TN: Side-by-side tasting of all nine Produttori crus in 2011

One of my groups tasted all nine Produttori di Barbaresco single-vineyard bottlings from 2011 this week.

They showed very well, with the Pora a standout, far ahead in the group’s ranking. The Paje’ in second place was well ahead of the rest, and the Rabaja’, 3rd, was out ahead of the rest, which were tightly bunched.

The wines were poured into unmarked bottles for serving about an hour ahead. Some changed noticeably with air, but overall I’d say there was less change in the glass than I expected. They were tasted over 90+ minutes.

I’ve been a little unsure what to make of the 2011s. When the same group tasted ’11 Barolos last December, they were sort of meh. And tasting in Piemonte in August and September I felt some of the ‘11s lacked a little structure.

Some people felt Barbaresco fared better in this warm year, though, and the results here are certainly consistent with that theory. The Produttoris had ample tannin and acid, plus good fruit concentration in most cases. With the right foods, these are all drinkable now, but plainly have the structure to go for many years.

Of course, the differences here were subtle as the winemaking is the same for all nine. We had a small group this week so there was about a third of a bottle of each left over. When I resampled last night, my impressions were largely the same. I’ll taste them again tonight.

I’ve grouped them in bands since it’s kind of meaningless to attempt more precise gradations among such similar wines.

TOP TIER (92 points or more for me)

Asili: I think there was some residue in my glass or something, because I got some burned rubber in the nose which others didn’t get and I didn’t perceive out of others’ glasses – or on day 2. This had hard tannins but opened up with air and came into balance. Still, more tannic than most. At first I gave this 85, but after tasting it from another glass and with more air, I bumped it up to 92. My 9th based on the initial points/group’s 5th

Pora: A sweetness on the nose and floral perfume that reminds me of talcum powder (someone suggested violets). Good grip, a bit riper than some, with excellent fruit concentration. Lots of tanning at the back but enough ripeness that this is pretty drinkable now. My 1st/group’s 1st

Montefico: This was a little more austere at first, a little less ripe than some. But with air it really came together and my score rose from 89 to 92. My 7th based on the initial point score/group’s 4th

Montestefano: Beautiful nebbiolo rose hips on the nose, and ripish fruit. Tannic but enough concentration of fruit to keep it in balance. The fruit was on the riper side. “Oodles of backbone,” I wrote. Great length. My 2nd/group’s 6th/7th (tie)
MIDDLE TIER (90-91 points for me)

Paje’: Some heat on the nose. A tad more feminine and forward than most, but very good structure in the mouth in the finish. My 5th/group’s 2nd [corrected]

Muncagotta: That talcum floral perfume again. Good grip, with ample fruit to back it up. “A touch less ripe, but in a good way,” I wrote. Long, full, concentrated finish. My 4th/group’s 8th

Ovello: Nice nebbiolo scents with a bit of air. A tad less focused – a little less structured than most, though still a lovely wine with good concentration. My 3rd/group’s 6th/7th (tie)

Rabaja’: Lovely rose hips and flowers on the nose. “Lots of power” I wrote, but harder in the mouth, and there was something a wee bit tart on the finish – a greenness I didn’t get in the others. Perhaps this just needs time, but it wasn’t any more giving on day 2, so I’m not sure. Still, not a bad wine. My 6th/group’s 3rd. 90-ish for me.

DISAPPOINTING

Rio Sordo: Decent wine but lacks a little of everything – aromas, fruit and structure. Still the weakest by far on day 2. 86/87 for me. My 8th/group’s 9th. This would have been my ninth had I not initially dinged the Asili.

Thanks John.

I have a bunch of the Asili, and my one time drinking it I thought it was really good.

Man! That was a great tour of their wines!

Well done, and appreciated.

Thanks. I have all of the 2008s; maybe one day I’ll do this with those.

Thanks for the write up.

I have not tasted any 2011 Produttori. Indeed, hardly any Barolo of Barbaresco from that vintage. So it was good to read your take on it.

Just one point. There seems to be a disconnect between your actual scoring/grouping and the summary you wrote at the beginning -where Pora, Paje, and Rabaja were scored 1st, 2nd and 3rd but down in the notes it did not appear so. Am I not reading it correctly?

Gotta love the tasting on paper, though maybe at an awkward stage for at least a few of them.

