2007 8281 Yellow Label Mengku sheng pu'er, compared with 8891

it's like visiting an aunt and uncle there, even though I'm not that much younger

I'm reviewing a tea sample the owners of my favorite Bangkok Chinatown tea shop, Jip Eu, gave to me when I last visited them.  It's a little unconventional that we tried that tea there during that visit, so I'm writing about it again, based on a much closer form of review.  It was nice of them, to give me more to also try later, and perhaps wise of them to get that impression documented in a tea blog, just by handing over a sample.

It's a little odd, but my impression of it changed.  I was fasting that day (the first day of 5), and talking quite a bit instead of focusing in, so two things changed.  Three, really; I also brew tea for myself differently, because I based infusion timing each round on how I liked the last round.  My water source is probably also different (filtered local tap water, but the filtration must vary).

I don't have a listing or site description to provide, under the circumstances.  Jip Eu is on Facebook here, and they're on Shopee, for people online shopping within Thailand (maybe easier to find as "Three Shell Tea").  I looked up online listings, and two different vendors sell this for two completely different price points (the 2007 version, probably the same tea, although I guess this could be sold in different batch numbers, so maybe not identical).  Here is one of them, listed by Crafted Leaf Tea:

2007 Yellow label Raw Puerh - Iron Cake

Tea Bush : Grade 1 Mengku large-leaf tea bush species

Made from supreme old tree Mengku material, this is a high quality raw puerh from a village in the Brown Mount. region. After 13 years of aging this cake has enter its mature stage, most of the strong bitterness & fresh fruitiness of raw puerh has turn into a mature taste crafted by time.  Comparing with our 2003 Premium Yiwu Private Collection Raw Puerh - Chimney. It features less smokiness but with a very well balance of sweetness of ripe puerh and pinewood & mineral bitterness, followed by a lingering light caramel aftertaste. The aroma lingers wonderfully in the throat. After about seven or eight steeps, the taste becomes more tender and mild, and starts to show a light, mellow fruity fragrance.

So they're saying that it's a Mengku, Lincang region tea.  Google's AI input and another listing agree this was made by the Kunming Tea Factory for CNNP release (Zhong Cha).

This second "Dragon Tea House" listing sells this cake for $40, while the other vendor, Crafted Leaf Tea, sells 50 grams for $22.  What should we make of that?  I'll spare you the idle speculation, beyond this summary.  Maybe one isn't "real," maybe one is overpriced, maybe there are other factors.  $40 for a 19 year old standard producer tea does seem low.  This was selling for closer to that than whatever $22 for 50 grams works out to (nearly 50 cents a gram?  come on.).

This other 19 year old CNNP cake is pressed as a 500 gram version, now listing for $104 through Yunnan Sourcing, where I bought it awhile back.  I first reviewed that in 2019 here, seven years ago, and don't seem to have any newer comparison use review to check in on.  People who have been following Yunnan Sourcing for a long time, and drink sheng pu'er, probably have already bought this cake; somehow it became the standard entry point item to try out way earlier on. 

Reviewing tea labels:  this could be a step too far, but in looking at the three labels of the three teas presented as generally the same they don't match.  The Dragon Leaf version has a different bottom producer identifier name, and the yellow mark in the center is slightly offset (although the Crafted Leaf page includes pictures of both types of differently marked labels; strange).  Make of it what you will; it's not intended as evidence of any indirect claim.  Per the owners of this shop they bought a good bit of this tea back in 2007 from a producer outlet when it came out, which on the face of it sounds reliable.  Who knows though.

the Jip Eu cake label

Crafted Leaf Tea version

Dragon Tea House version (note the "product of") section

Review:

8281 left (my cats just broke one of the plainer cups I use most often; not helpful)

8281 Kunming / CNNP 2007:  it's interesting that this is much darker initially, both the leaves and the infusion.  They're both 2007 versions, but the other spent half its time in Kunming, in relatively dry and cool storage, and this tea version came to Bangkok back when it was produced, bought by the shop owners back then.  It has been stored hot and humid.

Flavors are heavy, of course.  It's relatively clean though.  Beyond the heavy mineral base a pine note stands out, and some medicinal herb tone.  Feel has a nice thickness already, and it has only been one short infusion, after a short rinse.  There may be brighter and sweeter spice that will evolve, or maybe even a touch of dried fruit, but I think this will be easier to read next round.

8891:  it is lighter in flavor range, but this has transitioned pretty far along already.  It's not how I remember it.  There could be a faint hint of smoke-like flavor, but beyond the slightly lighter mineral it tastes something like aged bamboo might.  It's not exactly woody, but pretty close to that.  Sweetness is decent; it gives it balance.  There's just a hint of sourness at the finish, which doesn't ruin the effect for me, but I suppose it's not mostly positive.  Going back and tasting the other after this, the same first round, a bit more root spice stands out in that in contrast, towards root beer, or sassafras.  

I'm not sure why but I'm feeling these teas after the first round.  I took a week of drinking a lot less during a 5 day fast, and never really increased back to my earlier level in the week after, so my caffeine tolerance may be low.

the leaf and liquid color difference is noticeable

8281 #2:  these brewed for about 15 seconds, or maybe slightly over, which is a fairly long infusion for a high proportion and strong teas like these.

It's interesting how heavy and strong this flavor profile is, with it being clean at the same time.  This might turn into pretty good tea with another half a dozen years to finish the full fermentation transition process, which is really far along now, maybe equivalent to over 30 years in cooler and drier storage.

Heavy flavors could either be seen as a selling point or a negative, depending on preference.  Quite heavy mineral tone stands out.  It's strong enough that you need to "taste past it" to identify the rest.  One part of the remaining flavor is like a cured tree bark tone (so woody in a completely different sense than the other tea).  Spice range is still present; it links with that, or overlaps, some range of root spice.  Less of the more forward, bright, dry pine note is present, but it's still there, just in a different balance.  Other complexity probably still does relate to medicinal herb range, ginseng and such, but it's all hard to place, integrating with or being overshadowed by the rest.

8891:  complexity is good in this; there's a good bit going on (which is all relative, of course).  And the tone is lighter, which works well.  That hint of sourness at the end is a little more pervasive now.  I don't necessarily see it as a flaw, but if it was swapped out for something else the tea could be much more exceptional.  It seems to connect with a dryness that you feel in the center of your tongue as you drink it, and more just after you swallow.  

I remember this as a heavier and rougher edged tea.  It has mellowed.  The heaviness of flavor tones fading could easily relate to my judgment changing, or my general perspective.  Tasting any tea in combination with another also shifts things; that becomes a fixed baseline, adding a bias for what is a heavy level of any one input, or placing different aspects differently in comparison.

