2008 Dayi V93, 2018 Bulang shu pu'er from King Tea Mall

Dayi V93 left, Bokuro gushu shu right

On the King Tea Mall website--where these are from; samples shared for review, which is much appreciated--John mentioned he is shipping teas again, as of today.  I'm not sure how normal things are back in China just yet but it's good to hear that some normalcy is returning.

It's a little strange to review shu right after writing a long intro post about exploring sheng, but of course these tea types are related.  Aged sheng never really completely resembles shu, but that is kind of the general idea, and the character difference informs a lot about both; the overlap and the differences define both.  I'll get into all that, probably more so for just considering sheng basics that much.  I've been re-tasting a lot of what I reviewed last year (just not mentioning it in detail here), which also includes shu, just less of it.

It's not as if I have an endless supply of old samples but I do have enough to keep reviewing them once a week for awhile.  I could live with this blog going quiet instead but it's also nice reviewing, even if experience and themes just tend to repeat.  I expected these to be pretty good shu, and experiencing and placing good versions of tea types is different than the same related to examples that are only a bit above average.

Per standard approach I only knew what was on the labels when tasting these, but did look up and copy the descriptions here after.


2008 Dayi V93  (listed at $66 for 5 100 gram tuochas)

Origination:  Started from 2005 year. Made from high grade tea materials and decently fermented. 

Taste: Well balanced on thickness, mellowness and other taste factors. Aromatic and fragrant. Soft tea soup along with smoothness. 

Storage:  Guangzhou dry and clean storage.


That price looks a little steep related to it being for a set; when you divide it back out to $13 per tuocha it seems quite reasonable.  At least I see it that way after trying the tea.  The description works, that could just be taken in different ways.  They list similar 2007 and 2009 versions but for as nice as this seems maybe better just to go with it.

That still doesn't seem like a lot of background; maybe checking in with Yunnan Sourcing's related offerings will add to that:


2017 Menghai DaYi V93 Premium Ripe Pu-erh Tea ($7.50)

This is a classic Ripe tea blend, called "V93", it was most recently released in 2006 and quickly became one the most expensive ripe teas on the market. To this day the 2005 and 2006 V93 Ripe productions have commanded very high prices due to the fact that this is one of the most sought after Ripe teas for everyday drinking. It is smooth and full in the mouth. It is fermented just enough to break down the bitterness of raw pu-erh while lightly fermented enough to preserve the stimulating cha qi and hui gan of a raw pu-erh. After-taste is sweet and thick.


So it's a relatively classic shu blend; that's it.  It's really not that expensive to buy a newer version of it, but that might be better for sitting around another couple of years.  Or it's probably just fine as it is; three years lets a shu settle quite a bit.  I never mentioned aftertaste in these reviews, I don't think.  I suppose it is notable but not so much in comparison with how that goes with sheng.


KingTeaMall "TONG QIN" (Guqin) Puerh GuShu Shou Cha Ripe Tea  ($18 per cake or $86 for set of 5)

This tea was made from tea leaves picked up from GuShu tea trees in BuLang tea mountain in 2015 year and processed into shou cha in the same year. Then it had been kept into ware house in MengHai county, YunNan province to wait for smell off.  We pressed that into cakes in May, 2018 Year.

High ratio of tea buds which are covered by many golden tea hairs.

Medium fermentation.  Mellow and smooth.  Clean and clear taste feeling.

Storage: From July. 2018, it has been stored in Guangzhou. Dry and clean.

I think that is an in-house label, Bokuryo.  I tend to put more stock in how a tea comes across than branding or even background descriptions anyway.  It being Bulang does matter, but that means a different thing for shu than sheng, since even if the starting point is quite common shu fermentation changes everything.

Interesting that this 2018 tea was really produced in 2015.  It does seem really clean in effect, which isn't unheard of for tea that's not quite two years old, but for a version that's nearly five it makes more sense.  The high ratio of tea buds part you can see.  This being a small cake instead of a tuo it doesn't matter so much, but lower level of compression for cakes can make them age slightly faster and be less hassle to break off chunks from.  There are probably more low quality tuochas than mini-cakes out there but that broad generality doesn't mean much; you're only drinking the one or two versions at a time.

Review

I brewed these for up towards 20 seconds to get the process started faster, to skip an infusion that just points toward what the teas will really be like in the second.

V93 left, in all photos; the other is a bit darker, maybe just opening up faster

2008 Dayi V93 Tuo:  quite nice.  Deep, rich flavors, very smooth character, pleasant intensity, and rich, thick feel.  The overall balance is great.  Flavor range spans dark wood tones into aromatic spice range, frankincense and myrrh or whatever else.  Any hint of rough edges from fermentation process, if any had been present, are long gone.  Sweetness is nice; everything balances in this.  It's even a bit creamy.


2018 Tong Qin gushu:  interesting for including a pronounced flavor aspect that's not completely unrelated from what I described in the other sample, but not the same.  Oddly that same description would probably work about as well as any other anyway.  It's slightly lighter, just a little towards a balsa wood tone, or aromatic cedar, or both. 

This gives up some of the deeper, heavier underlying tones and richness present in the other.  For being on the "young" side it's quite clean in effect [or since it's really a 2015 version not so much, what one would expect], it's just that the overall balance hasn't evolved to where the other is.  Intensity is still good, just across a different range.  I suppose it comes across as trailing over into root spice range instead of the aromatic, "deeper," and different bark spice.

I had been thinking that the amount of the first tea looks to be slightly lower (dry weight), not by much, but enough that it might require adjusting infusion time.  Maybe not.  It is hard to judge dry tea amount with compression level varying, so these really could be exactly the same.  You would assume they were weighed; it probably just was about not appreciating compression level difference.  Even if they're not the intensity of the first sample is very good (or both really), and it would work well brewed lightly. 

Second infusion:

color more even this round

I brewed these a bit over 10 seconds, longer than they would need to get into a normal infusion strength range, but I tend to like shu a little strong.  It would work to drink these on the inky side, brewed for over 20 seconds, but for reviewing them that's not ideal, drinking them at a higher than average infusion strength.  If anything trying teas on the light side lets you identify both individual aspects and general character a bit better.

2008 Dayi:  the creaminess picked up; that's a really cool effect.  It's like how that comes across in Guiness Stout, just missing a lot of those heavier flavors in that, and of course the alcohol.  This has a lot more depth than a Guiness, but to be fair it also gives up a good bit of high end for flavor range.  The flavors are dark wood tones, with the other range I talked about, leaning towards spice.

Related to aged sheng this isn't as refined (versions that don't just fade to nothing), the way those layer together a lot of scope, even long after the astringency and bitterness drops out completely.  This is probably somewhat close to how a 25 year old relatively humid stored sheng would come across, something I've tried not so long ago (ok, really 30+), just still different.  Still pretty good though, for the range it covers.


2018 Tong Qin:  not bad, not really changing.  This version looks a bit redder (the dry leaf), as versions with bud content tend to (I never read descriptions before writing the notes; maybe they'll say more about that).  That tends to pull the flavor in a lighter direction, that cedar-wood range, but oddly the shu tends to gain an unusual type of depth too.  I'm using "depth" here in a couple different senses.  The first tea covers smooth, rich, broad range that extends to mild, warm underlying mineral content; one type of depth. 

My take--worth keeping in mind it's a work in progress--is that buds heavy shu tends to gain flavor range for including that mix of material content, and it lends the feel a texture that isn't necessarily rich or creamy but still has a more limited form of extra thickness.  This post goes into all that, about a Gong Ting shu.  I've got a Moychay version that's probably an even better quality example; it would take some doing looking up what that was, and the review, but I might get to it [not what I was thinking of but these work as an example].

