The place for all things wine, focused on serious wine discussions.

WTN: 95 v. 96 Roagna La Rocca e la Pira

Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker

no avatar
User

Oswaldo Costa

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

1902

Joined

Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:30 am

Location

São Paulo, Brazil

WTN: 95 v. 96 Roagna La Rocca e la Pira

by Oswaldo Costa » Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:08 am

Both were opened half an hour before serving and not decanted, possibly a mistake. Served in Burg bowls.

1995 Roagna Barolo La Rocca e La Pira DOCG 13.5%
Nose more feral and expressive. Deep cherry, leather, chalk, blood iron. Vibrant acidity and mouth-puckering tannins overwhelm fruit before food, but promise balance with food. Body on the medium side, wanted a little more weight.

1996 Roagna Barolo La Rocca e La Pira DOCG 13.5%
Nose more elegant and restrained. Bacon, tar, blood iron. Well-balanced combo of expressive fruit, fresh acidity and satisfying body. Tannins not as obtrusive as in the 1995.

I preferred the 96. Both were fine but not magical. A half bottle of the 96 in September of last year (from a different batch) was more pleasing. Both seem to have just entered the drinkable phase, and could last way longer, at least 10 more years.

The flavors described above were all faint, like the remnants of outlines in Kandinsky’s landscape paintings from the teens, landmarks in the transition to abstraction. It was more about the gestalt than the detail.

Kandinsky Landscape with Rain 1913.jpg

Landscape with Rain, 1913, Solomon Guggenheim Museum, New York
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"I went on a rigorous diet that eliminated alcohol, fat and sugar. In two weeks, I lost 14 days." Tim Maia, Brazilian singer-songwriter.
no avatar
User

Lou Kessler

Rank

Doesn't buy green bananas

Posts

3517

Joined

Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:20 pm

Re: WTN: 95 v. 96 Roagna La Rocca e la Pira

by Lou Kessler » Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:40 pm

Oswaldo Costa wrote:Both were opened half an hour before serving and not decanted, possibly a mistake. Served in Burg bowls.

1995 Roagna Barolo La Rocca e La Pira DOCG 13.5%
Nose more feral and expressive. Deep cherry, leather, chalk, blood iron. Vibrant acidity and mouth-puckering tannins overwhelm fruit before food, but promise balance with food. Body on the medium side, wanted a little more weight.

1996 Roagna Barolo La Rocca e La Pira DOCG 13.5%
Nose more elegant and restrained. Bacon, tar, blood iron. Well-balanced combo of expressive fruit, fresh acidity and satisfying body. Tannins not as obtrusive as in the 1995.

I preferred the 96. Both were fine but not magical. A half bottle of the 96 in September of last year (from a different batch) was more pleasing. Both seem to have just entered the drinkable phase, and could last way longer, at least 10 more years.

The flavors described above were all faint, like the remnants of outlines in Kandinsky’s landscape paintings from the teens, landmarks in the transition to abstraction. It was more about the gestalt than the detail.
We were fortunate to see the special Kandinsky exhibit last year at The Guggenheim. Hopefully you did too, it was really great. :D

Kandinsky Landscape with Rain 1913.jpg

Landscape with Rain, 1913, Solomon Guggenheim Museum, New York

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot, Amazon, ClaudeBot, Google AgentMatch, iphone swarm and 0 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign