Parfums Retro Grand Cuir

Posted on by

Grand Cuir was another inclusion in the March 2014, Olfactif package. Its copy tells me to expect a leather, smooth and unique. Dove right in.

Grand Cuir

Grand Cuir

In Bottle: Fresh, smooth and animalic upon first sniff. Heavy like a classic fragrance but lacking that “aged” feel you’d get from a vintage.

Applied:  I get an initial burst of freshness upon initial application. Woodsy and leathery with a lick of herbal. Grand Cuir is a chameleon, it changes before I can put a finger on what I expect it’s trying to smell like. There’s a note of stickiness to it as well, like an animal creeping around in the woods. I think that ultimately is how I’d describe this, something primal creeping around in some glorious woods. There’s a note of a flower bed, a hint of clean, and a dusting of leather. Grand Cuir fades down to a clean, light scent at the end. Complex with a good bit of throw and longevity, Grand Cuir is interesting at the very least. Not my kind of thing, but it’s something to consider if you want a smooth leather.

Extra: Grand Cuir was a more recent launch in 2013 and designed by Hugh Spencer. There’s also a rather interesting interview with Jeffry Dame about Parfums Retro you should check out.

Design: Very simple bottle, somewhat retro in design as well so I’d have to say they hit the visuals right on the mark. Good and clean, nothing garish. Well done bottle and design overall.

Fragrance Family: Woodsy Leather

Notes: Labdanum, birch tar, clary sage, orange flower, lavender, carnation, rose, violet, geranium, cinnamon, tarragon, pine, moss, sandalwood, rosewood, patchouli, musk.

No vanilla in this, but I don’t think it really needs it. At least, I got no vanilla. I was perfectly happy with the cute soda-like opening and the mellow, relaxing florals in the middle. The woods note in this is fantastic too. You can get your hands on Parfums Retro’s Grand Cuir from Olfactif.

Reviewed in This Post: Grand Cuir, 2013, Eau de Parfum.

Ineke Sweet William

Posted on by

I was wowed into trying Sweet William from seeing its packaging. There are two things I can’t resist (okay, there’s actually  a lot of things I can resist, but these are the two I can think of right now) 1) perfume, 2) books. You slap those two things together and you might as well just take my money right now.

Sweet William

Sweet William

In Bottle: Sweet William opens with a sweet and spicy peach with a smooth application of clove.

Applied: The fragrance goes on so light and sweet and pretty that I feel like putting on a flowery dress and frolicking in some random fields. The peach is so uncandy-like (thank goodness!) that it almost verges on a spicy orange opening. Sweet William is girly with a dose of spice to make sure it’s not all silliness and has a little bit of sophistication as well. The mid-stage is a sweet carnation with a soft beautifully done sandalwood and vanilla waft. Its dry down marks no sharp notes, no stray and misused cedar or patchouli at all. It’s a lovely, soft, warm spicy woods. Just lovely!

Extra: Sweet William by Ineke is a part of a limited edition collection of scents called Floral Curiosities. The packaging is adorable, and I was delighted to find that the sampler collection comes in what appears to be a book.

Design: The bottle itself is fairly similar to other Ineke 75mls, packaged in a lovely box and looking very nice. I have to shamefully admit that I would rather get the travel spray just because it’s packaged in another adorable book box. I’m a little obsessed with this packaging, you see.

Fragrance Family: Woodsy Spicy Floral

Notes: Peach, cinnamon, clove, carnation, sandalwood, cedar, patchouli, vanilla.

At the time of this writing, I haven’t yet tried the other fragrances that come with the sampler (I highly recommend giving this a try, especially if you’re looking for something outside of the standard department store fare for someone extra special), but I’m already delighted enough with Sweet William that I wonder what the others will be like. If nothing else, the beautifully done Sweet William has my vote.

Reviewed in This Post: Sweet William, 2013, Eau de Parfum.

Balenciaga Florabotanica

Posted on by

Florabotanica is a new Balenciaga release from 2012. After their Balenciaga Paris release, I had to give this one a try. If for nothing else than its beautiful bottle design.

Florabotanica

Florabotanica

In Bottle: A nice rose, tame and green and fresh. Not fake and overly sweet.

