Histoires de Parfums 1804

Posted on by

Okay, no more silly celebrity stuff for the time being. I went a little crazy for Histoires de Parfums. Gimmicky as the concept might seem sometimes, I can’t deny for a minute that it hooked me. So I went and got a few more years from the line.

1804

1804

In Bottle: I really didn’t expect the pineapple to be quite so prominent, but it’s just about the only thing there on first sniff.

Applied: Yep, pineapple. Very tropical, quite sweet with a juiciness to it that I want to attribute to the peach. The pineapple note is very strong and quite loud. I rather like it as it screams holidays and summer at me. Strange because I expected something entirely more subdued from 1804, still feminine, still fruity but not screaming fun and sun like it is right now. All confusion and expectations aside, 1804’s pineapple opening is pretty delightful. It’s sweet and girly and fun. It rolls into a mild floral bouquet with a sweet and clean finish at the end. I was looking for the spices the whole time, but they never made themselves known. Not elegant, but not at all bad. I quite like it.

Extra: 1804 was inspired by Amantine Aurore Lucile Dupin, who might be more recognizable by her pen name, George Sand.

Design: Designed in the same way as most other Histoires de Parfums bottles. I would love to have a full set of these, lined up in a neat row. I would finally be able to pretend I’m some sort of chemist with impeccable taste.

Fragrance Family: Fruity Floral

Notes: Pineapple, peach, gardenia, jasmine, rose, lily-of-the-valley, cloves, nutmeg, sandalwood, patchouli, benzoin, vanilla, white musk.

Probably not an instance where I’m dying to throw money at it, but 1804 remains a very pleasant, very feminine fragrance. If I had a hankering for pineapple, I think it would be the first thing I go for.

Reviewed in This Post: 1802, 2012, Eau de Parfum.

Thierry Mugler A*Men

Posted on by

Lots of thanks to Undina from Undina’s Looking Glass for the sample of this fragrance. A*Men has been one of those scents that I kept hearing about but never got around to trying.

A*Men

A*Men

In Bottle: Sweet and a bit dusty, I get a lot of woods out of this but at the same time, I’m smelling the gourmand too.

Applied: Sweet upon application, lavender with a bit of milk and honey and lots of caramel. The fragrance introduces its woodsier side rather earlier as I get patchouli mixed with cedar that blends in with the caramel and milky notes. The mid-stage is marked with a noticeable addition of spices and woods, I swear I can smell cinnamon as the fragrance gets a bit more coffee like with this dusty coating of woods following it. The dry down is warm with a sandalwood base and a sweet toffee-like backdrop. I’ve seen people absolutely love A*Men and other people who can’t stand it. I was all ready for a gourmand but I was more surprised by the prominence of the woods in this. It makes the fragrance more oriental in style with a creamy, sweet caramel scent accented with a lot of woodsiness.

Extra: A*Men was introduced in 1996 and comes in two bottle styles. One metallic bottle and a rubber bottle.

Design: I’ve never been much of a fan of Thierry Mugler’s bottle designs. I often found them too chunk or too alien-looking and I can’t say I really like the bottle designs for A*Men either. It just doesn’t strike a chord with my sensibilities.

Fragrance Family: Gourmand Oriental Woodsy

Notes: Coriander, lavender, fruits, spices, mint, bergamot, honey, jasmine, milk, caramel, lily of the valley, cedar, patchouli, sandalwood, tonka, amber, musk, benzoin, coffee, vanilla.

I don’t think I’m that big of a fan of A*Men. I wasn’t sure whether or not I liked the gourmand bits of it, or the oriental bits, or the woodsy bits. It just all melded together into one big “blah” for me, though it does have really fantastic longevity.

Reviewed in This Post: A*Men, 2012, Eau de Toilette.

M. Micallef Ylang in Gold

Posted on by

The perfume house of M. Micallef got in touch with me again and asked if I would be interested in reviewing their new, Ylang in Gold fragrance. Given the awesome Vanilla scents I tested from their last location, I really couldn’t say no.

In Bottle:Sweet, a little fruity up top with a nice clean and fresh vanilla background.

Ylang in Gold

Ylang in Gold

Applied: Sweet fruitiness, refreshing upon application. I get vanilla almost instantly with a clean waft of mint. As the fragrance wears on, the vanilla calms down a bit and the sweetness gets tempered by a pleasant mix of ylang-ylang and soft lily. The scent is very light, almost creamy with a lovely smooth aroma that I guess is coming from the combination of clean musk and coconut. The longer I wear it, the more vanilla comes back to further smooth out the scent. In the end, I get soft vanilla musk with a hint of woods and the barest reminder of ylang-ylang.

