2011 Azienda Agricola La Torre Rosso di Montalcino Sangiovese

8.6

NYTimes Eric Asimov 2/13/14:

It could be because it’s the second wine of the region, made with grapes that for one reason or another didn’t make the cut for the first. Or maybe it’s because the status of Brunello di Montalcino, and therefore the wines of Montalcino, were under a cloud of scandal for several years, making them difficult to embrace.
But whatever the logic, that second wine, Rosso di Montalcino, does not get a lot of respect.
This was evident after a wine-panel tasting of 20 bottles of Rosso di Montalcino from recently released vintages. I very much liked the wines. I found the best examples to be lovely expressions of the grape, which, as with Brunello, is the only grape legally permitted in the wine. But the other panelists weren’t buying it.
“I think Chianti blows these wines away,” said Chris Cannon, the restaurateur, whose new places include the Venetian restaurant All’onda near Union Square, and Jockey Hollow Bar and Kitchen, due to open this spring in Morristown, N.J.
The others were a bit more circumspect, like a stifled yawn. “I don’t super-gravitate toward them,” said Levi Dalton, a sommelier, wine writer and host of the “I’ll Drink to That” podcasts. Florence Fabricant allowed that they were pleasant. “But very few knocked my socks off,” she said.
Well, if I’m going to be the only enthusiastic voice in the room, allow me to make my case.
First, what is Rosso di Montalcino? Simply put, it’s a category of wine intended to make life a little easier for Brunello producers, who are required to age Brunellos a minimum of two years in barrels and two more in bottles before they can sell it. That’s a substantial investment. By contrast, Rosso di Montalcino must be aged a minimum of only a year, including six months in oak barrels. Theoretically at least, this division also permits producers to elevate the quality of the top wine by siphoning off any grapes or wine that does not meet their standards for the Brunello. For consumers, Rosso ought to be a fresher, easier-drinking wine that does not require prolonged cellar aging. In a word, it ought to be more joyous than contemplative.
So, what’s the issue? Perhaps it’s the inherent nature of the sangiovese grown in Montalcino, which tends to be richer and more concentrated than that grown in the Chianti zones. As a result, good Chiantis, in which sangiovese is the dominant rather than the sole grape, will generally be more graceful and finer textured than the Montalcino. The Montalcinos will be denser and more powerful; the best combine muscularity with elegance.
I love both expressions. The gorgeous, earthy, dusty, sweet and bitter red fruit aromas of Tuscan sangiovese reel me in like a pie cooling on a windowsill. While even the Rosso may be heavier than a good Chianti, the best wines offer a sense of purity, unmitigated by oaky chocolate or vanilla flavors. Sometimes, especially in warmer vintages, the fruit flavors can be a little too sweet. But that may also reflect the stylistic aims of the producer.
These ultra-ripe wines particularly bothered Chris.
“These should not be black, or express black fruits,” he said. “This appellation is a safe-bet value, but not compelling.”
I agree with Chris about the super-mature wines. They can take on a syrupy, cloying quality that I don’t like. But a safe-bet value? To me, that sounds like a good thing, though I would disagree that these Rossos were either safe or necessarily values.
The wines, as Levi pointed out, can be stylistically inconsistent (as can Chianti). So it is imperative to know both the style you prefer and the producers who strive for it.
As for value, that’s a deeper issue.
Our No. 1 wine, the deep, pure, focused 2011 La Torre, was also our best value, at $30; not bad, when its Brunello might run $50 to $60. In fact, it’s probably a pretty good value considering the quality of the wine, but it’s not cheap.
The issue is even more exaggerated in our No. 2 bottle, the 2008 Poggio di Sotto, the oldest wine in our tasting by a couple of years. I think Poggio di Sotto is one of the great Montalcino producers. Its wines are marked by power, finesse and purity, and its Rossos are aged far longer than the minimum before they are sold, two years in big oak barrels and six months in bottles. The ’08 was graceful, beautiful and delicious, but cost $82. That was far and away the most expensive bottle in the tasting, on par with the Rosso from Biondi-Santi, perhaps the greatest Brunello producer, whose Rosso we unfortunately did not have in our lineup.
This gets to the question of value and whether Rosso di Montalcino should be, as the marketers like to say, thought of as “Baby Brunello.” That’s a loaded term, suggesting you are getting Brunello at a cut rate. You’re not. A better way to think of the Rosso is simply as an introduction to a producer’s style. Personally, I have invested in those Poggio di Sotto Rossos because I love the style but can’t afford the Brunello, which might start around $140 a bottle.
Our other top wines were on the more austere side of the spectrum. At No. 3, the 2010 Conti Costanti was tightly structured yet deep and substantial. It would definitely benefit from further aging. So would the 2011 Fattoria dei Barbi, rich, tannic, spicy and leathery. Other Rossos that showed a riper, more immediately accessible style included the harmonious 2011 Poggio Antico; the dense, slightly sweet 2011 Valdicava; and the expressive, perfumed 2011 Lisini.
Though our tastings are intended to show a good cross-section of the appellation, they are not complete. I would not hesitate to look for producers like Il Paradiso di Manfredi, Mastrojanni and Gianni Brunelli.
In the end, your position on Rosso di Montalcino will depend on what excites you. I’m thrilled by sangiovese in all of its Tuscan manifestions, and I definitely have a place for the Rosso on my table.
Pairings: Pork Stewed With Lentils and Celery
Tasting Report
BEST VALUE
La Torre, $30, ***
Rosso di Montalcino 2011
Deep, lingering, pure flavors of red fruit and earth; will benefit from another year or two of age. (Rosenthal Wine Merchant, New York)
Poggio di Sotto, $82, ***
Rosso di Montalcino 2008
Subtle, restrained and graceful, with a lovely combination of sweet and bitter cherry flavors. (Kermit Lynch Wine Merchant, Berkeley, Calif.)
Conti Costanti, $45, ***
Rosso di Montalcino 2010
Tightly wound and structured, with depth and presence; needs time. (Empson U.S.A., Alexandria, Va.)
Fattoria dei Barbi, $23, ** ½
Rosso di Montalcino 2011
Tannic and rich, with spicy flavors of dark fruit and leather. (Frederick Wildman & Sons, New York)
Poggio Antico, $37, ** ½
Rosso di Montalcino 2011
Harmonious and lively, with pure, lingering cherry flavors. (The Sorting Table, Napa, Calif.)
Valdicava, $34, ** ½
Rosso di Montalcino 2011
Dense yet bright, with plenty of sweet red fruit. (Vinifera, Ronkonkoma, N.Y.)
Talenti, $23, ** ½
Rosso di Montalcino 2010
Graceful and elegant, with earthy, bright flavors of cherry and anise. (HP Selections, New York)
Lisini, $33, ** ½
Rosso di Montalcino 2011
Lively and expressive with rich, powerful aromas of sweet fruit. (Solair Selection, New York)
Cerbaiona, $51, **
Rosso di Montalcino 2010
Young and tannic, with rich, pure fruit flavors; needs time. (Rare Wine Company, Vinesburg, Calif.)
Uccelliera, $22, **
Rosso di Montalcino 2011
Rich yet focused, with bright fruit and maybe a touch of oak. (Marc de Grazia Selections, Winston-Salem, N.C.)