Creed Sublime Vanille

I managed to stumble upon a very tiny sample of Creed Sublime Vanille thanks to a friend who asked me the other day when I’ll get my nose out work and into perfumes again. I didn’t realize what kind of treasure she had dropped into my lap until I did some research and promptly exclaimed, “What? Are you insane?”

Sublime Vanille

Sublime Vanille

In Bottle: A really, really light vanilla and some slight green notes that almost feel sour in the back of the throat.

Applied:  I really doubt my friend supplied me with a faulty sample and I fully believe the weakness of this sauce is due to Creed’s mixing. Or maybe it’s me. Whatever it is, I hardly get anything out of this. It smells of barely there vanilla and kind of leaves me wanting a lot more, especially after finding out its price tag ($710.00 on Creed’s website, if you were so inclined). I get a little hint of green sourness that I want to attribute to some kind of citrus. The two actually go pretty well together in the kind of way that you wouldn’t expect. Like those Terry’s chocolate orange things. Except unlike the chocolate oranges, this lacks in flavor, being kind of a weak throw type of scent. I feel like I need to line the inside of my nostrils in order to smell it. I can’t say that I am a fan.

Extra: Creed’s Sublime Vanille is a part of a collection of exclusives from the house. The flacons are beautiful and the price tag matches the aesthetic.

Design: Gorgeous design. I love the bottle, it looks nice and weighty and absurdly expensive. If someone were to break in one day, this would likely be the thing I’d hurl at them first–then I would regret it later. What? It’s $710 for stuff that barely smells like anything. I can be snarky.

Fragrance Family: Gourmand

Notes: Vanilla, tonka bean, orchid, musk, bergamot, lemon.

Maybe it’s because I’m older now, but I’m so much more cynical towards these pricey scents than I used to be. And perhaps the fact that this stuff costs so much that I expected so much more from it.

Reviewed in This Post: Sublime Vanille, 2014, Eau de Toilette.


Lady Gaga Fame

I’m going to make a deal with you guys and myself. I’m going to review this thing, then I will absolutely not mention Lady Gaga or Fame again for the duration of this year. I think we’d all like to move on, and I was almost going to pass on even trying this because of how bored I got with the marketing. So, I promise, this one last post and then no more.

Fame

Fame

In Bottle: If I had any expectations that this would smell anything different than a generic fragrance then I would like to once again concede my disappointment. Fame smells of slightly synthetic honeyed florals and the barest glance of vanillic incense.

Applied: I aimed a spray of this on my arm was fascinated to see the black turn clear. And that was probably the most promising thing about Fame. I will say upfront that if you expected this to be bold, unique, or interesting then you might be in for a let down. Fame starts off with a synthetic blast of fruity florals. I can’t really tell if the synthetic waft I got came from the purported belladonna note or the honey note they used. Maybe it even came from whatever agent they used to turn black liquid into clear liquid. Whatever it is, it smells faintly of chemical and plastic on application. Rest easy though, that stage of it lasts for a few seconds and Fame settles down into a honeyed apricot floral fragrance. It is very apricots and jasmine based with a thick coat of sweet honey. After the very generic mid-stage, Fame dives into a slightly more interesting saffron and incense with florals dry down. The dry down gives off a smoky saffron (smells a bit like vanilla to me) twist to the generic florals, but it’s really late to the ballgame and to be honest, the incense is lightly used which makes the dry down even less noteworthy.

Extra: Fame has been causing a huge buzz in the celebuscent circles for months and I’m particularly happy that it’s finally released and we can hopefully move on from here. Fame was developed by Coty with some sort of collaborative effort from Haus Laboratories. The fragrance was apparently marketed as having new technology including the black liquid and some nonsense about it being “push-pull” where the notes weren’t going to work in a typical pyramid fashion. I don’t know where they got that one because 1) perfumers have already been making that happen for years, and 2) I experienced a mostly linear progression.

Design: What Fame does well is mix Lady Gaga’s style with the design of the bottle. It very much reminds me of her while at the same time forces me to draw some similarities to Thierry Mugler’s designs. It’s Alien-esque, but I think it works well for Gaga’s image. The bottle isn’t ugly, but at the same time it’s not my kind of style as I’ve confessed before that I find most Mugler bottles to be a bit of an eyesore. Still, it felt nice to nice to hold and was easy to use. I’m not going to be buying it for looks or smell any time soon though.

Fragrance Family: Fruity Floral

Notes: Apricot, orchid, belladonna, jasmine, honey, saffron, incense.

