuous, and can even build, but you give that up doing comparisons.

2015 Dayi:  smoke is just as pronounced, or maybe slightly more so.  So strange.  This must be a good example of a natural smoke flavor aspect in a tea since smoke from contact would've surely shown up in the early rounds at the same or higher level, not dropping back and picking up again.  Varying infusion times will do that, shifting which aspects stand out the most due to overall brewed intensity changing, or even shifting in proportion at the same intensity level.  I've been letting these trail to lighter infusion levels versus adding infusion time to adjust for a slight fade in intensity.  They work well lighter, and I could have been using 5 second infusion times in the earlier rounds, I just wasn't rushing.

2014 Dayi:  more of the same, just a bit lighter, maybe giving up a little intensity and aspect range (complexity).  Still not changed much though, so the last description still works for this round.  That shift due to using slightly longer infusion times would apply from here on out, but I'll skip making notes on how it works out.

2012 Xiaguan:  that dryness never is going to drop out, or apparently even fade further.  I'd be surprised if it didn't increase related to brewing these longer, after the next round or the one after.  Flavor range is still fine, unchanged.  Related to feel and aftertaste it doesn't seem to match the quality of the 2014 version, which may be slightly higher than the 2015, unless the change instead relates to a year of aging.  At a guess the 2014 version really is slightly better tea, and beyond other unrelated differences in character this Xiaguan isn't quite on their level.

Quality isn't some abstract, identifiable, unified variable, of course; if someone liked the Xiaguan character better for whatever reason then it would be a better tea.  I see markers as identifying it (quality), as a general indication, like thickness of feel and aftertaste type and duration.

Conclusions:

This was all as much about keeping really detailed notes to look back on later as it was communicating how partially aged tuochas work out (although it works for that too).  All three were fine.  I'm not sure if the 2014 really was slightly better quality tea than the 2015 version, for being more complex, and slightly thicker in feel, lacking smoke, etc., or if the difference in aging caused all that.  At a guess it may have been slightly better.  That will be clearer in a couple of more years once fermentation transition evens out for both.

I liked the Xiaguan version almost as much as the two Dayi versions, but to me it wasn't quite as positive.  Flavors were a bit more muddled, and a touch of dryness in feel wasn't positive.  It was in the same general range, still nice.  The point for all of these is how they'll turn out after years more aging; we'll see about that.

I could enjoy them as they are just now but it's kind of a shame to not let them transition to achieve more of their potential.  I expect that green wood aspect in the two Dayi to shift into a range that I enjoy a lot more.  The Xiaguan may well be roughly where it's going to be within another couple of years stored here.