Multi: Cockburn 1908, 27, 55, 60, 63, 70, 85; Taylor 08, 27, 50, 85

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Friday 16th March 2007: chez mon père, a sesquivertical of Cockburn and Taylor (paperwork). Present: JDAW MAW RAW WDBP RKA JFH MF SRG, and sort-of SVW.

A vertical of Cockburn, with some matching Taylor vintages, and some mystery bottles. Having had very little experience of Cockburn, this was educational for me (I do these things for their educational merits, of course not for pleasure). The Cockburn summary: cherries. Black cherries when young; glace cherries when old.

• Cockburn 1908
Very pale pink, and cloudy despite my usual decanting method through multiple layers of muslin. Very spirity; tasting of sugar and alcohol. Old and dead.

• Taylor 1908
Also cloudy pink, nosing of candy sugar and caramel. JFH said “fudge and chocolate”. Lovely soft old port, very delicate, but with great length. Alas too faded. Perhaps, according to JFH, cloves.

• Cockburn 1927
My one previous sample of Cockburn 1927 was a bottle opened the night before my brother’s wedding, which was splendid. This one wasn’t. A glorious rose colour, and a nose that JFH but nobody else described as “grass”. To taste sour, “medicinal” (RAW), and later having a burnt note. Off.

• Unknown 1927
Sold some years ago as two bottles of “1927 port, house unknown”, one of which — hurray for port tongs, the best invention since branded corks — was Taylor. Most appropriate for the company, and much better than my one previous experience of Taylor 1927 (that one having faded very fast). This was brown-tinged dark red, nosing of plums, and tasting strongly of plums and the classic Taylor backbone. Two hours later it was much simpler. A very fine old port indeed, and my favourite of the evening.

• Cockburn 1955
At the Acker BYOB party my Cockburn 1955 was gloriously fruity, but this one wasn’t. Brown-edged dark pink, smelling pruney, but in the mouth the alcohol predominated. Good length, but the fruit had nearly all gone — perhaps faint prunes.

• Cockburn “believed 1950’s”
Sold at auction as “believed 1950’s”, which — tongs again — was actually 1960. Pink again: I wondered whether pink is the Cockburn colour. Medium length, soft, “slightly spicy” (RAW), and JFH mysteriously detecting “vanilla”.

• Taylor Special Quinta 1950
Pale rose, maybe a hint of orange, with little nose. Later I noted “maybe citrus”. It was too acid to be enjoyable, though improved somewhat with time in the glass (or maybe with alcohol in me). (See thread.)

• Cockburn 1963
Dark red, light-brown-edged. The initial alcohol attack far too strong for me. My notes include the marvellous phrase “lovely finish of”, with nothing after it. A lovely finish of something, no doubt. Later, cherries; RAW finding “prunes”.

• Cockburn 1970
In January I donated and helped drink six bottles of Cockburn 1970 for the 52nd Annual Dinner of the Cambridge University Tiddlywinks Club, so not my first attempt at it. Pale red; little nose (I recall same at the CUTwC dinner); nicely rounded with prunes.

• Cockburn 1985
Excellent mid-tone pure red, nosing of liquorice, with huge cherrytastic fruit and maybe raisins. But simple: sugar and alcohol.

• Taylor 1985
RKA’s favourite. And did he tell us so, mentioning more than a few a times that he happens to own two cases of it. The darkest port here, very closed, with chocolate in the nose. Huge long fruit, classic Taylor. An excellent port, and not dear. JFH thought “too much” which I took as praise.

Links to individual TN threads:
Cockburn — 1908, 1927, 1955, 1960, 1963, 1970, 1985;
Taylor — 1908, 1927, S.Q. 1950, 1985.

[Derek T.]

Julian,

Great line-up and thanks for the notes.

I am particularly interested in the Taylor SQ 1950 - your bottle seems to have been less enjoyable than the one Alex B and I had last year - do you think the bottle was spoiled or just passed its best?
Derek

[John Danza]

Thanks very much Julian for the great notes. My experiences with 1927 Cockburn and Taylor have all been very good, thanksfully. In the case of the Cockburn, I did not have the pink color that you had. Mine were browning considerably and were quite far on their way to looking like a full-fledged tawny.

All the best,
John

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

The Taylor Special Quinta 1950 was past its best, which can’t be surprising for a not-really-declared vintage aged 57 years. I have photographs of the capsule that will eventually be posted somewhere.

Of the 1927s I have had Taylor twice (this time excellent, previous weak) and Cockburn twice (this time weak, previous excellent). For their age that must a fair outcome.

[Michael Ferrier]

Most interested in your comments on Taylor 1985, of which I am lucky enough to have a case. Any thoughts as to when I should start it?
Thanks

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Since buying two cases of singles and one of magnums in May 2001 I have been sampling, every time thinking that another half decade is needed. Better informed opinion would be welcome.

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Pictures from the Friday, which I shall break into several posts.

The Taylor’s Special Quinta 1950 was identifiable only from the capsule.

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Cockburn 1927, Army & Navy stores.

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Eight of the eleven decanters.

Readers with better decanter labelling technology are invited to share it.

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

People: in the lower picture yours truly is pouring the water.


Observe the colour of the ’08s in the decanters, and the cloudiness of the Taylor 1908 in the glass of the man far left, he being “JFH”.

[Andy Velebil]

Cool pictures, thanks for sharing...and I must say, quite the dressed up affair .

[Alan C.]

Looks like you had a great evening. The pictures really bring the occasion to life for the reader.

Alan.

[John Danza]

Great pictures Julian. And it's great to see that it was a black tie event. It's fun to get dressed up for this kind of thing.

All the best,
John

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Well, since people are being nice, I’ll post more. Bottles first.

Cockburn 1908 revealing that it was bought at Sotheby’s New York (lot 1203, 20 May 2006).


Sold at auction as “Cockburn, believed 1950’s” (Bonham’s, lot 711 on 27 Sep 2005) though actually 1960 (with my hand-written cellar label).


Cockburn 1963.


Cockburn 1985.


Taylor 1908.


Taylor 1985.

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

What the wife could see.

Naughty girl took no notes! (Or at least, very few notes.)

[Al B.]

Julian,

Great pictures. Thanks for posting them. Its always fun to look at other people's tasting events and sigh wistfully....

Alex

[Ghandih]

Photos of the occasion do certainly make you wish you were there. Hang on, I was! Excellent evening, Julian, many thanks. Apologies for the delay responding, but I've finally lined up the ducks and worked out how to add comments...

Not that I have much to add to your comprehensive notes; Cockburn = cherry was definitely the major learning point for me. As I recall, we finally defined the flavour in the '85 and then revisited the older ones to check what we'd spotted as a sweet and fruity note. A comment I noted at the time was the consistency of the Cockburns - with a bit of practice, I imagine you might get the hang of spotting them. If you need someone to help you practise, you know where to find me!

[Julian D. A. Wiseman]

Greetings, and welcome to FTLOP. You should be warned that the man who pays for the hosting is more than slightly cantankerous on the subject of real names. See this thread, bolding and all.

For those who care, this newcomer is the rightmost person in the first photo in this post.

[Andy Velebil]

Simon,

Welcome and glad to have here on FTLOP. Hope you will continue to drop by and post.

[Roy Hersh]

Simon,

It is nice to have you with us here on the FTLOP. It looks like you enjoyed a pretty great tasting and in tux no less. Glad to have you here and we look forward to having you share your Port wisdom and questions with us any time you'd like to.

Best regards,

Roy Hersh