or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Scent/Fragrance of the Day thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Scent/Fragrance of the Day thread - Page 1612

post #24166 of 25669
yeah I don't really own too many solids and given the choice always prefer at least an oil, or of course ideally an alcohol/synthetic base.

I have tried the diptyque and Kilian ones and they were nice, but would and do own the perfume versions instead
post #24167 of 25669
Quote:
Originally Posted by crdb View Post

I think it's because the vegetation in Australia is so different (you're an Aussie, right?) - at least based on my experiences in Sydney and Perth and Gold Coast. Australian plants are more resinous or tropical. I grew up in France where the fields would get covered in dandelion, and the flowers smell sweet and edible and the grey flying things were irresistible to play with as a kid. So I broke my fair amount of dandelion stems which especially in summer after cutting the grass have a smell similar to Grey Flannel (in that it's got that plant sap feel to it). And naturally if you've ever as a kid tried to taste the sap from a dandelion.. might look like milk but it's bitter. So, I associate the smell with the bitterness of fresh cut dandelion. But I think some of it might just be the utter lack of any gourmand notes.

Interesting association between memory and scent, something I've thought a lot about. Yes the Australian high summer when the sun begins to climb and heat forces the oil out from eucalyptus and pine trees during the day or the scent of roses and lavender near twilight while knocking back a Martin Miller and Tonic..
post #24168 of 25669
like a few recent posters i feel like this is the kind of rabbit hole i could easily start getting lost down.

hey @Master-Classter , did you say you wrote a primer for beginners? can you link to it?

the mrs. got me some creed, van cleef + arpels, acqua di parma over the years, to give a brief reference point.

would something like this be a reasonable jump-off point? 3 ml sprays?

http://theperfumedcourt.com/Products/Intermediate-Mens-Sampler---Best-Mens-Scents---11-samples__INTERMEDIATEMENS.aspx
post #24169 of 25669
Yep, go to Basenotes.net, the subforum of just starting out, and then there should be a sticky thread (which is horribly in need of an update I admit) called 'the resource archive for self-education about fragrance'. It's a good starting point!
post #24170 of 25669
SOTD is MFK Lumiere Noire. Kurkdjian may be my favorite perfumer. Everything he has made (including the scents for other companies) is beautifully constructed. The only criticism to be made of him is that his scents may be a little too perfect if you're looking for something edgy.
post #24171 of 25669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambulance Chaser View Post

SOTD is MFK Lumiere Noire. Kurkdjian may be my favorite perfumer. Everything he has made (including the scents for other companies) is beautifully constructed. The only criticism to be made of him is that his scents may be a little too perfect if you're looking for something edgy.

You know, you're absolutely right about that last statement - that has been my experience as well and I think he's a fantastic perfumer, his creations feel just too seamless for me. This is ridiculous, I know. The first time I smelled Elie Saab I was blown away with its quality and tried my best to get my ex to wear it to no avail. He has a very light and restrained touch.

Today I'm wearing Chanel Eau de Cologne.
post #24172 of 25669
Amour de Palazzo by Jul et Mad. This is the perfect comfort scent. It's a warm scent with clove and lots of labdanum, but it's also just a bit animalic. As I've mentioned hundreds of times, this is one of my favorite perfume houses.
post #24173 of 25669
L'Inc, did you get samples of Jul et Mad through Luckyscent?
post #24174 of 25669
Quote:
Originally Posted by tropics View Post

like a few recent posters i feel like this is the kind of rabbit hole i could easily start getting lost down.

hey @Master-Classter , did you say you wrote a primer for beginners? can you link to it?

the mrs. got me some creed, van cleef + arpels, acqua di parma over the years, to give a brief reference point.

would something like this be a reasonable jump-off point? 3 ml sprays?

http://theperfumedcourt.com/Products/Intermediate-Mens-Sampler---Best-Mens-Scents---11-samples__INTERMEDIATEMENS.aspx

The Basenotes thread is indeed epic in its breadth. Depth? I don't feel qualified enough to judge.

 

If I had to add a little:

 

1. Maybe avoid buying 3ml sprays straight off the bat. Instead, get the minimum size of more stuff (and if you can smell at the mall first; although watch out for exciting top notes to get you to buy, followed by a boring drydown), try them a couple of days each (never more than 2 at the same time), and explore what you like that way. Scent is ultimately very personal, a lot less "objective" as a field than, say, classic menswear. Where you grew up, with whom, what you did with your life all impact how you perceive things. And also what your partner will say once you've sprayed the thing! And I think you can't know until you've tried a lot of stuff properly.

 

2. I love to get insights from the great/famous names first, and use that as a starting point to spider my knowledge acquisition, particularly in very subjective fields. Who are big names who wrote about perfume? Roudnitska is well represented in that thread and probably the most prolific. JC Ellena is another one. Luca Turin is probably the biggest name on the review side, in part for qualitative reasons (for example comparing in detail vintage vs reformulations, and giving background info on perfumers), in part because he was one of the first to publish critical writing in an industry where ridiculous PR was the norm. Forcing yourself to read through his Perfumes book is one way to pick up many of the ideas and famous names/perfumes - my initial purchases were basically LT's 5*s. Roja Dove's book is basic, but I think a nice introduction. Both Roudnitska and LT argue that an artist or amateur should expand his culture in all fields in order to get a better appreciation of one (and LT even paired perfumes with classical music in one instance, touching briefly on the link between pieces and their perfumery counterpart). Creativity doesn't happen in a vacuum kind of thing.

 

3. the house and the perfume are incredibly dissociated, with some exceptions (Guerlain was a family-run business for a century with a very specific house style). Look at all the names that have done stuff for Amouage, or the places that Kurkdjian has turned up on commission before opening his house. So often, a brand means little in perfume beyond price point, and some houses (including at least one of those you mention) have gained a reputation of often "overcharging for cheap boring stuff". Now, a perfumer is, him/herself, a "brand" as well, and whilst they do have to eat and therefore occasionally succumb to the right bribe in exchange for knocking out a cheap formula built via market research, it can be quite interesting to follow the intellectual path taken by a perfumer over time (e.g. Ellena's gradual move to minimalism). 

 

4. vintage is really worth it. Pre-1960s, perfumery like couture were for a very different market. Houses were run by dictatorial artists who accumulated taste and knowledge and curated their employees' work (or, in Guerlain's case, were often the perfumer). The works from that era are monsters of complexity and intelligence, and use natural materials which have since been banned and give them depth and a certain roundness you don't find with modern works as often. Some vintage are impossible to find e.g. Nombre Noir, Lutens' first. Others are cheap-ish because they were popular back in the days - Habit Rouge, Cabochard... def worth a try.

 

5. in the case of deciding not to bother with the hobby, it's important to note that perfumery is fashion driven and the very nose of everybody around you is going to change with the fashion, because exposition drives learning and taste as well. This much more so than with clothing, again. So you have to be careful to pick a set of mainstream scents that the people you interact with currently like, and unlike a Savile Row suit cut in a timeless classic style (whatever you think that is) it will not age well. Stereotypically, 80s were about projection, 90s about boring, aquatic notes, etc. (considering most perfumes today are designed via market research, and the market adapts to like what is given to them, makes you wonder about the feedback loops...). 

 

"GLHF" as they say.

post #24175 of 25669
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNS View Post

L'Inc, did you get samples of Jul et Mad through Luckyscent?

I got my first set of samples through STC. But all the rest have come from Indigo Perfumery.
post #24176 of 25669

SOTD is MFK Aqua Vitae Forte. Nice cologne. I hated it 2 weeks ago, because of the cardamom. I love it today, because of the cardamom, which tames the orange blossom. Candidate for weekend cologne going forward? Maybe.

post #24177 of 25669
Quote:
Originally Posted by crdb View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tropics View Post

like a few recent posters i feel like this is the kind of rabbit hole i could easily start getting lost down.


hey @Master-Classter , did you say you wrote a primer for beginners? can you link to it?


the mrs. got me some creed, van cleef + arpels, acqua di parma over the years, to give a brief reference point.


would something like this be a reasonable jump-off point? 3 ml sprays?

http://theperfumedcourt.com/Products/Intermediate-Mens-Sampler---Best-Mens-Scents---11-samples__INTERMEDIATEMENS.aspx
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
If I had to add a little:

1. Maybe avoid buying 3ml sprays straight off the bat. Instead, get the minimum size of more stuff (and if you can smell at the mall first; although watch out for exciting top notes to get you to buy, followed by a boring drydown), try them a couple of days each (never more than 2 at the same time), and explore what you like that way. Scent is ultimately very personal, a lot less "objective" as a field than, say, classic menswear. Where you grew up, with whom, what you did with your life all impact how you perceive things. And also what your partner will say once you've sprayed the thing! And I think you can't know until you've tried a lot of stuff properly.

