I frequently think how the world of wine has changed over the last twenty years, in some cases, very quickly. It is unavoidable not to think about how certain “fads” were born, raised and exalted to the extreme, and then began their decline, therefore disowned, no less, considered as phenomena that it is good to keep hidden, even when they are part of the winemaking process used. These behaviours practically occur in every wine-growing country in the world, however, in Italy it seems to me this is a recurring phenomenon and changing with the fads, indeed, opportunities, of the moment. When a new enological fad or trend appears, I always think it is going to be a phenomenon waiting to fall into oblivion with a lot of fierce hostility. When this happens – that is, the occurrence of the more or less inglorious end – the old Latin saying always comes to my mind: sic transit gloria mundi (Thus passes the glory of the world).

 One of these “phenomena” is undeniably the barrique. Do you remember when, in the 1990s, this magical word was enough to sell a wine, even of dubious quality? In Italy, many bottles showed off, prominently on the labels, even the abominable neologism barriccato – or barricato (meaning “aged in barrique”) – to emphasize that divine nectar promised heavenly emotions for having being kissed by the barrique. Grape composition? It wasn't important: it's barriccato, everything else is irrelevant and insignificant. Every winery, in case it wanted to enter the enological heaven, had to show off the barriques, both in the aging rooms and on the labels. In those days, when visiting the wineries of certain producers, the sight of the magical Bordeaux-style casks was followed by the solemn announcement of the number of barriques owned. Moreover, in some wineries the barrique was the only type of barrel used. Any wooden container with a volume greater than 225 liters had been sacrificed in favor of the magic barrique.

 There was also a sort of competition in showing off the number of months spent by the wine inside the barrique, so much so that – in many cases – the poor wine succumbed under the weight of so much wood that erased its identity and quality. Who cares about that, it is barriccato. Indeed, in some cases, the producer – while tasting his or her wines – triumphantly and with a quite high pride emphasized the aroma and the flavor of the barrique in the wines. It was a praise, unquestionable proof of the highest quality. A sort of competition which inevitably led to the exasperation of organoleptic homologation as, in many cases, the wine was almost indistinguishable from the aromas transferred from the barrique. All the wines were the same, all proudly barriccato with the noble and cumbersome oak smell. There seemed to be no break from the barrique rush and producers, in order not to be outdone by others, cheerfully poured the most disparate and unfortunate wines into the small Bordeaux barrels looking forward in the coveted enological miracle.

 As a consequence, a huge quantity of grapes, slender and thin wines ended up being poured in the barrique, totally crushed by the weight and personality of the new and well-toasted oak, with the result of producing an alcoholic infusion with a wood flavor and which were soon called “carpenter's wines”. At the beginning – let's admit it – these wines were also “fun” to taste, despite the outrageous enological result, and soon they ended up boring and exasperating everyone, producers included. I remember, in those days, every time I tasted a wine strongly marked by what the barrique had copiously given the wine, to my mind always came the famous quote of Émile Peynaud, the great French winemaker, one of the most influential and important of the last century, which has left us – not least – a rich and important enological bibliography. The great French winemaker, among the many things he said about the use of wood in enology, said «the best wine aged in wood is the one where you cannot perceive the wood». He also said «the wood had to be used in the wines the way aromatic herbs are used in cooking, to help the other aromas stand out better».

 Following these quotes by Émile Peynaud, another famous saying of the French winemaker promptly came to my mind: «It is you (consumers) who in a certain sense make quality. If there are bad wines it is because there are bad drinkers. Taste conforms to the crudeness of the intellect: everyone drinks the wine he or she deserves.» Evidently, in those days, the taste of wine drinkers – good or bad – greatly appreciated the taste of wood. When a product is liked and sold, of course, it continues to be produced, with all due respect to Émile Peynaud and his teachings. The fad for carpenter's wines – this is how wood-flavored wines were jokingly called in those days – regarded not only Italy, but also other wine-producing countries of the world, such as the United States of America, Australia, Chile and Spain. In some cases, even France – which is the homeland of the Barrique – was not saved by this fad and it happened to have in the glass some French wines unexpectedly slaughtered by the barrique.