Extra: Ylang in Gold is the third member of M. Micallef’s Jewel Collection that features Jewel for Her and Jewel for Him. Ylang in Gold comes in two forms, one with a gold dust mixed with the juice and another without the gold dust. My sample didn’t have the gold dust. I’m not a big fan of shimmer on my skin so I actually preferred to go without it.

Design: Like with most bottles by M. Micallef, Ylang in Gold was hand decorated with little Swarovski crystals. I really like the presentation of it. The shape of the bottle is fairly standard, but the designs help give it a bit of uniqueness and luxury flare. It’s very fitting for its collection, looks quite nice, and is presented rather nicely.

Fragrance Family: Floral Oriental

Notes: Tangerine, geranium, sage, rosemary, artemisia, ylang-ylang, rose, lily of the valley, magnolia, mint, sandalwood, coconut, vanilla, musk, oakmoss.

I can best describe Ylang in Gold as a very soft vanilla with a nice sprinkling of Ylang-Ylang. It’s pleasant, very wearable and a bit sophisticated. If you’re interested in a bottle, you can nab one at LuckyScent as well as at their Scent Bar physical store, Parfum1, Parfumerie Nasreen, and Osswald NYC.

Reviewed in This Post: Ylang in Gold, 2012, Eau de Parfum.

Disclaimer: The fragrance reviewed in this post was provided to me for free for the purposes of review. In no other way am I receiving pay or compensation for this review. This review was written based upon my personal experiences and opinions of the product.

Thanks to Micallef for giving me the opportunity to try this fragrance and Jeffrey Dame at Hypoluxe for forwarding on the sample.

Faberge Flambeau

Posted on by

Deb from Luvparfum kindly included a couple of decants when I purchased vintage Coty Chypre. One of those decants was Fabergé Flambeau. And as with most things that take me by surprise, my first impression was, “Fabergé made perfume?” The next impression was, “Wow!”

In Bottle: That “Wow” was to denote how very good this was. Green aldehydes and florals were my first impression.

Applied: I could smell the florals in this upon application. Flambeau opens with a green aldehyde, flowing into a beautiful jasmine mid-note that’s joined by a full-bodied and tempered rose. There are florals in here that I can’t pick out, but I don’t mind very much because it all blends together beautifully. Flambeau ages into a gorgeous lush mid-stage that exudes white flowers with slight hints of animalic musk. Nothing too wild on the animal side. It’s only a touch to give the fragrance even more complexity. As it dries down, I get less of the rose and more vetiver with a little hint of amber and bit of woodsiness that’s been soften with time.

Extra: Fabergé’s Flambeau was a little known fragrance initially released in 1955. It has since been discontinued and is quite a rarity. It’s really a shame since it’s such a beautiful scent from a long gone era of perfume. Fabergé had other vintage classics as well, including Woodhue, Tigress, Aphrodisia.

Design: I haven’t held or seen an actual bottle of Flambeau, but going by the photos, the parfum vial is a beautiful elegant glass piece encased in a golden shell with lovely markings on it. Very reminiscent of luxury from the 50s.

Fragrance Family: Classic Floral

Notes: Aldehydes, jasmine, rose, lily of the valley, iris, ambergris, vetiver, sandalwood, musk.

I’m only guessing with those notes. Anyway, if you want to score yourself a bottle of Flambeau, Deb from LuvParfum might have one in stock along with some of Fabergé’s other classics. This includes a gorgeous Woodhue perfume whistle. If not, you might get lucky on eBay.

Reviewed in This Post: Flambeau, ~1960, ???.

Illuminum Rose Oud

Posted on by

It’s been a while since I tried a fragrance with oud in it. And just about as long since I tried a rose centered scent. So I picked Rose Oud pretty much out of the blue and was pleasantly surprised.

Rose Oud

Rose Oud

In Bottle: Smells very familiar to me. It’s clean, fresh and simple and plucks at some memory that starts forming the longer I wear it.

