Notes from a wonderful and enlightening Port tasting arranged by Jim
Roberston, a long time fan of Taylors Port. The wines spanned 30
years and represented four different decades, or if you include the
Scion, 156 years and 16 decades. We tasted every issued vintage of
Taylors between 1955 and 1985.

We tasted the Tawny Ports first. I have done this sort of comparison
three times before, with varying results, so was interested to see
what this time would show.

10 Year – really the only tawny that still had a red colour component.
Hot nutty nose, sweet in the mouth, and finishing with some raisin.
Very pleasant.

20 year – much less red, more orange here, a dry walnut nose, sweeter
in the mouth, smooth and finishing less hot. By far the best value
and very hard to go back to the 10, which seems simple in comparison.

30 Year – sadly, there was a discolouration on this cork and probably
a bit of a corkiness issue, judging not because of any TCA, as it was
hard to detect any, but because of the earthy slightly funky nose. It
had good midpalate fruit, and was Sherry like in weight and follow
through with a long dry finish. In 2 previous tastings I’d judged
this wine better than the 40, or at least more to my taste, but not
this day!

40 Year – pale and browner colour, with very good fruit in the nose,
and nice vanilla, lovely smooth and long. Good acidity. No saying if
a good bottle of 30 would surpass this.

Scion – this remarkable wine from 1855 or a bit older somehow survived
in a couple of barrels until Taylors bought it and bottled it after
the family that owned it had all expired. Done up in fancy packaging
for the princely price of $3,500 a bottle, this was certainly a
delight to have the opportunity to taste. It raised all sorts of
questions about whether the barrels had been topped over the decades,
and if so, with what, but there were no answers in the booklet
supplied with the wine.

A black walnut nose, exceptionally complex, the wine a darker walnut
sort of colour as well, with amber edges. The nose was fairly hot and
quite intense with hints of dried fruits and spice (we had a short
discussion of whether it was more like nutmeg, which I favoured, or
allspice as my friend propounded). It developed a nose that I would
liken to aged single malt whiskies with more vanilla and whisky notes
coming out as it aired. I left this as long as I could before
finishing it, just to see what it would do, but became nervous as the
people to my right and left began eying my glass with poorly concealed
larcenous intent, they having intemperately finished their own
aliquots.

We then paused for a bit of food (accompanied, rather unnecessarily,
at least for our blood alcohol level) by a magnum of dry Portuguese
wine).

After fortifying ourselves (in both senses) we gamely threw ourselves
once more into the affray with the vintage Ports.

1955 – these wines had been split into two for back to back tasting
the previous day, and the second half was placed in a sealed half
bottle and kept cool, and I’d think if anything, they’d probably
profited from any additional oxidation they’d picked up in that
process. They hadn’t had any great opportunity to air, therefore, and
we had to give them the time to do so. This one showed initially as
pale, spirity and elegant, but with time in the glass developed much
more character. I got a notable floral element in the nose, and some
anise. Medium bodied and medium length. Treating the wines from 1955
through 1966 as a flight, this was the second favourite of many.
Tasty.

1960 - a delicate wine with a nose initially similar to the 1955, but
developing its own cigar box and old, ripe date qualities with a bit
of time. Mostly red fruit. Elegant with a peppery finish.

1963 – serious sighs when this was sampled. More red in the colour,
and quite a lot of spice in the nose, (again, the nutmeg vs. allspice
debate!). Big fruity and sweet in the mouth, not overly warm, and with
really excellent length. complexity and balance. I wouldn’t have
wanted to change a single element of this – a ‘complete’ wine in
perfect balance.

1966 – good colour, lovely warm fruit driven nose, what I call a
‘pudding’ nose, with hints of white pepper. Lots of weight, great
midpalate presence and long warm finish. Lovely wine, but didn’t
displace the 63 in my affections.

1970 – while I looked forward to this wine, having enjoyed many
bottles in the past, the luck of the draw dictated that this would be
one of the corked bottles, fairly obviously so. Still some very
decent spice and fruit in the nose, but when a wine has been affected,
there is just no way to tell to what degree it has been changed, so
evaluating it is futile.

