What does "tea drunk" mean?

 

A question in Reddit inspired me to write out a detailed answer about this, what people mean by "tea drunk?"  The actual question, now deleted, related to asking if cold tea can make you tea drunk, but prior to that it's necessary to consider what it even means.  My answer was this:

"Tea drunk" is really used in two completely different ways by tea enthusiasts. One meaning relates to drinking a lot of tea, essentially related to experiencing strong effects from caffeine. There is definitely theanine in tea too, and other compounds that can affect your body and mental state, so it's not just caffeine, but it's mostly that. This kind of feeling is familiar to anyone who has drank a few cups of coffee in a short time, but it's not identical, because those other compounds really do alter the experience.

The next use and meaning relates to other compounds in tea combining with the caffeine and theanine effects to result in an atypical body feeling or mental state. In some description it's called cha qi, or what I take to mean the energy and feeling from tea, although that phrasing and implied meaning can lean towards mystical range a little. Per my experience this is a real thing. I don't tend to ever notice it unless I'm drinking sheng pu'er, and even then not so often. It's said that old tree and natural grown versions, or aged versions, can have a stronger effect, and there might be something to connecting those three inputs. It doesn't need to be regarded as a mystical theme, because it's well known that caffeine and theanine aren't the only two active compounds in tea, the only two that can potentially affect mental states.

You don't notice this much at all if you've eaten with or just before drinking the tea. My take on this, which isn't necessarily accepted conventional understanding, is that food slows the digestion of related compounds so that you are still absorbing and experiencing those inputs, but much slower, and it's the sudden change from one mental state to another that makes it so noticeable. At times it can feel like being stoned (a bit like on weed, just different), or very relaxed, or even hyper in unusual ways, all of which are also familiar ground for marijuana experience. I've drank tea that made me feel sleepy before, and have taken a nap after drinking a good bit of some.

So far nothing I've said is clearly supported beyond it being one more hearsay account, so let's consider what else is in tea that might account for this:

Tea Epicure article on tea chemistry

Tea leaves contain many amino acids, the most abundant of which is theanine. Theanine, specifically L-Theanine, is responsible for promoting alpha brain wave activity and a feeling of relaxation. L-Theanine in concert with caffeine can induce a state of “mindful alertness” in the tea drinker. Amino acids make up an average of 6% of the extract solids in steeped tea1...

The main methylxanthine in tea is the stimulant caffeine. Other methylxanthines found in tea are two chemically similar compounds, theobromine and theophylline. The tea plant creates these chemicals as a way to ward off insects and other animals. On average, methylxanthines make up 2% to 5% of the dry weight of the fresh tea leaves5. Methylxanthines also contribute to a bitter taste in the tea infusion. The level of methylxanthines in tea depends on the variety and cultivar of Camellia sinensis used, the climate, the age of the leaves, and the propagation method (seed vs. cutting) used on the plant...

Theobromine is also found in chocolate, and acts as a stimulant with similar effects as caffeine, seemingly just less intense (more on that here: https://neuropedia.com/theobromine-benefits-side-effects/). So there doesn't need to be any mystical explanation for why different types of tea have different effects on energy level and mood, even though we can't really completely unpack the total effect of all active compounds in tea, or map likely levels to tea types, since processing changes a lot beyond what that Tea Epicure article already cited.

Additional clarifications:

There's always more to add, so I'll extend those points just a little before closing.  

I didn't clarify that I always eat food before drinking tea, in part to offset the "tea drunk" experience, but really more to protect my stomach from either immediate or longer term negative impact.  I don't necessarily want to feel any sort of buzz or stony sensation from drinking tea, or to emphasize relaxed body-feel, and I couldn't be sure what the long-term effect on my stomach of drinking 8 to 10 grams worth of tea in daily sittings might be, so it works as a hedge of that risk to eat food first.  To me it seems to work best to eat something with both carbohydrates and fat in it, so fruit with toast and butter is fine, or breakfast cereal, or the heavier eggs, bacon, and rice breakfast (or the American version, with potatoes instead).

A separate line of thought, probably more common in sheng pu'er appreciation circles, is that "drinking tea with your body" is a higher form of experience, something people only come to value after long exposure and refined preference.  What to say about that?  I'm probably biased against wanting tea to affect me in related ways because I have some history with drug and alcohol use, not so much addiction and alcoholism, but enough that I don't want to revisit that path.

The sheng pu'er versions that affected me the most did match up with the hearsay input about what are said to, older tree plant material, natural grown versions, and those from regions that tend to be associated with that, like Lao Ban Zhang.  I've drank (and own) a significant amount of sheng aged from the early 2000s but I've not experienced much of the more prized 30 year old range, or well-regarded versions that stand out as most desirable related to tea enthusiast group hearsay.  It would be easier to isolate that kind of feel input if I was emphasizing it, not intentionally offsetting it related to eating food prior to drinking tea.

