fragrances
reviews
My Signature
627 reviews
Similar to Chanel No 5 EDT, but cheaper and easier to wear. No 5 has a sharp, acerbic edge which belongs in an era when it was acceptable for a feminine fragrance to choke everyone out and make their eyes water. This is a softer, more modern approach to the same idea, albeit with almost as heroic and challenging a blast of aldehydes in the opening. The difference is the abundance of florals and citrus which accompany the abrasive chemical side. Everything is discernable here, and unilike no 5 I don't wince at the OTT scratchiness. Needless to say I prefer this, and so does my wallet. Update: Now my bottle has had a few days to macerate, the perfume has blossomed. Instead of BAM ALDEHYDES IN YO FACE, it's a less histrionic, smoother mix of sparkle, citrus and florals, with a very dainty bed of patchouli carrying it. FYI I have the new formulation and it's great. I'm not familiar with the old, and I don't see the point of bleating on about the differences and/or the fact it's lost...this phenomena is part and parcel of perfumery, suck it up.
Strong ambroxan, watery rest of notes. It's OK but it's not a masterpiece. Maybe it used to be. Also, I get more geranium than rose, with that specific mintiness that ofren comes with it, although geranium isn't listed. Lasts forever if you count the residue of ambrox-chemicals as perfume lasting.
Instant love. Whereas a lot of fragrances of this genre would have some harsh ambro-underbelly, this is smooth sailing right to the end. I'm surprised how I didn't find the harsh opening others have mentioned here. Santal 33 is way harsher to my nose.
Farmyard / barnyard joy. Love it
It's Le Lion de Chanel shot with a tranquilizer gun and blinded with talc. Very, very strong...don't overspray. It's a bit powdery for me, but it is a very good amber. Super high quality and affordable.
I can barely smell anything despite testing I varios different ways on skin and on card stock. What I can smell is a faint whiff of chemicals and some plastic.
It doesn't smell like the list provided by ELDO, but it does smell awful. A cynical marketing gimmick, more fool all of us who felt compelled by it.
Chemical choke-bomb. Absolutely terrible. Maybe they're trying to do a Sauvage, that would make sense.
I get good performance from this misnamed, creamy sandlewood scent. Indeed, for me it's a delicate but strong, slightly gourmand sandlewood, like a less obnoxious Santal 33 but with a tiny touch of cardamom. I get no oud, but I wasn't expecting any, as is the case with almost all perfumes which have "oud" in the name. It's a polite woody perfume, not unique, not worth the price, but pretty and very unisex all the same, so it does have merit. Many have mentioned Hayat here, and while it's nothing like Hayat (which is way more potent and much less sandlewoody), they do share, erm, perhaps I can say a "tone". I like Hayat, but it's much less wearable, and way more screechy and abrasive and has a strong lavender note. All in all, I don't get the love for this perfume, although it's by no means bad, but I have many other more interesting sandlewood scents I prefer to wear.
It baffles me that people complain about performance. I find this absolutely relentless, and as with many of the private blends, the charm wears off way before the perfume does. It smells remarkably similar to Orto Parisi's Stercus, a scent based on the smell of bumhole.
Beast-mode skanky jasmine sheen. Love it
If you've smelled Molecule 05 you'll recognise the cashmeran in Alien. To my nose it's 50% cashmeran, 30% ambroxan or some such similar amber base and 20% sweetened jasmine. It's undoubtedly genius and groundbreaking, and it's all the craftier for it's simplicity.