http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091200424.html

Hey, does it seem odd to anyone else that folks here are drinking 57
year old tea?

" > writes:

> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091200424.html
>
> Hey, does it seem odd to anyone else that folks here are drinking 57
> year old tea?

Not to me. Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

If it's a tea bag from 1949, then yes it's very odd.
If it's pu-erh, no, not odd.
I'm not quite sure if I've ever heard of a 50+ years aged oolong.
Maybe they exists...especially those high fire gong fu tea or wuyi shan
yan cha. Any idea?

> I'm not quite sure if I've ever heard of a 50+ years aged oolong.
> Maybe they exists...especially those high fire gong fu tea or wuyi shan
> yan cha. Any idea?

A couple of the usual vendors sell wulongs from the 60s, which would of
course be up to 37-46 years ol - and that's a baozhong!

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4...0tea%20040.jpg

It doesn't seem too unlikely to find some older wulongs. Let me know
if you find some.


Toodlepip,

Hobbes

9/13/06


> If it's a tea bag from 1949, then yes it's very odd.
> If it's pu-erh, no, not odd.
> I'm not quite sure if I've ever heard of a 50+ years aged oolong.
> Maybe they exists...especially those high fire gong fu tea or wuyi shan
> yan cha. Any idea?

I have drunk 50 year old Oolongs and can report that
they can exude many wonderous complex aroma and
taste elements. They produce a remarkably clear red
liquor. These old oolongs are usually, but not always,
from the WuYi mountains. Delicious! But, not as
delicious, complex, or spiritually edifying as a 50
year old Pu'erh that had been properly made from
good leaf, and properly stored. Drinking such is truly
a heavenly experience.

Michael

Tell me how much money you got to spend and I'll tell you how old the
tea is. The people who bought the tea 50+ years ago are dead. At best
it was passed person to person for whatever reason but not for
commercial investment. Who was the last person to sell commercially to
make a profit. It would have been done in the chain decades and
decades ago and consumed. You scan the Chinese webpages with a
translator and you might see the collectors comparing taste but nothing
for sale. The aged Pu'er in the West is the same as the aged Pu'er in
the Chinese markets. It doesn't exist and there is always a fool
willing to part with his money. I have a 1oz tin from Tenren of loose
pu'er from 75. I have a black CNNP Tuo I bought in 85. These are the
kind of quantities that survive just by sheer chance. I don't see the
case made for any aged pu'er prior to say pick an arbitrary year 95
that due to public awareness would be considered worth storing as an
investment. The Chinese are the masters at selling mass produced old
stuff to the West. Just watch the antique shows. The same for tea of
any kind. It is very easy to doctor the taste of tea. There are
plenty of people who market you can trust me and take your money.

Jim

wrote:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091200424.html
>
> Hey, does it seem odd to anyone else that folks here are drinking 57
> year old tea?

Jim, can you repeat that last sentence please...I didn't get it. I
have begun to agree on the general skepticism. Thanks.

....I quote me...

"There are plenty of people who market you can trust me and take your
money."

There is an argument if you are part of an inner circle you can get
authentic aged puer of whatever age you choose from someone who
credentials are really nothing more than trust me. There is some truth
that somewhere in the general pipeline of tea you have to trust
somebody. I'm not sure of what was in place before the 75 modern
factory system capable of mass production for puer. AFAIK in the old
days it was produced and pressed in Yunnan bog pits. Also AFAIK back
then what was produced was sold and not stored for a rainy day. It was
considered a 'dirty' tea by the Chinese due to the nature of the
processing before the regulated modern factory system. My argument 50
year old tea has been consumed or got tossed out with the trash. It
may exist but not on the market for sale. What you see is 50 year old
tea available for tasting but not for sale by merchants. They do have
plenty of expensive supposed 30 year old tea. He won't sell the 50
year old stuff so I'm lucky to get the 30. Nobody has ever explained
to me why their tastebuds are any more important than those who came
before who didn't taste and those in the future who won't even if you
get your hands on some.

Jim

PS I'm on the outside looking in because I don't have anything older
than 2000. I'm glad I didn't get snookered on the old stuff in the
beginning before I got my puer sea legs. It's hard to make sure you
didn't get snookered on recent stuff. That comes back to the trust
thing. If they're laughing all the way to the bank it didn't cost me
very much. Yeah I know a 1000 fools are preferable to one.

Phyll wrote:
> Jim, can you repeat that last sentence please...I didn't get it. I
> have begun to agree on the general skepticism. Thanks.

On 13 Sep 2006 13:02:18 -0700, "
> wrote:

>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091200424.html
>
>Hey, does it seem odd to anyone else that folks here are drinking 57
>year old tea?


It is not "ODD" to me at all. If I am correct I believe the tea being
referred to in that article came from
http://www.mitea.com/index.php?main_...ndex&cPath=1_8 and having
personally tasted their aged offerings I can honestly say that they
are authentic in my honest opinion. Are they "exactly" 1949 vintage,
heck I don't know but give or take 25% I would say the vintage is
accurate. They are definitely on par with other 30 year + puerhs that
I have tasted. While there are those who doubt that the aged genre
actually exists, I can honestly confirm that it does indeed exist, as
a matter of fact several of us in this newsgroup have together shared
several pots of the real McCoy! A truly awesome experience! However
you MUST know your sources as the vast majority of so-called aged
puerhs are totally bogus forgeries.

--
Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net

In article >,
Mike Petro > wrote:

>It is not "ODD" to me at all. If I am correct I believe the tea being
>referred to in that article came from
>http://www.mitea.com/index.php?main_...ndex&cPath=1_8 and having
>personally tasted their aged offerings I can honestly say that they
>are authentic in my honest opinion. Are they "exactly" 1949 vintage,
>heck I don't know but give or take 25% I would say the vintage is
>accurate.

