Song Tea introduces a new Green Heart product, Ruby Variation #2

Today I received an Email from Song Tea & Ceramics, which introduces a new product that they seem pretty proud of: Ruby Variation #2. There’s a nice blurb on their website, and I’m sure many here who have enjoyed their products have received a similar eMail. Unfortunately, Song is further confusing Taiwan tea matters, and that is the point of this discussion topic.

Some years ago, Song vexingly named a (presently unavailable) product made with Taiwanese cultivar “Green Heart” (Qing Xin) as Ruby. I previously discussed this situation in a comment on @derk’s tea note about a separate Green Heart product, The Roaster’s Red, at http://steepster.com/derk/posts/451393 . There is, you see, a pre-existing and famous cultivar known as “Ruby” (Hong Yu), that is a product of the Taiwan Tea Experiment Station, referred to as TTES #18. It is this cultivar which Song says was used in making their Eighteen and A Different Eighteen products. But Ruby was not made from "Ruby” (Hong Yu); it used Green Heart.

Todays new Green Heart product has been named Ruby Variation #2. The TTES also lists a cultivar identified as TTES #2, which is stated to be a “cross between assamica from India (Jaipur, Assam) and Da Ye Oolong (big leaf oolong)” [refer to https://teapedia.org/en/Cultivar#Taiwan and https://teapedia.org/en/Cultivar#Taiwan_2 ]. The new Song product announced today is made from neither “Ruby” nor TTES #2, but instead is said to use the same Green Heart cultivar as Song’s former Ruby, albeit from a different grower having different terroir. So the vexation is multiply compounded! [And I’m not even getting into whether the Green Heart (seed, not clonal) line being used is the same or different from the line TTES #6, a wilde hybride of Qing Xin.]

Of course Song can name their products whatever they want, and I am not privy to their long-range plans. But using names of completely different varietals seems to me as a disservice to their clients, and something Steepsters here should be cognizant of: Ruby is not “Ruby” and #2 is not “#2” (but might be “#6”). To their credit, Song is pretty transparent about all this.