Applied: Balenciaga’s fragrances tend to excel at being understated and Florabotanica seems to be heading in that same direction. It’s sold as a fragrance for a younger audience, but doesn’t patronize them by loading itself up with fruits and a cheap-smelling rose. The rose in Florabotanica is well-mannered, having a fresh green spicy kick to keep it on the ground. The dry down is a nice grassy amber with a prominent rose. I get an impression of Juliette Has a Gun’s Lady Vengeance with a little less concentrated prettiness and more girlish charm.

Extra: Florabotanica was released in 2012 with Kristen Stewart as the campaign figurehead.

Design: Love the bottle design. Bold, modern and fashionable. I was somewhat questionable about them using Kristen Stewart as the face of the fragrance, but I love everything from the styling to the photography to the campaign itself. It’s stern and not at all silly.

Fragrance Family: Floral

Notes: Mint, rose, carnation, amber, vetiver.

The thing Florabotanica reminds me of is preppy clothing. It makes me think I’m shopping in some teenage store where all the teenagers play water polo, have stables of horses, and have parties on their yachts. I don’t know why it makes me think of this but the fresh, screaming clean rose just sort of fits the imagery. It’s not Lady Vengeance as I think Juliette Has a Gun’s rose fume was a little more likeable but Florabotanica is a good, pleasant addition all the same.

Reviewed in This Post: Florabotanica, 2012, Eau de Parfum.

Hermes Bel Ami

Posted on by

I’ve been on a chypre bender lately, wanting something full-bodied and classic once again. Enter Hermes Bel Ami, which inspired an hour-long look at some new Hermes scarves.

Bel Ami

Bel Ami

In Bottle: Now, it should be noted that I have the newer formulation of Bel Ami, so this isn’t a true vintage chypre. It’s one of those “modern” deals. But Hermes did a good job with it, sweet, deep, masculine and woodsy.

Applied: Sweet upon application with a nice bergamot and lemon opening. The spiciness is only a hint in this fragrance. What I’m getting the most out of it is a deep, rich leather scent with a hint of animal and a big dose of earthiness from the orris. There’s a pleasant touch of cedar in the background that doesn’t overwhelm but is in there enough to give the fragrance a hint of woodsiness. The herbal notes probably lend a tempering effect to this fragrance as it’s more of a blast of leather than anything else. I can see where the chypre construction in this lies and it’s fabulous, but it isn’t quite what I’m looking for. Still a really great, strong, masculine scent with a very interesting composition and a great sense of projection.

Extra: Bel Ami was released in 1986 and has, unfortunately, been reformulated a few times, I suspect. Still, it smells pretty good for having been tinkered with over the years.

Design: Bottled simply, and somewhat reminiscent of some other Hermes bottles. Looks classical and functions pretty well. No one is going to immediately notice this bottle, but it’s a joy to look at it nonetheless.

Fragrance Family: Chypre

Notes: Mandarin, sage, bergamot, lemon, cardamom, patchouli, orris, carnation, basil, jasmine, cedar, leather, coconut, vanilla, oakmoss, vetiver, styrax, amber.

So Bel Ami isn’t really my thing. I don’t go crazy much for this much leather as it tends to smell too bold for me. But it is still a very well constructed fragrance.

Reviewed in This Post: Bel Ami, ~2000, Eau de Toilette.

Roger & Gallet Oeillet Bleu

Posted on by

Much thanks to Deb at LuvParfum for a sample of Roger & Gallet’s Oeillet Bleu. My obsession with vintage fragrances hits a peak every time I visit her website. I really don’t know what’s stopping me from buying everything in sight.

In Bottle: Unmistakably vintage with a spicy floral opening. I get carnation in a big way, in the sort of way you don’t get these days because big carnation like this could scare off those faint of heart.

Applied: Spicy carnation. Lots of floral and plenty of clove to leaven it. This is green but makes me think of oranges and reds instead. I guess I needed a color that embodied the heat and passion that I get when I smell this. Oeillet Bleu is vibrant even after all these years and has a beautiful leathery vanilla base that complements it painfully well. I wasn’t sure if I would continue to like the leather in this, but it proved me wrong. Oeillet Bleu is something of a soliflore. I don’t get much else outside of carnation and the buttery base, but it’s one of the best carnations I’ve ever experienced. It’s also one of the most convincing and long lasting.

