The Resurrection of Collina Rionda

In Search of Piedmont’s Greatest Terroir

by Eric Guido (Originally published at The Cellar Table Blog)

As trends go, one which seems to have affected nearly every producer throughout Barolo is the desire to explore the terroir of Serralunga.  With nearly every visit to the region, I am told over and over again, often in hushed tones by a wide-grinned winemaker, that they are incredibly excited to be making wine from just about any vineyard in Serralunga.  In some cases, these proclamations are about vineyards that have yet to make a name for themselves or prove their worth.  However, that doesn’t matter to the lucky few who can buy or rent parcels here, because most of the region believes that Serralunga will be a big part of Barolo’s future.

Much of this has to do with consumers, who have liked what they've tasted from this village for many years now, especially as the great vintages of the last thirty years have matured into such beautiful wines, pushing their collectibility and prices through the roof. Then there’s Monfortino, produced by the Giacomo Conterno winery, one of the first wines of the region to demand prices on the same scale of the best Grand Cru Burgundy.  Of course, many wines have followed suit over the last decade or two, but Monfortino led the way, and today’s current releases nearly double or triple in price the moment they hit the secondary market.  

Then there are the vineyards, some of which are only just beginning to show what they are capable of in the right hands, and a few that history has firmly placed among the best in the village.  You can count them on one hand: Cascina Francia, Falletto, Brea, Lazzarito, and what is considered by most to be the Grand Cru of Serralunga--Vigna Rionda.

In fact, Vigna Rionda has a way of creating a fanaticism among lovers of Barolo, as they search for the best expressions from each of its many terroirs, the bottles that have made it famous, and the wines and producers that have either been obscured by the passage of time, or have only just emerged.  As these wine lovers recount the history of Vigna Rionda, they often do it with an excitement and bravado that you’d expect from a great tale or one of the most closely guarded secrets of the world.  This is the fanaticism that I speak of, and you know what, I’ve been guilty of it myself.

One such story involves what is easily one of the greatest wines ever made in all of Italy; some would even argue that it was “THE” greatest wine ever made in all of Italy: the 1989 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Collina Rionda, from the Vigna Rionda vineyard.   

For those of you that may have just found their way here without knowledge of Bruno Giacosa, he was without a doubt one of Piedmont's top winemakers for nearly fifty years.  He was a visionary, with a style that no one has been able to copy, and with an ability to find the best expositions and fruit from within any vineyard.  This was one of his greatest assets, as throughout his life, he often purchased the fruit, while working to add his own famous vineyard holdings to the portfolio, such as Falletto.  Yet it was his ability to find and purchase the best fruit that helped him to create the renowned Collina Rionda, which was only ever made in fourteen vintages, starting in 1967 and ending in 1993.  However, it was the 1989 vintage of Collina Rionda that forever sealed it in vinous history.  After 1993, Bruno Giacosa lost access to the fruit from this noble site, and so the story seemed to end.  As time passed and the vintages of Collina Rionda matured, it became obvious that Bruno had indeed found the best location within the vineyard to produce his wine.

However, my interest in Vigna Rionda was actually spurred by a different producer: Massolino. Currently run by Franco and Roberto Massolino, this family winery is the largest land-owner within the vineyard, and it makes what has become the benchmark wine from its slopes, the Vigna Rionda Riserva.  It was this wine that introduced me to what was possible here, as I searched for vintages after tasting the great bottles of ‘89, ‘90 and ‘96.  To this day, it’s one of the greatest wines that you can find from the vineyard, yet it takes decades in the cellar to mature.  This search one day led me to an opportunity to spend some time talking with Franco about his winery and the Vigna Rionda Riserva.  During this conversation, it occured to me that I didn’t know who Bruno Giacosa was buying fruit from when he created Collina Rionda.  

The Quest

The fact is that there are quite a few producers that make a wine from Vigna Rionda (Massolino, Luigi Pira, Oddero, Anselma, and Terre del Barolo, to name a few), but it’s important to understand that the vineyard crests around a hillside, where the vines face west toward Monforte, while the rest of the vineyard faces south-southwest, meaning that not all Vigna Rionda is created equal.  And so with the question in mind, and sitting with the largest land owner within the vineyard, I chose to ask Franco if he knew where Bruno Giacosa was sourcing his fruit from--and he didn’t.  This conversation started me on something of a quest to figure out who was using this fruit and what wine they were making with it.

This question became the most common thing I would ask any Serralunga producer I ran into, and for years, no one could tell me the answer--until 2015.  

While sitting with Luca Currado, of Vietti, at Centro Storico in Serralunga, he reached over to a bottle on the shelf and said, “This wine, watch for this wine, because this comes from the same vines that Bruno used for Collina Rionda.”  You can only imagine my surprise, after so many years of asking, to have someone simply tell me.  This started my interest in the Giovanni Rosso winery and my search for the Tomasso / Ester Canale Barolo Vigna Rionda.

Finding Vigna “Collina” Rionda

The reality was that the answer had been right in front of me for quite a while.  What’s more, I even had wines in my cellar made from the same vines.  The answer was Tommaso Canale, who had been tending to the family’s 2.2 hectare parcel within Vigna Rionda, a parcel planted in 1946, some of the oldest Nebbiolo vines in the region.  Rumor has it that not only did Tommaso’s Father, Aldo, supply Bruno Giacosa with fruit, but that in some cases he even provided him with finished wines (a rumor I would love to be able to substantiate, but haven’t yet.).  Where the fruit went after that is still a mystery to me, although it’s been said that Tommaso preferred selling only to private clients, yet sourcing from Tommaso later happened again between 2003 and 2006, when Luca Roagna began to buy from Tommaso and produce his own Roagna Barolo Vigna Rionda, a wine that I have tasted, loved, and even own some bottles of.  In 2007, Luca lost access to these vines, and Tommaso himself produced (yet didn’t release) a 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Unfortunately, Tommaso passed away in December of 2010 without a will, and his plot was split between the three surviving relatives, Ettore Germano, Guido Porro and Giovanni Rosso.  There was only one problem--much of the vineyard required replanting, and both Ettore Germano and Guido Porro replanted their entire sections of the vineyard.  

However, Davide Rosso, of Giovanni Rosso, had a wonderful idea.  He decided to replant all but a small section of the original vines at the top of the Rionda hill, in his mind, the best of the old vines, which he would use for massal selection of the new plantings, and also to make a Barolo Vigna Rionda.  It’s a wine that only sees between 1800-2000 total bottles made each year, and since Ettore Germano and Guido Porro have replanted, it makes the Giovanni Rosso “Ester Canale” (his mother) Barolo the only wine being made from the same vines as the famous Barolo of Bruno Giacosa.

What is a lover of Barolo and Vigna Rionda to do?

