Richard Mayson, Simon Field MW, and Andrew Jefford taste an impressive line-up of single-quinta Vintage Ports.
Single-quinta Vintage Port: Exciting and challenging
Quinta do Vesúvio 2022 (cask sample; 20% ABV) |94
SF | Midnight black, with the faintest of rims. The aroma is classic, haunting, and authoritative: dark fruit and flowers; jasmine, iris, and esteva; then tobacco pouch and a hint of crushed pepper. Involving and assonant. The palate is suitably assertive, but not in such a way as to signal structural irregularity; the intense tension of the acidity is no more and no less than required to show off the latent complexity here; the crushed-stone gravitas and the dark spicy fruit appeal. The spirit is already well integrated, and the tannins are velvety and generous. | 93
Related
AJ | One of the densest of its cohort, with splendidly opaque black-purple colors running right up to the rim and coloring the glass after a swirl. A torrent of prodigious black fruits, with the emphasis here on damson and sloe, as well as blackcurrant and blackberry. Cologne spices, too; even some raspberry liqueur. Hugely inviting. Then after a while in the glass, the nose closes down a little as if overwhelmed by its own constitutional solidity, and you need to swirl again. On the palate, too, this is very ambitious and promising. As with the best ’22s, it’s a Port with fresh and very generous, amply constituted fruit—fruit that still clings to its primary aromatic profile and fills the mouth. There are firmer tannins than for many, and if the fruit is still shapely and pristine, it is in part because of sustained fruit acidity. Pungent right to the last, too. Outstanding work here: a quinta Port of commanding dimensions. 2029–50. | 95
RM | Deep, inky, and opaque. Restrained but showing opulence on the nose, with lovely, ripe plum and cherry fruit under a veil of dusty tannin. Similarly broad and opulent on the palate, with ripe, fine-grained tannins that linger on to a well-defined but quite soft, elegant finish. 2035–55+. | 95
Cockburn’s Quinta dos Canais 2018 |93
Content from our partners
SF | Imperious and uncompromising in color, facets no doubt relayed to the rest of the ensemble. The nose marries terroir, fruit, and savoir-faire in equal measure, a persuasive floral incline (violets and iris) elegantly juxtaposed with herbs and spice; licorice, star anise, and cardamom especially prevalent. Lifted on the palate, and if not precisely ethereal, at the very least elegant and light on its feet, not too insignificant an accomplishment for a youthful Port. Timeless, therefore, but that will not prevent us from mentioning that it is just approaching its apogee. | 95
AJ | Very promising in the glass: midnight-black still, with wonderful purple lingering among the black, and glass-clinging purple in the swirl, too. Terrific aromas here, and exactly what you want to find in a serious Vintage-style Port: pristine, driving, fresh fruits (blackcurrant and blackberry), ground stone, a hint of cistus and herb. Spot-on and an invitation to plunge in. Very generous and complete on the palate: robust and rounded. I’m trying to hunt down the core of sumptuously defined fruit and having a little difficulty with that: [Graham’s Quinta dos Malvedos 2018] has finer fruit, for sure. But this is a total generosity package, storming your palate to hugely gratifying effect. I guess purists may find it a little warm, but when winter comes knocking on the windowpane, we might all be grateful. 2027–36. | 90
RM | Deep and opaque; focused, with density on the nose and much more to give. Lovely purity of fruit on the palate, beautifully defined and focused berry fruit, with good, grippy tannins and structure that lingers on the finish. The tannins are just a little green at this stage, but this will come together as a wonderful wine in ten years or so. 2034–55+. | 95
Quinta de Ventozelo 2016 (20% ABV) |93
SF | A pleasing vantage point from which to assess this single quinta, almost a decade down the track (not quite). It shows well, the primary fruit still present, but savory and spicy notes are also evident in support of complexity and harmony. There is mint, eucalypt, and quince here, too. A pleasing example, made for the medium term and therefore starting to shine. | 92
AJ | The first of our wines where the density is starting to dissipate a little, though it remains opaque at the core. Sweet, warm, and harmonious at the core; lovely evolution already, and those who like mature Vintage Port will begin to find all the things they cherish most beginning to appear here. Graceful and sweet, but that sweetness is beautifully qualified by fruit, mint, pine, and spice. Ditto on the palate, really: good Vintage Port writ small. The balance is near faultless; splendid tannins, bright fruit, sustaining acidity. All that is missing perhaps is top-flight concentration and drive, but while you are waiting, this is certainly well worth a look. 2026–38. | 91
RM | Still deep, youthful, and opaque. A little withdrawn and demure on the nose, but focused, with attractive, underlying, ripe berry and cassis fruit starting to reemerge on the nose. Confirmed on the palate, with lovely, bittersweet focus and concentration, firm tight-knit tannins, and linear, peppery length of flavor. 2028–50. | 95
Burmester Quinta do Arnozelo 2022 (20% ABV) |92
SF | Regal purple at the rim; the cardinal’s pomp. The nose is dominated, as it should be at such an age, by dark fruit, myrtle and blueberry especially, but there is also a pleasing, spicy backdrop, with hints of licorice and esteva, crushed rock and laurel. This complexity is evidenced on the palate, too. The spirit is powerful but does not dominate the structure to such an extent as to overwhelm the prospect of a lengthy vista of potential unfurling in the imagination. | 90
AJ | Classically opaque black-purple, with satisfactory density and visual grain. Perfumed and refined, with creamy blackcurrant and dried-orange and tangerine-peel scents. Pure and pristine, very enticing, and no sense of the excessive heat of midsummer here. Admirable fruit intensity on the palate, and admirable purity, lift, and energy in that fruit. As on the nose, no sense of the sun having the upper hand or raisins having crept into the mix. In addition to the creamy blackcurrant, there is delicious woodland plum (damson and sloe). Delicate, poised weight of tannins; lovely, mid-weight, mid-term extraction. Brandy glow at the end in flavor terms, but the raw spirit itself is folded in gracefully. A super mouthful and (for me) almost ready to drink now. 2027–40. | 92
