ThePortForum.com

Having tried the 30-year-old 10-year-old Fonseca tawny sourced by Derek and a few other bits and pieces at other off-lines, I am firmly with Tom in thinking that tawny Port will improve with age in the bottle.

However, this does leave to questions unanswered: i) what sorts of tawny Port are best for bottle ageing and ii) how long should they be aged.

Based entirely on speculation, I wonder if the best candidates might be the younger tawnies and the and colheitas which have had less barrel time. They tend to retain more colour and fruit which I would have thought would particularly benefit from ageing. Again, with speculation, the older ones might have become so oxidized in the barrel that there’s nothing left to change.

One particular problem, though, is the current use of T-Corks in most tawnies. I’m not convinced that these would provide the best enclosures over the long term. Perhaps, therefore, the best bet might be some of the Niepoort colheitas: most have had less than 10 years in the barrel and have proper corks. Indeed, I think I’m right in saying that Dirk Niepoort suggests that they should be aged for a little while before consumption.

I’d appreciate hearing any other thoughts, especially from people’s experiences with these sorts of Ports. And it would be interested to know what old tawnies people have in their cellars!

Tawny certainly CHANGES with time in the bottle. Some throw sediment, some get more orangy, some mellow. I think it depends on what someone is looking for.

I am not particularly keen on tawnies that have spent a long time in bottle. I like the freshness of a recently bottled tawny. A couple of years in bottle can sometimes give it extra interest, but prolonged bottle ageing usually just tires the port IMO.

SushiNorth wrote:Some throw sediment, some get more orangy, some mellow. I think it depends on what someone is looking for.

In general terms, I was wondering which tawnies people have tried aged and thought improved with time in the bottle; the mellowing is what I was particularly thinking about.

I have not had enough tawny to give an informed view but my limited experience is that standard tawny changes, but not necessarily in a good way, whereas colhieta can remain or become stunning. I experienced this with a Niepoort 1957 Colheita that had been in the bottle for at least 20 years and was one of the best ports I have ever tasted. Tom tasted the bottle with me, Roy and Nicos in Oct 07 at the Crusting Pipe. The few standard tawnies I have tasted after a few years in bottle can best be described as interesting but tired. I am not convinced it is possible for them to "improve", which is different to "change"

Do Niepoort filter and fine their Colheitas?

Derek

DRT wrote:I have not had enough tawny to give an informed view but my limited experience is that standard tawny changes, but not necessarily in a good way, whereas colhieta can remain or become stunning. I experienced this with a Niepoort 1957 Colheita that had been in the bottle for at least 20 years and was one of the best ports I have ever tasted. Tom tasted the bottle with me, Roy and Nicos in Oct 07 at the Crusting Pipe. The few standard tawnies I have tasted after a few years in bottle can best be described as interesting but tired. I am not convinced it is possible for them to "improve", which is different to "change"

Do Niepoort filter and fine their Colheitas?

I’m not sure about the Niepoort Colheitas and the information on their website isn’t terribly clear but, in any case, I wonder what it is about a tawny which makes it unsuitable for ageing compared to a Colheita?

Standard tawnies are the most variable class of port, not only on the palate, but are also created in diverse ways. As they are very rarely sent to auction,
I've not been able to reach a considered view as to whether or not these cheap tawnies will improve.

I am doubtful that those made by blending red and white wines together, or by stewing the wines in concrete 'mamas', are going to have much prospect; but those aged in wood might benefit from further aging in the bottle.

In the interests of science, I am cellaring a bottle of Q. Pulga that I bought last year, and hope to secure a fresh bottle in a year or three to compare it with.

I have consumed plenty of 10yr and 20yr tawny, both new and aged, and the principal difference that I identify is that aged bottles are much smoother.

Newly bottled wines have a 'bite' to them that older bottles lack, which, to my taste, makes the aged bottles much more attractive.

I am trying to recall if I've ever had a Colheita or indication of age Tawny that had seen better days - none immediately comes to mind. I have a sneaking suspicion that two decades in wood has a preservative effect on port, making it virtually indestructible in the bottle thereafter.

