Reviewing another nice Moychay shu, a 2018 produced version yesheng version from Menghai, so made from wild grown tea plant material, pressed in 2019. I'll cite their own description as background and frame what I'm focusing on in this review after:
Menghai Yesheng Shu Puer Moychay.com (wild tea trees raw material, harvested 2018, pressed 2019), 357 g (listing for $25.56)
Shu Puer from shoots of wild tea trees of Menghai County, 2018 harvest.
357 g teacake of pressed dark-brown twisted leaves with thin cuttings and reddish tips. The aroma is restrained, woody. The infusion is dark, reddish-chestnut .
The bouquet of the ready-made tea is mature, nutty-and-woody, with notes of baked milk, spicy herbs and dried berries. The aroma is deep and warm, nutty with a milky accent. The taste is rich, velvety, sweetish, with a slight woody tartness, refined bitterness of dried berries and spicy nuances.
So far so good. I've reviewed a number of shu from them before, and although shu isn't what I normally turn to in the mornings to drink I've liked all of them. When I feel like something basic it is nice having shu handy, an approachable version of tea that's easy to brew in any way you want. It's the only tea type that's flexible enough to brew in a thermos, per my limited experimentation, although if you're careful enough about proportion shou mei (white) might work too.
So the framing; given how their shu tends to be generally solid and great value I'd expect more of the same, but for this being that inexpensive it's something to consider. Related to my own general critique of shu typically being all a bit similar I'm comparison tasting this along with the last shu version I reviewed from them, a 2013 Menghai version, branded as "Cha Dao Si" or "A Tea Master," partly to test that outcome, if they kind of seem similar. That tea was selling for $35.56 (right, for a 357 gram cake), so $10 more, but a main point in that review was how unusual it seemed that the tea could be such a good value, a smooth, balanced, complex aged version for less than most Western outlets sell brand new versions for. How will this stack up, related to being a tea presented as a lower priced version (which doesn't clearly imply moderate quality level, but one could read it that way)?
Three years is long enough that I wouldn't expect a lot of fermentation related funkiness out of this. It being "wild sourced" material is hard to place; I have no clear expectations related to that. I've tried a lot of teas described as such but not very many shu. We'll see.
Review:
Menghai 2018 yesheng: very nice! There is a touch of funkiness to this too (fermentation related flavor), but I expect that's an early round theme that's going to settle out fast. It's hard to describe, a bit like wet stored cardboard, but stronger. I let this brew a little too long in trying not to have to relate how I'd have a clearer impression next round, so now I'm onto interpreting around a slightly too strong round. So be it.
Some part of this is really catchy, or the whole set of flavors and feel is. There's definitely some spice range aspect to this, and what I'm interpreting as dried fruit, and also a molasses sort of sweetness and heavy mineral range. It might be the molasses that's catchy, the way sweetness, earthiness, mineral, and a bit more tied to that come together. The fruit seems like elderberry to me; that's cool, and positive. I'll do a complete flavor list based on a shorter infusion next round, since that will double for dropping out whatever was going to clear up after one or two fast infusions.
Cha Dao Si Menghai 2013 shu: this suffers in comparison, at least this far along (too early to call, of course). It's pretty good still, pleasant, decently balanced, with positive nature coming across versus any flaws. It's just plainer, less distinctive. Earthiness is in the peat / dark wood / mild coffee range that's not atypical for shu at all. Sweetness is good; there's even a bit of creaminess to it. Feel isn't thin, but it could be richer. A hint towards roasted coffee is nice.
A lot of what comes across as distinctive, edgy, and more unusual in the other may have faded out in this due to age. The typical theme is that it should pick up depth to replace it, a range of character that can be harder to notice and appreciate than a strong flavor. I suppose that might show itself more clearly as flavor range in later rounds. Along with the distinctive and intense aspects in the first version the edge can include what people could interpret as negative, that storage-related aged cardboard effect I described in the other tea. Often that comes across as tar or petroleum instead, but regardless of form it's not necessarily a bad thing, if the tea is young and it's going to fade or transition. Tasting like fish is something else; at best that's going to fade, but it's not a good sign. Most fermentation related flavor range should drop out within 2 to 3 years of the tea being produced, typically, although any such patterns can vary, and a version might be more "clear" after 5 years or so.
