Tasting tea structurally

User avatar
Tillerman
Vendor
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:58 pm
Location: Napa, CA
Contact:

Sun May 31, 2020 10:09 pm

This month the Ultracrepidarian tackles tasting teas structurally. https://tillermantea.net/2020/06/structural/
Ethan Kurland
Vendor
Posts: 1026
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:01 am
Location: Boston
Contact:

Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:09 am

Thanks for another concise, well-written blog that is informative & interesting.
    What you write about balance leads me to think about how I am able to enjoy a tea that has a flavor that I don't like usually (it has "green" or "vegetal" flavor which to me is usually unpleasant bitterness). I had not thought that this tea is also sweet & that balance makes the bitter not bitter & the sweet not sweet as individual flavors. I have thought that somehow the greenness of the particular oolong just happens to be without bitterness. Looking at notes about teas from years ago, I see that I sometimes said "well-balanced" but haven't thought along those lines for quite some time.

    Thanks for stimulating the brain & bringing some order & clarity.

    ,
    John_B
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:42 am
    Location: Bangkok
    Contact:

    Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:17 am

    The only huge gap in that post was not mentioning Tea in the Ancient World.

    Just kidding; the content seemed to work. I cover essentially the same themes in lost of posts, just framed slightly differently. Even the framing and wording used isn't all that different.

    The underlying theme that it should be possible to evaluate tea quality completely separate from personal preference or knowledge / exposure to the types is interesting.

    It might not have been filled in by that post as much as it could have been, about how some tea types really emphasize certain ranges of aspects a lot more than others, and that's their appeal, the focus on a range within the broader whole. It doesn't completely work to say a tea should have good balance, and then assume that's something that different people would see or judge in the same way. I don't think the post was guilty of assuming anything, or especially anything wrong, but this needs to be developed to add more meaning to what was expressed.

    Examples might help. Oolongs can emphasize a thick feel that other tea types tend not to express in the same way. Sheng pu'er can have a thick structure (feel) that's just as pronounced but different, different in young / not aged and aged versions. Flavorful Chinese black teas emphasize flavor but not that range, to the same degree. It's not really "out of balance" for that one aspect to be so pronounced in some teas, or for it to be lacking in some other types; different tea types stress different aspects. It also doesn't really work to link feel to a tea being from a high elevation source, as a singular factor, although to some extent that does work as a generality (as you covered in a different post). Character type linked to tree age and natural growing conditions also works, but it's not simple to move from background conditions to clearly defined end results.

    There's no systematizing all this, right? It would work almost as well to keep it all very vague, and say that you appreciate balance in a tea, and then not expect a formula of aspects to fit together. Aftertaste experience (which I think you called length, or something such) could all but drop out, and for many that wouldn't impact quality or overall experience much. But then for someone mostly on that page the tea wouldn't be of quality or value.

    Some Vietnamese tea friends have been discussing tea and they appreciate mouthfeel first, then aftertaste experience, with flavor very much of secondary interest. Some of that might be cultural; feel aspects are especially valued in parts of the Chinese and Taiwanese traditions. I don't see it as better or wrong to flip that around, and value taste equally or more. I suppose natural patterns in what people tend to appreciate most do come up, and a sort of cycle through changes in that. To give credit where credit is due the author or Tea Addict's Journal has written some interesting thoughts on that. He does expect one particular pattern to apply, a move from taste preference, to mouthfeel and aftertaste range, then onto body experience, the cha qi theme.
    User avatar
    Tillerman
    Vendor
    Posts: 446
    Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:58 pm
    Location: Napa, CA
    Contact:

    Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:02 am

    Hi @John_B, thanks for your comments.

    There is no necessary order to the five elements that I mentioned; that is just the order which I use in evaluating the teas I drink. I do think it is a good sequential order but it needn't be cast in stone.

    As to your suggestions on the age of the bushes/trees, I am unconvinced that this makes a great deal of difference to quality other than in the mind of the beholder. I do stand to be corrected there of course. That said, certainly there are more factors at play than just pectin levels. The comment is a generality that, I believe holds true other factors being held constant.

    And, I shall become a more faithful reader of Tea in the Ancient World!

    Cheers,

    D.
    John_B
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:42 am
    Location: Bangkok
    Contact:

    Tue Jun 02, 2020 3:51 am

    To be fair my writing is too lengthy and too poorly organized to be read regularly. A little here and there could be informative.

    The age of plant issue is interesting related to sheng. I'm probably not the right person to fill in details, and anything I say about it might be partly or mostly wrong. But as an American it's my God-given right to have a strong opinion about things I know very little about, so let's go there.