I don't tend to overdo it with tea quantity and caffeine input either.  I've accidentally gone there in the past, of course, during tasting sessions with others, or while writing comparison reviews of multiple teas.  It's not aversion to that effect that I avoid as much as making it a habit to moderate caffeine intake to prevent long term exposure problems.  I know of four people who have developed long term sensitivity to caffeine from drinking too much tea, three of them tea bloggers.  Two never did return to more moderate consumption, while after a substantial break two did.  

comparison tastings are likely to overdo it for caffeine intake

Caffeine can become a headache trigger, or can cause problems with maintaining balanced energy levels, beyond potential sleep disruption, or even more problematic disruption of normal sleep period rest cycles.  It's simple to avoid this potential risk, by staying at or below the standard daily recommended intake level for caffeine, 400 mg per day.  Using the standard amount of 30 to 50 mg of caffeine per cup it's no risk to drink eight 250 ml cups of tea a day, around two quarts or liters, and that's enough tea anyway.  It's possible to break that down to a finer level to dry leaf amounts, or to factor in body size and natural tolerance, raising or lowering that practical limit, but it's easy enough to limit yourself to that general range.

I think appreciating the first effect is fine, drinking types of sheng pu'er that lend themselves to that, and it would work to judge stomach impact risk by feel, if it causes discomfort (even though I don't; I stop short of needing to gauge that by preventing it).  For the second case getting relatively blasted on caffeine once or twice a week might still be fine, again even though I don't, but going further and further with exposure and daily intake habit seems like more of a concern.  

Reviewing Marou Vietnamese bean to bar chocolate

Something different, tasting and reviewing chocolate instead of tea in this blog post.  I used input from a chocolate blogger (Lisebeth of the Ultimate Chocolate Blog) to write a post awhile back comparing tasting and reviewing the two things, or really she contributed most of that.  I finally turned up a regional bean-to-bar chocolate that she spoke highly of, Marou, based out of Vietnam.  I live in Bangkok, a stone's throw away, one small country over.  Anyone unusually interested in chocolate should check out their site since it talks about terroir issues and cacoa bean fermentation, next-level stuff related to what chocolate is.


It didn't seem to be available in Bangkok at the time of that writing, or other similar types, although not being a well-informed chocolate enthusiast that would be hard to determine.  But a local business, Maison Jean Phillippe--really a bakery--was working on importing it then.  But they ran into problems with that, for months, and I lost track of the idea, and their progress.

Maison Jean Phillipe, in the Bangkok Thong-Lo Commons

First a little background on what I expect, and methodology, and I'll get to the tasting.  For one thing, this general category of chocolate seems to typically be darker chocolate than one normally sees, even among what is sold as commercial dark chocolate (with a bit more on that to follow).  Per Lisabeth's past input it takes some adjustment to that different range to appreciate just how diverse and positive the aspects are in higher grades of chocolate.  Of course some makers would also do milk-inclusive versions, which could serve well as a bridge, but the ones I ran across from ranged from 70% to 80% chocolate, without any milk added.  I'll know what that really means better after the tasting.

The general idea is obvious enough, but it might be helpful to explain it.  The point is that fresh ingredients (fermented and roasted cacoa beans) are made using better processing, but the rest of the idea is that distinctiveness of beans from a certain location comes through only when making chocolate from beans from a very limited area.  It's the terroir idea, common to wine and tea, and probably to other food items I don't connect it with.  These two bars, or really all of the half-dozen that bakery was selling, are from very specific locations within Vietnam, with differences in character based on that.  Of course there are also generalities connected to beans and chocolate from whole countries in general, but that's not something I'm familiar with enough to discuss.

As for anticipated results of this tasting, I don't expect to do the chocolate review justice being on the very first step of the experience curve.  I'll try both chocolates, at the 70 and 76% cacao level, with the first from Dak Lak (missing diacritics to identify tones and distinguish between letters, so not really spelled that way, technically).  The higher percentage chocolate is from Ba Ria (also missing accents).  It should be interesting.  I won't research any more to pin down specifics about those locations, or the chocolates, but will include some third-party review after that.  All I will go on initially are the percentages and some very limited vendor descriptions:


Dak Lak 70%:  a wonderfully complex bar with a long spicy finish, made with a selection of the finest cacao from the highland districts of Dak Lak province.


Ba Ria 76%:  A bold and fruity chocolate made from fine flavour cacao sourced directly from family-owned farms in the province of Ba Ria.

Dak Lak is the highligthed central area, Ba Ria the star near Vung Tau (and HCMC)

Sounds great!  Let's taste those.  At the risk of throwing off my palate range I'll compare both to some Hershey kisses I have around from a trip back to the US.  I don't expect that to inform the taste-list review section of trying those other two but it might result in an interesting observation related to the over-all effect.  I'd expect for texture those two will be a bit firm packing in a good bit of cacoa but who knows, maybe some insight will arise related to both texture and the very different type of chocolate.  I'll use cool water as a palate rinse between tasting those, with a little left over Oriental Beauty tea from breakfast mixed in just to clear out the overload of the one flavors range.


I might also mention that Hershey's sort of isn't chocolate at all, in the same sense.  Per this article by the Washington Post their chocolate contains 11% cacao, 1% over the category minimum limit in the US, so it's really chocolate flavored candy (according to that author).  So what is it?  Per Hershey's it's made from this:

cane sugar, milk, chocolate, cocoa butter, milk fat, lecithin, natural flavor 

other bars I didn't buy, from different regions in Vietnam and with different cacao percentages

Review:

cacao nibs, roughly ground roasted cacao beans

Dak Lak (70%):  The first smell of the first bar is pretty intense.  I've been using cacoa nibs--ground fermented cacoa beans--for tea blends just a little lately (described in a Christmas blend post).  I also made a version of hot chocolate just out of that, and that very sweet, rich cocoa / cacao smell is the same.  Everyone would kind of think they know what chocolate and cocoa smell and taste like but it's a bit sweeter and richer.  As for that cocoa / cacao naming split, per my understanding cocoa is the name for roasted and processed cacao.


