I think certain producers struggle with this, but that it isn’t absolute. I’ve had some that I thought were very good and well balanced from some of the recent, hot vintages. I guess if anything above 13% doesn’t work for you, your perspective might be different, but that seems extreme to me.
If you guys like Arneis, look for the “Serra Lupini” or “Perdaudin” bottlings from Angelo Negro.
1 Like
Whose have you liked? This thread has made me thirsty for one.
I haven’t bought any arneis in a while. At its best, it’s a pretty subtle grape, and too many end being just nondescript. I can see that, if the fruit was too ripe, the grapes and wine might lose what little detail they have naturally.
What’s also being overlooked is how crazy fast Arneis ripens when it reaches a certain point. Literally 24 hours can mean the difference between a mineral driven good acidity wine instead of ponderous low acid boring wine.
Not saying this is what happened with the 2022 Giacosa Arneis but speaking to winemakers it is the one grape you need to monitor all the time when close to full ripening.
Tom
3 Likes
Interesting. Thanks, Tom.
John, I wish some of the California Winemakers I spoke with would come on here and explain in more precise detail what I wrote above. Honestly, it was some of the most interesting info I have heard about Italian varieties and Arneis in particular.
There are numerous articles on the web about Arneis and it’s unusually fast ripening-overripening.
Tom
Valfaccenda and Cascina Val de Prete are a couple. These are brought in by a small, local importer/distributor, so I don’t know how easy they are to find. Yes, it’s subtle, and sort of about texture, the way Northern Rhône whites can be (not quite the same, but I think there’s a comparison to be made).
I can understand tasting the big names and finding them underwhelming these days. I largely do too. Maybe winemakers specializing in Barolo don’t tend to have a great sense of what to do with Arneis in the era of climate change. I’m not tasting broadly enough to really know that, just sort of guessing.
Tom’s comment above might explain a lot. That’s very interesting.
1 Like
Auction prices are also highly reflective of this. Post 2005 pricing is much lower.
1 Like
Sorry, missed your post.
It’s mostly 2005, though there are a couple of success in 2007.
1 Like
I’m 100 Galloni points on this, totally agree and while I have a solid stock of Giacosa fron the 1996 - 2005 period I still bought 2008 and 2011 - and I’ve also bought a few bottles of later vintages. Only a few because I also sometimes remember my age (59 and counting - I hope)
1 Like
And that’s understating it (the latter statement)…
Try Cornarea if you can find it.
Auction prices follow scores. Galloni especially is able to move markets; not sure the pricing always reflects the quality of the wine.
Have you tasted the post 2005 wines?
They really don’t.
if that was the case, California wines would be sky high in value right now.
1 Like
- California doesn’t really have a global market
- Unlike Piedmont, there is no single critic who is a market mover
Yes of course, most of the wines made post 2005. Never really liked the 2007 wines from Giacosa, found them to warm and rich (no surprise given the vintage) where as 2008 was back on track for me. Even the Rocche 2009 is a fine wine (another warm vintage) and also the vintages after 2011 have contained some fine wines. The climate change in Piemonte plays an important part in the wines made in general in Piemonte but I never found this to be more pronounced in the wines from Giacosa than in other wins. And while I really liked the work of Galloni when he first started with the Piemonte Report he lost me completely with his reviews in general post 2006 but that is of course a strictly personal view.
1 Like
I purely making a point that scores don’t drive the market.
Galloni’s praise and hype didn’t do much for pricing on the La Ca Nova I dumped.
1 Like