It was my mistake in the detailed notes. I corrected it.

Incidently, tasting back through them all tonight with a lamb chop, my assessment doesn’t really change. I don’t think you can go wrong with any of these, except the Rio Sordo. The Rabaja is still a bit of a puzzler. Maybe it’s just tauter and less forthcoming. But it seems a tad less ripe – definitely less accessible now

Purchased 2 2011 Rabaja today - I’ll get back to you in 5 - 10 years with a tasting note!

Thanks for the notes. I was planning on adding 2 Asili, but maybe I’ll grab Pora instead.

Thanks for doing this, John. Interesting that the Pora wins. Do you think you are grading primarily on how the wine is showing right now, or on estimated quality when more mature?

The Rio Sorda is almost always a distant last for me. I really wonder if they should retire this Riserva and just blend it in with the normale.

I had the Paje this week and it really opened up on the second night; I wasn’t sure what to make of the initial pour To me, very distinctive, balsamic plummy fruit that reminded me of this bruit in the hand of Roagna, the bouquet was somewhat lifted but I didn’t find it hot. I was thrilled by the wine on a QPR. I’ve also enjoyed the Ovello several weeks but agree these wines are best stashed away for future enhjoyment…

I try to look forward. In this case, the Asili definitely showed more of its potential with time in the glass. The Rabaja didn’t. I can’t say if it’s just a tad less complete or whether it’s just a bit of a brute and will need more time in the bottle.

Thanks for the report John. FWIW, I think the Pora has a reputation for being the most open among the Produttori Riservas at an early stage whereas the Montestfano and Rabajà tend to be the most structured.

Right. If I had to pick one of the Riservas to try early, Pora is usually a good choice. I don’t usually buy it as I prefer some of the other ones (I like the ones that have a little herbal or mint note like Paje and Montefico), so I don’t have as many data points. It might be interesting to see how folks rank the riservas in order of preference, although I don’t want to sidetrack John’s thread.

That would be interesting. I guess I’d always figured that Rabaja and Asili were at the top, but that may have more to do with the fact that others, including Giacosa, produce from those vineyards.

I usually aim for Asili, Rabaja, Montefico, and Paje (and Torre, a lot of which is Pora, isn’t it?). I like the others, but sometimes Muncagatta underperforms, and with Montestefano, you might as well buy a Barolo. Ovello I enjoy, but just seems to get left out when I buy, and Pora and Rio Sordo have already been discussed.

Actually, Giacosa no longer makes a Rabajà. When they drew up the MGA zones in Barbaresco, the plots from which he used to make his Rabajà ended up on the “wrong side” of the border between Rabajà and Asili. So I would guess the grapes from those plots now go into the Asili along with those from the plots from which his Asili was made from the outset. The last vintage of his Rabajà was 2005. As we know, he decided not to bottle his 2006s and in 2007 the new “disciplinare” took effect.

With or without Giacosa, I’d say that Asili and Rabajà are on pretty much everyone’s list of the very top vineyards in Barbaresco. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are the very best from Produttori or the very best in every vintage. Personally, I have tasted all nine Riservas in the 1999 vintage only (where I cellared at least three of each). In that year, Montefico was my favorite. It was the most structured of them in that vintage (although I don’t think that’s generally the case) but with “fruit” to match. Luckily, it was also the one I had the most of (a full case).

EDIT: I now see that Ken V shows Giacosa to produce a Rabajà again from the 2013 vintage. The explanation is that Giacosa has bought a new small plot (half a hectare) in the Rabajà MGA zone. The plot was previously owned by Ca’ du Rabajà and used for the Produttori Riserva Rabajà up to and including the 2005 vintage.

http://www.finewinegeek.com/giacosa/bar … index.html

Most of us can’t or won’t buy them all, but I always want the Montestefano. In these hot years especially, Montestefano’s cooler site comes up roses.

Montestefano cool? It is largely southfacing, at relatively low altitude (200-250 meters), and protected from the wind in all directions except east. I’d say that’s likely to be about as hot as it gets in Barbaresco.

FYI, the Slow Food Wine Atlas of the Langhe calls Pora “aristocratically austere” and says it “needs a period of ageing before its full potential emerges and the wine achieves a pinnacle of harmony.” I.e., not so forward in their reckoning.