2006 Barolo:
A Modern-Day Classic in the Making

by Antonio
Galloni

One of the most fascinating aspects of
Nebbiolo is its ability to express an extraordinary amount of information with
regards to vintage, site, microclimate, terrain and a host of other variables.
That seemed to be the overwhelming takeaway from my tastings of the 2006
Barolos. To gain as much perspective as possible, I tasted the 2006 Barolos
next to vintages 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2009 (where the wines were through malo)
at a number of estates including Giacomo Conterno, Altare, Clerico, Brovia,
Conterno-Fantino, Bartolo Mascarello, E. Pira, Sandrone, Scavino, Vietti,
Roberto Voerzio and others; while at a handful of addresses time constraints
allowed for a comparison with just 2005 and/or 2007. I was struck by how
distinct each of these vintages is, but most importantly my tastings emphasized
a point I think is crucial when it comes to making purchasing decisions; in the
vast majority of cases readers will be best served by focusing on the finest
producers over vintage characteristics, which by nature are always generalized.
All of the wines in this article were tasted between November 2009 and January
2010. I will provide notes on the later-released 2006 Barolos in the October
issue. A number of wineries and importers had not set prices as we went to
press, but generally readers should expect prices that are in line with the
2005s, if not a touch lower.

To be sure, getting a handle on recent
vintages in Piedmont is no easy task. Since 2004 every harvest has been at
least above average and in some cases utterly profound. Vintage 2006 is
probably the hardest of the current vintages in the pipeline to get a grasp on.
For starters, hail was an issue in many places, most dramatically in La Morra,
where parts of Arborina were devastated. Bruno Giacosa’s decision to not bottle
his 2006 Barolos and Barbarescos (which I addressed in depth in Issue 185)
caused a great amount of consternation among producers and was a popular
subject of discussion in my visits with growers. It’s worth taking a moment to
remind readers that Giacosa’s decision not to bottle his 2006s is largely the
result of what was a very difficult year for him personally, rather than an
indictment of the overall quality of the vintage.

The winter and spring in 2006 were relatively
uneventful. The summer was quite warm, which yielded super-ripe Dolcettos and
Barberas. Nebbiolo is late to ripen, however, and the vines benefitted greatly
from well-timed spells of rain that fell in August and September. Evening
temperatures dropped during the final month of the growing season, allowing the
full development of color, expressive aromatics, ripe fruit, healthy acidity
and powerful structure. So far, it looks like the villages of Monforte and
Serralunga were the most privileged, perhaps because the fruit ripens a touch
later in both villages, which gave growers the ability to maximize the full
potential of the ideal conditions towards the end of the maturation cycle.

The 2006 Barolos are big, powerful wines the
best of which reveal extraordinary balance as well as significant potential to
improve in bottle. Today the 2006 Barolos remind me a bit of the 1999s with
perhaps a touch more density and richness. Producers describe the vintage as
‘classic’ by which they usually mean a year characterized by well-balanced
weather and cool nights during the harvest, conditions that tend to yield firm,
sturdy wines with the capacity to develop and age positively for many years,
such as 1989, 1996, 1999, 2001 and 2004; as opposed to ripe years where the
nights during the final month are warm and the wines are more overtly fruit-forward,
such as 1990, 1997, 2000 and 2003. These definitions are tricky, because
although the thought of a ‘classic’ vintage can cause the most diehard Barolo
aficionados to salivate, the reality is that there are more than a few
excessively stern, angular wines that I doubt will ever find their balance.
Nevertheless, the finest 2006 Barolos – and there is no shortage of fine
bottles – reveal a modern expression of ripeness married to a firm sense of
structure that readers are likely to find immensely appealing, although many of
the top wines will require cellaring.

One of the key metrics I look for in
evaluating a vintage is the quality of the entry-level Barolos, in some
quarters still known as Barolo normale, a term I deplore but sometimes
use simply for clarity. The best of these entry-level Barolos are gorgeous and
well-balanced. It doesn’t hurt that producers have made a concerted effort to
improve those wines in a weak market where demand for their higher-end
bottlings is slackening by adding some of the juice normally destined for their
more expensive selections. Still, it is impossible to ignore the success of the
best of the Baroli normali in 2006. Sadly, despite the quality of the
wines, I fear the 2006s will be overshadowed by the 2007s, which are also
shaping up to be extraordinary, albeit in a very different style. Of even
greater concern, especially to producers and the trade, is the weak demand for
Barolo (and high-end wine overall), particularly in the United States. I was
astonished to learn that a number of producers I visited in late November 2009
have still not shipped a single bottle of 2005 Barolo to the US.

