488002 Sat Feb 09 15:17:53 -0800 2008 24 34 Wine 0 3381069 Of course, it's just wine, so it's not "urgent"! But, I'm leaving the house in half an hour, and hoping to catch an "expert" online regarding the following: I bought a 2003 Azelia Barolo today. Would it be a big mistake to open tonight? If not, should I decant it? If so, for how long? Thanks! Alison Sat Feb 09 15:17:54 -0800 2008 14222 abowes 1 3381108 Have not tasted the wines from this producer but in *Barolo to Valpolicella: the Wines of Northern Italy*, Nicolas Belfrage writes: "not a wine of fearsome structure, rather one of richness and balance, inviting almost immediate consumption." Decanting for up to several hours might still be a good idea. Sat Feb 09 15:34:12 -0800 2008 3381069 10520 carswell 2 3381121 Thanks, carswell! Don't have several hours, but will give it a little air, at least. Will report back. Sat Feb 09 15:39:24 -0800 2008 3381108 14222 abowes 2 3385069 I'm not sure where you are getting this "Barolo is ready to drink upon release," but in my 25 years in the food and wine business, that has Nnever been the case. Altho there are some producers of Barolo these days who are making wine the "New World Way," the best Barolos still need 8 to 10 years AT LEAST to show their best. If you think Cabernet Sauvignon is tannic, you'e seen nothing compared to Nebbiolo! and especially the structured way the best winemakers in Piedmont make their Barolos to LAST... twenty years is not "old" for Barolo. Give your wine a chance and you will be richly rewarded. Decanting is in no way the same thing as laying the bottles down. Mon Feb 11 07:29:06 -0800 2008 3381108 52499 ChefJune 1 3381149 Although it definitely improves with bottle age, Barolo is generally accessible upon release... Va Pensiero restaurant in Chicago had several annual "release" dinners a few years back and, especially with food, the wine was always quite drinkable young. Decanting definitely recommended. At the least, uncork early, pour a sample glass, and swirl the rest in the bottle to get some oxygenation going. Sat Feb 09 15:56:52 -0800 2008 3381069 42549 Chicago Mike 1 3381872 Just to echo what was already said, although I guess this is too late, anyway. Yes, it can be drunk now, but a long decant would help. Hope you enjoyed it! Sat Feb 09 21:52:02 -0800 2008 3381069 50041 whiner 1 3382191 Thanks, all. I tried to drink mine slowly, so it would get some time in the glass, and it did improve through the hour - but, I didn't have time for what I suspect would have been very helpful. Given that I couldn't do that, I'd probably give it another try. I honestly couldn't taste much fruit, I felt overwhelmed by wood and tannin. Everyone else at the table seemed pleased, but as it was, it was not an eye-opening experience for me. Definitely not what I would want from a $45 bottle experience. I'd tasted a $20 bottle of old vine grenache earlier in the day, and must say I would have preferred that. Oh well, it was fun. Sun Feb 10 06:11:42 -0800 2008 3381069 14222 abowes 2 3382957 allison... what were you drinking this wine with, btw ?? I would have chosen a simple steak and mushrooms, given it's youth... If it wasn't reasonably well matched it's not surprising you didn't get much out of it. Young barolos aren't all that revelatory drank straight anyway. There's an interesting link on the food/wine pairings thread where a poster describes a young rutherford cabernet that he didn't like by itself but found it an incredible match for osso bucco... here's the link to the thread: http://www.chowhound.com/topics/487441 Your barolo, properly matched, could have been a very similar experience... uninteresting by itself but great with the right food(s). Sun Feb 10 11:31:56 -0800 2008 3382191 42549 Chicago Mike 3 3383413 Oh, Mike, I'm fairly sure it was a poor match - we were having tapas. Scallops, clams, duck, lamb, eggplant, paella, tuna, crab, mushroom... it was all over the board. Sun Feb 10 14:40:03 -0800 2008 3382957 14222 abowes 4 3383525 absolutely was... for the most part, without knowing more, the tapas seem to fall into a chardonnay - pinot noir pattern (w/exception of the lamb)..., Just