Dow and Quinta do Noval make nice offerings, and the latter is “traditional” in style, meaning it needs to be decanted. I believe the current Dow’s releases are filtered and don’t have a sediment.
Graham’s, Taylor Fladgate, and Smith Woodhouse are also good choices.
I see there’s a Wine Searcher article with links to the producers at https://www.wine-searcher.com/regions-lbv+-+late+bottled+vintage+port
LBV Port is a mass-market wine, and something that you would find in many supermarkets. You can also get it megastores, like BevMo, Total Wine, etc.
Lots of good ideas. I’d skip the basic port - you can get it at any bar. If you are this interested, skip the one no one here orders. Substitute another producer’s vintage port, esp if you can find 375s.
Warres LBV is also unfiltered (traditional). Noval makes both filtered and unfiltered. When given a choice, always go unfiltered.
Isn’t that getting pretty darned Port geeky?
It’s getting to be bigger and bigger in importance and relevance. White Ports have always been made, it’s just that only recently have they become offered. Kopke, Viera de Sousa, Quevedo, Andresen, and San Leonardo are ones to look out for.
I saw Grahams and Taylor 2016 in 375s plus a 94 Grahams in 375s
To my own tastes, I’d skip the 10 year and go 20 and 30 but it’s been a while since I had it. I’m going to predict that you will wind up preferring vintage port from great years, and enjoy the older tawnys, and serve the 10 to company that doesn’t know port.
For the 10, try it at a bar. Good thing about Tawny, they can be open a long time.
And Andy Vs suggestions trump mine.
Don’t waste time with LBV. If you can find one substitute in a Crusted port instead. Also hard to find but worth the effort are 20 or 30 year white tawny port. Colheita is the QPR leader for port, but cannot beat the very best vintage ports with proper age (40+ years). Very hard to find but worth the effort are ports from either 1960 or 1966. Not widely declared but some very nice wines.
A 20 yr old tawny. Ramos pinto do bom retire
A 200x single quinta like vesuvio
An 85 grahams vintage port
A 94 or 92 taylor
A 70 or 77 warres or dow or upscale fonseca or Taylor
40 yr old tawny
So very much this. Unless you want to just check out what Port is at its most boring, I’d skip the basic Ruby or Ruby Reserve and LBV entirely.
However, a Noval or Warre’s Unfiltered LBV is an entirely different story. They might not give you the best picture of LBV, because they are just so much better. 
But they cost basically the same. So if you want a good, serious LBV for a reasonable price that can be drunk soon after release yet easily aged for a decade or two, get a bottle of Noval (or Warre’s) Unfiltered LBV.
One interesting comparison would be an unfiltered LBV versus Crusted Port, because they’re almost the same thing - LBV is just a single-vintage Port and Crusted is a multi-vintage blend. It would be fun to check if there is much or any difference.
When it comes to old Colheita vs old Tawny, I think it really depends on the producer or the vintage. Some Colheitas have been some of the best oxidative fortified wines I’ve tasted, but then again, some have been quite underwhelming. The best ones can be real bargains, though. In old Tawny Ports the price difference between 20 yo and 30 yo is often quite huge; 20 yo can be quite affordable and 30 yo is often immediately quite pricey, yet qualitatively there might be surprisingly little difference between these two. 40 yo Tawnies are virtually always real stunners, but then again, they are often very expensive as well. Although 20 yo Tawny doesn’t offer the wow factor of a 40 yo Tawny, I think that many 20 yo Tawnies are the best value oxidative Ports around - unless you manage to find a reasonably priced old Colheita from a great vintage.
Interesting. My first three would be a younger vintage port, an older vintage port and a ten-year tawny. My six would be ten and twenty year tawnys, and a younger and older vintage port from two houses. One house would definitely be Graham as it is a bit lighter and sweeter than other ports and the other could be any of a number of houses but I probably would pick Taylor Fladgate (which I have always thought of as the gold standard to bigger house ports).
I agree. I think the OP would learn more if he tried old and young from two houses.
One interesting comparison would be an unfiltered LBV versus Crusted Port, because they’re almost the same thing - LBV is just a single-vintage Port and Crusted is a multi-vintage blend. It would be fun to check if there is much or any difference.
I have some Quevedo I’m planning on doing this with.
There won’t be much difference between them at that young age. But the 2011 will run the risk of hitting a shut down period soon, if not already. 2017 will still be open for (young) business.
I would lean toward exploring more vintage than tawny. I have probably an unpopular opinion that it’s the rare tawny that really shows anything worth chasing after. Get a good quality 20 or 30, from almost producer, and you’ll know what almost every tawny tastes like +/-. If you really, really like the taste and experience, then start exploring more. You can find some pretty good deals on vintage ports on winebid, there have been a quite a few over the past few months. As some other posters have said, a younger bottle, adolescent, and more mature will tell you a lot. There are house styles that I find reveal themselves more in younger bottles. A couple of particular favorites of mine are 85 Fonseca, and 2003 Croft. You don’t have to stick with declared vintages, others can be almost as good. 95 produced some really nice ports, for example, and they will sell at a big discount to, say, 94.
The best way to start to learn house styles is to see if you can find a retailer that does a larger port tasting for newly released wines. Though I confess I have not seen one of those across the entire bay area in years.
In my very limited experience, some 40 yo tawnies are more boring than their 30 yo brethren. I’ve noticed the same phenomenon with single malt whisky. I do think, in some cases, the additional age strips the wine of its interesting exuberance, leaving one with an elegant, but tepid, presentation.
I’ve certainly experienced this myself. And there certainly have been 30 yo’s that have blown my socks off.
But there have been many instances where the move from 20 yo to 30 yo has been surprisingly minor (except in price) whereas the move from 30 yo to 40 yo has been a huge leap. But then again, if this leap is in the direction one doesn’t enjoy, I can certainly understand why the style doesn’t really attract. Different strokes, etc!
But there have been many instances where the move from 20 yo to 30 yo has been surprisingly minor (except in price) whereas the move from 30 yo to 40 yo has been a huge leap. But then again, if this leap is in the direction one doesn’t enjoy, I can certainly understand why the style doesn’t really attract. Different strokes, etc!
Producer dependent. Some I prefer the value of their 30 year old, however, some 40’s are absolutely remarkable and obviously have some very, very old wine in the blend.
Fwiw, back when I tried them all over the course of a year I liked the Taylor 20 year tawny best out of the 10,20,30,40 year lineup. But I haven’t had any of them in over a decade. Maybe two.
My favorite ruby port is the Quinto do Infantado.
You definitely should try an older vintage port to see what’s up. Don’t be afraid to give it air.
I’m sort of divided between a young vp and an old vp from the same producer or 2 older vps from different producers so you get an idea of the stylistic differences.
Brian is spot on. I find most 30 yr tawnys are the best bang for buck and many 40 yr tawnys come off as being a touch tired compared to a 30.
Don’t get me wrong, some 40 yo are amazing; just not always.