Mike, are you saying that you are pretty sure they were manufactured
sometime between 1461 and 2436? Good thing they weren't using the Hebrew
calendar.

Best,

Rick.

(Richard Chappell) writes:

> In article >,
> Mike Petro > wrote:
>
> >It is not "ODD" to me at all. If I am correct I believe the tea being
> >referred to in that article came from
> >http://www.mitea.com/index.php?main_...ndex&cPath=1_8 and having
> >personally tasted their aged offerings I can honestly say that they
> >are authentic in my honest opinion. Are they "exactly" 1949 vintage,
> >heck I don't know but give or take 25% I would say the vintage is
> >accurate.
>
> Mike, are you saying that you are pretty sure they were manufactured
> sometime between 1461 and 2436? Good thing they weren't using the Hebrew
> calendar.

Or, more to the point, the Thai calendar:

http://www.pu-erh.net/stashfull.php?Tea=185

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

Why it can be claimed as 1949 exactly but not its manufactured name?
How many tea factories were existing by that time...Shun Ning (Feng
Qing) Tea Factory that was producing a little bit of green tea and red
tea, Xin Kang Zang (Xia Guan) Tea Factory that was producing Tuo Cha
and Jin Cha, and Fo Hai (Meng Hai) Tea Factory which had totally
stopped tea producing by that time...While I know this could be an aged
tea the timeline is just weird.

That 1949 is very compressed for a 57 year old tea and I bet that a
50's red lable won't be half compressed compares to it...there was no
iron mode with machine compressing by that time if I can remember well.
I like the 1978 compressed on the surface of the 1949 as well. This
1978 reminds me what I saw in Dali when I was travelling in Yunnan a
couple years ago...I wanted to buy an exact type of brick like this
with "production year" compressed...there was all years available and
was promoting as "get your birth year piece".

Jing

wrote:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091200424.html
>
> Hey, does it seem odd to anyone else that folks here are drinking 57
> year old tea?

Drinking aged Wulong is absolutely breathtaking experience. Last week
I went with a Taiwan pal of mine to visit one of his friend's shops
down here in the local tea market and they were able to let us try some
27 year old. Usually, I would be skeptical about someone trying to
market an age to me rather than a flavor, but actually they let me try
it first before they told me anything about it. Apparently, his
friend's family has been in the tea business for over 4 generations in
the Taizhong area actually growing their own tea on their own
plantations. Each year they keep several kilos of the good stuff for
aging and they have a decent stock of it.

So...how much do you think the offer would be for this kind of thing?
....

They don't sell it. They wouldn't even consider a really good offer by
my rich Taiwan pal; he was willing to pay in the hundreds of dollars
range for some of this stuff. You would not believe the multitude of
flavors that one can experience from such a tea.

How to describe it. Imagine swallowing liquid silk; that would be
basically the only way to describe the the texture of it. The
aftertaste was the most surprising thing. It had sorta like an aged
brandy flavor that was residual for more than an hour after we drank
it. The "hui gan" was so nice that my friend remarked that he thinks
he hadn't drank tea like that in the past...he is a little more than 50
and has been drinking tea for more than 20 years.

An excellent night.

Mydnight wrote:
> How to describe it. Imagine swallowing liquid silk; that would be
> basically the only way to describe the the texture of it. The
> aftertaste was the most surprising thing. It had sorta like an aged
> brandy flavor that was residual for more than an hour after we drank
> it. The "hui gan" was so nice that my friend remarked that he thinks
> he hadn't drank tea like that in the past...he is a little more than 50
> and has been drinking tea for more than 20 years.

Thanks for the report Mydnight. That sounds incredible. It makes me
want to go out and age some oolong in anticipation of drinking it in
2033.

Two questions:
1. Was it tightly rolled, like modern-day TGY, or twisted, like wuyi or
fenghuang?
2. Storage. Do you know if they re-roasted it every year? I
understand that some aged oolongs are kept dry this way. I'd like to
know more about how to store oolongs this way. It would also be
interesting if any of the chemists out there had any theories as to
what happens to an oolong when it ages.

Right now I have some 2004 yangqing hao going that is very nice,
although not as nice as some young pu'ers I've had, and certainly
nothing like drinking liquid silk.

Something purposefull has to be done to change the taste. Just sitting
around 20 or 30 years won't change the taste if stored with anykind of
care. I look at some of my old teas as a snapshot in time of the way
things were back then. I do think teas today in general don't taste the
same as back then. The commercial teas have lost something in the
process. I do have a liitle bit of a 30 year old sowmee that doesn't
look like or taste like something more recent. But sowmee taste itself
varies. I have Darjeeling in clay pots from the mid eighties that
taste better than anything I bought recently. But Darjeeling taste
itself varies. I think with old teas you do travel back in time but
the taste won't change. I think with puer it is the same. There is
the process of clearing the air or allowing it to breath but the taste
won't change but I could be wrong and won't be around long enough to
find out and was told why my 20 year old shu tuocha and 30 year old
loose shu didn't taste really different because they stopped aging at 5
years 'back then'. What will be the excuses in the future. IMHO if it
taste like liquid silk today it tasted like liquid silk back then. I
just have too much 25 year old stuff from 1980 when I started buying
more than I could drink to think otherwise.

Jim

Alex wrote:
> Mydnight wrote:
> > How to describe it. Imagine swallowing liquid silk; that would be
> > basically the only way to describe the the texture of it. The
> > aftertaste was the most surprising thing. It had sorta like an aged
> > brandy flavor that was residual for more than an hour after we drank
> > it. The "hui gan" was so nice that my friend remarked that he thinks
> > he hadn't drank tea like that in the past...he is a little more than 50
> > and has been drinking tea for more than 20 years.
>
> Thanks for the report Mydnight. That sounds incredible. It makes me
> want to go out and age some oolong in anticipation of drinking it in
> 2033.
>
> Two questions:
> 1. Was it tightly rolled, like modern-day TGY, or twisted, like wuyi or
> fenghuang?
> 2. Storage. Do you know if they re-roasted it every year? I
> understand that some aged oolongs are kept dry this way. I'd like to
> know more about how to store oolongs this way. It would also be
> interesting if any of the chemists out there had any theories as to
> what happens to an oolong when it ages.
>
> Right now I have some 2004 yangqing hao going that is very nice,
> although not as nice as some young pu'ers I've had, and certainly
> nothing like drinking liquid silk.

Space Cowboy wrote:
> Something purposefull has to be done to change the taste. Just sitting
> around 20 or 30 years won't change the taste if stored with anykind of
> care.
.... I whack but I'm not a butcher ... (best line ever, credited to you)

I fully agree with your comments. I may bring fire and brimstone down,
but I don't really buy into the aging theory. With a highly compressed
mass of tea, i just don't see how any more than the very top layer
would be affected. I have a feeling that the really good Puer's of
yesteryear were just as good then as they are now. Not this, "yeah it
tastes like arse now.. but give it 10-15 years and it will be amazing
stuff." Maybe slight variations but not this wholesale metamorphasis.
That being said, I have had many different types of tea (green, black,
oolong) that have been stored with normal care that I enjoy more a year
or two later. I think it is actually a dulling of some of the flavors
due to age and loss of some oils, but it actually helps to some
extent... however this is loose tea to begin with and any more than 2-3
years would most likely not change it any more for the better.

This aging business is something fairly new in the grand scheme of tea
and I'm just not sure if I buy the whole hog. Yearly re-fired tea,
sure, I can see a difference being made and it is loose so it is being
evenly altered... but to sit in a chest/cupboard/etc. for 30+ yrs. and
magicaly turn from a caterpillar into a butterfly is a bit out of my
beliefs. Also, let me say I'd be more than happy to hear the theories
and/or be put in my place... I'm a big boy, I can take it

- Dominic
Drinking: Puerh mini-tuo from Nicholas coffee (they knew nothing about
them or origin, but they are good and different than any other mini-tuo
I've had)

"Alex" > writes:

> [...]
> Right now I have some 2004 yangqing hao going that is very nice,
> although not as nice as some young pu'ers I've had, and certainly
> nothing like drinking liquid silk.

Maybe the problem is that you romanized its name correctly:

http://www.houdeasianart.com/index.p...288ee9a8b26 5

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html
recent addition: er mei

"Dominic T." > writes:

> Space Cowboy wrote:
> > Something purposefull has to be done to change the taste. Just sitting
> > around 20 or 30 years won't change the taste if stored with anykind of
> > care.
> ... I whack but I'm not a butcher ... (best line ever, credited to you)
>
> I fully agree with your comments. I may bring fire and brimstone
> down, but I don't really buy into the aging theory. With a highly
> compressed mass of tea, i just don't see how any more than the very
> top layer would be affected. I have a feeling that the really good
> Puer's of yesteryear were just as good then as they are now. Not
> this, "yeah it tastes like arse now.. but give it 10-15 years and it
> will be amazing stuff." Maybe slight variations but not this
> wholesale metamorphasis.

Well, it's your feeling against the testimony of lots of people, some
of whom I know personally and regard as both knowledgeable and
honest. I recommend Mike Petro's site as a place to start (and not
just to start):

http://www.pu-erh.net/

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

Lewis Perin wrote:
> Well, it's your feeling against the testimony of lots of people, some
> of whom I know personally and regard as both knowledgeable and
> honest. I recommend Mike Petro's site as a place to start (and not
> just to start):
>
> http://www.pu-erh.net/

I've read through his entire site and have referred back to it on
occasion, and I don't doubt their knowledge or honesty... just the
facts. With it being highly compressed I can;t see how more than say
the outter 1/4" or so around could possibly be affected.

Also, since I tend to follow more old traditional schools of thought
when it comes to tea... it takes me back to the caravan routes. So this
aging and fermentation and subjectivity to a range of environments is
most likely less than a year of aging before consumption, and then
maybe stretched out over a year of drinking... so 2 years tops. I could
see buying a few though to store since who knows how long the next
supply would come around and possibly 2-4 years max. But the extreme
aging of 20+ years is what I question. Obviously it is very difficult
to say what if any effect it has since no one here was there to try
that 30 year old Puer when it was fresh to compare to the aged version.
Mike may have had this opportunity from something of the 80's vintage,
and I'd like to actually see or hear about something like that. I've
got a two sets of two kinds of identical tuo's that I plan on doing my
own "experiment" on, but that will be some time coming.

I'm not claiming to be right, just giving MHO on the matter... not even
worth 2 cents

- Dominic

Obviously no one is going to change your mind on this, but for what
it's worth I have in my very modest collection green or sheng pu'ers
ranging from zero to about twenty years of age, and the effect of aging
is blatantly obvious even from such a small sample. It is a simple
thing for even someone with very little experience to tell the
difference between a young pu'er, a five-year-old pu'er, and a
ten-year-old pu'er. If you look at this post,
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN/527461730/item.html, you'll see pictures
of leaf and brewed tea from something that was allegedly 10 years old.
Below the picture, the author asks if the tea looks 10 years old or
not. My first reaction, upon seeing the picture, was "Of course not."
I expect that the other pu'er fans here on RFDT would have the same
reaction. Point being: a rank amateur can pick out the effect of aging
so easily that one glance at a picture of the brewed tea is enough to
tell the age, within a five-year range. The taste is also completely
different, and older is generally much smoother and tastes better. So
all I can say is this: if you think aging doesn't matter, go to Hou De,
Jing, or any other reputable dealer from Petro's website, order some
samples that cover a range of years (raw only!), and drink them. Any
experience at all with such teas will teach you that aging makes a
profound difference.

As to what causes the changes, as I understand it it's some kind of
bacterial fermentation, like yoghurt, that happens very, very slowly.
The cakes are compressed but there is certainly enough space between
leaves for air and microbes to mill around.

Aged oolongs are great too, but harder to find.

Dominic T. wrote:
> Lewis Perin wrote:
> > Well, it's your feeling against the testimony of lots of people, some
> > of whom I know personally and regard as both knowledgeable and
> > honest. I recommend Mike Petro's site as a place to start (and not
> > just to start):
> >
> > http://www.pu-erh.net/
>
> I've read through his entire site and have referred back to it on
> occasion, and I don't doubt their knowledge or honesty... just the
> facts. With it being highly compressed I can;t see how more than say
> the outter 1/4" or so around could possibly be affected.
>
> Also, since I tend to follow more old traditional schools of thought
> when it comes to tea... it takes me back to the caravan routes. So this
> aging and fermentation and subjectivity to a range of environments is
> most likely less than a year of aging before consumption, and then
> maybe stretched out over a year of drinking... so 2 years tops. I could
> see buying a few though to store since who knows how long the next
> supply would come around and possibly 2-4 years max. But the extreme
> aging of 20+ years is what I question. Obviously it is very difficult
> to say what if any effect it has since no one here was there to try
> that 30 year old Puer when it was fresh to compare to the aged version.
> Mike may have had this opportunity from something of the 80's vintage,
> and I'd like to actually see or hear about something like that. I've
> got a two sets of two kinds of identical tuo's that I plan on doing my
> own "experiment" on, but that will be some time coming.
>
> I'm not claiming to be right, just giving MHO on the matter... not even
> worth 2 cents
>
> - Dominic

Dominic T. wrote:
> I fully agree with your comments. I may bring fire and brimstone down,
> but I don't really buy into the aging theory. With a highly compressed
> mass of tea, i just don't see how any more than the very top layer
> would be affected.

Bacteria and fungi don't have to follow the rules.

--Blair

On 27 Sep 2006 08:49:23 -0700, "Dominic T." >
wrote:

>I fully agree with your comments. I may bring fire and brimstone down,
>but I don't really buy into the aging theory. With a highly compressed
>mass of tea, i just don't see how any more than the very top layer
>would be affected. I have a feeling that the really good Puer's of
>yesteryear were just as good then as they are now. Not this, "yeah it
>tastes like arse now.. but give it 10-15 years and it will be amazing
>stuff." Maybe slight variations but not this wholesale metamorphasis.
>That being said, I have had many different types of tea (green, black,
>oolong) that have been stored with normal care that I enjoy more a year
>or two later. I think it is actually a dulling of some of the flavors
>due to age and loss of some oils, but it actually helps to some
>extent... however this is loose tea to begin with and any more than 2-3
>years would most likely not change it any more for the better.

Hey Dominic,

I am not scientific enough to debate the chemistry of what occurs, I
suspect it is mostly oxidation and humidity, theoretically with
microbial activity but I have never found definitive proof of that.
The cakes are easily porous enough for o2 to penetrate them over a
period of years so oxidation is very real. In any event, I can assure
you that I, and many other even slightly seasoned puerhites, can taste
the difference between decades easily. Rather than intellectualizing
it (no negative tone intended) I encourage you to obtain sample from
one of the better vendors and try it for yourself. A 30 year + puerh
can be an awesome thing, however choose wisely as aged crap is still
crap, and forgeries of very inferior quality abound.

--
Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net

Mike Petro wrote:
> On 27 Sep 2006 08:49:23 -0700, "Dominic T." >
> wrote:
>
> >I fully agree with your comments. I may bring fire and brimstone down,
> >but I don't really buy into the aging theory. With a highly compressed
> >mass of tea, i just don't see how any more than the very top layer
> >would be affected. I have a feeling that the really good Puer's of
> >yesteryear were just as good then as they are now. Not this, "yeah it
> >tastes like arse now.. but give it 10-15 years and it will be amazing
> >stuff." Maybe slight variations but not this wholesale metamorphasis.
> >That being said, I have had many different types of tea (green, black,
> >oolong) that have been stored with normal care that I enjoy more a year
> >or two later. I think it is actually a dulling of some of the flavors
> >due to age and loss of some oils, but it actually helps to some
> >extent... however this is loose tea to begin with and any more than 2-3
> >years would most likely not change it any more for the better.
>
> Hey Dominic,
>
> I am not scientific enough to debate the chemistry of what occurs, I
> suspect it is mostly oxidation and humidity, theoretically with
> microbial activity but I have never found definitive proof of that.
> The cakes are easily porous enough for o2 to penetrate them over a
> period of years so oxidation is very real. In any event, I can assure
> you that I, and many other even slightly seasoned puerhites, can taste
> the difference between decades easily. Rather than intellectualizing
> it (no negative tone intended) I encourage you to obtain sample from
> one of the better vendors and try it for yourself. A 30 year + puerh
> can be an awesome thing, however choose wisely as aged crap is still
> crap, and forgeries of very inferior quality abound.
>
> --
> Mike Petro
> http://www.pu-erh.net

Thanks for the reply... and I understand it, and I have tasted a few
different vintages with the aged being "better" in some cases, but I
still question whether that excellent aged Puerh would have been just
as excellent when new... or at least very similar after 4 years as 30
years. Just as crap + 30 years = crap, I'd imagine heavenly + 30 (or 4)
= heavenly.

I guess that is my main point of contention, but I do still wonder if
the taste varies by depth into the bing/brick/etc. Also bing's and tuo
I can see easier, but bricks and highly compressed stuff still is
questionable to me. Dunno, I'm no expert or devote nor claim to be...
but I have found a few puerh's I enjoy a bit.

- Dominic

Alex wrote:
> Obviously no one is going to change your mind on this, but for what
> it's worth I have in my very modest collection green or sheng pu'ers
> ranging from zero to about twenty years of age, and the effect of aging
> is blatantly obvious even from such a small sample. It is a simple
> thing for even someone with very little experience to tell the
> difference between a young pu'er, a five-year-old pu'er, and a
> ten-year-old pu'er. If you look at this post,
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN/527461730/item.html, you'll see pictures
> of leaf and brewed tea from something that was allegedly 10 years old.

I'm more than happy to change my mind... really I am. No foolin'. I
replied a bit further down to Mike Petro's response, if you care to
check it out to see where I'm at with this whole aging business. I
tried to clarify a bit better what I was saying.

- Dominic

I have a good assortment of green and cooked puers made in the past
five years. They all look and taste different but location, grade, and
recipe determine the difference. It is hard to keep everything in puer
a constant to say aging takes place even over the long haul.

Jim

Alex wrote:
> Obviously no one is going to change your mind on this, but for what
> it's worth I have in my very modest collection green or sheng pu'ers
> ranging from zero to about twenty years of age, and the effect of aging
> is blatantly obvious even from such a small sample. It is a simple
> thing for even someone with very little experience to tell the
> difference between a young pu'er, a five-year-old pu'er, and a
> ten-year-old pu'er.

I always think it interesting when someone brings up the benign
bacteria argument. Surface bacteria is the most destructive force in
nature. I throw a beeng in my compost pile and it decays at the same
rate as the other organics. The only reason we're not eaten alive by
surface bacteria is because of our dead cell no nutrient epidermis.
I'm trying to think but the only good bacteria for us exists in our gut
and the byproduct excreted as a stool.

Jim

Blair P. Houghton wrote:
> Dominic T. wrote:
> > I fully agree with your comments. I may bring fire and brimstone down,
> > but I don't really buy into the aging theory. With a highly compressed
> > mass of tea, i just don't see how any more than the very top layer
> > would be affected.
>
> Bacteria and fungi don't have to follow the rules.
>
> --Blair

Mike Petro wrote:
> On 13 Sep 2006 13:02:18 -0700, "
> > wrote:
>
> >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...091200424.html
> >
> >Hey, does it seem odd to anyone else that folks here are drinking 57
> >year old tea?
>
>
> It is not "ODD" to me at all. If I am correct I believe the tea being
> referred to in that article came from
> http://www.mitea.com/index.php?main_...ndex&cPath=1_8 and having
> personally tasted their aged offerings I can honestly say that they
> are authentic in my honest opinion. Are they "exactly" 1949 vintage,
> heck I don't know but give or take 25% I would say the vintage is
> accurate. They are definitely on par with other 30 year + puerhs that
> I have tasted. While there are those who doubt that the aged genre
> actually exists, I can honestly confirm that it does indeed exist, as
> a matter of fact several of us in this newsgroup have together shared
> several pots of the real McCoy! A truly awesome experience! However
> you MUST know your sources as the vast majority of so-called aged
> puerhs are totally bogus forgeries.
>
> --
> Mike Petro
> http://www.pu-erh.net

Mike -- a few things worth considering about Mitea which makes me
rather suspicious of them.

1) 1949 was when the Communists won, in a brutal civil war that
engulfed the country. Somehow, dating anything to 1949 is pretty
suspect. Cave-aged just adds to that. And the fact that their picture
looks like a generic pic of some aged-looking puerh, and not a shot of
the actual thing. Sure, it might be aged and old, but claiming it with
such precision smacks of false advertising.

2) The 1982 brick is in fact not made in 1982 at all (even though it
says 1982 on the front). As far as I know, it's a cooked cake that is
still being made now. In fact, I think I saw one just the other day
selling for about 50 RMB in Maliandao. They had stacks of them.

3) The 1989 cake is again a bit suspect. First of all, the cake isn't
even shown with the front, so I can't tell what it might look like on
the front. Second, nobody was specifying in those days that a cake
came from wild tree. The whole wild tree business didn't really get
started until the mid to late 90s, so them claiming this is wild tree
is, well, suspect. The cake does look raw though, and is actually
darker than I'd expect from a 1989, so I don't know if it's gone
through wet storage. Seeing the front might help, it might not.

4) The small tuo is DEFINITELY cooked, which throws the other teas into
question. Again, not having nice, clear pictures or any concrete
description of the other stuff makes me really worried.

I'm not questioning your judgement, but I do wonder about their
honesty. Then again, they might very well just be duped by some
mainlander as well.

Thanks for the free advertising of my blog, I suppose.

Although I'd appreciate it if you noted that I also had doubts about
the 10 year old claim.

At the same time, I have had 10+ year old teas that DO look that way,
at least in terms of the colour of the liquor, so it's not entirely
impossible. Nothing is absolute in puerh. Colour alone is not a good
judge of the tea. It needs to be combined with the way the dry, wet
leaves look, and also how it goes down.

As for aging -- yes, it has a marked difference to the tea. I've been
drinking teas for.... 7 years now? I've had some teas three or four
years ago that now taste very very different. They do change, and in
remarkable fashion.