    The standard story is that Assamica plant types live a lot longer and produce better tea over a long time than variety Sinensis types. A Wuyishan friend said that those oolong plants are only productive on something around the order of a century (and of course I've lost track of the more detailed version of that). The tea plants can live a long time, variety Sinensis types, and how long and how productive over what time frame would surely vary by a lot of factors, so this part is really mostly just food for thought.

    In drinking "gushu" sheng pu'er, claimed to be from sources of 100 year old plants or older, some generalities about tea character seem to occur. But then those aren't a complete or direct mapping to teas produced from older "wild" sourced plants, so it seems that a few factors overlap and combine but are hard to sort out. It seems like plant age, growing conditions, mono-culture versus natural growth, and the specific mix of other plant types growing around them changes a lot. And of course conventional factors, what the plant type is (genetics), growing conditions, short term climate, and so on. Tea presented as "wild" in origin is often a bit more approachable (less bitter and astringent), and more flavorful, for example. Of course I'm probably mixing area inputs together with that, since I would've tried a lot more versions with that claim from a limited set of areas (from SE Asia, in my case).

    It seems like teas claimed to be gushu express more of a base mineral flavor. Something about old plant source input is said to tie with aging potential, although that's not usually expressed as a clear aspects list or cause and effect mapping. Beyond that other changes that tend to occur might only relate to processing differences that also map onto different quality level source material, and tea versions sold as better tea. They often tend to have a decent amount of astringency structure, but then bitterness and mouthfeel aspects also vary a lot related to source area, which may combine plant type and local climate inputs.

    It would be interesting to hear more about this issue from those guys in the one FB pu'er group. It takes a lot of filtering and interpretation to place input from them, and a tolerance for indirect self-promotion, but with all that their input is often interesting and helpful.
    Noonie
    Posts: 360
    Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:30 pm
    Location: Ontario, Canada

    Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:33 am

    @Tillerman

    What a great article! Thanks for writing it and sharing here.

    What hooked me was: "I’m not particularly proficient at discerning all of the descriptors that aficionados use to describe their taste experience. Save for the most obvious ones that, on occasion, I can recognize, I am not one who generally finds aromas of stone fruits or notes of pomegranate lingering in my cup." Me too :D

    I used to watch YouTube videos reviewing tea and was always turned off by the reviewers going into great depth to describe how a particular tea tastes like something else they've had, or an aroma from something that has little or nothing to do with tea (e.g., this tastes, smells or reminds me of candied pears!). I don't find such comparisons to be a sign of someone who knows tea very well (not saying they do or don't, but just because you can pick out these aromas or tastes in a tea doesn't make you an expert at discerning what is good tea, which is somewhat personal in any case).

    A tea shop here in Canada that I sometimes purchase from has a basic flavour guide (wheel) that I quite like as it's usually landed me with tea that I believe fits the profile rather well...it has Vegetal, Floral, Fruity, Woody, Earthy and Spice, and show up to three levels (in addition to 'nothing'). This makes a lot of sense to me.
    User avatar
    Baisao
    Posts: 1397
    Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 5:17 pm
    Location: ATX

    Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:37 am

    Good stuff as usual. And this had me chucking!
    Attachments
    66515329-3D62-4EF9-9F56-098A063E6F85.jpeg
    66515329-3D62-4EF9-9F56-098A063E6F85.jpeg (40.54 KiB) Viewed 5054 times
    User avatar
    Balthazar
    Posts: 706
    Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:04 am
    Location: Oslo, Norway

    Sun Jun 07, 2020 4:41 am

    An interesting blog post!

    "Although it is impossible to eliminate all subjectivity from the tasting effort, focusing on structure is the most objective way I know of to evaluate tea. Using structural criteria, one should be able to determine whether a tea is 'fine' or 'poor' even if one does not like the tea being evaluated."

    From a vendor's perspective this makes a lot of sense, and I think most of us have had teas (or even entire categories of tea) that do not appeal to our personal preferences but that we still recognize as having many qualities. Still, I am not totally convinced about the checklist approach, and in particular the balance component.

    "A good tea is balanced" - I'd rather say that a balanced tea is good, but good teas aren't always balanced. I've had very memorable teas that were pretty unidimensional in their profile, usually with an intense, unique and multi-layered variety of a single flavor group (e.g. citrus). I can also think of teas where the bitterness is rather overpowering, yet in a very pleasant way. I have a hard time articulating these experiences in English but it rather resembles my preference for whiskies, where my favorites were usually bold and with a clear direction rather than being "well-rounded".

    (Also, for teas such as young puer, you'd usually want to avoid something that is balanced from the get-go as they rarely develop into anything very interesting, although to be fair I assume your components refer to qualities a tea should show when it's actually ready to be brewed and consumed.)

    One thing that seems to be missing is the "bodyfeel" aspect. So not only mouthfeel, but the broader energy sensations the tea spreads (or not) through the body (and the intensity/jitteriness of these). This is by far the most difficult aspect to measure, and it's of course very subjective, but it's come to be what I personally emphasize above most other factors when I decide on what to brew. It's also the main reason why I mostly stay away from matcha, shincha (before it's proper rested, i.e. become sencha) and young puer. MarshalN wrote an interesting blog post about "drinking with the body" some years ago.
    Ethan Kurland
    Vendor
    Posts: 1026
    Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:01 am
    Location: Boston
    Contact:

    Mon Jun 08, 2020 8:37 am

    Balthazar wrote:
    Sun Jun 07, 2020 4:41 am

    1. "Although it is impossible to eliminate all subjectivity from the tasting effort, focusing on structure is the most objective way I know of to evaluate tea. Using structural criteria, one should be able to determine whether a tea is 'fine' or 'poor' even if one does not like the tea being evaluated."

    This quote reminds me of a documentary that showed a government board deciding which artists would be paid to work at it & which not qualify for government support. The committee had criteria (somewhat objective ways to judge) but ultimately the criteria was of little use. Almost every applicant met the requirements of the rules. The decisions were essentially subjective & incomprehensible because all of the "art" was nothing that anyone wanted to buy or even see for free in a gallery. Work of the artists lucky enough to be paid to produce it, ended up in warehouses storing it for a time when possibly it might be taken for display in museums. No one who was judging liked any it, nor did anyone filming the documentary: &, I felt it was awful..

    How tea tastes to us, I argue, is the most important thing we have to say about it. Other things we say are helpful & interesting but hardly as important.

    2. "A good tea is balanced" - I'd rather say that a balanced tea is good, but good teas aren't always balanced. I've had very memorable teas that were pretty unidimensional in their profile, usually with an intense, unique and multi-layered variety of a single flavor group (e.g. citrus). I can also think of teas where the bitterness is rather overpowering, yet in a very pleasant way....".
    +1 but complexity seems more & more important to me as I drink more & more tea.

    3. Mouthfeel may not be discussed so much because it may not be a deciding factor on what one purchases. For me teas that give bodyfeel, do not do it consistently. I don't know for others, but if that is how it is, perhaps it is a reason for it being written about less than other effects.
    User avatar
    Baisao
    Posts: 1397
    Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 5:17 pm
    Location: ATX

    Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:41 am

    Body feel is consistent for me per tea, and each tea is unique. For example, while I may expect every hong shui to have a gently relaxing feeling, each hong shui will have a unique complex of sensations. I don't know why and I don't know why some people don't feel tea this way, but I can guess.

    In regards to "...not one who generally finds aromas of stone fruits or notes of pomegranate lingering in my cup", this is foreign to me. I suppose this may relate to the acuity of an individual's senses, cup shape, sense training, techniques. I may brew a tea one way and not get gardenia aromas yet brew it slightly differently and get handfuls of gardenias. Scent training was very important in my childhood as I could smell further than I could see in the jungle-like woods I hunted weekly: deer, snakes, plants, waterways, other people, and scents used for navigation were essential. Unique aromas and how they interact and change are one of my favorite aspects of tea drinking. However, my acuity is not as fine as I age.
    User avatar
    pantry
    Posts: 389
    Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:34 am
    Location: US East Coast

    Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:46 am

    Same for me regarding body feel. There are teas with flavors I enjoy but from which I have to stay away due to certain aspects of body feel. It also differs from tea to tea, but is always consistent on the same tea with a varying degree of intensity. I sometimes can generalize the expected body feel based on terroirs. I agree it's very subjective, however.


    As for the description of aromas: my problem remains that I don't know my flowers very well, and generally not a stone fruits connoisseur though I enjoy them immensely. My childhood could not be more different from @Baisao, with heavy spices and vehicle toxic fumes guiding my scent training :lol:
    faj
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:45 am
    Location: Quebec

    Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:50 pm

    Baisao wrote:
    Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:41 am
    In regards to "...not one who generally finds aromas of stone fruits or notes of pomegranate lingering in my cup", this is foreign to me.
    I think the question is not whether or not tea offers varied aromas : it does, though different people may experience them differently for a variety of reasons. I think the discussion is about how we describe these aromas. How one describes sensory experiences is personal and subjective. There is no "right" or "wrong" way to approach that. My point is not to pretend otherwise.

    That being said, there is a tendency for people who develop an appreciation for things like tea and wine to describe their tasting experience by referring mostly to things other than tea or wine. Maybe this is only a reflection of the inadequate vocabulary we have to describe those sensations. Maybe, however, there is also a tendency to try a bit too hard to find similarities as a way to conform to implicit norms about how these experiences are supposed to be described.

    I like strawberries. The quality of strawberries varies very, very much, from the hard and dry, water-tasting bricks we get from the USA to the beautifully tender, ripe, juicy, sweet and aromatically intense beauties we will be getting soon from local fields for a precious few weeks only. I get an intense satisfaction from eating supremely good strawberries. I have never felt a need to say "this strawberry is great, it reminds me of fresh water lilies". I have never met someone else who did, either. Strangely, food or drink that is not "sophisticated" enough tends to be appreciated for what it is without the need to refer to other things, while the "good stuff" needs constant references to other things.

    It is undeniable that there are genuine similarities one can identify, sometimes they are striking, and it is OK to notice them and write about them, but to me appreciating tea is not really about tasting similarities. Gyokuro can remind me of raspberries, but the level to which I appreciate gyokuro is not associated with my ability to slice my tasting experience so that I can mentally isolate that aroma, just as my ability to appreciate a music performance is not about being able to hear it as individual notes.
    Ethan Kurland
    Vendor
    Posts: 1026
    Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:01 am
    Location: Boston
    Contact:

    Mon Jun 08, 2020 4:20 pm

    faj wrote:
    Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:50 pm
    .... Gyokuro can remind me of raspberries, but the level to which I appreciate gyokuro is not associated with my ability to slice my tasting experience so that I can mentally isolate that aroma, just as my ability to appreciate a music performance is not about being able to hear it as individual notes.
    Thank you, faj. Such a great way to explain how you enjoy & experience drinking tea. I feel the same way almost all of the time but never expressed it nearly so well.

    I drank tea with 2 members of Teachat quite a few years ago. They definitely decided that they would not drink with me again after our session. They enjoyed listing every flavor, note, hint, etc.; moreover, the goal of their preparation was to test the teas rather than to enjoy them. Indeed what I desired from preparation, the best-tasting brew possible, was so contrary to their desire, that I thoroughly annoyed my newly made & newly lost tea-friends. I learned a bit from that time & often try to be calmer when I feel very good leaves are being "put to the test" rather than being put to their best use.
    User avatar
    Baisao
    Posts: 1397
    Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 5:17 pm
    Location: ATX

    Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:14 pm

    I was an absentheur in the 90s and would noodle on the aromas of illicitly made absinthes trying to determine what aromatics had been used in each batch of absinthe I tried. I did a similar thing with gins. It was my passion and the passion of others in a similar online group of friendly enthusiasts. It was hardly a snooty thing at all!

    But then I stopped drinking alcohol and though I did not miss alcohol, I did miss noodling around for aromatics.

    And then I found tea, a beverage that has a diverse range of aromatics for me to noodle on.

    I enjoy noodling on aromatics but I also enjoy drinking tea according to my feelings and tastes.

    Nevertheless, those aromatics very much matter. In a few moments I'll choose a tea with citrus notes over one with seared scallop notes, because it is hot and I want citrus not something savory.
    faj
    Posts: 710
    Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:45 am
    Location: Quebec

    Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:31 pm

    Baisao wrote:
    Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:14 pm
    Nevertheless, those aromatics very much matter. In a few moments I'll choose a tea with citrus notes over one with seared scallop notes, because it is hot and I want citrus not something savory.
    I tend to be an analytical guy, so I am not trying to say analysis is bad. It can be great fun, and understanding teas better can allow making better choices, as you mention. Aromatics matter very much to me too, and I really did not mean that they are unimportant, quite the contrary.

    What I mean is I can appreciate very much aromas I am unable to describe well, just as I can have little appreciation for a tea which I can associate with clear aromatic similarities with other otherwise pleasant things (i.e. jasmine smells good, but jasmine tea is not at the top of my list). My (limited) ability to analyze a tea has little to do with how much I like it in the end, so tea descriptions where a large number of (unrelated) aromatic references are given tend to be of limited use to me.
    Post Reply