Young Brunello di Montalcino

The place on the web to chat about wine, Australian wines, or any other wines for that matter
Post Reply
Dang
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 12:23 pm

Young Brunello di Montalcino

Post by Dang »

Our cellarmaster decided that our palate (and nose) needed some education. He had been hoarding some Brunellos and got us to blind test a number of youngish (all from the great '07 vintage, to which RP gave a series of 94-95 score). Here was the lineup:
1) Agostina Pieri BdM
2) Casanova di Nieri BdM Tenuta Nova
3) Fuligni BdM
4) Gianni Brunelli le Chiuse di Sotto BdM
5) Lusini BdM
6) San Felici BdM Campogiovanni
7) Siro Pacenti BdM
8) Talenti BdM
The DOCG of BdM came into prominence in the early '70 due to the well known Biondi-Santi from the special brown Sangiovese grape grown on special galesto (shaly clay) soil around the hills of Montalcino. The rest of the soil is mostly sandy clay combined with limestone. The galestro tends to deliver steelier wine with deeper acidity than the rest, but it would take a very educated palate to determine the difference!
Unfortunately we started with the Fuligni and the Talenti being corked in two separate tables, so some of us did not have the chance to taste either one of them (damn corks). I discovered later that the Fuligni and the Siro Pacenti vineyards are on galesto soil.
Young BdM looked dark red and bright. They exhibited nose of cherry (mixture of black and red), mushrooms, earth and lots of spice (anise, licorice). Tasting became a bit difficult for. It seemed that I got tons of good fruit first, then a huge wall of tannins and spice and for the finish, a variation of bright fruit or dark fruit. So trying to find the steeliest palate is a lost cause for me. The best wine for me was the Agostina for that bright finish that saved my palate. For most tasters they did enjoy the Casanova.
The wines were in the range of $50-$100, certainly nowhere near a Biondi-Santi. They however needed (no, demanded) a plateful of spaghetti and tomato to soften up the spices and tannins. So this format of blind tasting BdM wines was a chore for me. Perhaps when we get to taste the older BdM, we might be into something different.
Cheers...Dac.

JamieBahrain
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 7:40 am
Location: Fragrant Harbour.

Re: Young Brunello di Montalcino

Post by JamieBahrain »

Dang

What an unfortunate experience. Though they are cheapies on the international market, I've seen Fuligni outperform bigger guns with suitable age.
"Barolo is Barolo, you can't describe it, just as you can't describe Picasso"

Teobaldo Cappellano

Sigmamupi
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:43 pm
Location: Canberra

Re: Young Brunello di Montalcino

Post by Sigmamupi »

Dang

Not sure why your cellarmaster thought 2007 was a great vintage. Over ripe and clumsy in my experience - may be that's why Parker rated it if he was still reviewing brunello at that time.

Pity about one of the Fuligni's being corked. I agree strongly with Jamie. The standard Fuligni wines are great value and 2006 and 2010 are worth seeking out. Paradoxically the standard wines are better wines (and obviously much better value) than the Riserva wines from this maker. Costanti is also worth a look if you can access them.

rooman
Posts: 1664
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 1:36 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Young Brunello di Montalcino

Post by rooman »

An interesting discussion - I just grabbed a 2010 Uccelliera Brunello di Montalcino Riserva out of the cellar to try one. My only concern was it might be fair too early. Has anyone tried one of these recently?

Sigmamupi
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:43 pm
Location: Canberra

Re: Young Brunello di Montalcino

Post by Sigmamupi »

rooman wrote:An interesting discussion - I just grabbed a 2010 Uccelliera Brunello di Montalcino Riserva out of the cellar to try one. My only concern was it might be fair too early. Has anyone tried one of these recently?
Never bought Uccelliera but you are on a good start with a 2010 vintage. I have tried Poggio di Sotto, Salvioni Cerbaiola, Fuligni and Costanti 2010s and all are drinkable now with a good protein meal as they are so well balanced. Salvioni the best but the Poggio di Sotto also very good in a medium bodied burgundy like style but at the continually rising prices for recent vintages, I am hard pressed to justify further purchases of these two. Fuligni and Costanti are still reasonably priced so I bought a few of each in 2012 vintage and I thought about the 2013s, but my compulsive burgundy buying drained the coffers.

I (and I am sure others) would be interested in your TN on the Uccelliera in due course.

Con J
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm

Re: Young Brunello di Montalcino

Post by Con J »

Sigmamupi wrote:Dang

Not sure why your cellarmaster thought 2007 was a great vintage. Over ripe and clumsy in my experience - may be that's why Parker rated it if he was still reviewing brunello at that time.

Pity about one of the Fuligni's being corked. I agree strongly with Jamie. The standard Fuligni wines are great value and 2006 and 2010 are worth seeking out. Paradoxically the standard wines are better wines (and obviously much better value) than the Riserva wines from this maker. Costanti is also worth a look if you can access them.
This was hyped up as a great vintage by Parker as he did for Chateauneuf du Pape and did buy a few for this reason.

A few months back I put on a 07 Valdicava for my wine group and everyone thought it was hot and over ripe.

Had the 2010 Valicava last Friday and a 2004 Madonna del Piano a couple of weeks ago.
Both of these were a lot better and more balanced than the 07.

Obviously this an observation from only one producer.

Cheers Con.

Post Reply