Longer Decanting Times - Message Catching On?

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 09:59 Mon 24 Sep 2007

I was browsing Berry Brother's website over the weekend and cam across an interesting comment in their description of the Quinta do Noval 1966 port. It read:

"1966
Quinta do Noval - - Portugal
Full Bodied, Sweet, Ready, but will keep, Port Blend, 20% alc.

Initially shows quite significant spirit character but if decanted and allowed to breath for 12 hours some classic and most charming fruit is revealed. "

This is the first time that I have seen anyone other than the people on this forum and FTLOP recommending decanting times longer than a few hours. Perhaps the message is starting to get out...

Alex

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 12:10 Mon 24 Sep 2007

From dialogue on this site and another place, I think you, Derek, and I can claim some credit for blowing the myth that vintage ports should be drunk within a few hours of decanting.

Not only do they keep for much longer than conventional wisdom decreed, but wines from certain vintages - notably '70 and '77 - often show a significant improvement between 24 and 48hrs.

One of the amusing asides to this discovery is how reluctant those on the other side of the pond have been to embrace it - I put it down to an innate impatience...

Authors frequently copy facts from existing works without personally checking the veracity of the information, perpetuating errors as they do so.

Some classic examples:

- The belief that oak trees are slow growing, and do not bear acorns until they are sixty years old (actually one of the fastest growing natives on drier terrain, and capable of bearing acorns before its tenth year)

- The myth that most half-timbered houses were built from dismantled ships (only to a very limited degree in some coastal areas)

- That the Norfolk Broads are old flooded river channels (detailed receipts for the mediaeval peat working that created them still survive)

Tom

Andy Velebil · Post by **Andy Velebil** » 12:42 Mon 24 Sep 2007

Alex,

i agree with Tom, I think this site and FTLOP have had quite an influence on getting the word out about long decant times for Port, even really old Port. Even on the Robert Parker forum people are finally getting the hint that one must decant Port.

I think the biggest issues is that most wine drinkers don't consume much Port and are not very knowledgeable about it. Coupled with the fact that if one was to decant a 30-60 year old bottle of dry wine for 6-24+ hours it would be dead by the time you drank it.

Slowly we all shall educate them

Post by **DRT** » 13:08 Mon 24 Sep 2007

uncle tom wrote:From dialogue on this site and another place, I think you, Derek, and I can claim some credit for blowing the myth that vintage ports should be drunk within a few hours of decanting.

Disclaimer: I cannot claim any credit in relation to the benefits of drinking Dalva 1970 over an extended period of time

Derek

Luc · Post by **Luc** » 15:19 Mon 24 Sep 2007

This being said , can we safely say that any pre- 1970 VP won't improve after 24 hrs decanting time . . .

Frederick Blais · Post by **Frederick Blais** » 15:36 Mon 24 Sep 2007

The neverending topic

And I'll reply the same as I usually do

I have to protect my school of thinking. Experiment, try and build your palate for what YOU LIKE.

Any port will last and will still be very drinkable 2 years after it was decanted. Yes I do prefer my VP with 3-6 hours, max 12 hours of time in the decanter. Any wine and port are evolving with time, the flavours are changing, the tannins, the acidity, the alcool presence.

The facts are that with oxydation the color will become darker, the acidity and alcool les present. The flavours with oxydation will also change, getting more dry fruits, less jammy, more secondary and tertiary accentuated flavours, less floral...

For me, oxydation, up to some time, is removing the primary pleasure I have with a VP, freshness and purity.

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 15:42 Mon 24 Sep 2007

This being said , can we safely say that any pre- 1970 VP won't improve after 24 hrs decanting time . . .

Not really - I noted recently that Croft '66 needed a full 24hrs, and a year or so back found a Delaforce '50 to be much improved by the third day.

It would be nice to work out a neat predictive formula, based on the age of the wine and its standing as a vintage, but I'm doubtful that can be done.

What is apparent is that far too much wine is drunk too soon - the perils of decanting too early are small compared to the perils of decanting too late.

Tom

mosesbotbol · Post by **mosesbotbol** » 20:54 Mon 24 Sep 2007

Our group tastings it is hard to let things decant for more 4 hours as the bottles are history by then. Bottles I open myself I are the ones I notice improvments over 24 hours. I had a '60 MacKenzie that fell apart after a couple hours while the '63 Taylor and Fonseca improved. I get nervous on the older ports. As a general rule for me, as soon as the acetone likes smells is gone off the nose - start drinking.

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 23:35 Mon 24 Sep 2007

Fred,

Horses for courses - if you are wedded to first releases then young tannic wines may impress, but I am personally a little averse to young tannic 'bite'.

I do not actively seek to drink any vintage port under ten years old, as I consider such wines to be hopelessly immature. I acknowledge the notion that these wines may afford a window of opportunity between first release and 'closing down' - but I am not entirely convinced by the theory - it is not supported by my personal experience - but I keep an open mind...

Tom

Luc · Post by **Luc** » 15:12 Wed 26 Sep 2007

So Tom , I guess following your thaught process , one can't say with certainty that all VP's enter a dumb phase after 10 yrs of age . . .

Frederick Blais · Post by **Frederick Blais** » 16:02 Wed 26 Sep 2007

uncle tom wrote:Fred,

Horses for courses - if you are wedded to first releases then young tannic wines may impress, but I am personally a little averse to young tannic 'bite'.

I do not actively seek to drink any vintage port under ten years old, as I consider such wines to be hopelessly immature. I acknowledge the notion that these wines may afford a window of opportunity between first release and 'closing down' - but I am not entirely convinced by the theory - it is not supported by my personal experience - but I keep an open mind...

Tom

Tom, I do drink more young VP than older ones mainly because they are widely available and cheap.... compared to old ones. Would you pay 300 pounds for Taylor 1970

This is what I have to pay to buy it in Québec

I wish I had access to auction house on a regular basis, this way I'd crack an old bottle at least one a week. For now I've developed a taste for both young and old VP and I appreciate them for what they are at a point in time. Yes I prefer old ones but I satisfy myself from what I can find.

For my theory on decanting time, it is simply a matter of taste and experience.

Overtired and emotional · 22:39 Sun 21 Oct 2007

This thread was a breath of fresh air.

I have let myself be talked into short decanting times. This has, generally, been a bad idea.

Some years ago, opening some 1980's, the wine exposed for 24/36 hours was a much better wine than that which had been just deacanted for 12 hours. This weekend, I experimented on some Dow 1985, a wine which has had universally bad reviews. Having tried it, experimentally, some months ago after 6 hours, I could understand why. It was nasty and attentuated.

Having broached a bottle late Thursday, it was good on Friday, alright on Satiruday and better tonight; much more the Dow we know and love.

This is obviously fairly subjective, but it is surprising that critics can have such different views on wines wich have either succumbed to air and gone to vinegar or have retained their character. It strikes me as a case where the average drinker,whoever he is, must, in the face of the critics, retain the confidence of his convictions.

Post by **DRT** » 00:20 Mon 22 Oct 2007

Another convert

I'm glad this thread popped back to life today. It reminded me of a conversation at Simon Lisle's house last night when his wife Cath asked me "whose that guy that writes his tasting notes with all the different times on them?" the look of amusement on her face told me she found this very geeky and worthy of ridicule.

I just raised my hand and said, that'll be me then

Derek

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 00:54 Mon 22 Oct 2007

"whose that guy that writes his tasting notes with all the different times on them?"

And me - and Alex B...

Tom

Post by **DRT** » 00:58 Mon 22 Oct 2007

Don't worry, Tom, I made sure Cath understood that I wasn't the only Geek on this site

Derek