So, the problem with this comparison is that is like comparing apples and oranges. While both sherry and port are classed as fortified wines, along with madeira, marsala, and a half dozen other styles, they are very different types of wine, the same way that apples and oranges are both fruits, but taste quite different. Further, the sherry I tasted was a low end cooking sherry, while the port was a high end vintage port. While both were on the sweeter side for wine, the port was, as port often is, very sweet, almost to the point of being sickly. The sherry was a lot less sweet, but also a lot less complex. Which is better? Damn if I know. It’s all a question of what you are up for. A fine celebratory desert wine? Go with the Bogle port. A simple quotidian apertif? The Taylor sherry will fit the bill just fine. In addition, tonight I enjoyed Grahm’s Six Grape Ruby Port and the 1999 Reciotto della Valpolicella from M. Castelli. The port was reasonably ordinary with nice berry and subtle nutty notes. The Valpolicella was interesting. While my father remarked that he had never had Manischewitz served cold before, I found the wine surprising. While it was indeed quite sweet the wine had an unexpected roundness to it, but the shocker was the finish. The finish felt like eating a fresh raspberry. If I could only drink one wine for all time, I guess it would have to be the sherry or the Valpolicella, just because the ports were both too sweet, but, to be honest, I would really want to limit my enjoyment of any of the wines to a less common-place thing.
This probably hasn’t been the most useful comparison, but I will say that between the two, the Grahm’s port was just as good as the Bogle, and likely much cheaper, so I would go with that. I will compare the sherries as soon as I crack the Barbadillo.
Keep your spirits (and wines) strong,
Filed under: Fortified |