Dining: Ignore the Straw. Savor the Chianti.

[AKR]

Dining: Ignore the Straw. Savor the Chianti.
2019-06-26 07:00:56.856 GMT


By ERIC ASIMOV
June 26 (New York Times) -- Chianti Classico wines are better than they
have ever been.
The best examples are remarkably distinctive, wonderfully satisfying
and, in some ways, the essence of Italian red wines. Still many people seem
unaware of what they are missing.
At a dinner party recently, I brought a few bottles of wine including one
of my favorite Chianti Classicos, a 2016 from Monteraponi. When the bottle was
poured, the other guests loved it, but seemed shocked at learning its
identity.
"Chianti?" one said. "Really? I don't think I've had Chianti since it
used to come in those straw-covered bottles."
Now, these people were not wine experts. But I had long convinced myself
that differentiating today's Chianti from those bottles of old was as
unnecessary as reminding people that Chablis comes from Burgundy, not
California.
Younger consumers nowadays may have no idea that 40 years ago Americans
often referred generically to California white wine as "Chablis." Nor are they
likely to know that college students in the 1970s bought Chianti not for the
wine but to use the empty fiasco, as the straw-covered bottle is called in
Italian, as a candleholder.
The last time I thought about Chianti in fiaschi was a few years ago when
Monte Bernardi, a very good producer, began selling Chianti in the
straw-covered bottles as a sort of playful retro statement.
As good as Chianti Classico is these days, it rarely seems to be an
object of anybody's desire. With the exception of some excellent Italian
restaurants, few wine lists put it in the spotlight. It seldom features on any
sommelier's Instagram feed.
Yet a good Chianti Classico is one of the most soulful wines I know. The
best have a pure, deep red-cherry flavor, sometimes deliciously tart or
bittersweet, along with pronounced floral aromas and flavors, and an earthy
minerality. The acidity is fresh and lively; tannins should be discernible,
though not overly chewy -- often with what I think of as a dusty quality,
focusing the wine and readying the mouth for another sip.
I love Chianti with cooked tomato sauces and pizza. It is also a natural
partner with sausages, all sorts of beef dishes and stews. And if you wonder
why I'm thinking about a red wine as summer is about to envelop us with heat,
I wonder if you ever plan to eat burgers or steaks off the grill. If so, you
might consider a Chianti Classico.
How is it that Chianti Classico is generally well known and so often
ignored? There are several reasons beyond its checkered-tablecloth past.
First, Chianti is an expression of the sangiovese grape, and sangiovese
is very much undervalued, except in the case of Chianti's Tuscan sibling,
Brunello di Montalcino.
Chianti is the historic name of the hilly Tuscan wine region between
Florence and Siena. As Chianti became well known in the early 20th century,
Italian wine authorities took advantage of its fame by expanding the zone in
which wine could legally be called Chianti. Not surprisingly, one result of
this expansion was to dilute the quality of the wine.
It wasn't until the 1980s and '90s that the greater Chianti region was
officially divided into a series of subzones, of which Chianti Classico
represents the historic heartland.
Geography was only one issue. While what constituted Chianti centuries
ago is difficult to reconstruct as few records exist, most authorities date
modern Chianti back to 1872, when Baron Bettino Ricasoli, a leading Tuscan
statesman and agricultural expert, set out what came to be considered the
formula for Chianti.
The wine should be mostly sangiovese, he said, recommending the addition
of canaiolo grapes to soften sangiovese's pronounced acidity. For those who
wanted lighter, fresher wines to drink young, the baron advised adding a
portion of white grapes, like malvasia.
By the 1960s, this suggested formula had hardened into rules, reified by
bureaucrats who encouraged quantity over quality. Chianti was required to be a
blended wine, and 10 to 30 percent of the blend had to be white grapes.
Some quality-minded producers rebelled. Montevertine, for one, left the
Chianti Classico appellation in 1981 because it wanted to make wines that were
100 percent sangiovese, or nearly so.
The laws have long since been changed -- sangiovese since 1996 must be 80
percent to 100 percent of the blend. But Montevertine has never returned to
the appellation. So this producer, which in my mind is one of the best in the
region, calls its wines Toscana Rosso even though they could qualify as
Chianti Classico.
White grapes are no longer part of the Chianti formula, but producers are
permitted to use many different red grapes in the 20 percent of the blend not
required to be sangiovese. That includes traditional local grapes like the
fragrant canaiolo and colorino (which deepens sangiovese's pale ruby color) as
well as international grapes like cabernet sauvignon, merlot and syrah.
