Five Decades of Conterno’s Barolo Monfortino

Am I ever a happy camper! Through the generosity of friends and friends of friends, I had the opportunity to share in a nine-bottle, five-decade tasting of one of Italy’s finest wines, Giacomo Conterno’s Barolo Riserva Monfortino. Nick Belfrage, who knows Italian wine well, has opted for a bottle of Monfortino as his “deathbed tipple.” The vintage he asks for is 1990. The youngest wine we tasted was 1985. Am I a happy camper?

The Giacomo Conterno winery, now run by Roberto Conterno, sits near some prime vineyards in Monforte d’Alba, though all its own vineyards are in Serralunga, and its finest wine is called Monfortino (Don’t ask; this is Italy). Roberto still makes wines the way his father and grandfather (the eponymous Giacomo) did, with long, long skin contact and long aging before release. Vintages of the last 15 years that I’ve tasted in Italy have all been impressive and formidable wines, structured on a large scale and packed with complex flavors that will need many years to evolve.

All the wines we tasted here in New York, however, were produced not by Roberto but by the older generations: 1985, 1978, 1971, 1967, 1968, 1958, 1955, 1947, and 1943. To me this made the tasting doubly interesting, because it was a chance to remind myself how the Barolos that first hooked me long ago have developed, as well as a chance to mentally compare them with what I’ve been tasting of more recent vintages.

In my private history of Piedmont wine, 1982 stands as a great dividing year, the year that climate change was first felt in the area. None of us realized that at the time: That very warm growing season gave grapes of such never-before-seen ripeness that it was thought of as a real anomaly: The growers called it their “California harvest.” Then ’85 was very warm again, forcing the growers to start to come to terms with changed climatic conditions. And then came the fantastic trio of harvests – 1988, 1989, and 1990 – that firmly pushed Barolo and Barbaresco into a whole new era.

From that point on, what came into the cellars from the fields was different from what Nebbiolo had been before. It had to be treated differently, even by the most traditional winemakers, and the history of Barolo and Barbaresco had to start over. If the wines of these latter years evolve anything like the wines of the pre-climate-change years that we had at this recent tasting, we all have a lot to look forward to.

So much for prologue: now for the tasting.

Monfortino 1985. Excellent color. Beautiful earth and mushroom nose, which opened in the glass to intense dry funghi porcini scents and finally to rich tobacco aromas. On the palate it was rich, smooth, and full, with very soft tannins and intense black fruits (with the merest suggestion of over-ripeness). The finish was all mushroom again. Wonderful as this wine was – unquestionably a five star wine – it would turn out to be one of the lesser wines we tasted. In contrast with the wines to come, it came to seem underdeveloped and needing more time to grow. And – just maybe – the winemaking wasn’t as sure-handed as it was before and would become again, once the Piedmont had adjusted to its new weather.

Monfortino 1978. Color and aroma quite similar to the ’85 – certainly no older looking, though perhaps a shade darker, and the porcini scents even more intense. The palate showed greater concentration, with the superb black cherry notes growing more intense, even liqueur-like, as they opened in the glass. Although ready to drink – the first ’78 I’ve encountered that I actually thought ready to drink (it was a tough year, marked by the hardest of tannins) – it was still remarkably fresh and gave every indication of having years and years of growth ahead of it. A glorious Barolo, simply off the charts.

Monfortino 1971. A bit more orange showing in the color, the start of truffle in the aroma, a touch thinner, less full, on the palate, with sour cherry and mushroom flavors dominating, and ending in a long, licorice-y finish. Classic pre-climate-change Barolo, with more obvious acidity contributing importantly to its structure and vitality, and everything held in a beautiful old-school balance. For many tasters, this was the wine of the day.

Monfortino 1967. Very pale: Most of the color had faded. Some acetone, some caramel in the nose, but lovely in the mouth: Burgundy-like, many tasters thought. A very balanced and elegant wine, Burgundian in its deportment and especially its finish.

Monfortino 1961. On the heels of the ’67, this wine was a surprise. It showed darker and more youthful-looking and smelled strongly of mushrooms and tobacco. It tasted young and fresh on the palate, with loads of maturing fruit and evident soft tannins. Not at all Burgudian, but pure Nebbiolo, through and through. For many, this wine upstaged even the ’78, which is really saying something.

Monfortino 1958. The color of this wine was slightly muddy, but it had an amazing nose of porcini and spices – really gorgeous. On the palate, fresh fruit with soft tannins and evident acidity (the latter clearly animating the whole wine), followed by a long licorice finish.