Applied: Rose Oud is decidedly less rosey and oudy than I thought it would be. The rose is there. I’m not sure I can say the same for the oud, but the rest of the fragrance carries it forward. The instant I put it on, I’m reminded of something, but it settles on the tip of my brain and doesn’t let me progress much further until I let the fragrance settle down a bit more. As Rose Oud continues its progression, the rose makes its way to the forefront, dominating the scent and leading a pack of fresh florals, most notably the lily of the valley that gives the fragrance it’s soft feel. I’m waiting for the oud and find myself waiting a while as it never really makes itself known. Rose Oud smells more of roses from afar and more of roses and florals up close. For those worried about the castoreum, don’t be. I never got much in the way of it as the fragrance remained largely clean, fresh and floral. I quite like Rose Oud. It might actually be my top pick of the Illuminums so far and it’s mainly because of the memories it teases up for me.

Extra: Castoreum is, ready for this? The secretions from the scent glands of beavers. And of course, as with all these animal sourced notes, the scent glands are located on the animal’s rear. But, don’t worry, castoreum is derived from these secretions after they’ve been put through all sorts of processes. By the time it gets to be an ingredient, you end up with a leather-like fragrance. If you enjoyed Shalimar, you’re smelling more castoreum than I did in Rose Oud.

Design: Rose Oud is bottled and packaged much the same way as the other Illuminum fragrances. Held in a squat and square frosted glass bottle with a brushed metal cap.

Fragrance Family: Floral

Notes: Basil, coriander, jasmine, lily of the valley, rose, geranium, oud, castoreum, patchouli.

While I was disappointed when the oud didn’t show up when I was searching for it, I finally realized why Rose Oud smelled familiar to me. It takes me back to 1990. I’m a child and my aunt is hugging me one last time before my parents put me in the taxi. I won’t see her again until 1992 and it made me sad. Two years isn’t that long for an adult, but it was ages for a child. The smell of roses and soap were wafting around at the time, partially from someone’s perfume and partially from the laundry soap that permeated through our luggage. I remember more precisely how dark it was because we were up at the break of dawn. Not much of a happy memory, but still a precious one.

Reviewed in This Post: Rose Oud, 2012, Eau de Parfum.

Disclaimer: The fragrance reviewed in this post was provided to me for free for the purposes of review. In no other way am I receiving pay or compensation for this review. This review was written based upon my personal experiences and opinions of the product.

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.

Donna Karan Cashmere Mist

Posted on by
Cashmere Mist

Cashmere Mist

I don’t know why I thought I had already done a review for Cashmere Mist. Perhaps it’s because of how used to it I am. Everywhere I went as a child, I smelled this perfume on somebody. It’s popularity has ingrained itself into my mind and made it something of a given that I should have talked about it already.

In Bottle: Bergamot and very soft floral woods.

Applied: Cashmere Mist opens with a little nip of citrus that serves to drive the fragrance into its dominant stage. The stage is that of a very soft floral tinged wood with a light dusting of powder that envelops the wearer in a warm blanket. A lot of fragrances remind me of my mother because, when I was growing up, her fragrance collection helped shape my perfume preferences today. Cashmere Mist is one of those perfumes that reminds me a lot of her because she had some of it at one point. I do have to admit that I’m not a big fan of this one, despite the good memories associated with it. It’s a bit dull, sadly. Otherwise, it’s warm and soft and nurturing. It’s nice and gentle and smells like memories of the early 90s. It’s also clean, like soap, powder and laundry if you were interested in a clean scent. I just think it’s a bit generic smelling and I’m entirely willing to admit that I might just be bored of smelling it because I’ve gotten so used to it since its release.

Extra: Cashmere Mist has been out and available since 1994. It remains easily accessible and can be purchased at a variety of department stores and online.

Design: Some people love this people and some don’t. I’m one of the people who love it, though I have to admit my bias because I grew up seeing this bottle and smelling Cashmere Mist so I’m a little bit attached to it. It is, however, a somewhat dated design in that it reflects an earlier aesthetic. There are two types of bottles for Cashmere Mist, a frosted glass bottle (pictured in this post) and a clear glass bottle.

Fragrance Family: Clean Woodsy Floral

Notes: Bergamot, lily of the valley, jasmine, suede, cashmere wood, sandalwood, musk, vanilla.

The version I reviewed should be noted as there has been some differences noticed by the fragrance community between the EDT that I’m reviewing and the EDP in the clear glass bottle that’s being widely circulated.

Reviewed in This Post: Cashmere Mist, 1998, 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.

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.