It's interesting going back and forth between them and seeing which is better, and just how good both probably are.  I think they're both quite good examples of shu, there's probably just still another level or two, just a bit more complexity or depth both could express.  The Tong Qin doesn't come across quite as positively to me, for being a simpler tea, but the flavor range and intensity across a narrower range is good.  Neither have any negative aspects, since I don't see limited complexity as that.  I'll try another round and get back to that. 

I suppose it is odd that a version made of gushu (old plant source tea) is less complex, and less intense, but starting point depends on a lot more than plant age.  Most likely this V93 had significant rough edges that all rounded off.

Third infusion:

2008 Dayi V93:  more of the same; I really don't expect these to evolve and change all that much.  The warm mineral range (like what is often present in Liu Bao) picked up a little.  This tea is nothing like Liu Bao, the rest of the set of aspects, and overall character, that creaminess, but mineral range overlaps.  There's still a catchy warm wood tone, off redwood and mahogany.  It's a bit less like Guiness for creaminess tapering off a little.


2018 Tong Qin:  still about the same as last round.  Wood tone might have shifted just a touch, but it won't work to break that down for as vague as the description had been.   This would seem more well-balanced, pleasant, and complex without direct comparison to the other, which age probably helped contribute.

To be clear I'm skeptical that aging shu makes anywhere near as much difference as people often claim.  Of course that seems to contradict this entire review.  There's an exception, that some tar-like or petroleum aspect range can really smooth out and become creamy over time, or funky fermentation related range can smooth out, or really drop out.  Maybe both happened in the case of this 2008, so the "rule" about shu improving with age was born out.  I'm not so convinced that this 2018 version would be all that much different or better in another 10 years.  Then again I'm not basing that on enough evidence and experience; maybe it will be.

It also runs against some strands of conventional wisdom that a shu could be as pleasant, balanced, intense, and free of flaws as this 2018 version is.  Really lots of examples disprove that, even across some degree of quality and cost range; anyone who has drank a good bit of shu would already be clear on that part.

Fourth infusion:

2008 Dayi V93:  not changed much; I'll leave it at that.  Dark wood it probably picking up more, creaminess is still leveling off.  It hasn't lost much for complexity yet but I'd expect it to narrow quite a bit over the next 2 or 3 infusions, since I have been letting these infusions run a bit long, over 10 seconds.


2018 Tong Qin:  again transitioning slightly but the same general description still kind of works.  This probably always did have a little more "high end" then I've been doing justice to.  I had said the wood tone was a bit bright, like redwood, but that extends a little towards orange zest, it's just not quite there.  It makes for an interesting contrast with the other, since it leans in an opposite direction.  I often wonder if lower or medium level fermentation level shu doesn't have a lot more aging potential over the longer run, after 15 years or so, but I can't really guess where this stands in relation to that.

Conclusions

I tried a long brewed round next; that's a pleasant way to drink shu that doesn't contain any flaws to work around.  These still had plenty left to produce a really thick, creamy, intense round, and are still far from finished.

It's hard to say just how good these versions are.  To me--and this is just my own impression--shu tends to level off quite a bit at "well above average."  I have reviewed a number of distinctive exceptions to that, that were different in lots of interesting and positive ways, but this is where a lot of relatively good shu lands. 

That's not a bad thing; these were quite pleasant, and not at all the same tea experience.  They're both not all that expensive.  As I see it shu is more of a comfort tea, a type that's great with breakfast, or with food on a work break.  There's less to focus on, and in a couple of senses less to appreciate, but good versions are quite positive, and hard to screw up in relation to brewing.  It's also easier on your stomach; I could probably get away with drinking these without food first thing in the morning, that's just not how I start my day.

For people who focus in and see shu as their own preferred end-point I guess that personal likes factor in.  I never had any problem appreciating buds-heavy shu, in the way it took time to really get black teas like that, but they're different.  One concern with shu is slight or even significant negative aspects, a bit of extra off flavor from fermentation effect, and that's definitely not a concern for both of these. 

I'd buy shu like this but I'm a bit too hung up on sheng.  It's the same story for oolongs; I really like those, but it's not where I am for main preference just now.  Dian Hong (Yunnan black tea) preference is never going to completely drop out; I keep mixing those in.  But I can only cover so much scope, so I've been setting aside those types, and for the most part also Indian and Nepalese teas (which are great), whites, and whatever else.  It also seems like it might be almost time to pull through this 2 1/2 year sheng cycle but I'm not quite there yet. 

I don't know what will be next; take a break from tea, maybe?  Some new theme will come up.

where I'm editing this, but that was last week

maybe the last day in that outfit; things keep changing

lots of sweet kids for friends, wherever she goes

2019 Taiwan "Oriental Beauty" Dong Fang Mei Ren

It's cold here, out of the 60s now (around 24 C / 75 F) at 10 AM, since I helped Keoni make breakfast and started a chicken roasting this morning.  Ordinarily we would go to a swimming class now but 75 F is too cold here to swim; funny how things work out in the tropics.

it doesn't look cold, or different

It's so cold the local pets even need to bundle up a bit:

I picked a tea that sort of matches cool weather, to me, and one I don't want to compare to anything since I'm not feeling like doing all that.  I have an interesting looking Oriental Beauty from King Tea Mall (a sample, provided by them) I've not tried yet.  It's interesting related to that type being a personal favorite; I have no idea how good it is, or how type-typical.  I hope it's above average so I can use this post, since I tend to just not write about teas that I don't like.  There's less of a story to those, although in some cases flaws in teas can be interesting.


This ties to a theme I mentioned in the last post, about why personal preference shifts over time as it does.  For example, why so many people experience sheng pu'er as close to the taste of taking an aspirin (or tasting like kerosene, I've heard), then still go on to keep trying versions until they like it.  I've been through that.  One read is that people try better versions later, so they're liking different things.  I think it's more that sheng is an acquired taste, like coffee, or beer, or lots of things.  My grandfather would eat smoked fish or cheese, and raw green onions, and all sorts of crazy foods and he had probably went through similar transitions.

In contrast a tea version like this would tend to appeal to everyone when they first try it; these are mild, sweet, complex in flavor, and lack significant astringency and any bitterness at all.  I can't place why so many people seem to like Oriental Beauty (per the comments that are made), and why it rarely ever comes up in discussion, and isn't really a main tea type.  There's the parts about bugs biting the leaves, and there only being so much of it, and good versions being expensive.  Somehow the general hype just never focused on it. 

Dan Cong gets good buzz, even though it's expensive, but sheng is a bit "hotter" as a tea type to like now.  Wuyi Yancha seemed more in that role in the past, between 5 and 10 years ago.  I'm not clear on how any of those levels work out, about preference transition, or public awareness and shared interest landing in different places.  Probably none of this will factor in much in a review description, so I'll just move on to that, starting with considering the King Tea Mall description:

Tea Name: Oriental Beauty (Dong Fang Mei Ren )
Harvesting Season: 2019 Year Summer
Production Area: Taiwan.
Level: Special Quality

The tea liquid has clear and clean amber like color.
Natural and elegant tea flavor which lasts long in whole mouth. After taste is honey like sweetness.


That's not very specific.  This tea type tends to be flavorful and pleasant and then vary across limited dimensions (flavor range, feel, level of sweetness, etc.), so detailed background matters less, as I see it.  There would be a more standard plant type and narrower source area but it's the final aspects that matter most.  As to pricing this costs $9 per 50 grams when purchased in the 100 gram amount; definitely on the low side for versions presented as above average in quality.

