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.

Dueling Blind Barolo Vintages

Article and Tasting Notes by Eric Guido

2001 & 1999 Barolo
Two classic vintages, both in need of time, yet just starting to show their early maturity. Why not put 2001 against 1999 in a blind tasting? We all have our preconceptions, which in some cases were shattered as we unveiled these wines. What’s more, recent reports on 2001 have called it uneven in its maturity, and some have raised the question of if it will go on to be considered a great vintage down the road.

On thing this tasting certainly proved is that there should be no fear that 2001 Barolo from the top producers will go on to be prolific, classic wines. Of course, as noted, these are the top wines of any vintage and finding a reference point here can be difficult. In fact, I don’t recall the last time I saw such a collection of the who’s who in Piedmont. If you’re looking to put something special in the cellar, you can’t go wrong here.

As for 99’s, it’s all been recently said. A retrospective tasting from two years ago put me on the hunt to acquire as much ’99 Barolo as possible. There have been naysayers, yet as time goes by, and more collectors and critics taste these wines, it is becoming apparent that 1999 will go down as one of the top vintages of the nineties—it may even surpass 1996 one day. What I truly love about these wines is their rich, ripe character contrasted by firm classic tannin structure. I taste a ’99 Barolo, even in this young stage, and receive so much satisfaction from not only its current state, but also the imagining of what it will one day become. These are beautiful wines worthy of our cellars.

Flight 1: This was a wonderful performance from the 2001 Bartolo, a wine that I have always been weary of. Inconsistency in this wine’s history, confirmed in the tasting notes of many other writers, leads me to believe an experience like the one below is in no way guaranteed. I couldn’t call out the producer in this flight, but I was sure I guessed the vintages right from their performances. Imagine my surprise to find the results were the exact opposite of my expectations.

2001 Bartolo Mascarello Barolo – The nose was classic, showing dusty cherry, cedar, crushed fall leaves moist earth and dried spice. On the palate, it was lean on entry with tart cherry and inner floral tones yet grew richer as it coated the senses with noble tannin. The finish was youthful with an acid, tannin tug across the palate, accentuated by lingering notes of dry red fruit, minerals and soil tones. Beautiful. (94 Points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

1999 Bartolo Mascarello Barolo – The nose was dark and inviting with black cherry, cranberry, hints of menthol and dusty, dark earth tones. Tart red berries clenched the palate in a tense, tightly wound expression of Nebbiolo, along with notes of cinnamon and inner floral tones. Tannin held the palate firm on the finish, with tart berry lingering long, yet drying out the senses. (92 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

Flight 2: For me, the most striking thing about this flight was how completely different the 2001 Ca d’Morissio was from the straight 2001 Monprivato. However, they were both equally enjoyable, for completely different reasons.

2001 Giuseppe E Figlio Mascarello Barolo Ca d'Morissio Riserva Monprivato – The 2001 Ca d'Morissio was a dark beast of a wine, with intense crushed raspberry, herbs, wood smoke, raw beef and soil laden minerals. On the palate, it was rich yet with a truly classic feel. Tart cherry and autumnal spices penetrated the senses, yet held firm, restrained—clenched. On the finish, lingering dark-red tart berry fruit and inner floral notes lasted long against its formidable structure. (94 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

2001 Giuseppe E Figlio Mascarello Barolo Monprivato – The nose was striking in its expression of bright, ripe red fruit, rosy floral tones, cinnamon and a lifting note of menthol. On the palate, it showed as a classic mid-weight Barolo, with soft yet focused red fruit and mineral tones. Tannin coated the senses throughout the finish, yet that red berry note continued to ring true. It would seem that there are many years of development ahead for this wine. (93 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

1999 Giuseppe E Figlio Mascarello Barolo Monprivato – The nose was beautiful, with dark, spiced cherry sauce, dusty minerals and a hint of VA. Yet on the palate, this wine took a downturn for me, as it was tight, ungiving and seeming almost diluted. The finish showed hints of red fruit yet remained unyielding. Maybe this was a bad bottle, yet others at the tasting seemed less bothered by its performance. (N/A) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

Flight 3: The 1999 Brunate Le Coste was a game changer within this tasting and really made me stop and think. The taster next to me called this flight as G. Rinaldi only moments before I was about to come to the same conclusion. They were both unique and beautiful wines.

