The inverted test (or anything else involve hanging or shaking) should be done above water. Other tests have proper ways too. It's not that test failures all receive death sentence

These tests are only relevant regarding craftsmanship, and say nothing at all about clay quality. Almost none of the cultural revolution teapots will pass any such test, yet they are still highly searched after for their pure clay.gingkoseto wrote:I do think these tests are very important and fast ways for examination. You don't see "oldies" (as in contrast to newbiesAdamMY wrote:Don't forget the following test ( I wonder how many broken lids it has resulted in). I swear in one book I purchased when they talked about yixing, they said a test of a good quality pot would be to fill it with water, place the lid on cover the spout, and while holding the lid invert. If you can keep the spout covered but stop holding the lid and the lid stays on your pot is incredibly well made.![]()
![]()
(Really not sure which is appropriate here, it is sort of the phases I went through after hearing about this.
) doing this all the time because experience can allow one >90% to predict the test results by examining the craftsmanship of the teapots. If a yixing can't pass the water-stop test with at least a B+ (the inverted test may depend on size and weight) and can still be considered good, then it had better be revolutionarily artistic. But chances are if a teapot can't pass this test, it's just not carefully made.
I feel like we've done this before...theredbaron wrote: As to filters, both ball and screen, i do not like them in Yixing pots at all. I only use pots with single hole spouts. I find the flow is better, and if leaves get stuck in the spout they are much easier to to get free - one little push with the pincher tool and they will be OK again.
Yeah it's true that the test has nothing to do with clay quality. But a team is as good as its weakest link. If there is an obvious flaw in alignment or leakage, then that's a flaw and that affects function.theredbaron wrote: These tests are only relevant regarding craftsmanship, and say nothing at all about clay quality. Almost none of the cultural revolution teapots will pass any such test, yet they are still highly searched after for their pure clay.
Where did you get this list of "basic" tests from?gingkoseto wrote:But I don't have enough experience to say whether most of them can't even pass basic tests. Those with high price tags may not have perfect details, but they at least seem to carry out basic functions pretty well. If a teapot can't pass the basic tests and people still want to pay a big price just for its clay (or its history), then, it's their own money and none of my business
Yet in Shanghai it's a big selling point. Listen to the crowd ooh and ahh!tingjunkie wrote:I feel like we've done this before...theredbaron wrote: As to filters, both ball and screen, i do not like them in Yixing pots at all. I only use pots with single hole spouts. I find the flow is better, and if leaves get stuck in the spout they are much easier to to get free - one little push with the pincher tool and they will be OK again.![]()
I agree with Adam and Redbaron. The upside down test proves nothing but the idea that the lid forms a vacuum with the pot body. This can be done with the most mass produced of pots simply by grinding the lid into the body with abrasive powder. Hardly a test of any sort of quality.
No, I assure you it doesn't. With many mass produced modern pots, the lids are made just slightly too big on purpose, and then are ground down with the abrasive powder to make a "perfect" lid fit. It's a neat technique and nicer than having a drippy pot with a loose lid, but it's a far cry from master craftsmanship.futurebird wrote:Well, when making the pots it's something to aim for it shows that you have perfected your lid fit-- I hope I can do it someday.
If given a choice, a perfect pot is great but I prefer the real old Yixing clay/pot with human touch craftmanship where the workmanship is often utilitarian. A little rattle on the lid and drip here and there humbled the whole process of the tea ceremony. An old imperfect genuine zisha teapot definately has the reminicense of tea culture past era, when tea was a leisurely fleeting indulgence.tingjunkie wrote:No, I assure you it doesn't. With many mass produced modern pots, the lids are made just slightly too big on purpose, and then are ground down with the abrasive powder to make a "perfect" lid fit. It's a neat technique and nicer than having a drippy pot with a loose lid, but it's a far cry from master craftsmanship.futurebird wrote:Well, when making the pots it's something to aim for it shows that you have perfected your lid fit-- I hope I can do it someday.
I suspect people are using very different standards here. When you talk about "A little rattle on the lid and drip here and there", you are talking about one level of imperfection, but others may be thinking of another level of imperfection and believing poor craftsmanship is ok and quality control tests are useless.Teaism wrote:If given a choice, a perfect pot is great but I prefer the real old Yixing clay/pot with human touch craftmanship where the workmanship is often utilitarian. A little rattle on the lid and drip here and there humbled the whole process of the tea ceremony. An old imperfect genuine zisha teapot definately has the reminicense of tea culture past era, when tea was a leisurely fleeting indulgence.tingjunkie wrote:No, I assure you it doesn't. With many mass produced modern pots, the lids are made just slightly too big on purpose, and then are ground down with the abrasive powder to make a "perfect" lid fit. It's a neat technique and nicer than having a drippy pot with a loose lid, but it's a far cry from master craftsmanship.futurebird wrote:Well, when making the pots it's something to aim for it shows that you have perfected your lid fit-- I hope I can do it someday.
The ball filter is one of my favourite too, I like the flatter ball of the early 70s pot which I appreciate the craftmen patience to try to perfect the holes of the ball. Sometimes I can just gaze into it and let my imagination run wild.![]()
Anyway, it is just a matter of personal preference.
I don't think one needs a list to test the basic function of daily utensils. Honestly I believe most of your teapots can easily pass most of the basic tests and I don't know if you are just having fun arguingtingjunkie wrote:Where did you get this list of "basic" tests from?gingkoseto wrote:But I don't have enough experience to say whether most of them can't even pass basic tests. Those with high price tags may not have perfect details, but they at least seem to carry out basic functions pretty well. If a teapot can't pass the basic tests and people still want to pay a big price just for its clay (or its history), then, it's their own money and none of my business