Review:

First infusion:  just awesome, perfectly type-typical, in the best sense.  Versions of this tea span a bit of range, covering different flavors, and this is well within the norm.  Those include heavy citrus, towards muscatel, or warm spice range, along the lines of cinnamon.  This particular version covers both:  there is pleasant orange zest citrus, and warm spice tones, not missing cinnamon but extending well beyond that.  Sweetness is great, mouthfeel is rich and full, soft and round (although that is all relative; there is probably a lot room for increase in that range).  Even a child would love this tea.

The heavy fruit tones aren't limited to citrus.  One part tastes a lot like apple cider, that warm, rich sweetness.  There's none of the sourness that cider can express (which balances well in the sweetness and flavor range, in even decent versions of that), but that warm, sweet, slightly fermented apple flavor is one of the main parts of the experience.  It leans a little towards raisin, I just don't think that would be the most natural interpretation.  After a minor shift in flavors across infusions, or caused by using slightly different brewing parameters, and it could be mainly raisin.

Why wouldn't people drink this?  Why don't I, related to seeking it out and buying it?  I've been exploring sheng for about 2 years now, and where for this type of tea you can appreciate it the very first time you drink it, in much the same way you might years later, that takes some doing.  It's not just about tolerating bitterness, or learning to like that; either that one part comes naturally or the whole venture would be a non-starter.  There's a lot of other range to consider, and lots of variations to explore.  Maybe it's as simple as that; after trying a dozen good versions of Oriental Beauty you'd be repeating the same experience, to some limited extent.  That wouldn't get you far for exploring the basic range of sheng, never mind sorting out aging and storage environment concerns.

Second infusion:  kind of similar, not shifting a lot.  The balance of those earlier aspects probably changed a little, but not in a significant enough form to make it worth the trouble describing that (spice gained a little ground on fruit, for example).  It's great; just what this should be.

Tied back to the idea of preference, one might wonder, why not just buy apple cider and throw a cinnamon stick, and a bit of orange zest in that, then simmer it?  That would be pleasant too, and that should happen.  The flavors would be in a similar range, but the overall balance and effect would be completely different.  This also "tastes like tea;" there's underlying mineral and a warm malt range that marks this as good tea (for lack of a better concept; it's not what most people associate with malt as found in Assam, which is dryer and as close to forms of mineral as fermented grain).  It's subtle, and well balanced. 

It's a similar answer for why this tea version is nothing like a Christmas blend featuring black tea, cinnamon spice, citrus, and some apple flavor.  You simply can't mix natural and artificial flavor inputs to get to this end point.  It would be nice if you could; then flavored tea blends found on grocery store shelves would be completely worth drinking.

It's not easy to say why it can't be replicated.  I just cooked a pumpkin pie from scratch, roasting a Thai version of a pumpkin (closer to Japanese pumpkin, or a bit more like squash), adding spices, making a crust, all of that.  In theory a version from canned pumpkin or one from a grocery store could be identical, or close enough, but they're just not the same thing.  Subtle differences add up.

Third infusion:  a mild vegetal range is picking up and the spice and fruit are dropping back.  I wouldn't say this has lost a lot of it's charm but it's not quite as good.  It's still very pleasant, just not great on the same level. 

It's interesting seeing an unusual level and type of oxidation on this, with a good bit of green showing through, and with other leaves or edges very darkened at the edges.  That probably means more to well-informed others than to me.  Related to final results I can't say that they "did it wrong" related to making this tea version; this is how this should be, in a positive case. 

The effect of a high level of sweetness is hard to place, and a rich feel that's almost an oiliness that covers your tongue and mouth, versus other kinds of structure in other teas.  Even though it has dropped back a little combining that much cinnamon, citrus, and slightly fermented apple is what makes this a unique experience.  If only two thirds of that was present this would still be a really pleasant tea.

Fourth infusion:  only faded slightly from where it was on the last round.  Often black teas and more oxidized oolongs tend to expend their flavor faster, to transition away from the most exceptional character over a much shorter brewing cycle, and that's going on with this.  Not all do; depending on type some black teas last a really long time, for a high infusion count, and keep transitioning in interesting and positive ways.

It's quite pleasant this round but two more infusions fading at the same rate will cost it a lot of what makes it exceptional.  It seems the more oxidized parts really did get a fast start, so now the parts of the leaves not as well oxidized are providing more input.  It will draw out how much tea this will produce but it might seem more like an ordinary, good oolong by the half-dozen infusion mark.  Since I've ventured into guessing about rounds transitions I'll have to keep going with the notes through a couple more.

Some of noting all this probably relates to being so focused on sheng for so long.  Young sheng tends to only "open up" and move past an initial edginess over the first two infusions, and stay consistent for the next half a dozen, maybe with some character transition but definitely no tapering off.  Older, more aged sheng (15 years old or older, to put a rough range to that) loses some intensity but it doesn't brew a lower count of positive rounds.


Fifth infusion:  still exceptional.  Some of the issue here is that I'm comparing these rounds against the benchmark of the earlier rounds, which were much more intense.  Lower quality Oriental Beauty tend to come across just as this one is on this fifth infusion, in the same general range but a good bit flatter.  Citrus seems to be ramping up in the balance again for some reason.  Even moderate shifts in infusion strength would cause that effect, switching which part seems stronger.  Lower quality Oriental Beauty (or moderate quality, really; what you would tend to buy from standard resale vendors) could include a slight mustiness or woodiness, not related to the tea being off or flawed, just as a part of the standard character for that version.  This doesn't include that.

A bit on infusion strength and brewing time is relevant.  This tea type you can prepare in lots of different ways; there is no astringency limiting that choice, no negative aspects to "brew around" at all.  It would work well wispy thin, how I tend to like lots of other tea types.  A relatively intense version of sheng pu'er can't be "wispy thin" in the most typical sense, even flash-brewed at moderate proportions.  The point here is that lighter often works better for appreciating some of the aspect range for some teas.  That's completely a matter of preference.  If someone values an intense feel aspect they may like teas prepared towards the other extreme. 

To me this works really well brewed in the middle, definitely not light, but also not so strong that it ramps up aspect intensity to well over what I consider normal.  Put in terms of timing, brewed for 10-15 seconds, closer to 15, across all these rounds, at a proportion that has the gaiwan just over 3/4ths filled with wet leaves (so most of what would fit).

That changes the transition cycle too, of course.  This same tea brewed for in between 5 and 10 seconds would be that much slower to change across rounds as this has.  The only way to really optimize that experience is to brew the tea exactly as you like it best, and not be concerned about how it plays out for a count.  It would make more sense to me to drink this really light than to brew it so strong that astringency, or at least stronger feel, really does ramp up, parting ways with experiencing those flavors as well-balanced, but that's just a statement about preference.  As transitions go it seems that people newer to better tea tend to like it prepared stronger, then lighter as they adjust to experiencing aspects at a different intensity level.


Sixth infusion:  still great, but still fading.  It wouldn't be nearly as good if that bright citrus wasn't hanging in there, but it is.  A lot of the other complexity has dropped out, narrowing the range of the experience, but the sweetness and positive balance remains.  The feel still has a nice thickness to it.  Pronounced aftertaste never was one of the positives of this experience, in relation to how some other tea types go.  It did prepare a few more infusions but those were light in intensity even brewed longer.

Conclusion

Pretty good Oriental Beauty, very nice.  It's been awhile since I've even tried one so I'm probably not the best judge of those (although I did try an aged version earlier in the year; that's different).  Earlier in my tea exploration these seemed to just come up more frequently, probably with a half dozen versions reviewed in this blog, maybe not even counting hybrid theme versions from other countries.  It helped passing through Taiwan on a trip once to gain exposure, but in other contexts too, buying samples, or teas from shops locally, or related to vendors sending tea to try.

