awww poor baby…
Posting just links is annoying. There’s no context and no reason I should even care. You can’t take some time to say a few words? /ignore troll
and who the hell IS Roy Richards and why should I care about what he says?
Please engage your eyes before your itchy fingers:
and who the hell IS Roy Richards and why should I care about what he says?
Having met Roy Richards several times through Claude, I can vouch for the fact that he’s an extremely knowledgeable and thoughtful taster. He imports to the UK a lot of the best small producers from Burgundy and the Rhone.
On the color issue, I’d always understood that new oak helps fix the pigments in nebbiolo, which explain in part why modern style Barolo and Barbaresco tends to be darker, apart from any differences in extraction or illicit blending. Other things being equal, you’d think the old-timers who do 20-30-day macerations would end up with deeper hues, but I guess it’s more complex than that.
John,
I have never worked with Nebbiolo but in many other varieties you can actually lose color with longer macerations. There are other factors that would impact color extraction during fermentation beyond maceration length, including: ripeness, use of saignee (bleeding off juice to increase solids:juice ratio), enzymes, temperature, whether your maceration is prolonged by cold soak vs. post maceration, and more. The big factors with color post fermentation would be barrique use and blending.
Thanks for the insights, Josh.
The fermentation temperatures tend to be fairly high in both camps there, so I doubt that explains the difference in color.
And doubt they are bleeding the tanks. Can you imagine the tannin levels if you did that with nebbiolo? That’s a scary thought!
The other difference in technique that is usually mentioned is roto-fermenting, which allows extraction of color with short fermentation times (as short as 8-10 days for some makers versus 20+ for the traditionalists).
This is a disconcerting quote. When they first declassified all their B&B, the winery said it was no reflection on anyone else’s wine in this vintage.
Do you know Franco Ziliani well? 
Welcome to the board andreadago !
Ah, thanks John. I’d never heard the name, so all I had was a quote from Some Guy and given how many people in the US pass themselves off as critics, I wondered. Makes sense.
He has an all-star portfolio (http://www.r-w.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), including Chave, Allemand, Verset and Barge in the Rhone and, in Burgundy, Mortet, Barthod, Méo-Camuzet, Maume, Grivot, Lamarche, Rouget, Tollot-Beaut, de Montille, Lafarge and Jobard.
During my most recent visit to the Piedmonte, several of the producer’s were pointing fingerings at other winemaker’s claiming they were using cab sav in the barolo’s to get more color and flavor. This has been an on-going battle.
One aspect that has changed there, is the more frequent use of thinning the crops (dropping fruit)to improve quality. The total number of acres planted to nebbiolo in the AVA is capped by the local authorities. The production/acre of nebbiolo is also capped. The production/acre figure still being used is an older one, and since more of the vintner’s are thinning more agressively today, most rarely ever reach their production quota. The local DOC will only issue bottle tax stamps to winemakers, for up to the calculated max. bottle production. What would happen in earlier days, if it was a good year and a vintner surpassed his production allowance, he could save some of the juice until the next year, in case it was a poor year and he ran short. Therefore, the DOC allowed the 15% other vintage rule to help out the farmers. But as I said overproduction is not much of a practical problem today because of the thinning. In fact, several producers say that their total wine Barolo or Barbe)production has now dropped 15-25% because of this practice. They, of course, hope they can charge higher prices for improved quality. The market will determine that.
I tried to keep the above paragraph simple, or it would otherwise be a long drawn out affair explaining all the ins and outs, but I hope you get the jest of the practice(s). I can explain further, if need be.
Under the DOC rules, Barolo and Barbe must be 100% nebbiolo grown with the AVA.
Interesting information about the green cropping. I think what you say about plantings is misleading, though. They may be capped, but the authorities have been pretty lax about raising the vineyard limits:
Between 1990 and 2004 there was a 47% increase in Nebbiolo plantings in the Barolo zone with 4,285 acres (1,714 ha) under vine. Production subsequently increased from 7 million bottles in the mid 1990s to 10.25 million bottles in the mid 2000s. – > Barolo - Wikipedia> " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (citing Jancis Robinson’s Oxford Companion To Wine)
You shouldn’t make fun of such serious matters. 
John;
Interesting statistics on 90-04. Perhaps that’s one reason they have all the caps today. One winemaker told me about buying nebbiolo acreage from another. First, they had to apply to the authorities. The DOC came out to ensure the land they wanted to plant the new nebbiolo was appropriate. After the approval and approval the acreage was planted, the authorities verified the destruction of the old vines on the previous property. A transfer tax of something like 10 Euros per meter had to be paid for every meter of new vines planted (transfered)in nebbiolo. (Huge bill) The old property could no longer get any stamps to sell nebbiolo wine past it’s production date. Everything is checked via areal photography twice a year to ensure no one is cheating.
Another interesting thing was must to grappa. Each winery turns in it’s production. Based on that production, a verified amount of must, etc. must be delievered to the refineries to make grappa. It’s the Law. Every is verified down to the liter.
The interesting thing is that the acreage planted to nebbiolo had been pretty much static in both Barolo and Barbaresco for decades before that, according to figures in the Slow Food Atlas of the Langhe.
The increase may not mean a decline in quality. I’m sure there were good plots planted in barbera and dolcetto, dating back to the days not so long ago when Barolo and Barbaresco didn’t sell for that much. Growers probably preferred varietals that produced wines that didn’t require long aging.
I decided to dig a little deeper about the 2006 vintage in the Piedmont.
Perhaps the glass was half full for some but not a majority of wineries…
Barbaresco and Barolo producers respond to negative reports in English-speaking press
Posted on July 6th, 2009 by VinoWire
http://vinowire.simplicissimus.it/2009/07/06/barbaresco-and-barolo-producers-respond-to-negative-reports-in-english-speaking-press/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“Giacosa sees the glass half full.” Nebbiolo producers speak out on Giacosa’s decision not to bottle the 2006 vintage
Posted on July 8th, 2009 by VinoWire
http://vinowire.simplicissimus.it/2009/07/08/giacosa-sees-the-glass-half-full-nebbiolo-producers-speak-out-on-giacosas-decision-not-to-bottle-the-2006-vintage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Giacosa’s 2006 vintage and Decanter’s slopping blogging
Giacosa’s 2006 vintage and Decanter’s slopping blogging | Do Bianchi" onclick=“window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.decanter.com/news/284310.html” onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I just stumbled across a link Ziliani provided to the TWFW article I cited above:
http://vinoalvino.org/files/2009/09/WFW-25-Barolo-Tasting.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Happy Thanksgiving !!! ![[berserker.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/8/8600bbd4810d342b8fbd4ffb62b4f0026275fd37.gif "berserker"){kind=small}