1964 Prunotto Barolo

Community Tasting Notes (7) Avg Score: 92 points

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View Tree512's profile
  • Report Issue

  1/8/2021 - Tree512 wrote: 92 Points

  Still vibrant with lots of acid and tannin, classic rose petal and tar. Could have more fruit and probably would have been better 10 years ago, but still highly enjoyable.

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

• Options

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

  5/12/2016 - Lype Likes this wine: 92 Points

  Consistent with my notes dated 28 August 2012.

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

• Options

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

  8/28/2012 - Lype Likes this wine: 92 Points

  Clear translucent liquid, requires couple of hours to open but after that very nice and good, black tea and pruney notes, attractive. The golden vintage.

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

• Options

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

  5/18/2010 - vindictive wrote:

  Very nice traditional barolo from a bottle with excellent fill and appearance. The cork was solidly seated and had to be extracted in a piecemeal fashion. The wine was decanted through a filter and breathing for about 3 hours - it needed it. Classic citrus, camphor, tar, roses all emerging gradually. Very tannic of course. This really improves with time in the glass, acquaintance and proper food - in this case morel pasta, parmesan and bacon cooked brussel sprouts. As is often the case with great, aged barolo, the last glass was the best. Alfred Prunotto made great wines in the 60s and 70s.

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

• Options

  • Post a Comment
  • View Serge Birbrair's profile
  • Report Issue

  7/9/2009 - Serge Birbrair wrote:

  Not great but very decent aged Nebbiolo. The wine was older than the ladies at the table, I think they were all impressed by that fact even more than by the wine itself. I personally think 1967 was better vintage.

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

View all 7 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.