Second infusion:
This should be way different for infusing these for around 10 seconds, although at this high proportion a relative flash infusion could make sense, the 5 or so seconds it takes for pouring water in, a little mixing, and pouring the brewed tea back out. The second version looks a bit darker; it might be more fermented for having a much longer rest time, for being an older tea version.
2018 Menghai yesheng: it's nice that this kind of challenges the "shu is shu" general position I tend to land on, over and over. It's still within a relatively narrow character range, compared to how sheng or oolong versions vary, but it's an outlier in terms of being distinctive. It did clean up a lot; that rough edge related to apparent fermentation taste seems all but dropped out. Or that could only relate to tea aspects coming across much differently at different infusion strengths; that can happen too. Astringency in particular varies a lot with infusion strength, that particular aspect range is just not a concern for shu.
Interpreted one way this hits a narrow note of complex flavor range, since it all integrates quite a bit. Then it's also quite complex. It's sort of a paradox, how it comes across as really complex but also as a narrow interrelated range, a little thin in one sense. One part is mineral; it's "inky." Then there is some fruit, not as clearly elderberry range, but seemingly still berry. Spice is harder to identify, but part seems to be that, leaning a little towards that set of aromatic incense bark spices. This should evolve a bit as that set shifts over some rounds; it should be interesting. Then it's hard to explain how that comes across as a narrow or simple set, in a different sense. I'll see if I can expand on that as this continues.
2013 Menghai: this improved, adding a good bit of depth and complexity, even though it's not completely different. A less distinct earthiness in the last round is more into a dark wood tone now, leaning toward mild coffee. That breakdown doesn't really do the experience justice; sometimes experiences parse out into concepts better or worse. It seems to connect with a deeper base of smooth and rich flavor and feel, even though the flavor set is also a bit limited, as in the case of the first.
Both of these are still evolving into the main character and cycle of infusions, even though faster rounds could have this extraction level at round 3 instead. It's funny how the first version seemed creamier and fuller in feel than the second in the first round, and that has completely reversed. That seems more about how both are evolving through an infusion cycle differently than actual character differences. Aspect progression through an infusion cycle is still under "character," I mean in a narrower sense, that this just took longer to "open up."
Third infusion:
2018 Menghai yesheng: it's interesting how much lighter this still is than the other in terms of brewed tea appearance. That could partly relate to how whole leaf the material is; that will be easier to see once it all completely unfurls, which should be pretty far along now [I never did notice either being very chopped leaf, so that didn't work out as different]. Fermentation level could also affect that, but it would seem odd for that alone to make so much difference.
This has settled further into a wood tone. For some that might be very positive, for others relatively negative, depending on preference. Since it ties to spice range and other complexity I'm taking it as positive, but that's a subjective interpretation. Berry / fruit doesn't stand out like it had earlier on at all; this is all that dark wood and spice tone. It's quite clean in effect; there is no mustiness or fermentation funkiness to this at all.
2013 Menghai: this seems "brewed stronger," although maybe without the color difference I wouldn't have noticed or interpreted the tea character that way. It hits harder across a broader flavor range, and has a thicker, more intense feel to it, as if it brewed stronger (longer, or I suppose in this case just faster). This includes more slate mineral as part of the warm tone. I suppose that could come across as not as clean as the wood and root spice effect, but I'm not interpreting it that way. It's just different.
Fourth infusion:
2018 Menghai Yesheng: again this brews lighter. One would imagine this is going to translate to a broad difference in later rounds, not necessarily to color, but to brewed tea experience. I just tend to not take notes for a full cycle, to try out 10 rounds and write about all of them. It's interesting how a blog like Mattcha's Blog--one of my favorites--writes out a separate flavor list for each infusion, up to at least a dozen. I can't account for not experiencing teas in the same way, as changing anywhere near that much round to round. Maybe he's more sensitive, maybe he's trying better teas, or maybe expectation leads in that direction, and he's just not repeating what stays the same over and over, focusing on changes instead.
This isn't different than last round, again quite clean, with wood tone and spice standing out. Not strong flavored and distinct spice, I mean an underlying flavor complexity that I interpret as within spice range. I wouldn't disagree with someone interpreting cocoa as pronounced in this, or it might be that it's transitioning towards that.
