I looked up an article Roy had written on the Nacional 31.
He explained that in his opinion, the ‘lesser’ Do Noval 31 was ‘better’ than the classic Nacional 31. That got me thinking. I couldn’t grasp how in general terms, the small part of the vineyard that produced the Nacional is generally claimed to be vastly superior, is it a special/different grape? outstanding position within the vineyard? Or is it the Quinta argument of being pure? But that would mean the normal Quinta Do Noval would have to be lesser port, and say a blend. But of what, if, it is already the grapes from the same year, from the same field? Does the vineyard have several grape types growing in it? If this is very obvious to you, or I'm missing a crucial fact, put me out of my misery please,
Alan.
The difference between Quinta Do Noval and the Nacional?
Moderators: Glenn E., Roy Hersh, Andy Velebil
-
Tom Archer
- Posts: 2790
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:09 pm
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
-
Andy Velebil
- Posts: 16813
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:49 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, United States of America - USA
- Contact:
Alan,
The short story is that the Nacional grapes are UNgrafted vines. After phylloxera hit in the 1880s a very small part of the vineyard was replanted with ungrafted vines (phylloxera resistant vines grafted with American rootstock were used in the rest of the vineyard). Although there is myths that this small section of vines has never been replanted, that is not true. The Nacional area gets new vines planted regularly when needed, its just those vines are from ungrafted rootstock. Other companies have tried to use the nacional vines in their vineyards but have not had success in the vines producing right. As a side note, the Nacional grapes are tread in their own separate lagare on the property.
The short story is that the Nacional grapes are UNgrafted vines. After phylloxera hit in the 1880s a very small part of the vineyard was replanted with ungrafted vines (phylloxera resistant vines grafted with American rootstock were used in the rest of the vineyard). Although there is myths that this small section of vines has never been replanted, that is not true. The Nacional area gets new vines planted regularly when needed, its just those vines are from ungrafted rootstock. Other companies have tried to use the nacional vines in their vineyards but have not had success in the vines producing right. As a side note, the Nacional grapes are tread in their own separate lagare on the property.
Andy Velebil Good wine is a good familiar creature if it be well used. William Shakespeare http://www.fortheloveofport.com
-
Tom Archer
- Posts: 2790
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:09 pm
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
Excuse Me !!!
You buggers have got me to buy a book and now you want to ruin the ending!!!
Sounds to me that this subject is suspiciously like many Port issues, like tasting, guessing longevity,etc, theres lots of agreed facts, some disputed ones, and then a large dollop of opinion and guesswork.
Thats ok, it all adds to the mystique. :)
Alan.
You buggers have got me to buy a book and now you want to ruin the ending!!!
Sounds to me that this subject is suspiciously like many Port issues, like tasting, guessing longevity,etc, theres lots of agreed facts, some disputed ones, and then a large dollop of opinion and guesswork.
Thats ok, it all adds to the mystique. :)
Alan.
-
Derek T.
- Posts: 4080
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:02 pm
- Location: Chesterfield, United Kingdom - UK
- Contact:
Alan,
To answer one of your specific questions, the Nacional vineyard has a large number of grape varieties planted in no particular order - known as a field-blend. Most modern Quinta's would have specific parcels of land allocated to each individual variety so that they can control the blend more easily.
I have to disagree with Tom on the grafted/ungrafted argumement - everyone knows that cutting US components out of any production line will always improve quality
Derek
To answer one of your specific questions, the Nacional vineyard has a large number of grape varieties planted in no particular order - known as a field-blend. Most modern Quinta's would have specific parcels of land allocated to each individual variety so that they can control the blend more easily.
I have to disagree with Tom on the grafted/ungrafted argumement - everyone knows that cutting US components out of any production line will always improve quality
Derek
-
Andy Velebil
- Posts: 16813
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:49 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, United States of America - USA
- Contact:
As for your grapes....please keep them to yourself. this is a family forum 
To answer Tom's question. IIRC, Noval has tried to plant the NN vines in other parts of the vineyard, without success. Seems they are a fussy bunch and like the little part of the vineyard they are in.
To answer Tom's question. IIRC, Noval has tried to plant the NN vines in other parts of the vineyard, without success. Seems they are a fussy bunch and like the little part of the vineyard they are in.
Andy Velebil Good wine is a good familiar creature if it be well used. William Shakespeare http://www.fortheloveofport.com
-
Derek T.
