Is it true that a batch of tea leaves can be reused (re-steeped) at
least once?

I use a Chatsford teapot. I put the loose leaves in, add boiling
water, set the timer, then pour it through a strainer into a cup or
thermos.

To make a second steep, can I just dump the leaves back into the pot
and go again? I just tried that with a batch of Earl Grey. The second
steep was slightly weaker than the first, but still fairly good.

Is the second steep the same time as the first? Perhaps I should have
steeped it a bit longer the second time.

Is the second steep likely to be bitter? This one wasn't. It was
actually a bit milder on both the taste scale as well as the
bitterness scale. Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes
the tea to be bitter. How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but
one 6-minute steep is?

--
For email, use usenet-20060507[at]spamex[dot]com

If you use a Chatsford, why don't you use the basket? Then you could
just lift the leaves out.

Some teas will stand a second steep, some won't. In general, oolongs
and greens and pu ers will give you a nice second steep, but black teas
won't. Of course, you may like the way your Earl Grey comes out on a
second steep where other people wouldn't. But then you come up against
the one abolute rule about making tea: If you like the results, you're
doing it right.

dmh

LurfysMa wrote:
> Is it true that a batch of tea leaves can be reused (re-steeped) at
> least once?
>
> I use a Chatsford teapot. I put the loose leaves in, add boiling
> water, set the timer, then pour it through a strainer into a cup or
> thermos.
>
> To make a second steep, can I just dump the leaves back into the pot
> and go again? I just tried that with a batch of Earl Grey. The second
> steep was slightly weaker than the first, but still fairly good.
>
> Is the second steep the same time as the first? Perhaps I should have
> steeped it a bit longer the second time.
>
> Is the second steep likely to be bitter? This one wasn't. It was
> actually a bit milder on both the taste scale as well as the
> bitterness scale. Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes
> the tea to be bitter. How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but
> one 6-minute steep is?
>

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:13:00 -0500, "David M. Harris"
> wrote:

>If you use a Chatsford, why don't you use the basket? Then you could
>just lift the leaves out.

I used to use the basket, but the leaves seemed all bunched up. Now
they seem free to float around better. I have a great little strainer
and it is actually a little easier than using the basket.

>Some teas will stand a second steep, some won't. In general, oolongs
>and greens and pu ers will give you a nice second steep, but black teas
>won't. Of course, you may like the way your Earl Grey comes out on a
>second steep where other people wouldn't. But then you come up against
>the one abolute rule about making tea: If you like the results, you're
>doing it right.
>
>dmh
>
>LurfysMa wrote:
>> Is it true that a batch of tea leaves can be reused (re-steeped) at
>> least once?
>>
>> I use a Chatsford teapot. I put the loose leaves in, add boiling
>> water, set the timer, then pour it through a strainer into a cup or
>> thermos.
>>
>> To make a second steep, can I just dump the leaves back into the pot
>> and go again? I just tried that with a batch of Earl Grey. The second
>> steep was slightly weaker than the first, but still fairly good.
>>
>> Is the second steep the same time as the first? Perhaps I should have
>> steeped it a bit longer the second time.
>>
>> Is the second steep likely to be bitter? This one wasn't. It was
>> actually a bit milder on both the taste scale as well as the
>> bitterness scale. Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes
>> the tea to be bitter. How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but
>> one 6-minute steep is?
>>


--
For email, use usenet-20060507[at]spamex[dot]com

it's true leaves can circulate better without the strainer, but I defy
anyone to be able to tell the difference in a cup of tea from one that had
the strainer to one that didn't by taste alone. I think the concept of
"cramping" the tea is a little overwrought.

On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 05:32:00 GMT, "Barky Bark"
> wrote:

>it's true leaves can circulate better without the strainer, but I defy
>anyone to be able to tell the difference in a cup of tea from one that had
>the strainer to one that didn't by taste alone.

OK, but where do you draw the line? I also doubt that most people
could tell the difference from a cup of tea brewed with a tea bag vs
the basket give the same amount of the exact same tea.