1975 – I’d bought quite a few wines from this vintage with the
intention of having something to console me when I felt like Port,
without having to prematurely plunder a bottle of 1977. The plan
worked very well, although I have now exhausted my 1975s (with the
possible exception of one bottle of Quinta do Noval, which may exist
or maybe a record keeping artefact on my cellar list – I’ll determine
which when I feel up to the considerable exercise needed for the
excavation involved in that task). It had been a long time since I
had tasted a bottle of the 75 Taylors, but it was as I remembered, a
very presentable, enjoyable Port. Lighter in colour than the 1970 and
with a lower key nose featuring mature wood and caramel, quite sweet
in the mouth and medium long.

1977 – given a choice, which two wines would you choose NOT to be
corked in this flight? Yup, the ones that were. This one was much
less affected but had slight TCA hints but some currant and vanilla
underneath, with cocoa and dark cherry in the mouth. Still pretty
presentable, it might have been stellar had it not been affected!

1980 – for some reason I never did buy much from this vintage (perhaps
regret for overindulgence in the 1977 vintage?), and have none in my
cellar now. Good colour, warm nose of dark cherries, I found this a
bit more simple on palate than the previous wines, but still
presentable and enjoyable with sweet red fruit on palate.

1983 – the last pair sparked some discussion about how they compared
now and how they would in future. This wine was fairly dark, in
contrast to some reports, and showed little sign of bricking edges,
and it had a spicy custard nose and some enticing berry fruit in the
mouth, seemingly lower in acidity and a bit softer than some of the
other vintages. It finished with good length and hints of chocolate.

1985 – significantly deeper colour, a very nice nose featuring figs
and blackberry, a solid hit of tannin in the mouth and the emphatic
plea to be cellared quite awhile longer before being opened. The 1983
was better right now, and I am going to reserve judgement on whether I
think that the 85 will do better in time than the 83 has now.

Great, great tasting opportunity and one of my top tastings of the
year (just sliding in under the wire for 2011)!

On Dec 11, 12:20*pm, "Bill S." > wrote:
> Notes from a wonderful and enlightening Port tasting arranged by Jim
> Roberston, a long time fan of Taylors Port. *The wines spanned 30
> years and represented four different decades, or if you include the
> Scion, 156 years and 16 decades. *We tasted every issued vintage of
> Taylors between 1955 and 1985.
>
> Scion – this remarkable wine from 1855 or a bit older somehow survived
> in a couple of barrels until Taylors bought it and bottled it after
> the family that owned it had all expired. *Done up in fancy packaging
> for the princely price of $3,500 a bottle, this was certainly a
> delight to have the opportunity to taste. *It raised all sorts of
> questions about whether the barrels had been topped over the decades,
> and if so, with what, but there were no answers in the booklet
> supplied with the wine.
>
> A black walnut nose, exceptionally complex, the wine a darker walnut
> sort of colour as well, with amber edges. The nose was fairly hot and
> quite intense with hints of dried fruits and spice (we had a short
> discussion of whether it was more like nutmeg, which I favoured, or
> allspice as my friend propounded). *It developed a nose that I would
> liken to aged single malt whiskies with more vanilla and whisky notes
> coming out as it aired. *I left this as long as I could before
> finishing it, just to see what it would do, but became nervous as the
> people to my right and left began eying my glass with poorly concealed
> larcenous intent, they having intemperately finished their own
> aliquots.

Scion is also being sold in the US. The 2011 Holiday Wine Sale catalog
of the Brown Derby in Springfield Missouri is asking US$ 3499.99 fo it
in a fancy box with hand blown crystal decanter. This is so close to
the price you give that I wonder if the price you quote is in Canadian
or US dollars. Only 100 bottles are available in the US.

Apparently someone thinks there is still a market for ultra expensive
wines in the US. A 15 liter bottle of Chateau D'Yquem 2005 is offered
for US$ 24999.99 and the 2007 vintage in the same size and price is to
be available soon. And for those who think the bigger, the better, a
18 liter bottle of Chateau Le Tertre Roteboeuf is available for US$
5299.99. To serve from these huge bottles, unless you have one of the
antique pouring carts for large format Champagne bottles, one likely
will have to visit a local gym and hire 2 weight lifters to move and
pour the wine. It might also be wise to have an agreement made that
you will not be liable for any hernias resulting from lifting and
pouring from these monster bottles :-). Alas, I don't think I can be
good enough for Santa to bring me one of the bottles mentioned. This
reminds me of a story about Mae West which may or may not be true.
Someone mentioned that she must have been very good to receive a very
expensive fur coat. Mae was supposed to have responded that: "Goodness
had nothing to do with it".