2. I love to get insights from the great/famous names first, and use that as a starting point to spider my knowledge acquisition, particularly in very subjective fields. Who are big names who wrote about perfume? Roudnitska is well represented in that thread and probably the most prolific. JC Ellena is another one. Luca Turin is probably the biggest name on the review side, in part for qualitative reasons (for example comparing in detail vintage vs reformulations, and giving background info on perfumers), in part because he was one of the first to publish critical writing in an industry where ridiculous PR was the norm. Forcing yourself to read through his Perfumes book is one way to pick up many of the ideas and famous names/perfumes - my initial purchases were basically LT's 5*s. Roja Dove's book is basic, but I think a nice introduction. Both Roudnitska and LT argue that an artist or amateur should expand his culture in all fields in order to get a better appreciation of one (and LT even paired perfumes with classical music in one instance, touching briefly on the link between pieces and their perfumery counterpart). Creativity doesn't happen in a vacuum kind of thing.

3. the house and the perfume are incredibly dissociated, with some exceptions (Guerlain was a family-run business for a century with a very specific house style). Look at all the names that have done stuff for Amouage, or the places that Kurkdjian has turned up on commission before opening his house. So often, a brand means little in perfume beyond price point, and some houses (including at least one of those you mention) have gained a reputation of often "overcharging for cheap boring stuff". Now, a perfumer is, him/herself, a "brand" as well, and whilst they do have to eat and therefore occasionally succumb to the right bribe in exchange for knocking out a cheap formula built via market research, it can be quite interesting to follow the intellectual path taken by a perfumer over time (e.g. Ellena's gradual move to minimalism). 

4. vintage is really worth it. Pre-1960s, perfumery like couture were for a very different market. Houses were run by dictatorial artists who accumulated taste and knowledge and curated their employees' work (or, in Guerlain's case, were often the perfumer). The works from that era are monsters of complexity and intelligence, and use natural materials which have since been banned and give them depth and a certain roundness you don't find with modern works as often. Some vintage are impossible to find e.g. Nombre Noir, Lutens' first. Others are cheap-ish because they were popular back in the days - Habit Rouge, Cabochard... def worth a try.

5. in the case of deciding not to bother with the hobby, it's important to note that perfumery is fashion driven and the very nose of everybody around you is going to change with the fashion, because exposition drives learning and taste as well. This much more so than with clothing, again. So you have to be careful to pick a set of mainstream scents that the people you interact with currently like, and unlike a Savile Row suit cut in a timeless classic style (whatever you think that is) it will not age well. Stereotypically, 80s were about projection, 90s about boring, aquatic notes, etc. (considering most perfumes today are designed via market research, and the market adapts to like what is given to them, makes you wonder about the feedback loops...). 

"GLHF" as they say.

You make some very good points, and I admire your "scholarship" into the great minds of past and present perfumery. Context is extremely important, but one context you find important and which I do not is the work environment. You've brought up before how someone should let the industry in which they work influence what one wears as a fragrance, and while certain industries carry an expectation on what clothing to wear it's my belief that for it to include what kind of fragrance to wear then you're imposing an unnecessary limitation on an expression of yourself that shouldn't be influenced by others. So much of the fragrance experience is for the wearer, and if you worry about what others think then you first need to look at how much you apply.

Also, I do happen to recommend 3 mL sprayers, unless you can get a smaller amount and it still be applied with an atomizer. I think small dabber samples are a pain to use and are hard to dose. This application has always been appropriate for parfum concentrates but eau de toilette and eau de colognes I just don't get the same smell experience, and if you're doing this sampling with the objective to ultimately buy a full bottle then you want the most germane sampling method.

This evening I am wearing Portrait of a Lady .
post #24178 of 25669
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNS View Post

...

Also, I do happen to recommend 3 mL sprayers, unless you can get a smaller amount and it still be applied with an atomizer. I think small dabber samples are a pain to use and are hard to dose. This application has always been appropriate for parfum concentrates but eau de toilette and eau de colognes I just don't get the same smell experience, and if you're doing this sampling with the objective to ultimately buy a full bottle then you want the most germane sampling method.
...

As a newbie and current owner of 20+ 0.x ml pretty much useless (at least to me) dab samples, I can only wholeheartedly second this. If the intended application is spray, an atomizer sample is essential.
post #24179 of 25669
Quote:
Originally Posted by HORNS View Post


You make some very good points, and I admire your "scholarship" into the great minds of past and present perfumery. Context is extremely important, but one context you find important and which I do not is the work environment. You've brought up before how someone should let the industry in which they work influence what one wears as a fragrance, and while certain industries carry an expectation on what clothing to wear it's my belief that for it to include what kind of fragrance to wear then you're imposing an unnecessary limitation on an expression of yourself that shouldn't be influenced by others. So much of the fragrance experience is for the wearer, and if you worry about what others think then you first need to look at how much you apply.