At this point I like the 8281 better, but this early sourness and dryness may be something that evolves out of this version over a few infusions, so it seems too early for that kind of judgment.  I should mention here that some claim that dry storage is "bad" for a tea, not for just slowing down transition pace, but also for imparting a slight sour note to teas.  I never really knew if that holds up, oddly, even though I've tried a good bit of dry stored pu'er.  Storage that is too wet (humid) is said to impart either a mustiness or overly heavy tones to a tea, or maybe both.  Then people talking about relative optimums tends to make for a complicated subject.

8281 #3:  brewing this faster, at 10 seconds, and being a couple of infusions in really lets this tea shine.  The flavor aspects I've been talking about (pine, heavy mineral tones, limited root spice, other medicinal spice) haven't changed, but the balance does shift completely.  Feel is still good, and pleasant aftertaste carries over.  Sweetness level is nice.  It works.  Brewed a bit stronger it probably wouldn't; this tea is pretty intense.

8891:  this also balances the best it has yet.  The bamboo woodiness seems to evolve to more of a sandalwood spice.  That one light sour range aspect is fading, or maybe a lighter infusion makes it seem to drop, but it's still present.  Feel is better.  

It's interesting tasting these and "looking for" the standard descriptors people often apply.  Do they taste nothing like betel nut (which could only be a guess on my part, not having tried that), or camphor?  Maybe the first (8281) does taste like betel nut, and the second like camphor.  Probably that second attribution is more grounded; there is an edge to this tea that kind of matches that.  The first seems to emphasize that light spice range all the more in comparison.

8281 #4:  I'm getting rocked by these teas.  Colors and color definition seems more vivid; it's affecting my vision.  Why didn't I put less tea in these gaiwans?  It's like a mental block, as if I can't.

This tea is really catchy, the way that a root spice stands out, with so much more going on beyond that.  Sweetness picks up, so the rootbeer like tone leans a little towards a dried fruit note input, but it's still really a sweeter range of spice input.

If flavors were a little heavier it would be too much, but for me that part is fine.  It's really clean, supported by great sweetness, rich feel, good balance, and pleasant aftertaste.  Maybe it would've been even better if it had been stored in a slightly cooler and drier place, and aged for 30 years instead of 19.  A decade of extra wait is a significant trade-off; you can't just move yourself through time to experience that.

8891:  that early sourness is losing its place in this tea, for the best.  It lacks some of smoothness and root spice complexity of the other, but a different form of lighter sandalwood sort of range spice is nice in this.  A light camphor edge has seemed to replace the sourness, definitely an improvement.  It might be even better after 4 more rounds, but it would be pushing it to drink just one more.  Let's go there; let's push it.

8281, #5:  I'm giving these more like 20 seconds to see them from a different perspective.  Heavier tones pick back up again; it's interesting how infusion strength varies perceived character like that.  And it's also handy, to be able to shift what you experience so easily.  It was better a little lighter.  That heavy mineral starts to come across almost like a charred tone, where is was part of a less prominent background context, less strong than the root spice, last round.

It's still not bad, not flawed, or too far out of balance, but it's better brewed lighter.

8891:  this version balances just fine brewed a little stronger.  The sourness didn't return; that did evolve out over early infusions, as I guessed might happen.  It might be slightly better than last round for being a little stronger.  It balances well.  One might expect the camphor effect to pick up, brewed stronger, but it's kind of the same, the flavors are just a little more intense, and the feel.  The other is smoother and richer, with this retaining a little dryness, just not in the same form as over the first few rounds, not as pronounced.  

If you drink the other right after this, while the aftertaste is still present, the contrast in it tasting so much more like spice really stands out.  Tried the other way that dryness stands out most in this, tasted right after the other.  It's not all that challenging or negative when you just drink this 8891, but in comparison it's more negative.  

Conclusions:

I tried a couple more rounds later and there wasn't more story to tell based on that.  Of course they didn't fade out and die within the first seven infusions.

I suppose that I like the 8281 more.  Could it be because it's more fermented, further along in aging transition?  Hard to say; that's not impossible.  The 8891 is lighter, smoother, and more balanced than I remember.  I may not have tried this for years.

Both are pretty decent.  I don't think these are what the Teas We Like curator vendor are probably looking for as the absolute best examples of aged sheng potential, but they're decent, and solid.  It doesn't help that I very rarely drink 20 year old range tea at this point; I mostly drink young sheng, within 3 or 4 years of being produced.  It's completely different in character.  It's interesting completing a 1500 word tea review without mentioning bitterness, for example.

What was missing, if these were reasonably well balanced, with pleasant flavor range, and not really expressing clear flaws, but I'm judging them to be good but not great?  Complexity was decent, and balance ok, but they both could've had a little more to offer.  That root spice range in the 8281 could've been more pronounced and spanned more interesting scope.  The 8891 had issues with dryness and light sourness early on, and then later evolved to be more pleasant, but it still mostly covered spice that wasn't so far removed from wood.  I think both will probably be better as 25 year old teas, that having plenty of intensity at this age is a good sign, so both have room to change positively, if only a little.  This 8891 might be fully age-transitioned at 30 years old, as this is going.

I hadn't planned to buy a cake of this but now I might.  As I mentioned I tried it once before, visiting that Chinatown shop, during a fast, on the first of 5 days off eating.  I didn't like it as much as this time.  It helps slowing things down and spending time with a tea, and brewing according to your own preference.  It helps having eaten.  Your sense of taste changes a lot more after 3 or 4 days of fasting, and you can smell the neighbors cooking dinner really far away, but just skipping breakfast changes things, a little.

This tea--the 8281--might be even better with a few more years to complete a transition, or a half dozen.  The 8891 is also much better than it was something like a half dozen years ago when I tried it last (maybe 3 or 4?  I lose track).  These are definitely not fading to not include much flavor intensity.  