 This phenomenon, like I was saying, has progressively led to the organoleptic exasperation of the wines, so much so that from the enthusiasm we progressively passed to the indignant refusal. Since the beginning of the 2000s the “barrique fad” was heading towards its sunset as well as the horrendous term “barriccato” disappeared from the labels. The barrique, blamed of being the primary culprit of the sensorial homologation of wines, had to somehow disappear from the consumers' imagination. But not in that of the producers who, despite the infamous accusation of homologation, have continued – and continue – to use it. Of course, not in the way they did in the past, they have probably and finally understood the real role of the barrique, which certainly is not that of obscenely altering the sensorial characteristics of wine. Producers, today, continue to use the barrique but, in many cases, they are even afraid to admit it, to such an extent that, often, they even avoid mentioning it in the production sheets of a wine.

 In order not to disturb the serenity of enthusiasts who, in the meantime, have developed a repulsion and aversion to the barrique, who still believe it is the absolute evil, many producers prefer to call it with more acceptable names. On the back labels of the wines and in the relative production sheets, we can see an interesting and flourishing use, often even imaginative, not least, misleading, of alternative terms alluding to the barrique without ever expressly mentioning it. Small wood, small barrels, oak barrels, carato barrels, small oak and so on. In the case of carato – the typical small Italian barrel – the term is clearly inappropriate and misleading, both for the volume and for the use when compared to the barrique. In any case, this is always better than mentioning the dreaded 225 liter Bordeaux barrel and arousing the indignation of the wine “purists” who only dream of uncontaminated and “true” nectars in their glasses, in accordance with the most rigorous and orthodox of traditions.

 Whenever I read these “acrobatic” attempts to sugar the pill, avoiding the word barrique but alluding directly to it, this always makes me smile. It is just like what happens on the labels of certain food preparations in which monosodium glutamate is present – an ingredient added to the black list of true connoisseurs of good food since quite long time – and everyone is happy and reassured when they don't read it on the labels but find, for example, yeast extract. Happy and reassured, they celebrate the good news with a tasty chip of aged Parmesan cheese, in which monosodium glutamate is notoriously and naturally contained and not added. I think it is superfluous to remember the barrique – in itself – is not at fault, rather the fault goes to the responsibility of the ones who used it, or continues to use it, in an inappropriate or excessive way. The barrique is neither good nor bad: it is simply a wine making tool, I would add, very important and useful, and when used in an appropriate and correct way, it is – for certain wines – fundamental and essential. Even when it is affectionately called small cask, small oak or small barrel, “it six of one, half a dozen of the other”.

 The history of wine grapes is always fascinating and surprising, often revealing unsuspected journeys reaching a place from distant places, sometimes also introducing new styles, viticultural and enological technologies. The reasons why grapes travel from one place to another, frequently, more than one, are generally and historically known. One of the most recurring reasons is due to colonization, with the “conquering people” introducing – besides their own cultures and habits – also their wine grapes into the new colonies. In this regard, as far as the enological history of Italy is concerned, the contribution given, in this sense, by the ancient Greeks is decidedly significant. As it is widely known, many of the varieties still cultivated today in Italy – in particular in the southern territory of the country – are evidently of Greek origin.

 Another reason which led to the introduction of wine varieties in other countries is the consequence of commercial exchanges as well as of travelers, missionaries and merchants, who, returning home, brought with them the varieties of the distant places they had visited. In certain cases, the determination of the origin of a grape is not always possible, both because of the lack of reliable and verifiable information, as well as for the impossibility of detecting analogies and affinities with other varieties. Last but not least, the history of grapes has sometimes been literally rewritten by the results of researches, in particular those conducted at the genetic level, which have sometimes allowed to confirm or deny the origins of different varieties. The grapes we are going to evaluate in this month's tasting by contrast – Malvasia Bianca and Ribolla Gialla – perfectly represent these two cases. Both varieties identify with the places and territories where they have been grown since time immemorial and in which they have adapted perfectly, so much so that today they are considered native Italian varieties.

 When talking about Malvasia it should always be pointed out that, with this name, it is meant a large family made of both white and red grapes varieties. Furthermore, it is a family of very ancient origins and with a decidedly long and fascinating history. It is no coincidence that Malvasia grapes are among the oldest known varieties, today widely spread all over the Italian territory and, last but not least, in its homeland: Greece. In Italy, the number of varieties defined as “Malvasie” is decidedly vast, so much so that in many regions there is at least one grape belonging to this large family and, last but not least, territories with Denominazione d'Origine Controllata (Denomination of Controlled Origin, DOC) which provide for their use in wines, both white and red. Among the many white berried representatives belonging to this large family, are mentioned Malvasia Bianca Lunga, Malvasia Istriana, Malvasia del Lazio, Malvasia delle Lipari, Malvasia di Candia and Malvasia di Sardegna. Among the red ones, the most known ones are Malvasia Nera, Malvasia Rossa, Malvasia di Casorzo and Malvasia di Schierano.

 The varieties belonging to the Malvasia family are appreciated, in particular, for the aroma of their wines which, in some cases, directly recall grape juice. This characteristic makes them consider by some as semi-aromatic varieties, even though they do not possess the strength and intensity of the real varieties defined as aromatic. The wine we are going to evaluate this month is, in truth, one of the many produced in Italy with at least one member of the Malvasia family, in particular, the one produced in the territory of Amelia, in Umbria and in the province of Terni. The territory is classified as Denominazione d'Origine Controllata (Denomination of Controlled Origin, DOC), and is among the largest in the region, particularly appreciated for its white and red wines, including monovarietal ones, such as Amelia Malvasia. It is a white wine and, according to the disciplinary, it is produced with at least 85% of Malvasia Toscana, more properly known as Malvasia Bianca Lunga. Amelia Malvasia is generally fermented and aged in inert containers – both steel and cement – however some producers prefer to carry out these operations in wooden barrel as well.

 For a long time, Ribolla Gialla – the famous white berried variety from Friuli-Venezia Giulia – was considered to be an original variety of Kefalonia, Greece, and, specifically, a clone deriving from the historic Robola grape. According to other theories, it has been supposed Ribolla Gialla had been introduced in its historical territory – Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Slovenia – by the ancient Romans. Today, thanks to research conducted on the DNA of Ribolla Gialla, it has been possible to found out the absence of genetic analogies with Robola, thus denying its Greek origin. It is very probable that it is a native variety of Collio, the large hilly area located between Gorizia, in Italy, and Goriška Brda, in Slovenia. It is however certain to be a variety present in this area from time immemorial and of which we have written evidence dated back to 1256, mentioned in a notarial document. Even today, Ribolla Gialla is among the most representative varieties of Collio, both on the Friulian and Slovenian sides.

 Gorizia Collio, on the Italian side of Friuli-Venezia Giulia, is characterized by a wine production which has always expressed levels of excellence and quality. In this important wine-producing territory of the region are in fact produced some of the most famous white and red wines of Friuli-Venezia Giulia and, among the whites, those produced with the autochthonous Ribolla Gialla definitely stand out. From an enological point of view, this interesting white berried variety is capable of extraordinary interpretations. With this grape, in fact, are successfully produced dry white wines, vinified both in inert containers and in wooden casks, as well as sparkling wines, also with the classic method, with an interesting sensorial profile. Furthermore, Ribolla Gialla is particularly appreciated in the production of white wines which provide for the maceration of the skins in the must, a fundamental technique for the so-called orange wines. The production disciplinary of Collio, just like most of the Italian disciplinary, in the definition of monovarietal wine provides for the use of the indicated variety for a minimum of 85%, a condition which is obviously applied for wines produced with Ribolla Gialla as well.

The color of Collio Ribolla Gialla

 Before starting this month's tasting by contrast, as usual, let's buy the two bottles we will pour into our glasses. The wine to be more difficult to find is certainly Amelia Malvasia, also considering the volumes produced in its territory and the relative presence in the market. Undeniably easier to find a bottle of Collio Ribolla Gialla, as it is one of the most produced wines in the area and, therefore, widely available on the market. In both cases, these are wines which can be found in every good wine shop. For the composition of the two wines – considering what is provided for the respective production disciplinary – we will make sure they are both produced exclusively with the varieties indicated on the label. We will also choose wines fermented and aged in inert containers, possibly steel tanks, therefore excluding any interpretation in cask. As for the vintage, we will make sure to get most recent one. The two wines are poured into their respective tasting glasses at a temperature of 10 °C (50 °F).