1999 Giuseppe Rinaldi Barolo Brunate Le Coste – The nose was exotic and dark, inciting excitement over reaching deeper into the glass as ripe black cherry, cinnamon spice, sweet balsamic tones and a hint of mint created a gorgeous bouquet. On the palate, it was dark, ripe, intense, juicy—lovely. Showing dark red fruit, accentuated by exotic spice and dried floral notes with a classic tug of Nebbiolo tannin. The finish was long with dried fruits, yet youthful and restrained. There are many years of development ahead of this wine; I only wish I had some in the cellar. (95 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

2001 Giuseppe Rinaldi Barolo Brunate Le Coste – Spiced cherry, licorice and sweet rosey floral notes make up the bouquet of the 2001 Brunate Le Coste. On the palate, it is still tightly wound in its structure, yet showing intense tart black cherry fruit and savory herbs. The finish was tight as a drum, youthful yet satisfying as the fruit clung to the center-palate. (92 points) Find it on Wine-searcher!

Flight 4: I was very happy to be able to call this flight as Giacomo Conterno Cascina Francia, although I did mistake the vintages. They were both beautiful, classic wines in need of considerable time in the cellar. I will say, that if you wanted to cellar one wine from this tasting, over the long term, the ’99 Giacomo Conterno Cascina Francia would be my pick.

1999 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The nose was dark and enticing with an exotic twist and all the iron, mineral-laden Serralunga character you could ever hope for. A mix of ripe strawberry, brown sugar, orange peel, tea leafs, iron and rich dark soil tones formed the bouquet. On the palate, it was firm yet crystalline focused, showing dried red fruits, dark soil tones, and a hint of grapefruit. Tannin continued to build throughout the finish nearly masking its tightly coiled fruit and permeating notes of dried florals and fall leaves. It was an unbelievably beautiful wine. (96 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

2001 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – Even darker and richer than the ’99, the nose on the 2001 Cascina Francia pulled me in, showing red berry, moist black soil, floral rose, rosemary and minerals. On the palate, it was youthfully lean with sour red fruit, yet gained momentum and focus as ripe strawberry developed along with inner floral notes and savory spice. The finish continued to impress with its saturating red fruits, inner floral tones and lingering minerals yet remained clenched in need of more time in the cellar. (94 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

Flight 5: This flight was a total mystery to me. Giacosa has a way of throwing me for a loop, especially in a blind format. As such, I have stayed with my initial impressions with these tasting notes to avoid any sway the labels may have had after the unveiling.

1999 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Falletto di Serralunga d'Alba – The nose was rich and intense with dark red fruits, cinnamon, cedar, and hints of herbs. On the palate, red berry fruit played a sweet and sour act on the senses, while inner floral and tobacco notes completed the experience. Tannin shut down the finish, allowing only a hint of red berry fruit to linger. (93 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

2001 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Falletto di Serralunga d'Alba – The nose was earthy and somewhat vegetal with tart red berry, sweet peas, and parchment. With time the fruit became sweeter and dark, yet a formidable earthiness remained. On the palate, it was lean showing tart red berry and spice, which lingered throughout the finish with stern structural components tugging at the cheeks. (90 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

Flight 6: I was very happy to correctly guess the first wine as the ’99 Giacosa Le Rocche del Falletto; what I didn’t realize is that the second wine was the exact same thing—ouch! (Originally there were three wines in this flight.) Going back to my notes, they were extremely similar; I’m guessing it was probably differences in conditions of the bottles and time of double-decant, which may explain the slight differences. I went with my first tasting note, as I believe it was the best representation of the wine.