In the old days they don't drink it right away after they get it, and
also, when they transport it on horseback, it's not the same as storing
in a dry, nice living room. It's on horseback, exposed to some
elements, and generally soaking in a lot of moisture (think horse
sweat) and things like that. It's sort of a mix between dry and wet
storage.

As for the tea in question, somehow it sounds like some offering from
mitea, but I think it's bogus. Nobody can date those teas to that
precision, especially since it's 1949, when China was raging in civil
war. Somebody's been duped.

MarshalN

Alex wrote:
> Obviously no one is going to change your mind on this, but for what
> it's worth I have in my very modest collection green or sheng pu'ers
> ranging from zero to about twenty years of age, and the effect of aging
> is blatantly obvious even from such a small sample. It is a simple
> thing for even someone with very little experience to tell the
> difference between a young pu'er, a five-year-old pu'er, and a
> ten-year-old pu'er. If you look at this post,
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN/527461730/item.html, you'll see pictures
> of leaf and brewed tea from something that was allegedly 10 years old.
> Below the picture, the author asks if the tea looks 10 years old or
> not. My first reaction, upon seeing the picture, was "Of course not."
> I expect that the other pu'er fans here on RFDT would have the same
> reaction. Point being: a rank amateur can pick out the effect of aging
> so easily that one glance at a picture of the brewed tea is enough to
> tell the age, within a five-year range. The taste is also completely
> different, and older is generally much smoother and tastes better. So
> all I can say is this: if you think aging doesn't matter, go to Hou De,
> Jing, or any other reputable dealer from Petro's website, order some
> samples that cover a range of years (raw only!), and drink them. Any
> experience at all with such teas will teach you that aging makes a
> profound difference.
>
> As to what causes the changes, as I understand it it's some kind of
> bacterial fermentation, like yoghurt, that happens very, very slowly.
> The cakes are compressed but there is certainly enough space between
> leaves for air and microbes to mill around.
>
> Aged oolongs are great too, but harder to find.
>
> Dominic T. wrote:
> > Lewis Perin wrote:
> > > Well, it's your feeling against the testimony of lots of people, some
> > > of whom I know personally and regard as both knowledgeable and
> > > honest. I recommend Mike Petro's site as a place to start (and not
> > > just to start):
> > >
> > > http://www.pu-erh.net/
> >
> > I've read through his entire site and have referred back to it on
> > occasion, and I don't doubt their knowledge or honesty... just the
> > facts. With it being highly compressed I can;t see how more than say
> > the outter 1/4" or so around could possibly be affected.
> >
> > Also, since I tend to follow more old traditional schools of thought
> > when it comes to tea... it takes me back to the caravan routes. So this
> > aging and fermentation and subjectivity to a range of environments is
> > most likely less than a year of aging before consumption, and then
> > maybe stretched out over a year of drinking... so 2 years tops. I could
> > see buying a few though to store since who knows how long the next
> > supply would come around and possibly 2-4 years max. But the extreme
> > aging of 20+ years is what I question. Obviously it is very difficult
> > to say what if any effect it has since no one here was there to try
> > that 30 year old Puer when it was fresh to compare to the aged version.
> > Mike may have had this opportunity from something of the 80's vintage,
> > and I'd like to actually see or hear about something like that. I've
> > got a two sets of two kinds of identical tuo's that I plan on doing my
> > own "experiment" on, but that will be some time coming.
> >
> > I'm not claiming to be right, just giving MHO on the matter... not even
> > worth 2 cents
> >
> > - Dominic

So you are saying that a ten-year-old pu'er tasted the way it does now
on the day it was made? Please clarify.

Space Cowboy wrote:
> I have a good assortment of green and cooked puers made in the past
> five years. They all look and taste different but location, grade, and
> recipe determine the difference. It is hard to keep everything in puer
> a constant to say aging takes place even over the long haul.
>
> Jim
>
> Alex wrote:
> > Obviously no one is going to change your mind on this, but for what
> > it's worth I have in my very modest collection green or sheng pu'ers
> > ranging from zero to about twenty years of age, and the effect of aging
> > is blatantly obvious even from such a small sample. It is a simple
> > thing for even someone with very little experience to tell the
> > difference between a young pu'er, a five-year-old pu'er, and a
> > ten-year-old pu'er.

Somebody help me. I understand all Shu is produced from the wodui
process. I surmise Sheng is nothing more than compressed QingMao with
no wodui or at best limited fandui. I came across the fandui term on a
Chinese site which means turning the pile. The process called shicang
is an after factory dangerous 'aging' technique for Sheng to enrich THE
*******S to quote Cartman.

Jim

PS Speaking of aging I just tried a YunWu which had been sitting on my
shelf for nearly three years which is one of my first purchases from my
local tea shoppe. I didn't care for it back then. I woke up this
morning KNOWING it would taste better. It aged overnight in my sleep.

MarshalN wrote:
....if it looks like a duck, it ain't aged puer...
> The cake does look raw though, and is actually
> darker than I'd expect from a 1989, so I don't know if it's gone
> through wet storage.

Space Cowboy wrote:
> > Bacteria and fungi don't have to follow the rules.
>
> I always think it interesting when someone brings up the benign
> bacteria argument. Surface bacteria is the most destructive force in
> nature. I throw a beeng in my compost pile and it decays at the same
> rate as the other organics. The only reason we're not eaten alive by
> surface bacteria is because of our dead cell no nutrient epidermis.
> I'm trying to think but the only good bacteria for us exists in our gut
> and the byproduct excreted as a stool.

Bacteria do a lot of stuff that you don't have to worry about, as long
as they're not doing it to you.

--Blair

"Space Cowboy" > writes:

> Somebody help me. I understand all Shu is produced from the wodui
> process.

