NYC Barolo Tasting Group Does it Again: Giacomo Conterno vs. Luciano Sandrone (LONG)

Who would have thought to put a producer known for being one of the bastions of traditional winemaking in Piedmont against another producer who is famous for eschewing the old ways, being one of the most forward-thinking, often labeled “Modern,” winemakers in the region? Our tasting group, of course.

All of my insights on the flights are below, as well as my tasting notes. However, for the full experience, and tons of great pictures, please check out my blog at : The Cellar Table

Flight 1 – Something of an oddball flight that ended up with wines from two highly-acclaimed vintages which simply haven’t lived up to the hype. It’s amazing how, to this very day, people will try to sell me 2000 and 1997 Barolo on the vintage hype. It makes me wonder how often these same people are tasting the wines. The fact is that both of these were probably beautiful in their day, yet the characteristics of the vintage have taken their toll.

1997 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The nose showed a mix of moist earth, minerals, musky cedar and olive brine. On the palate, I found tart red berry fruit in a sappy, yet somewhat muddled expression. Dried red fruits and musky tones lingered on the finish. The question came up if this is over the hill, or possibly damaged, yet the bottle was stored properly since release. It may just be that some ‘97s are fading fast. (88 points)

2000 Luciano Sandrone Barolo Cannubi Boschis – The nose was restrained at first, showing dark berry tones; yet with coaxing, it began to release a bouquet of cranberry and minty herbs with a hint of cedar. On the palate, I found radiant, focused fruit with hints of spice in a very pretty and brilliant expression of Nebbiolo. Gruff tannin coated the palate throughout the finish, yet with a lack of balancing fruit and acidity. (89 points)

What’s most telling about this wine is that it was the only one opened at the tasting, while the rest received double decanting and slow-o. Yet when this was tasted the morning after, it was severely oxidized, while other wines and vintages from this tasting were still going strong. Quality of the vintage (or lack thereof), I presume.

Flight 2 – 1998 has become known as the Barolo vintage of the late nineties to drink now, and this selection was a great example of why. All three were beautiful, but the Conterno really took the prize for its incredible freshness and purity of fruit. However, I would be remiss not to mention how absolutely stunning the ’98 Le Vigne was on this night. There was a moment when we went back and forth between it and the Cascina Francia, splitting hairs over which was the more beautiful wine. Also, with a hefty dose of Ceretta fruit in the Le Vigne, it showed many of the Serralunga qualities we were looking for in the Cascina Francia.

1998 Luciano Sandrone Barolo Le Vigne – The nose showed black cherry with soil, minerals, sweet floral tones and a hint of sawdust. On the palate, it showed smooth, almost creamy, medium-weight textures with stunning purity of fruit, as notes of cherry, spice and minerals cascaded across the palate. A note of hard red candy lingered on the palate, with hints of still-youthful tannin providing grip. (93 points)

1998 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The nose was dark and earthy, showing wild berry with olive, minerals, woodland tones and animal musk. On the palate, it displayed stunning purity with tart black cherry and soil-laden minerality, kept lively through a brisk wave of acidity. A mix of dark fruit and minerals coated the palate throughout the finish. This may be one of the best ‘98 Cascina Francias I’ve ever tasted. (94 points)

1998 Luciano Sandrone Barolo Cannubi Boschis – The nose showed rich, dark fruits with hints of spice, herbs, cedar and salty brine. On the palate, it was broad and dark, as dried red fruits turned to dry cocoa and coffee grind. Gruff tannin clenched the senses throughout the finish, drying the remaining fruit. This came across as smaller in scale than the ’98 Le Vigne yet lacked depth and definition, and didn’t improve over time. (91 points)

Flight 3 – Last year, our group revisited the 1999 vintage in a horizontal of some of the best wines of the region. The diagnosis was that ’99 represents one of the most classic years from the Barolo vintage streak of the late nineties. Tonight was yet another example of just how amazing this vintage is. The ’99 Monfortino was epic to say to the least, yet we did go back and forth between it and the Cascina Francia, trying to decide which was which–showing that the ’99 Cascina Francia is a gorgeous wine and should be in all of our cellars, even at its current price.

1999 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Monfortino Riserva – This was a thrilling wine to be sure, as a bouquet of intense rich fruits, masses of rose and tar, leather and earth came forward along with hints of mushroom and balsamic tones. On the palate, a dark mix of fruits washed across the senses, turning to cranberry and spice with deep, silky textures over a spine of fine tannin. The finish showed palate-saturating cherry with contrasting hints of dried citrus and inner floral tones. This was amazingly drinkable on this night, and some tasters wondered if it was the Cascina Francia, yet the bouquet alone gave it away. (98 points)

1999 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The ’99 Cascina Francia opened with a dark and brooding bouquet of earth, animal and fruit, showing soil-laden minerals up front, leading to dried flowers, animal musk and dark berry tones. On the palate, it showed brilliant, yet tart, wild berry and strawberry fruits, minerals, and fine tannic that saturated the senses. It finished clean and youthful with hints of dried fruits. This is so young today, and it should continue to evolve into something very special over time. (96 points)

