67, 71, 78 Produttori del Barbaresco

WINE TALK
1

IMG-1951
IMG-19511920Ɨ1440 375 KB

Unfortunately, I did not take detailed notes, but figured I would mention the little that I could.

I posted more detailed notes on the 1967 PdB Normale that can be found at https://www.wineberserkers.com/t/2011-tunina-1967-pdb-normale/289817

It was interesting having these side by side. They were tasted with 3 glasses 1 vintage at a time starting with the 67s. Rabaja and Pora are quite contrasting sites. Rabaja is known for complexity and richness, while Pora for its soft tannins from the high humidity in the soil.

The 67s - these tasted quite mature but all showed really well.
The normale is likely fading, but wonderful now.(See other link above for details)
The Pora is incredibly graceful and with great acidity. I would say my wine of the night.
The Rabaja, as one would expect was much firmer, but still more like the other 67s than it was like the other Rabajas

The 71s-
It was interesting to get into the 71s, as they were so very different from the 67s. The color was much darker, especially for the Pora and Rabaja. The wines were much more potent as the color would suggest. There was quite a bit of hazelnut on both the nose and palate as well, while licorice became a bit more apparent, though far from non existent in the 67s. They all matched their identity relative to each other. The Pora was the most delicate and again my personal favorite of the 3, followed closely by the more potent Rabaja. The normale was excellent, but did not quite keep up with the 2 single vineyards like the 67 did.

The 78s-
These were again a bit darker and even richer than the 71s. They all matched their expected profiles. The hazelnut was much less apparent. These were quite tannic, and seemed pretty young. They were the most masculine of the 3 vintages, and in all honesty, if I owned these, I would not touch them yet, not even the Normale. All 3 could use a few more years of cellaring. They are excellent, but still have time to evolve, especially the Rabaja.

One thing I learned is that I have a pretty clear preference toward Pora, so time for me to stock up a bit more!

I did go back afterwards, and put the 3 Pora sbs. I loved all, and lean slightly towards the 67. It was incredible how different they were with just a few years, yet how much they kept their identity at the same time.

6 Likes
2

Thank you for the notes, I loved the contrast and the detail for what you could offer among the various parcels/vintages. Iā€™m sitting on about a case of 78s varied across the spectrum (also including Moccagatta and Asili) and will factor your notes in to my own timing on these. That said, some will need to see some air sooner for science :slight_smile:

Wish I had vintages going back that far. Thatā€™s quite a tasting you had there, very special.

Still one of the best values running in Italy even today.

1 Like
3

Great write-up. I opened a 78 Rabaja recently, and my impression was identical to yours. Itā€™s superb but astonishingly youthful and probably not at peak. I also own 71 Rabaja so this is particularly helpful.

1 Like
4

After tasting some of these older wines, I am even more confused by how affordable the new releases are. I went in very heavy on the 2016s, Normale in particular, but some Riserva as well.

My big question is, will these age as well as the older vintages? The 2016s in particular I think might, but it is pretty unlikely I live long enough to find out.

5

Nice study, especially with bottles of this age. Interesting that you prefer the Pora. My understanding was that the Rabaja and maybe the Asili stood at the top of the hierarchy, so how they are showing may have been a factor. Then, again, there is always the matter of taste:)

1 Like
6

That was sort of my understanding as well. I think it is a matter of preference. Rabaja is rich, complex and powerful, while Pora is just incredibly delicate and nuanced. Both were outstanding, and some preferred the Rabaja. If I had to pick which was ā€œbetterā€ I donā€™t think I would be able to decide, but my personal preference was pretty clear.

I believe Asili is generally more like Rabaja in character as well, but I have not had Asili before and all of the bottles I own are too young to get into without having many more of them than I have.

1 Like
7

Iā€™m doubtful, and indeed Aldo Vacca doesnā€™t see them as wines made to last many decades (IIRC I think 12-15 years is his sweet spot for them). Whilst I think my tastes would stretch the drinking window beyond his, Iā€™m not as confident about 30, 40 or 50 year cellaring.

2 Likes
8

That kinda works out well for my age lol. Iā€™ll be in a wooden box if shooting for a peak 30 - 40 out :slight_smile:

1 Like
9

I do have a 1996 PdB Montestefano, which if any vintage / vineyard bottling might be up to 30+ years, thatā€™s probably the one. Itā€™s definitely getting to the point that itā€™s a ā€˜candidateā€™ for opening.

10

I donā€™t buy into a hierarchy of quality, though Rabaja and Asili have consistently been the more sought after bottlings (perhaps also enjoying a little reflected glory from Bruno Giacosa bottlings of wines sourced from those vineyards?). As you say, it is a matter of taste.

Perhaps better is to use the sheer volume of vintages bottled as SV Reserve bottlings, to find a vineyard that appeals most to you (or a vineyard / vintage character combo). Indeed theyā€™ve sold ā€˜tasting packsā€™ for many years, allowing for a full horizontal tasting across the vineyards, in the comfort of your own home.

1 Like
11

Thanks for the informative notes
I thought that Guido Alciati hoovered all 1971 Rabaja? I never had the opportunety to purchase one.
Well cellared mature Produttoris are unique and extremely delicious. This one is the best iā€™ve had

prod2
prod21836Ɨ3264 341 KB

2 Likes
12

Just tried a couple of glasses from the '96 Asili on Saturday, and that wine is delicious but still 10-15 years away from peak.

2 Likes