Tom

uncle tom wrote:I am trying to recall if I've ever had a Colheita or indication of age Tawny that had seen better days - none immediately comes to mind. I have a sneaking suspicion that two decades in wood has a preservative effect on port, making it virtually indestructible in the bottle thereafter.

I have the remains of a 1963 Romariz Colheita that was bottled in 1997 open downstairs right now. Something is clearly wrong with the bottle, but having only the one example I cannot guess what that might be. It was quite pleasant immediately after opening, but faded exceptionally quickly and a mere 6 hours later was closed down tight as a fist. It never opened back up, and deteriorated to a completely bland and tired state. It's not undrinkable by any stretch of the imagination, but it's also not something I'd turn to except out of desperation. I'll probably use it to make some Port poached pears for dessert this week.

I'm also tempted to blend it with a 1994 Delaforce Colheita (bottled in 2002) that I also have open. The Delaforce seems raw and unfocused, so a little of the Romariz blandness might actually help. Either that or they may both be used for cooking.

Glenn E. wrote:I have the remains of a 1963 Romariz Colheita that was bottled in 1997 open downstairs right now. Something is clearly wrong with the bottle, but having only the one example I cannot guess what that might be. It was quite pleasant immediately after opening, but faded exceptionally quickly and a mere 6 hours later was closed down tight as a fist.

Do you put this down to the time its spend in the bottle? I wouldn't have thought that 12 years would make that much difference to a colheita, especially after 37 in wood...

JacobH wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:I have the remains of a 1963 Romariz Colheita that was bottled in 1997 open downstairs right now. Something is clearly wrong with the bottle, but having only the one example I cannot guess what that might be. It was quite pleasant immediately after opening, but faded exceptionally quickly and a mere 6 hours later was closed down tight as a fist.

Do you put this down to the time its spend in the bottle? I wouldn't have thought that 12 years would make that much difference to a colheita, especially after 37 in wood...

Not really, no. As I said, I really can't even guess why this bottle is off, but thought that I would mention it since it fits the thread.

I could very well just be an off bottle, or it could have been stored poorly, or it could just be a weak Port. (I doubt the latter because I have had it before and it can be very good.) Or it could be that 12 years in bottle wasn't good for it, but given experiences with other Colheitas that have been in bottle far longer than 12 years I suspect that's not the case.

It doesn't taste baked to me, so I don't think it is heat damaged. What it really tastes like is that the bottle has been open for 12 years... it's just completely flat and lacking in character.

Anyway... it's just one data point.

My personal rule of thumb is that tawny can age half the time of its age in the bottle without any bigger harm. It normally does not get better when ageing, but looses some of its freshness. I just had a Colheita from 1890 which was bottled in 1958 and it was still good, though I think it would have been better when drunk earlier. On the other hand I just had a 10y old Taylors out of the Magnum, which was bottled 10 years ago and it was dumb and tired, but the aftertaste was a little longer than the freshly bottled 10y old.

Axel

I had Ramos 10 and 20 year tawny bottled in in '97 and I thought that they both lost some of the complexity and much of the freshness that recent bottlings have. Certainly did taste different than a recent bottling. I thknk Tawny fans would like the recent bottlings more, while those who are indifferent to either ruby or tawny it could be hard to tell where they would lean.

Glenn,

Having shared that bottle with you, it would not surprise me if it was corked. TCA can be like that sometimes, where there is no "off" smell or taste but utterly nothing comes to the fore. I have had this with Bordeaux and Burgundy as well as CA Cabs. Normally I can "sense" the TCA's affect in a Port, but given that you've enjoyed this in the past and the fact that you mentioned it was good early on ... this makes the most sense.




TAWNY PORT

Bottles with an indication of age, may improve in the bottle. A lot of that has to do with your definition of "improve" when it comes to a Tawny. It would make sense that those in the Port trade, even those like Dirk who espouse the virtues of Colheitas improving in the bottle ... have long been on the record as saying that Tawny Port is BEST when consumed as close to the bottling date as possible. However, is that just an opinion passed down the pipeline in the Port industry, or based on empirical evidence?