To me this range, standard CNNP character, is one of three good examples of favorable and distinctive factory tea production, along with Dayi and Xiaguan.  Maybe people would typically prefer one of those over the others?  I really do like best-case outcome Xiaguan versions.  Or even the barnyard character of well-transitioned more standard range.  Many of their teas come across as rough-edged and basic but that flavor range is interesting.

there is a second cat over on the other side of the fence

2006 China Tea (CNNP) 8001 sheng pu'er

This tea version goes back to when that new friend visited from Germany, Ralph.  He bought this China Tea Company / CNNP / Zhongcha 2006 8001 sheng pu'er tea cake at my favorite Chinatown shop, Jip Eu.  Not only did he say that he liked it but another friend visiting from Germany backed that up (if I know you a little and like you then to me you're my friend, as I use the concept, a bit loosely).  The curiosity got to me, and I also bought a cake.  This is the third version of a similar cake I'll have bought, with more on that in the following.

with Ralph and Jaba at that shop, and Kittichai, the owner

The research on what it is could have went better.  A few online sources mentioned the same version, but then you can find online references to tea cakes that are clearly not what they're labeled as, like that LBZ version I bought from a Chinatown shop here, or most of what's sold on Ebay.  That wasn't even supposed to be LBZ, given the pricing, just a random tea that happened to be mislabeled as that.  Next it becomes a concern not just if a cake is what labeling says that it is, but if that's even a reference to anything that it might actually be.  I'm not going to dwell on all that, but the number system story helps cover what I mean.

8001 refers to specific information, if it follows the convention, which not all cake numbers do.  The first two digits reference the year the tea recipe was developed, serving as a type number, the last a producer number, and the third a grading of leaves, more or less wholeness, but perhaps used in different ways.  So this was--if that holds--a type developed in 1980, from the "1" producer, Zhongcha, CNNP, or China Tea (one of the names of which dropped out at some point, no longer applying, if I'm partly remembering right), with a leaf grade of 0, the highest possible level.  Per input from that other friend, Jens, the third digit is also used to evaluate leaf quality in some instances, not just form / wholeness.  The date is something else; this has 2006 stamped on the label.

Sounds reasonable, right?  So why would I be uncertain that's it?  That probably is what this tea is, what it looks to be.  I just didn't turn up any familiar references, vendors like Yunnan Sourcing selling it, online discussion, and so on.  Dodgy looking Chinese vendors selling seemingly identical cakes isn't conclusive.  All the same the proof of the pudding is in the eating; it's real enough if it's pleasant to drink.  And this would be aiming a bit low for a tea to fake, since it wouldn't have been costly at all back when it was made, and it's not as if this shop just purchased it, so it can't well have been a very recent recreated version. 

There is a second concern, about image of this blog if I review or support a tea being something when in fact it's not that.  I'm not losing any sleep over that; as far as I know I don't have all that much public image to be worried about.  All this part is just framing what I'm thinking about the background.  Obviously I'm still exploring aged sheng, kind of just starting, even though there have been at least a couple of dozen reviews in that general range here.  It takes awhile to start on this particular subject.


I'm reviewing it alongside a 2007 red mark version from Yunnan Sourcing (reviewed here); that will help serve as a baseline.  I remember that tea being a bit rough-edged, extra earthy, but pleasant if someone was ok with that theme. 

This tasting was rushed , conducted in just over half an hour, limited in time due to a swim lesson occurring at 10 AM.  I had woke up early enough to use a full hour for it, about as long as note taking for a half dozen rounds would take, but used a significant amount of that time making French toast.  One has to keep priorities in order.  It wasn't mostly for me but the French toast was quite pleasant; we had it with ham, spiced with cinnamon, nutmeg, clove, and cardamom, so a slightly non-standard version.

More sort of related background:

I'll cite a lot of that Yunnan Sourcing description of that first tea I tried with it here, not all that directly relevant to this different version, but it will describe half of what I'm tasting, the benchmark version:

8891 Red Mark is one of two 8891's released in 2007 by the China Tea Co (aka Zhong Cha/CNNP)... 

...Most importantly this tea is incredibly good tasting and has a very unique flavor profile. It's been stored in Guangdong since 2007 in a dry-wet storage condition (wet stored but on the dry side of the wet storage spectrum). The raw material is from Nan Jian area of Yunnan which is technically part of Dali prefecture. I suspect the given the name "Da Li Cang Shan Xue Yin Yuan Cha" (Dali Town, Cang Mountain, Snow Mark Round Cake) and the font used that this was pressed for the CNNP company by the Nan Jian Tu Lin tea company. The material is fairly tippy, large leaf and obviously pure assamica. Not only that, but the raw material used is not from young plantation bushes as it's quite burly and large in scale.

Compression is medium, not too tight at all and the leaves easily separate in layers from the cake. The tea brews up an orange-red tea soup with a pungent aroma of flowers, mushrooms and earth. The taste is clean with no musty wet storage notes, but does have some some earthy notes. There is a kind of pronounced spice and cloves taste and aroma with a strong viscous sweetness throughout...

It's great that Scott tells you so much about what you are buying, beyond the tea just being what it's supposed to be. 

I really rush the flavor break-down here so I don't get far with interpreting the spice notes, or pinning down earthiness level or type, and skip over doing much with describing feel.  I reviewed that tea initially here, in April, and used it as a benchmark against a similarly aged tea brick I bought in a market in Shenzhen (China) in June, but I won't go too far with cross-comparing the different impressions.  I mention at the end it's not exactly as I remember it, even though I've tried it again a few times between June and now.  The purpose here is for comparison, more than for determining if it's transitioning.

I briefly mention how this compares with another CNNP / Zhong Cha / China Tea company version I've tried again in the last couple of weeks or so, another 2006 version I bought in Chinatown at Sen Xing Fa last year, reviewed here.  That review doesn't say how much I bought that for; if I'm remembering right a bit under 2000 baht / $60, but then that tea is slightly flawed related to storage mustiness (or so it seems to me).  It cleans up in character after the first 4 rounds or so but it's not really as pleasant as this tea through the first 5 rounds, based on these initial tasting notes and my memory of it.

I mentioned the apparently identical listings of it that turned up online weren't promising related to offering background or clear descriptions, but didn't add that Ralph also reviewed the tea in his tea blog (the Daily Tealegraph).  He also lists three Chinese vendor references relating to this tea; anyone interested in checking on that can click through to those.

Review:

2007 8891 left, 2006 8001 right

8891 left, 8001 right (in all following pictures)

2007 8891, red mark:  first infusion is too light to do much with, but it should start to tell something about storage conditions.  This tastes really clean, light in flavor, a sign it wasn't stored overly wet, or even moderately wet-stored, I'd imagine.  To some extent I'm speculating here, in claiming that storage flavor would stand out immediately, pushing past experience into the range of guessing a little.  Flavor that does come across is pleasant, towards tobacco (not matching everyone's preference, surely, but pleasant as aged sheng tasting like tobacco goes).  Within a round or two that will probably shift some.