That chocolate is pretty intense in taste too.  It tastes like dark chocolate, but there are layers beyond that (it is dark chocolate; I guess I mean it's more complex than what I've tried as such).  It has a fruitiness to it, just a little toward a dark cherry, but it also tastes a little like a mild version of coffee, but not bitter.  I get the initial impression that a main difference from typical dark chocolate might be that they've not roasted the beans quite as much, because those tend to pick up a bit more roast effect than I'm getting from this.  Of course all of that isn't something I've ever given much thought to, so it's odd reconstructing what I think about dark chocolate based on tasting it last awhile back (I had some a week ago, come to think of it, some commercial European version, grocery store brand chocolate).


About the finish, I guess it does last, a couple of minutes after eating the chocolate that taste range hangs in there.  About spice, I'm not so sure.  I cook with spices, of course, and I just tried a Taiwanese Oriental Beauty (oolong, of course) that was heavy on spice, so it's familiar ground, but the chocolate context here really isn't.  I'll try the other before trying to dig any deeper.

Ba Ria:  The scent of the Ba Ria is that much more intense, as likely from the elevated cocoa percentage.  It's getting pretty close to the smell of those cacoa nibs, those just pieces of fermented cacoa beans.  In tasting it--wow!  Chocolate that strong is hard to relate to at first, but it's not hard to appreciate the novelty of the experience.  The texture changes, I think due to that difference, so thick it takes a few seconds to melt and spread across your tongue to be tasted.  I'll never be able to separate the character of this particular chocolate from tasting one at this intensity, but I'm never at a complete loss to speculate.


Since it's that much less sweet (there's no milk in these, and sugar is the other percentage, and shifting it from 30% to 24% changes a lot) the flavor context is much different.  At first it almost comes across as more savory, but really that seems to not be what's going on, after more consideration.  Obviously it is less sweet.  It tastes like chocolate--I had to say that at some point.  The maker called it "bold and fruity," and it is bold, but I'm not getting fruit as much as for the other, but no spice either really.  I'm not getting far in general.  I'll try tasting the Hershey's to circle back to a familiar lighter baseline and try both again.



Hershey's Kiss:  it's hard to appreciate the role that milk had always been playing without tasting those others.  Again these "Kisses" are likely to contain 11% cocoa, with the Hershey's "Special Dark" chocolate at 45%; not all that dark in comparison.  Of course they are in the general range of typical chocolate, commercial products, on the light and sweet side.  It's like comparing a latte and a hot chocolate; they're not at all the same thing.  At first I'd think to use an analogy of comparing a mocha with the cocoa instead, but they're just so different that a bit of that common primary ingredient doesn't bring them into the same taste-space in the end.

one bar does look darker, but the pictures don't do the scent justice

It is interesting trying to separate out what the tastes of the cocoa add to the Hershey's beyond being focused on what the milk is doing, or being distracted by texture and sweetness.  It's just a generic "chocolate;" there aren't other layers of specific elements to try and taste.  That's not exactly horrible, just quite different.  I don't pick up a heavy roast element, so they seem to have not went to far with that processing step.  But then it's quite uniform, with comparatively much less chocolate flavor.  Of course it has the slightly chalky texture that it's known for, which is quite intentional, per a former co-worker who previously worked at Hershey.  They use crystal structure phase charts as used for metalurgy, with very specific cooling steps employed to get to that result.



Dak Lak, again:  it's interesting how the flavor changes over the taste experience.  The introduction taste isn't the same as it transitions to, which changes over a middle-period experience, then the aftertaste / finish is something else.  It was almost as if a trace of smoke showed up really early on, then it moved into richness and fruit.  I'm still not getting spice at the end but it's something unique, something I'll probably not pin down with accurate description.

Tea sort of does that too, transition flavors while you taste it, but I tend to not break tasting into phases, beyond what you taste during drinking it versus the aftertaste / finish.  Tea doesn't transition to the same degree that chocolate just did.  In that middle period it's cool the way the hint of bitterness and earthy complexity balances well with the sweetness, then fruit seems to pick up, and describing the finish is tricky.  It shares a little with the earthy malt-range astringency in black teas, even though I've just mixed a lot related to feel and taste, so that may well not make sense.

Marou image of cacao pods (credit Marou site)

Ba Ria, again:  that chocolate intensity is even more interesting when you know it's coming.  The chocolate may well be fruity but the intensity and range of what's going on remind me of sundried tomato, both in terms of flavors, and also how richness, brightness, and range play out in that.  The finish is different, the tasting effect different.  Related to a taste-list description, I'm going to have to settle for completely failing on that.  The overall intensity seems to overwhelm my normal processing into distinct flavor elements.


Hershey's:  I still like it.  I can relate to people sort of "moving beyond" it, to some extent, to developing an appreciation for all the rest going on, and that completely different taste range.  It is chocolate, to me, but not in the same sense as those other bars.

It's funny how I feel as if I have enough habits in the one subject, tea, so I don't really want to be a chocolate enthusiast, or get back further into tisanes, or other foods, etc.  I'd make a terrible foodie.  I'm in a Facebook Bangkok-oriented foodie group and it's cool the way so much of what they address really is on the common-sense page though, talking about good Mexican restaurants, or burgers, etc.  There are lots of other tangents they could be on, like better and stranger cheese, and foi gras, or even something like that strange molecular gastronomy trend that went through, eating foam as a companion to food, or freezing things that aren't normally frozen.  But they just appreciate normal foods in that group, for the most part.


Next I'll research these chocolates and cite "real" reviews to see how I did.

Chocolate enthusiasts / reviewers input

Lisabeth!  My favorite chocolate blogger

I wanted to find Lisabeth's reviews, but she only seems to have written one up for the Dak Lak bar.  In an earlier post she reviewed a different version, and described the producer company's mission in general:


Marou not only makes chocolate from the bean, but they make it at its source.  The cacao is all grown in Vietnam and their mission was to make "unadulterated chocolate made from nothing but cocoa and sugar" (ref). 


In that second review post she does elaborate on that:


The chocolate bars are more than simple single-origin chocolate bars; each chocolate is being made from cocoa beans grown in different regions of Vietnam. This is even more fun than the usual country-of-origin chocolate tastings because Marou showcases how regional differences can vary so significantly even within a small country.



I'm not sure those guys leave off with that; they probably could go on and on about the micro-climate details that each farm location is drawing on to produce individual ingredients with related flavors:  local temperature, elevation, rainfall, soil type, sun exposure, effect of other vegetation, etc.  In a series on terroir on their site Marou mentions one input they are testing, and also others:


we expect that mineral composition in the soil will affect the mineral composition of the cacao tree, its pods, the beans and eventually the mineral composition of chocolate.


Lets move on to check that Dak Lak review:


Dak Lak 70%, Batch #2929:  Tastes of the roast with a hint of smokiness, mint, berry fruit, smooth and full-bodied with a hint of blackberry flavours and a hint of black liquorice.


I caught some of that.  It would've been interesting if she'd try to say more about that aftertaste since I had some trouble pinning that down.  Here's another review to check on that, by the "Bean to Bar" blog:


Semi quick starting with roasted bread followed by a strong brown sugar aroma. Gently turning over to liquorice with small twinkles of acidity and bitterness popping up to keep the aroma interesting and ever-changing...  A deep and very satisfying chocolate flavor comes forth next. Near the end of the melt gentle wood aromas give body to the entire experience without overpowering the palate. The aftertaste follows the main aroma of the Dắk Lắk bar, slowly turning to volatile cacao, wood and faint spice aromas. The aftertaste keeps rolling and rolling in your mouth for an exceptional long time...  Unlike the other Marou chocolates I’ve tried so far, this bar doesn’t feature the nice, abundant spice tones and isn’t fruity at all, yet it delivers such an amazing warm and gratifying chocolate flavor...

internet photo of cacao pods; see next photo for clarification

I didn't pick up much of that, but then there's not much common ground between that and Lisabeth's take either.  It would be interesting to compare every review of this product on the internet to identify variability in those but I'll move on to the next bar instead.  Here's one of Ba Ria from the One Golden Ticket blog:




The chocolate tasted initially of a cocoa roast, but soon revealed sweetness and fruit flavors. The sweetness tasted similar to honey. The fruit was complex. Among the specific flavors I identified were raspberry and apricot, as well as a general citrus... The finish was somewhat acidic and somewhat tannin...  Ba Ria was much fruitier than the other Marou chocolates. Of the five, I think I liked Dong Nai best, though Ba Ria was a close second. 


Or another review of the same type from Mostly About Chocolate:

Marou cacao pod photo; not the same look as the last

This particular cote starts out with an intense dark flavour with an edge of acidity. Super dark coffee and I think I got a bit of tobacco coming in there (not like the smoker who sits next to me on the train sometimes – real tobacco). There is an edge of almost over-stewed tea in there... and a very quick finish...  I think there was some leather in there but overwhelmingly this is a dark bar that I want to call bitter but it really isn’t...




Again, completely different; interesting.  Let's sample a third to see how that goes, from Chocolate Codex:


The sour fruit and tea [scent] carries over to the taste. This bar is tangy (sour cherries, tamarind) and tannic like a strong green. The aftertaste is black coffee sans sugar. I also found some grassy/earthy notes wrapped up in there. This earthiness seems to be a defining characteristic of Marou bars.


Interesting!  These descriptions vary, but then the degree of complexity, intensity, and degree of flavors layering in these chocolates is something that can't really be explained or described, it has to be experienced.  Variations in interpretation seem reasonable based on all that is going on.


Back to my own typical subject scope, the degree of objectivity even possible in tea tasting--getting to a final description--has always been an interesting point for me.  I've suspected that's more or less asking the wrong question, that it's more interesting to consider why there are natural variations in interpretation.  But this post already runs long, so I won't get into that here.  I wrote a bit on that subject awhile back that didn't really get past framing the question more completely, and a year later revisited the general subject scope based on input from other tea bloggers.

Imagination and subjectivity in tea tasting, with blogger and expert input

I've been considering a crazy idea about how internal mental processing of tea tasting goes, and decided to ask some favorite bloggers for input on tasting process.  The following is where that led.

Starting point, request for input, and some crazy initial ideas of my own

I'll start with a description I passed on to one of them with the request for input, a mix of some odd ideas that never did summarize particularly well:


I'm working on a blog post that is based on input about tea tasting, one very narrow and unusual aspect, and I'm asking you for help with that.  It's about something I've been considering for awhile, the possible role of imagination as an interface between more raw sensory input and description, analysis.