Extra: Released in the late 1930s, Oeillet Bleu or Blue Carnation was a major hit for Roger & Gallet. I’m not sure when they decided to take it off the markets, but it was truly a sad day and I haven’t smelled a carnation quite as pure as this yet.

Design: Oeillet Bleu came in a few forms, the one I kept seeing was a somewhat unassuming ribbed glass flacon with a blue cap and matching blue label with the house name and fragrance name on it. Its designs are all perfectly beautiful in the classic way. It definitely reminds me of an era long gone.

Fragrance Family: Soliflore

Notes: Carnation, clove, vanilla, leather.

It needs to be said that things are truly unfair when some of the finest smelling fragrances are discontinued. Ah well, happy Valentine’s Day!

Reviewed in This Post: Oeillet Bleu, ~1950, Eau de Toilette.

Miss Dior

Posted on by

Miss Dior, unlike her younger sister (Miss Dior Cherie), is a smart, sophisticated woman who enjoys the finer things in life but doesn’t let it get to her head. She’s humble and complex with a classical charm that Miss Dior Cherie can never beat.

Miss Dior

Miss Dior

In Bottle: Green with a prominent aldehyde quality to it and a dusting of florals.

Applied: Sharp green aldehydes that are a bit of a sting on the old nostrils. Miss Dior goes on strong and powerful, hits you with a wave of classical perfume and reminds you of what a real chypre ought to smell like. Nothing like the lilting chypres of today that have been toned down and have lost their oak moss. Miss Dior is the full force of chypres upon application. As the fragrance ages, she smooths out a bit taking on a powdery quality to me with a warm sensuality that works in the complexity of the fragrance. It’s hard to describe complex fragrances for me because breaking them down into components and saying, “I smell this and now I smell this” would ruin the experience. Instead let me just say that Miss Dior smells like a vintage with an aldehyde and floral mid-stage prominent in neroli and jasmine and is every bit the chypre that she’s supposed to be. The fragrance dries down into a lovely rich flowers, forest and buttery leather scent that makes me want to stick my nose to my wrists and deeply inhale.

Extra: Miss Dior was released in the late 1940s and was composed by Jean Carles and Paul Vacher. Like most (if not all) classics that have survived till today, Miss Dior has been reformulated. The version I’m reviewing in this post is reportedly from sometime in the 1970s. I have not tried the more readily available, “Miss Dior Originale” yet, but I do have a sample of that so I will be trying it eventually.

Design: Miss Dior seems to do everything better than Miss Dior Cherie. The bottle has a classic look, but one that will never go out of style. While it’s a familiar shape to Miss Dior Cherie, Miss Dior’s more grown-up style and beautiful textured glass sets it a class above its younger counterpart. Miss Dior doesn’t need a bow on its neck to exude femininity, basically.

Fragrance Family: Chypre

Notes: Aldehydes, gardenia, galbanum, clary sage, bergamot, carnation, iris, jasmine, neroli, lily of the valley, rose, narcissus, labdanum, leather, sandalwood, amber, patchouli, oak moss, vetiver.

It probably sounds like I’m ragging on Miss Dior Cherie a lot in this post, and I am. It’s not that Miss Dior Cherie doesn’t accomplish good things as a modern gourmand that appeals to younger women, it’s just that Miss Dior–who sometimes gets confused with her younger counterpart–gets a lot of bad press from people who accidentally picked her up thinking she’ll smell anything like the candy-like Miss Dior Cherie. Then come the proclamations that Miss Dior “smells like old lady”, and that’s just unfortunate.

Reviewed in This Post: Miss Dior, ~1970, Eau de Toilette.

Estee Lauder Beautiful

Posted on by

A pleasant surprise arrived for Christmas 2011–a book of perfume samples. Many of the fragrances were new and I was just thrilled. Estée Lauder’s Beautiful was one of the first I pulled out and giddily peeled back the flap to smell.

Beautiful

Beautiful

In Bottle: Extremely floral and a bit powdery. There’s no floral standing out, it’s just a big homogenous bouquet at the moment.

Applied: Initial hit of citrus then the floral bouquet rolls into town and takes over the whole operation. From then on, it’s all flowers all the time. Now, I love a good floral fragrance. But the key is balance and moderation. It seems like those are the two things missing from this iteration of Estée Lauder’s Beautiful. I heard the original Beautiful is a far different animal. So don’t turn yourself off from the classic based on what I say about this contemporary version. The florals in Beautiful really do smell like a confused mish mash that doesn’t quite know what it wants to do with itself. The scent seems to suffer a bit from over composition where there are too many ingredients vying for space and there just isn’t enough space to go around. The result is a fragrance that people can distinguish as “flowery”, but no one can truly say what kind of flower. I’m not the kind of person who just likes smelling like a bunch of flowers. I wanted more depth to it than this, but Beautiful settles into it’s explosion of florals in the midstage then ends it all with a bit of cedar at the end as my nostrils continue to burn from the florals thrown at me earlier.

Extra: The first iteration of Beautiful was released in 1985. It has since gone through a few cosmetic changes and some formula changes. I do not have any access to classic Beautiful, which is a real shame as I’d love to see how it compares to this.

Design: The bottle is reminiscent of Calvin Klein’s designs. I want to say Obsession for Women comes to mind when I look at this, but Beautiful is a little easier on the eyes. It’s metallic cap really helps pull it together a little more.

Fragrance Family: Floral

Notes: Bergamot, lemon, cassia, fruit, blackcurrant, galbanum, mimosa, magnolia, carnation, chamomile, tuberose, orange blossom, freesia, lilac, narcissus, jasmine, neroli, clary sage, violet, iris, lily of the valley, ylang ylang, marigold, geranium, sandalwood, myrrh, vanilla, vetiver, cedar.

As I looked up the notes list for this one, I found every single source listed an enormous amount of stuff. I just ended up picking out what I thought I could get out of this. In the end, I’m sorry, Beautiful, but you really just smell like flower stuff.

Reviewed in This Post: Beautiful, 2011, Eau de Parfum.

Yves Saint Laurent Kouros

Posted on by

Every time someone asks for a strong, long-lasting fragrance marketed toward men someone else is bound to suggest Kouros.

Kouros

Kouros

In Bottle: Holy cow, it’s strong. Yeah, I’d say it lives up to its reputation. Bergamot, I think is what I’m smelling with a lot of aldehydes and some drowning florals.

Applied: All right, I understand why a lot of people hate this fragrance. They were kidding when they said it was strong. If you were thinking of getting this because you wanted a strong (with italics and everything) fragrance then Kouros will make you happy. Well, it’ll make you happen if you happen to enjoy powerful animalic fougeres. Kouros starts off with a big hit of bergamot that’s bolstered with a ton of aldehydes and a spicy herbal treatment that adds to the masculinity of the fragrance. You’re going to see a lot of hyperbolic language in this post because this stuff is strong. Period. It’s a bit screechy at first, and if you’re not used to strong fragrances, you will get a headache or your nose will be overwhelmed. Let Kouros rest on your skin for a while and it’ll develop into a deeper more animal fragrance that introduces another round of spices and a bit of incense. This is complex defined with its classical personality paired with an 80s Powerhouse underbelly. The dry down never seems to come with this stuff as it’s just so strong and so dominant that I can only say by the time I had to shower it off, it still smelled finely of smoke, musks, spice, florals and confidence.

Extra: Kouros was released in 1981. Named after a Greecian statue that typically depicts a youth in a standing pose.

Design: Not the most interesting bottle to look at, but I do notice the relative simplicity of men’s fragrance packaging compared to women’s fragrances. Kouros is a fine design though. It’s simple but functional, would not look out of place on a man’s wardrobe or wherever he chooses to use his cologne. It’s nice to hold, easy to use, and has an excellent sprayer.

Fragrance Family: Fougere

Notes: Aldehydes, artemisia, coriander, clary sage, bergamot, carnation, patchouli, cinnamon, orris root, jasmine, vetiver, geranium, honey, leather, tonka bean, amber, musk, civet, oakmoss, vanilla.

Despite being so strong Kouros hits a nice and reasonable ground with me so that I don’t find it repulsive and strong. It’s a good fragrance, it’s very strong, and it’s considered close to the classics. If you can handle it’s strength then you’ll be very happy with it.

Reviewed in This Post: Kouros,  ~2000, Eau de Parfum.

Knize Ten

Posted on by

Picked up this classic out of the pile today. I had heard of Knize Ten on various fragrance boards and saw it had a lot of love and praise so I was very excited to see how I’d react to it.