Per my judgement this version was quite pleasant.  Related to placing it on a scale of the highest quality types I'm just not on this page enough.  I suspect someone much more familiar with this range could spot limitations or flaws better than I have here.  I tend to not see brewing a limited number of infusions as a flaw, as much as seeing the opposite as a strength, but that could relate to room for improvement.  Overall this seemed a well above average example of this tea type, probably more so for emphasizing flavor as the primary consideration.

at skating class, with a new haircut

experiencing snow in a form closer to shaved ice, by making it

limited Christmas decor at the rink

Water type experiments, with Wuyi Origins Rou Gui and KTM Lao Man E sheng

This is all a bit much.  I've been meaning to test the effect of using different water versions on tea for awhile, it was just always too much messing around to get to it.  Now that I finally did results were interesting, but one part related to sample type selection could have went better.

In retrospect it was odd using teas I hadn't reviewed before, and teas of this quality level for this purpose.  Cindy's Wuyi Origin Rou Gui versions are about as good as that type ever gets, and the fruitier version is a strong contender for my favorite tea among all types and versions.  I guess the reasoning was that using good tea is going to tell more of the story related to what input the water has, versus using teas that are of medium quality, and trying to extrapolate results to likely outcome if the teas had been better.  It was also about just using interesting versions that I had around.

The same concern and atypical theme applies for the King Tea Mall Lao Man E sample; this is a gushu version from a respected, in demand origin area.  It's questionable judgement, shifting focus off the tea onto the effect water mineral content variation has on preparing it.  One might argue that both can be covered at the same time, but per the actual experience a lot gets lost.

About water type / input testing in general, it had always seemed next to impossible to identify what a really good or ideal source of water would be.  Really doing that process justice would involve trying lots of water types, and then probably folding in how that varies across at least a few different tea types.  Online discussions of water mineral levels as an input have been interesting, and standard patterns of opinions do emerge, but nothing that works well as starting point guidance. 

Avoiding high levels of calcium is generally advocated, for example, but my own interpretation of what would be low, medium, and high based on sampling lots of hearsay may or may not be remotely reliable.  I mentioned some advice passed on by Peter Jones in covering some theory in this post, which was really about trying a Myanmar Kokang shu version:

We are still several months away from any conclusions. But basically you want your alkalinity to be 1/2 your total hardness, a pH in the 7s, and a balance of 2/1 of Ca to Mg. The other positive ion mineral salts also play a role in extraction...

The form I finally arrived on--definitely not a final word on a practical, functional approach--was to try two completely different teas using Volvic water (which gets mentioned as some people's personal favorite), compared to the filtered local Bangkok tap water I use at home.  It was a stretch but I picked two relatively random, opposite type teas I happened to have on hand, a Rou Gui and a sheng pu'er.  It turned out to be not the best selection because I didn't factor in the high level of bitterness in the sheng version (a Lao Man E); kind of an obvious mistake to make, in retrospect.  Trying an already familiar, milder version would've made a lot more sense.

I can't describe what the local water is like in relation to lots of other sources, but of course I have tried the same teas prepared using it and also other spring water, RO water, and whatever is being used in other places.  My friend Sasha had a favorite spring water he used, for example, and some of those teas I had tried at home, a number of versions tasted there many times.  A vendor at an expo had been using RO water, and I re-tasted the same teas I tried with them again at home within a couple of days, and I try teas in shops sometimes.  To really isolate differences trying the tea prepared together is all but essential; the point here is that how differences in water source work out in general, and how the local water compares, isn't completely unfamiliar.

Bangkok municipal water had been truly awful, years back.  It varied so much even the color and smell could be off.  We used bottled spring water for years, or at least local water sold as such, which really could be different things.  As of a few years ago we switched over to using a multi-stage filtration system, and the water seems fine.  Per online hearsay the tap water here is based on rainwater sources instead of natural spring origin, so it's low in mineral content, which makes sense given that it rains a lot and we're not exactly near a mountainous or even hilly area.  Per other hearsay local distribution systems are a main problem for water quality, the pipes from there to houses, not so much what the processing centers put out, or even use of old pipes in your house.  It probably helps to live right beside one of the main Royal palaces in Bangkok as we do; infrastructure seems pretty stable and well maintained.

One might expect the water quality and mineral contents to vary based on lots of local factors, and I'm not certain that it doesn't.  I've included a number of captures from the local Bangkok real-time water quality monitoring system, from when I tried these teas, but of course those don't include a measurement of contents broken out by mineral grams / liter at any given time.

It would make the most sense to run this type of comparison multiple times, evaluating tea types one at a time.  I didn't do that, I tried two types together.  That I still don't consider a mistake; I've been training to do comparisons that make sense, or else those that don't instead, for about three years now.  I've tried hundreds of teas over uncountable combined tasting sessions.  It's familiar ground.  If someone without that odd tasting habit wanted to get the clearest results I'd definitely recommend using the more intuitive approach, trying the teas one at a time, perhaps using 3 or 4 types of water to add review complexity.  Selecting mild, well-known versions of teas would probably work best, regardless of type; that part was a mistake.

I'll probably try this again with a rolled oolong version to see how it works with a very mild but complex tea, which should also help to isolate feel effect even better.

Review, comparison of Wuyi Origins Rou Gui with two water types:

Rou Gui with Volvic:  just amazing tea!  I'm not sure if that's the water though.  This didn't say if it was fruity type or cinnamon Rou Gui but judging from the heavy, warm cinnamon taste it's that.  Flavor is intense, feel is thick, level of roast is perfect, slightly noticeable but only complimentary.

Rou Gui with filtered tap water:  this is similar but the flavor may pop a little less.  It seems to be drawing out a lightly different vegetal note, as if the warm mineral resembles celery just a little.  Cinnamon is slightly flattened out.  This difference is so minor that tasting across different times it wouldn't really stand out as much, but side by side it does quite a bit.  Sweetness is down just a little too.  It's the same great tea, almost the same flavor profile and feel, just a little different.

an early round; color differences didn't seem to tell a lot of story, so I'll pass on adding more about that

Second infusion:

Rou Gui with Volvic:  this tea is just perfect as cinnamon intensive Rou Gui goes.  The balance, intensity, all the profile taken together; this is it.  The cinnamon part really jumps out.  It's warm and rich, almost connecting a little with a very subtle roast level, or maybe it only seems that way.

Rou Gui with tap water:  it's almost the same experience but it is missing some of the one high point that makes the other tea experience so special, the brightness, sharpness, and intensity of that cinnamon flavor.  The deeper tones and supporting elements carry across fairly well; fullness and body isn't bad, kind of similar.  The first version might have a slightly heavier, oilier feel, which is more positive.  It's a quite similar tea experience but funny how those parts that seem most interesting and critical are what flattens out.


It's too early for conclusions but the results already seem clear enough; this local water doesn't work as well.  I don't foresee buying bottled water to drink tea with though.  I wouldn't throw out a few large plastic bottles a week to get this effect difference, or probably even one 1.5 liter bottle a week to review using a different version.  It's a shame the local water isn't better but adding expense and impacting the environment to drink slightly different versions of tea isn't going to work out.  Maybe a charcoal treatment effect will help; that idea comes up a lot.

Later edit:  it was too early for conclusions; the opposite kind of trend turned up in the fourth and fifth infusions, a trend that was much more pronounced in the sheng version.

Third infusion:

Rou Gui with Volvic:  This tea is probably evolving a bit in character but I've lost track of clear prior impression to describe that.  It's still great, probably with a slightly shifted balance of aspects.