- Posts: 4080
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:02 pm
- Location: Chesterfield, United Kingdom - UK
- Contact:
- thankfully, the only grapes I have are in the freezer 
Alan, another book you should order is Michael Broadbent's Vintage Wine - tasting notes galore from a well respected authority on all things supplied with a cork. ISBN: 0-15-100704-7
This is a very useful book to have when considering buying port or any other high quality wine.
Derek
-
Jay Powers
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:48 pm
- Location: Pacifica, California, United States of America - USA
Alan,
I'll give you a serious answer to your question.
Phylloxera is a louse that attacks the roots of a vine. In the 1870-1880 period, this louse spread down through Europe (where it had been accidentally imported from America) into Portugal and devasted the vineyards and production by munching its way through the roots of every vine it could find.
One example I have read but can't recall precisely because I don't have my books with me is that this particular quinta's production fell over a three year period from 100+ pipes of port to just 3. Phylloxera caused economic devastation. At the very least its impact on the vines caused them to be stressed and for grape production to fall dramatically, at worst the vines died.
However, some bright spark somewhere spotted that the native american vine (vitis labrusca) did not seem to suffer from attack by this louse. However, grapes from vitis labrusca are reported to make horrible - you might say lousy - wine, with descriptions like "foxy" and "wet wool" being used. After a few years of experimentation it was found that you could graft European vines (vitis vinifera), like Cabernet Sauvignon or the varieties in the Douro, onto vitis labrusca rootstocks and they would flourish even in the presence of the louse.
So the world - at least the producers with the money to do so - replanted their vineyards with grafted vines. Only a handful of territories were unaffected by the louse, the largest of these being Chile. There are stories that I have read that wines from grafted vines are not as great as wines from ungrafted vines, that something of the terroir was lost when putting American rootstock between the grape and the soil. Having never tried a wine from pre-phylloxera days, I can't give a first hand comment on this but some put the growing reputation of Chilean wines partly down to their ungrafted vines.
At some point in the mid-late 1920's Noval must have taken a decision to (re)plant a parcel of ungrafted vines on a little terrace of land just above the main Quinta building. I would love to know why this decision was taken, but don't have a clue. I've deduced that this replanting was done in the mid-late 1920's since the great 1931 Nacional was produced from grapes grown on vines that were only 5-6 years old. I don't know whether these vines were replacements for older vines (grafted or ungrafted) or whether this was a derelict parcel of land that was planted up. The ungrafted vines are attacked by the louse, but this particular area of land does not seem to support the louse particularly well and so the attacks on the vine roots are moderated to some extent and the vines are stressed, but able to survive and produce small volumes of highly flavoured grapes. These grapes are vinified separately from grapes grown in other areas of the vineyard and if the quality is up to it, they are bottled and sold as Quinta do Noval Nacional. (If the quality is not up to separate bottling then they are used to blend into Noval's other ports.)
Every now and then, one of the ungrafted vines needs to be replaced through old age or accident. When this happens, that vine is replaced by a cutting from the same plant. For this reason the vines in the Nacional parcel of land are genetically identical to the vines that were planted in 1925-6.
And finally, Andy is absolutely spot on when he says that both Noval and other shippers have tried planting ungrafted vines in other areas of land in the Douro. To the best of my knowledge, none have survived to be economically viable.
Enjoy reading Mayson's book....and Suckling's.....and Broadbent's....and....
Alex
Postscript - I have edited this posting to correct the latin names of the vines after Tom was able to provide the details I was missing.
I'll give you a serious answer to your question.
Phylloxera is a louse that attacks the roots of a vine. In the 1870-1880 period, this louse spread down through Europe (where it had been accidentally imported from America) into Portugal and devasted the vineyards and production by munching its way through the roots of every vine it could find.
One example I have read but can't recall precisely because I don't have my books with me is that this particular quinta's production fell over a three year period from 100+ pipes of port to just 3. Phylloxera caused economic devastation. At the very least its impact on the vines caused them to be stressed and for grape production to fall dramatically, at worst the vines died.
However, some bright spark somewhere spotted that the native american vine (vitis labrusca) did not seem to suffer from attack by this louse. However, grapes from vitis labrusca are reported to make horrible - you might say lousy - wine, with descriptions like "foxy" and "wet wool" being used. After a few years of experimentation it was found that you could graft European vines (vitis vinifera), like Cabernet Sauvignon or the varieties in the Douro, onto vitis labrusca rootstocks and they would flourish even in the presence of the louse.