based on your description I'd say that the food/wine mismatch had more to do with your experience of this wine than anything else... Sun Feb 10 15:31:09 -0800 2008 3383413 42549 Chicago Mike 5 3388127 Yeah - well, I certainly would not have chosen scallops, clams, and tuna, at the very least, for a big red of any sort - but wth it was fun nonetheless - and now I have concrete experience about what not to do :-) Mon Feb 11 19:46:52 -0800 2008 3383525 14222 abowes 1 3384071 My experience with Barolo wines has been different from other posters so far. I appreciate Belfrage's write-up of this wine as being "inviting almost immediate consumption," but this is at variance with what I have experienced firsthand. At least every other spring, I attend the Barolo Symposium in Alba, Italy, and it's a heavy week of "academic" wine tasting -- about 70 Barolos a day for five days straight, and I would say that Barolos are rarely enjoyable upon release. Usually they have enough tannin to stop a truck. Yet a new style of making Barolo has emerged in recent years, a style that is drinkable sooner, in about 5-6 years. The traditional style of making Barolo takes about 10 -15 years for the tannins to resolve and become silky. What I describe as drinkable is distinguished by tannins that are resolved and integrated, fruit that has re-emerged after oak aging and is now unobscured by oak, and a silky non-puckery mouthfeel. By either method of making Barolo, your bottle didn't have the years on it to make it drinkable, in spite of what Belfrage writes. (BTW, I don't recommend drinking a wine that isn't properly aged or with obvious, unresolved oak tannins, but if you forge ahead anyway, a tip is to serve that wine with rare roast beef. It must be rare, and it's a bit of molecular magic the way rare roast beef dissolves and resolves most puckery tannins.) My sense is that this bottle wine was too young. As a separate issue, the foodstuffs (except for the lamb) were not of enough flavor intensity to pair well with either a too young or a resolved Barolo. But do give Barolo another shot -- a properly aged bottle -- so that you can understand this wine's beauty and power. Sun Feb 10 18:33:33 -0800 2008 3381069 18222 maria lorraine 2 3388122 LOL - Yup, I pretty much did every thing wrong that I could have done wrong. "Tannin to stop a truck"... that pretty much describes it. I guess my dining companions were just being polite, but I was wondering if they were nuts!! Ok... so buy a bottle to lay down for 10 years and then have it with the right food... crap, does that mean I can't try Barolo for 10 years???!? Mon Feb 11 19:45:11 -0800 2008 3384071 14222 abowes 2 3407050 maria, i was wondering of the producers that make barolo that is drinkable in five to six years, which do you think are doing a really good job? any comments on the winemaking differences that make this accessibility possible? thanks in advance Sun Feb 17 13:49:06 -0800 2008 3384071 10403 StephP 3 3415833 Steph, I probably don't know as much about Barolo as Maria does (I probably haven't drank 70 in total in my life, never mind in a day!) but maybe I can offer some help in the meantime. (This will of course, be the reader's digest version of what you could easily write a book or two on) There's almost an unspoken civil war going on in the Barolo zone today, with producers being lumped (and lumping themselves) into one of two categories: traditional or modern. Traditional producers make their wine to age (think 10-20 years), and usually will do this by leaving the wine to macerate on the skins for quite a long time, soaking up all kinds of tannin (sometimes this maceration wont even be temperature controlled). They will then usually age the wine in large slovenian oak casts (called botte), which does not influence the wine as much as new barrique does. Modern producers do the opposite. They will macerate the skins for a much much shorter period of time (temperature controlled), and age the wine in small, usually french barrique, which softens the wine and makes it accessible much younger (think 5-7 years. Never drink a Barolo that is 8 or 9 years old. haaa. i kid. oh