Not really if we look at it in terms of Andrea’s terms.
Based on pure taste, I agree completely, and there were many that I have tasted in Piemonte who fall into this category, but if we go into maceration times, yada yada yada then it is a completely different story.
Then tell me what is modern at Cappellano, Roagna, G Rinaldi, F Rinaldi, G Mascarello, Oddero or Marcarini. I guess I’m perplexed.
Sorry for the slight thread drift, but have you tasted the 2004 Boito? I have a few of the Pajore and thinking about grabbing a few Boito. Thanks.
Back on topic…Where would one peg Michele Chiarlo’s wines? Traditional?
No. If you try it, let me know as I’ll be in Vancouver next month.
Josh, that is sort of the point that I’m trying to make… If you delve deeply into modern techniques as oppose to flavors in the wine, a lot more are using more modern techniques of production compared to the past.
In terms of flavors, there are far more traditional styles of Nebbiolo than Modern in the modern age.
07 Barbaresco a Tavola in May 2010 showed maybe only 3 or 4 producers that could be called ‘modern’ in terms stated in this thread, but if we go to cement tanks v. Steel, or long v short maceration as is mentioned above but for me is irrelevant to whether the style or flavor is modern or not, then they are all modern and some staunchly trad wines were in the line- up.
I’m just trying to state it is more about style than production techniques.
I prefer Fondetta to Boito, as usual I find it more profound, but it’s splitting hairs, you can’t go wrong with either.
Chiarlo is a big winery, difficult to define, some wines have been very modernist in style, whereas now they are trying to be more traditional with Barolo and Barbaresco, at least with barrels. I’m pretty sure they go heavy with “selected” yeasts. Not my cup of tea.
This pretty much sums up the entire thread - it’s a great question - but so many producers that were traditional 10-15 years ago are decidedly modern today -
I think the majority of the producers that have evolved/changed have seen regime changes - father passing the keys to his son or daughter etc -
I can’t remember the name of the producer I was visiting ten some years ago - but the son had just taken over the winery over the previous couple of years and he was explaining to me that he sends his parents on vacation every time he has to “green” his vines because his father would have a heart attack watching him drop so much fruit to the ground.
The younger generation in Piedmont are going to change with the times - so the list today of traditional producers is going to be dramatically different over time - Nebbiolo is such a chameleon grape -
Will there be traditional producers in Barolo & Barbaresco left at all ten years from now?
AND -
When I think of La Spinetta - I think of Napa Valley Nebbiolo - it’s that modern -
When I think of tradional/old school - I think of Giuseppe Rinaldi -
I’m not sure I get your point.
About techniques you may be right in the sense that even traditional producers, though not all of them, are using more modern tools in order to make cleaner wines, to avoid defects and faulty wines. OTOH there are far LESS modern producers that are now using the “modernist” tricks to make their wines, tricks that were never used by a lot of traditional producers. It’s not style per se, it’s the choice of arm-twisting the grapes into your “style” vs. leaving your fruit develop under your control. Traditional winemaking in Langa does not involve “improving” wine with yeasts, rigid temperature control, short maceration, heavy color extraction, new oak…
These seem all techniques to me…
Giuseppe Rinaldi makes, to my palate, the best traditional wines in Piedmont. This is not to say that he makes the best. My favorites are Gaja, A. Conterno, Giacosa, Conterno-Fantino, and Voerzio (suely a traditional/modern mix), but in terms of real, old-school, I love the Rinaldi Brunate-Le Coste bottling.
Andrea,
As an example, let us take Albino Rocca…
Very modern, clean winery, modern winemaking techniques, but gentle maceration and aging in large oak in the traditional way… I.e. The 2 years in oak, immediate bottling and then release… The wines taste traditional (on my recent visit) and you would find it hard, without using technical/technical parameters to say that they are not traditional.
Nada Giuseppe, again very clean winery, who bought their vines in Casot from Gaja (Barbaresco is predominantly from the Casot vineyards and the vines lay next to each other). These wines were purchased over 120 years ago. But they only use large oak, and when they use smaller tonneau it is for the Barolo and Riserva and the barrels are 10 years old. The perfume is more akin to Giacosa than Gaja, although very different.
Oddero, very trad, very old school, everything old. But the wines tasted ferrel (not truffle and forest floor) tough and lacking in vitality and depth, in fact you could say that they 2000s and 2005s were old before their time, and I like my Nebbiolo old, so was very disappointed. I associate ferrel notes with well tuned, well judged use of new oak barriques, ala Northern & Northern Rhone, but not with traditional Styled Nebbiolo, so for me, knowing their older wines, there is something going wrong in the winery.
So which is modern, which is traditional, which is trying to mould a style and which is letting the grapes do the talking? If anything the list goes Nada Giuseppe, Albino Rocca and then Oddero… Because it seems like Oddero are now the ones trying to force their style.
This are all observations from my trip in May, and are just three examples of many. For me traditional is about the taste and not whether or not they used a rotary fermentor or an extra two days maceration but with less stirring/ pumping over…these are techniques to as you say make cleaner wines. The oak is where the style of modern v traditional comes in, and how the oak is then used and is about letting the grapes do the talking. And this can br done with barriques if they are old and used in the traditional way as oppose the modern.
That is my point and I’m pretty sure I’ve just elaborated on what vie already said earlier in the thread.