1999 Luciano Sandrone Barolo Le Vigne – This was a gorgeous wine, crashing down many of my preconceptions. The nose was massive, yet refined, showing black cherry, charred meat, sweet herbs, dusty soil and balsamic tones. On the palate, it showed velvety textures with dark red fruits, sweet spice and saturating minerality, which carried fine tannin across the senses. It was palate-coating and intense on the finish with hints of cranberry lingering long. (94 points)

Flight 4 – Where do you go after 1999 in Barolo? You go to 1996, of course. The ‘96s represent a vintage which comes across as impossibly young. The better modern producers seemed to have hit gold in ’96 (Domenico Cleric CMG and Azelia Bricco Fiasco come to mind), as the wines have been drinking beautifully. However, as modern ‘96s go, on two occasions, I’ve found the Sandrone to be good, but far from great. However, as far Giacomo Conterno is concerned, I believe these wines may be immortal, especially the Monfortino, which was as tight as a drum. Unfortunately, the word is out on these wines, and acquiring them can be costly.

1996 Luciano Sandrone Barolo Cannubi Boschis – The nose was rich and intense, showing dark red fruits, sweet spice and dusty soil tones. On the palate, it showed more mature than I would have expected, yet wonderfully smooth in texture with notes of crushed berry, plum and minerals. Tannin coated the palate throughout the finish, yet maintained the presence of ripe fruit. (93 points)

1996 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The ’96 Cascina Francia displayed a gorgeous bouquet of bright cherry, fresh minty herbs, rose and tobacco with a slight medicinal note to its fruit. It entered the palate with silky textures, yet quickly firmed up by fine tannin, releasing notes of tart berry, dried strawberry and minerals. It finished firm with lingering minerality and dried fruits. This was a very pretty, even if tannic, expression of ’96 Cascina Francia. (95 points)

1996 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Monfortino Riserva – Still a brick wall of a wine, giving hints of mint and eucalyptus with dark soil and mineral tones lurking in the glass, yet still not ready to show us its gifts. Intense, dark, brooding—but so far from ready on the palate, showing focused dark red fruit on a seemingly taught and wiry structure, with herbal hints in the background. It finished cool and structured, yet not hard or tannic. The balance here is beautiful; I just hope I’ll one day be able to see it in its maturity, which I believe will warrant a higher score. (95 points)

Flight 5 – An epic tasting must have at least one epic flight—at this tasting, there were two. The ‘99s were a revelation for us, but the combination of the two ‘90s and the Conterno ’85 was otherworldly. Rating these wines was a difficult task, and I’m very lucky to have been able to revisit them to watch their evolution. Both of these vintages were considered warmer years, and this was a true testament to how the better producers can make great wine no matter what Mother Nature gives to them. As for the Cascina Francia, I almost shed a tear when I think about my old stash, which has been completely diminished. If you can afford them, buy them!

1985 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The bouquet of the ’85 Cascina Francia was everything that I wanted out of a mature Barolo, especially with its Serralunga earthiness and minerals. The nose opened with dark red berries, dried flowers, tea leaves, minerals and exotic spices, becoming sweeter with time in the glass. On the palate, soft, caressing textures washed over the senses, leaving masses of mature red fruits, inner floral tones and soil-laden minerals. It finished with dried fruits and berries, crushed fall leaves, and a hint of iodine. Stunning. (97 points)

1990 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The nose was intense, with currents of black cherry and dark soil tones wafting up from the glass. Digging deeper, I found sweet herbs, mushroom, tobacco, balsamic notes, black olive and minerals. Dark red fruits seemed to saturate the entire palate in a silky shroud, along with flavors of savory meat, minerals, and dark inner floral notes. The finish showed youthful tannin, with dried strawberry, minerals and tobacco leaf. This is an amazing wine. (96 points)

1990 Luciano Sandrone Barolo Cannubi Boschis – The ’90 Cannubi Boschis was a great way to end an epic tasting. The nose was so amazingly rich and lively with black cherry, sweet spice and balsamic tones. On the palate, it was a smooth as silk, yet seamless and finessed. The fruit entered sweet yet quickly turned to tart berry with hints of mint, tobacco and cedar box. The finish was long and saturating to the senses, as its tannin resolved to reveal spice and a hint of wood. (96 points)

Thanks for posting Eric. I always appreciate the Barolo notes from your tasting group, especially since we usually get to hear from a few of the participants.

Meh

Had the 2003 Cascina Francia yesterday expecting a fairly rich version of the wine. Surprisingly evolved, and drinking beautifully, and archetypal Conterno; dried roses, cranberry and earth. Good tasted alone, superb with the food.

As for 1997s, no, I don’t think they are fading. We tasted the two 1997 Sandrones recently, and while the Cannubi was excellent, we were all entranced by the Le Vigne. The only other one I have had was the Giacosa Rabaja which was promising, but quite backward,

Great write-up, Eric.

Nebbiolo is, to me, the variety that best rewards aging. Your teenage wines sound great, but those with twentyish plus years, OMG!

Great notes on what sound like a great night. Thanks.

I didn’t get a sense from this where the wine is in its evolution. Young? Adolescent? Young adulthood?

Quite possible, I just can’t remember the last time I had a '97 that impressed me. Even from the top producers. I’m sure there are exceptions though.

I agree 100% and only wish I could drink mature Barolo on a regular basis, but that’s why I keep stockpiling vintages over the last ten years. One day my friend.

Drinking very well in my opinion. I see the peak in sight (maybe 5-10, but there is no shame in drinking one now with the right decanting/slow-o. I’m sorry to say that this was my last one–very sad.

Eric, try 1997 Sperss. I just had one and it was ZOMFG, with tons of ageability to come.

What was the prep (ie aeration, pop and pour, pulling the cork) on these wines. They sure sound expressive.

FWIW, I had '98 Einaudi Barolo “Cannubi” this week. While it was good and expressive…it took days left in the bottle to really show how lovely it was/will be. I’m thinking '98 will benefit from lots of aging still…or lots of aeration before drinking.

I’d love to taste one of these! Sounds great. Wish, I’d knew 10 yrs ago what I know now about Barolo.

1985 Giacomo Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia – The bouquet of the ’85 Cascina Francia was everything that I wanted out of a mature Barolo, especially with its Serralunga earthiness and minerals. The nose opened with dark red berries, dried flowers, tea leaves, minerals and exotic spices, becoming sweeter with time in the glass. On the palate, soft, caressing textures washed over the senses, leaving masses of mature red fruits, inner floral tones and soil-laden minerals. It finished with dried fruits and berries, crushed fall leaves, and a hint of iodine. Stunning. (97 points

Yeah, I’ve been finding Sperss to be quite good, and I can imagine that Gaja wouldn’t disappoint in '97. To be honest, I don’t drink a lot of them–that said, we know this bottle was sourced and stored properly since release, so there was really no reason for it to perform badly.

I wish I could say it was all the same, but we did the best we could to open all early with a double decant and slow-o. The only one that was opened at the event was the 2000 Luciano Sandrone.

These are the other’s I handled,
Opened, double decanted for sediment and slow-o’d at 2:30 pm
'98 Giacomo Conterno Cascina Francia
'96 Giacomo Conterno Monfortino
'85 Giacomo Conterno Cascina Francia
'99 Sandrone le Vigne

If I get any more details I’ll happily share.

Thanks for the excellent write up.

Just stylistically how would you compare the two producers?

1997 was one of the best vintages ever for Gaja.

It was a great evening. I didn’t think any of the wines were over the hill, even the 1997. To me, a few of the wines were shut down ('96 Monfortino, '99 Cascina Francia), but the rest were quite lovely considering their youth. However, when we got to the 1985 Cascina Francia – which I believe is at peak maturity and will not get better – I was reminded of why we buy Barolo to hold, and hold, and hold.

-Ben

Thanks, Eric. It sounded like you had a good experience, so…whatever you did “worked”.
I am interested why you slow oxed vs. aerated…(I think “slow ox” is essentially not doing much further aeration from what you did when you cleaned the wine.) My question is whether you did what you did because of logistics limitations or conscious choices? (I am not suggesting you were “wrong”; you enjoyed the wines.) I am just trying to understand why you did what you did. [cheers.gif]

These days, this question is becoming very difficult to answer. I’m sure that by this time we’ve all heard about how the lines have been blurred between the traditional and modern camps in Barolo. Many people that fall in the middle are starting to use the term “classic”, which I first heard from Gaia Gaja, and now hear repeated often. What’s most interesting about this tasting was that it covered the years when Traditional and Modern was really supposed to mean something. However, what most people think of when they hear modern is the use of roto-fermenters and small new French oak barrels—which, as far as I know, Sandrone didn’t use for these wines.

When you really drill down, I’ve been told that Cascina Francia is farmed at some of the lowest yields in Barolo—and that’s one of the Sandrone calling cards from the nineties. I suppose that’s where they may be similar and the lines start to blur.

However, Sandrone stays away from long skin contact (a Conterno staple), and does use some new oak—but only 20% and in larger format barrels.
Hopefully I didn’t just confuse the topic.

In the end, you can call Giacomo Conterno a Traditionalist and Sandrone a Modernist. Or you can say that Sandrone is more about the fruit, while Conterno is more about making age worthy wines of terroir.

If anyone else has a different perspective on this, I’d like to hear it as well.

I find that Barolo does much better when allowed to decant in the bottle, than it does in a decanter. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve decanted Barolo, only to find an oxidized (almost even rusty) quality to it afterward. There’s no science behind my answer, only experience. That said, I’ve enjoyed a lot of great Barolo using this method. It gets lots of air from the initial decant and then gently evolves in the bottle throughout the rest of the day.