Now, if you’re a huge fan of Gaga, I don’t think my review is going to curb you away from buying this. If you aren’t a fan of Gaga and just want to know if this is anything at like Mother Monster, then I’ll save you a trip to the department store and say, “No”. Fame is very pleasant, not gross or weird, but really generic and easily beaten by more competent honey fragrances such as Tokyo Milk’s Honey and the Moon or for a less gourmand and more floral scent, Aftelier’s Honey Blossom. If you want Gaga branding, go with Fame. If you want an actual interesting and beautiful honey floral fragrance? Seriously, check out Aftelier’s Honey Blossom.

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


Karl Lagerfield Sun Moon Stars

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.


Bath and Body Works Orange Sapphire

I had smelled Orange Sapphire a few months ago and thought it would be a part of Bath and Body Work’s regular collection. When I went back recently to freshen my memory of this scent, I found that it had been discontinued. That’s the thing with Bath and Body Works, they come out with some nice, wearable, easy fragrances that smell all right. Then when you go back looking for it again, it’s been discontinued. Talk about frustrating.

Orange Sapphire

Orange Sapphire

In Bottle: Clean, sweet citrus that reminds me immediately of summer and the tropics. Nicely done citrus-based fragrance that’s more interesting than White Citrus. Orange Sapphire is like White Citrus if the latter would loosen its shirt collar a little bit.

Applied: It’s like a sweet citrus party upon application as all the citrus notes flood up top and vie over each other for dominance. There’s definitely a distinct sweet mandarin scent amongst the various citruses. As the fragrance wears on, it gets a bit more floral and a lot more generic. Orange Sapphire’s citrus notes try to hold on in the midstage but the fragrance develops into a floral near the end of its midstage and when Orange Sapphire hits the endstage, it still smells like a sweet floral generic fragrance, the base notes don’t add much to the fragrance, as is usually the case.

Extra: Orange Sapphire was discontinued sometime in 2011. The last time I saw this on the shelves at a Bath and Body Works store was in 2010. You can still buy this on eBay and Amazon from third party vendors. But given the history of BnBW discontinuing scents then bringing them back under different names, I wouldn’t be surprised if Orange Sapphire resurfaced with a different name.

Design: All Bath and Body Works perfumes are pretty much designed the same way. I suppose the uniform design approach works for them. I mean, the design itself is easy enough to like and easy enough to rebrand for other fragrances. Orange Sapphire, appropriately enough, features an orange glass bottle with some sapphire blue elements on the design.

Fragrance Family: Fruity Floral

Notes: Blood orange, orange, grapefruit, bergamot, mandarin, cassis, raspberry, peach, jasmine, orange flower, freesia, lily of the valley, magnolia, orchid, vetiver, musk, patchouli.

It’s too bad this was discontinued because I think it did fill a niche in that it’s more playful than White Citrus but is still refreshing without being a full out gourmand. But, I wouldn’t be surprised if they brought this back at some point.

Reviewed in This Post: Orange Sapphire, 2010, Eau de Toilette.


Moschino Glamour

The bottle for this fragrance reminded me of Nina by Nina Ricci so as I was drawn to the bottle, I also had to see what this stuff smelled like on me. Having little to no luck with Moschino’s I Love Love, I discovered Glamour was actually quite nice.

Glamour

Glamour

In Bottle: Very light but rather nice. It’s a clean, sweet floral fragrance. like fresh laundry or hand soap and something just a tad salty.

Applied: Okay, I’ve got it. This is what washing your hands smells like. At least it’s what Glamour will smell like on the top performance. The saltiness does stick around but as it mingles with the rest of the fragrance it becomes less pronounced. The scent goes into its mid-stage in a soft, gentle, clean floral with a woody cedar note trying to break through and ruin my day. But thankfully the cedar never gets very far as this fragrance can pretty much be defined in one word; weak. Not weak in a bad way but Glamour’s not very interesting, unique, or new. It’s a staid and safe clean floral that’s very soft and very fleeting. The dry down is a pretty dull affair of warmed amber and vanilla with the lingering floral notes from the mid-stage. I can’t quite pick out the florals but they blend together to smell like soap instead of the very dreaded “perfumey” smell where the florals are mixed so haphazardly that the fragrance just smells cheap and bad. Glamour doesn’t smell cheap and bad, it’s just incredibly light and rather boring.

Extra: Glamour’s longevity kind of sucks as she faded on me after about two hours and there was almost no projection. At times it was like I had actually washed my hands instead of sprayed a fragrance on.

Design: I like the bottle and the shape. Like I said, I was drawn to this initially because it looked so similar to my believed Nina by Nina Ricci. There’s a slight hint of burlesque to the design which could be entirely me speaking as there’s nothing remotely burlesque about the fragrance itself.

Fragrance Family: Fresh Floral

Notes: Salt, artemesia, tangerine blossom, pear, rose, lotus, petit grain, hibiscus, orchid, vanilla, amber, cedar, musk.

Me being the clean floral lover, I could see myself rocking out with Glamour. Though rocking out is probably a bad term to refer to this. Glamour’s more of a stay in and have a tea party kind of girl.

