Wow! This stuff is REALLY good!
I'll qualify this by reminding everyone that I don't have that much experience with port, but this has been one of the tastiest I have had.
Fabulous aromas, mid to heavy weight on the palate, loads of dark fruit, and a smooth, long finish.
Not going to wax poetic on this one, just a really fabulous port experience!
:)
R
1994 Smith Woodhouse LBV Port -- (Unfiltered)
Moderators: Glenn E., Andy Velebil
-
Rich Greenberg
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:21 am
- Location: Redwood City, California, United States of America - USA
-
Todd Pettinger
- Posts: 2022
- Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 7:59 am
- Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada
Rich,
I have had both the '94 and '95 SW LBV and enjoyed them both. I found that I scored them both 91, with the 95 earning a 90 on one occasion due to a poorer showing.
If you can find it, try the '95 and then also the '95 Warre - I would be interested to see what you think of these three - ideally side by side, but knowing your budget constraints (much like mine) and your ability to find some of these in your market (again, similar to some of the constraints I have find certain Ports here) it may be tough.
The '94 did show extremely well though for an unfiltered LBV. (And I qualify the above scores with the fact that these would be my scores for unfiltered LBVs. Versus a true VP, they would not be so high, but I feel it is impossible and unfair to score an unfiltered LBV vs a VP vs a Ruby vs a Tawny using the same scale.
Todd
I have had both the '94 and '95 SW LBV and enjoyed them both. I found that I scored them both 91, with the 95 earning a 90 on one occasion due to a poorer showing.
If you can find it, try the '95 and then also the '95 Warre - I would be interested to see what you think of these three - ideally side by side, but knowing your budget constraints (much like mine) and your ability to find some of these in your market (again, similar to some of the constraints I have find certain Ports here) it may be tough.
The '94 did show extremely well though for an unfiltered LBV. (And I qualify the above scores with the fact that these would be my scores for unfiltered LBVs. Versus a true VP, they would not be so high, but I feel it is impossible and unfair to score an unfiltered LBV vs a VP vs a Ruby vs a Tawny using the same scale.
Todd
-
Rich Greenberg
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:21 am
- Location: Redwood City, California, United States of America - USA
T-
If I wasn't already more than 1/2 a bottle in with no dinner, I'd open the '95 Warre LBV for some true comparitive analysis. :)
I did consume a bottle of the Warre earlier in the month (Cellar Tracker doesn't lie), and as I recall, there was not nearly as much going on with the Warre as I am enjoying with the SW. This one has so much lively, up front fruit, that I don't think the Warre really compares. I liked the Warre, but it was a more subtle, less vibrant LBV than this SW.
I'll have to poke around and see if I can find a '95 SW to compare, but will definitely look for more of this '94, too.
R
If I wasn't already more than 1/2 a bottle in with no dinner, I'd open the '95 Warre LBV for some true comparitive analysis. :)
I did consume a bottle of the Warre earlier in the month (Cellar Tracker doesn't lie), and as I recall, there was not nearly as much going on with the Warre as I am enjoying with the SW. This one has so much lively, up front fruit, that I don't think the Warre really compares. I liked the Warre, but it was a more subtle, less vibrant LBV than this SW.
I'll have to poke around and see if I can find a '95 SW to compare, but will definitely look for more of this '94, too.
R
-
Todd Pettinger
- Posts: 2022
- Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 7:59 am
- Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada