This may not be new from me but:
For 40 years I thought 63 was better than 70. But in the last few years my 63's can be great the first
day but after decline. On the other hand 70's can last for several days at a high level.
What are others opinions?
1963 vs 1970
Moderators: Glenn E., Roy Hersh, Andy Velebil
-
- Posts: 5975
- Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:38 am
- Location: Boston, USA
Re: 1963 vs 1970
Mean quality level of 1970 ports was higher than 1963 as whole. You'll be hard pressed to find a producer whose 1970 vintage wasn't at least good-to-great. I had Dow, Croft, and Graham within last year from both vintages (individually on separate occasion's). I seem to think '63 had a smoother spirit... Both held up equally well. At this point it fair to start to nitpicking actual bottles rather than the vintage.
Provenance becomes more an issue as the years go by. Most are not going to have bottles sourced from the same original cellar of both vintages
Provenance becomes more an issue as the years go by. Most are not going to have bottles sourced from the same original cellar of both vintages
Welsh Corgis | F1 |British Cars
- Andy Velebil
- Posts: 16717
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:49 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, United States of America - USA
- Contact:
Re: 1963 vs 1970
+1Moses Botbol wrote: Provenance becomes more an issue as the years go by.
At 51 years of age the 1963's mostly are now on the slow downhill slide with a handful of the top ones still on a plateau. But the same can now be said of most 1970's, with the addition of a few that are still on the upswing. Overall, I would probably say that 1970 did see much better VP's from companies that traditionally, at that time, didn't make long lived VP's. As the joke goes, "If you couldn't make a decent VP in 1970 you shouldn't be making Port." But coming up on 45 years old the 1970's are reaching their life span for most of them and it's time to start drinking up the majority of them, leaving that top handful to continue to very gracefully slide further into old age.
Andy Velebil Good wine is a good familiar creature if it be well used. William Shakespeare http://www.fortheloveofport.com
Re: 1963 vs 1970
1963 Dow's still drinking very well and not in any respect on downside. I was lucky enough to have sampled this vintage from more than one bottle from a wonderful wine society:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/147648174@N08/?
I liked this kind of vintage port -- elegant, balanced, robust and not "in your face". Developed and beautiful. Developed flavors unfolding on one's palate. Lovely.
As seen from pics, decanted just after opening and then served within 1/2 hour or so thereafter. Not sure if that was necessary but it showed well.
Roy's 2010 tasting note:
"Very light ruby with a light pink-tawny meniscus. Tight initially with minty, cocoa, cedar and strawberry aromas. This exhibited the biggest, richest and roundest palate of Dow's troika of VPs. The tannins are still alive and refined; texturally this is a beauty with sumptuous elegance. Massive, dense, voluptuous and with great purity. One of the best bottles of 1963 Dow I've tasted. Bottles of this quality will provide immense pleasure at 65 years of age if not more. An awesome not-yet-fully-mature VP nearing 50!
Scoe: 96+"
https://www.flickr.com/photos/147648174@N08/?
I liked this kind of vintage port -- elegant, balanced, robust and not "in your face". Developed and beautiful. Developed flavors unfolding on one's palate. Lovely.
As seen from pics, decanted just after opening and then served within 1/2 hour or so thereafter. Not sure if that was necessary but it showed well.
Roy's 2010 tasting note:
"Very light ruby with a light pink-tawny meniscus. Tight initially with minty, cocoa, cedar and strawberry aromas. This exhibited the biggest, richest and roundest palate of Dow's troika of VPs. The tannins are still alive and refined; texturally this is a beauty with sumptuous elegance. Massive, dense, voluptuous and with great purity. One of the best bottles of 1963 Dow I've tasted. Bottles of this quality will provide immense pleasure at 65 years of age if not more. An awesome not-yet-fully-mature VP nearing 50!
