I don’t decant young Nebbiolo. Tends to mask the fruit and accentuate tannin.
for long aeration, can you reliably ‘sample’ during the day with nose only?
I would decant in a wide bowl decanter a day (24 hours) before service. I would swirl the wine in the decanter multiple times while it sits in the cellar before double decanting it back into the bottle leaving just enough time for the wine to come up to temp in bottle outside the cellar. I would be conscious of ensuring no sediment found its way over into the decanter, and I would thoroughly wash the bottle to ensure that wasn’t the case.
This is how I handle the vast majority of traditional Barolo and Barbaresco I drink. Only caveat is some very old bottles (50+ years or more) might fall over in that time. But others (eg F. Rinaldi) will not assuming the individual bottle is sound.
I will defer to Alan, who can provide the scientific details. but I don’t think that will introduce any significant amount of oxygen. Particularly since you have to pour in and out very gently to avoid stirring up nebbiolo sediment.
John, the way you described it suggests you wouldn’t expect leaving wine in a decanter for an extended period (eg overnight, several days) would have any more effect (and perhaps less) than if you double decanted back into an completely full, sealed bottle and drank it after the same period.
Is that right?
This feels like a topic a wine critic/writer should talk about in more depth, with feedback from producers on what they prefer. I would find that interesting
In this conversation we have said: don’t decant, decant, double decant. Don’t decant young. Always decant young. Truly fascinating how many views there are on this topic and feels like the producers who know their wine best in an article could share some insight here
I am going to test the dont decant route, simply because my favorite wine writer Kerin O’Keefe feels so strongly on it, with the advice said here that you can always add more air but can’t subtract air. Let’s see how it goes. Really appreciate folks taking the time to share their view
1 Like
This topic was a very active one here on WB a decade ago with a lot of back and forth. He’s a thread about it pointing specifically to one of Bill Klapp’s posts.
As you can see, Bill doesn’t have a ‘set in stone’ rule for this but has broad brushstrokes guidelines.
2 Likes
The weird thing to me about using science in this way is that it negates all empiricism. Science is meant to help us understand and predict observable phenomenon. Not say that the observable phenomenon must be wrong because we can’t understand how it occurs scientifically.
For me the observable difference is evident. I try to test these things in many ways, and certainly do not infer that I can write out the formula that explains the observation, but the observation continues to repeat itself.
With wine I have taken a mag and split it into slowox, vs half of the bottle decanted. I’ve opened 2 of the same bottle and treated each differently. I have opened a bottle and sampled 4-6 times over many hours countless times.
With whiskey I have poured some into 4oz sample bottles with no space for air, and left small amounts in the nearly empty full size bottle and done sbs months later…
Everything I have experienced tells me something is happening in the bottle causing observable changes, even without being put in a decanter.
What that something is, is totally up for debate.
3 Likes
if I recall correctly, Biondi Santi always opened the wine way in advance, and preferred not to decant. Usually the wines were opened the day before.
This is not meant to be confrontational, but a genuine question. Is there any reason to believe that some amount of oxygen, can’t cause a chain reaction within the wine, without the oxygen having to have spread around the bottle?
1 Like
I heard the same from multiple locals over a couple of visits to Montalcino.
But have always found decanting the stuff works better for me!
1 Like
I think this is an important point because nebbiolo sediment is among, if not the most, foul on earth and can totally ruin the wine. So, that is why I decant wines that likely need it – to separate clear wine, not to aerate.
If the wines are a bit tight, they can sit in the glass.
2 Likes
I’m interested in what you think this “chain reaction” might be, what the reactants and products are?
1 Like
I made no such suggestion that there even was one. You are misrepresenting my question as if I made an inference.
It was a genuine thought.
We don’t always know the things we don’t know. There could be other possibilities, but that one was a recognizable possibility to me, so I am genuinely wondering if there is any reason to believe there could not be some sort of chain reaction that occurs by some particular amount of air.
Another possibility that just came to mind are changes that might occur relating to pressure changes in the bottle. I have no idea if that could be a thing. Again, just a thought. I am sure there are many other ideas we can come up with if we have an open mind to it and actually seek out the answer to why so many people keep having this observation.
We can always dismiss it and say “because they are fools.” But that seems pretty poor foundation for scientific exploration of an observed phenomenon.
1 Like
This is certainly true.
I mean doesn’t tasting one before the other negate any control of a experiment? Especially with something so subjective as personal taste?
1 Like
+1. And if you’re dealing with a traditional producer chances are the wine has seen minimal, if any, fining or filtering. I opened a 2010 Bartolo Mascarello Barolo late last year that was already starting to throw significant amounts of sediment.
1 Like
I have experimented withe the different approaches and what I would keep in mind with this direction - be prepared to be very patient. even with a decanter you never know if today or tomorrow is the day a Barolo announce itself ready.
A 2008 is less likely to have to go through the resurrection from close to dead to youthful, but if first it seems tired, don’t loose hope. It might just require more time.
2 Likes
Thanks for this thoughtful post, with which I largely agree.
One thing I’ve observed on this board that makes me laugh is this: when some people observe a wine thing to be true in their own experience (slow ox is an exampe) they dismiss the fact that there is no science behind it. But when the same person does NOT observe a thing, then they are the first ones to sneer about how there’s no science…
I’ve remained pretty consistent - I don’t care if there is science to support a certain wine treatment. If, after experience and experimentation, the wine tastes better to me with a particular approach, that’s all that matters. The science can be interesting, but irrelevant when it comes to the goal of making the experience as good as possible.
4 Likes