

@TeaTotalingTeaTotaling wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:21 pmFrom top to bottom:
1. Gong Ju Zini LQ/ER
2. Chang Ji (昌記) Zhuni LQ/ER
3. 80's Duanni
4. 60's Hui Meng Chen Hongni
![]()
Nice selection, looks like you got the essentials covered – in the premium versionTeaTotaling wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:21 pm1. Gong Ju Zini LQ/ER
2. Chang Ji (昌記) Zhuni LQ/ER
3. 80's Duanni
4. 60's Hui Meng Chen Hongni
![]()
Unless this claim is a result of tests being ran on pots from studios like Yann, Yinchen, or Wuxing Shan Fang, I don't see how this is a valid argument in this instance. To cast doubt on the pots from reputable western facing studios because other studios use additives, who probably aren't known as reputable western-facing sellers, is an ineffective argument to suggest people buy primarily pre-80's pots.
This is my main problem with the basis of your argument in support of antiques. The term "well made antique" sounds very unassuming and nonchalant, but in reality we're talking about a pot that was probably made by an extremely skilled potter.This means that this "well made antique" is probably not even attainable to the general public both because of the rarity of such items and the fact that most people can't afford to go to auction for such item. I do not think that my opinion is too far off base when speaking about common antique, and if we're talking about pots made by potters of such skill then we can really only compare to the pots from YZG made by certified artists.
Things like lid fit are unimportant to you. This is exactly why in my response I said that it was my opinion and completely subjunctive. Also, build quality is not just about lid fit; lest we forget how commonplace kiln and tool marks are in older pots, or spouts and handles that are attached very haphazardly or not aligned.None of these things speak for the quality of antiques, but that's not what I was talking about. Build quality, when defined separately from artistic nuances, is, I believe, one of the few ways that we can compare antiques, vintage, and modern pots. Even then it's often futile since they're all really in a league of their own.steanze wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 9:21 pmThings like lid fit are unimportant - a somewhat loose lid is not an issue, neither for functionality nor for aesthetics. Saying that a modern pot is better than an antique because the lid fit is better would be like saying that a digital photo I just took is much better than a Raphael because it is more realistic.
I do not think that this has anything to do with build quality. The physical and structural characteristics of something that was well-built is not determined by how an object measures up to such metaphysical questions. I am not questioning that antiques better reflect an artisan's lifelong search for beauty.
I don't see this being an issue. YZG and Yinchen both sell pots with clay processed in a hand-powered stone mills, and these pots are not much more expensive than their pots processed in a modern way. YZG has even posted videos of them using one of the aforementioned stone mills. Furthermore, I think that the idea that the western market is not willing to pay top money for teaware is simply not true. If this was the case, we would all be buying yixing from amazon or ebay, and YZG wouldn't be selling pots made by Senior Master of Arts and Crafts and Nationaly Certified Research-level Senior Master of Arts and Crafts.Bok wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:53 amMoney.
Traditional methods are more labour and time intensive, more costs that the end-consumer might care little about and is not willing to pay for. Easy to forget that the Western Yixing market is but a little tiny niche of the overall market, so for the studios probably easy to ignore, especially as this is the market which is the least willing to pay top money for teaware.
Well it depends on the definition of top money. From personal observation, for most Westerners the limit for what they are willing to spend for quality teaware is around 500$, which is far from what are considered premium teapots in Asia. Not saying below priced are not good pots, far from it, but definitely not the upper segment.alejandro2high wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:43 amI don't see this being an issue. YZG and Yinchen both sell pots with clay processed in a hand-powered stone mills, and these pots are not much more expensive than their pots processed in a modern way. YZG has even posted videos of them using one of the aforementioned stone mills. Furthermore, I think that the idea that the western market is not willing to pay top money for teaware is simply not true. If this was the case, we would all be buying yixing from amazon or ebay, and YZG wouldn't be selling pots made by Senior Master of Arts and Crafts and Nationaly Certified Research-level Senior Master of Arts and Crafts.Bok wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:53 amMoney.
Traditional methods are more labour and time intensive, more costs that the end-consumer might care little about and is not willing to pay for. Easy to forget that the Western Yixing market is but a little tiny niche of the overall market, so for the studios probably easy to ignore, especially as this is the market which is the least willing to pay top money for teaware.
Thanks! Mine is 125ml as well! I’ve seen a couple of these at a friends house, all roughly the same size. But beware this type is famous for cracking! Especially the lid as mine is.TeaTotaling wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 11:21 am
Regarding the magnetism, is this due to a higher iron content? I have heard black bones mentioned before, but I am not too familiar with the reference. Is this a desirable quality?