A friend of mine recently shared with me a bottle of 2007 Domenico Clerico Barolo Pajana, a remarkable wine that was quite approachable in spite of barolo’s reputation. When we began to discuss the “Barolo Wars,” a documentary but also a conflict between traditionalist and progressive winemakers, he insisted on pouring the 2007 Azelia Barolo Bricco Fiasco to demonstrate the difference.

Traditional barolos undergo a short maceration — 15 to 30 days — and then are put into neutral oak barrels for several years before release. The newer style, introduced in the mid-1980s, shortened the maceration time to about 10 days and then aged the wine in French oak. The traditional wines were tannic monsters because they were exposed to the skins for a longer period of time — as long as 3 weeks! Skins are the primary source of tannin and these barolos were monsters that required another decade of cellaring. The newer process sped up the drinkability factor with less skin exposure and French oak. These wines could be enjoyed within a few years of aging and were even enjoyable on release.

Traditionalists argued these modern wines didn’t represent the history of the region or the wine and tasted more of oak. But the progressives said the public liked them more. Eventually, the dust settled and now you can find both styles in the market. It behooves the consumer to understand which style they are buying because these can be very expensive wines.

Both of the wines I tasted were extraordinary. The Azelia was aged 24 months in a mix of oak — Slavonian, French and Austrian. Maceration was 55 days. The Wine Advocate gave it 95 points. The Domenico Clerico Pajana was macerated for half the time and aged 16 months in barrique. Domenico Clerico, who recently died, was called one of the progressive “Barolo Boys.”