Knize Ten

Knize Ten

In Bottle: Strong leather up top with a mixture of notes that reminds me of motor oil or rubber. I know my fiance, whose love of things that smell like car garages would love this.

Applied: Once again a very heavy leather note up top with a few notes that remind me of rubber or motor oil. Just something really heavy and mechanical. This makes me think ‘masculine’ right away as it has a very strong initial personality. If you keep wearing Knize Ten it mellows out a bit, turning into a soft, plush leather fragrance with a hint of floral to back it up. It’s rich, sophisticated and very complex as all classics tend to be. I love it, but I would probably love it more on a man than myself because I can’t see myself rocking this with the same kind of style due to my penchant for lighter fragrances. Anyway, Knize Ten develops into this fabulous comforting leather. The kind of warm, plus leather you can wrap yourself in. The ‘motor oil’ fades so if you were concerned about that aspect, it did fade for me. Also keep in mind that it is hard to pin point exactly what Knize Ten is aside from a really, really good leather. It’s constantly evolving but remains a very nice comforting, luxurious fragrance. The dry down is marked with a warm amber quality and a hint of balancing patchouli.

Extra: Knize Ten is a classic fragrance from the 1920s and it smells like it too. It’s complex and unlike most modern men’s scents in that it has a fabulous balance of notes. It was composed by François Coty and Vincent Roubert.

Design: Fairly simple design choice for this fragrance but it’s a quality-looking fragrance bottle made of quality materials. Feels nice in the hand, has a good weight to it, isn’t awkward to hold or spray and looks simple and tasteful. Overall, a nicely done design.

Fragrance Family: Classic

Notes: Lemon, bergamot, orange, petitgrain, rosemary, geranium, rose, cedar, orris, carnation, cinnamon, orange blossom, sandalwood, leather, musk, moss, patchouli, ambergris, castoreum, vanilla.

Knize Ten is beautiful. I just can’t see myself wearing it, but I can definitely see a man with this fragrance. It’s warm, comforting, and sophisticated at the same time. Not to mention it’s a classic which almost always wins extra points. I’m just not sure how old my sample is.

Reviewed in This Post: Knize Ten, ~2000, Eau de Toilette.

Karl Lagerfield Sun Moon Stars

Posted on by

I saw the bottle, said, ‘No way!’ and decided it had to be tried. I don’t actually have a bottle or held a bottle of this but I do have a somewhat aged sampler vial.

Sun Moon Stars

Sun Moon Stars

In Bottle: Strong fruitiness up top. That’s pretty much all I get.

Applied: Very strong and sweet fruits up top in this fragrance. It’s the candy version of fruit and it’s a bit nauseating. I read some of the reviews on this one before I tried it and many people report a synthetic quality to the fragrance. I almost want to explain that particular problem on the over eager fruit opening. The sweetness does settle down in the mid-stage where the soft florals roll in with a spicy carnation making a pretty big impression to me. The  fragrance ends on a very nicely done vanilla with sandalwood. Normally I’d loathe the standard sandalwood vanilla mixture but the fragrance does it so well that I can’t fault it for taking a trope and doing it justice.

Extra: Sun Moon Stars was released in 1994 as a fabulous floral oriental. The Karl Lagerfield brand is primarily focused on fashion and headed by the iconic man of the same name. Presently the brand is owned by the parent company, Tommy Hilfiger.

Design: I saw the bottle and immediately thought of the Britney Spears Fantasy line. The shapes are so familiar that I couldn’t help but seek this one out. The bottle reportedly contains designs of a sun, a star and a moon as per its name. While I still think the shape is unappealing the blue glass used in the design is quite nice. At the very least, the design is much better put together than anything in the Fantasy line. It’s quite a bit more elegant, actually.

Fragrance Family: Fruity Floral Oriental

Notes: Bergamot, pineapple, orange blossom, lotus, rice, peach, heliotrope, freesia, jasmine, orange blossom, daffodil, lily of the valley, orchid, carnation, iris, sandalwood, cedar, amber, musk, vanilla.

Apparently there was a reformulation of this fragrance at some point. I’m not sure which version of the fragrance I have, but judging from the general disappointment in the reformulation, perhaps I have the old formula.

Reviewed in This Post: Sun Moon Stars,  ~1998 Eau de Toilette.