At the price point, I’d say Burlotto’s Acclivi or Brovia’s Rocche. Both have been mentioned, so I’m not covering new ground, but I think they’re both good examples. I think Vajra’s Bricco del Viole is another good one, though I’m personally not a huge fan of that bottling.
Ambrogio is in the commune of Roddi, a tiny hill near Verduno, not far from the Tanaro River, so it might resemble Monvigliero. But Scavino’s wines often have a marked new oak overlay.
The Martinenga Barbaresco from Marchesi Di Gresy contains about 20% Nebbiolo Rose. I also believe the Pajore Cru in Barbaresco has some Rose planted in it. How much it contains varies depends on who you ask
I think that Levi highlighted Cascina Baricchi Rose delle Casasse as the only other wine made with 100% Nebbiolo Rose clone.
It’s not Barolo, but the Columbera & Garella 2016 Costa Della Sesia fits this profile nicely, and is a great wine for the price. 70% Nebbiolo but rather less rustic than many nebbish blends. Fantastic match with my hot turkey sandwich.
I might even narrow down Verduno further, to Burlotto’s Acclivi and Monvigliero. Alessandria’s on the radar there too, though not quite in the same class quite yet.
B. Giacosa. Always a floral top note (rose & violet), more so in their Barbaresco but also the Baroli. Price may be an issue.
POTY for understatement.
As some have already mentioned, my first answer was Barbaresco. As I considered the question in the conrext of Barolo, examples that came to mind included Podere e Cantina’s Classico, E. Grasso Chiniera, and B. Giacosa.
But, it can depend on a number of factors, which means it’s less consistent, for me, in Barolo, than the Barbaresco wines which I find are more often tending toward floral.
I’ve just finished a tasting of all the 2016 Sottimano wines here at the farm (new F. Freres barrique is 15% these days), including an en primeuer tasting of the Basarin (a new Cru for them), and I have to say these are the wines I’d always knew were possible - utterly stunning. And, all have floral to spare, with Cotta being a minor exception - these are the finest wines I’ve ever tasted here. They are already sold out (i. e. importer reservations) for all of their 2016s - buy without hesitation.
+1 on Sottimano. Had a great visit with Andrea last year. The 2016s are indeed stunning. Super family.
I don’t usually associate leather or tobacco with nebbiolo, not do I find many “funky”, but see that you don’t care for “truffle, iron and balsamic” which is clearly in many of them. Not sure I can help you.
How quickly are you emptying your bottles?
Every bottle of Nebbiolo deserves to be followed for at least seven days, and I would strongly urge you to follow your Barolo & Barbaresco bottles for a minimum of fourteen days.
If you’re practicing Pop-N-Pour Infanticide on these wines, then you’ll never learn whether the funk might have blown off by Day 6 or Day 8, and you’ll never get a chance to experience any magic which might have lain in wait just beneath the funk.
PS: The corks won’t last that long [they’ll tend to shatter after three or four days], so you’ll need to invest in some rubber stoppers:
Immediately after pouring, I just shove a rubber stopper in the bottle, put the stoppered-bottle back in the bottom of the refrigerator, and let it sit there until I need to make a cold pour the next day.
I think Alessandria’s Monvigliero is very good (and I own a bunch), but it’s a far cry from Burlotto’s. I’m curious what Vietti’s Monvigliero will be like. They’re also doing whole cluster, and I only had it out of the botti, so while it was good I’m not quite sure it’ll have the same lift. But Vietti certainly know what they’re doing.
No one routinely drinks wine this way. If you want to spend 2 weeks drinking every bottle of Nebbiolo, that’s up to you, but that’s not a reasonable recommendation to make for the average drinker, even the average Nebbiolo fan. Plus, sometimes we open wine for others. Try telling a group that they can only have a thimble of wine because you have to drink it for the next few weeks.
Oliver McCrum has reminded me that nebbiolo rosé is not a clone/variant of nebbiolo. It is genetically distinct, though closely related. (Ian D’Amato discusses it in his Grapes book at pp. 361-363.)
In my experience so far, I’ve enjoyed most barolos with 15-25 years or so with age. I typically follow the wines in a decanter for the entire evening which can be up to 6 hours or so. I think the most I’ve followed aged wines is 2 days… afterwards, I’ve found many fall apart, but perhaps people have different experiences. For young wines (within 5 years of current release), I follow over a few days to see if they evolve. As for the truffle and mushroom character, I feel that’s a quality of certain wines. I’m not talking about bretty aromas that often dissipates with air, but are inherent qualities to some wines. I tend to prefer wines that retain some of that floral, red fruit character with hint of sweetness to the fruit, instead of going 100% savory and earthy. Some of the most memorable wines in my journey so far including barolos from the 70s-90s and burgundy from the 80s-90s had these qualities in spades.
Do people have recommendations on vintages in general? I noticed some people pointed towards '12 and '14 which were generally considered cooler, late harvest vintages producing “lighter” wines. Nobody mentioned '11 so I’m guessing best to avoid god-awful hot vintages. Safe to pick in the crus mentioned for more classic vintages like '13 and upcoming '16?
Maybe try some Fratelli Alessandria or Productori Barbaresco. Brovia hovers at the 100+ mark limit that you mentioned. There are a number of producers that are right around 100. Other producers you may want to check out is Principiano they have several different Barolos and maybe Trediberri (a little sweeter). Depending on the bottling, there may or may not be a funky nose at the start. Both a older Barbaresco and a Barolo that had tried recently had a bit of a funky nose to start but it reduced over time a bit for the Barbaresco. (It may have been some sulfur, not sure).
I have found Barbaresco’s to be a little lighter in style and smoother. But it’s a personal opinion and may be more due to what producers I have tried.
2011: A warm year. Not god-awful, but I find many of the wines a little lacking in focus and sometimes they show their alcohol. I’m not crazy about the vintage, but the Produttori crus were very good. Some others have liked it better. Seems generally better than the very warm ‘09.
2012: Common wisdom is that these are decent but not long-lived wines. There wasn’t much excitement about the vintage, but I and some others (e.g., WBer Oliver McCrum, who imports a number of Barolo producers) are fans for the wines’ aromatics. I haven’t opened any in a while, but they should be approachable relatively early.
2013: A very good year, balanced, with real concentration. The Barolos showed very well early on.
2014: Very difficult in Barolo, where there were hail and rain storms. Some producers such as Brovia didn’t bottle crus. Much better in Barbaresco.
2015: A warmer year but sounds like it’s still very good if you lean toward that style.
2016: There’s a lot of excitement about the vintage. Growing conditions were pretty much ideal – long and even. I’ve posted notes on two recent Barbaresco tastings. The wines haven’t all showed well, but this may just be an awkward stage:
If you want a good reference source with lots of tasting notes, Greg dal Piaz’s www.simplybetterwines.com can’t be beat.
I’m pretty sure the 15 Barolos are out already. I know I’ve had the 15 Cavallotto here. I’m also very curious to see how the 12s develop. I think I have a bit more faith in that vintage than some others.
Plenty of 2015 Barolo available now. I know the vintage has been characterized as a warm, fruit forward vintage resulting in juicy wines. My experience so far, admittedly fairly limited, has been these wines have more structure and acidity than I would have expected