Rou Gui with tap water:  it's great with this water too, with less difference standing out than had initially.  It's still not quite as intense, giving up just a little sweetness, and more so dropping out just a little punch in the warm cinnamon aspect.  There is a very minor difference in the mineral tone, so subtle it would only come across in direct comparison, but it doesn't work to describe it or judge how negative it is.  I think it is slightly negative versus neutral, but that's a judgement call at this point, as much just a difference.

Fourth infusion:

Rou Gui with Volvic:  a slightly dry underlying mineral in this might have increased this round, it just doesn't stand out as much in this as it had for the sheng at this stage, or take exactly the same form.  The tap water version is just as good this round, or perhaps even slightly better.  So strange; I have no idea why that would be.  I would expect effects to shift a lot for increasing brewing time in later round but this isn't really onto that as much as it would be in two more infusions.

Rou Gui with tap water:  still really exceptional, not losing anything for intensity or positive range.  I think depth is picking up, that the one-note emphasis on cinnamon is deepening to include a lot of other warmer tone range, that it balances even better.  It was great the other way too though, focused more on that one flavor aspect.

Fifth infusion:

I'll lengthen infusion time slightly but these teas are holding up; adding a lot of time for that wouldn't be positive.  I'm brewing these over 10 seconds now, for what I'd take to be optimum, maybe around 15, but it goes without saying that I'm not timing this, since I just don't.


Rou Gui with Volvic:  mineral is a bit much in this, a dry version of it.  Looking at the mineral profile calcium and magnesium seem to be at the level I'd expect to work best, based on following online discussions about that (12 mg and 8 mg, respectively).  It's not "hard" water, but that should be enough to play a standard role in extraction and setting profile.  The rest, the total dissolved solids value, would be a bit much; there's lots of other minerals in this.  This is still really pleasant, and a very nice citrus aspect is ramping up in this tea, a "chen pi" dried mandarin peel type effect.

Rou Gui with tap water:  slightly better than the Volvic, for not including so much of that dry mineral effect.  The rest of the profile is similar.  The citrus part may be at a slightly lower level, so not as intense or positive, but the overall effect is better for not tasting as much like that dry version of mineral.  Mineral is great in tea, in the right balance; it grounds the experience.  Older plant source teas and natural origin teas seem to express a lot of that, an underlying mineral element supporting overall complexity.  It's just slightly nicer in this tap water version for balancing better, in this particular infusion of this tea, per my judgement.  The difference in extracting other flavor range hasn't dropped out but is has shifted in balance; it seems to matter less.

I didn't note differences or aspect range for feel or aftertaste much for these; that didn't seem to vary as much as flavor related to the water type input.

a later round; adjusting infusion times would change effect of color difference

Lao Man E sheng water source input testing:

King Tea Mall 2018 Lao Man E sheng gushu with Volvic:  bitterness stands out; to be expected.  One could learn to love that effect, even at this level, but I haven't.  If it balances well with the rest I can appreciate it, even like it, but this is a bit much.  The tea seems to obviously be good tea; all the other markers for quality work out, thick feel, clean flavors, depth and complexity, lingering aftertaste.  That front end bitterness really defines the experience though, then it trails on, not dropping that much intensity for awhile.  At least sweetness goes along with it, and there is plenty of other range.  I'd expect it to drop off a little by round 3 or so but I'm not sure how far past that I'll get.

Lao Man E with filtered tap water:  a touch of metallic taste seems to be added to the rest.  That extended aftertaste is going to make this a terrible choice for combined tasting though, about as poor a choice as one could make.  I might have considered that, but it's not like I'm drinking Lao Man E all the time.  Rinsing your palate with plain water (not warm, not cold) works, but it's a lot to rinse in this case.  Making mistakes to learn from can be a good thing, it's just more pleasant when they're less obvious, less stupid mistakes.

In general the flavor profile seems to pop a little less, again, with that mineral difference the main change.  Sweetness may be slightly reduced but bitterness is dominating the flavor profile anyway, so it would stand out less.

Second infusion:

Lao Man E with Volvic:  bitterness is easing up; it's balancing a little better.  It won't be until the next round this approaches a more conventional sheng profile though, more evened out.  The point here is the difference anyway.

Lao Man E with tap water:  beyond a touch of mineral difference in this (not really a positive one; a touch of metallic flavor) and a slightly reduced fullness of feel it's similar.  The other Volvic brewed version comes across as slightly sweeter.  In the case of the Rou Gui it's about a shift in the best attributes being slightly dimmed, but the character isn't so different beyond that.  In the case of this it comes across differently.  That shift in underlying mineral, slightly less full feel, and slight reduction in sweetness seems to add up to change the tea character more.  They're only small shifts, and the basic aspects are the same beyond that, the general feel, flavors range, aftertaste, feel, but the effect is more of a change, or a change at a deeper level.  Again the Volvic brewed tea is just better; there was no trade-off that benefited using this local Bangkok tap water, at least not yet at this stage of infusions.

Third infusion:

Lao Man E with Volvic:  this is much better balanced for transitioning over those rounds.  Not in comparison with sheng that doesn't emphasize bitterness, if someone doesn't like bitterness, but I'm fine with it at this level, it's just definitely not a close match to personal preference.  The thick feel is nice, how clean this tea is, how the different layers of aspects work together.  One part under that is actually a little floral, drifting a little towards fruit, but deeper light mineral is really stronger. 

Rich, full feel is nice.  Aftertaste works a lot better for dropping off.  Usually people would couple those last two descriptions with where the feel impacts your mouth or throat, with aftertaste also related to a lingering feel.  I'm never so good with all that, in part for not valuing it.  It probably is as much a valid quality marker as what I do pick up more, but it seems a developed preference that would be as natural to never develop.

Lao Man E with tap water:  this finally works about as well as the other version.  It gives up a little thickness in feel but somehow the fruit and floral range (complex, but subtle, hard to define) is standing out a little more in this.  It might be working out as well or even better for not stripping out as intense a version of that bitterness.  Feel losing a little thickness isn't as positive.

The floral and fruit range I can try to define, to describe, but it would be a guess:  it's bright and sweet, so along the line of plumeria and dried mango.  There are lots of types of dried mango, so those tend to vary a lot, but that gets complicated to wade into that.  The brighter, sweeter, more citrus oriented kind.  In retasting both that bitterness hitting a little harder in the Volvic version isn't quite as positive, to me.  It may make for an exception that stripping out a little less intensity wouldn't always be a bad thing.

Fourth infusion:

Lao Man E with Volvic:  it's really strange how this is exhibiting a stronger mineral aspect, a slight metallic range.  It's almost as if I've mixed up the water sources, but then this probably does have more mineral content, so maybe that makes sense.  I have no idea what that means.

Lao Man E with tap water:  it's nice how that balance evened out.  Bitterness is still pronounced but the proportion is more relatable now.  The complexity is nice, the range of flavor, and how feel and aftertaste contribute to overall effect.

Fifth infusion:

Lao Man E with Volvic:  a dry mineral input is much stronger in this tea version.  It tips just a little towards how chlorine comes, that's just not it.  It's much more positive to say it tastes like limestone, and to be fair it's really in between the two.

Lao Man E with tap water:  there is less mineral effect in this, making it come across as sweeter in character, and better balanced.  I don't know that it is actually sweeter; that may just be how it seems, without as much of the mineral input changing things.  The tap water version was actually slightly better over the last two infusions, but to be fair the difference is a bit minor.