1999 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Le Rocche del Falletto di Serralunga d'Alba – The nose was all at once intense, yet elegant and truly radiant. A bouquet of dark red fruits, plum, rosy florals, dusty spice and minerals wafted up from the glass without any coaxing. On the palate, it opened with bitter cherry, yet fleshed out turning riper and softer with a savory meatiness, dry spice, saline minerals and inner floral tones. The finish was tight yet focused with red fruit, cinnamon and gorgeous autumnal character. (97 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

2001 Bruno Giacosa Barolo Riserva Le Rocche del Falletto di Serralunga d'Alba – The nose showed a ripe mix of crushed berries, dry spice, menthol, leather and hints of herbs in a dark, warm and inviting bouquet. On the palate, it started youthfully lean with tart cherry, gaining mass and riper character as it wrapped around the senses. A woody balsamic note lingered long with sweet exotic spice and violet floral tones. The finish was the epitome of dried flowers and fruit with dry spice lingering long. (98 points) Find it on: Wine-searcher!

It was a tasting of epic proportions!

Check out: The Fine Wine Geek, for more notes and photos.

In closing, I would be remiss not to mention the excellent service and location provided for this tasting by New York Vintners. New York Vintners is a specialty wine shop in Downtown Manhattan, which appears small upon entry, yet as you pass behind a curtain separating the wine selection from the rest of the store, you come to realize that this is much more than a simple retail location.

New York Vintners has a full kitchen with tasting table within sight. As well as two floors below where they hold educational classes, their wine cellar, and a cellar tasting room (seen in the photo). The food, prepared by Chef Ryan Smith, was a perfect companion to help us through tasting these youthful wines. It was truly a culmination of vinous and culinary perfection.

1999 Barolo and Barbaresco: Right on Track

One of the most common discussions among Barolo drinkers are which vintages from the 1995 through 2001 vintage streak will rise to the top. It’s a debate that has been going on for years, and for quite some time, ’99 seemed to be a big question mark--until recently.

A recent experience with a '99 Aldo
Conterno Colonnello, truly peaked
my interest in revisiting these wines.

This time last year, I would have worried about opening a ’99 Barolo. It was a fear that it would be too broad yet too tannic and far from maturity. I’d say you should be drinking ’95, most ‘97’s, and some ’98’s. I would have gone on to say that ’96 was more structured but classic with fruit that would last the test of time. Then I’d explain that ’01 was still a baby in need of more time, but that it appeared to be a great vintage in the making. But with ’99, I had feared that it wouldn’t come around while the fruit was still intact. However, Barolo has a way of surprising you, and ’99 has done just that.

1999 had a great start, being a year that saw favorable conditions throughout the entire region. A warm summer with cool nights lent the grapes that much needed push and pull of heat to ripen, and a break at night retained balance and added aromatics. Maybe I was at a disadvantage, having never tasted these upon release. For me, most of these bottles were at least seven or eight years old before my first taste and may have been in a dormant stage. However, after this tasting, I can see that they are right on track.

Most of these wines are just entering their drinking window. I wouldn’t put them in the same league as ’96 for ageability, yet I would say there’s at least a decade of improvement in store for the majority of wines we tasted. What was troubling was the number of bottles that appeared to be suffering from unusually high amounts of volatile acidity. Lastly, there was the revelation that our wine of the night wasn’t a Barolo—It was a Barbaresco.

In my opinion, ’99 is a vintage to sample over the coming years--and buy, if the price and provenance is right.

On to the notes:

La Morra and Barolo

1999 Giuseppe Rinaldi Barolo Brunate / Le Coste – The nose was highly expressive with black cherry and raspberry fruits, followed by soil, slate dust and earthy minerals with a hint of V.A. On the palate, it was silky with a full body, showing rich red fruits, sweet spice and saline minerals. It’s structure seemed to creep in with the second sip as drying tannin coated the palate, yet still managed to close with flavors of cherry and wild herbs. (92 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher!

1999 Michele Chiarlo Barolo Cerequio – On the nose, I found cherry fruit with oak influences of sawdust, cinnamon with an odd note of raw beef. On the palate, it was soft and juicy with sweet red fruits, coffee notes and spice. The finish was staying with red fruit, cinnamon spice, inner floral notes and cheek-puckering tannin. (89 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher!

