http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/19/dining/making-his-case-for-the-second-montalcino.html?ref=ericasimov
Like Mr. Asimov, whom I follow closely and usually find myself in synch with (I just bought a copy of his latest book entitled How to Love Wine; more on that later), I'm a big fan of Rosso as a moderately priced alternative to the often over-priced Brunello. Although I haven't (yet) tasted any of the wines they review in the article, I look forward to seeking them out and will be sure to report on them. The Rosso wines they taste range in price from $23 to $82, which is seriously moving into Brunello territory with respect to price points, though as a Kermit Lynch import, it is likely worth the big bucks. However, as with the Rosso I reported on in the previous post, there are very decent Rossos to be enjoyed for less than $20 and represent a very good value.
Both Chianti and Rosso are made from the Sangiovese grape (as is the Brunello), but what distinguishes them is the expression of the grape which, no doubt, arises from the particular terroir in which it is cultivated and matured. As Asimov points out, the Montalcino "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."
You may have a preference for one or the other, but again like Asimov, I enjoy both styles - the earthy, sweet & bitter aromas of Chianti, as well as the denser, more robust fruit expression of the Rosso di Montalcino. Do let me know what you think!
No comments:
Post a Comment