The standard take, per my understanding, is that flavor description for tea is essentially a memory function supported by practice and training, so no mental function related to imagination needs to be invoked.  Of course taste is only one aspect of tea, but this limitation--considering only flavor descriptions--seemed a good way to narrow scope for discussion and input.

Even if imagination does play a role that function should be subconscious, I shouldn't be able to notice it, but I could swear I seem to. Of course I'm still talking about objective experience, picking up flavor elements others would be likely to agree are there, although variations in perceptions related to this are interesting, people noticing relatively different aspects.


So the initial question wasn't really if tea tasting and evaluation is subjective, but rather if it's possible to say more about how it works, the internal mental processing of taste into description.  Actually liking tea aspects has to be subjective, and to some extent comparisons of flavor aspects must be objective, with more coming up about that in the input.

Geoffrey Norman:  author of one of my favorite blogs, Steep Stories

Most discussion input I'm citing from him here isn't about internal tasting process but it does work for a nice intro to a standard review approach, along with a description of how he deviates from that:


When I first got into tea reviewing back in 2008, I was contributing to another website - Teaviews. When I was on there, I tried to stick to the typical review format, but I tried to add my own flare to the introduction. Of course, I always began with a background about the tea, about the company selling it, a personal anecdote of some sort. 

Then this was followed by tea leaf descriptions - size of leaf, aroma, color, etc. 

That was then followed by brewing instructions.  Next after that, taster notes,  And lastly, closing anecdote. 

For the most part, I still stick to that sort of format, but I've now structured the narrative to be more story-like. It's what I prefer, aesthetically. What few readers I have seem to appreciate it, too. 

As for how my taster notes evolved . . . they really haven't. To tell you the truth, I deviate from the standard taster practices almost as a personal mandate. Sure, some standard notes are in my lexicon - floral, chewy, herbaceous, etc. - but for the most part, I like to record what my sensations are in real-time. What you see on the page is EXACTLY how I'm feeling about that tea - right that moment. 


Really that's what I like about his writing, the story-based aspect, and also the non-standard use of descriptions that enable you to share in his experience by any means necessary.  He doesn't push the flavor-list style of reviewing, and sometimes will rely on comparing a tea as in between two other styles, which is unconventional, but it can really work.

I'll add a bit more he passed on about the subject I had described as a starting point, about an internal process:


Taste, like a person's memory and imagination, are purely subjective. 

I think [the ideas about the role of imagination] also has something to do with what I heard about from a Taiwanese tea seller.  It's not just about the taste, it's also about the sensation.  And that triggers the imagination.


Interesting, right?  He is either saying that taste preference is subjective (most likely, or at least including that), or that there could even be variances in what is tasted, with completely different aspects described.

In truth we see in reviews that people experience teas in vastly different ways, not just related to preference but in how they describe teas in terms of basic flavor components. Of course the experience itself isn't just about a list of individual aspects, it relates to the feeling the experience invokes, the last part mentioned.  More on all that follows.

Amanda Wilson; another favorite blogger (My Thoughts are Like Butterflies)

Amanda writes very detailed blog post tea reviews, with a good bit of rambling about whatever else comes up in them, to me an interesting mix.  She talks about one thing that might help her write reviews in a different way:


I think due in part to the way having autism wired my brain, I perceive the world primarily through taste (this gets me into trouble at times) my memories of tastes are significantly stronger than any other sense. Not sure how much help I will be since I am 'special.'

I get asked a lot how to train to make taste as strong as mine, so to speak, and I never really know what to say other than go experience a lot of things. It comes off better than 'be born with a broken brain.'  

The exact term for it is Sensory Processing Disorder, I go on the 'over stimulated' end of the spectrum.  It is a comorbidity with Aspergers.  Autism is an annoyingly complex spectrum.


Cool!  And definitely different, a line of thought I had never considered.  Really there is too much there to go deeper in this type of post so I'll just leave it as some interesting input about the way people's minds and sensations really can and do differ.  Leaving objectivity and subjectivity aside, with the basic experience varying the description and response to that experience would naturally also vary.

Micheal Coffey (Tea Geek blog, and he's got other things going on); input from an unusually well informed tea enthusiast

After some initial discussion of that background Michael recommended looking into a great resource:  "Taste What You're Missing" by Barb Stuckey.


Taste is influenced by all kinds of things.  One example that Stuckey uses is that of airplane food.  It sucks, right?  Well that has more to do with how loud the engines are than with how cheap the company is.  If you tasted airplane food with the engines quiet it would have a totally different flavor.

And that's the big difference.  You don't experience "taste" (the raw sensory input), you experience "flavor" (a mental construct that blends multiple sensory inputs into whatever you experience).  This may be where your idea of imagination comes in.  

Also, the need to "refresh the palate" because you've been tasting too much tea, or one flavor is bleeding into the next is a similar effect.  It doesn't have anything to do with your actual taste organs, but with how the mind is putting them together.  When you smell a funny smell but eventually it fades?  That's your brain just ignoring that input, not a change in your olfactory nerves.

I've heard that first point before, and have considered it related to trying to taste tea with the sounds of Legos crashing together in the background at home.  It seems to not just relate to noise but stimulus in general, so that the more engaged I am in whatever is causing the problems (like two kids fighting versus them just breaking toys) the further I get from a full experience of tasting.