With all of the pieces in place, I decided that I had to taste these two wines together.  It was with that in mind that I first worked to find the wine being made by Davide Rosso, which was much harder than you might think.  In fact, after having been denied the ability to buy the wine in the last two vintages, it was in 2018, with the release of the 2014, that I had finally gotten my hands on one.

Then, as fate would have it, a friend contacted me about a tasting he was organizing that would include Icon wines from Barolo and Barbaresco, and he hinted that there might be a Bruno Giacosa Barolo Collina Rionda at the tasting.  Somehow the stars had aligned.

You can imagine the anxiety I felt leading up to this event.  What if one of the wines was corked?  What if the Bruno Giacosa wasn’t a perfect bottle? What if I got sick the day of the tasting?  Luckily, none of that happened, and both myself and the group were able to taste two pieces of history, a mystery solved, and share one of the few times that these two limited and amazing wines would be able sit next to each other at a table.

Yes, the 2014 was young and from a difficult vintage, yet it’s also a vintage that many have called a throwback to the Barolo styles of old.  Still, the ‘89 lived up to its reputation, and the 2014 was an experience I hope to never forget.

The Tasting Notes

1989 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Riserva Collina Rionda - The bouquet was remarkably deep and layered with masses of pure black cherry and ripe strawberry fruit, giving way to a mix of sweet mineral-infused Indian spice, hints of balsamic, and smoky crushed stone. On the palate, I found the most silky, fine textures imaginable, like a veil being pulled across the senses, ushering in vibrant, fleshy cherry fruit, offset by savory minerals and spice, with inner rose and cedar notes, as hints of fine tannin slowly mounted. The finish was long and showed the first signs of the ‘89’s twenty-nine years, as savory minerals, moist earth, and dried floral tones resonated amidst saturating dried cherries and spice. I am in awe of how the ‘89 Collina Rionda has lived up to all of the hype. (99 points)

2014 Giovanni Rosso Barolo Ester Canale Rosso Vigna Rionda - The ‘14 Vigna Rionda was so densely packed and poised, a quality that I don’t often associate with the vintage. The bouquet was beautiful, both savory and spicy, showing zesty tart cherries and cranberry with hints of spiced dried orange, crushed stone minerality, sweet rosy florals and savory botanicals. On the palate, I found soft textures, which were firmed up quickly by a mix of saline-minerality and brisk acidity, as notes of citrus-kissed strawberry, cedar, and earth tones emerged along with grippy mineral-laden tannin. The finish was long and structured with fine tannins saturating the senses, while dried red berries, savory herbs and hints of cedar lingered. This was one of the most structured and backward 2014s I’ve tasted, in need of a long slumber in the cellar, yet gorgeous. (95 points)

** As a bonus, from the newly planted vines of Vigna Rionda, Davide Rosso creates the Ester Canale Nebbiolo, and if this is any clue to how good these wines will be when these vines are old enough to produce Barolo, then we are in store for something very special.

2015 Giovanni Rosso Ester Canale Rosso Nebbiolo Rionda - The nose was dark, rich and layered with masses of dried florals and earth tones, bright cherry, and hints of animal musk. As it spent time in the glass, its bright cherry evolved into ripe strawberry, also adding hints of leather and crushed stone. Like silk on the palate, it washed effortlessly across the senses, brightened by zesty acidity, as notes of dried cherry and inner rose resonated, showing amazing purity and with slow mounting tannin. The finish was long, opening with dried cherries, then cleansed by zesty acidity, leaving hints of strawberries and rosy florals in its wake. The ‘15 Nebbiolo Vigna Rionda Ester Canale is gorgeous. (94 points)

Following Monprivato Through the Ages

by Eric Guido (Originally published at The Cellar Table Blog)

It all started with the 2009 vintage.  As an avid reader of Antonio Galloni, I remember it well.  What was originally a 93-95 point wine in a difficult vintage had suddenly been downgraded to a “?” in January 2014, with reports that the addition of declassified juice from Mascarello’s top wine, Cà d’Morissio, had done nothing to boost the quality of Monprivato--in fact, it hurt it.  However, with a downgrade like this, we were left to read between the lines.  Then there was 2010, a great vintage, and an 89-point score.  Other critics continued to dole out scores in the mid-nineties, while Antonio held his ground.

Frankly, I’m glad that he did, because it has become apparent to me that something has changed about Giuseppe Mascarello Monprivato Barolo, and I know I’m not alone.  Granted, only time will tell if this change is for the better or worse, yet if there’s one thing that tasting this wine multiple times in vertical tastings has shown me, it’s that the Monprivato of today is absolutely a different wine than the Monprivato that most Barolo lovers have come to know over the last forty years.

The Monprivato of yesterday and today

I’ve formed a sincere love for many vintages of Monprivato, yet I’m the first one to admit that it’s a wine that’s incredibly hard to judge in its youth.  However, I’ve learned through experience that the youthful expressions of Monprivato of the past are very different from what we find today.  For me, Monprivato has always been a wine that showed severe austerity in its youth, crystalline tannin against incredibly delicate fruit, making it difficult to imagine the wine ever coming into balance.  Not only that, Monprivato always seemed to take at least two decades before it would even begin to open up.  I can’t recount how many tastings showed younger vintages to be completely shut down.  Yet, once the wines reached maturity, there was really nothing quite like it.

After a recent vertical tasting, led and hosted by Elena Mascarello, I had the chance to taste some of my favorite vintages of the past, along with new releases and recent vintages.  This is where the questions began to arise.  Tasting the 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010, one can’t help but notice that those hard crystalline tannins that used to define this wine in its youth are quite different today.  Yes, the wines are tannic and youthful, but today’s tannins are finer and softer than they were previously.  I know I’m not alone in this opinion either, as fellow tasters began asking questions.

Questions about Monprivato and… Answers?

One of the first questions from the audience that day was asking Elena if the tannin management was being handled differently at any point in the process.  Her answer was a resolute “No.” 

Another taster asked about changes to the pressing of grapes.  Again, a firm “No.” 

Turning our attention to the fruit, today’s Monprivato is more forward, which is not to say riper, just more present with a bright red berry persona, instead of the delicate, almost floral fruit I was accustomed to (this is a vineyard that has often been compared to Rocche). During the question and answer, I asked about replanting, as I had heard that a good amount of replanting had been done recently.  Elena confirmed this, stating that it has been more widespread than in the past, yet also confirmed that those plants are not currently being used for Monprivato.  Struck out again.

As we all continued to try to bend our brains around the apparent differences between older and newer vintages without a satisfactory reason for the differences, another participant asked about yeasts, citing Kerin O’keefe’s book, Barolo and Barbaresco: The King and Queen of Italian Wine, where she explained that Giuseppe Mascarello is using  “...a strain of selected Barolo yeasts, BRL 97, created by the University of Turin.” (p.118).  Elena confirmed that in 1997, the family did decide to switch from naturally-occurring yeasts to selected yeasts, because they discovered that the fermentations went smoother and were more uniform.  This did raise a few eyebrows in the crowd, but the fact is that the majority of wineries around the world use selected yeasts.  That said, yeast could be part of the equation, but not the answer.