Scoe: 96+"
- Tom Archer
- Posts: 2790
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:09 pm
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
Re: 1963 vs 1970
I have seen no real evidence of '70s going over the hill, other than through poor cellarage. Some have plateaued and others still have a little more to offer. Several 63s on the other hand, have been showing signs of tiring for over a decade now. Most '66s are likely to outlive both of their adjoining vintages however, and the '60s are frequently showing better now than their counterparts from '63.
Re: 1963 vs 1970
I agree with both Andy and Tom and Moses.
Provenance is EVERYTHING with old VP.
Buying them on the cheap, often times coming from less advantageous provenance, is the number one reason for opening disappointing bottles from 1970, which may present qualities that seem past their prime. Sure, there are certainly a few that have not survived to this point in time, but that is a rarity in my experience and typically from 3rd tier shippers.
I find the majority of 1970 VPs that I encounter are still in their prime to mature/plateau drinking window. Still, there are a solid number of 1970s that are in a GREAT place in their lives, with 1-3 decades of fine drinking ahead of them (depending on the producer of course). IF I was buying a single mixed case from any vintage between 1955 and 1977, to drink over the next couple of decades, it would definitely be 1970 at this point. 1966 possibly would be even more in line with my palate preference ... but that would be because I narrowed my selection process further than I would have to do when considering which VPs to buy from 1970.
For 1966s, which while the top eight to ten are currently in a fabulous and extraordinary realm in terms of their aging curve; many others are fully mature. 1963s ... even more so and with a smaller bandwidth than either of the aforementioned vintages. As Tom mentioned, I find some of the1960 VPs to be in a great place evolution wise; holding up seemingly better as a % of total bottles from this vintage, that cross my palate. Admittedly, the number of 1960s that I have consumed in the past half decade seems to be shrinking, due to their greater scarcity here in the USA. Fortunately, when they do emerge from cellars, most have been really special and nearly always, pleasurable at the very least.
Provenance is EVERYTHING with old VP.
Buying them on the cheap, often times coming from less advantageous provenance, is the number one reason for opening disappointing bottles from 1970, which may present qualities that seem past their prime. Sure, there are certainly a few that have not survived to this point in time, but that is a rarity in my experience and typically from 3rd tier shippers.
I find the majority of 1970 VPs that I encounter are still in their prime to mature/plateau drinking window. Still, there are a solid number of 1970s that are in a GREAT place in their lives, with 1-3 decades of fine drinking ahead of them (depending on the producer of course). IF I was buying a single mixed case from any vintage between 1955 and 1977, to drink over the next couple of decades, it would definitely be 1970 at this point. 1966 possibly would be even more in line with my palate preference ... but that would be because I narrowed my selection process further than I would have to do when considering which VPs to buy from 1970.
For 1966s, which while the top eight to ten are currently in a fabulous and extraordinary realm in terms of their aging curve; many others are fully mature. 1963s ... even more so and with a smaller bandwidth than either of the aforementioned vintages. As Tom mentioned, I find some of the1960 VPs to be in a great place evolution wise; holding up seemingly better as a % of total bottles from this vintage, that cross my palate. Admittedly, the number of 1960s that I have consumed in the past half decade seems to be shrinking, due to their greater scarcity here in the USA. Fortunately, when they do emerge from cellars, most have been really special and nearly always, pleasurable at the very least.
Ambition driven by passion, rather than money, is as strong an elixir as is Port. http://www.fortheloveofport.com
Re: 1963 vs 1970
What do you mean by provenance?
Surely all bottles from the same producer, from the same vintage, has the same provenance.
ie come from the same place of origin.
Surely all bottles from the same producer, from the same vintage, has the same provenance.
ie come from the same place of origin.
- Andy Velebil
- Posts: 16717
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:49 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, United States of America - USA
- Contact:
Re: 1963 vs 1970
It means how it has been stored since being bottled.Svein CE wrote:What do you mean by provenance?
.
Andy Velebil Good wine is a good familiar creature if it be well used. William Shakespeare http://www.fortheloveofport.com