The shade of Silvio Berlusconi hung over the OWC tasting on 24th January, when Jonathan Pedley MW, channelling the spirit of Il Cavaliere, gave us a typically wise and witty look at two great grapes. The last ‘Big Match’ was Cabernet Sauvignon versus Merlot where he was able to compare vintage with vintage, producer with producer, wine with wine – often in the same estate.
This time the contest was between Sangiovese and Nebbiolo; two great grapes which have not yet really found their style outside Italy. The former was first recorded in the 1600s and (tell this not to the Tuscans) appears – on ampelographic evidence – to originate from Calabria.
Under many different names, Sangiovese and clones thereof are hugely important to the Italian wine industry. From its 70,000 ha in the homeland, it produces both wines of enormous distinction and a lot of what Jonathan elegantly dismissed as ‘wishy washy swill’. It’s far too easy, and far too financially tempting to exploit its vigour and wildly over-crop. Outside Italy its best home has been California where, in the 1980s, it was seen as the next ‘Big Thing’, with the potential to unlock major sales in all those Italian restaurants and pizzerias across the States. But the style never settled and, as Jonathan testified from his own experience with Grants of St James, it failed to sell.
Nebbiolo, on the other hand, is older and highly revered. First recorded in 1266, it has for centuries produced perfumed, age-worthy wines of great distinction in and around the town of Alba in Piedmont. There are only some 5,000 ha in Italy and a few hundreds of hectares in the rest of the world. Nebbiolo is choosy about its locations. It’s early budding (meaning at risk of frost), but also slow ripening (so vulnerable to any climatic problems in September / October) and it likes, even demands, the best lime and clay soils. A bit of a Prima Donna, said Jonathan.
Both grapes have a distinctive aroma that sets them apart from the French classic varieties. Sangiovese has red fruit aromas, often with a bitter cherry or cranberry note; Nebbiolo a highly distinctive nose of dried fruits (think figs or prunes) allied with floral notes (roses or violets for many people) and quickly acquires secondary aromas of leather and tar. On the palate, Nebbiolo has high tannins and acidity and can often come across as tight and austere. Traditionally aged in old botti of Slovenian oak, it matures slowly (even glacially) and there’s an ever-present danger that by the time the tannins have softened the fruit has gone. Like being ‘flogged with barbed wire’ – but less pleasurable perhaps.) One of the reasons, Jonathan speculated, for Sangiovese’s difficulties in the US was that the wine-makers tried a Cabernet style recipe with lots of new oak.
There was a suggestion from Jonathan that by now we might be looking forward to the ‘tasting from hell’ and turning violent through lack of wine. Not so. Jonathan’s clear exposition of the qualities of the grapes gave us a framework to judge his eight wines. First came a pair of lower-priced Italians (one Nebbiolo, one Sangiovese), then a pair of US wines, then a pair of Australians before coming back to the higher end Italians.
First up, a Morellino di Scansano 2010 (Sangiovese) was paired with Marco Porello’s Nebbiolo d’Alba 2010. The former was £11, the latter £9 – definitely an entry level wine. Both wines were ‘from the wrong side of the tracks. The Morellino (part of the Marco Bacci stable) comes from the most SW chunk of Tuscany, close to the coast and Lazio and represents what one might call the Mediterranean take on Sangiovese. The Nebbiolo comes from the wrong (ie Northern) side of the Tanaro near Roero where the soil is sandier than ideal for perfect Nebbiolo.
Immediately the differences started to become clear. The Morellino was far darker in colour with a purple core and little sign of ageing; the Nebbiolo already paler (barely even a rosé in some parts of the New World) with brick tints and a broad rim. On the nose, the Morellino had dark cherry fruit and a suggestion of new oak giving a spicy tinge to the wine. Brisk tannin and acidity with medium alcohol, this is a wine that would cut through rich meat dishes. The Nebbiolo’s nose was more restrained with dates and figs allied to plum and a hint of floral perfume. This was a lighter-bodied wine whose acidity and power would make it an excellent partner for the meat and mushroom-heavy cuisine of Northern Italy (no olive oil there of course).
The next pair of wines were from North America: the Sangiovese (£21) from the Seghesio family in California’s own ‘Chianti’ in the Alexander Valley, the Nebbiolo (£30) from Virginia on the East coast. The Seghesio 2009 was slightly paler than the Morellino with a slightly broader rim. The bouquet showed strong new oak influence with black fruit and a hint of coconut. Less acidity and less tannin than the Morellino but significantly more alcohol at 15%. The Nebbiolo was again paler with a hint of brick in the rim and a spicy, slightly farmyard bouquet with flowers, lots of dried fruit and a touch of sage. 14% alcohol but refreshing, even brisk, acidity and a lighter mouthfeel.
We then moved on to Australia, comparing the Greenstone Heathcote Sangiovese of 2009 (£24) with the Stephen C. Pannell Nebbiolo (£29) from the Adelaide Hills of 2007. Both these wines are the product of star wine-makers committed to their respective grapes. The Sangiovese, grown north of Melbourne but vinified in the Mornington Peninsula, had cherry stone and black fruit character with clear oak character (the recipe here is 2 years in wood, though only 20% new oak). Softer tannins and thoroughly balanced with good length and harmony – an attractive wine.
The Nebbiolo is made in the McLaren Vale by Stephen Pannell, formerly chief wine-maker at Hardy’s but running his own operation and increasingly seen as one Australia’s star wine-makers. Red berry fruit was allied to prunes, dark chocolate and a touch of leather and tar in the complex bouquet; in the mouth dry and powerful with ripe tannins and bracing acidity. This is a wine that marries, as Jonathan said, pain with pleasure but will evolve over decades. Pannell’s recipe is close to the traditional Italian take – ageing in old oak, though he gives it only a couple of years rather than a couple of decades.
For the last pair, we returned to Italy. In the Sangiovese corner was Marco Bacci’s 2007 Brunello di Montalcino (£34): an intense dark red with opulent black fruit in a spice and vanilla tinged bouquet this ‘monster’ wine has power, richness and ripeness. It will continue to evolve for many years with the tannins softening further and the palate evolving. If wines were singers this would be Tito Gobbi, the great operatic baritone of the 1950s and 1960s.
Last wine of the evening was Mauro Mascarello’s 2007 Mon Privato, from one of the very top Barolo sites. This wine is still 6 years or more from its peak and has the capacity to evolve for decades yet so we were tasting it in its infancy. In the glass it was pale red with a brick tinge; on the nose restrained (even tight) but hints of red fruits and roses in its inky, tarry depths (Jonathan thought he detected the smell of fountain pen ink from days long ago). Cutting tannins, briskly acidic but hints of the savoury fruit to come to those who will wait. This wine spends 30 days on the skins (old Giuseppe demanded 60 days) and then 3 ½ years in old botti. Giuseppe di Stefano, thought Jonathan, would be the singer for this wine, though some members were less sure whether this wine would reach the lyrical heights of that great Italian tenor. Was there enough fruit there? Time will tell.
What is not in doubt was the excellence of this tasting and the clarity of the different profiles of these two great Italian grapes. We look forward to the next Big Match! Suggestions to the Secretary please….
GH: 26/1/13