1963 Quinta do Noval Vintage Port

[Al B.]

This was one of the ullaged broking bottles from Berry Brothers in Basingstoke. Sadly, it was the only one I bought and now they have none left

The bottle was a light coloured glass, covered in cellar dirt (so looked mighty impressive). The lead capsule was in place but was stuck to the bottle, which had clearly seem some seepage in the past although this was not obvious before I removed the capsule. The cork had also been pushed out slightly. All of which worried me slightly.

The cork fragmented on removal with an Ah-So style cork remover but was clearly branded "Quinta do Noval Vintage 1963". The wine decanted off the sediment easily and securely.

Tasted straight from the decanter as I was worried about the age and fragility of this wine, it was pale and watery looking, a light ruby/tawny colour with distinct browning at the rim.

The nose was spirity and had an odd tinge of damp earth, blackberries and sweet, ripe fruit.

Initial impact in the mouth was a little bland and overly acidic. A touch of fruit overwhelmed by off-putting earthy tones. Hot and alcoholic mid-palate with fruit coming through eventually. Quite sweet.

Hot aftertaste with weak chocolate coming through. I can see why Suckling is slightly dismissive about this wine. 82/100.

After 2 hours in the decanter there was no real difference in the appearance of the wine. The nose was more developed, I picked up the pleasant smell of the wine from arms length. Reminded me of sweet loganberries. Still earthy with my nose in the glass, a touch medicinal and spirity.

Disjointed sweet and acidic entry, too acidic to be balanced. Still oddly medicinal and earthy in the mouth. Fruit more pronounced, reminding me of sweet raspberries. Hot and spirity still.

Aftertaste better than the first tasting. Initially fruit but quickly changes to bitter chocolate and coffee of a moderate length. Improved from the first tasting, but not great. 85/100.

After 4 hours the wine had changed and was darker than before. More ruby and less watery looking. Either the light had changed or my eyes were playing tricks, but I could swear that there was less browning on the rim.

Dusty, sweet strawberries on the nose. Smooth and sweet into the mouth, bringing liquorice and aniseed. Peppery alcohol in the mid-palate, but not hot and spirity as before. Lovely fruit structure. Unbalanced acidity has gone and tannins are appearing in the mid-palate!

Aftertaste takes a while to kick in, but gets going eventually with a very long length of chocolate and coffee. This needs more decanter time than I had first expected. 89/100.

The next evening there was still a glassful of wine left in the decanter. This was very different from the previous evening, but was still extremely enjoyable.

Overall, I was very impressed with this wine, the first time I have tasted the Noval 1963. As a wine the same age as me, I always enjoy experimenting with the '63s. This one was delicious and very drinkable....and extremely good value for money. I just wish I had bought more.


Alex

[Stuart Chatfield]

Similar notes to my experience of this same wine at the BBR Xmas tasting. I found it sweet, a little hot and spirity and quite pale for the age.

However, your summing-up comment seemed to give it more praise than your earlier narrative Are you saying that with hindsight you'd have not had your first glass for several hours and it wasn't so bad after extended decanting?

I hesitate to say it, but most 63s I've had recently have left me with the same feeling. I'm even going to change my rule on 63s from drink/hold to drink up. I'm certainly going to hesitate before buying any more 63s for long-term cellaring, especially when you see the price of them now.

[Al B.]

Stuart,

That first glass I had was disjointed and unbalanced, and the wine hadn't improved much with 2 hours of decanting.

However, when I came back to it after 4 hours in the decanter (and the following 2 hours) it was singing and was hugely improved from the early tasting. While slightly pale, it was darker than the Sandeman 63 that I tasted in November and on a par with the Taylors that day. While it was sweet, I didn't find it too sweet for my taste.

With hindsight - and if I had any more bottles - I would not approach this wine until it had been sitting in the decanter for at least 4 hours. After 4 hours, it was a lovely wine and had balance, poise and elegance. The unbalanced spirity nature had gone and the wine had integrated well. What surprised me was the tannic structure that was still present.

My view, based on my 4-6 hour tasting (plus the re-tasting the day afterwards) was that this is on its plateau and will hold there for a good few years yet. Drink/hold would seem a fair assessment based on this experience from a well cellared but ullaged bottle.

Mind you, I am also generally not buying any more '63s because of their price. However, I will make an exception for bargains like this one.

Alex

[Andrew Stevenson]

Thanks Alex - that's very useful, as I bought a bottle of 63 Noval from BBR in St James' in January.

Of course, it's more expensive than other sources, but I could buy a single bottle, and you've got pretty good provenance.