While I love 100 percent sangiovese Chiantis, I also believe that the
local grapes blend seamlessly with sangiovese, often enhancing it. The
international varieties, however, often dominate, intruding on and changing
Chianti's character.
In the 1990s it became common to see Chiantis that made full use of the
20 percent with these international grapes. This was an era of insecurity in
many historic European wine regions, but especially in Italy. Indigenous
grapes, even great ones like nebbiolo and sangiovese, vinified with
traditional techniques, produced wines that were often judged in need of
improvement.
When compared with wines embraced by international critics, particularly
Bordeaux, these Italian wines were thought to be too pale, too acidic, too
rustic. The solution was to adopt methods used in these more exalted regions,
like small barrels made of new French oak, rather than the traditional large
vats of old, neutral oak. Or to add what some have called "amelioration
grapes," like cabernet, syrah or merlot.
While Chianti was struggling to get itself on track, Brunello di
Montalcino in the 1980s and '90s had become a darling of American wine
critics, particularly those Brunellos that had taken their own steps toward
improvement.
Brunello by law must be 100 percent sangiovese, but by the 1990s, some
producers seeking darker, softer wines were sneaking in foreign grapes. This
came to a head with the Brunello scandal of 2008, when more than a million
bottles were impounded.
Since then, Brunello producers have reaffirmed their commitment to wines
made only of sangiovese. And, as has happened all over Europe, regions like
Chianti have seemingly overcome insecurities about their own traditions and
are making wines that are confidently distinctive, without resorting to the
international crutches of old.
Yes, I still run into Chianti Classicos that are rich and oaky, tasting
more of the chocolate of merlot than the cherry of sangiovese. In general,
though, the state of Chianti Classico is strong.
Chianti Classicos come in three tiers. The first, labeled simply Chianti
Classico, must be aged one year before it is released. Chianti Classico
Riserva must be aged two years, while the third, Gran Selezione, established
in 2010, must be aged 30 months, made entirely of estate grapes and approved
by a tasting panel.
I don't have much experience with the Gran Seleziones, I confess. I am
already challenged in general by riservas, which tend to be denser, richer and
potentially more complex than the plain Chianti Classicos. They can be
wonderful, but I think require considerable aging, 10 years or so, for their
intensity to mellow.
In general, I am happiest with ordinary Chianti Classicos, which run
roughly $15 to $30 compared with $40 to $100 for the riservas.
Far more interesting to me are the emerging subzones within Chianti
Classico centered around nine communes, stretching from, in the north, Greve
in Chianti and San Casciano in Val di Pesa to Castelnuovo Berardenga to the
south.
I would have to spend a lot of time in Chianti getting to know the
complexities of the soils and microclimates before speaking confidently about
the characteristics of each commune.
I can say, though, that wines from Castelnuovo Berardenga, like those
from Fèlsina, will often taste riper and rounder than those from, say, Radda
in Chianti in the midsection, like Montevertine's, which seem sleeker and more
elegant. If you want to dive deeper into the terroirs of Chianti Classico, I
recommend a book from Ian D'Agata, "Italy's Native Wine Grape Terroirs," to be
published this summer by University of California Press.
What of the wines from the greater Chianti region, those areas that are
not in the Chianti Classico zone? They can be called, simply, Chianti, or, if
they come from seven subzones, they are permitted to append a local
designation. They include: Chianti Rùfina, Chianti Colline Pisane, Chianti
Colli Senesi, Chianti Colli Aretini, Chianti Colli Fiorentini, Chianti
Montespertoli and Chianti Montalbano.
These wines are a lot less expensive than Chianti Classico, and some,
especially those from Chianti Rùfina, can be quite good.
Chianti Classicos to Try
Here are six excellent Chianti Classico producers (though one,
Montevertine, does not use the appellation).
Castellinuzza e Piuca Exquisitely balanced, almost textbook. (Oliver
McCrum Wines, Berkeley, Calif.)
Fèlsina Dense, ripe and rich Chiantis. (Polaner Selections, Mount Kisco,
N.Y.)
Fontodi Structured yet juicy wines. (Vinifera Imports, Ronkonkoma, N.Y.)
Monte Bernardi Fresh, earthy, mineral wines. (T. Edward Wines, New York)
Monteraponi Chiantis of purity and beauty. (Grand Cru Selections, New
York)
Montevertine Classic, pure sangioveses, labeled simply Toscana Rosso.
(Rosenthal Wine Merchant, New York)
Follow NYT Food on Twitter and NYT Cooking on Instagram, Facebook,
YouTube and Pinterest. Get regular updates from NYT Cooking, with recipe
suggestions, cooking tips and shopping advice.

[JCNorthway]

I've been a fan of the Felsina family - regular, riserva and Rancia - for the past 25 years or so. Year in and year out, they seem to make the most of what mother nature makes available. Lately the Rancia has become a bit pricey around $50 +/-, but sometimes I've found it in the low $40s, which I think makes it a decent value - if you can wait 5-10 years to drink it.

[JimHow]

Agreed, Jon. that seems to be my go to Chianti.

Hope you and Paula are having a good summer!

[JCNorthway]

Been good so far, though a bit warm this week. But we leave on Friday for two weeks in Italy - including a few days in Tuscany. So life is good.

[DavidG]

Is Chianti still all about tart cherries and acidity? That never satisfied my hedonistic palate, but I’ve shifted a fair amount the last few years. Maybe I should give them another try.

[JCNorthway]

David, I think whether because of global warming, better vineyard and vinification techniques, or both, recent Chianti vintages do not seem nearly as "tart" as they once did. The are still miles away from ripe Cali wines, but you might find them more to your liking than in the past.

[AKR]

I like Felsina too, but have been buying other producers e.g. Selvapiana, San Felice

A couple of summers ago I read Rosemary George's book on the DOC and it was pretty good.

https://www.wineberserkers.com/forum/vi ... p?t=143043

The wines do seem better than what was made 20 years ago or so, whether that's due to the benefits of global warming, or the important teachings of wine consultants.

[JCNorthway]

San Felice is also pretty consistently a decent bottling. I would say it is less structured and a bit rounder than some, so it could be a good starting point for those concerned about acidity or tartness.

[Nicklasss]

I like the two producers named here.

But I also like a lot Riecine.

Nic

[DavidG]

Thanks Jon. I'll look for a bottle of Felsina, Rancia or Riecine.

[AKR]

Many producers also make Super Tuscans that may be bdx varietals or sangiovese combined with Atlantic varietals.

Felsina has Fontallaro, San Felice has Vigorello, etc.

They are usually a bit more than their Chianti badged wines (runing $30-$100) but they can be interesting as well

Tignanello might have been the first one of that ilk?

A week or two ago I had the 2012 Isole e Olena, which was a bit on the lean side. I have not tried their Cepperello yet though.

[DavidG]

Arv, I like a number of super-Tuscan Cab/Sangiovese blends like Tig, though I don’t drink the often.

[Blanquito]

David, give a 2016 Chianti or Rosso di Montalcino a try. It seems the 2016s are common on wine lists at Italian restaurants right now, they're inexpensive and pair wonderfully with the cuisine. The 2016s have just a little bit more fruit than usual, from what I've tried, and not a hair out of place. I had a glass of the Coltibuono Chianti Classico at dinner out a few nights ago, and it was really good.

My favorite chianti might be Selvapiana's Riserva Bucerchiale. I haven't tried any vintage post-2009, but the 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2009 are all outstanding. Monsanto and Fontodi make excellent chianti as well. In general, I think nearly all chianti is at least drinkable, even the $7.99 bottles, and probably all of the good houses make an excellent one.

One comment on Felsina: Rancia is by far the most structured chianti out there in my experience-- the 2004 still needs time-- and the Fontalloro is pretty oaky and modern these days. The regular Felsina chiantis (the riserva and normale) are good but lack pizzazz.

[AKR]

I like the Buerchiale too, in the limited tasting. K&L just got some the 2015 in. I had actually set up a tickler to watch for it. It's not so widely available at retail out here.

I almost never buy cases nowadays, but their normale might one I would get in an good vintage.

Chianti is still living in a world price wise that is 1993, it seems.

But the quality is mostly better.

They are not to my taste, but some of the AFWE enthusiasts should consider a bottle of Castel' in Villa.

Their release cycle is not like typical producers either.