As the tasting let out, I found myself leaving without any of the answers I’d hoped for.  Don’t get me wrong, the new vintages are good wines, especially the 2010 which has continued to get better over the last few years.  But that’s just it; with over a decade of tasting Monprivato, I can’t help but feel that a vintage like 2010 should be an iron vault at this time--impossible to read.

This all got me thinking, reading (and re-reading), digging and searching for answers, and through it all, I can’t help but come to one conclusion: the Mascarello family has been experimenting in their vineyards and altering their processes for decades.  Is it possible that they have simply experimented and refined their way into a completely different style of wine?

A Deep Dive on Giuseppe Mascarello and Monprivato

The Mascarello family has a winemaking history that goes back to the mid-1800s.  Originally located in Monforte, and working the vineyards of wealthy landowners of the region, the family aspired to own their own vineyards, and by the early 1900s, moved the winery to Castiglione Falletto.  The key to their success was acquiring Monprivato, a vineyard located in Castiglione Falletto, with vines that enjoy a southwest exposure, planted in white and grey marl soils rich in limestone.  Sourcing fruit from Monprivato as well as purchasing from other sources (Villero and Bussia Soprana among them), Giuseppe Mascarello began to build a reputation as one of the region’s top producers.  I can attest to the outstanding quality of the amazing wines from that time, as they rank among the best Barolo I’ve ever tasted.

Today, the cantina resides in Monchiero, and it still incorporates the large Slavonian oak barrels that were purchased by the current owner’s grandfather, Maurizio, in the 1950s.  Mauro, the head of toady’s Mascarello family, is the fourth-generation winemaker of the estate, having taken the reins from his father Giuseppe and his grandfather Maurizio in 1967.  Any source will tell you that he is a traditionalist, like the generations before him, yet I believe that a better way to describe Mauro is as a progressive.  The winery does employ long macerations (by today's standards, 25-30 days) and aging in large Slavonian oak, calling cards of a traditional estate.  However, Mauro was bent on refining the winemaking and experimenting in the vineyards to create the absolutely perfect representation of Monprivato terroir, and to be more specific, how that terroir could be communicated using the Michét Nebbiolo clone.

It all started with the 1970 vintage, the first single-vineyard example of Monprivato, which was created from a small parcel of old vines in the heart of vineyard.  Mauro had been instructed by his father that these vines, all of the Michét clone variety, were the best that the family had.  Michét is a late-ripening clone of Nebbiolo that is known to give lower yields. In 1920,  Mauro’s grandfather, Morissio, had identified the best Michét vines within the vineyard and planted this section using massal selection.  The 1970 Monprivato was an unprecedented success and remains one of the iconic examples of the region.  With the success of this wine, Mauro decided to use Monprivato to make only one Barolo, a blend of Michét, Lampia, and Rosé Nebbiolo clones from throughout the entire vineyard.

Yet Mauro had an idea which began with the 1970 vintage.  He believed that the vines planted by his grandfather had so perfectly adjusted to the distinct terroir of Monprivato, that they would create a far superior wine if planted throughout the vineyard using massal selection from the estate’s best performing vines.  His father before him had a similar idea, having done some replanting in 1963 using the same logic.

This began the Cà d’Morissio project, which started in 1983 and continued on through the late nineties.  Mauro started by dedicating two acres of Monprivato, where he removed the Rosé vines that were planted, installed drains to help prevent erosion (which had plagued Monprivato in the past), and replanted these locations through massal selection using Michét at high density.  Mauro worked block by block, and by 1993 had decided that it was time to put his theory to the test; the Cà d’Morissio Riserva was born.  Sourced from the blocks Mauro had experimented on and aged an extra year in smaller Slavonian oak barrels (25-27 hectoliter), Cà d’Morissio continues to only be released when the wine itself is unique enough to stand out from the Barolo Monprivato, if not, it’s blended in.  Mauro was so happy with the results of the 1993 and 1995 vintages that he immediately started work on another block of the vineyard in 1996, following the same processes as before.

The Theory, or maybe just a fool’s ponderings

As stated on the Giuseppe Mascarello website, prior to 1992, the clonal makeup of Monprivato was Michét 30%, Lampia 45%, and Rosé 25%.  I could find no reference of the exact current percentages, but since that time, Mauro has ripped up multiple acres of Rosé clones to replant Michét for the production of Cà d’Morissio.  While doing this, he changed the plant density of the vineyard to 5680 plants per acre and added “drainage.”  The only reference that I could find relating to the clones planted in Monprivato today comes again from Kerin O’keefe’s book, Barolo and Barbaresco: The King and Queen of Italian Wine, where she explains that beyond the planting of Michét, that “...the rest of Monprivato is cultivated with Lampia clones… planted in the 1960s” (p.117), making no mention of Rosé.  What’s more, during the tasting event, Elena Mascarello confirmed that even today, when replanting needs to be done in the vineyard, it is completed using massal selection from the best Michét of the estate.

Other than the fact that the winery changed from naturally-occurring yeasts to selected yeasts in 1997, we’ve been told that nothing else has changed.  The fruit is always destemmed, macerated for about thirty days, fermented in temperature-controlled stainless steel tanks (since the early nineties, which is quite common in the region today), employing a soft vinification with gentle pumping over, and then aging in large neutral Botti for three years until bottling.

Having said that and circling back to where this all started…

Is it possible that the Giuseppe Mascarello winery has forever changed the profile of Monprivato over the course of thirty years by removing clonal and biodiversity from their vineyards, using their best plots for Cà d’Morissio in all but the worst vintages and planting at a higher density in their vineyard?

This is just a theory, but it’s a theory based on over a decade of experience tasting these wines, and countless (I repeat, countless) hours obsessing over every source and printed piece of material (including the Mascarello website) that I could find.  Until a firm answer is found, what I can assure you is that the recent vintages of Giuseppe Mascarello are quite enjoyable, but they are not the same Barolo Monprivato that I have grown to love over the decades.  How will they age?  It’s anyone's guess.   For now, all we can do is love them for what they are.