>I think the concept of
>"cramping" the tea is a little overwrought.

My main point was that I find the strainer easier to use than the
basket.

So, is it OK with you if I continue to use the strainer even if I
can't tell the difference in the taste? Or even if I just think that
the leaves are less cramped? ;-)


--
For email, use usenet-20060507[at]spamex[dot]com

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 17:28:17 -0700, LurfysMa wrote:

> Is it true that a batch of tea leaves can be reused (re-steeped) at least
> once?
>
> I use a Chatsford teapot. I put the loose leaves in, add boiling water,
> set the timer, then pour it through a strainer into a cup or thermos.
>
> To make a second steep, can I just dump the leaves back into the pot and
> go again? I just tried that with a batch of Earl Grey. The second steep
> was slightly weaker than the first, but still fairly good.
>
> Is the second steep the same time as the first? Perhaps I should have
> steeped it a bit longer the second time.
>
> Is the second steep likely to be bitter? This one wasn't. It was actually
> a bit milder on both the taste scale as well as the bitterness scale.
> Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes the tea to be bitter.
> How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but one 6-minute steep is?

Steep once in the volume of one cup for 3 minutes, or once in the volume
of two cups for 6 minutes.
JB

On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 08:07:50 +0100, danube > wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 17:28:17 -0700, LurfysMa wrote:
>
>> Is it true that a batch of tea leaves can be reused (re-steeped) at least
>> once?
>>
>> I use a Chatsford teapot. I put the loose leaves in, add boiling water,
>> set the timer, then pour it through a strainer into a cup or thermos.
>>
>> To make a second steep, can I just dump the leaves back into the pot and
>> go again? I just tried that with a batch of Earl Grey. The second steep
>> was slightly weaker than the first, but still fairly good.
>>
>> Is the second steep the same time as the first? Perhaps I should have
>> steeped it a bit longer the second time.
>>
>> Is the second steep likely to be bitter? This one wasn't. It was actually
>> a bit milder on both the taste scale as well as the bitterness scale.
>> Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes the tea to be bitter.
>> How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but one 6-minute steep is?
>
>Steep once in the volume of one cup for 3 minutes, or once in the volume
>of two cups for 6 minutes.
>JB

Doh. Some scientist I am. Two separate 3-minute steeps is not
comparable to one 6-minute steep because the volume of the water is
also doubled.

Now I have to go run some tests:

Tea Water Time Result
1 tsp 1 cup 3 min My regular brew
1 tsp 1 cup 6 min Bitter?
1 tsp 2 cups 3 min Weak?
1 tsp 2 cups 6 min ???

--
For email, use usenet-20060507[at]spamex[dot]com

In a nutshell the six minute brew reaches a state of solution. The two
three minute brews are partial solutions which are not additive based
on time.

Jim

LurfysMa wrote:
....
> Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes
> the tea to be bitter. How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but
> one 6-minute steep is?

On 6 Jun 2006 06:22:14 -0700, "Space Cowboy" >
wrote:

>LurfysMa wrote:
>...
>> Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes
>> the tea to be bitter. How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but
>> one 6-minute steep is?

>In a nutshell the six minute brew reaches a state of solution. The two
>three minute brews are partial solutions which are not additive based
>on time.

You're making that up, right, Mr. Science?

--
For email, use usenet-20060507[at]spamex[dot]com

LurfysMa > writes:

> Is it true that a batch of tea leaves can be reused (re-steeped) at
> least once?

With most teas, yes. With some, believe it or not, you might get ten
or even more good steeps.

> [...]
>
> Is the second steep the same time as the first? Perhaps I should have
> steeped it a bit longer the second time.

This varies a lot. There are some teas, like sencha, where you should
probably pour off the second steep instantly.

> Is the second steep likely to be bitter? This one wasn't. It was
> actually a bit milder on both the taste scale as well as the
> bitterness scale. Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes
> the tea to be bitter.

Sorry to be wishy-washy once again, but teas vary a lot; some just
don't have any bitterness in them.

> How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but one 6-minute steep
> is?

