1996 Renato Ratti Barolo Marcenasco

Community Tasting Notes (13) Avg Score: 90.6 points

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View AdVinoRosso's profile
  • Report Issue

  8/28/2020 - AdVinoRosso wrote: 88 Points

  Pleasant with tannins and acids showing up after an hour or so. Better than expected on the tail end of its drinkability range.

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View Fractalage's profile
  • Report Issue

  12/27/2018 - Fractalage Likes this wine: 91 Points

  I'm upgrading my score as here is my experience with this bottle as I finished it off 3 days after opening.
  
  This magnum, I had brought home from my art studio, tipped upright and let rest for 3 weeks before opening. To make sure it was settled enough I shined an LED flashlight through the bottle. It looked clear through to the bottom.
  I had opened and decanted with light shining through (I never use a candle, but that same LED flashlight) the bottle so that I could see when the sediment started to smoke drift. I stopped at that point, but apparently my transporting from cellar had disturbed enough sediment so that a whole quarter bottle remained.
  The decanted portion I drank over the next two days and comprised my previous review, where you'll see that I was not too impressed.
  
  The quarter bottle that remained I left open and undisturbed on my table for 3 days. Then I decanted off the sediment enough for 3 glasses.
  Immediately it tasted fresher. Those delicious classic Barolo zone notes were all there.
  Nose was very bright and floral with distinct rose and herbs.
  Palate was full, dense with explosion of flavors of tarry roses, orange rind, finishing very long with asphalt and smoke. Excellent flavor.
  I paired with roasted duck and apples with potatoes in jus and kalamata olives: Great combo and pairing.
  Though it was the same wine, that quality of roughness that rather spoiled it for me previously was not there, until about 2 hours in. It indeed showed back up on the last glass. Air in abundance did not serve this bottle.
  I had still a half glass in my original decanter from the first day and it was flat.
  
  In summary, don't give this bottle too much time with incorporated air.
  
  The dregs were very delicious with excellent thick tar and floral herbs.

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View Fractalage's profile
  • Report Issue

  12/25/2018 - Fractalage Likes this wine: 89 Points

  From magnum.
  Decanted Christmas Eve.
  Used Durand. Cork was in great shape.
  Notes will follow over 48 hours.
  
  Summary:
  Not even close to the best Barolo I've yet had. If this were my first Barolo experience I would not have pursued this zone so ardently. Was disappointed as the name and year held such high esteem, but reviews fell short for a reason. Mediocre Barolo at best, but still enjoyable to drink. It's dense flavor cut the fat of Christmas duck with apple. Roses were there. Herbs were there. Tar was there though very minimal. Sage and citrus rind poked through, but there was a continual rough edge of rustic cheap that kept prevalent. It kept and stayed rough. That rough texture lended to a feeling of inexpensive/bourgeois nature that I've not yet tasted from Barolo. Maybe this lends to the price obtained at auction.
  If I had to choose again another Chistmas wine it would not be this one.
  
  Sips without food, as a magnum gives plenty of room for that since no one else is enjoying wine with me on Chistmas, brings density of buildup that conveys ever more with each a tarry aspect laiden with orange rind that makes this more enjoyable.
  
  For sure, this bottle has not hit its peak. I'm degusting a teenager. Even at over 24 hours decanting it's still too soon.
  Tomorrow will give more insights.
  It's crazy tannins persist even after 22 years.
  
  As this wine coats my tongue, it does not want to leave. It lingers all over my mouth: A plague of tannins that hold various flavors of rind and plum skin. Some smoke is prevalent but a sort of fig residue persists.

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View neruda11's profile
  • Report Issue

  11/14/2015 - neruda11 wrote:

  I'm afraid our bottle hadn't made it the distance...ill give it a non-rating as others have had recent successful outcomes...

  Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View ChristP's profile
  • Report Issue

  1/10/2015 - ChristP Likes this wine: 92 Points

  Second of two bottles opened (see previous note 12/19/2014). The cork in this 2nd bottle also had some seepage about 50% along its length as might be forgiven with a bottle this age. It was nowhere near as severe as with the first. The cork in fact put up quite a good fight, indicating that the seal was good. This time the aroma when decanting was very pleasant. On first taste, this had fresh acidity, some light fruits, dry tannins but a nice deep red colour. Two hours later, floral notes were emerging with roses and some red fruits to the fore but no tar. The body had also firmed up with beautiful complexity and rounded tannins that made this bottle an absolute pleasure – in fact all that I had expected of a Barolo with this pedigree and age. There is little likelihood of serious improvement from here, but the wine is still holding its own for now. However, the older these bottles get the more that can go wrong, so I would advise anyone with stock to enjoy over the next couple of years but not wait much longer than 2016-2017.

  1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment

View all 13 Community Tasting Notes

Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews below. Learn more.