On To the Tasting Notes

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2013 - Here I found intense floral perfumes with dusty dried roses up front, followed by notes of ripe strawberry, bright cherry and hints of undergrowth.  On the palate, I found a lifted expression, showing feminine textures with pure ripe strawberry, a light dusting of sweet spices and inner floral tones, remaining remarkably fresh and pure throughout, with hints of acid and tannin.  The finish was shorter than expected with light strawberry and light, fine grain tannin. (91 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2012 - The nose was reserved with mineral-infused dried strawberry, tart raspberry, stone dust, dried flowers and dusty earth.  On the palate, I found wonderfully soft textures with tart raspberry, inner spices and floral perfumes.  The finish was medium in length with lingering spice and floral tones. This showed very little in the way of structure, save for a coating of dry inner florals.  As much as I enjoyed this, it’s a lighter style of Barolo that depends on grace over staying power. (92 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2011 - The nose showed crushed cherry with an herbal tinge, marine-minerality, and hints of spice that emerged over time. The warmth of the vintage showed only in its sweet cherry fruit, being a bit overripe, yet kept in check through earth tones.  On the palate, I found soft, medium-weight textures with pretty notes of strawberry, minerals and light spice.  The finish was long, showing crushed cherry and spices, which coated the senses. This is not one for the ages, yet I found it quite enjoyable today. (91 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2010 - The nose showed dusty dry earth and notes of raspberry, with sweet and sour brown sauce, then lifted by notes of lavender, hints of licorice and cinnamon.  On the palate, I found silky textures with sweet-and-sour cherry, masses of inner floral tones, licorice and spice, yet lacking dimension on the mid-palate.  It finished with medium-length and hints of young tannin, yet remained lifted throughout. (94 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2009 - The nose was darker than the surrounding vintages, with marine-influenced minerals giving way to dark moist undergrowth, hints of animal musk, black cherry, raspberry and herbs.  On the palate, I found silky, pliant textures with notes of bitter cherry, blackberry, lavender and hints of spice.  The finish was medium-long and balanced, showing ripe strawberry and inner florals over hints of grippy tannin. (92 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2008 - The '08 Monprivato showed a pretty bouquet of dusty, mineral-encased bright cherry, crushed stone, dried roses, soil tones and hints of undergrowth. On the palate, I found zesty, feminine textures, accentuated by brisk acidity with bright cherry and strawberry, sweet herbal tea, saturating mineral tones and the slightest hint of fine tannin. It finished medium-long, fresh and savory, with lingering inner florals, minerals and spice. This is showing beautifully tonight, but it's very hard to gauge how well it will age. (93 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2006 - The nose was dark and brooding with hints of animal musk up front, then opening to reveal exotic florals, dusty spice, earth, and mineral-infused black cherry.  It seemed to seamlessly glide across the palate, where I found silky textures offset by an intense mix of black cherry and tart raspberry, with mineral and savory spice tones emerging along saline-minerals.  The finish was long, with a coating of complex tannin offset by brisk acidity and dark red fruit. (96 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2004 -  The nose was intense yet also quite pretty with marine-influenced minerality, dried flowers, undergrowth, hints of rosemary and animal musk.  On the palate, I found silky textures with an energizing mix of brisk acids and saline-minerality, as notes of tart cherry and inner floral tones emerged. The finish was medium-long with saturating cherry tones, minerals, hints of spice and lingering tannin. This was highly enjoyable and worth every point, yet it fell short of the 2006, as I craved more persistence on the palate. (94 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 2003 - The nose was dark with earth and minerals up front, followed by crushed blackberry, cherry and spicy florals.  On the palate, I found silky textures with ripe cherry, violets, brisk acidity and hints of grippy tannin in an unexpectedly balanced and highly enjoyable performance.  The finish was medium-long with lingering dark fruits and hints of gruff tannin. This was a beautifully balanced wine for the vintage. (92 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 1998 - The ‘98 showed a mature color in the glass. The nose was dark and earthy with hints of undergrowth, moist fall leaves, sous bois, crushed ripe cherry, and hints of spice.  On the palate, I found silky textures with a wave of balancing acidity, notes of tart cherry, spice and balsamic tones with impeccable balance.  The finish was long and spicy with saturating dark fruits, moist earth and inner floral tones. Wow. (94 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 1996 - The nose showed mineral-infused black cherry and crushed stone, as hints of wild herbs, moist soil and animal musk evolved.  On the palate, I found soft textures, which were firmed up by a mix of tart red fruits, minerals and fine tannin, yet the fruit persisted throughout, picking up perfumed florals and spice.  It was remarkably balanced yet still very young, with a long and structured finish that showcased intense tart red fruit that saturated the senses. (96 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 1988 - The nose was gorgeous, showing dried cherry and undergrowth up front, opening more with time in the glass as the fruit gained richness, changing more to crushed strawberry, dried orange, smoked meats, wild herbs, dusty earth and hints of animal musk.  On the palate, I found soft textures with sweet cherry offset by savory minerals with saline spray, spice and zesty acidity.  The finish was remarkably long and fresh with lingering dried cherry and inner florals.  What a performance from the ‘88, showing perfect balance and maturity. (96 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 1985 - The nose was dark and earthy with iron-borne minerality up front, giving way to dried roses, tomato leaf, dusty earth and hints of dried strawberry.  On the palate, I found soft yet zesty textures with tart raspberry, dried citrus and hints of lingering tannin.  It finished long and a bit spicy, still full of so much life with lingering hints of red berry and rosey florals. This was wonderfully youthful on the palate and finish, promising years of further development. (93 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato 1979 - The nose showed dark red fruits with dried florals, dusty earth and hints of animal musk.  On the palate, I found soft, perfectly resolved, fresh textures with minerals, hints of earth and dried red fruits.  It finished with medium-length, showing earthy minerals and inner floral tones. It was very pretty with beautiful energy, yet the fruit has dropped out to show more earth and minerals than anything else. (88 points)

Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Ca’ d’Morissio 1995 - Here I found a gorgeous, dark and brooding bouquet with animal musk up front, giving way to mineral-infused crushed black cherry, licorice, dried orange, stone dust and dusty roses.  On the palate, I found silky textures with saline-mineral thrust, before giving way to tart black cherry, inner rosey florals and youthful fine tannin. The finish was long with lasting fine tannins and mineral-soaked red berry fruit. (94  points)

Is Monprivato a Monopole

At one time, Mauro Mascarello was thought to have controlled the entire slope of Monprivato, making the vineyard a monopoly for nearly two decades, as no other producer bottled its fruit as a single vineyard. You would need to look all the way back to 1990 for the last Monprivato made by another producer, and that was Brovia.  Today it is thought that Giuseppe Mascarello controls over 93% of the vineyard, with only one other producer that I know of who has begun to bottle a Barolo Monprivato: Giovanni Sordo.  However, having tasted this wine, it is still far off from the quality, of even the lesser vintages from Mascarello.

What is Massal Selection or Selection Massale

Massal selection is a process of replanting vineyards using cuttings from vines which are identified as superior or better suited to the terroir of a specific location.  These cuttings can be obtained through nurseries or from vines within the vineyard that have demonstrated superior performance or health.  It’s important not to mistake this for clonal selection, a process carried out in nurseries to propagate the same genetic clone of a vine for planting.  In the case of Giuseppe Mascarello, he has been identifying Michet vines (Michet being a clone of Nebbiolo) within Monprivato, and then using massal selection to propagate these vines throughout the rest of the vineyard.