This is very interesting, now that you mention it. I've noticed this
often myself. Dog Ma, are you there?

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

Lewis Perin wrote:
> This is very interesting, now that you mention it. I've noticed this
> often myself. Dog Ma, are you there?

No. Not until my Zen teacher gets back, anyway.

So much to say, so few actual facts, so much mythology unshakably
installed in uninquiring minds... Here are two propositions that may be
useful (or not):

1. Reciprocity. In an arithmetically linear system, twice the (x) for
half the (y) gives the same (z). Twice the wattage added to a fixed mass
of water for half the time gives the same rise in temperature. And it
doesn't matter how fast, or in what order, or what kind.

The only problem is that nothing in real life is linear. Not only is
arithmetic commutativity rare, but there is often a strong history
dependence. For one small example, that second steep is generally made
on a pot and contents at higher temperature than the first. And
extraction of some components probably rises rapidly with temperature,
while others may actually decline. (Yes, inverse temperature coefficient
of solubility really happens. It usually results from entropy-driven
changes in structure and/or hydration.) It is most improbable that one
long steep at any chosen temperature will produce the same results as
even a mix of sequential steeps, much less any one of them individually.

My attitude is that if one enjoys the blend effect, then go for it. Many
of us prefer to attend and appreciate the sequence of (often dramatic)
changes that occur through four to twenty steeps of tea that was made
for this. (I.e., almost anything but dust/fannings and CTC reds that are
bruised to put the juice within easy reach.) It means more involvement,
which can be soothing ritual, amusing experimentation or a big
inconvenience. No judgment; just choice. When I want a jolt, it's red
tea and milk, one long and very hot steep every time. For enjoying the
tea, much lower temperatures and rarely fewer than 8~10 small steeps.

2. Flavor masking, balancing and other non-scaling experiential factors.
If life is non-linear generally, sensory systems are much more so. Lots
of things saturate or change significantly in perceived qualities at
high concentrations. Hydrogen sulfide is famously dangerous because,
already much more toxic than cyanide, it numbs the nose below the danger
threshold. Durian, conversely, is pretty vile even to most of us
aficionados. But at nasal saturation, it's not much worse than at lower
levels, and the wonderful flavor takes over.

Not having seen (or sought) any scientific publications on the subject,
I wouldn't know for sure. But my personal experience is consistently
that many notes in tea reach saturation quickly, while others scale
monotonically. So where short, repeated steeps of some oolongs and green
Pu-erhs come out sweet, fragrant and smooth, slightly longer ones are
bitter, tannic, harsh. One might infer that the "nice" notes saturate
while the "nasty" ones just keep building. Good argument for gong-fu
brewing.

There is a great deal more one could say about both of these points. But
who cares, other than for idle curiosity or sententious argument? Why
not just find your preferred way to make tea, and enjoy it? The main
value of such understanding, even to those who have (which is far fewer
than pretend to it, or have been told they have it by others who also
don't) is probably to point experimentation in directions most likely to
be personally fruitful.

And speaking of myth, just to raise the stakes: a cake of my best Pu-erh
to anyone who can provide some convincing science to support the
oft-cited "fact" that oxygen in water is critical to making good tea.

-DM

DogMa wrote:
> a cake of my best Pu-erh
> to anyone who can provide some convincing science to support the
> oft-cited "fact" that oxygen in water is critical to making good tea.

me first!

ahem,

water = H2O

no O = no water (?--> hydrogen tea infusion... O_O ?)

please, ship the pu-erh insured thx.

SN wrote:
>>a cake of my best Pu-erh
>>to anyone who can provide some convincing science to support the
>>oft-cited "fact" that oxygen in water is critical to making good tea.
>
> me first!
> ahem,
> water = H2O
> no O = no water (?--> hydrogen tea infusion... O_O ?)

In general, non-aqueous solvent extractions of plant materials will
produce a very different product. However, there are two small but
significant categories of materials that often do what water can, and
sometimes even better: the so-called "super-solvents" that are both
highly polar and aprotic, and close homologues to water. The former
include hexamethylphosphoramide, dimethylformamide and
dimethylsulfoxide; the latter ammonia, hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen
sulfide. The former all contain oxygen.

