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.

Coach Poppy

Posted on by

In some ways Coach’s progression from its beautiful, durable, everlasting classic bags to the monogram chic bags reflects the direction of the perfume industry. Both things were once lovingly crafted objects made with fine materials have been reduced to faster, larger, and cheaper. So I found it rather funny to be reviewing Poppy, the fragrance from Coach and named in similarity to Coach’s youthful line of bags that feature vibrant colors and–of course–the Coach monogram.

Poppy

Poppy

In Bottle: Smells like a dime-a-dozen candy floral fragrance. Not bad, not too exciting. It hits me right away with the mandarin note and wastes no time digging into the marshmallow.

Applied: Mandarin up top followed quickly by the clean, crisp tones of cucumber. Freesia and the other florals are present in the first minute of the opening and the fragrance evolves more into its floral candy-coated personality near the mid-stage with that marshmallow vanilla thing they did. Poppy settles into its floral candy self for the majority of the rest of the fragrance as the wood notes make themselves known near the very end and in a very faint way.

Extra: I used to be something of a Coach fan and was ecstatic to receive a Coach Wilson bag from the 90s. These days, Coach’s bags don’t interest me too much. I don’t see the appeal of the Poppy line at all and I don’t see the appeal of the Poppy fragrance either, unfortunately. It’s probably another one of those instances where my tastes clash with the company’s aim. But Poppy is like a generic perfume for which I can name several alternatives. If you do need an actual recommendation, the perfume community likens this to Britney Spears’ Fantasy. I can see the connection between the two, especially when the fragrance hits its mid-stage. If you want a personal alternative recommendation, try smelling Bath and Body Works’ Be Enchanted that has a similar progression from refreshing to sweet.

Design: I do like the bottle and feel that scribbly the monogramed look of the Poppy line works rather well for this fragrance and what it’s trying to be. It’s cute and functional and simple. It’s clearly marketed towards girliness and people who like that sort of thing. So in terms of looks, Poppy’s got it down.

Fragrance Family: Sweet Floral

Notes: Mandarin, cucumber, freesia, jasmine, gardenia, water lily, rose, sugar, marshmallow, sandalwood, vanilla, cedar.

A big disappointment in terms of uniqueness but Poppy, like pretty much everything else similar to it works well if you’re into the sweet and flowery fragrances. You can, however, get more affordable fragrances that have a similar aim for the amount that Poppy costs if your chief concern was how it smells.

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

Parfums de Coeur Fireworks

Posted on by

With a weather related headache, I had to question whether it was a good idea for me to test another Sexiest Fantasies fragrance from Parfums de Coeur considering the last fragrance I reviewed from them gave me a headache.

Fireworks

Fireworks

In Bottle: Very sweet, very peachy and fruity with an equal part vanilla and not a whole lot else.

Applied: Super sweet peach and vanilla. The vanilla gets even stronger as the fragrance ages until all you smell is pretty much synthetic vanilla with a fruity background. I’m not getting much else but fruity vanilla out of this which is a bit of a disappointment. In terms of individual notes, they’re all drowned out by the very strong vanilla. The dry down ends up as a plain old synthetic vanilla fragrance.

Extra: Fireworks and a lot of the other scents I have in this line are just body sprays. Fireworks, itself, is very strongly scented so don’t feel that a body spray won’t last as long or be as strong as a full on fragrance. This particular scent can hold its own in terms of longevity and power.

Design: Packaged in a simple black bottle. No frills or thrills here. It’s functional and tries to dress itself up a little, but it’s still essentially a body spray bottle.

Fragrance Family: Fruity

Notes: Strawberry, peach, vanilla.

Not much to say about this one, it’s fruity and sweet and that’s about the start and end of it. It’s not my kind of thing as it’s too sweet and one-dimensional, but it will smell great to the right person.

Reviewed in This Post: Fireworks,  2009, Body Spray.

Christina Aguilera Royal Desire

Posted on by

Royal Desire was apparently designed for women who feel like royalty. Though it’s an interesting thought the fragrance itself is less interesting than hoped.

In Bottle: Sugar and marshmallows, a little dusty but mostly candy-like with a little echo of flowers.

Applied: Sugar high on application though Royal Desire is a very low sillage fragrance. It won’t go very far but you will smell like a fruity marshmallow at first before the fragrance introduces its equally light floral heart. I can get a bit of rose out of the mid-stage if I really wanted but Royal Design isn’t about the florals. It’s pretty obvious this stuff is capitalizing on its sweet mallowy goodness as there’s a tremendous amount of it along with a creeping vanilla. Though with how meek the fragrance is, you’ll have to concentrate to smell it. The dry down is pretty uninteresting, the marshmallow ends up smelling a bit more like sweet and powdery vanilla during the end game.

Extra: I should make a note to just stop reading the ads that go along with these fragrances. Royal Desire’s claim is that it’s for women who want to feel seductive. Marshmallows don’t make me think of seduction. They make me think of campfires and smores.

Design: I’m not wild about the bottle design but it could have been much worse. There’s a lace motif that seems to grace a lot of Christina Aguilera fragrances and this one isn’t much different. The shape is fine, the lace design is fine, the little charm is cute. Just something about the way it was all put together doesn’t inspire me.

