Mydnight > writes:

> >If you're doing something wrong, it's an error I repeatedly committed
> >a couple of years ago as I worked my way through a quarter pound of
> >those titanic leaves. But there seem to be (at least) two different
> >kinds of kuding cha. I recently got a sample from China, courtesy of
> >a friend, of something called Qing Shan Lu Shui, which looks nothing
> >like the giant-leaf stuff and has a certain sweetness to its
> >herbaceous, non-camellia-sinensis taste. This stuff is apparently
> >considered kuding, but whether it's closely related botanically I have
> >no idea.
>
> Ya, I started a post on this before about if kuding cha was a class
> and a specific type of tea. Kuding basically means bitter. The stuff
> that is sold domestically (US and hereabouts) apparently is the holly
> leaf stuff while in China the Kuding cha either is the large leaf
> variety that's rolled tight or the qing shan lv shui (blue/green
> mountain green water is translation). The property of the tea that
> brings people back to it is the bitter/sweet quality that's to be
> expected after drinking it.
>
> Use a clear glass and pour your boiling water on top of it. It's
> really a show tea and much can be appreciated by it's appearance.
>
> I found out from someone that it's considered a slight subclass of
> green tea as well as a type of tea. I had never heard of the holly
> variant that is mentioned in this post before coming to this NG.

So you're sure it's c. sinensis? To me it really doesn't taste like
real tea. (But really, the range of tastes you get from real tea is
so vast that maybe I shouldn't say that.)

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