A recent read of Eric Guido’s report on 2019 Brunello di Montalcino prompted by 2019 Brunello di Montalicno got me thinking again about the idea of subzones in Montalcino.
“Montalcino still needs the infrastructure and tools that nearly all other high-profile regions excel at, such as zoning and maps”
Both Kerin O’Keefe and Ian d’Agata have also advocated for this, and there are few if any who I hold to as high esteem, but I am curious to get everyone and anyone’s thoughts on the matter.
Is zonation within Montalcino important for the region?
My initial personal take is, of course. The last thing we want is someone to try one Brunello from Montosoli and love it, and then try 3 others from somewhere near Sant’Angelo Scalo and not care for them at all, and give up on the Brunello altogether. But on the other hand, will it actually help?
Vintage, wine making, and age of the bottle seem to correlate much higher to an individual’s preference when it comes to Montalcino from my experience. And of course, the average customer will never understand the differences. I do not see many people seeking out Chianti Classico from Gaiole in Chianti for example. On the other end, as a lover of Brunello, I am usually already aware of where the grapes are grown within Montalcino, so will anything change for those like myself?
But, I’m certainly in the camp of adding subzones as I even see a broad brush painted on this forum without consideration for where a Brunello is coming from and the climactic influences that can go into where it’s made.
A Brunello from Castellnuovo dell’abate is a different beast from those down by Sant’Angelo as they are quite different from wines made just southwest of Montalcino or near Montosoli.
Personally I agree that it would make more than sense to do it. Just look at Barolo/Barbaresco, and relatively recently Chianti Classico (it’s an incredible work and resource!). What everyone is asking for I guess is an end product a la Alessandro Masnaghetti, and his incredible insight and thoughtful work.
Why wouldn’t you want to (probably commercial interest who it doesn’t benefit - felt like it was some of that when it came to the CC work by AM). And if they have the chance and possibly to work with Alessandro and have not yet done so… fools.
I see it the same was as, “the last thing we want is some to try one red wine from Napa and love it, and then try 3 others from Europe and not care for them at all, and give up on red wine altogether.”
Would I prefer a wine from Panzano or a wine from Fontodi? It is fun to nerd out and taste through a sub-zone, but is it useful to the consumer?
Does delineating detract customers from focusing on wineries, and drive them to think more about the sub-zone? Even if slightly, I think this would be a mistake. All of the delineation is too euclidean to me. Often useful, but often misleading if you take it too seriously.
But on the other hand, does it spark curiosity? Triggering people to be more mindful and seek out wineries that they may not even know exist now?
Fair enough. On the other hand, Napa or Bordeaux or Burgundy have a bunch of areas and it does help differentiate for some. I’m guessing it’s not going to help for your average Joe, but the guy a step up from there might get some value out of it.
I’m in the camp where sub-zoning usually hurts more that it helps. Napa is known world wide, Chiles Valley, not so much, Rutherford, Oakville, maybe. Brunello already distinguishes itself within Tuscany, with same grape (mostly) as Chianti. Only the true wine geek would care, or even recognize, sub zones, and then I question what, if any, value that would bring to producers.
I’ve seen Washington, and Oregon but I know Washington more, sub-divided beyond recognition, even to some in the industry, and never in past 20 years has it made much if any difference. Walla Walla, Red Mountain, to a lesser extent Yakima and Horse Heaven Hills, are the most known besides the greater Columbia Valley, and I guarantee nobody could find Naches Heights or The Burn on a map without lines and labels already drawn.
I’ve been drinking BdM for ~20 years and have never needed to know more about the terroir than which producers I like.
For the record, I live in and grow grapes in Naches Heights AVA.
I think at times this granular information is helpful. Alessandro Masnaghetti’s work on Barolo serves as an example of linking particular wines to place. I like wines from St.-Emilion. I really know nothing of the communes and what that translates to with respect to those wines made from those communes. But at the end of the day, we all drink those producers we like and trust.
Interestingly, make of the producers already think along these lines. I was there twice in the last year, meeting with many producers, and when we talked about the vineyards, it was common to mention “This vineyard has the classic characteristics of a vineyard on the western flank”, etc. I am a strong proponent for better delineation within the BdM area.
I was about to mention Paso Robles as an area where subzones have been overused to a point where they don’t help at all and, if anything, only cause confusion. There are other places in California and Washington where I would say the same thing.
BUT, the fact that this has been done poorly in some places does not support the idea that it shouldn’t be done at all, or that it wouldn’t be meaningful in Montalcino. Rather, there are clear differences in climate in Montalcino that tend to give different characteristics to the wines. Yes, there are exceptions where producer style trumps this, or specific sites might have their own character, but the same is true in Burgundy, and I don’t think there’s a sound argument that Burgundy shouldn’t have all of those village AOCs.
I think a small number of subzones could be a good thing for Montalcino. Nerds like us could pay attention and maybe find meaning there. Other people could ignore it. As with Burgundy or anywhere else, producer would remain the most important factor, but maybe some people would learn that their favorite producers are in the same subzone and become more engaged with the region, finding more appreciation and enjoyment for the wines.
The sub zones already do exist. The map that the DOCG made with all the producers is incredibly well done. If it’s a matter of adding to the label, that’s a whole other case.
I feel the same way. A bottle of Brunello was my “ah-ha” moment for wine and that has led me to where I am today. I still love Brunello, but I’ve never really looked at the maps that much. Actually I’ve probably looked at the maps many times but never committed any of it to memory. I buy based off of producers that I know I like and producers that I want to investigate and then secondarily on vintage.
Even in places like Bordeaux, where I actually have committed a lot of the geographical information to memory, I don’t really care if it’s Medoc or Pomerol or whatever else. Is it good? Do I like it? And that is driven off of, again, the producers that I know I like and the producers that I want to try. To me, it’s fun to read up and learn more and I’m the curious sort that buys books and comes to boards like this to try to learn more, but it doesn’t cause me to spend more or less money on Brunello. Now from a producer’s standpoint maybe these are tools that will bring in more folks to start trying/buying/drinking/loving their wines, and if so, I’m happy for them. It’s all a big shoulder shrug for me personally.
There is a great map at the link below, but even those who know the territory just talk about which village the winery is near. Kerin O’Keefe proposes breaking it down in into roughly quadrants in her Brunello book. I think her idea is interesting and simple enough, and it has effected how I think about Montalcino. There is still the question of whether or not it should be formalized and regulated.
We can break it down much further than quadrants if we really wanted to as well. It was only some years ago that Le Ragnaie’s highest vineyards were not even permitted to be used for Brunello because they were thought to be too cold due to the altitude, but now they are prime sites. A bunch more I am sure will change in the next 10-20 years.