how i kid.) Modern producers believe their winemaking style corrects the flaws of the "old school" style of winemaking, making sleeker, more worldly wines that will be more accessible younger. Old world style producers believe that using barrique strips the wine of its natural beauty and "terroir", basically turning the unique aspects of nebbiolo into just another modern, oaky wine. Who's right? Well, you'll have to do some taste testing to decide for yourself (and many producers will use a mix of both botte and barrique in their Barolo), though in MY own opinion, you'd be hard pressed to find a modern style barolo that can have the "wow" factor of a well made traditional style one. For modern style producers doing it well, Conterno-Fantino is a usually reliable producer to check out (if you can't find their wines, Fontanafredda is a bigger producer, that should be widely available. Look for their single vineyard offerings). For traditional, check out the wines of Bartolo Mascarello, who at one point, was so adamant about the traditional style of wine making, he put on his label "No Barrique, No Berlosconi". Of course, if you have the cash, you can always dish it out for the king of Barolo's old school, Giacomo Conterno. If you can find a Barolo from Giacomo from a good year in the 60's it will probably still be at its peak. Just a warning, this could start to become a really, really expensive hobby. And remember, if you're looking for accessability, don't forget to check out Barolo's "cousin", Barbaresco. Made from the same grape as Barolo, nebbiolo, the Barbaresco zone is literally a 15 minute drive from Barolo. But because of soil differences, Barbaresco's version of nebbiolo tends to be a bit more feminine, and usually (though not always) can be drunk a little earlier than Barolo. for modern style Barbaresco, check out Moccagatta, and for more traditional seek out the wines of Produttori del Barbaresco, who churn out great values. If you want to do some work, look for Ca del Baio's barbarescos. They make one aged in barrique (mixed with some botte now too) and one aged in botte, so you can compare the two side by side. Hope this helps! Wed Feb 20 04:34:43 -0800 2008 3407050 160336 COrrico 4 3416044 "I probably don't know as much about Barolo as Maria does (I probably haven't drank 70 in total in my life, never mind in a day!) but maybe I can offer some help in the meantime. (This will of course, be the reader's digest version of what you could easily write a book or two on)" If Reader's Digest were this well written, I'd have a subscription. Very nice summary, thanks, it is very informative! Wed Feb 20 06:36:00 -0800 2008 3415833 89969 moh 4 3416948 Wow, your explanation lit up my banks of great memories. My wife and I were fortunate to be able to visit both Moccagatta and Conterno Fantino last March. Not only did we enjoy great wines but Franco Minuto at Moccagatta and Guido & Alda Fantino at CF are extremely warm, nice people. The only thing I could add is to “looking for accessability”, I would add Conterno Fantino’s Langhe Rosso, “Monprà”, which is a blend of nebbiolo and barbera. This wine got the 2 red glass award for the ‘03 but the ‘97 and ‘98 both got 3 glasses. I got the ‘98 at Beltramo’s in the SF Bay Area for $35, so the price is right on Langhe Nebbiolo in the U.S. On a side note, we enjoyed a bottle of ‘97 Moccagatta Langhe Chardonnay “Buschet” at Antinè in Barbaresco. This was an education as I don’t usually like Chardonnay, especially the oaky, buttery style in California and knew nothing of aged Chardonnay, but this was wonderful. Moccagatta is a heck of a winery. Wed Feb 20 10:05:48 -0800 2008 3415833 14128 BN1 4 3420583 <Barbaresco's version of nebbiolo tends to be a bit more feminine, and usually (though not always) can be drunk a little earlier than Barolo. > a little, but not very much! Barbarescos also age easily for 10-20 years, and benefit MUCH from that age. Thu Feb 21 09:32:18 -0800 2008 3415833 52499 ChefJune 2 3421722 maria, I was wondering your take on the 2001 Riccardo Talenti Brunello di Montalcino Pian del Conte. As I understand it Riccardo took over from his father