All in all some great input, some connections one might not normally make, really what I'd hoped to get out of this sort of input process.  This digs a little deeper into how if the basic experience of tasting varies with environment and related to factors in individual processing even any one person might experience a tea differently at different times, beyond differences that could relate to different people having varied impressions.

Citing a chocolate blogger on subjectivity in tasting (Lisabeth of Ultimate Chocolate Blog)

A chocolate blogger gave some great input on an earlier blog post that is worth considering here, that fits in with some other ideas, presented in that earlier blog post in a Q & A format:


my question:  To what extent do these seem like subjective judgments to you, that different people would cite different taste elements for the same chocolate?


Lisabeth's answer:  Certainly chocolate tasting is subjective to some extent. Everyone tastes food differently, and so will relate the flavours they taste in chocolate to different foods. In the case of Madagascar-origin chocolate, for instance, the chocolate is so clearly fruity that most people will identify that as a flavour in chocolate made from cocoa beans grown in Madagascar. But whether they taste raspberry versus grape or lemon, is a whole other thing. 

What we taste is also dependent on what we eat prior to tasting. It is important to give yourself one-to-two hours without eating or drinking (other than water), prior to tasting chocolate.


More on subjectivity and yet another input; our sense of taste will vary based on what we are eating, not just then but for hours prior.  This is probably a good place to mention that Lisabeth is not just a veteran chocolate blogger but also a chocolatier, a chocolate maker, so her experience with tasting extends beyond review blogging into daily experience.

Time of day seems to make some difference to me too.  That haziness some people experience in early mornings seems to extend to my sense of taste as well.  All the same I tend to write notes for tea reviews when it comes up, not by tuning my sense of taste based on optimum time of day and eating patterns.  I try to compensate by tasting teas more than once for reviews, and often different aspects will come up, but I really see my review role as providing an informed impression of a tea, not laying out an objective last word.

My wine guru input; advise on tasting from a wine maker

looks like, but not him

My friend Dan, a very experienced professional wine maker, independently mentioned a point that overlaps with Lisabeth's, that prior personal history is a factor in tasting.   Related to his wine making resume, I could mention some wineries and then you would be impressed, but only if you follow higher end wines.  According to Dan people taste what they expect to taste, to some extent, which depends on lots of factors.  Preconceptions and the other senses' input come into play, and their history of tasting other things.  This ties in to a common idea cited in taste-testing process articles, of even experts getting attributes completely wrong when white wines or pale beers are dyed to look like a different type.

It's odd how much Dan restated Barb Stuckey's ideas about how tasting works in general, but I guess that makes sense since they're both working from the same current awareness.  If you don't get around to reading her books there is a nice Google Videos reference of her presenting a summary of some ideas.  In particular he essentially repeated the parts about the role of taste versus other sense elements, and the description of what astringency is.  The main point is that astringency is not a taste element, definitely not the same as bitterness, and not even a flavor aspect, it's a "feel."  She described astringency as an irritant that can be pleasant in moderation (towards the last parts of that Google Videos reference).  Of course Dan took that same line of thought in the direction of this element adding body and structure to a wine or tea. This is familiar in the world of wine and to a lesser extent common in tea description.  Even if the description is typically not clearly defined people are noticing the same effects, that feel and taste are two different things, of course with some relation in the final overall impression.

In discussion with him I never did get to the point of breaking tasting process analysis down to some manageable defined subset.  His approach to wine tasting is intentionally holistic, leaving space for subjectivity in the tasting process, and he sees enjoyment as the main goal and condition.  In discussing objectivity, or the limitations of that, Dan wouldn't say that people generally taste things that aren't there, although he said that can happen.  Instead he said that judgment and experience are based on past experience and preferences, so that different people won't prefer or even notice exactly the same things.  The issue that identified lists of flavors can vary--whether or not there is a "right answer" for taste analysis--seemed essentially separate from the main point to him, the experience of subjective preference.

Dan!  I'll leave in his stand-in picture for comparison though

Of course I'm coming to the problem from a tasting and review writing background, so in the end written description has to occur in some form.  It serves as an assumed goal to make the review as objective and descriptive as possible, although people go about that in different ways.  


Dan didn't seem to see a relatively complete and objective description as a workable goal, but then we didn't extend discussion to the number scoring system for wines, the natural place that would lead.  I would expect that his feedback about that gets a bit complicated, not completely rejecting objective analysis, but likely limiting how relevant such a thing can be to pinning down subjective preference.

To clarify all this he drew an analogy to physical beauty:  what defines a beautiful woman or man for one person is not the same as that preferred by another.  This did lead to an interesting related point; beauty in people does relate to one absolute, to preference for symmetry.  He compared this to the balance that people seek in wine, or tea.  Their preference for type and characteristics could vary widely, and certainly does, but in some sense the different elements coming together in a balanced form is a general underlying preference.

Of course the physical symmetry is a bit more clearly defined, the left eye looking like the right eye, and so on, whereas taste balance is about things like sweetness existing in proper proportion to level of astringency, which all lead back to a more subjective realm.  But it's a nice analogy, the kind of input only a guru would end up bringing up.

Kevin Craig; former author of the Tea Journeyman (a great review blog)

Kevin isn't actively reviewing these days, but when he was his reviews were so detailed and clear and flavor-description oriented that they really got the sense of the teas across, even the feel, to some extent, which is not so easy to do.  He gave some good input on the process:


I would be able to separate the tastes, and individually identify that there were a certain number of tastes that I was experiencing. Yet, some of the tastes I could not specifically define. For example, was the taste lemon, or another citrus fruit? Was it papaya, or another tropical fruit? Is that wet stone, or another mineral?

I agree with you that when you are familiar with specific tastes more than others, you tend to identify those familiar tastes, perhaps even when they are not truly there. Case in point, the cherry taste, which is easily identifiable. I swore I was able to taste cherry in so many teas that I began to intentionally leave it out of reviews just to avoid redundancy. Like you, I began to question if I really was tasting cherry, or just convincing myself that I was.

Additionally, I recall tasting the same tea months separated from writing the original review, and I experienced totally different tastes. Same steeping parameters, same exact tea kept in proper storage, but my taste had evolved.



I have this experience from time to time, catching something that I had missed, sometimes even something that seemed obvious.  But I could never be sure it related to my taste evolving, or somehow really "getting" the tea after more introduction, or exactly what variation led to it.  This almost seems to supercede the idea that objectivity may or may not be available across multiple reviewer inputs, if tasting can vary according to an individual at different times.

Conclusion

me!  that really should be tea, not ramen

There is too much here to really wrap up.  I had planned to include more on research of the initial subject, how internal taste evaluation actually works, a bit about brain functions and such, and there is a little out there as references on that, but this is already a bit much.  I'm much indebted to these people, who have each been my teachers in different ways, for that previous help and for helping bring these unusual observations together.


If more turns up I'll continue this review, perhaps further in that original direction, or to wherever else it leads.

Comparing tea and chocolate tasting based on the Ultimate Chocolate Blog input

Comparing tea and wine tasting has come up quite a bit, but what about chocolate?  Of course I mean specialty, bean to bar chocolate, the kind of thing many people aren't aware even exists.

Lisabeth; blogging seriously about chocolate

Some chocolate bloggers are just talking about things like how to bake a nice cake, which is surely very useful, but after some searching I found a chocolate blogger that is thorough and analytical, but still personable and genuine.  The reviews seem familiar, even though the subject is very different from tea.


I'm talking about Lisabeth Flanagan, author of The Ultimate Chocolate Blog.  I might go too far in mentioning it but she even reminds me of one of the tea blogging world's favorite daughters, who hardly even needs to be named after a scan of Lisabeth's blog mission statement, but I'll add the link to that tea blog since some chocolate people may read this.


Of course the point is that flavor description approach is comparable, and so on, but some of the rest of the results are shocking!  Wait, you are already reading this, and it's quite interesting but maybe not shocking.

Chocolate reviews:

Tanzania Origin Chocolate by Askinosie: 72% Dark Chocolate

This chocolate bar was creamier in texture than the other two origins, and to me, had and an instant bitter flavour reminiscent of tobacco smoke, spice and dark roast coffee before it opens up to a berry fruit flavour and perhaps dried cranberries. Also, maybe a hint of dried grass. It is my favourite.


For anyone else I'd edit those extra "u's" out of there...

Use of a similar type of taste-by-taste component analysis is clear in this, and to me it's a nice touch that it isn't completely objective, that personal preference is included.  In case you wanted to try this at home here is a link on some chocolate tasting basics.  Same post / maker following:

cacao pod, the beans

Davao, Philippines 62% Dark Milk Chocolate + Fleur de Sel (Goat's milk chocolate)

This is somewhat acidic, lightly salty, and has the taste of soft goat cheese, not as strong as in the white chocolate, but still very apparent. Sometimes I love it. Sometimes not. It depends on my taste buds at the time. It tastes great with red wine.


Almost nothing to break down further here; reference to subjective preference changing over time, a pairing suggestion, coupled with a clear and informal writing style.  If you don't already love her review style then the problem lies with you.  Of course I don't know if I'd like that chocolate, and if I had to pick just one I'd go with the Tanzanian one.

A bit more on texture in the next review, seemingly the equivalent to mouthfeel or body in tea.

François Pralus Chocolate: Intended for Indulgence

Many of the 'new school' chocolate makers focus on minimizing the cocoa butter content, and sticking to 'two-ingredient chocolate' for health benefits or to highlight the flavour of the bean. These two ingredient chocolate bars are often stiffer, with a slower melt-in-the-mouth effect. 


Ok, so at some point I'd actually have to try the chocolate to experience that, but I guess I could use my imagination based on having tried Hershey's Special Dark.

Fiji chocolate (photo credit)

So we've got taste description by flavor element, feel, pairing, some terroir scope, but it's still just chocolate, a few of the same ingredients sourced and blended differently, right?  Not so fast:


...on the Pralus chocolate bar packages, I learned immediately that the Djakarta bar is made from Criollo and Trinitario type cacao, whereas the Cuban bar is made from Trinitario-only beans, and the Indonesia bar is made from Criollo-only beans.


So there's that; cocoa bean cultivars (or maybe it's actually cacao; per this reference it's only called cocoa after you roast it, which involves different types of changes).