2006 8001:  completely different; pronounced mushroom and mustiness comes across immediately.  That's not a terrible sign; per past experience that might well clean up a lot over the first two rounds.  Other flavor is along the lines of old barn smell, versus tobacco in the other.  Of course it's not nearly as clean in effect as the other version but to me this is still very promising.  It has intensity and depth, and with some degree of transition it could be quite nice.

Second infusion:

2007 8891:  much improved, probably not completely ramped up yet but getting there.  Sweetness increased, in a toffee-like range.  Tobacco gives way to other flavor complexity, warm mineral base, rich dark wood tone, hinting a little towards aromatic root spice.  It's nice, just a little light still.


2006 8001:  cleaning up but not there yet.  Mustiness fades; it's no longer in the range of mushroom (as much, at least) but there's definitely an aged character to it, like stored items in an old garage or barn.  It's still promising, a bit clean for being that musty, with a lot of depth and complexity.  I expect it will be a good bit cleaner next round, and then more where it's going to be the one after.

Third infusion:

2007 8891:  this could've been brewed slightly longer than the 8 or so seconds I gave it.  Flavor level is appropriate and pleasant but it would be fine a little stronger.  Earthy range is evolving, but since time is tight I won't put effort into unpacking that.  It's clean enough, and pleasant.


2006 8001:  this version is around optimum for intensity level, brewing slightly faster, or else just more intense flavored tea.  It has cleaned up a lot; probably one more round to go for that process to complete, but the character balance is fine now.  If I had an extra half hour for this review (taking notes) it would be interesting to do a more detailed comparison of flavor, adding more about feel differences and aftertaste, but I'm running out of time, off to that swimming class.  Mustiness is still on an even level with the other flavors, even though I could enjoy it like this; we'll see if that keeps tipping next round.  I'll give these over 10 seconds to try them a little stronger.

Fourth infusion:

2007 8891:  more of the same, clean and pleasant, more into light toffee and root spice range now.  Earthiness is present but not necessarily woody or like tobacco, just adding some depth, along with warm mineral.  I think this might have improved since I've first tried it, cleaned up a bit. 


2006 8001:  much better; this did just tip over to tasting less musty and more into warm mineral, earth, and spice range.  It's similar to that other CNNP / China Tea / Zhong cha sheng cake I bought--at least that seems to be that--that needs 3 or 4 infusions to really settle off that initial musty range, but then brews another 10 or so positive infusions.  We'll see about that part, in the case of this version.  Complexity is quite good; that might include a bit of dried fruit, along the line of date, or maybe jujube, Chinese date.

Fifth infusion:

2007 8891:  nice, just a bit light as flavors go.  It's positive, what is there, and feel has a bit of thickness to it, but it's subdued.  Warm earth and mineral give it great complexity, it's more the front end that's a bit light.  It's not how I remember this; I thought it was earthier [and in going back to glance through a first review that description seems to say that].


2006 8001:  this tastes a bit like jujube, dried Chinese date.  It might keep evolving; that main flavor might be a phase it's going through.  Warm mineral is strong beyond that.

Conclusions:

It's more or less what I'd hoped it would be.  I often end up saying an aged sheng version will probably be great when it just has a few more years to finish aging, and this is ready now.  The first two infusions are slightly musty, and that's still evident in the third, but beyond that the taste is relatively clean, balanced, and quite complex. 

It's comparable to the other CNNP version in character, seemingly just relatively different, probably partly tied to storage background.  It seems more fermented, further along in aging, but at the same time a bit more intense than the 8891, just not as clean in aspect range.  But then that other version did seem to improve related to earthiness mellowing out, and maybe some mustiness could fade from this.

It's interesting comparing this to Ralph's impression, from his blog review (an excerpt):


Out comes a dark orange liquid, which reminds of leather, honey, sweet-sour exotic stone fruits, sugary notes, a warm and comfortable tobacco aroma (not to be confused with a colder smokey flavor which I personally dislike) and a typical aged sourbittersweet aroma.

The brewed leaves have a leathery brown color, you can really see the 13 year dry warehouse aging process as this is a very post fermented tea already.

The brew is strong and thick, the steeping times can be kept short for 7-10 seconds. The aroma is wonderful, the honey sweetness in this one is outstanding and it should be a perfect product for further aging...


It seemed fine to me, a lot like that.  Where I left off the notes it was closer to a dried Chinese date than stone fruit but that flavor range was transitioning a good bit per round.  The tobacco distinction he makes is nice; there is a dry, light, flintier range smoke aspect common in some sheng that I also don't care for (although some people do), and this did include a warmer, sweeter, closer to pipe tobacco earthiness instead of that.

I tried both teas another half dozen rounds after the swim class.  The 8891 was still positive but fading, and this 8001 version picked up more mushroom again, maybe somehow related to lengthening infusion times a little, which can shift character, emphasizing some aspects over others.  It was really positive except for that one flavor aspect (dried wild mushroom, to be more precise, close enough to shitake).  The sweetness, depth of flavors, supporting mineral balance and light earth tones, complex fruit range, thickness of feel--all that was fine.  I don't necessarily expect that mushroom is going to drop out over aging for any reason, but I suppose stranger things have happened.


I hadn't mentioned cost, did I?  It sold for 2000 baht, $60, for a 400 gram cake.  I just checked the Yunnan Sourcing 2007 8891 (which I bought about 6 months ago) and it lists for $67 for a 500 gram cake; not so different.  Character is quite different, probably related to aging conditions as much as to the teas not being the same thing.  The leaves in this 8001 version are much more whole than the 8891, although it seems odd that both would be at the far ends of that scale (the 0 and 9, the third digits), odd related to appearance in both cases.

It raised the question, which do I like better?  They're kind of just different.  Not in completely different ballparks for character, but not really similar.  For being more intense and complex this 8001 is better, even though I didn't love that one mushroom aspect.  For being more subtle, a bit cleaner, and not including any rougher earthy aspects in the first three rounds, or towards the end, the 8891 is better.  Feel was fine for both, maybe with the 8891 thinning more later on.  It would really require a slower, more complete tasting session through a dozen rounds to pin down more differences.  I think the other Zhong cha / CNNP cake I'd mentioned might have been more positive in later rounds than both, maybe with this 8001 only clearly the best of the three for 2 or 3 infusions in the middle.

It will be interesting to see what I make of it over more tastings.  And nice to have over a kilogram of similar teas to mess around with, drink over a long time, check on aging transitions, and give away samples of.  It's nice having aged sheng that works as a daily drinker, as something to have 10 quick infusions of with a breakfast, stacking (mixing) some rounds during brewing to speed that along, without worrying about fully appreciating the nuances of the tea.  Shu works for that too, for rushing brewing as an easy to drink tea, but it's nice having a range of types on hand, to pick whichever sounds best that morning.

with her best friend at the swimming class (from that set of kids)

adding some silliness to a warm-up  walk

2006 Shenzhen market sheng compared with 2007 CNNP 8891

a translation of some of this follows but it doesn't really help

no idea what any of this says

On that trip to Shenzhen and Hong Kong I bought two more types of sheng I've not reviewed here yet, another cake and this 2006 sheng brick.  I've tried both, maybe only once back in a hotel room in China, or twice counting when I tasted them in that market buying them.  I'm not sure if the idea of letting them rest even applies, since they only did a short flight from Hong Kong to here, I've just been busy.

I don't remember what it is, or what the vendor said it is, beyond aged sheng pu'er.  She should have mentioned a source region, but her English use was so limited there's a decent chance we didn't get far through that part.  If memory serves this cost about 240 RMB / yuan, or $35 or so; not much.  It wasn't presented as any specific quality level, or character, again mostly because all conversation was limited. 

Google Translate converted some of the label text:

she seemed nice enough; who knows about all that 90s sheng though

That rough translation could work as a lead for sorting out more about what the tea is but I sort of don't care.  Factory teas aren't always clear about what went into the products, and it may not be what it's labeled as.  The brewed tea character is more of interest in this case.

Western facing pu'er vendors use risk concerns about buying completely random sheng as a marketing tool, claiming that someone would be likely to ingest inappropriate levels of pesticide toxins if they undertake such a practice, but I'm not too worried.  The same concern applies to food, and I haven't switched over to a completely organic diet.  In Thailand that may or may not make a lot of difference anyway, given how controls of all sorts go here.  I buy most teas from vendors and initial producer sources that I'd tend to trust more and rest easy that the rest probably won't kill me.

I think a higher risk comes from buying the cheapest possible substantial quantity of randomly sourced tea you can find, a kilogram of a version that costs almost nothing at some Indian or Chinatown market, then drinking mostly only that for a few months.  Even a moderate dosage of any contaminant in that would really add up.  Obviously enough I'm varying what I drink.

I'm reviewing this in direct comparison with a 2007 CNNP 8891 red label.  That second tea is for evaluation purposes, as a benchmark for my own experience, since I reviewed it not long ago, but it will really work to help communicate what I mean about the other tea to anyone who is familiar with this one.  Often reviewing two teas is more about just getting through a volume of samples but in this case the comparison is more the point.

Review

I went with a slightly longer rinse step than usual, more to get the chunks to open up than related to concerns over toxins, dust, or whatever else (towards 30 seconds).  Then I used a really long first infusion due to not paying attention, writing this intro section and losing track of time.  That first impression will be about the character when over-infused, but at least that will get the initial rounds transition issue cleared away.  These teas aren't going anywhere fast in terms of "brewing out;" wasting a potentially more positive initial infusion or two isn't a concern.

this Shenzhen market tea left, CNNP 8891 right

that CNNP 8891 "red mark" version; a bit compressed

2006 Shenzhen market sheng brick:  it's not quite as rough as I remember.  Overbrewed it's pretty far from optimum but the flavor is still pretty decent.  It tastes a little like coffee and old furniture, but a much cleaner version of those than I'd expect from a too-strong initial round of some random wholesale market 13 year old sheng brick.  It might clean up to be quite decent in a much shorter second infusion.


2007 CNNP 8891 red mark:  brewing it too strong doesn't help this either but it's interesting noting how similar and different these are.  "Clean" isn't necessarily how most people would describe either of these, but I've tried badly stored teas before and the mustiness is different from the normal aging transitions these seem to be showing.


Remembering that Shenzhen version as much rougher than I'm experiencing it could just be due to a shift in expectations, for whatever reason, or maybe the initial guess here of how it will change later when brewed appropriately isn't accurate.  This CNNP version includes a sweeter old-furniture range flavor, a bit towards dried fruit.  Along with that old antiques aspect there's a touch of nail polish range too; it's only "clean" in that one limited sense.  It's smoother, and less intense, but not necessarily in a more positive range, just different.  Both aren't bad, and are interesting, but the next rounds will really tell the story for both.

Second infusion

Shenzhen market tea left, CNNP right

The CNNP chunks seem more stubborn about loosening up and opening, and the quantity seems slightly different (I just eyeball amounts, a carry-over from brewing loose tea for a long time before I ever got more serious about it).  It would be possible to try to compensate with brewing time but this isn't supposed to be an informative direct-parallel comparison of similar types anyway, with the CNNP just giving me a better idea of where this other one stands.


Shenzhen brick:  it's odd how this is a good bit better than I remember it; it seemed really rough tasting it back in that Shenzhen hotel, earthy in a less approachable way.  It's conceivable that it settled or aired out to some extent but I'm guessing that the variation is probably from my judgment.  I never really get as clear an impression when drinking teas with a vendor because they're making it per their own standard approach, and the extra stimulus of being in a different place and either discussing teas or failing to do so due to language issues adds too much else to distract me.  Using different water when tasting in the hotel may have caused a real variation.  It was a bottled water version but who knows what the mineral content in that was like.

The "coffee" range has dropped back but the old-furniture effect is still strong enough.  I suppose some of this flavor is geosmin, or the taste aspect from beets, but it's balanced within other range that's not so earthy.  There's a sweetness to it that's pleasant, in a toffee-like range.  Other flavor range is in between vegetal and earthy, kind of a tree-root sort of general theme, or maybe tree bark instead, or both.  Oddly it's much cleaner in effect than any of that list implies.


CNNP:  so different!  Some of the earthiness overlaps, that antique furniture range, but beyond that it's completely different.  The sweetness that can pair with that aroma is different, extending a bit towards nail polish, but in a mostly good sense.  It's much lighter, and much less earthy.  There really isn't all that much geosmin / beet effect, although in tasting it alone I might see something like that as a dominant aspect range, with this seeming lighter and less earthy in comparison with the other.

It has a woody character (as the other did), but in a much different range, like a very mild version of well-aged dark tropical wood, which works a little better than tree root or bark in the other.  There's a slight musty hint too, like balsa wood, which could be interpreted as cardboard instead, but I don't see it as that.

It's hard to explain or justify why I like these teas, given the flavors I'm describing (beets, cardboard, bark, antiques).  Maybe that's not how personal preference works anyway, that someone can explain why floral range works for them better than fruit, or why they hate grassiness but love earthiness that's much closer to dirt.  It probably helps to have been exposed to a lot of shu, and to like those, to appreciate a lot of variations of more earthy aspect themes.