Conclusions:

It's crazy that two main shifts occurred in difference, varying a lot in early and later rounds.  Volvic brewed tea was clearly much better over the first two infusions, and clearly not as positive in the last, probably more even in the fourth, with tap water working just a little better in that round too.  I can't really unpack or explain that.  Somehow a shift in flavor and feel proportion across rounds favored the Volvic earlier on, and the filtered tap water later (which probably contains a lot less mineral).

It's worth noting that different people can and do use completely different timing sequences related to brewing different rounds to different infusion strengths.  It's more common to use lower proportions and longer times, and then to extend the timing more across later rounds than I tend to.  Why that is becomes a lot to account for, and beyond citing personal preference some of the rest wouldn't be clear.  It's hard for me to account for why people like tea prepared differently than I do; to some extent I suppose I never could.

It could be interesting to consider the water mineral content though, starting with the Volvic listing:

I'm kind of guessing, since I have been involved with plenty of discussions about water content but haven't memorized ranges, but the calcium and magnesium levels look ok, if maybe even a little low.  Per discussions those two are the main factors, with a moderate amount improving results, and high levels throwing them way off.  Looking back through old discussions and references, Rie Taluli did a review post comparing tasting results using of a number of types for green tea, and in a discussion comment of that post Peter Jones (who is into reviewing mineral effect themes) cited listings of standard mineral content of a number of brands:


EVIAN - Natural spring in France - 290mg/L sodium bicarbonate, 81mg/L calcium, 27mg/L magnesium, 6.7mg/L sodium. 

AQUAFINA (Pepsi), DASANI (Coke) - Municipal water through RO - no sodium bicarbonate, no calcium, no magnesium, no sodium. 

GLACEAU (Coke) - Municipal water through RO - no data, but unlike Dasani, they then add back in for flavor the calcium, magnesium, and bicarbonate. 

FIJI WATER - Natural spring in Fiji - 153mg/L bicarbonate, 18mg/L calcium, 14mg/L magnesium, 18mg/L sodium. 

NESTLE PURE LIFE - Municipal water through RO - no bicarbonate, 7.4-11mg/L calcium, 2.9-5mg/L magnesium, 4.4-9mg/L sodium. 

ARROWHEAD (Nestle) - Natural spring in Arkansas - no bicarbonate, 4-66mg/L calcium, 1.4-19mg/L magnesium, 3-17mg/L sodium.


I can't imagine that using Evian would work well, and it's odd that Arrowhead water is so inconsistent, but I'll leave off saying much more about the rest.  I do come back to the sodium level idea related to the local water version level.

About the local water description, some input is offered by Bangkok real time tap water quality monitoring (http://twqonline.mwa.co.th/EN/map.php?type=).  We live next to the Chitralada station, in the center.  These don't mean that much to me but they could to someone else:

free residual chlorine levels, Nov 9, 2019, 1 PM

chloride levels (mg / L)

turbidity (NTU)

ph

salinity, listed as g / L (seems wrong, too high?)

July 2019 ph capture (to show variability)

I don't know what was in that water, for specific mineral content, and I don't know what the filtration process would have removed.  Chloride level was around 4 mg / l in this water, versus 15 mg / l in Volvic, but what of that?  Salinity just seemed wrong; those readings would seem like way too much salt, in the 150 mg / l range.  What if that is right; shouldn't the water taste like salt?  As a baseline I checked how much is in seawater:

On average, seawater in the world's oceans has a salinity of approximately 3.5%, or 35 parts per thousand.  This means that for every 1 litre (1000 mL) of seawater there are 35 grams of salts (mostly, but not entirely, sodium chloride) dissolved in it.


So 35,000 mg / l, which still doesn't answer if I could taste 150 mg, but it's a context of sorts.  It occurred to me that salt is sodium chloride, so unless I'm missing something the two values don't match up, the measured amounts of chlorides and salinity.  That prompted me to look up answers to both questions, how much salt can one taste, and what are normal levels for these.  This WHO reference covers the first:

Taste thresholds for sodium chloride and calcium chloride in water are in the range 200–300 mg/litre (2). The taste of coffee is affected if it is made with water containing a chloride concentration of 400 mg/litre as sodium chloride or 530 mg/litre as calcium chloride (3).



I don't think we can take that second sentence as good input about coffee enthusiast perspective.  More input from that source pins down range of chloride in typical fresh water:

The mean chloride concentration in several rivers in the United Kingdom was in the range 11–42 mg/litre during 1974–81..


That still doesn't resolve the monitoring inconsistency between salinity and choloride levels, but it is interesting to compare that to sodium levels in the other bottled waters.

Further conclusions:

That last section was mislabeled, wasn't it; not much for conclusions in there, or even speculation.

I suspect this tap water version ended up with very little mineral content in it, due to starting out with limited amounts and filtration removing some.  It's interesting to consider that tea producing more positive infusions initially might generally relate to producing less positive infusions across later rounds.  At least that did happen here, per my interpretation, and it may work out as a somewhat uniform generality (or may not; that goes without saying).  This could explain why some people push teas to produce very long counts of infusions, and others tend to not like them as much after a much shorter sequence, although simple preference difference seems to be just as relevant an input. 

Then again, who knows.  Round after round of trying out lots of water and tea versions would tell a longer, more accurate story.  In online discussion it's not uncommon for people to claim that they prefer different water (mineral content, presumably) for different tea types, and that would intuitively make sense.

I've never ran across much detailed speculation of why soaking bamboo charcoal in water is said to improve the results for making tea with it, even though people advocating that practice comes up a lot in discussion.  Even when it's being sold for this use, as in the case of this Yunnan Sourcing version, there's not necessarily a reason for why it might make any difference.  It probably does, it would just be interesting to hear guesses about why.  Here is one that Google search turned up, Tony Gebely's input, but somehow it's not satisfying as a complete and plausible explanation:


The idea behind bamboo charcoal, and any charcoal for that matter is the fact that it is extremely porous and will absorb impurities in water. It really isn’t “filtering” water if you set a stick in the water, in order to filter the water, the water must pass through granulated charcoal or some other medium (this is how Brita filters work)...


It would seem that it could be both adding and removing minerals from the water, and that only testing, instead of speculation or traditional input, would shed light on this.  I would tentatively accept that it really does improve results, although that would be clearer to me if I tried it myself.

2006 Li Ming "Zao Chun Yin Hao" and Xiaguan "Ba Jiao He Qi Zi"

Really interesting looking teas this time, samples provided by John of King Tea Mall, in a set of three oriented towards exploring storage conditions (so one still to go).  Interpreting that input together along with origin and other type differences could be a challenge. 

Rather than saying much about these I'll include some relatively long product descriptions (from John) that focus quite a bit on the storage background.  Tasting completely identical teas would make it possible to isolate that factor, or even teas that are very similar, but I'll just do what I can with that part, since these aren't supposed to be that.


2006 Li Ming "Zao Chun Yin Hao" (Earl Spring Silver Hairs) 200g Raw / Sheng Pu'er 

Guangzhou natural storage.  This tea hasn't been stored in a professional warehouse where the humidity and temperature were well controlled but affected by natural weather conditions.  In Guangzhou, on average the humidity is around 77% and temperature is around 20-28 C.  Under these conditions the tea ages fast but is affected by seasonal weather.  During natural storage the ea conditions are near a medium level.


2006 Xiaguan "Ba Jiao He Qi Zi Bing" 357 g sheng pu'er

Guangzhou wet storage.  On this individual tea conditions are near traditional Hong Kong storage.  It is welcomed by certain old tea lovers who appreciate this aged and some earthy like taste.  More mellowness and much less irritation than young puer raw tea.  But to younger and new generations, this tea is not appreciated.  During wet storage, this tea condition is near medium level but a little better.