So the world - at least the producers with the money to do so - replanted their vineyards with grafted vines. Only a handful of territories were unaffected by the louse, the largest of these being Chile. There are stories that I have read that wines from grafted vines are not as great as wines from ungrafted vines, that something of the terroir was lost when putting American rootstock between the grape and the soil. Having never tried a wine from pre-phylloxera days, I can't give a first hand comment on this but some put the growing reputation of Chilean wines partly down to their ungrafted vines.
At some point in the mid-late 1920's Noval must have taken a decision to (re)plant a parcel of ungrafted vines on a little terrace of land just above the main Quinta building. I would love to know why this decision was taken, but don't have a clue. I've deduced that this replanting was done in the mid-late 1920's since the great 1931 Nacional was produced from grapes grown on vines that were only 5-6 years old. I don't know whether these vines were replacements for older vines (grafted or ungrafted) or whether this was a derelict parcel of land that was planted up. The ungrafted vines are attacked by the louse, but this particular area of land does not seem to support the louse particularly well and so the attacks on the vine roots are moderated to some extent and the vines are stressed, but able to survive and produce small volumes of highly flavoured grapes. These grapes are vinified separately from grapes grown in other areas of the vineyard and if the quality is up to it, they are bottled and sold as Quinta do Noval Nacional. (If the quality is not up to separate bottling then they are used to blend into Noval's other ports.)
Every now and then, one of the ungrafted vines needs to be replaced through old age or accident. When this happens, that vine is replaced by a cutting from the same plant. For this reason the vines in the Nacional parcel of land are genetically identical to the vines that were planted in 1925-6.
And finally, Andy is absolutely spot on when he says that both Noval and other shippers have tried planting ungrafted vines in other areas of land in the Douro. To the best of my knowledge, none have survived to be economically viable.
Enjoy reading Mayson's book....and Suckling's.....and Broadbent's....and....
Alex
Postscript - I have edited this posting to correct the latin names of the vines after Tom was able to provide the details I was missing.
Last edited by Al B. on Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:59 am, edited 2 times in total.
Alex
Thanks, and very informative. That was a much more comprehensive answer than I could of hoped for. I'll remember the gist of that, and be able to recount it when required....UNLESS, as you guys have a habit of doing, someone then posts 'With all due respect, I cant agree with the previous point....'
For those of you lucky enough to have compared the two Noval's side by side, from the same year, Is there a noticable and clear difference. Or is it a subtlety you would suspect of such similar products?
I ask this question without wanting to evoke phrases like 'Tastes of minced loganberry with a side dish of crushed and sauted Squirrel liver' .
Alan
PS. I'm only jealous. My tastebuds generally concentrate on whether chips have vinegar on them, or not!
Thanks, and very informative. That was a much more comprehensive answer than I could of hoped for. I'll remember the gist of that, and be able to recount it when required....UNLESS, as you guys have a habit of doing, someone then posts 'With all due respect, I cant agree with the previous point....'
For those of you lucky enough to have compared the two Noval's side by side, from the same year, Is there a noticable and clear difference. Or is it a subtlety you would suspect of such similar products?
I ask this question without wanting to evoke phrases like 'Tastes of minced loganberry with a side dish of crushed and sauted Squirrel liver' .
Alan
PS. I'm only jealous. My tastebuds generally concentrate on whether chips have vinegar on them, or not!
-
Derek T.
- Posts: 4080
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:02 pm
- Location: Chesterfield, United Kingdom - UK
- Contact:
Alan,
I have been lucky enough to taste a number of Noval and Noval Nacional (and Noval Silval) vintage ports side by side from the same years and they do taste different. However, it is not always the case that the Noval Nacional is the best of the three. In side by side tastings, the great 1931 Noval often comes out on top of it's Nacional twin brother, which is 3 times as expensive :?
Derek
I have been lucky enough to taste a number of Noval and Noval Nacional (and Noval Silval) vintage ports side by side from the same years and they do taste different. However, it is not always the case that the Noval Nacional is the best of the three. In side by side tastings, the great 1931 Noval often comes out on top of it's Nacional twin brother, which is 3 times as expensive :?