As I am in the midst of putting together an article on Tawny Port for Sommelier Journal that I occasionally write for, I made a careful study and tried a few dozen 10-40 year old Tawnies while over in Portugal last month. Having more current reference points on some that I had not tasted for several years was enlightening. I paid attention to the bottling dates. Some of these I have had many times in the past, others --only a few times, and there were only a few which were brand new to me.

From where I sit, I believe that Tawny Port definitely does change in the bottle ... (as will even a filtered LBV or basic Ruby over many years). Again, it boils down to your personal taste preferences. What I noticed <generalizing here> was that:

a. The aromatics declined on bottles that had more age. They just were not as vibrant as more currently bottled examples of the same genre.

b. Body weight & texture - it seemed that older bottles tended to have a more viscous mouthfeel and at times, appeared almost syrupy by comparison to younger bottles. Older ones also exhibited a smoother more round and silken texture. So, for those that like these characterisitics ... it would certainly be considered an "improvement."

c. Acidity level - although chemically speaking, acidity does not die down in an older wine ... Madeira being the greatest example of how piercing acidity can live on for 2+ centuries ... Tawny Ports in bottle longer, tended towards "flabby" or just plain fat in some instances. I realize the acidity was not the issue, but the lack of freshness that many in this thread have mentioned; is reality. I sensed this in a number of Tawny Port bottles that ranged between 6 and 14 years old since bottling. The palate impact and sense of the acidity was very different in the majority of the older bottles, and not for the better. I have a feeling the loss of intensity -- is the specific dynamic that the Port trade is most concerned about, when suggesting not to age Tawny Port "with-an-indication-of-age."

d. The end game - this is a tale of two distinctions. The finish and the aftertaste. While I found that the actual finish was smoother AND longer in Tawny bottles with more age, I also paid close attention to the aftertaste. Although theoretically "longer" on the finish, the aftertaste did not provide the same pleasure as younger bottles. There was a crispness that I sensed in younger bottlings, AFTER swallowing with more defined layers. In the older bottlings, the aftertaste seemed "dumbed down" if you follow my meaning; there was no zest and the more caramelized flavors were quite tasty, but very simplistic.

This is not easy to describe, so I hope I am being clear.

Roy Hersh wrote:Having shared that bottle with you, it would not surprise me if it was corked. TCA can be like that sometimes, where there is no "off" smell or taste but utterly nothing comes to the fore.

Interesting... well I still have a little bit of that bottle, so I'll give it another shot and concentrate on trying to detect TCA. I seem to be fairly immune to it, though, so probably won't be able to tell. It's worth the try, though!

Roy Hersh wrote:This is not easy to describe, so I hope I am being clear.

I think you've done a great job of describing the changes, at least the ones I've noticed in my brief experience.

For b) and c), I have occasionally noticed a sensation in older bottles that I have described as "buttery." That seems to fit with your descriptions of a more viscous mouth feel and a more rounded and silky texture, and also with the impression of "fat" that seems to hide some of the acidity. As you know I tend to like less acidity in my wines, so this buttery texture is an improvement to me as long as the sensation of the acidity is still present. If it gets completely hidden... well then it's gone too far.

Harder question. At what ages did this happen?

E.g., imagine that the good young features disappear after two years, but the good old features appear only ten years after bottling. That would suggest an eight-year ‘pessimal zone’. Equally, if the action times were reversed, it would be an ‘optimal zone’. Is middle-age good or bad?

I'd like to point out that a tawny port that jdaw1 brought over a few months ago, helped me rock my dental exam.

g-man wrote:I'd like to point out that a tawny port that jdaw1 brought over a few months ago, helped me rock my dental exam.

Ignoring the delicious ambiguity, a Fonseca 1966 would have made you top of the class.

jdaw1 wrote:

g-man wrote:I'd like to point out that a tawny port that jdaw1 brought over a few months ago, helped me rock my dental exam.

Ignoring the delicious ambiguity, a Fonseca 1966 would have made you top of the class.

more like the bottom, drolling with a happy face.