I have a tough relationship with Sangiovese. It seems a variety that I should like, yet I rarely do. Yet in a half-blind tasting of aged Montrose ('66-'76) I chose a fully blind joker wine as my favourite (Tignanello '86). I thought it was much like the Montroses, yet perhaps a tiny bit sweeter and more red toned in its aromatics. I haven't dared dismiss Tignanello after that stunning showing, though I rarely enjoy Super Tuscans.
Today I had a brief sip of the Tignanello 2004 (13,5% abv; 49,90€). Since it was just a brief sip, I have no idea if it was decanted for any period of time. Aromatically it was fully open, but very young. It seemed to have a true Sangiovese aroma about it: peanuts and red toned fruit. There is quite a bit of oak here and even a bit of that dreaded dill aroma I can't stand, but the oak doesn't mask the sandalwoody and savoury/herbal yet very primary fruit so I guess it might integrate well. I am a bit iffy on this, however (oakophobe that I am...)
The palate is sweet, the tannins are very soft but still bring enough grip, the acidity is moderate but the full-bodiedness of the holistic experience is frankly too much for my tastes (the tasting portion was c.5cl and I felt sated at that). If I could have some assurance that this will turn out as lovable for my tastes as the '86 I would buy a bottle or two, but as it is, I don't dare do so. Despite my rather negative comments, there is much to admire about this wine if you have somewhat differing tastes to mine: the Cab S and (always lovable) F didn't hide the Sangiovese aromatics, though often I find that is the case; it has a Tuscan feel to it despite the prefixed Super; there is some true depth and character in this (I just don't know if that character is such that I like, lol!).
-O-