RM | Very deep, opaque, and quite dense on the nose, with underlying, ripe, tight-knit fruit; a lot more to give. Well-defined, ripe plum and berry fruit, still a bit raw but with fine, firm tannins rising in the mouth, leading to a big, firm peppery finish. Good purity of fruit and balance; middle- to long-distance wine. 2034–55. | 93
Graham’s Quinta dos Malvedos 2018 (20% ABV) |92
SF | A generous and attractive style; rich, a little syrupy, ripe and impressive; big-boned, generous, and all embracing, maybe lacking the focus and attention to detail of the best single quintas, but it’s not without modest appeal for all that. | 91
AJ | Saturated opaque black-red and still clinging to its purple in the swirl. Pure, fresh blackcurrant and mulberry, with a touch of forest resin, citrus peel, and sweeter popped-maize notes, too. Lovely on the palate and very clearly a deeply serious wine, with admirably freshly defined fruits in this very warm vintage, and ample sweetness and lavishly coaxing tannins, too. A chocolate finish, to ice the cake. Little acidity, but I’d have been surprised to see it. It’s now acquiring harmony and will last well. The longer you leave it in the glass, the more stature it seems to acquire. If you want a quinta fix on 2018, this would be an excellent choice. Wonderful width and resonance. 2027–38. | 93
RM | Very deep, opaque, and inky. Partially open, with lovely, minty, berry fruit and a hint of a floral aroma, too, with ripeness and definition. Showing similar definition on the palate, with a firm tannic core and a lovely, vibrant, spicy tannin finish. Still needs a little more time to soften up. Lovely balance and poise. 2030–50. | 92
Kopke Quinta S Luiz 2022 (cask sample) |92
SF | Saturated blood, but with no evidence of a crime; viscosity abounds, however. A nose dominated by soot, Quink ink, blueberry, and vanillin. Generous, despite the restraint of youth, itself enforced by well-integrated spirit and sense of purpose. The palate assumes a pleasing floral note, with jasmine and violet lending moral support to the fruit, the latter now accompanied by soft spice and the all-enveloping wrap of tense acidity. Chalky tannins, ripe and generous, but not overwhelming. A nicely tapered finish. | 90
AJ | Dark, dense, black-purple-red; opaque, glass-staining, and promising. Ample, lush, ripe fruits (blackberry, damson, blackcurrant) freshened with citrus and woodland intrigue; root spices, too. A little bassline fatness and suet sets the scene for the year, but it’s a counterpoise and gives the fruit a naughty fudge-core charm. The wine comes bustling into the palate with trays full of good things to share: fresh black fruits and sweet dried fruits, too, with lots of spice and some crystallized plum. Grand (for the vintage) tannins and the necessary subterranean acidity of the best: delicious, wealthy and welcoming. 2028–48. | 92
RM | Deep and opaque. A bit sullen on the nose at this stage, with underlying spicy hedgerow character and a hint of dark-chocolate concentration. Quite dense initially on the palate, with firm, dusty-grainy tannins mid-palate leading to a good, broad, fresh finish. Not showing much purity of fruit at this stage but well balanced and very promising. 2025–55. | 93
Taylor’s Quinta de Vargellas 2019 (20% ABV) |92
SF | Deep of hue, with a nose dominated by black fruit, smoke, and charcuterie. Chalk and sour cherry, jasmine and sloe. An attractive Port, with firm, resonant acidity and impressive length, the weight of fruit assured and reassuring, long and quietly powerful. The wine chimes well with the vintage, classic and terroir-driven, and is therefore, unsurprisingly, well matched to the raison d’être of a single quinta, notching up an impressive accolade. | 94
AJ | Dense, saturated black-red. Rather mentholated fruits here, and with a barley-sugar sweetness, too, but exciting and engaging aromas. Not the purity of the very best, but great fun to smell. And actually, with time and air in the glass, this becomes significantly more refined, and the pure fruits begin to play a more prominent role in the aromatic profile. Sweet, sound, and amply tannin-supported. The tannins, indeed, are the very best feature of this wine, and they will give it long-haul legs, while the sweetness will charm. The problem (if problem it is) is that the fruit doesn’t really have the necessary carrying vivacity to provide the filling in the sandwich. This sturdy wine will be around for a decade or more yet, though, and it will always warm and nourish. And then, coming back to it after its two 2019 peers, it seems obvious to me that this has the best fruit core of the three 2019s we are considering. 2026–40. | 92
RM | Very deep, opaque. Closed-in on the nose, with plenty of richness and ripe fruit underlying, perhaps just a touch stewed, though this may be just a phase. Lovely, ripe, fleshy fruit on the palate, with broad, ripe tannins to back it up. It’s lacking a little in definition at this stage but is full and complete, with a structured, spicy finish. 2030–55. | 91
Quinta da Côrte 2020 (19.5% ABV) |91
SF | A deep authoritative color and a delightful aromatic—pure, intense, and descanting, with a granitic acidity that dispels the warmer excesses of this strident vintage. The palate is equally impressive and, while not aspiring to the latent complexity of a generic blend, appears well placed to showcase the virtues, narrower yet more precise, of the single-quinta template. | 92
AJ | Still promisingly dense: opaque black-purple, right to the rim, and lots of deep scarlet glass-cling when you swirl. Fine aromas, with some harmony and finesse already. Untroubled, dense ripeness, with delicious blackberry and blackcurrant classicism and creamy softness. You’ll also find a little vegetal freshness and citrus-peel perfume to add extra charm. Spot-on. Very weighty and sweet in the mouth, and the aroma profile is reproduced pretty faithfully here, all nuances included. In other words, this is a terrific quinta Port, with lots to offer and no need to hurry. All that is missing for me is the “subterranean acidity” that brings that edge of extra lift to the very finest wines, but this is very satisfying, dense, energetic, and well crafted. 2028–39. | 93
RM | Deep, opaque and a little demure, but with ripe, opulent fruit underlying. Soft and fleshy on the palate, with rich, sweet, plummy fruit and soft, ripe tannins leading to a broad finish. Developing well but perhaps without the structure for the very long term. 2030–45. | 89
Quinta da Côrte 2015 (19.5% ABV) |91
SF | Smoky, deeply pigmented, and with secondary characteristics that combine fruits, spices, and herbs. A touch of syrup, a dash of spice. All in all, a pleasing, if not very challenging example, indulgent and approachable. | 89
AJ | Dense, dark black-red and opaque at the core, though now clear at the rim. Subtle, warm, sweet, well into its maturity stride and vaguely claretty, as Vintage Port can sometimes be. Overtly sweet (blackcurrant) and fresh (pine forest), too. Lovely nose here, though I don’t think it’s going to flip and go sublime. Just a little bit leafy and vegetal in the final analysis. Lots of wine here. This is thicker, more richly textured and wealthier than our 2016 example, though the fruit of the 2016 wine is clearly purer and finer. So—your choice. This is a stonking little brontosaurus of a quinta Port, and it will be around for a while. Warming, exuberant, a touch rough and ready, a little bit foresty around the gills, but gutsy. 2027–40. | 90
RM | Deep center, just starting to turn on the rim. Ripe, heady, plum-jam aromas, with more still to give. Lovely, ripe, firm, fleshy fruit, well structured and focused, with ripe tannins leading to a firm but full finish. Still needs a little time to soften up, but very satisfying overall. 2026–45. | 93
Dow’s Quinta Senhora da Ribeira 2022 (cask sample; 20% ABV) |91
SF | Regal of hue and aromatic, the latter a little more restrained than some of its peers, with spice and herbs holding their own amid the contours of ripe fruit. Wet coal and thyme. The palate is hitherto somewhat astringent, unforgiving in youth; firm, stony tannins envelop the ensemble with a degree of austerity. A lot of the heat of the vintage but less of its joy. Maybe that is still to come… | 88
AJ | Another promisingly deep and saturated wine, midnight black drizzled with purple right to the rim, and encouragingly glass-coloring after a swirl. Aromatically, it is a little fatter and more caramelized on the nose than some of its peers, but there are fresh fruits there, too, as well as that delicious aromatic undergrowth of vegetal wealth. Gutsy, dense fruitcake, too, packed with raisins and sultanas. A big lava flow of warm, sweet fruits; soft but flavory (and almost bitter-edged) tannins, which help resolve and propel those fruits through the mouth. Lush spices and incense perfumes to finish. This is one of the more exotic 2022s, but it has magnificent concentration and width. The fruits are a little less fresh and sculpted than for some of its peers, but it may reflect a warmer site. I’ll be fascinated to see how this Falstaff-like quinta wine evolves. 2028–48. | 93
RM | Deep, inky, and opaque. Dense and slightly soupy on the nose, with just a hint of hot country fruit, perhaps just a phase. Broad and showing greater purity of fruit on the palate; ripe and fleshy, with broad, ripe tannins mid-palate, firming up on the finish. Middle- to long-distance wine. 2032–50+. | 92
Ramos Pinto Quinta de Ervamoira 2020 (19.5% ABV) |91
SF | Deep of color and aromatic. The nose betrays a little evolution and an attractive marriage of fruit (ripe yet restrained) and spice. A relatively forward style (given its age), with an engaging, almost forward, fruit character and a beguiling tannic weave in support. This is a pleasing example, with a gently persuasive personality. | 92
AJ | Saturated, dense black-purple right to the opaque core; glass-staining swirls. In contrast to its 2020 peer, this wine has rather 2021-like, fresh, copse-like and almost leafy aromas, with just a touch of tomato stalk. Not perfectly classical, in other words, but not unattractive either. Lively and generous, too, on the palate, and much less 2021-like at this level; indeed the faint note of leafiness here helps the wine’s fruit communicate and linger rather than quickly subsiding into the bassline tannic wealth. Generous and good. Perhaps not huge finesse, but it will bring great pleasure in the medium term. 2026–36. | 89
Sandeman Quinta do Seixo 2022 |91
SF | Dense onyx, deeply saturated. The aroma hints at layers of velvety texture, a divan of indulgence and impossible luxury. Nothing therein is gainsaid thereafter. A wine of intensity and power, dark fruit and dark chocolate entwined, hot-house flowers at dusk and a finely tapered line of supporting acidity. Bristling with potential, its spirit persuasive, its potential stretching long down the vistas of imagination. | 93
AJ | Dense, saturated, opaque purple-black, running right to the rim. Warm, attractive fruits here combine some of the summer’s warmth (bramble and bilberry) with woodland notes that are a little leaner. Simpler in aromatic constitution, nonetheless, than the best of its peers. Deftly drawn on the palate, with plenty to enjoy in sculpted, poised fruit-first style. Graceful, ample tannins; little subterranean acidity, but those tannins do the balancing work; no spirit-roar. Sound and satisfying, for the mid-term. Not the most multidimensional ’22, but it is very lovely to drink, hence my final score is a little higher than the aromatics led me to expect. 2027–35. | 90
RM | Deep, opaque colour. Dense on the nose, with some hot-country fruit evident (just a hint of Bovril), though this may be just a phase. Similarly rich and dense in the mouth, lacking in purity of fruit definition at this stage, but solidly built, with broad, ripe tannins and a complete mouth-filling finish, while lacking a little in verve and vitality. 2035–55. | 91
Burmester 2022 (cask sample) |90
SF | An uncompromising midnight black in its appearance, with only the faintest phosphorescence at the rim, looking back to the shoreline from the prow of the last ferry. Both nose and palate are densely textured, slightly treacly in their indulgence, the sweetness and the spirit almost overwhelming the ensemble in its extreme youth. | 87
AJ | Dark, dense black-purple and opaque almost to the rim. Sweet, lifted, fresh, and graceful on the nose, with more emphasis on pure fruit and fresh flowers than for some of its ’22 peers. Very pretty and charming and inviting—perhaps from a higher-sited quinta? That’s what the palate suggests, too: gorgeous, rose-petal charm and fresh-fruit drive. A mid-weight wine, not heavily ballasted, but no reason why it should be: pure and refined. No false notes at all, and if you are shy about 2022’s August warmth, this will do much to reassure you. 2027–36. | 88
RM | Deep, opaque. Lovely, open, ripe, opulent black-cherry fruit, already floral and showing its charm. Similarly ripe, fleshy fruit on the palate, with firm, ripe tannins building in the mouth leading to a big, broad, spicy tannic finish, with lovely, fresh persistence and presence. Mid- to long-distance wine. 2032–55+. | 94
Quinta do Crasto 2019 (20% ABV) |90
SF | Jet black, with the faintest of rims, then an aroma that marries spice, dark fruit, and a crushed-stone character, itself inevitably of the terroir in play here. All well and good. The palate supports the “terroir” theory, its fruit powerful, dark, and rich but disinclined to overwhelm the purpose of the exercise, thankfully. A neat trio of ’19s, each subtly different, each therefore betraying revelation of the specifics of the quinta in play and its ability to negotiate the vintage in question with imagination and self belief. | 92
AJ | Dense, saturated, and opaque black-purple, and seemingly the deepest and densest of the 2019s. Aromatically, a little less articulate than its peers. I noted a sense of brooding on [Taylor’s Quinta de Terra Feita 2019], and perhaps, in general, the 2019s are in a brooding phase, since this wine also lacks lift and articulacy just now. Just a touch gruff and grumpy, but give it time. As with its two peers, this is another—well—amazing hulk. Lots of power and presence, and no shortage of sweetness either. They all lack the driving fruit core that provides the astonishment and illumination in great Vintage Port, but they have all that sweet, shaggy, hairy, tannic-sugar wealth, and I have a soft spot for this little herd of mammoths. Like the 2003s, they will endure very well and may yet surprise us. This is probably the sweetest of the three, and maybe [Taylor’s Quinta de Terra Feita 2019] has the best fruit, but they are all very close in quality, and actually they are all very good. Note them well! Just don’t expect too much polish and aromatic finesse. 2028–41. | 91
RM | Deep, opaque, ripe, open, and quite attractive, with a hint of menthol and eucalypt on the nose. Similar ripe, soft, fleshy fruit, with a touch of rusticity on the palate, firm tannins, and a supple, ripe finish, quite loose-knit and already quite accessible. Mid-term, middle-distance wine. 2028–45. | 88
Ramos Pinto Quinta do Bom Retiro 2014 (19.5% ABV) |90
SF | An impressive example from a tricky year. Plenty of extract and ripe fruit, supple tannins, satin rather than velvet, and good balancing acidity. Very well made, the winery to take the credit, and clearly benefiting from judicious fruit selection and a well-judged aging regime. | 89
AJ | Saturated, dense, black-red; like all the 2014s, this has kept its cloak wrapped closely about it. A little dry and inarticulate at first, but with coaxing, the wine disengages sweet, black-fruit scents, lavender, and stone. Intriguing, and it draws you in, though not 100% classical. Okay; certainly the best and densest of the three 2014 wines we are looking at, and the only one of the three that still insists on further storage. This is in fact a remarkably dense, close-knit, and serious single-quinta Port, and the tannins underscore the fact that it will certainly last for another 15 years without problem. I’m also hugely impressed by the buried retronasal aromas that come charging out of the wine when you warm it on the tongue. So, what’s the “but”? Only the fact that the fruit quality is just a little green, from top to bottom. It has profile, crispness, texture, depth, and impact, but it doesn’t glow, warm, and smile. It will always be minor in key and just a little bit mean, and in the final analysis I can’t personally warm to meanness. This, though, would be a 2014 to seek out. 2026–37. | 92
RM | Still deep and youthful in appearance. Ripe, not especially well-defined aromas at this stage, with a hint of menthol and dark-chocolate concentration. Reflected on the palate in ripe-berry and stewed-plum fruit, backed by a firm tannic grip and a rather extractive, astringent finish not as well balanced as some, and I am not sure that the astringency will ever soften, but it is vibrant and satisfying nonetheless. Drink now to 2050. | 89
Taylor’s Quinta de Terra Feita 2019 (20% ABV) |90
SF | Deep color, with a rich, almost tarry aromatic; behind that, flowers and liqueur de cassis, crushed rock, and hints of licorice and Assam tea. Texturally, the wine is broad and layered, its acidity supporting the shards of flavor and the plush cushion of indulgent flavor; punnets of raspberries and soft spice adorn the ensemble and the finish is strong. A classic single-quinta expression. | 92
AJ | Saturated, dense purple-black. Brooding here, but complex, packed, and stacked: dark, curranty fruits, stones, a touch of reduction, notes of stem and stalk. Agreeably allusive, and it does draw you in, but aromatically a bit gaunt and forbidding, without a lot of sweet charm. It’s very solid, rich, chewy, dense, and sound on the palate, and I’m almost tempted to write, “Who needs charm?” There is so much generosity and fundament here. A glorious winter-night antidote. Note this well in Oslo and Riga. Rough-hewn and craggy, but very, very good, and there’s no hurry to pull the cork. Just a little warm on the finish, as it was a little chilly on the nose. 2028–41. | 91
RM | Deep, opaque. Closed in on the nose, with ripe but slightly leathery undertones. Soft, sweet, and fleshy initially, with some spicy tannic structure, but overall fairly approachable on the palate, with a nicely defined, fresh finish. Mid-weight, middle-distance wine. 2028–45. | 88
Taylor’s Quinta de Vargellas 2022 (37.5cl; 20% ABV) |90
SF | Deep purple, with a faint, less pronounced rim. Aromatics are dominated by loganberry, plum, and a hint of thyme and white pepper. The palate is elegant and spicy, with its spirit nicely integrated and its tannins chalky and fine. A half-bottle sample, one notes, therefore maybe a little more advanced than some of its peers, but this is all to the good and shows off an impressive potential. | 89
AJ | Dark, black-purple red, though not quite the same glass-staining power as the best of its peers. Sweet, fresh, lively: graceful blackcurrant and blueberry, with a marmalade twist. Unassertive and not a blockbuster, but very attractive and well drawn. After a while in the glass, it sinks back into a kind of vegetative torpor, but swirling will bring the fruits back up from the well. Close-grained, dense, tongue-staining, and… Well, once it is on the tongue, it is a little more secondary, powerful, and provoking than some of its peers. Very good, actually. I wrote that it wasn’t a “blockbuster” as I sniffed, but actually (on the palate) it isn’t far short of that, in the vintage context—thrusting, controlled fruits smoothed into an earthy, textured, bass-palate wealth. The fruits (still blacker than they seemed on the nose) aren’t particularly acid-lifted but are very fine and masterful; ample tannins somehow propel them into perfumed grace. Exceptionally satisfying. Maybe in the end it will only be a medium-term wine, but it will be a very good one. It seems ultimately more powerful and gravitational than its colors and aromas suggested. Just a touch fiery on the finish. 2028–40. | 93
RM | Deep and opaque. Still a bit withdrawn but underlying well-defined, spicy-berry fruit. Fresh, with good purity of fruit on the palate, firm, spicy, angular tannins rising in the mouth and on to an attractive linear finish. Well-balanced, middle-distance wine. 2032–50. | 89
Quinta da Côrte 2017 (19.5% ABV) |89
SF | Deeply pigmented, with only the faintest indulgence of a crepuscular rim. The nose is attractive, marrying red and black fruit, kitchen garden spice, and a confident, chalky substrata; the palate is broad and generous, the sweetness maybe more than expected at this stage of its development; a lot on the attack, therefore, immediately attractive, but maybe lacking textural nuance and structural integrity. It is churlish to find fault with something as delicious as this, but there we are. Such are the challenges of a professional wine taster… | 93
AJ | Still deep and promising, with plenty of opacity. Close-grained, a touch vegetal and minty, but energetic and articulate. Tomato; chocolate; characterful, if a little off-beam. Dense and relatively muscular still, but this wasn’t the finest fruit of this great vintage. It fills the mouth, is splendidly tannin-supported, and has some subterranean acidity, too—but it is a little leafy and herbaceous in style, and finishes overly minty for such a young wine. Very fair, nonetheless, and no one should miss a chance to stock up on 2017s. 2026–32. | 87
RM | Still deep, youthful, and opaque. Rather hot-country, stewed fruit, and a bit rustic on the nose, though this may be just a phase; there is some power underlying. Quite rich and powerful on the palate, with a broad tannic structure and full, rich, rather jammy fruit, leading to a good, defined, firm finish. Needs five years to come together. 2029–50. | 88
Quinta do Crasto 2018 (20% ABV) |89
SF | Precocious, edgy, powerful, and still relatively untamed a little way down the track… One expects single quinta to mature before the Vintage Ports, but neither should be doing much beyond slumber at six years of age. The spirit marks out this wine, and one infers that it may need a little longer than many of its peers to settle down. Classy, for all that. | 91
AJ | Dark, dense, opaque black-red, with both purple and red in the glints Not quite up with its cohort, aromatically speaking: raw fruits without much finesse, purity, or polish, and not much subtle support either. On the palate, it’s gutsy but rather rough and ready, and I wouldn’t keep it beyond its exuberant phase. 2027–30. | 85
RM | Deep, opaque, open, ripe, almost-Burgundian aromas, with plenty of dense, fleshy, berry fruit on both the nose and the palate, richly sweet, broad, lacking a bit of focus and definition at this stage, but well structured, with a satisfying, bittersweet finish. Very good indeed. 2030–50. | 92
Dow’s Quinta do Bomfim 2014 |89
SF | Rich and ripe of color, and in every other sense. A carpet of velvet plush, with plenty of peppery spice in support, and firm balancing acidity buttressing the ensemble. Evidence of a generous, maybe overindulgent extraction, but today the wine tastes well, and will prove popular with those who favor rich, flamboyantly textured examples, with sweet fruit unabashed on the attack and the kick of alcohol/spirit generous in its support. | 89
AJ | Still dark, dense and purposeful, opaque at the core and indeed most of the way to the rim. Sweet, warm, complete, and allusive, with red- and black-fruit harmony, grace, and charm. Inviting and appetizing. On the palate, this is very sound, bright, and generous: exuberant, rather “loud” fruits, without much subtlety. Grand tannins, though, and those colors are holding well. It doesn’t have the density of our single 2015 example; nor does it have the purity of fruit of our single 2016 example, but it’s going to be good fun over the next half-decade. 2025–31. | 87
RM | Still deep and youthful in appearance. A little withdrawn on the nose but with some well-defined fruit starting to emerge. Reflected on the palate, well-defined berry fruit and firm, structured, grippy tannins rising mid-palate and onto the finish, which is still quite astringent for the moment but very satisfying nonetheless. Needs another year or two to soften up. 2026–45+. | 91
Fonseca Quinta do Panascal 2004 (20.5% ABV) |89
SF | Dense color, uncompromising at the rim. The nose is delightful, with fruit and spice, pepper, charcuterie, and leather all observed; nothing, however, to undermine an essential integrity. Medium alcohol and just the most modest imprimatur from the omnipresent acidity; nothing volatile or overworked; plenty of poise and precision. A very nice single-quinta to approach now, by implication, and one that will hold graciously, over the medium term. | 88
AJ | Another very deeply colored wine, still totally opaque black-red, though not as freshly dense as our almost unbelievably deeply colored 2007. Warm, rather stewy fruits, a little compote-like, but everything very ripe. Actually it’s very nice, and I enjoy it, and it is very inviting, but I sense this was probably not a classical period; “stewy” implies a certain coarseness and lack of precision. [Croft Quinta da Roêda 2004], by comparison, is a meatier wine, and [Quinta das Carvalhas 2004] more chocolaty. Wow! This is extraordinarily sweet: I’d love to know what the residual sugar level is in this wine. It is honestly slightly mad. Maybe buy a bottle, because no one is ever going to make anything else like this in the Douro. Extreme, extreme, extreme. It will still be throbbing on in 30 years, so sweet is it and so firm the tannins behind. But the problem is there is just nothing else other than sugar and tannin. Awesome and doomed. I feel I ought to give it 97 for effort, but in the end I’m a drinker. You can put +++ on my score if you like, for Icarus-like ambition. Very glad I have tasted this, and hats off to those involved in its creation. 2026–48. | 88
RM | Still deep and almost opaque, turning on the rim. Lovely, open, fragrant plum and black-cherry fruit on the nose and on the palate; sweet, quite rich and accessible if a little stewed mid-palate, but backed by firm, slightly green tannins and followed by a well-defined, fresh, vibrant finish. Now to 2045. | 90
Quinta da Pacheca 2021 (19.5% ABV) |89
SF | Dense color, a little more purple at the rim. Nose of wet coal, leaves, sous-bois, and boysenberry; a hint of chalk behind it. The palate is softer than some, betraying the cooler vintage—more approachable, therefore, but lacking the concentration that would ensure lengthy development. Attractive now, but in a minor key. | 87
AJ | Dense, saturated opaque purple-black. Lively and fresh, with lots of woodland and spice charm. The black fruits have a cigar-leaf refinement. Actually one of the best 2021s on the aromatic front. Dense, close-textured, and vivid, with better sweetness, texture, and generosity than many of its 2021 peers. Fine sweetness, and the leafy notes of the vintage are underplayed here, just giving the fruit a bit of edge and finesse. Bravo. 2028–36. | 90
RM | Very deep, inky, and opaque. A bit sullen on the nose, perhaps just closing in on itself with underlying ripe mint and berry fruit. Smooth and suave initially in the mouth, with broad, ripe yet soft tannins mid-palate and onto the finish. Not much definition, but supple and easygoing overall. 2030–45. | 89
Quinta de Ventozelo 2018 (20% ABV) |89
SF | Jet black; uncompromising six years on. The nose is attractive, subtle, and civilized: wet stones, plum, tobacco, and iris, cassis and hearthside. The palate is equally seductive, plush, fleshy, indulgent, and yet still not lacking for shape and perspective, the finely etched tannins neatly traced but failing to overwhelm the modest indulgence of a warm year. An impressive example. | 93
AJ | Saturated dense black-red. Still plenty of opacity, though when you swirl you’ll see that the sides of the glass are now red rather than purple Warm and full, just a touch spirity, more vegetal than fruity at this stage. Exuberant and lively. Ditto on the palate: gutsy and artless quinta wine; best in the next eight to ten years. Lacks freshness, fruit density, and precision, but there is plenty of energy to enjoy. 2028–36. | 85
RM | Still deep and opaque, with a withdrawn but ripe and rather soupy sort of nose at this stage, not displaying much focus or definition. Ripe and fleshy, but rather soupy on the palate, without much focus, though redeemed by a broad, fairly well-structured finish, with some freshness and vitality on the finish. 2028–45. | 88
Quinta do Vesúvio Capela da Quinta do Vesúvio 2022 (20% ABV) |89
SF | Dense fluorescence ceding to a narrow pink rim. The nose is attractively floral, the ripe fruit harmoniously entwined, with marked schistous acidity buttressing a structure, which, if a little less muscular than some of its peers, makes up for it with an elegant, dancing structure. There are hints of pencil shavings and charcuterie evidenced here. | 89
AJ | Ample red, purple and black here; opaque, of course—perhaps slightly clearer streaks than some. Barely anything in it, though, and satisfactorily somber for the two-year stage. Not the most prodigiously perfumed of the ’22 set; indeed, impressively harmonious and balanced at this stage. Fresh fruits, warm stones, some herb and cistus, and the perfumed citrus peels, too—it’s all there if you look, under a lovely, snow-sugar shake. Ample texture on the palate, and that same balance and harmony in the wine that the nose suggested. Warm, exuberant, juicy, affable, friendly: a blend of fruits to open, and something more savory and earthy to finish. Delicious and approachable quinta Port that won’t insist you wait too long and will provide huge pleasure whenever you choose to go in. 2028–40. | 89
RM | Very deep, opaque. A bit sullen on the nose at this very young age, quite dense, perhaps closing in on itself, a touch of green hedgerow character underlying. Fresh and vibrant on the palate, with good purity of fruit, firm tannic structure leading to a long linear finish, perhaps lacking a little in breadth but well-defined nonetheless. 2032–50+. | 90
Cockburn’s Quinta dos Canais 2014 (20% ABV) |88
SF | This is holding color well. Aromatically, though, it’s a little less sure of itself, secondary fruit characters ceding to a leafy, slightly tired personality. The palate relies a little too much on the linearity provided by the acidity and fails to seduce structurally. | 88
AJ | Oh! Right… this is dark—darker than the ’15s and ’16s in our tasting. A very serious looker, with purple still loitering and almost opaque to the rim. I had hoped for miracles given the color, but in fact the aromas here are mildly disappointing: canned fruits and tomato, lacking vivacity and lift. Sweet and rather kinky in style. Lavish, lush fruit but lacking purity and lift. A bit of a box-ticker, but you can’t do this by extraction alone; you need to do the work in the vineyard. 2025–29. | 85
RM | Still deep and surprisingly youthful in hue. Fine, fragrant, minty berry fruit emerging in the glass, with similarly fresh-berry and cassis-fruit flavors on the palate. Lovely purity of fruit, firm, slightly green, astringent tannins but up front. Ready to drink now and giving plenty of pleasure. Now to 2045. | 92
Croft Quinta da Roêda 2004 (20.5% ABV) |88
SF | The faintest hint of garnet on the rim, forgivable after two decades, then a spicy, forward nose, the fruit now in its secondary phase but with plenty in reserve to afford interest and intrigue. The palate is a little understated, with hints of tar and sappy oak witnessed and a slightly cloying syrupy finish. | 91
AJ | A little less dense than [Quinta das Carvalhas 2004], though the two wines are both dark and opaque at the core. They are both modulating now toward black and red hues, with no lingering purple. Rather gruff and fierce aromas: dried fruit and dark chocolate, earthy, raisiny fruits, slabs of beef… I’m getting the feeling that folks were looking for a little bit of “overripeness” back in 2004. The overall effect is a bit glowering and stewy, though it is still all there and in a way rather powerfully articulate. Like its two 2004 peers, this is a sweet depth-charge of raisiny fruit and lingering tannin. If you can accommodate the aesthetic, they are very impressive. But there must be a reason why they are still on sale, and it’s this: Overripeness makes for tedious drinking. I don’t want to be unfair to this wine, which for me is the best of the 2004 trio; it still has much to offer and will endure in time. It comes from great vineyards in the Douro, and that means that it will have an intricacy and inner extractive sinew that will mark it out from all other competitors. So, in a global sense my score is ridiculously mean, but it makes sense in the context of the tasting, where we have so many finer younger wines. Its makers must know that this wine came from a period when a doubtful aesthetic held sway. 2026–34. | 87
RM | Starting to show its age: mid-deep with a browning rim. Open, ripe, plummy fruit on the nose and palate, but loose-knit and without much focus or concentration, retaining freshness and vitality, with firm tannins. However, it is rather short and astringent on the finish. Lacking a core. Now to 2040. | 85