On 12/11/2011 07:20 PM, Bill S. wrote:
> Notes from a wonderful and enlightening Port tasting arranged by Jim
> Roberston, a long time fan of Taylors Port. The wines spanned 30
> years and represented four different decades, or if you include the
> Scion, 156 years and 16 decades. We tasted every issued vintage of
> Taylors between 1955 and 1985.

Fabulous notes, thanks Bill. I agree the 20 yr is good value. The last
time I had the 30 it was very very good.

Have you had the '70 recently? Wondering what the evolution is like.
Any hurry to open it?

cheers

-E

On Dec 16, 10:25*am, Emery Davis > wrote:
> On 12/11/2011 07:20 PM, Bill S. wrote:
>
> > Notes from a wonderful and enlightening Port tasting arranged by Jim
> > Roberston, a long time fan of Taylors Port. *The wines spanned 30
> > years and represented four different decades, or if you include the
> > Scion, 156 years and 16 decades. *We tasted every issued vintage of
> > Taylors between 1955 and 1985.
>
> Fabulous notes, thanks Bill. *I agree the 20 yr is good value. The last
> time I had the 30 it was very very good.
>
> Have you had the '70 recently? *Wondering what the evolution is like.
> Any hurry to open it?
>
> cheers
>
> -E

I bought a case of the 1970 VP many years ago. I have had the same
problem with every bottle I've opened that Bill encountered...all
corked.

On Dec 11, 12:20*pm, "Bill S." > wrote:
> Notes from a wonderful and enlightening Port tasting arranged by Jim
> Roberston, a long time fan of Taylors Port. *The wines spanned 30
> years and represented four different decades, or if you include the
> Scion, 156 years and 16 decades. *We tasted every issued vintage of
> Taylors between 1955 and 1985.

> 1955 – these wines had been split into two for back to back tasting
> the previous day, and the second half was placed in a sealed half
> bottle and kept cool, and I’d think if anything, they’d probably
> profited from any additional oxidation they’d picked up in that
> process. *They hadn’t had any great opportunity to air, therefore, and
> we had to give them the time to do so. *This one showed initially as
> pale, spirity and elegant, but with time in the glass developed much
> more character. I got a notable floral element in the nose, and some
> anise. Medium bodied and medium length. Treating the wines from 1955
> through 1966 as a flight, this was the second favourite of many.
> Tasty.

Thanks for the notes on the 1955, as I have a bottle of it. I also
have a bottle of Taylor's 1935 which was considered outstanding in the
past, but I have not tasted it yet. Hopefully it is holding well. The
unopened bottle has a good fill and is not leaking. I only have 2
bottles of port older than the Taylor's 1935. One is Quinta do Noval
1931. The other is Cockburn's 1908 which was re-corked in the UK. In
general, I like old vintage Madeira better than old vintage Port and
have quite a few bottles back to Bual Vintage 1827, Quinta do Serrado.
When I bought 1880s and early 1900s vintage Madeira many years ago, it
was a good buy compared to most other old wines. These old vintage
Madeiras have become very much more expensive and difficult to find,
so I have not bought any in many years now. I have found that for many
old vintage ports one may have to say they are interesting and good
for their age. Such is usually not the case for even very old vintage
Madeira that was in good repute in the first place when younger.

On 12/16/2011 05:48 PM, Bi!! wrote:
> On Dec 16, 10:25 am, Emery Davis > wrote:
[]
>> Have you had the '70 recently? Wondering what the evolution is like.
>> Any hurry to open it?
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> -E
>
> I bought a case of the 1970 VP many years ago. I have had the same
> problem with every bottle I've opened that Bill encountered...all
> corked.

Ack! That's bad news Bill. I had one many years ago, it wasn't corked.
IIRC I bought this particular bottle around 1998...