Need a port wine recommendation

Hi, I'm tossing around the idea of picking up a nice bottle of port for a birthday present for my brother. He turns 40 this winter, a few days after Xmas.

I'm thinking of spending in the $100 to $150 range, and maybe in the 60 or 70s era vintage. I live close by to K&L wines in the SF bay area so I'll probably stop there to pick something up. I'm not sure if they stock everything they have on their web site but I'm sure they will point out everything in the store when I'm there. Rather than go in unprepared, it would be nice to have a few ideas of what to look for.

Any thoughts or recommendations?

Ted

Reply to
Ted Hart
Loading thread data ...

How many days after Christmas? At some point both K&L and Premier Cru had the '66 Krohn Colheita, if he's a '66. Haven't had, but it got nice recent reviews.

Reply to
DaleW

Anything from 1977 Starting with Taylor Fladgate at the top $---before that

Reply to
Joe "Beppe"Rosenberg

Reply to
DaleW

I have.. At this event:

formatting link
( Scroll down to about half way for the TN. Yum!

Reply to
Steve Slatcher

Reply to
Joe "Beppe"Rosenberg

You'll probably have to schlep to Redwood City to get most of this...

I'd go for the 70 Fonseca, perhaps. That 63 Graham looks tempting!

-E

Reply to
Emery Davis

He's 4 days after Xmas. I need to double check on the 66. I'm pretty sure that's it though. - Ted

Reply to
Ted Hart

Ted,

As someone pointed out, the Redwood City loc. might be the spot for Port. Next, the '70 Taylor, or Fonseca are fabulous. The '77s of each, a bit less so, but still great. All will possibly be above your range. A Colheita from that period (a Tawny with a vintage date, not a Vintage Port) is likely to be a better fit for the budget, and a great, though different, Port. There might be some smaller houses that did declare some non-traditional vintages in teh

70's, but I do not have my list of declarations handy. All are likely to be very good - even the lesser houses do not declare for the fun of it. There might be some great bargains there. Ralph Sands (@ Redwood City) is a good source at K&L, though he is mainly a Bdx. specialist.

Hunt

Reply to
Hunt

I'm thinking about picking up that 70 Fonseca that Emery pointed out. It's a bit expensive but I'm sure my brother would appreciate it. I don't see a 70 taylor on the KL web site anywhere. How would it compare to the Fonseca and where do you see it? Also, these are these better than tawneys or is it a matter of taste? thx - Ted

Reply to
Ted Hart

Matter of taste I'd say. But that is in itself a matter of opinion . Some would say that the quality of all wines can be expressed on a one dimensional scale.

When buying old ports to match birth years afew decades back, Colheita Tawnys have the big practical advantage of availability in shops, as they will have been recently bottled.

Reply to
Steve Slatcher
[]

Hi again Ted. If the '70 Taylor had been on the list, I would have picked it over the Fonseca. But it's just a matter of personal taste; many would prefer the Fonseca. Both are great wines (which I haven't tasted for many years, although I do own a Taylor.)

Tawny is a different drink as Hunt pointed out; personally I think very old tawnys sometimes dry out a little too much, I tend to like them at

20 or 30 more than 40. They can be very very good and perhaps rival a great vintage port, but for me, not surpass it. The great advantage of a tawny is it keeps better after opening. One is pretty much obliged to finish a vintage over a couple of nights, whereas a tawny can be enjoyed for weeks.

YMMV!

-E

Reply to
Emery Davis

I have had both the Fonseca & Taylor '70, though not side-by-side. Both were excellent. From memory, I'd give a very slight nod to the Taylor. I rate their '70 up there with the '48 & '63 (never have gotten to try the '55). Maybe those two houses' '94s will beat it one day, but they are still very much in their youth. Without an A-B comparison, I doubt that one could score either one 1st or 2nd.

As for Vintage v Tawny, they are two totally different wines. I like Tawnies with dessert and Vintage AS dessert. One has spent years in the wood (Tawny) and has changed greatly in its characteristics. The other (Vintage) has spent most of its time in the bottle and has matured, but without the oxidizing effects of being in wood. They look different and taste different, but both are great - just different.

If K&L has the Fonseca, I'd go for it. Matter-of-fact, I may well give Ralph a call and see if he's got a few more, as I have consumed all of both '70s from my cellar. Last time I saw the Taylor, it was about US$375/btl. and I passed on it. Probably should have acquired a couple of bottles, but I still have a ton of Port to drink, in what's left of my lifetime. I kinda' doubt that I'll live long enough to really appreciate my '94s, and I know that I'll have to commit infaticide on my later VPs, but that is life.

Hunt

Reply to
Hunt

Emery,

I agree completely.