Family, Tradition & Barolo: Video Interview with Giuseppe Vaira

My sit-down and chat with Giuseppe Vaira of G.D. Vajra to talk about family, the history of Vajra, life-long traditions, and what the future looks like.

One of the most impactful moments of my career in wine, was meeting Giuseppe Vaira over ten years ago, at a local shop, as he talked about his love of the region and wine.  His spirit, and passion moved me, as well as having a taste of the great wines G.D. Vajra produces.  Imagine my excitement over having the opportunity to sit with Giuseppe and ask him all the questions that my heart desired. 

This interview is packed with insights from Giuseppe on the region, a great family history and some Easter eggs regarding what we have to look forward to in the years ahead.

Enjoy!

The Balance of the Blend: Vietti Castiglione

What It Takes to Make the Vietti Barolo Castiglione

By Eric Guido

What does it take for a producer of Barolo to decide that it’s more important to create one great wine to please the majority of collectors, at a tremendous price, versus creating five single-vineyard Cru Barolo that they could charge 3-4 times as much for and easily sell?

Passion? Tradition? Responsibility? Love for the region and for their family?  I’m of the opinion that when it comes to Luca Currado of the Vietti winery, each of these reasons come into play.

As Luca talks about Barolo, Piedmont and all that has come before him in this region, he speaks with such love, excitement and reverence, that it becomes easy to understand why the Vietti Barolo Castiglione continues to be produced.  To this day, it is one of the greatest examples of traditional Barolo, as well as being priced remarkably fair and able to stand proud next to many of the top wines of the region.  It’s because of this that I feel compelled to be an advocate of both the wine and the winery, to make sure that people know just how much goes into producing it.  However, there’s another reason as well, and that reason is that I also feel it’s my duty to make sure that Barolo lovers really do understand the benefit of having the Barolo Castiglione in their own cellars.

The first thing to understand is that Luca is determined to make Vietti’s flagship wine the best Barolo that he can in every vintage.  And don’t fool yourself.  The flagship of this house is not the multiple 100-point-scoring Ravera, the classic Rocche with its amazingly long track record, the Lazzarito from one of the region’s “hottest” locals, or the Brunate, with its famous location and name.  No, the flagship at Vietti is the Castiglione.

In order to make Castiglione the best that it can be, Luca looks to a collection of single vineyards,  He could easily vinify and bottle each of these on their own, however, he chooses to instead blend into one Barolo, the Castiglione.  This doesn’t mean that all of the fruit is picked and added to massive tanks and barrels, like many other producers would do.  Instead, Luca chooses to raise the fruit from each of these parcels like it would one day be a single-vineyard bottling of Barolo.  Each one receives unique care and upbringing through the aging process.  It is only after the refinement in large neutral barrels that Vietti begins the blending process and completes the Castiglione.

Recently, I was granted an amazing opportunity to taste through the different vineyards that will produce the 2016 Barolo Castiglione--hold onto your seats, because 2016 is going to blow your minds.

The 2016 Barolo Vintage

Just to provide a bit of background on the year, as I’ve been tasting 2016s from barrel now for the past two years, it’s a vintage that may outperform the best of the last three decades.  The vintage doesn’t require a producer to express their own excitement over it as you taste, because from the moment you put your nose to the glass, or take that first sip, the importance of 2016 becomes apparent.  

The 2016 vintage was one of the longest growing seasons on record, with an early start in the late winter due to drier and warmer conditions than usual.  Budbreak took place in early March, yet as the season continued, it became cooler that usual, hence slowing down the maturation.  Summer brought long dry days with moderate temperatures, which was followed by a mild and dry September.  The result was that picking for Barolo began late on October 5th (in Brunate) and ended on the 25th in Ravera.  The fruit was healthy and abundant with ripe tannins and balanced acidities.  As for Luca Currado, he believes it may be the greatest collection of wines he’s ever produced, including the Castiglione.

Back to the Castiglione

As I’ve mentioned, the Castiglione is a traditional blend of vineyards. In 2016, those vineyards included Ravera (Novello), Teodoro (Serralunga), Scaronne (Castiglione), Rocchettevino (La Morra), Bricco Fiasco (Castiglione), and a mix (due to the small size of the parcels) of Mosconi and Le Coste (Monforte).  In each year, Luca will use as much or as little of these barrels that’s necessary to create the perfect blend of the Barolo Castiglione.

However, before today, I was never been able to taste each of these wines separately, all while hearing Luca’s comments on each of them.  Of course, with Ravera, I’ve had the chance to taste this when barrel-tasting with Luca.  Keep in mind that Vietti is able to fill three large, neutral botti with their production from Ravera; it’s one of their largest holdings.  From those three barrels, only one makes the cut for the single-vineyard, while the rest can go on to be added to the Castiglione.  While visiting with Luca in Piedmont, I’ve been able to taste from all three of those barrels, and I can’t tell you how hard it must be for the Vietti winery to decide which one will be the “Cru” and which will go into the blend, because they are all sublime. 

That said, one of the most eye-opening bottles on this day came from a little-known vineyard in Serralunga, named Teodoro.  It was the vibrancy of the fruit, remarkably pretty florals and exotic nature of the wine that first caught my attention.  However, what sealed the deal was Luca’s explanation of how the wine is made.  Apparently, Teodoro is one of the few vineyards in Barolo that produces fruit that benefits from whole-cluster fermentation.  This is a practice that isn’t often used in the region, simply because the character of the grape and terroir doesn’t lend well to it.  Most of us know that one of the region’s most highly regarded wines today (Burlotto Monvigliero) is made with whole-clusters.  However, that location, with its sandy soils and cool climate, is a perfect example of one terroir that does benefit from it.  Apparently, so does Teodoro, and since Luca is always willing to experiment, he found the perfect mix by leaving 60% of the stems intact.  What’s more, we were able to taste two different bottlings of Teodoro, one made “traditionally” and one left in barrel for only 18 months, which is a much older tradition from the early 20th century.  Comparing these two wines was fascinating.

Granted, this is just the tip of the iceberg, as the completed 2016 Castiglione is not assembled and ready to taste, but I can tell you that I’d be happy with a Barolo made from any one of the components we tasted.  That said, with the blending prowess of Luca Currado to make the final decisions, I’m extremely excited to see what the end result will be.

The Blend Component Tasting

All wines were barrel samples that had been bottled for this event.  Also, my opinions of what each component lends to the blend are my own, and I’m sure Luca has his own thoughts on the matter.