Chris,
Rinaldi’s Brunate is a beauty at the worst of times!!!
The fact that we’ve actually had posters describe Moccagatta and Sottimano as “traditional” shows you how blurred the definitions have become - with the exception of guys like Voerzio/La Spinetta, I would struggle to find too many wineries that I consider more modernist than Moccagatta & Sottimano ![[scratch.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/4/42a16863a8714da3c1604419e3eb9206bb87aa50.gif "scratch"){kind=small}
For me, the top 3 “traditional” producers are Giacosa, Bartolo Mascarello, and G. Conterno. The funny thing is that it would be almost impossible to confuse their top Barolos in a blind tasting. Even within the bounds of tradition, they manage to produce distinctive wines.
And even these three have drastically reduced maceration and botti times.
Not a lot of experience with Sottimano but Moccagatta certainly had me scratching my head.
Jonathan,
I can assure you that Angelo’s wines during the 90’s were much more than modernist. His '93 Bric Ronchi was an oaky mess just a couple of years ago. I’m aware he changed the oak regime in all his wines. Nevertheless I don’t know whether he changed other practices. You talk about gentle maceration but, what about extraction and yeasts? I haven’t tasted his wines lately (so much wine out there that I tend to avoid wines with which I have consolidated bad experiences), you say they taste traditional. I’m glad and will try his 2004 Loreto soon. I’m still afraid I’ll find too much tea and peach skin and dry gallic tannins but I may be wrong.
OTOH I have consistent good experiences with Oddero (BTW Luigi or Oddero sisters?). His 2000 Barolo base is a little gem, maybe it’s ready a bit too soon, it won’t last decades, but it’s sweet, earthy. 2000 is not a vintage I’d advise for Barolo lovers anyway, regardless of Suckling’s rating [middle-finger.gif]
I agree with you that the difference is in the glass, however winemaking has great influence IMHO.
Just picked up the following
Boasso 04
Erbaluna 1990
and Oddero 2005
not sure if they are traditional or modern at all?
Yes,Bob,we are truly living in Nebbiolo Bizzaaaaro world.
spinetta,saffirio come to mind… 
If you think of Traditional Barolo as being made by blending grapes from at least a couple of vineyards, aged in Slavonian Oak Botti, strictly no roto-fermementers, then I can only think of Bartolo Mascarello and Giuseppe Rinaldi.
If you accept single vineyard Barolo as long as it is aged in Botti with strictly no roto-fermenters, then the door opens pretty wide with Giacomo Conterno, Giuseppe Mascarello, Cappellano, Francesco Rinaldi, and a few others. Macarini? Oddero?
If you accept Single vineyard Barolo, a producer who uses Traditional methods with some wines, but modern with others the doors open again and you get Vietti (Rocche and Brunate), Massolino (Vigna Rionda Riverva, Margheria), Aldo Conterno…
If you accept Single vineyard with some French Oak as long as it is not barrique, but is larger 20HL and up as long as everything else is traditional, the door opens again and you get Brovia, Giacosa…
If you can accept single vineyard & roto-fermenter as long as it is used artfully, with longer macerations as in traditional style and everything else is traditional then the door opens for Cavallotto…
I’m sure I’ve left some out and may have erred on the details, feel free to add or correct…
It’s a group effort right?
I haven’t seen Clerico mentioned. Sipping on the '01 Ginestra now. I have little Barolo experience, but my guess would be somewhere in the middle between modern and traditional. Curious whether the deep color, intense flavor, and massive tannic grip are more a product of the vineyard or producer. A big, powerful wine, but not one designed for the impatient. So different from last night’s Monprivato.
Traditional vs Modern isn’t the right way to frame this and a lot of the replies show that. It is, literally, a one dimensional scale.
A more useful framing is a scale of intervention from least to most coupled with a style filter. Producers who intervene as little as possible but end up by using a ton of new French oak at the end wouldn’t be considered ‘traditional’. But a producer might use a select ‘modern’ intervention and still produce what would be considered a traditional wine. From our perspective as the drinkers of the wine, the question is really… how does it taste? Does this say Barolo or Barbaresco to me or is it a more international, less specific style?
The debate really boils down to style and terroir. The traditional camp tends to let the qualities of the vineyard shine through and, when the blend, do blends that still let a sense of place shine through. Modern producers tend to value these characteristics to different degrees and to also value early drinking appeal and appeal to the international market, hence more extraction and/or oak. IN flavor terms, the modernista wines seem to not show the standard tar and roses aromas as much if at all and feel more polished and less of Piedmont. A recent tasting of 95s showed this very clearly - the Sandrone Le Vigne was a very nice wine… but the Cascina Francia was a great Barolo.
Do you have tasting notes for last night’s Monprivato?
It seems that Clerico has been shifting;
Here’s a blurb from Galloni’s review of the 2006 Clerico CMG…
What has changed? For starters, the move toward longer fermentations/macerations and the reduction in the use of French oak have begun to yield wines of incomparable finesse and elegance. Tasting the vintages side by side, it is apparent that 2004 – as great as those wines are – represents the end of an era at Clerico. The 2005s signal a move towards a more elegant style (much of that is due to the vintage itself, rather than to changes in winemaking) but it is the 2006s that show the first true results of the new approach, and the wines are simply breathtaking.