Kopke Quinta S Luiz 2022 (20% ABV) |88
SF | Midnight black in appearance, viscosity panther-like, omnipresent. A warm nose of gum cistus, plum, and liqueur de cassis. Mouth-coating sweetness, all-embracing, other structural components hitherto invisible or, at the very least, submissive. | 87
AJ | Dense, saturated, red-black, and deeply stained at the meniscus. Ample cherry, bilberry, and blackberry fruits and a fine, vegetative roar, too. Perhaps even a little fiery at this stage, but there is plenty there, and serenity may come with a few more years in bottle. The brandy comes at you on the nose just a touch. Very sweet, rich, warm, and exuberant, with ample black-fruit and dried-fruit flavor. The tannins are smooth and svelte; there is just a little lurking acidity, which becomes evident on the back palate. Generosity and exuberance in equal measure. 2027–42. | 89
RM | Deep color, still completely opaque. Lovely, lifted berry-fruit aromas and a touch of tar; also a touch floral but more to give. Open, sweet-spicy, berry fruit; not dense—mid-weight, with firm, peppery tannins mid-palate and on through to a linear finish, which already shows some charm. This is a good middle-distance wine. 2030–45. | 89
Quinta do Vale Meão 2021 (19.5% ABV) |88
SF | Medium in intensity and concentration, aromatically pure (violets, gum cistus, and blueberries), and with an elegant, finely judged mouthfeel. An impressive effort, tailored to the vintage conditions with no lack of skill and an accomplished outcome. | 89
AJ | Dark purple-red, though a little less saturated than the best of its cohort. Sweetly attractive, with some supple fruits, though this doesn’t smell quite multidimensional enough to be top quinta material at the three-year-old stage. Lots of graceful charm, for all that. Ditto on the palate: This is an early-access quinta Port that delivers on the “Vintage family” promise, represents 2021 very fairly, and will provide lots of early to medium-term pleasure. 2026–30. | 87
Quinta das Carvalhas 2004 (20% ABV) |87
SF | Full in color and attitude on the attack, which has not abandoned the primary fruit—dark fruit in essence. And even if the palate lacks a little in terms of focus and concentration, there is still plenty to value in this impressive example, two decades down the track. | 90
AJ | This, too, like our single 2007, is very dark and dense, though a little less bewilderingly so. Clearly some evolution here, but pretty serious stuff. It smells grippy and earthy, with more stem than fruit. Peaty malt, dark chocolate; and the fruit that is there is a touch raisiny. Perhaps a little effortful, but this may have been the Zeitgeist back then. Treacly, finally. Another very tannic, sweet, and stewy wine on the palate, packed with raisin and fig and date and (at best) a bit of prune. Oh, dear… These things will loiter around forever, but they will never provide the lift and zest and energy that should always infuse and charge great wine. If you want a depth-charge of tannin-supported, sweet-dried fruit, find it here. Super generosity, to look on the bright side! 2026–36. | 84
RM | Deep center, just turning color on the rim. A bit demure on the nose, surprisingly so given its age, with fresh but rather unexpressive and unfocused fruit on the palate. Sweet, a touch jammy; firm, spicy tannins, and a fresh plum-jam finish. Ready to drink but just not saying very much. Now to 2040. | 86
Churchill’s Quinta da Gricha 2022 (19.5% ABV) |87
SF | Neat squid-ink black—not much by way of gradation. The nose is precocious, meaty, and a little ungainly. Wet stone, slightly stalky fruit, maybe a little troubled by its extreme youth. The palate is somewhat amorphous; plenty of intent, no shortage of ripe and dark fruit, licorice and fig as a backdrop, but the wine has yet to take on sincerity of shape and thus appears somewhat spherical and hard to judge with benevolence. And yet—he says, having another look ten minutes later—the wine appears to have settled down and assumed an interesting aromatic purity… Hard to judge at the moment, one may conclude. | 88
AJ | Down-the-line black-purple, the color pulled up right to the rim; mobile in the glass. Oh, an odd one out—this almost has a grassy scent, as if (improbably enough) there was a parcel or two that never quite got ripe. Off the pace for the cohort, and it seems a little varnishy at this stage. Plenty of choice blackcurrant to enjoy, and indeed it will be enjoyable in the short to medium term. I still find the tealeaf/capsicum a bit of a puzzle, though—a particular site? Delicious drinking, but the cohort is a classy one, and in that context this is merely good. 2027–32. | 85
RM | Deep, opaque. A little raw, green, and lifted on the nose, quite out of character with the rest
of the wines in this vintage. (The second bottle did seem slightly better, with rather more focus.) More depth on the palate, with some soft berry fruit and good, firm, spicy, structured tannins, if again a little green and “chaffy” on the finish. 2030–50. | 88
Ferreira Quinta do Porto 2022 |87
SF | Deep saturated black. Its nose is equally inscrutable, sepulchral in its quiet intent. Crushed rock, ground pepper, and extremely ripe blackberries; maybe the faintest hint of oxidation. This suspicion is rejoined on the palate and undermines an otherwise impressive display, diminuendo ceding to a raw crescendo of color, only slightly marred, in this instance, by a hit of volatility that would, in any event, normally dissipate with time. | 89
AJ | Dense, opaque dark black-red. This is another of our 2022 cohort that is lagging the peloton: coarse aromas, without any of the fruit precision, wealth, or incipient charm of the best. It has loads of stuffing and will reward in that sense, so the site is a propitious one, but either the season got the better of the vines or the post-harvest handling wasn’t as gentle as it might have been… I don’t know. Whatever the truth, this just doesn’t have the perfumed poise and irresistible chic of the best of these ’22s. Lots to chew over and enjoy, as I say, so at the right price this might be an excellent mid-term buy. 2027–34. | 87
RM | Deep and opaque, with baked, hot-country fruit and stewed-plum aromas. More definition on the palate, with broad, sweet, plummy fruit but still a touch stewed mid-palate, with soft, dusty tannins and a rather soupy finish, though it does show some verve. 2030–45. | 86
Quinta das Carvalhas 2007 (20% ABV) |86