I've tried teas stored under different conditions, so that input isn't completely unfamiliar.  An interesting tasting of teas from one village area in Yiwu two years ago brought up some of those variations, and experiences since have built on that exposure.  "Separated at birth" cases would make it all a lot clearer, comparison of only factor, but to some extent this should work. 

Some readers might really want to question further what traditional Hong Kong storage is, pinning down control aspects and range stats, and isolate if the uniformity of that as a set of conditions holds, or if that linkage to conditions in this case is accurate.  I'll just move on here instead.

Review

Li Ming left; Xiaguan brews darker

2006 Li Ming "Zao Chun Yin Hao:"  I am picking up a lot of fermentation related transition in this tea; it's pretty far along.  This level, based on 13 years, seemingly isn't completely transitioned, it will keep aging, but it's getting into the fully aged range.  Aging related flavor like slate and dry basement smell come across, but I expect some of that will change a good bit over the first two rounds, and it's not negative in this.  It's not musty.  Earthy flavor range stands out in the rest, forest floor, dark wood, leaning a little towards aromatic spice (frankincense and myrrh, not that I can separate those).  Interpreting that as cigar tobacco instead would seem natural, even with a faint trace of dried mushroom.

It'll be interesting to see what the character is really like after another infusion.  It's hard to be clear on how all that tastes relatively clean, given the flavor description I just passed on, but it does.  Mustiness often pairs with aged range, in varying forms and levels, and there isn't much of that in this, even though the flavors have shifted to a warm, earthy place.


 2006 Xiaguan "Ba Jiao He Qi Zi Bing:"  this seems like the next level of increased fermentation and wetter storage effect, a continuation in the same direction.  A good bit of beet or potato skin flavor comes across, geosmin, in the range of that mineral smell in potting soil.  It's complex:  there's an interesting sweetness that goes along with that, and it's not really musty either, although closer to what people might interpret as that.

Again I expect this to be a good bit different on the second of two more fast infusions.  Intensity in these is pretty notable, even based on using a moderate infusion strength (towards 10 seconds, not exactly short); it will work to use fast steeps.

It's interesting the way that geosmin hits your palate pretty hard initially in the flavor experience and then sweeter, other complex flavor lingers on as an aftertaste.  It still relates to how raw potato skin tastes but there's more to it, and again it's not really musty.  Some of this range does relate to a damp basement effect but the mustier part of that doesn't come across.  So dry basement, I guess.

The contrast in these teas is interesting, not just the storage effect, of course, but also in the way it all comes together.  The first seems a lot lighter and milder, surely partly related to both starting point and conditions inputs.  It would be easy to miss that intensity or misinterpret the differences in character beyond transition degree and type, if tasting these over a couple weeks apart, to remember them as more similar than they actually are, since there is some character overlap.

Second infusion:

Color difference really stands out again, even though both were only brewed for around 5 seconds.  It would be possible to rush that, to drop it to closer to 3, but it takes time to add and remove the water.


Li Ming "Zao Chun Yin Hao:"  to me the overall effect of this is quite pleasant, the way it balances.  It might have one more infusion to get into the main range it will transition across but it's nice like this.  It's interesting how it's really intense, but also subtle in a different sense, earthy but also clean and on the sweet and mild side.

The same general character and flavor list really applies:  very moderate earthiness at the level of geosmin, closer to old tree bark than potato skin, beet, or dirt, other flavor range towards cigar tobacco, extending into aromatic spice range.  It's not so far off dried fruit, but not a typical, familiar, light form of that, not like dried mango or apple, more towards Chinese date (jujube).  I suppose it works to think of that as near Middle Eastern date but shifted towards a medicinal range just a little, or towards the smell of ginseng root.


Xiaguan "Ba Jiao He Qi Zi:"  that geosmin packs a punch; not everyone would love this.  Oddly it's not nearly as musty as one would expect, with that being as dominant a flavor aspect as it is.  It's hard to describe how it's really also clean in an unusual sense, how it really could be quite musty in a way that would match that range, but it's not.  A touch of dried wild mushroom does join the more primary flavors, and in different types and levels I really don't care for that in aged sheng versions, but it works as minor input in this.

Beyond that there is lots of other range, it's just also warm, rich, and deep (just clean).  There's an aged furniture quality to it, the way that old versions of dark wood combined with very old aromatic oils used to preserve such things comes across.  Another part is a little medicinal in a way that's hard to describe.  It seems a little sweeter than the other tea, and definitely more intense.  It doesn't really work to try this tea and then switch to the other, because it seems muted.  Tasting it the other way, with the other first, both seem intense and complex, just with this version more so.

Third infusion:

Li Ming:  this is nice, even cleaner.  It definitely wouldn't come across as a subtle version but it is dialed down related to the other.  A specific warm mineral aspect is increasing, or maybe a complex set of related or seemingly associated flavors is picking up.  It includes the mineral one can smell from a natural well, a mix of whatever had been in the rocks below extracted and concentrated at the surface at an outflow.  Cigar tobacco is still present but aged tree bark is picking up more intensity, covering more of a proportion.

It goes without saying but there is absolutely no working back to what these might have been like very early on in their production and aging; they're quite age-transitioned now.  I do wonder about that.  Given how intense both are they may not have been sweet, mellow, and positive to drink, perhaps on the bitter and challenging side instead.  I'll get to doing more with that mapping later, after another decade of trying lots of teas.


Xiaguan:  essentially not different than last round, although the proportion is shifting just a little.  It might work for that geosmin to fade a little, and that might be losing a little ground in this.  It's interesting how that hits you first in the tasting, then the other complexity washes across you, and the aftertaste is something else again, so that the flavors and experience comes in three distinct waves.  The second part, what you taste before swallowing it, includes geosmin but plenty of other complexity.  After you swallow mineral stands out, lots of it, including a good bit of sweetness.

Flavor range is so intense that it's easy to lose focus on feel.  It's soft but has some fullness to it, just in a different sense than the younger teas I've been drinking.  Aftertaste is even more notable and interesting, especially in the way a subset of this Xiaguan version remains, but parts you taste with it in your mouth drop out.  For as intense as it is it's almost better that the aftertaste is slightly less strong in flavor than the actual tea.

Both of these are quite different than the other three China Tea / Zhong Cha, or supposed China Tea versions I've been drinking, two from 2006, and an 8891 version from Yunnan Sourcing from 2007 (quite likely the only "real" version).  They include a lot more aged earthiness, and intensity.  There's no comparison at all to be made with the range of Kunming stored teas I was on for awhile, a round of lots of different sheng versions from different source areas, producers, and of different ages from Chawang Shop.  Even the two older Xiaguan versions from there weren't even close to the same thing, but then those were years younger, from 2010 and 2011.

Fourth infusion:

To keep this from getting too repetitive (maybe already too late now) I'll limit comments to main transitions, and not run through lists and proportions of flavors and other aspect range.

Li Ming:  the balance works well, that aged character scope, warm earthy range, cleanness, sweetness, moderate but considerable intensity.  Of those Chawang Shop versions I bought a Yiwu brick that had great feel and depth, just lacking a typical flavor intensity to balance those.  That was a 2008 version, reviewed here.  In the end it was a very positive tea, but distinctive for missing that range.  This includes that richness of feel, depth, and clean effect, but adds flavor intensity and complexity back in.  A touch more sweetness would change things for this, and improve the balance, but even for that it's fine.

It doesn't really have rough edges to wear back off but I'd expect the flavor intensity to taper a little and it to gain smoothness and depth over longer storage time, to keep improving.  The other version has so much flavor intensity to spare that in another decade it will still be intense, but this may be within a near enough optimum range over the next half dozen years.  The transition and trade off is in a good place now.  I'm only guessing, of course; I've tried few enough sheng versions between 15 and 25 years old.


