Has anyone read it? What do you think?
Byron
1 Like
I received the book last week and am about half way through it. Kerin OāKeefe expresses a very strong point of view regarding the influence of certain unnamed critics who were ignorant of what real brunello is/was and only favorably reviewed the jammy, oaky versions of brunello. She is much more of a traditionalist in her view that the best Brunello comes from high vineyards with certain types of soil that is rich in minerals, native yeasts, long macerations and relatively neutral oak (botti vs. barrique). She has chosen to review wineries in her book that are more consistent with her view rather than the other versions of brunello. She also advocates for further demarcation within brunello di Montalcino since the geography, topography, soil types and weather are different depending upon where you are.
She also has an interesting section of the book on ābrunellogateā and the role that regional politics play. She is also critical of the Consorzio in that the large producers have many more votes than the smaller artisanal producers. Therefore, the Consorzio tends to look out for the interests of the large and powerful wineries as opposed to the little guys.
I know that the three producers who dropped out of the Consorzio and formed SPA (Sangiovese per Amico): Stella di Campalto, Pian dellāOrino, and Salicutti: want to do exactly that: give a parcel by parcel definition of the terroir of Montalcino, a la Burgundy (villages, 1er cru, grand cru for example). Jan Henrik Erbach of Pian dellāOrino is a very intense, detail oriented guy, and he is carrying out meticulous experiments in several zones of Montalcino with several clonal varities to try and give some time tested concrete data about the grapes that come from different portions of the Montalcino zone.
They were treated with hostility and veiled threats at their proposal to do soā¦it does indeed threaten the worst abusers of the ill-defined appellation.
Iām excited to see how things unfoldā¦
I googled the title but canāt find the publisher, etc.
Is this true? If it is, that situation seems ideal. I donāt know much about Brunello, but I had the impression that modern/international styles were not limited to the inferior terroirs of the zone.
In Bordeaux, for example, spoofulation first took hold in inferior terroirs. The garagistes made something they could sell. All was well. The problem was that Parker and some others decided they liked these wines even better, gave high praise, blah, blah, and now we see many of the finest estates have abandoned their heritage (and their terroir-derived distinctiveness) to chase this spoofed style.
1 Like
Salicuttiās Brunello is too expensive for me, but I can say that they make an excellent Rosso. I didnāt know about the SPA; Iāll have to look for those other two producers.
This book sounds great! Put me in the botti camp. Tasted a 97 Valdicava recently and that baby was still pretty oaky. I really like the Sangio to shine though in my BDMs.
The maps are wrong in the book. They got the North Montalcino and South Montalcino maps mixed up in the book.
I think the maps could have been much better. A map that showed topography would have been very helpful. A map that showed soil types would have been helpful. A map that showed degree days would be helpful as well since she spends so much time talking about the hot south vs the cooler north.
Other than those quibbles, I am glad I bought the book because it did sensitize me to the geographical and style differences in a way that I hadnāt realized before.
That said, tonight I am opening a 1997 Valdicava and a 1997 Silvio Nardi Manchiara to assess some of her perceptions.
Byron
The two 1997 Brunellos are drinking beautifully albeit in two very different styles. Kerin OāKeefe suggested in her book that many of the 1997 Brunellos are dropping their fruit. We didnāt get that perception. The wines were popped and poured and tasted over two hours.
The Silvio Nardi Manachiara Brunello was a much more structured and minerally wine than the Valdicava as I expected. In no way was the Manachiara overripe. It gained weight and complexity on the palate as it was exposed to air. Long finish. I would be happy to have more of this wine in the future. 92 points.
The 1997 Valdicava has integrated its oak and was balanced and smooth. This was a more ripe and rich wine, but for my palate was not over the top at all. 94 pts.
In a line up that included a 2007 Felsina Fontalloro which showed plenty of tannins and structure as well as a nice leathery earthiness 91 pts. and a 2006 Siro Pacenti Brunello (very ripe with sweet fruit and a nice streak of acidity) which needs time, 90 pts, the Valdicava was clearly the wine of the night although the ringer of the 2002 Shafer Firebreak (91% Sangiovese/9% Cabernet Sauvignon) was also pretty tasty. 93 pts.
We also enjoyed a lovely meal at Monsu Cafe in Philly which is Sicilian cuisine.
Byron
Thanks for the lead, just what I needed before heading to Montalcino!
I had a bottle of the '01 recently and thought it was excellent.
Contrary to frequent assertions to the contrary, Valdicava Brunello is aged solely in large neutral casks and does not use any other particularly āmodernā techniques. Nor are their vineyards those large, flat areas where you see Banfi and others like that growing their Sangiovese.
I think Valdicava does achieve a substantially greater degree of ripeness in their vineyardās microclimate, and that tricks some people in the early years of those wines into thinking they are oaky or spoofed. A few comments from Antonio Galloni in reviewing the 04 and 05 Valdicava:
āThe Brunellos are typically very concentrated and dense when young, which can make them hard to assess. Make no mistake about it though; these are very serious wines whose only difficulty lies in giving them a few more years in bottle than the vast majority of Brunellos. A vertical tasting last year going back to 1988 published on > www.erobertparker.com > showed that the Valdicava Brunellos age exquisitely.ā
āThe winery itself is unremarkable and is equipped with just the bare essentials. All of the wines are aged in large, neutral oak; what comes through is Abbruzzeseās commitment to low yields, sustainable farming and non-interventionalist winemaking.ā
From my visits to Montalcino, it was very clear to see the difference between the rocky, hilly locations closer to the city, where you find all the traditional/artisinal type producers, and the large flat areas farther from town where the large, corporate, modernist producers are located. That is painting with a broad brush and of course there are exceptions, but you are definitely struck by how different the landscape looks at places like Lisini, Fuligni and Uccelliera as compared to Banfi, Argiano and Poggio Antico.
Lewisās point is a good one, that to some extent the popularity and/or critical praise for the dark, oaky styles made from the flatland grapes could influence the styles employed by some who sit in better terroir. One thing you see there is that some producers make different Brunellos in different styles ā Casanova di Neri, for example, makes their normale (white label) Brunello solely in casks, and as a result it is a lighter colored, red fruited, dry, spicy style of Brunello, whereas the Tenuta Nuova and Cerretalto are aged in barriques and are much darker and more lush in style. But I donāt think Montalcino is being overrun in any sense by modernism ā there is a big range of wine styles being produced there, something for everyone.
I read the book, I really liked it. I think Kerin OāKeefe has done an outstanding job in researching the subject and based on her tasting notes she seems to have a good palate, something also confirmed by Gregory Dal Piaz who knows her personally. She clearly prefers a non-interventionist approach in the cellar, which is just what I am looking for. What I found most interesting is the thorough explanation of geology, micro-climate, and viticulture. It also brings to the point that what seems on the surface a āstyleā choice by a winemaker is often in reality a necessary move to try to overcome, or maybe cover up some of the weaknesses in the wines.
If you have your vineyards in good places, where sangiovese shines year in year out and you spend a whole year baby-sitting your vines why would you want to go heavy handed in the cellar (small oak, micro-oxygenation, additives that are surprisingly permitted even by the very restrictive regulation in Italy such as concentrated must, or acacia gum to make the wine rounder). Wouldnāt just make more sense to leave the wine alone slowly maturing in large Slavonian oak that does not impart any flavor?
On the other hand, if your vineyards are in the wrong place and no matter how hard you try making a good ānaturalā 100% Sangiovese is
very hard what are your options?
- You could produce a SantāAntimo DOC ot a Toscana IGT and cut it with other varieties but in that case you loose the ābrand valueā attached to a label āBrunello di Montalcinoā which means selling the wine at 1/2 the price or perhaps even less.
- You could break the law and cut the wine with other varieties, but we all know what happened with Brunellogate and tests are getting better and better and you are risking of getting caught loosing your reputation and facing even some jail time.
- You call a consulting enologist that starts experimenting with additives until he comes up with some corrections to the defects.
Carlo Ferrini, probably the top consulting enologist in Italy, admits (page 89-90) that: Sangiovese can produce exceptional wines. The problem is that Sangiovese insnāt easy; the grape needs to be pampered. It is a grape that performs well only in select parts of Montalcino, but producers pretend itās going to be great everywhere, and as a result they have planted in every corner of Montalcino from river banks to compact clay. Where Sangiovese doesnāt yield exceptional results, then adding other grapes to compensate is necessary.
Here is Kerin OāKeefe take on 2008 Brunello and 2007 Brunello Riserva:
http://www.wine-searcher.com/m/2013/03/inconsistent-new-brunellos-pose-challenge-for-wine-lovers
I love her book, perhaps because I entirely agree with her stylistic preference for traditional winemaking. I think the discussion of sub-regions of Montalcino is extremely useful. I hear a rumor that sheās working on Barolo and Barbaresco, which I canāt wait to see.
So which producers does the board (& Kerin) contend would fall into the theoretic āBdM grand cruā category?
OK, Iāll play.
GC: Biondi Santi, Soldera, Palmucci, Molinari, Salvioni 
Price-wise, Biondi-Santi (Riservas) and Soldera play in a class by themselvesāaround 3x the other leading producers. Theyāre the Cheval Blanc and Ausone of Montalcino, if you will. After that, just as in St. Emilion, thereās a host of excellent winemakers in the $50-$100 range. It just depends on your palate. Personally, Iād single out Il Poggione from the traditionalists and Casanova di Neri from the modernists as stylistic archetypes, with Ciacci Piccolomini as an intermediate. But a lot of the best Sangioveses are not BrunellosāI prefer Flaccianello, Monsanto il Poggio, and Le Pergole Torte to anything in their price range from Montalcino itself.
Very interesting discussion. I just ordered the book and look forward to reading it in light of this thread.
Cheers,
Doug
If she does do a book on Piemonte, I hope she puts more information in it regarding terroir, geology, aspect, degree-days, temperature, etc. I think the Brunello book, while good and appreciated, would have been even stronger with more information on those topics. In Brunello, she could have been more provocative as to proposing some boundaries for the demarcations that she alluded to.
Byron