ThePortForum.com

2004 Fortnum and Mason LBV (by Niepoort)
After going on a Phil about how good Niepoort’s LBVs are, I thought I should drink one.

This was from a half-bottle bought in the sale a while ago. It is unfiltered LBV and bottled in 2008. The back of the bottle said it was an exclusive blend and since the cork was branded ‟Fortnum & Mason” and not ‟Niepoort”, I believe that.

Quite reddish in colour, and fairly translucent at the edge. Gave very little away on the nose. Surprisingly mute. In the mouth, again very subtle. Almost didn’t taste of anything. Perhaps some elderflower, over a sugary syrup. Slightly tannic with a peppery aftertaste. Extremely easy to drink. You could easily get through this like a soft-drink. Very unlike what I expected; it seems surprisingly mature for its age. Although this might seem like a criticism, I do not necessarily think this is a bad Port; having one that is lovely and easy to drink is some achievement. It will be interesting to revisit this in a few years when it becomes a bit more mature. And perhaps compare it to a normal 2004 Niepoort LBV.

JacobH wrote:After going on a Phil about how good Niepoort’s LBVs are, I thought I should drink one.

This was from a half-bottle bought in the sale a while ago. It is unfiltered LBV and bottled in 2008. The back of the bottle said it was an exclusive blend and since the cork was branded ‟Fortnum & Mason” and not ‟Niepoort”, I believe that.

Quite reddish in colour, and fairly translucent at the edge. Gave very little away on the nose. Surprisingly mute. In the mouth, again very subtle. Almost didn’t taste of anything. Perhaps some elderflower, over a sugary syrup. Slightly tannic with a peppery aftertaste. Extremely easy to drink. You could easily get through this like a soft-drink. Very unlike what I expected; it seems surprisingly mature for its age. Although this might seem like a criticism, I do not necessarily think this is a bad Port; having one that is lovely and easy to drink is some achievement. It will be interesting to revisit this in a few years when it becomes a bit more mature. And perhaps compare it to a normal 2004 Niepoort LBV.

hmm - you describe it as "no smell, minimal taste" and then as 'lovely' ? not sure you're convincing me there...

Jacob - I must admit i was not a fan of the 04 Niepoort lbv - especially by comparison to the 03 lbv.

The 05 I have read is impressive, but have yet to try.

RAYC wrote:Jacob - I must admit i was not a fan of the 04 Niepoort lbv - especially by comparison to the 03 lbv.

The 05 I have read is impressive, but have yet to try.

I suppose that is not surprising; compared to ’03 and ’05, ’04 wasn’t a great year.

PhilW wrote:hmm - you describe it as "no smell, minimal taste" and then as 'lovely' ? not sure you're convincing me there...

Yes, such is life! I think this being a smaller bottle and a non-standard blend probably made this a bit lighter. It’s not how I remember the 2004 LBV, albeit that the last time I tried it was a couple of years ago!

In any case, I don’t particularly mind a very restrained Port. Indeed, in my mind Port is often most attractive when the fruit and sugar are both so well balanced that pulling individual aromas or flavours out of the texture is quite hard. I know that’s not to everyone’s taste, though! However, it is quite hard to make (especially cheaper) Ports which are elegant and subtle. Usually there is too much alcohol, or an astringency at the end of the taste which I think ought to be avoided.

Anyway, on drinking the last glass at +24 things had fallen into place quite well. Still very subtle on the nose but in the mouth the flavours had become better integrated with subtle fruits over some syrupy sugar. I think, if I was blind guessing, I would have put this as an SQVP from the early 1980s. I’m not sure if I’d buy any more unless they were deeply discounted, though.