Tea group discussions, some comments and forms in them, can tend to imply that preference curves tend to follow similar progressions for different people, and that although relatively subjective personal preference is a valid and individual yardstick that somehow more experienced individuals can just be further along the path others are on.  That can be valid, to a limited extent, but I don't completely buy it. 

On the one hand I've experienced some of the transitions I'm "supposed to" have went through, like adjusting to appreciating a balanced level of bitterness in young sheng, when earlier on a lot more of it just tasted like taking an aspirin (but then that example cites a coarse level of preference adjustment, doesn't it?).  On the other hand I don't necessarily see most of my preference for types or individual aspects as having followed such patterns.  Shu pu'er alone throws off the idea that there should be a consensus, since people divide on whether it's a reasonable type preference or not.  It's conventional for more experienced pu'er drinkers to just skip that type altogether, to see it as a pale shadow of well-aged sheng, more one-dimensional and unpleasant in character.  But it's not clear to me that people retaining appreciation for shu is an objectively negative indication of their judgement.

At any rate that's probably enough philosophy of tea for one tangent.

Third infusion

It does look like these are nearly identical quantities of leaf once this CNNP version's chunks opened up, facilitated by stirring the leaves with the gaiwan lid.  These should be relatively close to parallel in terms of proportion, without that much difference from the brick version brewing out faster in the rinse and first two rounds.


Shenzhen 2006 brick:  it's a good bit cleaner; those earthier aspects had been secondary to what I've been describing as an antique furniture effect, with the sweetness also standing out more, and now they're diminished even further, transitioning out.  There's still a coffee-like edge as a main flavor, like French roast, related to the earthy effect coming across similarly to roasting char in coffee beans.  The tea doesn't taste like coffee; that's just part of the complex range.  The tree bark / root effect is transitioning to more of a tropical hardwood range (teak, mahogany, etc.), like the wardrobe (closet-like furniture) that I keep my clothes in.

The feel is interesting, full with a slight hint of dryness, more full in effect than dry really, but not full in the same way younger shengs are.  The aftertaste is persistent; that sweetness and roasted coffee flavor lingers a lot more than the rest, which is milder while you drink the tea as well.

The intensity is interesting; some sheng fades away a lot more by this age.  It's not a given that any sheng version will "come through" the awkward teen years of 4 to 10 years in age with plenty of intensity, and I have trouble appreciating versions that are either subtle or just don't taste like much, depending on how you interpret that.  If anything this intensity could round off a bit with more age and be fine.  I'm not sure how much the character will keep changing, but then I can't be certain this really is even 13 year old tea.  It definitely seems like it, but rapid aging and then drying back out might lead to a similar place in some regards.  I also wonder if this tea was even drinkable a decade ago.


2007 CNNP 8891:  earthiness picked up in this version; it seemed like limited leaf exposure was causing it to be more subtle than it naturally would be brewed at this proportion for a substantial length of time.  I'll try a fast infusion of both next to see how that changes things, one in between 5 and 10 seconds, more typical of how I brew intense younger sheng.

It's not necessarily "cleaning up" in character as the other is, if anything picking up more of that beet / geosmin range.  An extra bit of stirring might've thrown off the parallel in this round, but it probably drew them closer together in transition cycle since the other started out faster, with more leaf contact earlier.  Everything is slightly different from the aspects in the other tea, but in the same general range, and explaining "different how" may not be worth going back through an aspects list again.  I'll do that next round instead, to the extent I get to it at all.

Fourth infusion

Shenzhen brick:  the effect is different brewed very lightly, probably not optimum for my preference, but interesting for providing a different impression.  A trace of mushroom stands out, which may well have just not be detectable due to earthier aspects overpowering it brewed stronger, versus being a result of aspect transitions across rounds.  It's odd how clean this tastes, given all the specific aspect range present (I guess I'll just keep repeating that).  Even the feel has a pleasant quality to it, and a flavor echoing aftertaste experience is still pronounced, even though this is brewed very lightly.

I might qualify that when I say a tea tastes like "old furniture" to me I'm not talking about the couch from my childhood days in my parent's basement, more like the odd fragrant, sweet, complex scent of old cabinets in dry storage areas in a temple I was a resident in there, ordained for two months as a Buddhist monk.  It's like old, dark wood and the lingering effect of furniture polishes, stains, and clear-coats.

that one aspect is how you would expect this Polish tearoom to smell (Herbaciarnia Czajnik Zabrze)

even teaware is stored and forgotten in those old temple rooms

CNNP 8891:  really the catchiest aspect range in both of these teas is probably escaping identification as a clearly defined concept.  Old sheng versions tend to be described as tasting like camphor, tobacco, or betel nut, or using lots of other standard terms, that surely really would describe similar aspects present.  Maybe this tastes like a mix of all three and I'm just not flagging that.  I see that betel nut for sale every few years in Chinatown but never think to buy it, so I'm not at all familiar with that.

I suppose there could be a faint hint of camphor in this, but tobacco doesn't seem quite right.  Not mentioning specifics beyond a vague complex wood-tone description isn't helpful either.  It seems closest to a lighter and more subtle version of cigar tobacco, versus cigarettes or pipe tobacco, and nothing like chewing tobacco.  Groups of people who regularly taste teas together potentially could agree on terms for impressions, surely informed from some branch of tradition, but for others it doesn't work so well.  To be clearer, what I'm calling dark tropical wood probably does overlap with mild cigar tobacco to some people.

Fifth infusion

Shenzhen tea (left) slightly darker; that makes sense, given storage input

The time flies.  These probably would be at this transition level after 6 or 7 infusions instead without letting that first round really run, or maybe after 8 or 9 if someone preferred drinking aged sheng infused very lightly.  This round is again brewed for 15 seconds or so, more of an optimum per my preference for these losing a little intensity already.


Shenzhen brick:  "catchy" describes it; the sweetness and earthy complexity is a little towards how root beer comes across, drawing closer to a sassafras root infusion.  It's as clean as that sounds, even though there is still dark-wood tone beyond that, and a subtle mineral input that I've just not mentioned since earthy range had stood out more (less subtle this round, with the earthiness fading).  It's odd how this tea really mellowed out while the other became a lot earthier and more intense; that could relate to it being so slow to saturate and unpack.