1999 Brezza Barolo Cannubi – The ’99 Brezza Cannubi was a gorgeous Barolo with crushed red berries, roses, mineral dust, and tobacco on the nose. On the palate, it was elegant and finessed with ripe cherry fruit and minerals, which turned darker and more dramatic over time to reveal sweet balsamic notes. The finish showed red berries made tart by cheek-puckering tannin. This wine was youthful, with many years of development ahead of it. (94 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher!

Barbaresco

1999 Produttori del Barbaresco “Torre” – The ’99 Barbaresco “Torre” from Produttorri del Barbaresco makes a serious case for the quality of their normale. The nose showed cherry fruit, dried roses and earth tones of soil, a bit of green stem and raw chestnut. On the palate, a rush of intense red berry fruit was followed by earth and mushroom with a chewy texture that gave way to tannin. The finish showed dried red berries with gruff tannin that was fine on this night but may one day overpower the fruit in this wine. (90 points) Find in on Wine-Searcher!

1999 Produttori del Barbaresco Moccagatta Riserva – The Produttori Moccagatta was classic in every way, and having tasted it blind, was easily confused for being a Barolo. The nose started out muted, but with a short time in the glass, a bouquet of dried cherry, potpourri, menthol and dark, dark chocolate filled the senses. On the palate, intense tart cherry washed across the senses with notes of cedar but was quickly subdued by fine tannin. Penetrating red fruits stayed through the finish in good balance against this wine’s tense structure. The Moccagatta was dark, mysterious and truly seductive on the nose with a truly classic feel on the palate. (95 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher!

1999 Bruno Giacosa Barbaresco Santo Stefano – The nose showed spiced red fruits, cherry pipe smoke and notes of acetone. On the palate, it showed an abundance of aggressive acidity with ripe red berries that coated the palate yet seemed to drop off in the middle. The finish was drying with penetrating red fruits. It would appear that this bottle was flawed. (NR) Find it on Wine-Searcher!


Monforte d’Alba (Important to note that the ’99 Poderi Aldo Conterno Barolo Colonnello was tasted separatly but with similar treatment before tasting.)

1999 Attilio Ghisolfi Barolo Bricco Visette – The nose was unexpectedly advanced, showing damp soil with cherry, herbs, floral rose and minerals. On the palate, it was soft with ripe cherry and hints of iron like minerals. Stern tannins showed through on the finish with notes of cherry and cedar staying through the close. (87 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher!

1999 Poderi Aldo Conterno Barolo Colonnello – The nose was dark and seductive with cherry tobacco, plum, dusty potpourri a hint of musk and medicinal herbs. On the palate, it was velvety and perfectly balanced with masses of fruit. Sour cherry sauce and a hint of cedar filled the senses and warded off the silky tannins that were still present but not out front. On the finish, the fruit turned dry yet still intense with hints of sweet spices. (94 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher! 

Castiglione Falletto

1999 Giuseppe Mascarello Barolo Monprivato – The nose showed sweet dark cherries and roses with spice and licorice. On the palate it was balanced and feminine with ripe cherry and spices, all driven by juicy acidity that brightened up the palate and nearly masked its underlying structure. The finish was fresh and juicy with inner floral notes lingering throughout. (94 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher!

Serralunga

1999 Massolino Barolo Vigna Rionda Riserva – The nose was restrained, yet found its center with time in the glass, showing a bouquet of bright spiced cherry, tobacco, sandy soil and saline minerals. On the palate, it was lean in body, showing notes of dried cherry, earth and mushroom with teaming acidity and a broad structure that took control and lasted throughout the finish. (90 points) Find it on Wine-Searcher!

1999 Schiavenza Barolo Riserva – The nose showed intense cherry but was followed by sweet acetone and plastic notes. On the palate, it showed tart cherry, minerals and rust with drying tannin that dominated the finish. This wine was marked by V.A. (NR) Find it on Wine-Searcher!