Piero, but has continued the family style instead of going to the jammy, new wood style of Burnellos. I received a bottle from a cousin who brought it back with him last year and am inclined to hold if for quite a while longer, but it is hard keeping my hands off it. Thu Feb 21 13:43:03 -0800 2008 3384071 11814 dinwiddie 3 3423011 This thread so far has been about Barolo. I'm happy to talk about your Brunello but perhaps you should start a new thread. Give me a heads up, if so. Thu Feb 21 21:23:28 -0800 2008 3421722 18222 maria lorraine 1 3416253 Query to those folks referencing aging times on Barolo - are you referring to years from vintage date, or from bottle release date? DOCG requires at least 3 years aging before release which is why what's available at retail is currently the 2003 vintage. Wed Feb 20 07:34:16 -0800 2008 3381069 35525 Frodnesor 2 3418091 The estimations for aging times are from the vintage listed on the bottle. So if someone suggests the wine needs 10 years, and its a 1997 barolo, they are referring to 2007 (But these are really just estimations. There are so many variables. Personal taste, how good of a year it was, etc. Its really not a science.) And as BN1 mentioned a great, and often much less expensive alternative to Barolo and Barbaresco are Langhe Nebbiolos, Nebbiolo d'Alba, etc. It doesn't have the strict aging requiremets of Barolo and Barbaresco, and can be drank a lot younger. Its a great way to get those tarry mushroomy flavors that nebbiolo gives you without breaking the bank or waiting until your grandkids graudate from college. Find a producer whose Barolo or Barbaresco you like, and chances are their Nebbiolo d'Alba will be done in a similar style, so you should hopefully like it. Wed Feb 20 14:07:56 -0800 2008 3416253 160336 COrrico 3 3418469 I'm a little late coming back to the party. COrrico, you've answered StephP's question quite nicely. Barolo wines are especially tough to learn, digest, enjoy and afford. Not only are there the communes (the lovely eleven little villages in the hills of Piedmont) but Nebbiolo is the single most site-specific grape I know. It's like a chameleon, a prism, reflecting the soil, terrain, terroir, transparently. The mere difference of a 100 yards makes a difference in the wine. And that's not even considering vinification differences. So the individual producers become quite important. I've been especially struck by that in my visits to the Barolo hills. And then there are the prototypical commune differences, the vintages, and getting past all that dang tannin. It's a lot to apprehend, even for a winehead. Which is why I especially agree with turning to Barolo's more beguiling, seductive sister, Barbaresco, made from the same grape, Nebbiolo. And I wholeheartedly agree with checking out those wines made by the Produttori del Barbaresco. This is one of the few wine co-ops that does an exceptional job, and the wines are priced quite reasonably. I especially like the Asili from them, but I've enjoyed every Asili I've drunk. I agree that Moccagatta is a good Barbaresco producer, as is Fontanafredda, which also makes Barolo (and is a stunning winery to visit). Here are some other threads that are exactly on this topic: Help with Barolo purchase http://www.chowhound.com/topics/471441 TN: 1990 Barbaresco Riserva, Vignetti di Asili, Produttori del Barbaresco http://www.chowhound.com/topics/447983 Faves and values in the Tre Bicchieri? http://www.chowhound.com/topics/460426 Wed Feb 20 15:54:57 -0800 2008 3418091 18222 maria lorraine 4 3419407 COrrico, maria, thank you! Wed Feb 20 20:56:03 -0800 2008 3418469 10403 StephP 1 3426390 I have a couple bottles of 1997 barolo. Has anyone had any exerience with this vintage? I hear it is supposed to be one of the better vintages and I've been trying to hold back on opening it. Do you think another 4-6 years in the cellar would make a difference? Also, is grignolino typically meant to be enjoyed fairly young or should it be aged like barolo. I had a fairly young bottle, 2001 or 2002 a couple of years ago and really enjoyed it despite its heavy tannins. Fri Feb 22 21:12:10 -0800 2008 3381069 155482 tonabang