This tea is better than some random, inexpensive find I'd expect to stumble across.  It's not clearly a higher quality version either but the level of rough edges I see as obvious flaws is relatively limited.  It might appeal to a slightly broader set of people than the CNNP 8891, but then the general range of both is so close that if someone liked one they'd be likely to appreciate the other, or else dislike both.

Probably after a lot of exposure to even better aged sheng versions the novelty of these two just being aged sheng wouldn't have the same effect, as occurs with a progression of preference across any tea type. In the beginning any general-type-range medium quality versions are interesting and pleasant, and later one narrows that preference down, as experiencing better versions becomes normal and preferences become more specific.


CNNP 8891:  this is still evolving too, moving a bit towards clove.  I was kind of thinking of letting the notes go, saying they'd both transition some but that was already the main story, but another round's description seems in order.  To some the difference in feel and aftertaste might be what separates these but that's a complicated range to pin down.  They're quite comparable across that scope, just different.

Sixth infusion

I let this round go closer to 20 seconds since these are losing some intensity.

Shenzhen brick:  range of aspects keeps narrowing slightly but what comes across is still quite pleasant, as described in the last round.

CNNP:  both of these could be regarded as the best they've been, since both have settled into two different spice ranges, sassafras root versus clove, with mild earth and warm mineral supporting that.  Dropping out intensity and a lot of aspect range diminishes both in one different sense, so preference for a character type would come into play in judgment. 

Obviously enough tweaking brewing approach for the first few rounds to match preference better, or just not losing track of timing in one, would go a long way towards optimizing the experience of both.

Conclusion

A couple more rounds were uneventful; they just tapered off.

To me they're both nice.  But then even among people who like aged sheng the 2007 CNNP 8891 seemed to draw out two completely different responses in online discussion about it.  It could seem a little rough.  It's hard to be clear if moving past that character in preference progression makes sense or if it's just too earthy for many.

Some of the same applies not only to shu pu'er but also to hei cha; not everyone is into that set of tea types, Liu Bao and the rest.  I've got a couple of samples of them from Yunnan Sourcing from that last order to go through, and an online pen-pal friend just sent me a lot more of a Liu Bao version from KL, maybe similar to this one, so I'll be cycling back to say more about that.  It seems normal for some people to only like Liu Bao after 20 or so years of aging; although as with shu transitions aren't so dramatic after a few years longer term aging does seem to lend both a mellow character, and a limited degree of additional depth.

It's been nice sticking mostly to sheng, across lots of different ages, and then alternating with considering other types.  It's all a bit much but within another dozen or so reviews I'll be mostly through this wave of orders, market purchases, and samples.  I'll be ready to do less with this process and write a couple of research or interview posts instead, or just let this blog go quieter.

2007 CNNP 8891 sheng from Yunnan Sourcing

cool looking, nice color, a bit tight as compression goes

same photo with a light turned on; funny how background lighting shifts color

This is the last in a hectic series of review posts I started while I had a few days off with my kids visiting family back in the US, without my wife and I.  I'll go quiet again here for another week or two due to being out of town this weekend, but a TChing post I wrote on tea evangelism should post in that time, so I may add that in this blog too.

This is another interesting tea from a Yunnan Sourcing order.  I never did list what I bought or post a purchase photo anywhere.  I'll let a partial citation of their description serve as an intro (with the rest really worth a read; there's a bit more of an origin story there):


...this tea is incredibly good tasting and has a very unique flavor profile. It's been stored in Guangdong since 2007 in a dry-wet storage condition (wet stored but on the dry side of the wet storage spectrum). The raw material is from Nan Jian area of Yunnan which is technically part of Dali prefecture...

The tea brews up an orange-red tea soup with a pungent aroma of flowers, mushrooms and earth. The taste is clean with no musty wet storage notes, but does have some some earthy notes. There is a kind of pronounced spice and cloves taste and aroma with a strong viscous sweetness throughout...


No rambling from me this time.  I've tried teas of this age but I won't go through comparing them since starting point character and storage differences would cause that to not be meaningful.

Review

The first impression won't tell a lot of the story but it is interesting.  There's a pronounced dry wood tone to the flavor, which could be described as mushroom and earth.  It strikes me more as the scent of an old barn.  Oddly my impression is positive though; that earthiness isn't where it will be in another infusion or two but it's paired well with general warmth and sweetness.  The aftertaste is pleasant, mineral intensive, even a bit towards natural spring scent or long-rusted metal, with a hint of the clove showing through already.  That's why I don't read descriptions before tasting though; that last part really could be suggestion.

Earth picked up a good bit in this second round; I'll have to keep these infusions fast since the flavor intensity won't balance well unless this tea is light, given how it's a bit intense.  I was reading some really interesting pu'er storage experiments in a blog by "M Gault" (Late Steeps) in which he describes flavors as geosmin.  I had to look that up; it's basically dirt.  It's not dirt, although some descriptions of the term tie it back to that, but here is Wikipedia's description (partial):


Geosmin is an organic compound with a distinct earthy flavor and aroma produced by certain bacteria, and is responsible for the earthy taste of beets and a contributor to the strong scent (petrichor) that occurs in the air when rain falls after a dry spell of weather or when soil is disturbed.[1] In chemical terms, it is a bicyclic alcohol with formula C12H22O, a derivative of decalin...

Seems likely this tea tastes like that.  Luckily I like that strange flavor aspect in beets.

The tea isn't musty but it is earthy; what could've been mushrooms but reminded me of well-aged wood has shifted a little towards well-aged hay, beyond fully cured into an old version of it.  Again though, it works.  I'm picking up a lot more mineral input than floral, although a little seems to be present, and the spice range isn't as pronounced as it might be, but it's a cool mix.  It wouldn't be for everyone.  It's funny I've taken to saying that lately; it sort of goes without saying, doesn't it?

Either it's the Bangkok-hot season heat getting to me or else I'm really already feeling this tea on the second infusion, which is not how that usually goes.  I'm not all that sensitive to "cha qi" effects but at their strongest I can notice it, but I'm at a pretty low dosage this far in for the head buzz I'm feeling.  Might be both acting together, the heat and the tea.

I lost focus and let this infuse for over 5 seconds, my typical timing range, a bit long.  It'll be nice seeing where that puts it and noticing the contrast with a flash infusion the next time.  The earthiness tie-in to mushroom makes a lot more sense on this infusion; that's what's going on.  The mineral has shifted to taste a good bit like potato skin, although still also a little like beet. 

