A flaw...

[Monique Heinemans.]

As I said before I hardly take any notes when I drink a glass of wine or port. I just drink and enjoy them (and sometimes write down on my excel-sheet: love it, buy more). I off course do sense/taste the difference between just a nice glass of wine or port and a very good glass of wine or port. F.i: I drank a bottle of Vargellas 1987 last week which I really loved (have to buy more), I had a bottle of Sandeman Vau 1997 this week and didn't enjoy it very much (don't buy anymore).

Now I have read in many of your TN's that the port you were tasting had a flaw (I had to look this word up ), a "fault" as I understand.
My question now is: Is the presence of a flaw in a port the most important item to you when you make a TN? And do you really enjoy a glass of port better when it has no flaws? Does it make a port more/less enjoyable for you? Can I f.i. say that the Vau vintage lack's complexity (for me) and that would be a flaw i.m.o?
I hope you understant my question, because I didn't know how else to describe it....

But, thanks for any answer,

Monique.

[John M.]

Hello Monique;

For me a TN is vital information regardless of flaw or not. In the extreme, one helps you avoid a bad port, the other helps you find excellent ones. But mainly, to me, TNs let me know what to expect; and to compare my experiences with everyone else. It also makes it more fun.

Too, few things in this world are perfect, excellent, etc. I think there is great depth to exploring where something comes up short and why as it helps us appreciate the things that are perfect, excellent, etc. In the meantime, if you only have a good port, just enjoy!

As to the Vau lack of complexity, that is more of a characteristic of that wine (Vau) than a flaw. Either way, it is good info.

Cheers;
John

[Glenn E.]

To me, a lack of complexity isn't a flaw itself, but might be an indication of some other flaw. (And yes, fault is an equally good word in this case.) Some Ports are intentionally less complex than others, such as the Sandeman Vau Vintage, in order to be more approachable at a younger age.

I think of a flaw as being some sort of mistake along the way. It might have been a mistake that the winemaker made such as over-extraction, or it might have been a mistake that some previous owner made such as storing the bottle upright so that the cork dried out. Exposure to heat can also cause flaws (sometimes referred to as heat damaged or cooked). Excessive alcohol ("hot") or volatile acidity can also be considered flaws since a well-made and well-stored Port should not exhibit either. And of course, a corked bottle (caused by the presence of a chemical known as TCA) is also considered flawed.

So to answer your question, it is very important to note a flaw in a tasting note as that is the taster's warning to the reader that something was wrong with this bottle and so the results should not be considered normal. A bottle with no flaws is by definition more enjoyable than one with flaws.

A lack of complexity, though, is also important to note especially if you feel that the Port in question should have been more complex. I can enjoy simpler Ports - generally speaking LBVs are less complex than Vintage Ports - but will expect to pay less for them. If someone has posted a TN that says a Port lacks complexity, I can use that information to help me make purchasing decisions.

Does that help?

[dom carter]

hi,

A flaw is something that is wrong/incorrect,

to quote the Oxford English dictionary; "…a mark, blemish, or other imperfection which mars a substance or object…"

- so if the Sandeman is less complex by design (that's the important bit!) it's not flawed - it's just not as complex as other Port or your expectation.

If on the other hand, a bottle of (picking an example) 1970 Taylor's tastes of vinegar then it is flawed, as by design it's not supposed to taste like that!!

Hope this helps, and welcome, and don't worry about struggles with the English language - I'm English and i don't get it sometimes and it's my first language!!!!

Regards

Dom

[Jim R.]

I am with the group that says your impressions are the most important! For the reader and your future decisions. A port with a flaw can still be enjoyable! Some flaws will air out in the decanter (high acidity, high alcohol, sometimes high tannins but they seem to hang on longer). If you feel the price was right (Sandeman Vau being more reasonable priced than some others) then you should consider the enjoyment received and shared and buy more if still sanely priced. I usually have ports at parties and don't have any leftovers unfortunately, so, hopefully, the ones you like are still available. For us, your fellow port nuts and readers we enjoy all tasting notes. Sometimes we ask for clarification but that is just a request for information and NOT an editorial comment! Enjoy More Port!

[Peter W. Meek]

Monique,

The important thing about seeing something like flaw, fault, atypical or other words like that in a tasting note is that it is a warning that the particular bottle referred to in the tasting note may not be like other bottles of the same wine. However, if many people find the same flaw with a particular wine, then it may be something wrong with a great many examples of that wine. I noticed a flaw (cooked) in two bottles of a port that most other people liked. I bought both bottles from the same source, so it is possible that an entire case (or cases) may have been stored improperly.