SF | Assertive, sweet, and dominated by syrupy, slightly indulgent notes. Attractive but lacking in any virtue of scrutiny or poignant analysis. | 89
AJ | Crikey, this is black! Almost unbelievably dense in color—like, twice as dense as the 2016 we looked at. Black-red and formally opaque all the way to the rim. What’s going on? How on earth was this extracted? Few clues on the nose: It’s almost shuttered and barred. A close mill of dark fruit, pepper, and spice, but not particularly aromatic or allusive. What will we find in the mouth? Dense and sweet, but in a way also shuttered and barred. For me this must have been a tardy harvest of semi-raisins (which Brian Croser calls “dead fruit”). It gives you sweetness, concentration, and depth, and the tannins are holding the wine in time, but the palate lacks all vivacity and brightness for me, and so finally it is a drinking disappointment. 2027–36. | 85
RM | Very deep opaque and even inky in color, with a very extractive and at the same time rather green, stalky nose, which doesn’t give much pleasure, and I am not sure it ever will. Better on the palate, with red-fruit compote flavors, though not much definition and an astringent, linear, verging on lean finish, which shows the freshness and verve of the year. A wine of two parts. Now to 2040. | 85
Quinta do Vesúvio 1995 (20% ABV) |86
SF | Old-school: tar and roses, syrup and dried fruit, with hints of tar, graphite, slate, and raspberry compote. A worthy exemplar, but it is lacking a little in terms of freshness and structural integrity. | 89
AJ | Still dense, saturated black-red: almost worryingly deep in color for a wine almost 30 years old. Powerfully earthy, gruff, medicinal, fruity, with pounded bay leaves and tamarind and cinnamon and syrup of raisins and so many other things. Striking and searching but a little bit incoherent. Nonetheless awesome and admirable in its energy and range of reference. Dense, taut, tight-wrapped, exciting, super-sweet, chaotic, and finally sprawling: a total kitchen sink of a Port but clearly with at least some (though probably not all) fine-quality vineyard contributions. Dense tannins and super-sweetness. Ferocious after all these years. I’m not sure how you assess a wine of this raw energy and resonant chaos. I salute its creator—but aesthetically, it isn’t a great success. Nonetheless, a bottle will always be a talking point for the next 30 years. 2027–38. | 87
RM | Still deep and amazingly opaque at the center, with a rather hot, stewed-soupy character on the nose, perhaps reflecting the heat of the vintage. Sweet, jammy fruit; not unappealing if you like that sort of thing, with rather stalky-woody tannins and a rustic sweet-and-sour tannic finish that rather tails off. Overextracted style. Some may like this, but I am not a fan. Now to 2040. | 82
Warre’s Quinta da Cavadinha 2010 (20% ABV) |86
SF | Deep onyx color, with very little sign of development. A seductive nose with primary fruit, slightly surprisingly, still in the ascendant; blueberry and myrtle, with violet and soft spice behind. A pleasing savory kick on the palate, raw, granitic acidity, and a powerful, slightly syrupy finish. Nicely constructed and pleasing. | 91
AJ | Very red-black with no more purple, but a looker, with tons of density still. Opaque at the core. These are exciting aromas. They are evolved, now, with little lingering freshness, but they are complex and embrace multitudes as only this wonderful wine category knows how. This has cinder, toffee, raisin, prune, tobacco, and caramel: well into its tertiary phase, but founded on fruit. On the palate: jammy. No question here—jammy fruit. Enjoyable in its own way, but it lacks finesse and long-term engagement. The wine is still very dense, and the tannins are firm and supportive, but finally the flavors are as much fig and date as they are prune (and we don’t even get a glimpse of blackcurrant or sloe). Although this is sturdy and will endure, I wouldn’t much enjoy drinking it. 2026–34. | 86
RM | Still deep and youthful in appearance, though open and rather loose-knit on the nose, with odd aromas of baked-fruit compote. Similarly jammy on the palate, with very sweet and slightly singed fruit, like a crème brûlée, with cassis and a stewed finish. Ready to drink but unbalanced and rather one-dimensional overall. Now to 2035. | 82
Ramos Pinto Quinta do Bom Retiro 2018 (19.5% ABV) |84
SF | A stalky, reedy character is evidenced, both fruit character and structural integrity thereby undermined. Hard, therefore, to judge with any degree of objectivity. | 84
AJ | Dark, saturated black-red; opaque at the core. Hmm… this smells almost herbaceous; very odd for such a ripe vintage. Box/privet and hedgerow aromas here, too, and the green palate ends up in bitter-edged confusion. Vineyard issues? That would be my guess. Sorry. Drinkable and enjoyable as such, but you won’t be glimpsing the glory. 2026–29. | 81
RM | Very deep and opaque, with a rather stalky, green nose and a hint of bell pepper. Better initially on the palate, some good, expressive, ripe cassis fruit and green-pepper tannins that leave a rather astringent finish, making this an oddball, particularly in the context of these 2018s. This may, however, come together in time. 2030–50. | 88
Quinta da Côrte 2021 (19.5% ABV) |78
SF | Deeply stained purple and an unusual nose of nutmeg and shoe polish. There is a touch of volatility that masks and undermines what may well be an impressive crop of fruit. | 86
AJ | Dense, dark, opaque purple-black. Odd, varnishy or estery aromas. We try two bottles, and both are distressing, with a strange chemical note that should really not be there (and which, on this showing, shouldn’t have got through the DO tasting). 2026–29. | 74
RM | Deep opaque, with a ripe but slightly stalky, vegetal character on the nose. This is less noticeable on the palate, some soft, fleshy plummy fruit and broad, ripe tannins rising in the mouth, but it is still marked by a slightly green, stalky finish. 2030–45. | 75
Ramos Pinto Quinta de Ervamoira 1994 (20% ABV) |76
SF | Tiring a little; a period piece that does not quite capture the merits of a famous vintage. A little musty, alas, with both bottles tired. | 84
AJ | Dense, dark, black-red, though less saturated than [Quinta do Vesúvio 1995]. Faded and tired. Almost unscorable, unfortunately. | 68
RM | Mid-deep color, starting to show its age on the rim. Musty/woody aromas. Second bottle similar on the nose, with a pronounced musty character. Better on the palate, with some fruit and firm but rather green tannins (not reflecting the character of the vintage at all) and a rather lean, astringent finish—I would never have guessed this wine as a ’94! Now or never. | 75
