For the actual tasting, the Fonseca was now decanted 24 hr, with the Dow, Warre, and Grahams decanted 6 hr. The Fonseca threw surprisingly little of a fine sediment, while the other three threw a respectable amount of flakey gunk.
Aroma: Fonseca-very nice, strong fruity smell. The Dow had a more ethereal aroma of flowers and fruit. The Grahams had an "off" smell, which took me all night to come up with a description for. Finally I resolved on "light sewing machine oil" to describe the grahams aroma, which carried over to the taste as well. The only thing I can think of is a insufficiently cleaned decanter used for the first time...but still hard to explain. I'll need to retaste another bottle of this wine to come to a conclusion. It was not so much bad as odd and unusual.
The Fonseca was dark/plum colored, while the Dow was the lightest colored, being ruby with orangish-red highlights. The Warre was a perfect ruby color, darker than the Grahams and Dow but lighter than the Fonseca. The Fonseca was still putting off too much alcohol, degrading what otherwise would have been an excellent port. The Dow and Warre were both very smooth, and well balanced.
In summary, none of the four are in decline yet, and the Fonseca could/should go for another ten years to get the same smoothness as the Dow and Warre. The Dow was the lightest of the four, but drinking very well. Of the four, the Warre is the one I would choose for a dinner party tomorrow, followed by the Dow. The Fonseca has more aging potential, but none of the others are on the decline. The alcohol in the Fonseca is too much to make it a perfect port yet, but I still have some left so I'll follow it out to 72 hour or more an see how it develops. Ratings (using all of the recently discussed scales):lol: :
Warre.....Excellent.....*****.....9/8.....>90.....
Dow.....Excellent.....*****.....9/8.....>90.....
Fonseca.....Very good.....****(*).....8/9.....~90.....
Grahams NR
