Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

One of the intentionally aged teas, Pu-Erh has a loyal following.


User avatar
Jul 4th, '13, 06:45
Posts: 720
Joined: Jan 5th, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by Teaism » Jul 4th, '13, 06:45

The first Dayi Tea brick was produced in 1994 (7582recipe) and then 1996 and both are shou not sheng. There are quite a number of batch in 2004 (Rose Dayi, 7562, Purple Dayi, 1kg, 2kg Dayi) some of it which is similar to the wrapper to your picture except that they are all shou tea. Your tea is sheng, and the only one recorded in 2004 as sheng is green font(9742 recipe). The paper is your picture is consistent to 2004 not 94 or 96 batch but the tea type doesn't match however.
So where do we go from here ....frankly I don't know. I once disguised as a merchant in the tea wholesale market in Fangchun in Guangzhou and was asked about the tea I want, at what price, what year and what wrapper. Some of them can custom make to match all the requirements! :shock:

User avatar
Jul 4th, '13, 11:39
Posts: 683
Joined: Mar 10th, '11
Location: on top of a mountain.

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by gasninja » Jul 4th, '13, 11:39

It does not look Ike the right paper for the wrapper this brick the wrapper had a lined look to it. That is not noticeable on your wrapper. The paper looks wrong for the images I have of the early 00 bricks as well. But that doesn't necisarilles mean its not it. I doubt it's early 90s though.

User avatar
Jul 4th, '13, 12:22
Posts: 720
Joined: Jan 5th, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by Teaism » Jul 4th, '13, 12:22

gasninja wrote:It does not look Ike the right paper for the wrapper this brick the wrapper had a lined look to it. That is not noticeable on your wrapper


+1 good observation gasninja

Those 90s one has line on it. The paper is also known as mahjong paper.

User avatar
Jul 4th, '13, 13:47
Vendor Member
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sep 24th, '08
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by gingkoseto » Jul 4th, '13, 13:47

deadlysight wrote:If this tea brick is not from Menghai / Dayi, then where does it come from. It's quality is quite good, complete leaves show up after the steep, and certainly look very aged. What are the intention of faking a good tea.

That is why I posted this topic, I found this tea brick kinda wild.


Ho ho... believe it, there is big intention of faking. Nowadays, many people buy tea based on label, and not based on the tea itself. A good tea has a good price, but a good tea with a good label could have 10x or higher price.

I don't think there are many good ways to judge the authenticity of pre-2005 teas, unless the tea is an obvious fake. Generally speaking, I think the most reliable way to tell if an old tea is authentic is based one who is the person you bought from. But even on that, there are exceptions.

User avatar
Jul 4th, '13, 18:54
Posts: 625
Joined: Apr 11th, '09
Location: UK

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by apache » Jul 4th, '13, 18:54

Just for reference, here one I got, been told it is 2002, but I cannot verify the year, but what ever the year, it's very likely legit from MTF.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Jul 4th, '13, 19:06
Posts: 33
Joined: Jul 2nd, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by deadlysight » Jul 4th, '13, 19:06

The back of my 90's wrapper looks similar to yours, but the paper material is different. I took those pictures a long time ago, and at that time the wrapper was already decomposing :-)

I also had the 2003 year brick, and the wrapper looked exactly like yours.

User avatar
Jul 4th, '13, 21:06
Posts: 720
Joined: Jan 5th, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by Teaism » Jul 4th, '13, 21:06

apache wrote:Just for reference, here one I got, been told it is 2002, but I cannot verify the year, but what ever the year, it's very likely legit from MTF.


This is a 1994 piece,base on 7582 recipe, the first batch of Dayi Tea Brick. The wrapper and tea leaves are consistent to that batch.

Jul 4th, '13, 23:08
Posts: 407
Joined: Feb 17th, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by mr mopu » Jul 4th, '13, 23:08

I have the same one as Apache. Just pulled the wrapper away but no nei fei visible. I wonder if they "submarined" it. As far as I can tell the wrapper was taken off by me tonight for the first time. The wrapper has 2002 stamped on it under the fold of the brick where they sealed it together.

User avatar
Jul 5th, '13, 00:00
Vendor Member
Posts: 4562
Joined: Apr 1st, '09
Location: Bangkok

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by Tead Off » Jul 5th, '13, 00:00

mr mopu wrote:I have the same one as Apache. Just pulled the wrapper away but no nei fei visible. I wonder if they "submarined" it. As far as I can tell the wrapper was taken off by me tonight for the first time. The wrapper has 2002 stamped on it under the fold of the brick where they sealed it together.

What does the 04-94 refer to that is printed on the back of the wrapper?

Jul 5th, '13, 00:11
Posts: 407
Joined: Feb 17th, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by mr mopu » Jul 5th, '13, 00:11

I am not sure. I am at a loss to explain that one. It was one I got a good deal on but the two different stamps are very confusing. Since it says Hc on it I would assume it is a health compliance code stamping.

User avatar
Jul 5th, '13, 04:35
Vendor Member
Posts: 4562
Joined: Apr 1st, '09
Location: Bangkok

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by Tead Off » Jul 5th, '13, 04:35

mr mopu wrote:I am not sure. I am at a loss to explain that one. It was one I got a good deal on but the two different stamps are very confusing. Since it says Hc on it I would assume it is a health compliance code stamping.

Often the dating is a separate stamp and not printed on the wrapper.

Jul 5th, '13, 08:07
Posts: 407
Joined: Feb 17th, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by mr mopu » Jul 5th, '13, 08:07

Agreed the stamp for 2002 is on there and in a different color ink.

User avatar
Jul 5th, '13, 23:03
Posts: 683
Joined: Mar 10th, '11
Location: on top of a mountain.

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by gasninja » Jul 5th, '13, 23:03

mr mopu wrote:I have the same one as Apache. Just pulled the wrapper away but no nei fei visible. I wonder if they "submarined" it. As far as I can tell the wrapper was taken off by me tonight for the first time. The wrapper has 2002 stamped on it under the fold of the brick where they sealed it together.

There are two versions one has a nie fei one does not the wrapper is slightly different aswell.

Jul 5th, '13, 23:43
Posts: 407
Joined: Feb 17th, '13

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by mr mopu » Jul 5th, '13, 23:43

gasninja wrote:
mr mopu wrote:I have the same one as Apache. Just pulled the wrapper away but no nei fei visible. I wonder if they "submarined" it. As far as I can tell the wrapper was taken off by me tonight for the first time. The wrapper has 2002 stamped on it under the fold of the brick where they sealed it together.

There are two versions one has a nie fei one does not the wrapper is slightly different aswell.
Yes mine has no nie fei unless it is under the top layer. I have not "picked" around on it yet but as far as I can tell it has none. Would you have any info about the one with no nie fei? I am still trying to find info on it.

User avatar
Jul 7th, '13, 06:15
Posts: 2109
Joined: Mar 15th, '06
Contact: MarshalN

Re: Aged Puerh Brick: Raw or Cooked?

by MarshalN » Jul 7th, '13, 06:15

Tead Off wrote:
mr mopu wrote:I have the same one as Apache. Just pulled the wrapper away but no nei fei visible. I wonder if they "submarined" it. As far as I can tell the wrapper was taken off by me tonight for the first time. The wrapper has 2002 stamped on it under the fold of the brick where they sealed it together.

What does the 04-94 refer to that is printed on the back of the wrapper?


Nothing, it's just some registration number.

+ Post Reply