How would you describe the difference between Brunello and Chianti Classico from your own personal experience?
This might be a bit generalized considering there can be such massive differences between a CC from Castelnuovo Berardenga as compared to Castellina in Chianti for example, or between Brunelli from Sant’Angelo compared to Montosoli, and this is not even to mention stylistic variation, so if possible, please provide some of the Brunelli or Chianti producers you have consumed that have influenced your thinking.
1 Like
Montalcino is a warmer region, so the wine is automatically going to be a bigger, more alcoholic and sweeter-fruited wine compared to Chianti Classico. Usually the warmer temps also result in grapes that are smaller and/or have thicker skins, resulting in darker and more tannic wines.
Chianti Classico is - on average - higher in acidity, lower in alcohol and the fruit profile is going to be more dry with a more pronounced streak of sour cherry bitterness compared to Brunello.
Also the minimum aging requirement has a large impact on the wine style; often a young Brunello seems more evolved with a lot more tertiary tones compared to a similarly aged, young CC. The worst offenders are Brunellos aged exclusively in barriques - I really don’t think aging Sangiovese in a small barrel is for the benefit of the wine. Instead of making the wine feel more complex, the wines can feel rather tired and balsamic already in their youth. However, this is a different thing altogether if the producer uses large, neutral oak botti casks.
While there are a good number of producers making CC using at least a portion of new French oak, I think on average one is going to see modern, polished and oaky Chianti Classicos compared to Brunello.
Brunello is (ar, at least should be) always 100% Sangiovese, whereas most CC are not. I don’t mind any Canaiolo, Colorino or Mammolo in the blend, because IMO their flavor profiles go really well with that of Sangiovese. However, usually Cabernet Sauvignon tends to stick out like sore thumb and Merlot only dilutes and softens those qualities I love in a Sangiovese - which is why I’m not really a fan of blending Bdx varieties with CC.
16 Likes
Great info, as always Otto. Thanks for the input.
I am asking more to the personal experiential side though and also to understand which wines/ wineries influenced our opinions. I pretty much agree with everything you wrote though.
1 Like
It’s going to be a rather long list - and I was not planning on doing an extensive analysis on which producers and wines I’ve drunk and how they relate to my impressions on the respective appellations.
My impressions are based on accumulative data from the wines I’ve tasted, which is (according to CT) approx. 140 analyzed Chianti Classicos and Brunellos (plus all the wines made in these regions that were for one reason or other bottled under some other appellation). I’m not sure if anyone wants a list of +100 producers/wines and how they were - nor do I want to write such a piece. 
4 Likes
Quite some bland statements here.
Just because Montalcino is more south doesn‘t mean it necessarily has to be warmer. Wines near Castelnuovo Berardenga - eg Percarlo - show a much more warm climate profile than many Brunelli around Montalcino, for instance.
More important are clonal differences, soil and blends. These aspects influence the final wine more than eventual climate differences. Imho, of course.
And, personally, nowadays I think several CC would profit from getting back to the old classic blend with some Malvasia in it…
3 Likes
This seems to me an excellent encapsulation of the typical difference. I almost always think of sour, dried cherry plus leather (oak influence?) when drinking a fine, aged CC or CCR, e.g. Felsina Rancia. These descriptors are more rare for me when drinking Brunello.
Of course, I’m expecting 100+ posts now laying out exceptions. 
2 Likes
I didn’t say anything about Montalcino’s more southerly location having anything to do with its higher temperatures. I said it because the region simply is - on average - warmer than Chianti Classico:
Montalcino enjoys a hotter, drier climate than Chianti Classico further north. An average growing season in Montalcino produces very ripe berries, due to the high summer temperatures and low rainfall.
(Brunello di Montalcino & Chianti Classico Wine: A Comparison)
The area around Montalcino is normally hotter and drier than Chianti Classico. Because of the ridge that divides the DOCG zone into rough triangles, the southwestern half of the area usually sees greater extremes of temperature and/or drought than the northeastern half.
(Chianti Classico and Brunello di Montalcino: Tuscan greats - Decanter)
And so on.
Sure, you can find some warmer spots in CC and cooler spots in Montalcino. I am well aware there are several terrific old-school Brunello producers that are a far cry from the bulky, extracted modernist wines many people associate with the region. And I do know how parameters like blends (in CC) or terroir (of which there are lots of in both the appellations) can influence the wine greatly. However, my comment was just a broad-sweeping statement based on averages, not these corner cases. An average Brunello is a bigger, heavier and burlier wine than an average CC with a higher level of ABV and often more oak influence.
Finally, I’d want to hear more about why Malvasia would help some select CC producers. Most of the Tuscan white wines with Malvasia have been quite bland and even flabby in character and I really can’t see wines like these doing much to the wine, apart from diluting it. I would understand your point better if they’d use some variety that would make interesting white wines in its own right.
1 Like
Hmmm.
To quote from the article you cited from Jeroboam: “Indeed, it is primarily the variances in weather and landscape that maintain a pleasing stylistic divergence at the heart of central Tuscany”. This is just bullshit. It’s primarily differences in clones, varietals, soils, wine making and others that make it nonsensical to compare these regions geographically.
I guess my point is I don’t understand why one would compare CC and BdM geographically. Just because they’re close geographically? It’s like you would compare Alto Piemonte with Barolo.
1 Like
You keep mentioning clones, but a massive issue with Sangiovese is how much and frequently it mutates. While clones “matter”, weather, geological forces, vineyard management, and cellar practices have a greater influence than identifying a few clones that will end up mutating in short order
It’s also not nonsense to compare the two regions. Chianti is wetter and sees more influence from the sea. Montalcino is drier with mountains to create rain shadows and thus bringing about richer, more powerful, and riper wines on the whole.
5 Likes