tea is only as good as the water you make it with

I’ve come across a lot of analogies when talking about water for tea. A memorable one is: tea is the music, water is the speakers. Thats pretty close to how it is, but maybe tea is the music and water is the orchestra playing it. Both of these analogies involve the reproduction of music, but with the orchestra analogy there’s more responsibility given to the water. Furthermore, the orchestra would have a conductor, which would be the human brewer. But then, is the teapot the first chair, the best player in the orchestra? Or would that be the dominant flavor? No, the dominant flavor is part of the musical composition. Then, the cup must be the acoustics. But isn’t the acoustics the actual space that the tea drinking is happening in? The teapot might be the instruments that the orchestra is playing. So the water is playing the teapot, which is playing the tea into the cup; all led by the brewer.

I’ve gotten feedback on discord from people who tried a different water and were struck by how big of a difference it made, more than teaware, brewing temperature, ratio, or any other parameter. Water can be heavy, light, vibrant, muddled, astringent, subdued, dense, spacious, fluffy, metallic, smooth, and more. Water can, by the way it extracts, cause tea to be any of these things. You can even have a smooth water that makes astringent tea, so there can be a mismatch. That’s like how a shy violin player can play quite loudly and with great presence on stage.

The point is, there are many different kinds of water, and different levels. You wouldn’t yell at a 6th grade orchestra for not sounding like the Vienna symphony. So, either you have to accept your water as it is, with its flaws, or you have to figure out something better. I’ve found that there’s not much you can add or change with a bad water to make it better, just like there’s not much you can do with a not-so-talented orchestra to make it world-class. For the orchestra, you basically have to kick out all but the best players, and then replace them with better ones. With water, it’s similar. By diluting the water, you make room to introduce a better group and balance of minerals. Since every water is different and mineral content reports are so spotty and often incomplete, it’s hard to know what to add to the diluted water. So, it’s often easier to simply throw out the old water and get a new one.

With the modern recycling crisis and the expense of water transport, coupled with the non-availability of good water in glass bottles for any reasonable price, and the difficulty of making 0ppm TDS water to make recipes with (home Reverse Osmosis filters make 10ppm usually, depending on starting TDS, and distillers don’t make good tasting water, at least that I’ve tried) we as tea drinkers have to get lucky with our tap, or make do with a difficult and imperfect solution for the time being.

Impractically Pure Water

Water Review #1 – Saratoga

I know this is a tea blog, but I am so interested in water that I’ve begun to focus on it more. It turns out, every water is different – it only takes one side-by-side to notice the differences. I haven’t seen any water reviews online, so I thought I might give them a shot, as someone who’s been working with water for a few years.

Today’s water is:

Saratoga Still

Origin: Sweet Water Spring, Saratoga Springs, NY OR Pristine Mountain Springs, Stockbridge, VT

Bottle: 750 ml Glass

Mineral Content:

Calcium11
Magnesium2.3
Sodium8.6
Potassium0.6
Bicarbonate41
Sulfate5.5
Chloride14
Nitrate0.54
SilicaNot reported
Ion concentrations in mg/L from Water Quality Report
Hardness37 mg/L as CaCO3
Alkalinity34 mg/L as CaCO3
Hardness to Alkalinity Ratio1.08
TDS 75 ppm
Electrical Conductivity at 25ºC140 μS/cm
pH7.14
Cations charge1.128
Anions charge1.190
Water quality report error5.5%
Other statistics
Electrical Conductivity at 25ºC142 μS/cm
pH7.1
Measurements (mine)

First off – the presentation of Saratoga is gorgeous. The elegant, transparent blue glass bottle hides the contents: you know there’s water in there, but you want to get it out of the bottle to really get a look at it. This presentation is reminiscent of wine bottles, where the product is hidden from view, but not invisible.

The smell of the water is odorless. You might think all water is like that, but it’s not the case. For light mineral waters, odorless is often the expected goal, especially in glass.

The mouthfeel of Saratoga is rather fluffy. This suggests that there is a lot of dissolved gas/air in it. At first, it’s rather sweet and cloud-like, but quickly multiple things become apparent. The water has a bit much CO2, giving it a stale taste, similar to when you leave a glass of water out too long. This can be considered a feature of this water, however I don’t totally love that quality. Amidst this slightly flat taste, the mineral profile asserts itself. For a medium-light water, there’s plenty of taste here. A generally sweet calcium presence balances out a fairly dense bicarbonate-sulfate earthiness aftertaste. The high chloride brings a bit of brightness and smoothness – the water is very smooth. I wouldn’t say it tastes clean, though – the excess co2 is really obvious in both the front and back of the mouth, and combined with the minerality it comes across rather bold. There is a slight milk/cream feel to the water, but much less than harder water. It’s not very dry, there’s rather a general sweetness and density to the water, despite its fluffiness.

For tea, this is a good water – it makes smooth tea with enough complexity, and the TDS is in a good range for all sorts of tea.

I would appreciate if it said which of the two sources were in the bottle. When I drink Saratoga, I’d rather it be from Saratoga rather than some “backup spring” in Vermont. I wonder if they blend them together, or if some bottles are Vermont water and some are New York. If anyone knows, send me a DM!

78 points