Monfortino 1955. Clearer and brighter than the ’58. Unusual nose of cumin and tobacco. Acidity is the factor structuring this wine and keeping it alive, which it very evidently was, in a state of lovely equilibrium. An excellent, still-sprightly wine with a long licorice finish. The prominence of the acidity seems to be a hallmark of pre-climate-change Barolo, and one of the characteristics that may distinguish it from our contemporary Barolos, which – I’m using the crystal ball here – don’t look to me as if their acidity will ever come so prominently to the fore.

Monfortino 1947. A wonder year all over Europe, producing some of the greatest wines of the last century. This wine was probably starting downslope: For my palate it was good but not great. It still had decent color and good aromas – tobacco, mushroom, earth. And its fruit was still sweet, soft, and long-finishing. It had no flaws: it was just playing in a very tough league, and at 65 years old it was showing a little fatigue.

Clockwise from bottom right: ’43, ’47, ’58, ’55

Monfortino 1943. A rare wine from the war years, and – sadly – over the hill. Its color had completely faded, leaving it looking like a sherry – a Palo Cortado or a Manzanilla – which it also smelled and tasted like. This was the only disappointing wine of the day. With so many so old wines, that, I think, says everything anyone needs to know about how high the level of winemaking was and is at Giacomo Conterno.

9 Responses to “Five Decades of Conterno’s Barolo Monfortino”

  1. Ole Udsen Says:

    “Adjectival diminutive formed from the name Monforte” indeed. It is also the name given to a wine that used to be blended from several vineyards in Serralunga and Monforte, but which now hails only from the fabulous Cascina Francia vineyard in the southern part of the Serralunga comune. The difference to the “normal” Barolo simply called Cascina Francia is a bit of grape selection, then longer and warmer fermentation and maceration, then longer time in huge old Slavonian wood casks. My all-time favourite Barolos, and also my death-bed wine.

  2. Aaron Byrd Says:

    Thank you so much for sharing your notes!

    May I ask you a beginner’s question about the basic logistics of enjoying bottles like these?

    I tried my first-ever old Barolo earlier this month (a Francesco Rinaldi from my wife’s birth year on her birthday), and I had some basic problems opening and pouring it.

    First, the cork broke off about two-thirds of the way down. I tried to pry it out with one of those two-pronged things, but I ended up having to push it down into the bottle.

    Then, there was a lot of sediment. Even though I stood the bottle up for a few days beforehand, I still wasn’t able to pour it slowly or carefully enough to keep all the sediment in the bottle. The final glass of the night was undrinkable, because I let too much sediment get into it.

    Any tips on how to avoid these mistakes in the future?

    Finally, I should point out that my wife is not old. Only the wine was. 🙂 Oh, and we have a tasting appointment at Aldo Conterno next Tuesday afternoon. It’s our first trip to Barolo, and we’re so excited. Perhaps we can be lucky enough to taste a Monfortino while we’re there.

    • Tom Maresca Says:

      Those aren’t mistakes: those are mishaps, and sometimes unavoidable.

      I wish I had a solution for corks that break off in the bottle. It’s maddening (and obviously not confined to Barolo). Pushing the cork down into the bottle is as good a solution as any, and easier than most.

      As for sediment: old Barolos are always going to have some, though the amount can vary considerably. Gentle pouring and not trying to get every drop from the bottle are the only solutions, short of developing a taste for sediment (I know one or two people who have!). You can also pour the wine through a clean cloth or good paper towel, but some people find that affects the taste of the wine.

      Sorry I can’t be more help.

      • aaron Says:

        We had a great trip, but it was a sad week in Barolo with the passing of Aldo Conterno. The family was tied up with funeral preparations, so we didn’t visit either Giacomo Conterno or Aldo Conterno. It was nevertheless a beautiful introduction to a wonderful region. Hopefully we will get as much as happiness from one day drinking the 06s and 08s we picked up as you did with these Monfortinos.

  3. Charles Scicolone Says:

    Great Article and I was there!

  4. Ed McCarthy Says:

    I spoke to some of the attendees and I’ve had some of these G.Conterno Monfortinos myself. Consensus was that the best were the 1978, 1961, 1958, and 1955. With most putting the 1961 first. I wonder how the 1964 would have done in this company.BTW, this is my favorite Barolo.

  5. Michael Apstein Says:

    Tom,
    Well written, as always. I liked your division of pre and post “climate change .” but what exactly is Monfortino? A vineyard? A proprietary name? A barrel selection? A site selection? Or something else?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s