That's my understanding. (wodui = moisten pile)

> I surmise Sheng is nothing more than compressed QingMao with
> no wodui or at best limited fandui.

That doesn't sound right to me. How can you have fandui (turn over
the pile) without a pile?

> I came across the fandui term on a Chinese site which means turning
> the pile. The process called shicang is an after factory dangerous
> 'aging' technique for Sheng to enrich THE *******S to quote Cartman.

I think most experts would agree with this. But I can't help
wondering - forgive me, purists - if the border between shicang and
its opposite gancang might be fuzzy. You run across reputable sources
touting sheng Pu'er stored a few years in humid Guangdong (as opposed,
especially, to relatively dry Yunnan) on the basis of it tasting more
aged than you would expect from its actual vintage.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html
recent entry: Cha Ma Si

>> It is not "ODD" to me at all. If I am correct I believe the tea being
>> referred to in that article came from
>> http://www.mitea.com/index.php?main_...ndex&cPath=1_8 and having
>> personally tasted their aged offerings I can honestly say that they
>> are authentic in my honest opinion. Are they "exactly" 1949 vintage,
>> heck I don't know but give or take 25% I would say the vintage is
>> accurate. They are definitely on par with other 30 year + puerhs that
>> I have tasted.


>Mike -- a few things worth considering about Mitea which makes me
>rather suspicious of them.

Hi MarshalN,

I don't dispute any of way you say, it all has merit. I totally agree
the "specifics" of what they claim are questionable. However I have
tasted their 1949 puerh and one of their 80s puerhs and, as those
before me have said, "the tea doesn't lie". The allegedly 56 year old
puerh is indeed on par with other authentic thirty year plus puerhs I
have tasted.

Unfortunately, I don't have a sophisticated enough palate to tell the
difference once we get beyond 30 years. That why I added +/- 25%
disclaimer, it is definitely well aged, and not wet storage, but
whether it is 30 years or 50 years I couldn't say. It is difficult,
actually impossible, for me to tell a 30 year cake from a 50 year cake
based on 20g sample. Actually I probably couldn't tell the difference
based on taste alone unless I compared the 2 side by side. Especially
since efforts are often taken to halt, or dramatically slow, the aging
process after a tea reaches 30 years or so.

There are so many "stories" being told about different puerhs,
especially antique ones, that I tend to not pay any attention to them
anymore, after all "the tea doesn't lie" but many (probably most)
vendors do! It seems like most vendors add 10 or 20 years to the
legitimate age of a cake, particularly when the wrapper is not clearly
identifiable, but even those are often forged. So yes, MIT probably
embellished the truth, or those who sold them the tea did, but the tea
I tasted was easily in the same class as other reputable 60s and 70s
puerhs I have tasted, for example those that came from Sunsing or
Teahub. Unfortunately I have not tasted enough of the old stuff to get
any more granular than that.

--
Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net

Mike Petro wrote:

> Hi MarshalN,
>
> I don't dispute any of way you say, it all has merit. I totally agree
> the "specifics" of what they claim are questionable. However I have
> tasted their 1949 puerh and one of their 80s puerhs and, as those
> before me have said, "the tea doesn't lie". The allegedly 56 year old
> puerh is indeed on par with other authentic thirty year plus puerhs I
> have tasted.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have a sophisticated enough palate to tell the
> difference once we get beyond 30 years. That why I added +/- 25%
> disclaimer, it is definitely well aged, and not wet storage, but
> whether it is 30 years or 50 years I couldn't say. It is difficult,
> actually impossible, for me to tell a 30 year cake from a 50 year cake
> based on 20g sample. Actually I probably couldn't tell the difference
> based on taste alone unless I compared the 2 side by side. Especially
> since efforts are often taken to halt, or dramatically slow, the aging
> process after a tea reaches 30 years or so.
>
> There are so many "stories" being told about different puerhs,
> especially antique ones, that I tend to not pay any attention to them
> anymore, after all "the tea doesn't lie" but many (probably most)
> vendors do! It seems like most vendors add 10 or 20 years to the
> legitimate age of a cake, particularly when the wrapper is not clearly
> identifiable, but even those are often forged. So yes, MIT probably
> embellished the truth, or those who sold them the tea did, but the tea
> I tasted was easily in the same class as other reputable 60s and 70s
> puerhs I have tasted, for example those that came from Sunsing or
> Teahub. Unfortunately I have not tasted enough of the old stuff to get
> any more granular than that.
>
> --
> Mike Petro
> http://www.pu-erh.net

Well Mike... the problem is the price for that thing though.

At that price, I can find myself 357g of 20+ year old puerh....

Do you have tasting notes/pictures from that sample? i am curious as
to what it might actually be.

> PS Speaking of aging I just tried a YunWu which had been sitting on my
> shelf for nearly three years which is one of my first purchases from my
> local tea shoppe. I didn't care for it back then. I woke up this
> morning KNOWING it would taste better. It aged overnight in my sleep.

Jim, could you please describe a little bit what
it tasted like three years ago, how it changed,
and what it tastes like now? Thanks. That
would be interesting.
Michael

>From my understanding of the Chinese language sites on the subject
Sheng does not go through the wòdui process (AKA 'artificial'
accelerated fermentation) ergo no pile. Sheng is the process of
'natural' gancang or dry storage using QingMao to
start/promote/establish fermentation under strict factory controlled
scientific conditions. In the first case fermentation takes place over
the short haul in the factory, in the second over the long haul as
shelf life, supposedly. Strictly speaking neither factory method
existed before 1975 which dates the modern shu and sheng puer product.

Jim

PS I see more parallel between tobacco processing than wine or cheese
usng fermenatation to first change and second preserve taste.
Unfortunately the tobacco companies used other accelerants which turned
out to be addictive and lied.

Lewis Perin wrote:
> "Space Cowboy" > writes:
>
> > Somebody help me. I understand all Shu is produced from the wodui
> > process.
>
> That's my understanding. (wodui = moisten pile)
>
> > I surmise Sheng is nothing more than compressed QingMao with
> > no wodui or at best limited fandui.
>
> That doesn't sound right to me. How can you have fandui (turn over
> the pile) without a pile?
>
> > I came across the fandui term on a Chinese site which means turning
> > the pile. The process called shicang is an after factory dangerous
> > 'aging' technique for Sheng to enrich THE *******S to quote Cartman.
>
> I think most experts would agree with this. But I can't help
> wondering - forgive me, purists - if the border between shicang and
> its opposite gancang might be fuzzy. You run across reputable sources
> touting sheng Pu'er stored a few years in humid Guangdong (as opposed,
> especially, to relatively dry Yunnan) on the basis of it tasting more
> aged than you would expect from its actual vintage.
>
> /Lew
> ---
> Lew Perin /
> http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html
> recent entry: Cha Ma Si

You sly devil. I can't say teas fundamentally don't change their taste
over a long period of time and claim one that did over a short period.
I got me pride. In this case I simply woke up and liked the taste
versus what I remember a couple of years ago. Back then I thought it
tasted bitter now the flavor gets through. Some would say aging via
time made a difference. I would say I can't be sure. Certainly my
taste buds aren't the same. I now like teas for simply the variety of
taste and not some arbitrary taste ranking based on my idiosyncractic
personality quirks. I always thought YunWu should taste better but
then one day I started to like Wuyi Rock tea and the first eventually
fell like a domino. I've been revisiting my 10,20,30 year old tins and
realize nostalgia is more important than taste.

Jim

Michael Plant wrote:
> > PS Speaking of aging I just tried a YunWu which had been sitting on my
> > shelf for nearly three years which is one of my first purchases from my
> > local tea shoppe. I didn't care for it back then. I woke up this
> > morning KNOWING it would taste better. It aged overnight in my sleep.
>
> Jim, could you please describe a little bit what
> it tasted like three years ago, how it changed,
> and what it tastes like now? Thanks. That
> would be interesting.
> Michael

"Space Cowboy" > writes:

> From my understanding of the Chinese language sites on the subject
> Sheng does not go through the wòdui process (AKA 'artificial'
> accelerated fermentation) ergo no pile. Sheng is the process of
> 'natural' gancang or dry storage using QingMao to
> start/promote/establish fermentation under strict factory controlled
> scientific conditions.

I don't think you need a factory for gancang; you can do it in the
privacy of your own home.

> In the first case fermentation takes place over the short haul in
> the factory, in the second over the long haul as shelf life,
> supposedly. Strictly speaking neither factory method existed before
> 1975 which dates the modern shu and sheng puer product.

Well, apparently shu Pu'er didn't exist before then, though similar
methods were being used for heicha outside Yunnan. But sheng
certainly existed before '75, though maybe the word wasn't needed
because there was no contrast to draw with shu?

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

You need a factory to start or establish the modern Sheng 'natural'
gancang fermentation, you need a shelf in your home to finish it,
supposedly. The old description I see of pre modern factory puer
processing is fermenting in pits similar too composting. I'm not sure
what it would have been called. Probably closer in taste to sheng
because shu uses modern fermentation bacteria. Tea compression is
independent of puer.

Jim

PS In general you dehumidify shu, you humidify sheng.

Lewis Perin wrote:
> "Space Cowboy" > writes:
>
> > From my understanding of the Chinese language sites on the subject
> > Sheng does not go through the wòdui process (AKA 'artificial'
> > accelerated fermentation) ergo no pile. Sheng is the process of
> > 'natural' gancang or dry storage using QingMao to
> > start/promote/establish fermentation under strict factory controlled
> > scientific conditions.
>
> I don't think you need a factory for gancang; you can do it in the
> privacy of your own home.
>
> > In the first case fermentation takes place over the short haul in
> > the factory, in the second over the long haul as shelf life,
> > supposedly. Strictly speaking neither factory method existed before
> > 1975 which dates the modern shu and sheng puer product.
>
> Well, apparently shu Pu'er didn't exist before then, though similar
> methods were being used for heicha outside Yunnan. But sheng
> certainly existed before '75, though maybe the word wasn't needed
> because there was no contrast to draw with shu?
>
> /Lew
> ---
> Lew Perin /
> http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

MarshalN wrote:

> Well Mike... the problem is the price for that thing though.
> At that price, I can find myself 357g of 20+ year old puerh....

I agree, I never said I would pay that for it, nor did I recommend it
to others, if you refer to my original post you will see that all I was
saying was that it was not "odd" to be drinking tea that was more or
less that age. Expensive yes, but not odd, I can find similar vintages
from several sources. I was mainly responding to those who were
questioning the sheer existance of an "aged genre", I was not endorsing
this particular vintage, I was pretty clear on that when I said "Are
they "exactly" 1949 vintage, heck I don't know but give or take 25% I
would say the vintage is accurate". In other words it was at least 30+
but beyond that who knows - not me.....

> Do you have tasting notes/pictures from that sample? i am curious as
> to what it might actually be.

Pictures no, it was only a ~20g piece and I shared parts of it with
friends. Tasting notes maybe, I would have to dig through my archives
at home. However it is possible, even probable, that I simply drank it
without taking notes, I often drink tea just for the sheer enjoyment of
it. There is nothing like drinking a good aged puerh (or other fine
tea) and enjoying the sights and sounds in the woods behind my house,
it's almost spiritual!

Mike
http://www.pu-erh.net