Piemonte!
I happened upon a Piedmont tasting at Vino, recently. It’s a region that I’ve been seeking out more often, lately. The Barberas hailing from Piedmont have intrigued me as one of the best food wines around, and one of the best values we can find (until the US dollar tanks even more). I’ve also been interested in experimenting with Barbaresco and Barolo, both made with the Nebbiolo grape. Even still, the consistency of quality of the Nebbiolo-based wines has been elusive, and still warrants extended trials. However, some “experts” out there fell in love with them years ago, so now the prices have been too high for simple “experimentation”. That’s where these tastings come in handy.
So the lineup was:
Podere Ruggeri Corsini 2006 Langhe Rosso
Montaribaldi 2006 Dolcetto d’Alba
Molino 2005 Barbera d’Alba
Pasquero Paitin 2004 Nebbiolo “Ca Veja”
Elio Altare 2006 Barbera d’Alba
Ca del Baio 2004 Barbaresco “Valgrande”
Vietti 2001 Barolo “Castiglione”
Mauro Molino 1998 Barolo “Vigna Gancia”
The verdict?
For the cost, the Barberas outshone all the others. Robust flavors, enough acid to cut through the snacks we were having, and that fruitiness that I’ve come to know from Barbera: Coy, yet relatively full-bodied. The standard Nebbiolo was decent, but unexciting making the cost not worthwhile.
The same goes for the Barbaresco, which proved uneventful and forgettable. I knew the Producer from the Piedmont tastings I used to organize, and it’s the least expensive Barbaresco out there, as far as I remember. I understand its place in the tasting, though. It’s best to give someone a taste of Barbaresco, and that’s the starting point. If only it were a bit more exciting . . .
Of the two Barolo featured, the 2001 Vietti, the less expensive of the two, certainly performed better in my own opinion. The more expensive, the 1998 Mauro Molino, the emphasis of oak seemed to suggest to me that this wine could really be a Riserva, and had spent more time in barrels, or the wood treatment was a bit heavy-handed for the ripeness of the fruit. Also it could be the age of the wine deemphasized the fruit over the wood. Or it could be that stylistic thing . . . and that’s a completely different argument. But for the money, I’d be going with the 2001.
The “also-rans” were fairly forgettable. The Langhe Rosso, which I am assuming was a Nebbiolo (I was unable to find any solid confirmation of this), was simple. You could drink it without really noticing. As far as price, you could say it’s a good value, but value only goes so far as to the things you’re willing to purchase. Although I may drink this if it were put in front of me (as I did), I probably wouldn’t go out of my way to find it, or order it for a meal.
That said, the final wine was the Dolcetto. I’ve enjoyed Dolcetto in the past as a simple quaffer, good with light snacks and often compared with Beaujolais in lightness of character. The first round of Dolcetto was lightly corked and funky, to no fault of anyone but the cork. But the replacement wine, although solving the corky problem, was not much of an improvement. The tannins were a bit strong and harsh, and dare I say bitter and perhaps flat? This was not the light and fruity Dolcetto. It seemed overripe and fairly unpleasant.
The Bottom Line: I’d actively seek out and get those Barberas. I’d be perfectly accepting of a glass of someone else’s Barolo or Barbaresco, given the occasion. I’d end up drinking the Nebbiolo or Rosso if they happened to be in close proximity to my glass. And I’d not recommend the Dolcetto in question to my worst enemy. Of course, it’s best not to have a worst enemy, but I suppose if I DID have one, they probably wouldn’t be wine drinkers, anyway . . . certainly not to be fooled into a recommendation from the likes of me, right?