Last week I began a series of tastings on the 2007 Brunello. Part I, is located here: 2007 Brunello, Part I.
My initial impression of the vintage was that it would be an early charmer and not quite have the staying power that the 2006’s have. After these early samples, that’s still not entirely clear, but what is certain is that the vintage produced fine wines, with wonderful perfumes and ripe juicy fruit.
The 2007 Uccelliera Brunello di Montalcino was the first wine tasted. In the glass, the wine is dark blackish red, and the first thing that hits you is the color extraction. The attractive nose is filled with cherries, newly turned earth, and some underbrush. A bit more earth than I remember in the 2006. In the mouth the fruit is ripe and persistent with good acid balance and a pleasing spice to the finish. This isn’t nearly the massive wine the 2006 was and it’s not nearly as complex. The quality of the vintage is evident as well as the ripeness of the fruit. But when comparing these two, the 2006 is the winner hands down. 91 points, about $42.
 |
| 2007 Uccelliera Brunello di Montalcino |
Next up was the 2007 Mocali Brunello di Montalcino. This wine was almost identical to it’s 2006 counterpart, though I think this vintage actually displays fruit that is a bit riper than the 2006. In the glass the wine is medium violet to cranberry in color. The nose is very nice – with attractive flowers, fruit, cinnamon and dried herbs. The complexity to the nose doesn’t quite carry through to the palate. Some cellar time might bring that out, however, I think the fruit, acids and tannins are in balance now, so I’m not sure how much cellaring this wine would benefit from. Still, it’s pretty tasty now and quite the bargain given the price. It shows that in vintages as good as 2006/2007 even producers that aren’t in the top tier of quality make outstanding wines. 91 points, about $28.
 |
| 2007 Mocali Brunello di Montalcino |
John, you and others have expressed this view and its converse as well:"It shows that in vintages as good as 2006/2007 even producers that aren't in the top tier of quality make outstanding wines."
It would seem to go without saying that Picasso or Monet would consistently produce masterpieces, but I'm wondering about the four point spread from the 2006-2007; would you say that the 2006 Uccelliera is a "Masterpiece" while the 2007 is a great wine? Or is it that Uccelliera is not a 'Top tier' producer?
I'm not trying to put you on the spot, and I wouldn't blame you for not replying to this seemingly trite comment, but I tend to be glib on line as I am in person.
Either way, you've forced me to think. 🙂
Dennis,
I agree that the converse can be true. Producer over vintage as I've written, but also sometimes "vintage aids producer".
For me, I do not think Uccelliera is a top tier producer. They haven't been making great wine as consistently as some other producers. That said, they're not in what I'd call the bottom half either.
As for their 2006-2007, I would say that the 4 point spread, in two vintages of such good quality is pretty bit. I think the 2006 Uccelliera is a Masterpiece. I think it's amazing now, and will be grand with 10-15 years in the cellar. The 2007 isn't as good now as the 2006 and I don't think that cellar time will benefit it. I'd also say that it isn't "great" but merely "excellent". It may seem like splitting hairs, but to me, a "great wine" is one of incredible character and quality. It's a shining example of what the vintage should be. The 2007, while very good, was pretty generic and not unique. Not for the vintage, or for the producer. Hopefully that makes sense? If not, at least it will get you thinking. 🙂