Are there any regions in the world more gatekept than Barolo and Barbaresco? The gatekeepers tell us that we must wait, patiently, for Barolo. The idea that young Barolo is always too big and aggressive—with growling tannins that might rip your face off—is just one of those deeply ingrained beliefs in our wine culture. This reputation has also fostered a certain machismo around Barolo, as well as a strange gendering that happens when Barolo is compared to its neighboring Nebbiolo-based wine, Barbaresco. We’re often told that Barolo is “masculine,” while Barbaresco is “feminine.”
This gendering of Barolo and Barbaresco, mind you, is not a thing of the past. You’ll still regularly find it in wine media. On my recent trip to Piedmont, I was told by several producers: “We call Barolo the king, and Barbaresco the queen.” At least two others told me: “Barolo is the man. Barbaresco is the wife.”
In this cringy metaphor, Barbaresco is stereotyped as “feminine” simply because of its reputation of being “approachable” and ready to drink earlier, with softer tannins. Meanwhile Barolo is defined as “masculine” mainly due to the bolder, harder tannins of its youth, before more years of cellar aging. How this masculine/feminine thing plays out in America is unsurprising. Dudes love Barolo, and mostly give Barbaresco a pass.
I do think that Barolo gets an unfair rep for being “unapproachable” in youth but as someone who has used that metaphor I don’t think it insinuates anything bad about Barbaresco at all and from my experience I don’t know anyone who loves Barolo and thinks lesser of Barbaresco. Considering no other region in the world produces Nebbiolo at that scale I don’t see how anyone could love one and not the other. I think that metaphor is simply a way to communicate the differences of the two wines especially to people who aren’t really well acquainted with Nebbiolo. It’s not a “perfect” analogy and I guess I could see why someone might find it offensive or lazy but I never heard it used with any negative connotation attached.
Have to disagree with this statement. The flavour profile of Barbaresco generally sees a lot of florals, (roses etc) red fruit, a more elegant flavour profile. Whereas Barolo often shows dark brooding fruits, camphor, iron, blood, leather.
In an old fashioned sense, Barbaresco therefore is more feminine, and Barolo more Masculine. The tannins play a part of course but i dont feel that tannins are the main reason for this labelling.
Have to disagree with this statement. These differences depend so much more on the producer than on the appellation today.
This might have been true in the past, when basically everybody was making the wines in a same way and the only differences were the vineyard sites. However, today, when all the producers are vinifying the wines in so many different ways, aging them in all kinds of vessels for varying amounts of time, there is no longer a certain style of Barolo or Barbaresco.
I have had tons of delicate, floral and red-fruited Barolos and brooding, dark-toned and savory Barbarescos. Wines you would easily identify incorrectly as each other, if tasted blind. In my opinion, it is dumb to tell that “Barolo is X and Barbaresco is Y” today. This basically applies only when both the wines come from one producer who vinifies the wines in an identical fashion - and even then the vineyard and possible vintage variation between the appellations might throw a curveball.
Otto totally agree with your points regarding the wines having similar traits. Thats why i wrote ‘generally’ in my point as of course there are outliers. However if for example i take the last few vintages as an example, i attended Barbaresco a Tavola a few times (2015,2016, 2019) and to my palate there is a common trait of red fruits and often lighter on their feet than barolo. (and often some oaky vanilla )… similar perhaps to La Morra/Verduno profiles but a world away from the heavier profiles of Serralunga and Monforte. We can always find a producer to disprove theories but thats what my palate tells me. Of course we each have a different read on wines. A friend of mine connstantly finds apple in the darker barolos which personally i dont find.
What i disagreed with in the OP statement was that Barolo is called Masculine because of its harder tannins and barbaresco feminine because it is more approachable and softer tannins. To me that is too basic an analogy and to me personally, and friends i drink with, its commonly (not always!) accepted that Barbaresco has a more elegant red profile which most of the time we can pick blind from a group of otherwise Barolos.
Anyway nice to have a conversation with you i have read lota of ypur posts and always find them fascinating the level of depth you go into! Cheers
)… similar perhaps to La Morra/Verduno profiles but a world away from the heavier profiles of Serralunga and Monforte. We can always find a producer to disprove theories but thats what my palate tells me. Of course we each have a different read on wines. A friend of mine connstantly finds apple in the darker barolos which personally i dont find.