So, you see that it is important to post tasting notes, even if you think that the particular bottle you are describing may be flawed. The more information we have about each wine, the more able we are to make useful decisions. My notes about that wine might allow someone else to keep trying to get a good bottle, where they might have decided not to buy another bottle based on a bad experience. I will certainly try that wine again (if I can get it from a different source), knowing (from other people's notes) that most bottles are very good.

[Roy Hersh]

Lots of wisdom in the posts above. I enjoyed reading the responses and felt they were all quite solid.


I may look at your questions differently though:

My question now is: Is the presence of a flaw in a port the most important item to you when you make a TN?

When I create a tasting note, I look to provide information on the coloration of the wine to give an indication if it was youthful or showing signs of maturity. Then give an indication of the aromatics, flavors, body weight, structure, texture and finish ... usually a drinking window. That's what I like to include when time permits. But ultimately, what counts most is conveying whether or not I enjoyed the wine or not. A tasting note can be as simple as "I loved it" or "this really was not to my liking" but you get the picture. As to a flaw in a wine, whether it is: cooked, VA, devoid of acidity, TCA, oxidized, Brettanomyces etc., should be noted in the TN to provide the backdrop for others to understand there was something wrong. It may take a specific individual years to be able to tell what the flaw is derived from, and sometimes they never do learn that. Either way, most people can tell when something smells or tastes "wrong" and that should be conveyed in the TN, even if it can't be explained. That said, I do NOT go looking for flaws in Port or any wine I drink. I note them if they are present, as mentioned, but I don't look for them or hope to find them.

Now comes the personal philosophy of the reviewer. Is the glass half empty or full? I choose to try to find something good in every glass of Port or wine I taste. I may rate it 80 points, but will still try to find whatever characteristics in the juice that seem to be good and make sure to include that too. I truly do not like to read wine reviews that seem focused on finding flaws or the negative aspects of wine ... and there are many that I have found who do come from the 'glass is half empty' direction and it becomes tiresome to read. I am not advocating making everything bright and cheery, when a wine is clearly no good. I am just sayin' that the majority of wine is sound and there are going to be things that can be picked on if looking to do so ... in just about every wine. However, it is so much more enjoyable to read about what someone found in their glass to really enjoy.

And do you really enjoy a glass of port better when it has no flaws?

Of course. Who wouldn't prefer a near perfect glass or bottle of Port? But depending on the seriousness of a flaw, it can be overlooked, or "compartmentalized" and the Port still enjoyed. I recently had a 1977 Taylor here that was slightly corked. Most couldn't detect the low level of TCA, but it was immediately apparent to me. The good news was that it was still fairly light and allowed for the aromatics and flavors to still shine through. I was able to drink past the obvious flaw and enjoy the VP nonetheless. Sometimes that is just not possible, but in this case, I was able to 'drink around it.'

Does it make a port more/less enjoyable for you?

Depends on the issue. Most flaws detract from the experience and in evaluating a wine, the flaw will lead to a lower score than if it was a perfect bottle. But as mentioned above, it depends on how serious the flaw actually is. Sometimes, a flaw ... like VA (aka = volatile acidity) is something in low levels that may make a wine better and provides for lifted or high-toned aromatics in a Port (moreso Madeira) which I can find enjoyable. So, it not only depends on how flawed, but which one for which wine. Given my druthers, I would much prefer a wine without a flaw though.

Can I f.i. say that the Vau vintage lack's complexity (for me) and that would be a flaw i.m.o?

There are flaws which are chemically induced, or introduced by poor winemaking or even viticulture. Those are flaws that if in a wine, you can't help but notice when trained to do so. For a beginner or someone who is not as experienced or "immune" to a particular flaw or the majority of them ... this person might find the wine is not to their liking but they just don't know why. That's ok too. But something like the wine lacking complexity ... is not really what I'd call a flaw, it is just the natural character of the wine, as experienced by you. Someone sitting next to you might find it the most complex wine they've ever tasted. So, my "must buy" might be your "pour down the drain" and vice versa. What counts most is how the wine smells and tastes to YOU and the impression it leaves on your palate. But don't think that any/everything you don't like is a flaw.

Last but not least, for me ... look for the beauty in every wine, when possible. It just makes life and wine, that much more enjoyable.

[Monique Heinemans.]

Thank you all for giving me explanations on this item. Now I understand it a bit more.
Nevertheless, I don't think that I ever will be that expierienced in tasting to make the difference between V.A. or the other flaws Roy mentioned.
But I keep enjoying my wine!

, Monique.

[Roy Hersh]

Monique,

The good news for you: in reality, that is all that counts.

for an excellent thread and hopefully others will still have different vantage points and provide you with their views too.