It's funny how when I consider these terms (dirt, beet, potato skin, mushroom, well-aged hay, rock mineral leaning towards metal) it doesn't sound like a pleasant thing to experience, but it is.  It's still on the soft and approachable side, nothing is too jarring as flavors or other experience range, and a good bit of sweetness helps all that work.  It comes across as "cleaner" than all that would sound; aging-related flavors can be musty, and this isn't.  If anything the feel is pleasant; it intuitively should be edgier and a bit dry given all that flavor range but it's not.

Brewed faster, a quick in and out, the tea doesn't give up nearly as much intensity as you would expect.  It's not even all that different.  Sweetness plays a slightly larger role in the flavor balance, and heavier mineral drops back.  The aftertaste is still intense, and the feel is still an odd mix of hinting towards dryness and tightening across a lot of my mouth with feeling a bit juicy.  It will be really interesting to see how this changes after just a couple of years here, in a nice and hot, consistently humid place.  I'd bet all of Bangkok is firmly in the wet-wet storage condition per that description spectrum postulated.

It's 97 F here right not, around one of those temperatures I can convert back and forth from C to F easily, close to the 37 C of human body temperature.  Relative humidity is 57% right now, much lower than the typical 70% here, but I think that's because the amount of water in the air has probably gone up just a little but the carrying capacity at this hotter temperature is a good bit higher, hence the lower relative percentage.  I went through all that in this post, which cites this related graph:

Since I'm mentioning it I went a lot further with pu'er storage themes in this article I wrote for a vendor, for Moychay, mentioning a reference on how to make do-it-yourself humidity control packs and one on temperature related aging experiments.

Those black boxes (or whatever shapes) in this graph are recommended environments for IT equipment operation; never mind all that.  The other two colored versions were me messing around with where people say pu'er stores well.  I'd probably draw them differently now since that was from 2017 but the idea is the same.  The point here is that even a relatively small step up in temperature from 33 C to 38 (91 F to 100 F) changes how much moisture the air can hold at those levels.  The air I'm sitting in contains about 22 grams water per kilogram of dry air right now, or way above any of those boxes.

Really it's my understanding now (based on input from M Gault's blog, Late Steeps) that tea can age just fine at whatever temperature, even up to 40, which is good since it is almost that now.  That, and the sheng I have around (the limited amount of it) seems to transition well with age, maybe just a little faster than I'd expect.  The character doesn't seem to have been impacted negatively for it being so hot.  To qualify that, I don't have enough other baseline of experience to be a good judge of such a thing; it's more a vague and poorly grounded impression.


The tea is shifting a good bit over the next infusion, softening, with those different aspects integrating much better.  Clove really does start to make sense as an interpretation of part of the flavor.  The feel still has good complexity but it's different too.

Again on the infusion after it's still shifting; that's a cool experience, after a lot of young sheng I've been drinking lately staying more consistent.  The warm mushroom / aged wood or hay aspect is now as much like a bark spice.  The mineral is still on the deep and earthier side, still including a touch of "geosmin," but milder, different, and more integrated with the rest.

This lighter range is more familiar, not far off that in a couple of different 2006 Hong Tai Chang versions I compared at one point.  A more recent 2006 find in Chinatown had a really heavy earthy flavor, more on the musty side, which I took to likely be storage condition related (but again, I'm guessing at this level of exposure).  I never did report back that within a couple months of trying that tea I tried it again and it was much improved, probably benefiting from airing out a little.

It's odd that this local environment could count as "airing out" but who knows where that Chinatown tea was stored, or even exactly what it was, given the frequency of gaps in how teas are labeled and what they actually are.  As with those other inexpensive teas I just reviewed if you buy a tea labeled as something not overly desirable that kind of helps (with limiting concern about it being "fake"), because a producer isn't going to fake a tea being a relatively generic, lowly regarded, lower-cost source product.  At a minimum they would fake a tea being an in-demand but moderate cost known-vendor version.  If a tea is sold as a $15 cake of Lao Ban Zhang in one sense it's fake but in another it's more or less what it's presented as; as mis-labeled tea.


This tea might be transitioning to thin in intensity just a little; far from brewed out but fading in intensity.  It would have helped going with flash infusions from the start.  I suspect it has just as long a cycle to go, just either drinking it as moderate strength (which is probably better) or extending infusion time.  The leaves being more chopped than I'm accustomed to must have altered how it brews.  I've drank factory teas since first getting into sheng a half dozen years ago, some so finely broken it's almost as much a ground leaf, but more often I'm drinking more whole-leaf versions.


On the next infusion the last description mentioned still works; the tea is still pleasant (where I'll leave off description, something like 8 to 9 rounds in).  I'm happy with this tea.  I'm guessing that it will benefit quite a bit from another 2 to 4 years of getting a little further through aging here but I could enjoy drinking it like this, and will probably try it a few more times over the next year.

Later observation, some online review

I did brew that tea at least another half dozen rounds later and the flavor held up fine, thinning and changing a little but staying positive.  Even without any further aging or change I would really enjoy that tea, and that just getting used to the novel character a little more would already make it seem even more positive, when I already liked it to begin with. 

To some extent it must be a relatively basic tea compared to refined and highly desirable aged versions that get discussed in tea groups.  Since I'm still on the new side related to exposure to aged sheng it's still novel and probably more positive to me.  The cost is moderate, listing at $67 there on YS now; maybe they just forgot to add the standard per year mark-up in this case.  Then again I tried to look up alternative vendors selling it and saw a reference of the pricing from a couple of years ago; it just started really low.

No alternative sources turned up easily in a Google search but in looking that up I ran across a couple of interesting related references.  Tea DB (James) did a review of it; he liked it, especially related to value, but I didn't watch that video yet to get to the details.  The Steepster entry feedback was generally positive, which is probably as well taken with a grain of salt, listing these aspect in the main header description: 


Sawdust, Tobacco, Vegetal, Musty, Raisins, Whiskey, Sweet, Chestnut, Dried Fruit, Floral, Mineral, Mushrooms, Nutmeg, Rose, Spinach, Wet Earth, Caramel, Sweet, warm grass, Earth, Hay, Spicy, Stonefruits, Straw


Maybe it was like that; I'll have to taste it again a few times and try to sort all that out.  Odd that no one borrowed mentioning "clove" from the vendor description. 

Just to be clear, in tasting a tea that's in a less than familiar style, and a complex tea at that, interpretations could vary quite a bit.  I didn't notice that much fruit but about a third of that list appears by name in this review, and some of the rest overlaps a bit (saying it tastes a little like clove is close to saying it tastes a little like nutmeg, even though they're different, and so on).  Tobacco and whiskey are something else; I'll consider that in re-tasting.

talking to Kalani on video call

those two love messing with the app features