4/6/15, 12:21 AM - Hi chatters, thank you for your comment. You are correct on both counts: the alcohol is in balance and does not stick out (and hence not mentioned in the conclusion) nor do I, imho, think this will become an issue over time as the primary fruit character gives way to the more tertiary character. Hope this helpsHans
12/8/14, 4:00 PM - Hi Chris,Thanks for your comments, let me try and answer them or at least give you some form of reference point to help and position my comments."What is the meaning of the 2014 reference?" When I came to enter my tasting note for the 10 year old tawny CT presented with numerous options of already created entries. Going with the NV route would be the obvious route as most people seem to have done. For me this doesn't convey though when the wine was a 10 year old tawny i.e. You would need to look at purchase date to get a feel for bottling date or make an implicit assumption that everyone on CT drink their tawny port pretty much on purchase. So as 2014 already existed I chose to use this indicate at least the year it was purchased. When I came to enter my tasting note for the 20 year old tawny only the NV already existed so in this case I did not want to create a new "vintage""Also, tawnys don't "age". They don't improve in the bottle (like malt whisky) ... not suitable for further aging (none of them are suitable)"Yes so this reflects that the wine will not improve in the bottle since it is already fully developed. I am not sure what you are commenting on here - is it the why am I stating the obvious - tawnys don't "age" etc. In that case let me draw your attention to the Tasting Story that all these tasting notes are under - namely as part of of my WSET 4 training. So as WSET requires a statement on Potential to age it is included even though obvious to many on CT."Also, don't know how to interpret "medium sweet", relative to what? Other tawnys? Oloroso? PX? ... by whom."The scale I am using is the WSET one (as explained above) so basically gives me Medium-Sweet, Sweet and Luscious at this end of the scale. In terms of the relative on the day context one of the other ports was a Graham's 1980 vintage port - this was clearly sweet. Both the 10 yo and 20 yo Noval tawny were markedly less sweet, so the call then became are they still the same level of sweetness. Consensus on the day was to call this medium sweet. Hope this helps.
10/21/14, 11:57 PM - Hi chatters - thanks for the comment and best wishes. To answer your question first - if I had any of these I would probably leave them for another 3 years and then try again or alternatively give it at least an hour in a decanter and probably more. This had quite a lot of acidity and tannin and was only just getting those tertiary notes so I would think it had quite a bit of life left in it. I see the current advise is 2016 - 2021; I would probably modify that to 2017/8 - 2025. Some more details behind my experience of this wine as follows:This wine definitely evolved the longer it sat in the glass - it was a bit closed at first but became really very good about an hour later. I am not sure you read the context in which we tasted this wine - so here is a bit of a recap (and apologies if you had already read this - on re-edit I see you use Tasting stories too so you will have more then likely seen the context, will leave it in here for anyone else reading this):"For the first half we were divided into groups of 4 and asked to write the first half of a tasting note - so covering Appearance, Nose and Palate. This was then exchanged with another group doing another wine. We then had to write the second half the tasting note based on the comments / observations made by the other group - so covering quality, grape variety, readiness to drink, identity. After our initial guesses we were allowed to taste the other wine and adjust our assessment. The tasting note here reflects the final outcome." The first group accurately described the wine but seriously under called the quality. When we tasted it we were expecting something pedestrian but were really wowed by what we got. This led to some debate and the first group wanting to re-taste - they concluded it was no longer closed and was indeed noticeably better then when they had tasted it about an hour before. Now I am not sure when the bottle was first opened and I assume it had been decanted into a neutral (I.e. No label and generic) bottle and then re-stoppered - so I am not sure how much air it had been exposed to before we got to taste it. But it had been open in glasses for about 45 mins or so between the first group and us tasting this.Hope that helps
9/25/14, 11:24 AM - I am glad someone is paying attention - apologies for the typing error - problem with bulk entering tasting notes - you are ofcourse correct and this should be "can drink now but has potential for ageing" - duly corrected now - many thanks
Thanks for letting us know about this problem. We will review your comments and be in touch soon with an update.
Search