Still, you might be thinking, this chocolate is relatively large-batch standard ingredients blended per a standard recipe, nothing like tea leaves that are sourced from a small plot of land, hand picked and processed, then carefully brewed, so that each cup of tea is a natural, unique, semi-mystical experience.  Check out this processing step description, from François Pralus, chocolate maker and owner of his own cocoa plantation in Madagascar:

Francios Pralus (photo credit link)

I brew the cocoa in water, rather like making herbal tea and sweeten it slightly with sugar, then I leave it to settle. This gives me a precise idea of what the flavour will be like before I launch the manufacturing process.


So he seems to be a genius French Master Chocolate Maker; nice!  One product is even described as barres infernales; hellishly delightful.  Sounds good.


Just when you worried this post might end I asked her to cover some questions that dig deeper into comparing chocolate tasting to tea tasting, and then some.  She also makes chocolate related products, which helps explain the depth of these answers.

Comparing tea and chocolate tasting:

1.  my question: Tea tasting often compares tea tastes to other foods tastes, which I also see in specialty chocolate reviews.  To what extent do these seem like subjective judgments to you, that different people would cite different taste elements for the same chocolate?

Lisabeth's answer:  Certainly chocolate tasting is subjective to some extent. Everyone tastes food differently, and so will relate the flavours they taste in chocolate to different foods. In the case of Madagascar-origin chocolate, for instance, the chocolate is so clearly fruity that most people will identify that as a flavour in chocolate made from cocoa beans grown in Madagascar. But whether they taste raspberry versus grape or lemon, is a whole other thing. What we taste is also dependent on what we eat prior to tasting. It is important to give yourself one-to-two hours without eating or drinking (other than water), prior to tasting chocolate.


2.  Do you experience palate training in tasting chocolate?  That is, does it seem like over time with experience you taste chocolate differently, for example, can identify different flavors, or judge chocolate differently, or is it more a matter of just being able to compare the chocolate to more things you've already tried?

With palate training, it is more about learning how to identify and articulate what you are tasting. The more you taste, and compare, the more you will be able to identify the flavours inherently within the chocolate. And over time, you will get better at identifying those flavours. It's about tasting a lot of chocolate bars, and tasting them against each other (i.e. comparing a fruity Madagascar chocolate to a nutty Ecuador or Venezuelan chocolate, and then to a smoky Indonesian chocolate). It's also about research, and learning about the origin, the processing, etc. and what may affect the flavour within the chocolate. I imagine tea is the same thing - one change in manufacturing process can change the entire flavour. After a while, you will be able to taste it, and know what is affecting the flavour without needed to do research.


3.  In tea there may be a normal type of preference learning curve, although that's not something everyone agrees on.  For example, one might normally start with lighter oolongs and later move on to darker oolongs, or pu'er.  Is there such a thing with chocolate?

Over time, your tastes certainly change. As you are exposed to more and more types of chocolate, you might begin to dislike one of your former favourite chocolate bars, and love a chocolate bar that you may have spit out years ago. Certainly I could not palate chocolate with 85% to 100% cocoa solids 10 years ago, but now I enjoy chocolate bars as dark as those. I now love all chocolate and can appreciate it.  But certainly, if I am to enjoy a 100% dark chocolate, I cannot eat a super sweet chocolate bar just before, or sometimes within a few days before.  I work my way up so my palate is used to the bitter taste.


4.  Tea enthusiast circles are generally positive and supportive groups, but there is also the element of "tea snobbery," people telling others that "you're doing it wrong."  Are there examples of such a thing among chocolate enthusiasts?  Related to that, an article about the Mast brothers products seemed to cover some of the same disagreement over perspective (more background on them here, and that article covering that controversy).

Mast brothers, photo credit, meltingbutter.com

It is all about perspective.  For Mast Brother's - I believe - the complaint is that their chocolate is not consistent.  So I could go out tomorrow and buy a chocolate bar from them that tastes wonderful.  But in a month I may buy that same chocolate bar and it is not tempered properly, or has a funny taste. 


The chocolate 'aficionado' community is frustrated because Mast Brother's gets a lot of media coverage, but perhaps should not be the face of the craft chocolate movement, due to their product inconsistency.  They are worried that Mast Brother's will become the benchmark, and those that have tasted poor quality chocolate from them will never try craft chocolate again. 


I have not tasted Mast Brother's chocolate myself yet, but I still plan to. They may change their processes and become very fine chocolate makers over time. All that said, there will always be those that take tasting - of any food group - to a snobbery level.  But it is just best to ignore that and do it your own way.  Speaking from experience, you can find your own way over time and become knowledgeable and skilled at it, without always following the common 'rules' of tasting.


[editor’s note:  later allegations of the Mast Brothers using re-melted purchased chocolate, and their admission of limited early cases of this, not matching the extent of those allegations, made this subject an active news story at the end of 2015]

5.  What is an example of something you would want to tell others that don't know anything about specialty chocolate?

Two ingredients is all you need for a perfect, balanced tasting chocolate bar. Three can make it better, sometimes. But beyond that....well, let's just say that less is often better. So if you are looking to taste fine chocolate, seek out chocolate makers that focus on creating world-renown chocolate bars with 2 to 4 ingredients at most (cacao, sugar, cocoa butter and sometimes vanilla or lecithin). Then taste and research and do that over and over again.  Search 'craft chocolate' and 'fine chocolate' on the Internet and reference lists, like the bean-to-bar craft chocolate makers lists on my blog, or find some in your area, and taste.  Use brands like Michel Cluizel, Valrhona, Bonnat, Amano as starting points - then move on to others from there.