L35 Ravera di Novello - This is a wine that I have tasted from barrel and loved each time. Here I found a dark and exotic expression, showing wild berry fruit with notes of purple florals, crushed stone minerality and sweet spice. On the palate, it was smooth, displaying pure red berry fruit in a lifted expression with saline-minerals, showing a tactile mix of acid and tannin that saturated the senses all the way through its dark fruit finish, leaving hints of balsamic spice. I see this as the core of the blend, and the soul. (94-96 points)

L44 2016 Teodoro (Serralunga) - The 2016 Teodoro was absolutely gorgeous on the nose, with an array of wild red berries, rosy florals, earth, and hints of savory herbs, as the wine continued to open in the glass, becoming more Burgundian, lifted and refined.  On the palate, I found a soft expression, with tantalizing acidity paving the way for fresh red fruits, inner florals and grippy tannins.  The finish was medium in length, resonating on red fruits and florals. The Teodoro is a relatively recent acquisition, and likely what has given the Castiglione its recent boost of aromatic complexity. (92-94 points)

L20 2016 Scarrone (Castiglione) - This is another wine that I’ve tasted in the past, and as before, one I wish that Luca would consider bottling one day on its own.  The nose was remarkably pretty, bursting with an intense expression of red fruits.  Raspberry, strawberry and cranberry seemed to all come together as a sweet dusting of spice, minerals and red florals filled the senses.  On the palate, I found silky textures, which were offset by saturating red berry and sweet spices, kept in check by a wash of grippy young tannin, which lasted throughout the long finish.  I can only imagine what this might taste like in twenty years, and I doubt I will ever find out. That said, the Castiglione would miss the addition of Scaronne, as I see this as the spice in the blend. (93-95 points)

L41 2016 Rocchettevino (La Morra) - Here I found a floral expression with rosy red berry fruit complemented by dusty sweet spice, and minerality, creating an exotic and feminine expression.  On the palate, soft, enveloping textures gave way to seductive dark, ripe red fruits with a grounding wash of brisk acidity to balance them out beautifully.  Hints of tannin emerged on the long, dark fruit finish, yet all in all, this is a wine of texture and very easy to like.  I think it goes without saying that the Rocchettevino levels out the structure, giving Castiglione its silky presence on the palate.  (91-94 points)

L39 2016 Mosconi and Le Coste (Monforte) - The nose was dark and woodsy, showing a mix of sweet herbal and floral tones, offset by woodland berries and hints of moist earth.  On the palate, I found silky textures, yet restrained by a web of complex tannin with mineral underpinnings, as dark red fruits fought to make an appearance.  The finish was medium in length, showing the wine’s power and drying its dark red fruits.  This is certainly the backbone of Castiglione, and it is sure to lend the structure necessary to mature. (90-93 points)

L43 2016 Bricco Fiasco (Castiglione) - The nose was dark and rich, with a mix of brown spices, crushed red berries, and earthy minerality, yet with time, it became prettier, more floral and gained a note of sweet spice.  On the palate, I found a feminine expression, with silky, lifted textures giving way to mineral-encased, crunchy black fruits, echos of dark florals and spice.  The finish was long, as fine tannin mounted, slowly drying the wine’s fruit and leaving an expression of power.  I find this to be the iron fist that comfortably fits into the Castiglione’s velvet glove.  Gorgeous. (93-95 points)

** Addition after tasting the final bottled 2016 Castiglione Barolo on 5-12-2019 **

2016 Vietti Barolo Castiglione - The nose on the 2016 Castiglione is stunningly dark and alluring, as it draws me closer to the glass. Here I'm finding notes of crushed strawberry, with wild herbs, orange-spiced tea, smoke, licorice, and hints of white pepper. Its silky textures flood the senses with a mix of ripe red and blue fruits along with sweet herb tones, which are complimented by zesty acids and saturating minerality. Yet through it all, fine tannins slowly mount with each sip, leading to a structured finale, as mineral-infused sweet cherry resonates amidst hints of tobacco and cedary spice. (94 points)

On a side note, and a bit of a treat

As Luca had explained, the Teodoro vineyard is one of the few locations within Barolo where the harvested Nebbiolo benefits from whole-cluster fermentation.  He also went on the explain that what we all consider traditional only depends on how far back into history that we are looking, and that he is often looking further back to consider everything that came before.  Thinking along these lines, Luca looked to a time before the first World War, a time when your average Barolo producer would only have one large barrel in their cellar, which was used to collect all of their fruit, ferment it, and age it.  What this meant is that with the next harvest, the barrel would have to be emptied so that they could use it for the next harvest--meaning that Barolo of the early 20th century was only aged 12 months before being bottled.

As time went on and the region began to recover from the second World War, producers began to add more barrels to their cellars when possible, but at the time, the region was still quite poor.  It was during this period that the aging of Barolo in barrel moved from 12 to 18 months.  With this in mind, and while tasting his whole-cluster fermented Teodoro, Luca decided that he would experiment by aging part of his Teodoro fruit for only 18 months, to see if it would benefit the wine.  Luca’s thought is that, one day, we may see more Barolo aged for less time in wood.  Sort of a “what was old is new again” approach.  Luckily for all of us at this tasting, he brought a sample.

L1861 2016 Teodoro (Whole-cluster 60%, aged in Neutral barrels 18 months) - The nose was remarkably pretty and spicy, showing intense layers of sweet herbs, rosy florals, and crushed stone minerality, before giving way to dark red berry tones with hints of pepper, dried orange peel and hints of new leather.  On the palate, I found silky textures offset by a vibrant wave of acidity, as zesty red berry fruits with floral and peppery underpinnings washed across the senses, leaving hints of tannin and spice in their wake.  The finish was long with a twang of acid tapering off to reveal dried red fruits and hints of fine tannin.  This is something like I’ve never tasted before from Barolo, and it’s an expression of Nebbiolo that I would absolutely seek out if available on the market. (92-94 points)

Note

Maps borrowed from Barolo MGA by Alessandro Masnaghetti

Exploring The Classics of Piedmont

Early on in my journey to understanding wine, I realized that there was something about the Nebbiolo grape that captivated me. It was something about its purity, mixed with the multidimensional layers or fruit, florals and earth that would develop over time. The difference between a young and old Barolo or Barbaresco (both made 100% from Nebbiolo) is so drastic, as the wine evolves over decades–not years–and transforms from an angular and austere expression into something so graceful, feminine, soft, and giving. Sometimes you don’t even need to taste these wines to receive the gratification you desire, because their bouquet can be so remarkably beautiful, haunting, alluring and satiating that the sip is only the completion of the experience, before returning to the glass for another aromatic exploration.

Nebbiolo also has the ability to teleport your imagination by communicating terroir so transparently. This is the same reason that so many collectors find their way to Pinot Noir in Burgundy, and why the two grapes are often compared to each other. You’ll find very little in common between Nebbiolo and Pinot Noir, other than their earthy and floral natures, but it is absolute that both will speak more about the places from which they came than most other grapes do. It’s because of this that the trend of single-vineyard or Cru wines became so popular in Barolo and Barbaresco, and even when a producer blends different vineyards together, you can often find the telltale signs of how one site lent the wine its power, another its spice, and another its structure. A lover of fine details, hidden traits, an explorer, or even those who enjoy nearly incalculable equations will find a lot to like in the variety.

