Smelly Masterpieces (Sanchez/Turin Review) - Page 5

Hmmmm. I'm starting to question this a bit more.

If you have different two scent molecules in suspension, they would each transmit their own vibrations (independently) and behave as notes in a chord. An imblance of notes would result in an imbalanced chord, while scents in good proportions should result in a reasonably tightly-wound blend.

However, a blended molecule forming form the reaction of peach + cumin making "peachcumin" should probably maintain all of the peach bonds plus all of the cumin bonds plus the bond between peach and cumin. This might wind up creating something a little more than the sum of its parts. How much energy is required to get peach and cumin to react is a question I cannot answer, but if they're game I guess it will happen under the right circumstances.

I wonder how chefs view this sort of thing. They make sauces all the time.

You're discussing both shape theory (which features different mechanisms for detection), and vibration, and our analogies may wind up at odds here, but...here goes.

IMHO, amplitude is a non-issue for either theory - either a receptor acknowledges a signal or it doesn't - you either register a molecule clicking into place (one at a time) or a vibration hits the nasal tuning fork at "peach" frequency. It seems amplitude is measured more by how many receptors register "peach" than by how loud the molecule is.

Molecules stay separate all the time, though...now that I think of it. The alcohol evaporates first, then the topnotes. If the topnotes were chemically combined with the heart and basenotes, then you wouldn't see any differing evaporative rates - they would all be these honking-big citrus/sage/thyme/musk molecules that loiter on your skin forever. So there may be chemical reactions here and there depending on the ambient conditions and friendliness of the constitutent molecules, but it's hardly a requirement.

IMHO - the only way I can think of to get such an algorithm would be through samples gathered at differing points within a given space - such as the receptors on the inside of the nose. The more receptors fire "peach" means the stronger the peach scent is registered.

Of course vibrational amplitude could likewise account for intensities but as you noted earlier you would be hard-pressed to discern a doubled amplitude if two scents both featured lemon notes - unless you have a backdrop against which to discern the lemon (i.e. - scent 1: lemon plus civet, scent 2: lemon plus sage. - the civet and sage would likely be overpowered by the common lemon. Maybe.)



I never meant to suggest that a new molecule was created but rather that our perception of the molecule would not be easily separated into its consitituent components. Your nose may register each scent separately (as in a gas chromatospectrograph (??)), but why are some perfumes so hard to pin down? A chypre consists of moss, bergamot, and labdanum, and I know this on an intellectual level, but I'm hard pressed to pick out the bergamot in Chanel PM. What registers isn't the components - but the overall effect.

Dior Homme for instance is iris, cocoa, leather, etc. I however get Lipstick and Cocoa Puffs. Alternately we can deconstruct Cocoa Puffs into...what...cocoa, corn syrup, flour, maltodextrin? maybe?

That said, back to the chord analogy - if your skin presents a harmonious note with the scents you apply (C-E-G)- then theoretically the scent should work for you. If your skin presents a dissonant note to the scent you apply, then you get B-C-D and a lot of nasty stares. There are very few holy grails and very few unmitigated disasters relative to body chemistry, IMHO, so we're not realy talking about Russian Roulette with a perfume bottle here.

Also, the amount of oil on your skin is probably enough to do the trick for nearly any Edt or Edp - given their concentrations, by mid-day you're probably equal in terms of fragrace:body oil ratio.

Re: disclaimer...whatever. You're actually thinking about this and making me think, too.

Turin's vibration theory means that smell is a quantum mechanical phenomenon, not a chemical one, with proteins in the nose effecting electron tunnelling to measure the vibrational frequency. He claims that this is one reason why shape advocates, who are traditionally biology people, get so freaked out by his theory. The interesting thing about his theory is that he's shown that the basic building blocks of his smell mechanism actually work --- eg. he's conducted electricity through the right kinds of proteins.

But it gets complicated. Turin is talking about the receptors --- the things that actually interact with the smelly stuff and generate some response. However, if smell is like a typical human sense there is still plenty of processing going on between the receptors and the brain, and this can affect how we perceive a smell. For example, in the ear, the signalling pathway friom the ear to the brain can be totally loaded up with a certain frequency of sound so that it ignores (and we don't get to hear) other sounds in its vicinity. This happens both in frequency and temporally.

Do the signal channels from the smell receptors have similar limits? If two smells are similar, can the presence of one mask the other, and how far apart (in smell) would they have to be to be smelled distinctly or as a new joint smell? Do they transition in a continuum from same to joint to distinct as they get further apart? I suspect the art of the perfumer partly involves finding these physiological limits, and playing around with them to get the effect they want.

An old professor of mine has a side project going on building an electronic nose, and their working theory on recognition is similar to the chord concept some people have brought up --- smells have fingerprints, and that's how we recognize them. No word on how much you can deconstruct a smell, though.

Just some food for thought.

--Andre

I forgot to mention that there is a Studio 360 interview on NPR that I've linked to before where Turin and Sanchez wander around a drugstore smelling stuff and commenting on it. They also talk about their personal preferences for perfume and the body oil affecting smell issue. It's worth listening to for both information and entertainment.

Another interesting Turin-Sanchezism that causes some controversy is that they don't really believe in masculine- or feminine-only scents.

--Andre

Malle similarly doesn't segregate their scents between men's and women's. However, I bought Kenzo Ca Sent Beau from their glowing review, and I find it utterly unwearable while I still sport a penis.

Heh, try Yatagan. I know a few women who wear it and it just seems...wrong.

A friend referred to Third Man as a "lesbian with a strap-on."