This was so much better a year ago. Still great but the fruit was a lot more fresh and intense. This bottle showed a ton of mature fruit however the tannin was in perfect balance. Texture was really soft but the tannin supported it nicely. Color was more brown but had a pretty garnet center. This was my fourth bottle. I'm contemplating holding the other bottle for a bit thinking this bottle may be an outlier. The other bottles over the years were just so spectacular that I'm shocked it feel off so quickly in 16 months.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Solid cork with limited seepage. Clear red-brown color. Complex aromas of dark fruit and leather. With time floral notes and spicy red fruit. Very dry finish which also improved with aeration. Clean pure, well integrated wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Small vintage, and it shows. Wine was lovely, perfumed with menthol, but a little tired and out of balance. Nice expression of Monprivato, of which it has all the characteristics, but not the best example of how much it can give.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Notes from memory. Served cool maybe too cold. Shy nose without depth or much complexity but also from a relatively poor vintage. Taste is slightly metallic but this is just a detractor. Otherwise in good shape and likeable.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
While this wine has a solid nose of cherry and a hint of herbs and perhaps soft cedar, and a lovely dark and tart cherry presence on the palate, it develops no secondary flavors or profile and in my view simply falls short of its reputation. I enjoyed it for sure, but it is not what it purports to be in my book.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Really so disappointing. Wine is faded and relatively one dimensional, not at all what i hoped for from a Mascarello Riserva. But i am also of the view that recent vintage Barolo, 1990s and younger, are simply not the wines of their predecessors. They do not live up to their pedigree any longer as a general statement, no at all limited to either one producer or one vineyard.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Roses and tar along with red summer fruit. Quite lean on the palate and a bit of a let-down after the wonderful nose. I'd wait or decant more before serving this.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Good colour, good weight and balance, but no fruit and not much tertiary interest - plenty of savoury leatheriness but no lift. Improved marginally over an hour. Very nice but either past its prime or (given the density) in a deep sleep.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Bottle variation. Young impression at first, fresh, nice tannins, balanced. Lots of roses on the nose. After some time a bit mest stock on the nose. I am starting to wonder if there is enough fruit for more years of life. Drink now.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Drunk at Felidia, New York, December 30, 2009. Light amber at center turning to brick at rim. Initial impression enormously positive: mushrooms, a bit of truffle, very faint tar, some barnyard, some flowers, though probably not violets (Lyle Fass suggests geraniums, but didn't get that). Medium body, still noticeably tannic. As we sipped, most of the tannins were resolved and the wine became very pleasant to drink. Not the revelation I'd hoped for, but a very nice wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
6/9/2022 - Joe Gabagool Likes this wine:
This was so much better a year ago. Still great but the fruit was a lot more fresh and intense. This bottle showed a ton of mature fruit however the tannin was in perfect balance. Texture was really soft but the tannin supported it nicely. Color was more brown but had a pretty garnet center. This was my fourth bottle. I'm contemplating holding the other bottle for a bit thinking this bottle may be an outlier. The other bottles over the years were just so spectacular that I'm shocked it feel off so quickly in 16 months.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/7/2021 - DH90 Likes this wine: 91 Points
Solid cork with limited seepage. Clear red-brown color. Complex aromas of dark fruit and leather. With time floral notes and spicy red fruit. Very dry finish which also improved with aeration. Clean pure, well integrated wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/9/2018 - Jonathan A A Likes this wine: 90 Points
Small vintage, and it shows. Wine was lovely, perfumed with menthol, but a little tired and out of balance. Nice expression of Monprivato, of which it has all the characteristics, but not the best example of how much it can give.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/13/2018 - Mascarello59 wrote: 89 Points
Notes from memory. Served cool maybe too cold. Shy nose without depth or much complexity but also from a relatively poor vintage. Taste is slightly metallic but this is just a detractor. Otherwise in good shape and likeable.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
6/19/2016 - Ajnate wrote:
While this wine has a solid nose of cherry and a hint of herbs and perhaps soft cedar, and a lovely dark and tart cherry presence on the palate, it develops no secondary flavors or profile and in my view simply falls short of its reputation. I enjoyed it for sure, but it is not what it purports to be in my book.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/3/2015 - Ajnate wrote:
Really so disappointing. Wine is faded and relatively one dimensional, not at all what i hoped for from a Mascarello Riserva. But i am also of the view that recent vintage Barolo, 1990s and younger, are simply not the wines of their predecessors. They do not live up to their pedigree any longer as a general statement, no at all limited to either one producer or one vineyard.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/17/2012 - Rani wrote: 91 Points
Roses and tar along with red summer fruit. Quite lean on the palate and a bit of a let-down after the wonderful nose. I'd wait or decant more before serving this.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/13/2012 - presterjohn wrote:
Good colour, good weight and balance, but no fruit and not much tertiary interest - plenty of savoury leatheriness but no lift. Improved marginally over an hour. Very nice but either past its prime or (given the density) in a deep sleep.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/13/2011 - bamawine wrote: 94 Points
This is my concept of classic barolo-tar , roses leather-enjoyable wine from a consistent producer
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/12/2011 - Karl Kristian wrote: 87 Points
Bottle variation. Young impression at first, fresh, nice tannins, balanced. Lots of roses on the nose. After some time a bit mest stock on the nose. I am starting to wonder if there is enough fruit for more years of life. Drink now.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/27/2010 - Karl Kristian wrote: 84 Points
Young, too tannic. Good with raindeer filet.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/31/2009 - MichaelJennings wrote: 90 Points
Drunk at Felidia, New York, December 30, 2009. Light amber at center turning to brick at rim. Initial impression enormously positive: mushrooms, a bit of truffle, very faint tar, some barnyard, some flowers, though probably not violets (Lyle Fass suggests geraniums, but didn't get that). Medium body, still noticeably tannic. As we sipped, most of the tannins were resolved and the wine became very pleasant to drink. Not the revelation I'd hoped for, but a very nice wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment