Brunello di Montalcino 2009 and 2008 Riserva

In fact, many positive things have happened in Montalcino since 2008, when the Brunellopoli scandal broke out [a few suspiciously dark wines were questioned for not being 100% sangiovese, as the law requires]. Today there are many new faces in the Brunello di Montalcino Consortium, and it's exciting to hear about their goals and ideas.  Current President Fabrizio Bindocci, current director Giampiero Pazzaglia (who worked for more than 30 years at Argiano) and Francesco Ripaccioli (whose family owns the outstanding Canalicchio di Sopra estate) are just a few of the new people now on the board who bring a fresh outlook and years of experience to the table.  The recent presentation of groundbreaking scientific research on sangiovese's anthocyanins (the pigments present in grape skins and, to a lesser extent, pulp) is but one example.  The landmark study by Arapitsas et al. (2012) has offered insight into sangiovese's world as never before, illustrating the comparatively greater anthocyanin endowment of sangiovese grapes grown in the Montalcino zone.

Applying science to wine tasting elevates it to more than just an art form and will inevitably allow for a better understanding of the grape variety, its interaction with specific terroirs, and how best to express the unique potential of the Montalcino production zone.  In this light, as I have already documented in last year's Brunello report, Bindocci believes a zonation study of Montalcino's complex terroir is also necessary, and he looks forward to implementing one in the future.  He understands that cru systems are hard to put in place in as complex a viticultural zone as Montalcino's, made up as it is of many different altitudes, exposures, rootstocks, soils, water regimens, slopes, ventilation gradients and solar radiation angles.  For example, unlike Bordeaux or Burgundy, Montalcino's vineyards are located at very different altitudes (from roughly 250 to 500 meters above sea level), and in the area's potentially cool climate even a 50-meter variation makes a huge difference.  In comparison, the average altitude in Pauillac is only 15 meters above sea level. 

Furthermore, there are estates in Montalcino that make their Brunello by blending grapes from very different sites, which complicates recognition of site-specificity in the glass (when not making it downright impossible!). Identifying sub-areas within Montalcino that produce wines that are relatively different from others made within the production zone requires the integration of that tasting data with precise soil analysis of the vineyards where the grapes were grown (for example: mineral contents, AWC or available water capacity, granulometry, depth, percentage of calcium carbonate), rootstocks, pruning and canopy choices, exposures, slope gradients and more.  The goal shouldn't be to issue a qualitative hierarchy, but rather a characterization of a territory and the different wines it produces. Though some wine writers seem to think that just tasting wines for a few years is good enough to allow drawing up of his or her favorite sites or crus, that view is simplistic at best.

I believe that Brunello di Montalcino has never been better than it is today.  Essentially gone are the many truly defective wines of decades ago, plagued by problems such as bad oak, dirty oak, over-extraction or fruit deficiency.  Many wines were simply tired and already drying upon release, but this is rarely the case nowadays, even if some laggards remain.  The general improvement in Montalcino's wines is also highlighted by the many wonderful examples of Rosso di Montalcino (Brunello's lighter-styled, more accessible and faster-maturing little brother) now being made.  But as good as many Rossos are (the improvement of which I have written about before in the IWC), even the best of them (e.g., Poggio di Sotto, Le Potazzine) rarely reach the complexity or depth of most Brunellos.