Also, I do happen to recommend 3 mL sprayers, unless you can get a smaller amount and it still be applied with an atomizer. I think small dabber samples are a pain to use and are hard to dose. This application has always been appropriate for parfum concentrates but eau de toilette and eau de colognes I just don't get the same smell experience, and if you're doing this sampling with the objective to ultimately buy a full bottle then you want the most germane sampling method.

This evening I am wearing Portrait of a Lady .

It's not quite what I meant. Let me attempt a more nuanced explanation. 

 

The Japanese have captured the essence of it in the concept of honne/tatemae (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honne_and_tatemae). Tatemae is the public facade, the spelt out rules, the spoken etiquette ("don't put your elbows on the table!")... the myth (political manifestos). Honne is the "truth", what is actually going on, including the unspoken rules (realpolitik as opposed to "principles"). Various environments, cultures and times have different levels of honne.

 

Yes, we know it's a bad idea to have shirt pockets on a trading floor in London (increasingly less so), and in many McKinsey offices around the world, you will be verbally instructed to wear only white or light blue shirts during training. But, is a Silicon Valley company necessarily looser? I can think of at least one big tech group where people are pressured into wearing T-shirts/shorts/jeans instead of shirts/chinos, preferably with humoristic hipster logos, and those who do not comply are socially ostracized. The tatemae is that there is no dress code, we're all techies here, it's ok. The honne is that there is a dress code (and more generally the oddly evasive and undefined concept of "culture fit" - see: http://www.newyorker.com/cartoons/a19287) and the cost of not adhering to it is actually almost higher than in banking or consulting - hell, I knew an engagement manager who wore green and brown suits bought in the local supermarket to client board meetings and he was still the top ranked EM in the region. Talking of tech companies, I know many startups where again, officially there is no dress code, but somehow all the executives are wearing jeans + white/blue shirts and a Rolex or IWC Portuguese...

 

My point is, there's a social cost to wearing the "wrong kind" of scent in many work environments, and you have to think about what it is (might be negligible at your workplace), whether you're willing to pay, and especially whether you can afford it thanks to your social capital being high enough (which is how the EM got away with his suits; you could almost argue it's a form of signalling, telling the world you CAN afford it). Extreme example from a controversial CEO who likes to spell out the honne: http://www.alexstjohn.com/WP/2016/04/21/i-apologize/

 

As for quantity, I think it depends on budget. If you're happy spending hundreds of dollars in trials, yes, indeed the spray is a much superior application method. But looking at what I personally like to order - niche, like MFK or AbdesSalaam, or vintage - the prices really send up the total order value. Take the earlier recommended Enigma by Roja Dove. On TPC, a 1/4ml is $6.95; the 1.5ml glass spray (the smallest) is a full $41.99 - 6x as high and perhaps 1/5th of a typical 20-30 vial order for me. What if you hate the thing? I personally prefer to go vial first, try it a few times, and if I like it or at least think it worth trying further, reorder on a larger spray size - the mini-vial being a "sample of sample", not something you'd use daily per se. Of course, if you're order Caron PUH, where the 3ml spray is only $6.95, this is less of an issue.

 

Also personally again, I like to dig into the history of perfume and so buy many things that I don't think I'll ever wear - like Nahema or l'Heure Bleue vintages... or, eventually, Mitsouko, the Holy Grail - in order to at least understand how we got where we are today. Or perhaps, grab a few oud scents - say, from perfumers who treat it as a Middle East reference, versus those like MFK who prefer to play around with its facets as if it was a normal Western perfumery ingredient - to gain a better understanding of how the material is worked. Again, vials will win out there.

 

(One last minor issue with sprays: my last TPC order had a spilt spray, because TPC packed all the sprays really tightly with no protective material in between. The box smelled very nice as a result but the spray was empty. The vials were similarly packed, but are much more resistant by virtue of their wall thickness to size ratio, and their much tighter lid. Cost of doing business, I guess.)

post #24180 of 25669

On MFK AVF: the only two notes I can detect, or at least that drive the show for me, are orange blossom and cardamom.

 

There's a really strange effect in play where both have great longevity, but orange blossom's projection distance is perhaps 2-4x larger than cardamom. So most of the time I smell predominantly orange blossom (like Diptyque Eau des Sens), and every so often I move and my shirt moves a block of air with cardamom closer and I get the pair again. All the other citrus notes are long gone.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Scent/Fragrance of the Day thread