When you add the many different styles of winemaking to this mix, the complexities of Barolo and Barbaresco grow deeper. I found myself saying that I preferred the traditionally-styled wines of the region, macerated for long periods of time on the skins and aged in large neutral oak. Yet I must confess that over time, my mind has been opened to a large number of producers who create wines that are considered “modern” yet made with a soft touch. In fact, the only “modern” barolo I would turn my nose up at today would be one that leaned hard toward drastically reduced yields in the vineyards and a large percentage of new oak. Because if I’ve learned anything in over a decade of tasting these wines, it’s that the lines between modern and traditional have blurred so deeply, that only a small number of producers can now be considered a hardliner in one direction or other. Also, there are some great wines from the past that were made in a “modern” style that are simply irresistible today.

Speaking of winemakers, Nebbiolo also has a way of inciting as much passion in its producers as in the people who buy them. Passion is what drives many wine lovers, and to think that there is someone on the other side of growing, raising and bottling these wines, who shares a similar passion–is a remarkable feeling. In Piedmont, most winemakers are also the same people who care for the vines in the vineyard (another similarity to Burgundy). These aren’t business people who wear fancy suits or designer clothes to work; they are farmers. Most of them can trace their vine-growing roots back generations, and their face will often light up when presented with a wine that their father, grandfather or older generation produced. Of course, this is slowly changing in Piedmont, as outside investment threatens to buy up its vineyards, but that’s a story for another blog.

Our Very Own Piedmont Classics Dinner

With all of that said, the only way to truly understand all of these differences is to taste, which is absolutely the most enjoyable part of this hobby (obsession) that I share with a wonderful community of fellow worshippers of the Nebbiolo grape. Often we’ve done this through vertical tasting (multiple vintages of different or the same producer to understand vintage characteristics). Sometimes through horizontal tasting (one vintage of the same or multiple producers). We’ve even pitted two producers against each other in a traditional-versus-modern showdown. However, what moved me to words today was our most recent tasting, and one of the best we’ve ever embarked on.

Being that our group was started on the Vinous forums, we thought that we would borrow an idea from Antonio Galloni and create our own version of his Piedmont Classics dinner. Why not? This is a group of collectors who each have deep cellars of Nebbiolo going back decades. The tasting was organized into four flights by producer. In most cases, each flight had at least one bottle with significant age and a few with moderate to even youthful wines. (Which is funny when you consider that the youngest bottle on the table was ten years old–but this is Nebbiolo we’re talking about.) The producers we settled on were Giacomo Conterno, Bruno Giacosa, Marcarini, and Brovia–all undeniable classics. Plus, we were treated to a blind tasting addition from Cappellano. The venue was La Pizza Fresca, owned, operated–and on this night even manning the brick-fire oven–by Brad Bonnewell (a fellow Cavalieri del Tartufo e dei Vini di Alba).

It was a study of producer, a study of terroir, a study of vintage, a brick-oven pizza exploration… and one hell of a good time.

On To The Tasting Notes

Surprise Blind Bottle: Cappellano

I had no idea going into the tasting that I would be treated to a 70-year-old Barolo, which was a true testament to the staying power and nobility of Nebbiolo It makes sense that the producer would be Cappellano. At that time, they were one of the biggest names in the region with some 60 hectares, as well as one of the largest purchasers of grapes. Even with this tremendous production, the name stood for undeniable quality, which is something that has not changed to this day. Bottles of Cappellano from the ‘50s, ‘60s and on to today are always a welcome addition to any tasting.

1947 Cappellano Super Barolo – This was served blind, and what a treat it was. The ‘47 “Super” Barolo was completely mature yet gorgeous, with a bouquet of cigar box, dried flowers, dusty dry spices, and dark soil tones. On the palate, I found pure, lifted sweet red fruits with zesty acidity, minerals and inner florals. It finished long and spicy with ripe yet dried red fruits and lingering sweet minerality. Wow, what an experience. (93 points)

Flight 1: Giacomo Conterno

We’re looking back 47 years at a time before Giacomo Conterno even owned the vineyard that defines them today: Cascina Francia. In fact, the ‘70 Barolo that was labeled Cascina Francia was due to a lapse in time between bottling, labeling and shipping. It isn’t a Cascina Francia at all (they didn’t own the vineyard at that time), but that didn’t stop it from being one of my wines of the night. At that time, the fruit would have come from a source in Monforte, but little else is known. Another highlight from this night’s flight was a peek into some recent vintages that are coming along very nicely as well.

1970 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Riserva – Here I found a dark display of mature Nebbiolo, complemented by layers of earthy, savory aromas. Dried leaves, dusty old spices, and hints of roasted meat wafted up from the glass, yet it remained feminine and pure throughout the experience. On the palate, a soft and inviting textural display gave way to tart red fruits with lifting acidity that created an almost-mouthwatering experience. It finished with saturating tart berry tones, earthy soil tones and lingering undergrowth. (95 points)

1971 Giacomo Conterno Barolo – Where the ‘70 Barolo Riserva was all about feminine grace, the ‘71 instead showed the muscular and attractive gritty side of Nebbiolo. Here I found a rich and dark display with tart red berries up front, followed by animal musk, dried flowers and dark soil tones. It was soft on the palate, with mouth-filling textures which seemed to touch upon all of the senses, as notes of sweet dried red fruits, hints of spice, and minerals prevailed. The finish was long with sour berries, undergrowth and crushed stone. This would have scored higher if there was more clarity or a bump of acidity on the palate, but the fact is that the ‘70 is in fine form and drinking beautifully. (94 points)

2000 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – Having never been a big fan of the vintage, the 2000 Giacomo Conterno shows some of its telltale drawbacks, yet it manages to be incredibly enjoyable all the same. Here I found a rich, dark bouquet with crushed cherry, brown spices and dried flowers, yet the wine lacked momentum. On the palate, it displayed silky textures contrasted by intense tart red fruits, inner spice and sweet tannins. The finish was saturating with red fruits, yet it was soft and only medium in length. (92 points)

2007 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – While the 2000 did the best it could in a warm vintage, the 2007 excelled with it. The nose was intense with dusty spices, saline minerals, a hint of savory tomato leaf and notes of undergrowth. It showed silky, enveloping textures with intense dark red fruits, which turned slightly tart as youthful tannin began to saturate the senses. Savory minerality and spice persisted throughout the finish, with a cheek-puckering twang of tart fruit and hints of savory herbs. The density here is formidable, nearly masking its young tannin, but the underlying structure should guarantee the 2007 a long life. Very nice. (95 points)

Flight 2: Bruno Giacosa

There is really only one way to follow up a flight of Giacomo Conterno, and that’s with a flight of Bruno Giacosa. What was really amazing were the similarities found throughout each of these wines, a combination of the winemakers stamp and terroir. Picking favorites here was like splitting hairs, and what it really came down to was the level of drinkability from bottle to bottle. However, scoring-wise, it was the potential mixed with the performance that won out the day.

