1963 Sandeman

Tasting notes for individual Ports, with an index sorted by vintage and alphabetically.
Forum rules
Tasting notes for individual Ports, with an index sorted by vintage and alphabetically.
Post Reply
User avatar
g-man
Quinta do Vesuvio 1994
Posts: 3429
Joined: 13:50 Wed 24 Oct 2007
Location: NYC
Contact:

1963 Sandeman Vintage Port

Post by g-man »

Placeholder
Disclosure: Distributor of Quevedo wines and Quinta do Gomariz
Glenn E.
Graham’s 1977
Posts: 4188
Joined: 22:27 Wed 09 Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: 1963 Sandeman Vintage Port

Post by Glenn E. »

Color: Deep garnet. Darkest (of 5) by a decent amount.
Nose: Really off... dirty socks, musky, some alcohol. Since I'm apparently immune to TCA, this is something else wrong with the bottle.
Palate: Hot, musty, and very dry. Very good tannins for a '63, but only decent acidity. Light body. Fruits seem a bit sour.

General concensus at the table was that the bottle was flawed, so no rating. Interestingly, by the end of the evening (2-3 hours later) my glass was actually fine. The dirty socks and musk odor had blown off, and the fruits mellowed enough to make it a perfectly acceptable drink. It had even sweetened up a bit, but was still dry and hot. Even after the improvement, still last out of 5.
Glenn Elliott
User avatar
SushiNorth
Martinez 1985
Posts: 1341
Joined: 07:45 Mon 18 Feb 2008
Location: NJ & NY

Re: 1963 Sandeman Vintage Port

Post by SushiNorth »

Sandeman 1960, Sandeman 1963, Sandeman 1966, Sandeman 1970, Sandeman 1977, Croft 2000, Planning, Review, Placemats

The darkest Sandeman of the night, but the nose is vegetal with some celery: volatile acidity (g-man). In the mouth, it's dry with wood and licorice flavors, and a slick mouthfeel. This wine improved a bit with fat in the mouth, but was generally disappointing.
JoshDrinksPort
Image Port wine should perhaps be added -- A Trollope
Post Reply