 Let's pour Amelia Malvasia and Collio Ribolla Gialla in the glasses and start this month's tasting by contrast, proceeding – as usual – from the analysis of appearance. The first wine we examine is Amelia Malvasia, therefore, by tilting the glass over a white surface, let's observe its base in order to evaluate the color, which in this wine is clearly pale and brilliant straw yellow. By placing an object in contrast between the glass and the white surface, we clearly see a very high transparency. Let's now pass to the evaluation of nuances, therefore let's observe the wine towards the opening of the glass, where the thickness is thinner. The color which can be observed is greenish yellow, not only a typical shade for wines produced with Malvasia Bianca, but also the sign of its young age. Let's now pass to the evaluation of Collio Ribolla Gialla and – by tilting the glass over the white surface – we can see an intense straw yellow color, deeper than Amelia Malvasia. Also in this case transparency is very high, whereas nuances confirm the straw yellow base color.

 The olfactory profiles of Amelia Malvasia and Collio Ribolla Gialla are decidedly different and distant from analysis. The grapes used for the production of these wines, in fact, are characterized by olfactory profiles expressing different aromas, although it is possible to perceive some similarities. Malvasia Toscana – variety used, according to its disciplinary, for the Umbrian wine and which should be better called Malvasia Bianca Lunga – is considered by some as a semi-aromatic variety, because of the moderate scent of grape juice which is sometimes perceptible in its wines. In this regard, it should be observed that, when it is perceived, the aroma of grape juice is never as intense and clear as the one perceived in properly defined aromatic grapes. The olfactory profile of Ribolla Gialla, on the other hand, does not have any quality that can recall aromatic varieties. In both cases, these are grapes with excellent olfactory profiles and a well-defined character, in which are clearly perceived aromas of white and yellow flowers and fruits.

 Let's continue the sensorial analysis of the wines of our tasting by contrast and proceed with the evaluation of their olfactory profiles. The first wine we will examine – as in the previous phase – is Amelia Malvasia. Let's hold the glass in vertical position and, without swirling, proceed with the first smell in order to appreciate the opening of the wine, that is its primary and identifying qualities. From the glass we can recognize intense and clean aromas of pear, peach, apricot and broom, sometimes followed by a moderate aroma of grape juice. Let's now swirl the glass, an operation favoring the development of the other aromas, and proceed with the second smell. The olfactory profile of Amelia Malvasia is completed with aromas of hawthorn, apple, plum and pineapple, to which is added the distinct scent of almond. Let's now pass to the evaluation of the opening of Collio Ribolla Gialla, therefore – by holding the glass in vertical position and without swirling – let's do the first smell. From the glass we perceive intense and clean aromas of apple, pear and hawthorn, frequently followed by the scent of peach. After having swirled the glass, the olfactory profile is completed with broom, jasmine, lemon, pineapple and plum.

 We now pass to the evaluation of the gustatory profiles of the two wines, starting from Amelia Malvasia, just like the previous phase. Let's take a sip of the Umbrian wine in order to evaluate its attack, that is the primary gustatory sensations. In the mouth is perceived a pleasing crispness and a moderate body, followed by the pseudo-burning effect of alcohol, with a moderate intensity however enough to make the wine balanced. In the mouth are perceived flavors of pear, apricot, apple and peach, therefore expressing good correspondence to the nose. Let's proceed with the evaluation of the attack of Collio Ribolla Gialla, therefore take a sip of this wine. In the mouth Ribolla Gialla is appreciated for the pleasing crispness given by acidity and which finds immediate balance in the effect of alcohol, decidedly higher than Amelia Malvasia as well as its structure, clearly more robust. In the mouth are perceived the flavors of apple, pear, peach, pineapple and lemon.

 We have reached the end of this month's tasting by contrast, let's therefore proceed with the evaluation of the final sensations the two wines leave in the mouth after swallowing, in particular the taste-olfactory persistence. The finish of Amelia Malvasia is persistent, leaving the sensation of pleasing crispness in the mouth with a moderate structure. We can also perceive the flavors of pear, apricot, apple and peach to which is added the characteristic bitter taste of almond. The finish of Collio Ribolla Gialla is persistent as well and, like in the previous wine, in the mouth is clearly perceived the sensation of crispness given by acidity. In this wine we can detect a much fuller structure as well as the flavors of apple, pear, pineapple and lemon. Before concluding the tasting, let's evaluate again the olfactory profiles of Amelia Malvasia and Collio Ribolla Gialla, by holding the glasses in vertical position. The differences between the two wines are still clear and distant.

 In this section are published news and information about events concerning the world of wine and food. Whoever is interested in publishing this kind of information can send us a mail to our address.