Fragrance Family: Gourmand

Notes: Mandarin, blackberry, marshmallow, rose, honeysuckle, lily, cedar, musk, vanilla, sandalwood.

So another fragrance goes into the slush pile of celebuscents. Royal Desire would be great for a young woman or a teenager interested in smelling sweet, but don’t want something too overpowering.

Reviewed in This Post: Royal Desire,  2010, 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.

Givenchy Pi

Posted on by

Having completed a recent move, I am slowly coming back to the smell game and starting off with Givenchy Pi, a men’s fragrance toting itself as a woody oriental.

Pi

Pi

In Bottle: Mandarin with a vanilla and herbal scent up top. A pleasant if somewhat strange combination.

Applied: Mandarin right away with a nice wave of herbs coming in soon after it. I smell the rosemary rather predominantly. Almost as fast as the opening rolls in, I get a big whiff of almonds and vanilla and the fragrance sweetens up almost immediately. It’s kind of a shame that almond and vanilla and generally considered feminine fragrances because if given enough of a chance, Pi could make anyone of any gender smell good. It’s certainly a bit of a change from what I usually see with men’s scents. I rather like that it started off typical enough then takes itself into a sweet vanilla direction. The fragrance wears on with sweet vanilla and almond until the woodsiness comes up and mingles with the vanilla. The end product is a rather pleasant vanilla woods.

Extra: Pi was released in 1999 and has since split into a few flankers. You can still easily find Pi at department stores and even some drug stores.

Design: Serge Mansau strikes again with this bottle design. It reminds me a bit of Ancient Egyptian architecture with its even, straight form and coloring. The bottle is rather hefty, a little difficult to hold, but it is otherwise a beautiful, interesting piece to have.

Fragrance Family: Woodsy Oriental

Notes: Mandarin, tarragon, basil, rosemary, tonka, vanilla, benzoin, almond, brown sugar, cedar.

Pi is like a fragrance exploring the three concepts of fragrance gendering. It starts off masculine, evolves a bit into the feminine, then ends on a rather unisex note.

Reviewed in This Post: Pi,  2010, Eau de Toilette.

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.

Avon Eternal Magic

Posted on by

I don’t know why so many people think Avon perfumes aren’t any good. They, like any other place that has a line of perfume, have hits and misses.

Eternal Magic

Eternal Magic

In Bottle: Powdery iris with a sweet rose note mixed with a dusty woodsy background.

Applied: Powdered  iris up first with a bit of green bitterness that blends in nicely with a sweet rose note. The two are blended in with some less obvious florals–or they turn into a less obvious floral. Either way, it’s a pleasant powder and floral fragrance that hits a woodsiness near the end of its midstage and takes on a more vanillic personality as it ages it on the skin. The vanilla comes up nicely between the florals, complimenting the fragrance rather than distracting from it. Nicely done, if somewhat dull.

Extra: Avon’s Eternal Magic was composed by Ellen Molner who also made such fragrances as Tocca Florence and Guess Seude.

Design: The bottle is a bit underwhelming. You know how some fragrance makers have a signature look? Avon’s got that for some of its bottles. If I see a rounded, squat bottle with a round cap I immediately think of Avon. Eternal Magic’s design itself isn’t bad, it’s not great either. I only think it looks rather plain, but it is otherwise functional.

Fragrance Family: Floral

Notes: Iris, rose, woods, vanilla.

So in the end, what about Eternal Magic and how it smells? It’s all right, I guess. Nothing to phone home about certainly, but it’s still better composed than a lot of other fragrances out there.

Reviewed in This Post: Eternal Magic,  2010, Eau de Parfum.

Escada Magnetism for Women

Posted on by

Magnetism by Escada is an easy to like and easy to wear sweet floral oriental with a stroke of pure fun.

Magnetism

Magnetism

In Bottle: Sweet vanilla blended with a fun fruity and juicy opening coated with flowers.

Applied: Sweet and green rather crisp and juicy up top with a distinct fruitiness that blends well with the fragrance. The scent delves into this floral mish-mash that comes out smelling distinctly flowery but keeps a rein on its strength. There is a sweetness throughout this fragrance that doesn’t take away from the fragrance’s purpose. In the end, it is a sweet sandalwood with an earthy vibe and a strong sweet vanilla finish.

Extra: Magnetism for Women was introduced in 2003. It’s a fairly decent fragrance though it’s not in any way groundbreaking. It does smell good and does the Escada brand some fine justice.

Design: Not too wild about the design of the bottle but then Escada’s bottle designs have always seemed a bit off to me. Magnetism is a hot pink curved glass bottle. It’s vaguely unpleasant and looks a bit too suggestive for me to take it seriously.

Fragrance Family: Sweet Floral Oriental

Notes: Pineapple, black currant, melon, berries, cassia, litchi, magnolia, orris, green leaves, freesia, basil, jasmine, caraway, heliotrope, lily of the valley, rose, sandalwood, amber, patchouli, musk, benzoin, caramel, vetiver, vanilla.

So in the end, Magnetism isn’t attracting me, but it is doing a good job of trying. If you want a nice, wearable floral oriental with a dollop of sweet then this might be good. As a bonus, Magnetism can be purchased from several discounters for a rather fair price.

Reviewed in This Post: Magnetism for Women,  2010, Eau de Parfum.

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.