2013 Menghai: slate mineral is still primary. That's nice, since I like that. I suppose someone who hates Liu Bao might not see that as positively, since it's more or less the overlap range with shu and that type. Of course this lacks every bit of the harsher edge in Liu Bao that haven't been aged for 20 years or so (so it might be a decent replacement for well-aged Liu Bao?). Maybe not, even though one flavor aspect is comparable; it's pretty obvious this is shu.
Fifth infusion:
I don't really want to tell the story of a full round of transitions, so this might be it. This round may already include a lot of what there is to say about these version differences, but I can always add a summary form of how the rest went without round by round notes. I'll get back to giving these over 10 seconds to try a nice strong infusion, more my own preference for shu than the best way to review them.
2018 Menghai yesheng: the clean nature in this is still quite pleasant. In a sense that seems to link to the flavor range being more limited, narrower, but it works. Again that being woody / spice oriented / now towards cocoa someone might interpret in different ways, both as seeing it described in different ways and in relation to match to preference. Feel and aftertaste both could be more pronounced but both work, distinctive in form and present in enough degree to not be a gap.
2018 Menghai: again slate mineral stands out most, with other warm and rich tones supporting that. It's interesting for these being so different. This comes across as expressing a broader flavor range but I'm not sure it's necessarily more complex, it just spans more range. I like the slate mineral dominating it. It would seem possible to interpret that in different ways, and that it would come across a lot stronger for being in contrast with this other version. It could just seem like the earthy background present in all shu, I mean, versus having that distinct form. This version has a fuller feel and more depth.
Conclusions:
Both were really nice; both are an incredible value for how good they are in relation to price. As for which I liked best even though the older (2013 tasting comparison version) had more complexity, fuller feel, and more depth I really liked the catchy flavor range in this younger and somewhat thinner "wild plant" version. If someone values shu for brewing a version inky strong and thick, like "shupresso," the second older version might support that effect better.
These have to be quite comparable to $50-some versions from mainstream US producers; that extra value alone would justify shipping cost from a different part of the world. Usually there is an order cost cut-off past which shipping is free; I just looked that up on their site and for them it's $130. Looking that up I also saw their standard delivery cost is $13, and express $35, but essentially every tea group site repeats horror stories about how long slow-boat shipping can take from China or Taiwan.
I don't intend all that as some sort of hard sell; lots of producers would make pretty decent shu, and to me a lot of factory versions are pretty good. Sites like Chawang Shop and King Tea Mall would sell a broad range with some age on them for not so much, and Yunnan Sourcing's in-house versions must be ok, or maybe better than just ok, distinctive and refined. Small batch themes are becoming trendy, and in some cases those can be slightly more distinctive. Moychay is working on that too, versions produced from Russian tea material, but the experimental young versions I've tried seemed to need more time to settle, so the jury could still be out on how good they'll be in the end, after 3 or 4 years of rest.
These two teas really don't overlap that much in aspect range. I guess that main finding counters that "shu is shu" theme. At the same time earthy and mineral range are what they express, without astringency, along with some supporting fruit and spice, and of course there is no bitterness or floral range at all. They are completely different but comparable in general range.
I think a lot of the "all shu is the same" theme--which is from my own bias, to be clear, not presented here as a universal perspective--relates to seeing sheng pu'er and oolong, and even black teas to a lesser extent, as varying across a broader range. It's not as much about any individual tea being that much more complex, although that can come up too. Sheng picks up an extra dimension for versions being different year to year. These two shu versions will be similar to this in another decade, I think, just a bit smoother, trading out a little higher end flavor intensity for depth, shifting flavor range just a little.
I doubt this 2018 version is going to evolve much over a few more years but there is an off chance that the lower intensity level, clean flavor range, and light infusion color could relate to this being a little less fermented than is typical, in which case another half dozen years might draw out more complexity.
There is no way I would buy one cake and hold onto it to check; at most I would buy two and drink through one, using the second to check on that. Or it can work to only drink a tea a few times a year, and keep tabs on it while leaving half remaining after a decade long aging cycle (drinking 3 x 6 grams x 10 years, half a cake), but for tea in this value range it seems like too much limitation and messing around. And it's just shu; so what if it gains some extra complexity and depth, it's still going to be similar. One nice aspect of shu is that you don't need to put extra thought into optimizing storage conditions and aging time input; once it's past a fermentation settling out phase you can just drink it.
No comments:
Post a Comment