Talk:Port wine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Barrel aged vs bottle aged

I removed the false classification as Rubies are indeed stored in largares which is made of oak and is a barrel also. There also would cause confusion and ambiguity because Colheitas while may be from a distinctive vintage and aged in wood for such, are treated much like vintage port. Some wine houses will also age their colheitas (like niepoort) after bottling before release. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.43.48.130 (talk) 15:33, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

LBV

I have removed the reference to the test for distinguishing between filtered and unfiltered LBV, as Croft are now marketing their unfiltered LBV with a stopper instead of a driven cork. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.225.61 (talk) 22:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Years

The following is a list of the great port-producing years of the last century.

1900, 1908, 1912, 1927, 1931, 1934, 1935, 1945, 1948, 1955, 1963, 1966, 1970, 1977, 1983, 1985, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1997

I had to remove this because there is no great agreement as to which vintages are the best. It would be OK to list the years that all houses declared, or maybe spotlight a few years that are widely acknowledged. But a completely subjective list is not NPOV, sorry to say. Besides, you left off 2000. ;) --Wnissen 14:47, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Is there a source that says what years all houses declared? this website lists the following subset of years as classic, whatever that means: 1912, 1927, 1931, 1935, 1945, 1948, 1963, 1970, 1977, 1985, 1994, 2000. NTK 05:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

This seems like a decent source: thevintageportsite.com I don't think there's any 100% objective way to come up with "the" list. Even if you look at years that "all major houses declared," you need to decide which are major, and quibble over which abstentions are significant. I don't think we should not include a list because it isn't 100% objective, certainly we can come up with a consensus. It's not like port is the most controversial subject on WP. NTK 05:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Was edited out: An uncomfirmed British tradition concerning Port holds that, within some unnamed "olden days", every British father would buy a pipe (126 U.S. gallons) of Port for his son at birth, so that by the time he was of age, it would be old enough for him to drink.

Its kind of true. Wording not good. Not "everyone" but I knew people who had nad port bought for them. Justinc 10:40, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

1917 is also considered one of the finest vintages of the 20th century.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.172.173.12 (talk) 23:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC) 

Tawny ports

The line ""Tawny" port produced outside Portugal is rarely aged long enough to develop a natural tawny color. Instead, it is the result of blending "ruby" and "white" ports, or possibly the addition of caramel coloring." is a bit confusing. What is "Port" produced outside of Portugal? The article starts by saying Port is a type of wine produced in Portugal. It would perhaps be better to seperate the Tawny port section into "Aged Tawnies" and "Mixed Tawny". Tawny made by aging in wood is always named "Aged Tawny" or has an indicated age. Tawnies made by mixing white and red does not - but is still called "Port" (in the UK) and comes from Portugal. Also "Colheitas" should really be considered seperate. Colheitas are ports made from wines from a single Colheita, which is a somewhat poorly defined idea, but a Colheita is roughly a collection of vinyards. Colheita ports are a relatively recent occurance, coming about after a change in the trade laws allowed vinyards to sell wine as Port directly, without going through the shipping companies. I don't believe there is any link between Colheitas and tawny port; many are sold as Vintage (the grapes are all from one year; however that is not a declared year). There should be some mention that names "Port" (in the U.K.) and Oporto (most of the rest of the world) are protected names.

I suppose I should be putting this in the article, instead of in here. I should dig up some referrance material.

EDIT: All online sources I can find seem to disagree with me on Colheita. So maybe I am getting confused. Will dig out a book.

The paragraphs ""Tawny" port produced outside Portugal is rarely aged long enough to develop a natural tawny color. Instead, it is the result of blending "ruby" and "white" ports, or possibly the addition of caramel coloring."

and

"This is increasingly no longer true as Australia produces some excellent aged Tawnies. Yalumba has released a 50 year old tawny and Hardy's Whiskers Blake,Rosemount's Old Benson and Galway Pipe are also made in the traditional manner. South Africa's largest wine producer KWV also makes tawny port in the traditional manner."

Seem to be contradictory and look like a "debate". I suggest that both are deleted and a section made on "foreign" port-styled wine. Besides, the first paragraph also applies to some portugese made tawny. --Nwinther 13:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Single Quinta Vintage Port

"This is a relatively new (at least in terms of marketing) development : it is vintage port produced from a particular vineyard and sometimes from a lesser "undeclared" year. However, some of the most renowned Vintage Ports are Single Quintas."

Noval nacional, fonseca guimareans, dow's bonfim and a few others(not labeled as such) have been around for decades no?

Much of the complex character of aged vintage port comes from the continued slow decomposition of grape solids in each bottle. However, these solids are undesirable when port is consumed, and thus vintage port typically requires a period of settling before decanting and pouring.

this is unscientific. Complexity comes from the phenols, and the various acids not the slow decomposition of grape solids.

I've also known friends who rolled cigars with these solids and smoked them with a glass of port. They'd disagree about the undesirability of these solids.

Vintage port should not be confused with 'Late Bottled Vintage' (see above).

This line is redundant —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.38.194.9 (talk) 05:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Halt Fermination results in higher alcohol?

From the article: "This is caused by the addition of distilled grape spirits to fortify the wine and halt fermentation before all the sugar is converted to alcohol."

How is it that halting fermentation results in a more alcoholic wine?