Xiaguan:  continually swapping out geosmin for the rest is improving this tea, round by round.  It might just keep getting better, even more positive after a dozen infusions.  It has a lot of depth and intensity.  Listing out a half dozen flavors that it seems to resemble doesn't really do that experience justice.  Pronounced sweetness makes it all work well.  Part of that, and a related flavor, resembles well-roasted sweet potato.  Some Dian Hong, Yunnan black teas, also express that aspect, but it's in a different form, and more than that situated within a completely different context of other aspects.  No black tea covers this potato skin and other mineral range, or has anywhere near this much going on, but the relatively extreme earthiness is a trade-off, not completely positive.

A trace more mustiness would completely ruin the overall effect, but even that touch of dried mushroom faded and dropped out earlier on.

Fifth infusion:

Li Ming:  wood tone is picking up, a complex range of it that includes well-cured hardwood and also tree bark.  Parts of all the rest I've kept describing join that, so it's relatively complex.  I doubt this is transition a that marks the end point, that it will keep changing over further infusions.


Xiaguan:  it is interesting how this tea is better every round.  That geosmin is only part of a complex range of flavors now, not dominant at all.  The other tea has complexity and depth but not on the scale of this one (but then again it also doesn't taste like dirt).  This doesn't resemble brandy in flavor but there is a way that kind of flavor experience goes, an intensity and range to it, that this reminds me of.  It's the opposite of subtle, but it's not as if heavy earthy range is out of balance.  There are layers to this, all presenting as one continuous range:  that geosmin, a warm mineral at the bottom, towards dried fruit (jujube), a medicinal edge, aged furniture as more a context, etc.

I keep coming back to considering John's input, the idea that "to young and new generations this [aged effect] tea is not appreciated."  It's not a natural starting point for preference in this form, that's for sure, and not everyone would pick up a liking for this later on, or retain it as their preferences kept changing if they did.

I've had less exposure than many to a range of Xiaguan products, but some are really easy to appreciate, simpler, towards less challenging flavors.  At the same time this is just earthy, clean, complex, and intense at this point in transitioning; it's not as challenging as the stronger geosmin aspect might've made it in earlier rounds.  Brewing it wrong would make it undrinkable; there's that.  As far as standard preference transitions go probably starting on mild, sweet, and complex shu would make more sense, moving onto teas like this after experiencing some other range, and surely a lot of people would never get far into preferring this range.

Sixth infusion:

I'll probably let the notes go after this round and pass on final thoughts including more on later transitions.  It's all way too much to read.

Li Ming:  intensity is dropping off a bit; it works well like this but extending timing would renew that, if it was of interest.  I like it slightly lighter.  It's funny how it's more subtle in one sense but still really complex in another, related to covering a lot of range.


Xiaguan:  this version is just hitting it's stride.  Geosmin is relatively limited now, compared to earlier levels.  The mineral and earthiness reminds me of the smell of an old horse's saddle.  I mean that in the positive way possible, although I'd imagine few would get the reference as it's intended.  There's an earthy, deep, sweet, complex smell to those that other forms of leather just doesn't have.  It includes the smell of the barn, of age, dried hay, the sweet and complex scent of other feeds.  Who knows, maybe that of the horse too, a little.  To me it's very nice, that aspect set.

Conclusions:

I tried these for more rounds but the teas were fading later on, without much for novel or interesting transitions coming up.  When extending brewing time to retain intensity both picked up even more of an earthy range again, just slightly different in form than in the earlier cycle.  For both it sort of reminded me of the high-roast effect of Wuyi Yancha oolongs, that touch of char.  It wasn't identical to that, but not so far off it either.

Placing how much I like these is difficult.  It seems to work well to reduce the main theme, reviewing storage input, to a few central themes, and consider that along with those:

-to what extent could I seem to isolate storage conditions input and fermentation level as a distinct cause for experienced aspects?

-was one such input preferable over the other (to the extent it worked to isolate it), per my preference?

-how would this compare to other aging transition effects I'm familiar with, related to other examples?


It's only a guess for me to specify answers to the first question, since the individual starting points and the difference between them wasn't familiar.  It's a bit vague to answer "to some extent," but that's about it.  The unique flavor I've encountered in trying wetter Malaysian stored sheng in the past did sort of link to the extreme fermentation transition in the Xiaguan version, it just went further than I've experienced, way into geosmin range and the rest.  It was interesting noting related but quite different aspect range in the other tea, just missing that one particular flavor element, at least at a comparable level.

The second question, about preference, seems to tie to both starting points (suitability for aging, and initial aspect range and quality) versus just the storage and fermentation factor.  It would work much better tied to trying very similar teas with that input as a difference.  As far as only considering end effect I could appreciate both teas but the fermentation transition effects were a bit strong in the Xiaguan version.  It was interesting trying that as a relatively fully aged version, seeing what worked and what didn't come across as well in that character.  I've been trying a lot of teas that are around this age but not fully age-transitioned, which leads more into answers tied to third question, about mapping to other experiences.

I just retried the 2007 CNNP version today, to compare it.  The Yunnan Sourcing description adds some thoughts on storage and fermentation transition input:


...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... 

...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...


That one sentence on what it actually is I left in as a reminder that it's just as much (or more) a factor than how the tea has changed, which really goes without saying.  I wasn't trying to pin down tasting-notes aspects in that re-trying it, more to review general character and level of fermentation transition.  It seems like a much younger tea than the other two did, seemingly stored in much dryer conditions.  The leaves haven't darkened to the same level either, but you don't need to see that to notice the obvious difference.  It's clean, and it is pleasant, as described here, but a completely different thing, at least related to fermentation effect, and perhaps not at all similar in starting point character too.

high level of compression may have slowed the CNNP cake aging

It was closer to the Li Ming, in terms of apparent fermentation input.  The difference comes across in reconsidering the wet leaf and brewed tea appearance, in those two versions and in that 2007 CNNP version following:

brewed tea color is completely different as well

Price really doesn't work as a direct input related to tea quality, because vendors adjust pricing as they see fit.  Demand shifts a lot related to individual producers, production areas, and other inputs that might relate to image or awareness much more than quality level or positive character.  All the same it's worth considering:  this King Tea Mall version lists for $30 for a 200 gram cake and the Yunnan Sourcing 2007 CNNP for $67 for a 500 gram cake.  Oddly that's nearly identical; it works out to 15 cents a gram for the Li Ming version and 13.4 for the CNNP.  I don't think that really tells us anything, it's just interesting to also consider.

I should mention that based on trying that CNNP, and two other cakes like it, buying this version for $55 (per standard size 357 gram cake amount, when really it's a 200 gram cake instead) seems more than fair, a good value for the tea.  I spent $60 each on the other two I bought locally, which seemed in the right range, maybe not best-value related to all possible online sources.  This Li Ming version is at least as positive as those, maybe just a little better.  None seemed like the kinds of tea that really should be selling for much more, for much higher value and quality versions that somehow were a "steal," but they seem like decent aged teas for the modest selling price.

It's my impression that more dry-stored teas tend to cost less, that the demand is low enough for those that you would get a price break on just that factor alone.  I'm not sure how storage perceived as wetter than optimum would factor in; a consumer would need more specific input about the tea version to make any call related to that, since just judging broad storage-area region wouldn't work.  It's odd that all of these (the two reviewed, and that CNNP version) were stored in Guangdong, with these two stored under different conditions in Guangzhou, its capital.

I liked the teas, and even more so the experience shedding light on that one input.  It didn't necessarily end with tidy conclusions but it was really informative and interesting.