Derek
-
Tom Archer
- Posts: 2790
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:09 pm
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
V. Vinifera is the original european vine - V. Labrusca is the American vine with the famously odd taste.grapes from vitis vinifera are reported to make horrible - you might say lousy - wine
According to Jancis Robinson, 15% of the world's vineyards use ungrafted vines - the Phylloxera louse does not like certain soils - and she states that she would never claim to be able to tell the difference.
I think a degree of skepticism is in order when one tries to separate fact from fantasy with Nacional. My one bottle (an '83) states clearly on the label "Produced from pre-phylloxera vines" - which is a blatent lie...
Mayson notes that the soil for the Nacional vineyard was fumigated prior to planting (in about 1926) Surface applied soil fumigant chemicals have been around a long time, so it would not be surprising if this is the continuing means of Phylloxera control.
I personally believe the quality of the wine stems from the intimate and expert care of every vine in the vineyard, and an attention to the vinification process that surpasses all others.
I think the ungrafted bit adds romance and mystique - but nothing else!
Tom
I've also tasted Nacional and regular Noval side by side, and can confirm that they are different. As Derek says, different but not necessarily better. However, the fact remains that it is very difficult to get hold of Nacional wines and they are very expensive. Are they worth 5-10 times the cost of the regular Noval?
Not sure. But there is something nice about drinking such a special port.
Tom has also quoted Jancis on her comment on her being unsure whether she would be able to tell the difference between wine from grafted vines and wine from ungrafted vines. I tend to agree with this. I can tell Nacional from regular Noval when compared side-by-side out of bottles where I can see the labels. They are different but is that difference because one is grafted and the other is not? Or is it because one is grown in basically a sand outcrop and the others in schist? Or is it because they are treated and vinified differently? Personally, I don't think its the last of these as I saw no difference in the way the grapes or vines were being treated when we visited Noval, but who knows what goes on for the other 364 days of the year?
Tom also commented on the wording on his label, that Nacional is made from pre-phyloxera vines. While this is clearly untrue as the vineyard was replanted in 1925-6, my romantic heart holds to the hope that it was replanted using cuttings from the original vines that survived in this plot of land after the attack of phylloxera. Who knows, maybe this particular port IS made from (genetically) pre-phylloxera vines!
Tom - Thanks for being able to correct my memory on the latin names of the vines. Without my books, I was relying on the old grey cells. They are clearly in need of some additional lubrication. Since I'm in London again today I will be trotting off to the nearest wine bar for lunch!
Alex
Not sure. But there is something nice about drinking such a special port.
Tom has also quoted Jancis on her comment on her being unsure whether she would be able to tell the difference between wine from grafted vines and wine from ungrafted vines. I tend to agree with this. I can tell Nacional from regular Noval when compared side-by-side out of bottles where I can see the labels. They are different but is that difference because one is grafted and the other is not? Or is it because one is grown in basically a sand outcrop and the others in schist? Or is it because they are treated and vinified differently? Personally, I don't think its the last of these as I saw no difference in the way the grapes or vines were being treated when we visited Noval, but who knows what goes on for the other 364 days of the year?
Tom also commented on the wording on his label, that Nacional is made from pre-phyloxera vines. While this is clearly untrue as the vineyard was replanted in 1925-6, my romantic heart holds to the hope that it was replanted using cuttings from the original vines that survived in this plot of land after the attack of phylloxera. Who knows, maybe this particular port IS made from (genetically) pre-phylloxera vines!
Tom - Thanks for being able to correct my memory on the latin names of the vines. Without my books, I was relying on the old grey cells. They are clearly in need of some additional lubrication. Since I'm in London again today I will be trotting off to the nearest wine bar for lunch!
Alex
Last edited by Al B. on Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Tom Archer
- Posts: 2790
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:09 pm
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
-
Derek T.
- Posts: 4080
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:02 pm
- Location: Chesterfield, United Kingdom - UK
- Contact:
Prompted by this question I have read through all of the books I have and Roy's notes on this site. I can only find 1 instance where the Noval bottling from a particular year has been given a higher score than the Nacional from the same year. As that instance comes from Roy's notes I will not go into details here as the information is not available to non-PP Members.
Although not too scientific, I think this goes some way to demonstrating that Nacional is consistently of better quality than the regular Noval. The odd occasions when the trend is reversed may well be down to bottle variation rather than general quality of the respective wines.
Derek
Although not too scientific, I think this goes some way to demonstrating that Nacional is consistently of better quality than the regular Noval. The odd occasions when the trend is reversed may well be down to bottle variation rather than general quality of the respective wines.
Derek