As a side note on VP I'll share a personal experience. For a Port tasting, I finished with the the Taylor '85, '77, '70 and '63 VPs. I decanted each, pretty much in that order, with the '63 only sitting for about 45 minutes in the decanter. During the finale, all VPs showed well, but the '70 was the clear standout, and I had anticipated the '63 to knock socks off. It was good, but was behind the '70, probably tied with the '77, while the '85 was still too young then. OK, I was a bit surprised, but hey, they were all great. A few days later, some of the same folk were over and there was a bit of each left in the stoppered, but not purged, or blanketed decanters. We started with the '85 and it was still holding up well. Same for the '77, very nice indeed. We then were faced with the '70, the clear winner 4 days before, and the '63, which was good, but not what I had expected. The '70 was marvelous - still, but when we got to the '63, Oh WOW, what a difference a few days made. It had evolved into a killer Port, just as I had expected it to be. I had decanted it last, by at least a good hour, because of its age. Now it was wonderful and consensus held that it finally beat the '70, though by just a bit. I've had them both several times, and go back and forth over which is my favorite. Last time I poured them, I decanted both about 3 hrs. ahead of time.

I was first surprised at how well they all held up in a stoppered decanter, and at the evolution of the '63 with more time. It was NOT a fragile wine. The others didn't change that much, and each had quite a bit of air in the decanters with fair wine to air surface.

Hunt

Reply to
Hunt

Thanks for all the information. Actually thanks to everybody who replied to my post. I think I will pick up a bottle of this later today, it sounds like an excellent wine. I'm not really worried about matching his 40 yr mark anymore, just that I get him something he will enjoy. I have one final question regarding your tasting. Was it possible the 63 vintage was on the downslide? Or should I word that, how long does a Port last? This is just for my own curiosity.

- Ted

Reply to
Ted Hart

I recently picked up a Smith Woodhouse 77 for around $80. I have had mixed results with SMH in the past, some excellent, some so-so. But the 77 was definately the best I have had from them. I was looking for a Taylor 77 or

74, but found the SMH at such a resaonable price so I took a chance. It definately paid off.

Reply to
Joel R Anderson

snipped-for-privacy@vicon.net

snipped-for-privacy@vic [SNIP]

While it is possible, the way that it came around with extended (much longer than I, or my sommelier buddy had imagined) time in the decanter, I'd venture that it just needed time to really open up. It surprised several of us.

Vintage Port can last many, many generations. Well stored, it is probably drinkable hundreds of years after production. Now, as with all wines, whether the wine benefits from this aging, is on the palete of the drinker. While I like VP in its youth, I really love it with a few decades in the bottle. My wife, doesn't appreciate the aging, as much as I, and likes her's in their "youth." I find that the "edges" in the wine are smoothed out and the experience is of a more "rounded" wine. She likes the tons of fruit up front. Neither choice is wrong, only different. She's pretty much the same with Cabs (Cab-based wines), Syrah and especially whites, even Sauternes. Maybe I dig more deeply into the total package and she's just looking for something that is fun to drink.

VP, Madeira and some other wines, especially fortified ones, can last pretty much indefinitely. One can find VPs from the late 1700s (same with Madeiras), that are trotted out for special tastings, and the reports are of very enjoyable wines. I have only had one really old (in my book) wine, an 1893 Bual Madeira, that was absolutely wonderful - wife also loved this one, regardless of the age!

Hunt

Reply to
Hunt

I, too, have had mixed results with Smith Woodhouse, ranging from good to great. At $80 (US?) I'd have bought a handful of the '77s, just because of my experience with others of that year.

About the only house that I have had some less than "good" VPs from is Osborne, but one could easily question the storage of these - same supplier. OTOH, I've had some Osbornes that were very good, though never "great."

Hunt

Reply to
Hunt

Great minds think alike! :)

[snip interesting story]

Fascinating. I guess '63 was such a strong vintage, that it's still a youngster.

One of my best bottles ever showed a similar evolution over 3 days. A '63 Dow's we had at the Devon hotel Gidleigh Park. (Which has a smashing wine list and is really a first rate place). The staff held the bottle over the long weekend, we drank some each night after dinner. It just seemed to get better and better, we were very sad to finish it!

All this said, I'd hate to hold it open and undrunk for much longer...

Now, one thing I do at Christmas is to get a nice tawny, so that the traditional glass may be left out for Mr. Claus. Amazingly this glass is always empty in the morning! ;) This thread has reminded me to get on with the job.

cheers,

-E

Reply to
Emery Davis

Hi Emery, Just a quick note to tell you I ended up purchasing the 70 Fonseca today that you initially recommended. Hunt's tasting notes were also helpful, so I'm sure I got an excellent bottle and I'm sure it will go over well.

I'm thinking about splurging and picking up another one later in the week for myself. I enjoy drinking cabs every so often but wouldn't mind trying a vintage port myself. Plus I can't guarantee I will be around when my brother opens his unfortunately. Thanks again for the help. - Ted

Reply to
Ted Hart

DrinksForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.