A Preview Of
The 2007 Barolos

The 2007 Barolos are some of the most
exciting, electrifying and viscerally thrilling wines I have tasted in over a
dozen years of visiting Piedmont. As was the case throughout continental
Europe, the winter essentially never appeared in Italy. Temperatures remained
well above normal and precipitation was non-existent. As a result, plants and
flowers were a full month ahead of schedule in the early spring. Summer
temperatures, instead, were quite moderate, which allowed the maturation of the
grapes to slow down. Temperatures dropped again in September, allowing for cool
nights during the final phase of maturation, which is essential for developing
the aromatics that are such a big part of what makes Nebbiolo such a
magnificent grape. The 2007 Barolos combine elements of cold and warm vintages
to a degree I have never seen before. Today the wines come across as similar in
style to the 2004s, but with more opulence and depth of fruit. The 2007 Barolos
will be immensely appealing on release due to the relatively low acidities and
sheer density of fruit. I have already heard one producer tell me rather dismissively
“2007 is a vintage the Americans will love.” In addition to finding this
stereotypical BS ridiculous in the year 2010, my guess is that the wines will
appeal to a broad public. Critics may claim the wines won’t age. One look at
the development of the 1985s and 1990s – two warm vintages that weren’t
supposed to last – show that, if properly stored, Barolos from hot years can
easily drink well to age thirty and likely beyond.

An Update on
the 2005 and 2004 Barolos

As I wrote in Issue 185, the 2005 Barolos
have turned out better than I originally expected. However, when tasted next to
the 2006s, it is clear they lack the stuffing and density of the finest years.
In time, I expect it will become clear that 2005, while interesting, is the
least exciting of the batch of current vintages. It is a year to be especially
selective, and a vintage that should offer quite a bit of value given the
current economic climate. I don’t have much to say about the 2004 Barolos other
than the wines appear to be shutting down mightily in bottle. If a window still
exists for sampling the top 2004s, it is closing rapidly.

Eating and
Drinking in Piedmont

Another of the other main topics of
conversation during my trip to Piedmont this fall was the awarding of two
Michelin stars each to Antica Corona Reale (known locally as da Renzo) in
Cervere and Piazza Duomo in Alba, which is understandably a huge source of
pride for the locals. The food at da Renzo can be sublime and the service is
usually outstanding, but unfortunately the wine list is full of holes and
bottles aren’t properly stored. My one meal at Piazza Duomo was a disaster.
Normally I would be more inclined to be forgiving, as I spent many years
working in restaurants and am fully aware of the unexpected things that can, and
often do, happen. Still, there is no excuse for treating diners rudely and not
excelling in those aspects of the dining experience such as service that are
much easier to control. In today’s economy no business can afford to treat
customers with the arrogance, disdain and indifference I experienced at Piazza
Duomo. Both Renzo and Piazza Duomo far fall short of what readers expect from a
two-star experience. In particular, wine service is far more professional at
dozens of New York City restaurants with no Michelin stars and far humbler
aspirations.

The Piedmontese table is certainly one of the
richest in Italy. When paired with the wines, there is arguably no other region
in the country and few in the world that offer diners such a breadth of utterly
mind-blowing dishes and bottles, particularly in the fall, when white truffles
grace Piedmont’s dining rooms. For that reason, I continue to be deeply
disappointed by many restaurants in Piedmont. Most restaurateurs would kill to
have such an abundance of raw materials to work with but the Piedmontese
routinely squander many of their greatest gifts. Wine service in Piedmont’s top
restaurants is generally appalling and far out of line with the level today’s
diner is accustomed to throughout the world. By now I have forgotten how many
times I have been served cooked, ruined bottles at Michelin-starred
restaurants, which is especially disappointing when they are wines I have rated
highly. I often wonder what diners think when they order these same bottles.

There are a few beacons readers should look
to for the finest wine and food Piedmont can offer, where bottles are cellared
properly and treated with the respect they deserve, including La Ciau del
Tornavento in Treiso, Da Guido (in the Relais San Maurizio) in Santo Stefano
Belbo and La Libera in Alba. At virtually all of Piedmont’s big-name
restaurants wine is a hit and miss affair. The safest bet is to stick with a
young Dolcetto or Barbera that hasn’t had the time to be ruined. Alternatively,
readers should inquire about corkage and bring in their own wines, although
that makes it much harder to enjoy an older bottle. Diners should feel
absolutely no hesitation to send back pricey bottles that are dull, brown,
lifeless or otherwise damaged. Of course, the best solution would be for
Piedmont’s restaurateurs to properly cellar their wines. I find it amazing, and
frankly sad, that butter, milk and cheese are kept in the refrigerator, but
bottles of some of the rarest and most extraordinary wines on Planet Earth are
left for years in the sun and in warm temperatures, only to be sold years later
at obscene markups to unsuspecting diners. I will never forget the sight of a
room full of Piedmont’s most famous wines, all standing upright and exposed to
light in one of the region’s highly decorated restaurants, simply because the
owners were too lazy to put the wines in their temperature controlled cellar!
Readers need not worry about the cooked 2001 Conterno Barolo Cascina Francia, I
was served the last bottle.

Content

Engage

Vinous

Social