Double, then Single Blind Barolos

We started with the wines double blind, just a table of half-filled wine glasses looking ever so much like jewels on huge necklace laid out before us. It was impossible not to feel a surge of excitement with the constellation of mystery wines in front of us.

So, the tasting begins. Hmmm, let’s see—a deep ruby color verging on purple, on the nose a volatile character with notes of black cherry, maybe a touch of violet. On the palate, some very firm acidity, but balanced by a great depth of dark fruit in a finely structured, distinctly aristocratic package. There was no doubt that we were in the presence of something special. Well, the signature of acidity and dark fruit gave it away for everybody—a Nebbiolo from Barolo or Barbaresco.

Our host and Board member Lou Rittenhouse gave us a series of tasting notes from Robert Parker, plus one from Steve Tanzer, and then a series of communes and their descriptors. We were also asked to classify the wines as “Traditional”, “Mid-level Modern/Traditional”, or “Modernist”. We were also given the names of five Barolo producers, with one additional producer that we were to guess. As we tasted, it became clear to most (well, to me at least) that all of the wines were very similar in style, with the exception of wine #2. My guess also was that they were all of similar age, or very nearly so. Here are my notes:

Wine 1: A subtle nose of black cherry, with finely structured detail in the mouth, very classical in style. This wine became increasingly massive with time in the glass, losing none of its energy or its slightly daunting acidity and tannin as the evening progressed. Not your friendliest wine, still this uncompromising wine continued to grow on me, showing much better in fact when the pork tenderloin with the balsamic vinegar reduction was served. This might just be the finest wine in the bunch with some bottle age.

Wine 2: I originally lumped this in with the other Barolos because of the firm acidity on the palate, but with time the differences begin to emerge here. The nose showed a hotter, more alcoholic finish, with an extravagant cherry liqueur/kirsch character that if anything intensified with time. This was either a clear New World style, or maybe even a ringer from the New World, although the acidity on the palate was still not what I normally associate with California. Maybe less impressive than the rest given the rigorous standards of the Barolo, still this was drinking very well.

Wine 3: Many of the tasters voted this as their Number 2 wine of the night. The nose showed a touch of barnyard, with kirsch on the nose, but in a subtler, less in-your-face style than Wine #2. This is made again in what seemed a classical Barolo style, with some massive tannins and high acidity, but also showing a multi-layered character that combined power and detail. Very impressive, aristocratic juice here.

Wine 4: This was probably my least favorite of the classical Barolos at the tasting, with its massive structure and abundant tannins dominating the profile. Perhaps the most backward of the wines along with Wine #1, this presented a volatile acidity on the nose that came across as less friendly for the taster. Still one could not fail to be impressed by the combination of power, the range of flavors, and its detailed structure.

Wine 5: This wine, which like all of them had been open for about six hours before the tasting, showed the most obviously fragrant, floral nose. In the mouth, the character is distinctly friendlier on this multi-layered wine, as if those forbidding and demanding tannins had been brought under some measure of control. The only thing negative I could say is that the wine did not continue to strengthen in the glass the way some of the others did (Wine 1 and 3 especially). Still, many of the tasters considered this Wine of the Night.

Once we had tasted and recorded our notes, we found out what we were drinking:

1. Wine 1: 1997 Paulo Scavino Bric del Fiasc Castiglione Falletto
2. Wine 2: 2003 Palmina Nebbiolo Sisquoc Vineyard, Santa Maria
3. Wine 3: 1997 Bartolo Mascarello, Barolo
4. Wine 4: 1997 Massolino Vigna Rionda Riserva, Serralunga
5. Wine 5: 1997 Ceretto Brunate, La Morra

An impressive showing across the board here. The Palmina had the disadvantage of competing in an environment defined by the classical Barolo style—otherwise, it showed beautifully. And the Barolos were all in beautiful shape, each just beginning to show some secondary characteristics that if anything heightened the combination of exquisite detail and power on the wines. If we were scoring them, they would probably all fall within 1-2 points of each other.