That is getting the cause and effect reversed. Halting fermentation does not result in a more alcoholic wine, adding alcohol, the distilled grape spirits in this case, makes it a more alcoholic wine (fortifies it). The halting of fermentation is a result of adding the alcohol, which kills the yeast.

The full bit from the article is: "Port wine is typically thicker, richer, sweeter, and possesses a higher alcohol content than most other wines. This is caused by the addition of distilled grape spirits to fortify the wine and halt fermentation before all the sugar is converted to alcohol."

Adding brandy/grape spirits makes it stronger. Doing this before fermentation completed makes it sweeter.

Crusted Port

The article as it stands reads 'Crusted port is a blend of port wine from several years; the "crust" refers to the sediment that it has in common with Late-Bottled and vintage ports'. Late Bottled vintage does not contain sediment. I will edit it to 'Crusted port is a blend of port wine from several years, but retains the crust otherwise restricted to vintage ports.'

Well, Traditional LBV does contain sediments. Perhaps, correcting that would solve the problem?--Nwinther 13:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

White Port?

• I didn't know that there is an White Port... And I'm Portuguese!

(anonymous)

• Hmmm... that just means you don't drink wines regulary or you don't care about them. If you had some attention while going to a supermarket you would surely notice white Ports. There is a famous one, known as Lágrimas, try it, and you can find it in supermarkets, it is not very expensive. But it also depends on the region you are, in here (Northern Portugal) surely everyone knows this kind of wine; some years ago, these were the trendiest Port wines consumed by regular people. --Pedro 13:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Ruby Port

There are some small details that I would change in this article. I work in a port wine cellar, so I know many things about this wine. Firstly, ruby isn't the cheapest type of port. Both Rubys and standard Tawnies age for 3 years, so they belong to the same category, that is the lowest category. This is what happens in Portugal. In some countries, traders take advantage of people's ignorance, and increase prices because tawnies seem to be older than rubys. Rubys are not stored in tanks made of concrete or stainless steal, as the article says. In fact, they age for 3 years inside large vats (about 40 000 litres) made of oak, where the wine breathes less than tawnies, wich age inside small oak casks (about 650 litres). This is why tawinies seem to be older than rubys: they have got an higher oxidation during the aging process

Pedro Mesquita, Porto

General edit - August '06

I hope the original contributors will forgive me for giving this topic a heavy makeover, but this is a fascinating subject that I have been studying (and drinking!) for a long time.

There was (and is) much to add to the original text. Although I am re-structuring much of the original material, I am only removing the very small amount that is factually inaccurate, or un-verifiable. If anyone takes issue with my contributions, I'd be happy to discuss - THRA321@AOL.COM

Spotted a couple of minor errors - Single Quinta Vintage Port IS a true Vintage Port (indeed the most highly priced Vintage Port of them all - Noval Nacional - is from a single quinta) and for some reason Ruby ports were said to be bulk stored in glass? Surely someone didn't mean to say that!

I have also removed the reference to the Australian tawnies being 'excellent' - for being too subjective. I have substituted the word 'interesting' - which is less contentious. I am also doubtful that any of the Australian product is produced in exactly the same manner as the Portuguese - some certainly isn't - so I have removed the reference to it being produced 'in the traditional manner'.

Some of the information was slightly out of date - the IVDP introduced regulations that re-defined the nomenclature and specification of many products in 2002, and I have updated the text accordingly, while retaining information on the old specifications.

There's much more to do - but all in good time!

Tom Archer, August 20th 2006

Ruby Port again

I decided to remove "Ruby ports can also be quite sensitive to exposure to air and are best drunk within a day or two of opening." because this is not true. In fact, standar rubys, after opened, can be kept for more than six months, and it's flavour doesn't change. That's why Ruby's bottles have a plastic cap on the top of the cork, meaning that the wine is a long-term drink. Pedro, Portugal

Well done Pedro - someone tweaked a few bits shortly after my last makeover - that wasn't my work. A misuse of the minor edit tool, I think..

I've just done a minor rework of the Vintage section - as some mods appeared that gave the impression that Vintage and LBV were made from the same quality wine - OK, they can be, but not in practice!

Tom, August 23rd.

Sept 6th - some vandalism to the texts - have restored from file as minor edits

Tom

A year on since I last checked this out, and the text (subject, overall..) has been largely re-written. At first glance this looks like mostly good work - but some needless corporate promotion from the US seems to have crept in, and the main writer appears to be a well versed academic in the field of wine, but not perhaps a dyed-in-the-wool portotfile!

Will re-visit and tweak (gently..!) when I am less busy in a couple of months time

Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.3.197 (talk) 23:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Decanting

The decanting section is interesting and complete, but it seems a bit long for an article on port. Should Decanting Port be its own article? Derekt75 23:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The section really isn't written in a encyclopedic style (it's in the second person), and Wikipedia is not an Instruction manual. I don't really want to see that much information just vanish though. Perhaps it'll make sense to write a general Decanting (wine) article that goes into more of the details of decanting. -- The Bethling^(Talk) 05:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't that make it a candidate for a move to WikiBooks, linked from the article? --KGF0 ( T | C ) 06:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it's too 'instruction oriented' to belong here. It does appear to be good content - I don't know what qualifies something for WikiBooks, but I'm in favor of keeping the information somewhere - just not here. --Spyforthemoon 22:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)