2001 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Falletto di Serralunga d’Alba – The ‘01 Falletto showed all of the classic hallmarks of the vintage married to the Giscosa style. The bouquet was lifted and pure with a sweet-and-sour persona, as spicy black cherry mixed with sweet herbs and hints of savory tomato leaf. On the palate, I found silky textures that were quickly offset by a combination of dusty minerals and crystalline tannin, as tense, youthful crisp red fruits were ushered across the senses by brisk acidity. The finish was long, showing its youthful tannin with saturating tart red fruits. We still have a ways to go before the ‘01 is in its perfect drinking window, but this night’s bottle was enjoyable on potential alone. (94 points)

2004 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Falletto di Serralunga d’Alba – You should be very pleased with yourself if you have the ‘04 Falletto in your cellar. Here I found a gorgeous display of rich black cherry and cranberry, with notes of holiday spice, sweet florals, crushed stone minerality and mint. It was silky on the palate with enveloping, soft, ripe spiced cherry fruit, juicy acidity and the sweetest of sweet tannin. The finish was long, showing the first signs of youthful structure with saturating spice and dried cherry tones lingering on. (96 points)

1999 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Le Rocche del Falletto di Serralunga d’Alba – I’ve been lucky to taste the ‘99 Le Rocche on multiple occasions, as each time it has been stunning. The nose was radiant in its cool, dark red fruit, with raspberry and black cherry, as well as hints of plum. Rosy florals tones, dusty spice and minerals joined the fray with time in the glass. On the palate, I found a refined and structured expression, with black cherry, inner floral, mineral tones and crunchy youthful tannin. The finish was long with palate-coating spiced cherry, sweet inner florals, spice and hints of lingering undergrowth. (96 points)

1996 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Riserva Falletto di Serralunga d’Alba – The ‘96 Falletto showed youthfully restrained, yet it was impossible to ignore on its potential alone. The nose was cool and minty, with notes of black cherry, dusty dried floral tones, licorice and hints of smoke. On the palate, I found an angular expression with depths of dark red fruit and minerals, as fine tannin kept everything in check. The finish was long with saturating tannin, lingering spice, dried inner-florals and mineral tones. (96 points)

Flight 3: Marcarini

Speaking of the classics of Piedmont is not possible without including Marcarini in the conversation. Following a large vertical tasting many years ago, my eyes were opened to this traditional producer, who still manages to fly comfortably under the radar. As you look back to older vintages, the name Cogno is often proudly emblazoned across the label, which is the same man who would go on to create the Elvio Cogno winery that has earned an elevated position in Piedmont today. These are classic, traditionally-styled wines that represent a similar mix of value and quality that we find from vintage Produttori del Barbaresco.

1968 Marcarini Barolo Brunate – Following a flight on unbelievable Giacosa Barolo isn’t easy, but the ‘68 Marcarini Brunate held its own. Here I found a perfectly mature and remarkably pretty expression of Nebbiolo fruit with dried floral tones up front giving way to dusty soil, hints of brown spice and faded cherry. On the palate, I found a soft and feminine display with zesty acidity giving life to its dried red fruits, along with earth tones and minerals. It was shorter on the finish than I had hoped yet cleaned up very nicely with a twang of tart red fruit and lingering florality. (93 points)

1973 Marcarini Barolo Brunate Riserva – The nose showed dark dried red berries with sweet florals and a hint of leather. On the palate, I found zesty expression, yet rich enough to the impression of weight, showing bright red berries, earth and minerals. It finished long and balanced with lingering mineral and dried cherry tones. (91 points)

1974 Marcarini Barolo Brunate – The nose showed dark dried berry tones, followed by animal musk, crushed fall leaves, earth tones, and dusty spice. On the palate, it was airy and lifted with great acidity, showing tart red berries with a savory edge and earthy minerality. The finish was long and earthy, with inner floral tones lasting throughout. I’ve always been a fan of the ‘74 vintage, and this Marcarini was a textbook example of why I love them so much. Simply a great drinking wine and vintage. (92 points)

1999 Marcarini Barolo Brunate – The ‘99 Brunate is full of potential, showing a classic, traditional nose, with dried red fruits, pine nettles, licorice, medicinal herbs, and sweet florals. On the palate, it was feminine and slightly firm, with saturating tart berry tones, leather, spice and youthful tannin. It finished beautiful and long, displaying earth tones, dried spices and inner florals. This wine is only just starting to approach its drinking window, and I see many decades of positive evolution ahead for it. (93 points)

Flight 4: Brovia

The house of Brovia has undergone many changes over the last thirty years, as Elena and Cristina Brovia took the reins from their father. Quality was said to have steadily improved through that time, and even more in 2001, when Alex Sanchez joined the family. The exciting thing about this night’s tasting was the ability to taste the ‘79 Rio Sordo–a wine made by the previous generation–next to three wines that represent that period of change. The fact that the ‘79 ended up being my wine of the flight has more to do with its perfect maturity, while the ‘96 Ca’Mia technically scored higher.

1979 Fratelli Brovia Barbaresco Rio Sordo – The bouquet was stunning, showing dusty spices, earth, undergrowth and a hint of iodine, before notes of dried cherry and floral tones began to develop in the glass. On the palate, I found soft textures with zesty acidity giving way to minerals, spice and sweet and sour red fruits. The finish was medium in length, yet still zesty and fresh with dried berry tones, spices and lingering minerality. (93 points)

1995 Fratelli Brovia Barbaresco Rio Sordo – (Flawed–Badly)

1996 Fratelli Brovia Barbaresco Rio Sordo – The nose was dark and intense, showing dried cherry, dusty spices, smoke, and minerals upon minerals. On the palate, I found a silky expression with dark red fruits, classic ‘96-styled crunchy tannin, and earthy minerals. It finished long, as its young tannin saturated the senses, drying out the fruit and leaving an impressive of austerity. This was very good, but I do wonder if the fruit will outlive the tannins. (92 points)

1996 Fratelli Brovia Barolo Ca’Mia – The nose was dark, rich, mineral-laden–classic. Here I found a mix of dried cherry, raspberry, dusty spice, earthy minerality and moist soil tones. On the palate, silky textures were quickly offset by intense dark red fruits, with brisk acidity adding mineral lift and young tannin, which settled down hard on the senses. The finish was long and structured, even cheek-puckering, allowing hints of tart red fruit and minerals to linger. This wine was densely packed, with dark focused fruit wrapped in fine tannin with balancing acidity, which sounds like a recipe for success to me. I can’t wait to see where it’s going. (94 points)

Credits and Resources

Article, Tasting Notes, and Photos by: Eric Guido

Thank you to La Pizza Fresca and Brad Bonnewell

Don’t forget to check out one of the world’s great wine loving communities: Vinous Forums