Please let me know when you have confirmed that NH3, HF and H2S do not
make good tea, and the cake is yours. Come to think of it, better
include hydrazine. (Or you can just buy one from Eric at Pu-erhtea.com;
it's under $50, unlabeled but about 14 years old, and absolutely
delicious. Thanks to Mike P. for letting me know about it.)

-DM

DogMa > wrote:

> In general, non-aqueous solvent extractions of plant materials will
> produce a very different product.

Hello, Dogma, thanks for the education. I look forward to seeing
a demonstration of tea brewed with dimethyl sulfoxide or hydrogen
fluoride. But for the latter, what pot? A teflon gaiwan?

I restrict my tea-related solvents to water. Given that admittedly
harsh limitation, what can be done? For one thing, water's ionic
properties can be altered with dissolved solids, right? Remember
that Lu" Yu, in his _Classic of Tea_, condemns those who add spices,
butter, and onions to tea as barbarians but demands that we add salt.
No hint of how much though. Because it is added during "the first
stage of boiling", and water drawn from the kettle during the second
stage, it will raise the temperature of the brew. I'll let Dogma do
the calculation of how much - my Handbook of Chemistry and Physics is
gone.

Best,

Rick.

On 7 Jun 2006 01:41:07 -0700, "SN" > wrote:

>
>DogMa wrote:
>> a cake of my best Pu-erh
>> to anyone who can provide some convincing science to support the
>> oft-cited "fact" that oxygen in water is critical to making good tea.
>
>me first!
>
>ahem,
>
>water = H2O
>
>no O = no water (?--> hydrogen tea infusion... O_O ?)

You are disqualified.

The oxygen he is referring to is dissolved oxygen, not the oxygen that
is part of the water molecule. If you remove the O from H2O, you no
longer have water, it's just H2 (and you better not be smoking). If
you remove the dissolved oxygen (according to some) you get a flat
tasteless water.

But then maybe you knew that are were just playing.

--
For email, use usenet-20060507[at]spamex[dot]com

LurfysMa,
technically, his contract stated as per [2] did not specify the oxygen
as being oxygen _dissolved_ in water, but as "oxygen in water", ...
well i guess my argument wont stand up in court since the contract is
ambiguous in expression... :P (unless the judge doesnt know the
difference)

but now, i'll go try some microwaved water tea, to see if it tastes any
different... maybe a blind test...

LurfysMa wrote:

[1]
> The oxygen he is referring to is dissolved oxygen, not the oxygen that
> is part of the water molecule.

[2]
> >DogMa wrote:
> >> a cake of my best Pu-erh
> >> to anyone who can provide some convincing science to support the
> >> oft-cited "fact" that oxygen in water is critical to making good tea.
> >

LurfysMa, This area is too vast for one post, but this board has
several great suggestions and it really comes down to the type and
quality of tea (and your own taste vs. others). Good quality Chinese/
Tawainese are meant to be re-steeped, and the best taste often does
not come from the fist steep.

A
http://blog.ateava.com/



LurfysMa wrote:
> Is it true that a batch of tea leaves can be reused (re-steeped) at
> least once?
>
> I use a Chatsford teapot. I put the loose leaves in, add boiling
> water, set the timer, then pour it through a strainer into a cup or
> thermos.
>
> To make a second steep, can I just dump the leaves back into the pot
> and go again? I just tried that with a batch of Earl Grey. The second
> steep was slightly weaker than the first, but still fairly good.
>
> Is the second steep the same time as the first? Perhaps I should have
> steeped it a bit longer the second time.
>
> Is the second steep likely to be bitter? This one wasn't. It was
> actually a bit milder on both the taste scale as well as the
> bitterness scale. Everyone keep saying that steeping too long causes
> the tea to be bitter. How come two 3-minutes steeps are not bitter but
> one 6-minute steep is?
>
> --
> For email, use usenet-20060507[at]spamex[dot]com