Reviewed in This Post: Glamour, 2008, Eau de Parfum.


Givenchy Ange ou Demon

From the other reviews I’ve read, it seems Ange ou Demon used to be something much better than the iteration I smelled. There’s a lot of bitterness for the silent reformulation of this fragrance and I regret not having smelled its original incarnation.

Ange ou Demon

Ange ou Demon

In Bottle: Looking at the notes list, I wouldn’t have pegged any of those to be in this fragrance. My impression is a very sweet rather girlish fragrance. Certainly not one that I could see the likes of rosewood and oak moss being present. This smells like fruity candy basically.

Applied: Very sweet fruity opening that reminds me a bit of Coco Mademoiselle’s very sweet opening without the amber or the powderiness. Ange ou Demon is like a slap in the face with a bag of hard candies. It quickly becomes cloying before it even starts introducing other notes into the mix. As I keep wearing it, there’s a few flowers that come in, none of them very deep but they do add themselves to the fruity candy mixture in the opening so what I end up getting is this sweet flowery mess that doesn’t smell like a high-end fragrance should smell like. Basically, it smells sloppily put together. Like someone mixed two incompatible perfumes together. The dry down doesn’t make things much better as that annoying cloying sweetness sidles up to the vanilla in the base to take Ange ou Demon out to end what was ultimately a pretty banal and semi-annoying performance.

Extra: Seems to me like sometime in the last few years Ange ou Demon went from a more sophisticated spicy floral scent to what it is now as a candy-laden mess. A shame, really, as the previous version sounded brilliant.

Design: I rather like the bottle design even though it can be a bit over the top. It reminds me of a jewel or a geode or something rocky and sparkling like that. The bottle itself is easy to hold and use though so I’m happy with it.

Fragrance Family: Sweet Floral

Notes: Mandarin,  cumin, saffron, lily, orchid, ylang-ylang, rosewood , oak moss, vanilla, tonka.

If there was more to this fragrance, I really missed it. The notes list makes Ange ou Demon sound so awesome. Cumon, saffron, rosewood and oak moss. All hugely sophisticated and beautiful notes but I got none of that. Instead, I got a flower covered lollipop.

Reviewed in This Post: Ange ou Demon, 2011, Eau de Parfum.


Tom Ford Black Orchid

Black Orchid’s one of the more popular of Tom Ford’s line. It’s a luscious, heady floral that’s billed as an oriental chypre. I see the oriental but I don’t understand where the chypre is supposed to come into play.

Black Orchid

In Bottle: Rich, heady and very strong. If you’re going to whiff up some of this stuff do it slowly and sparingly. It is strong and it will smell very creamy with a heady powdery jasmine and orchid scent. But taking a huge whiff of this kind of destroys its beauty because all you’re getting is a noseful of overwhelming smells.

Applied: Black Orchid goes much better on the skin and even then it should be used in small, exquisite little dabs. This fragrance is not light and it is not meek. It’s loud and full and unashamed of what it is. The first thing I get is this creamy white floral feel then a rolling in of the jasmine and orchid for a lush bouquet of florals that mingles with this powdery cocoa note that also introduces a bit of sweetness. As you continue to wear Black Orchid the rush of powerful fragrances tempers out a little bit, letting me detect a bit of smoky-spiciness. So Black Orchid’s mid-stage is a sweet and spicy floral powder with a layer of cream and a dusting of cocoa. I love its complexity and I love the drydown of dry, sweet woods and sweet amberous vanilla.

Extra: There’s been some rumors that Black Orchid was one of Michael Jackson’s favorite perfumes. While I know admittedly little about the late King of Pop, I do have to say that MJ had good taste in perfume.

Design: Tom Ford’s fragrances are bottled rather similarly, they can be white or black and are often in the shape shown above. The bottles have a very nice weight to them and they also have a simple, but luxurious, look to them. I like it!

Fragrance Family: Floral Oriental

Notes: Jasmine, black truffle, ylang-ylang, black currant, citrus, orchid, patchouli, sandalwood, dark chocolate, incense, amber, vetiver, vanilla, balsam.

While Black Orchid’s heady, creamy, powdery florals isn’t my cup of tea it is a very nice and very complex fragrance that I can see would work rather well for special occasions.

Reviewed in This Post: Black Orchid, 2006, Eau de Parfum.


Sarah Jessica Parker Lovely

Lovely is like one of the few fleeting breaths of fresh air in between the intoxicating aftermath of a fruit and candy explosion at the celebirty perfume factory. That is to say, this fragrance can stand up on its own even without SJP’s name on it.

Lovely

In Bottle: A mix of lavender, woods, and clean amber. Not at all what I was expecting from a celebrity perfume but word has it that Sarah Jessica Parker’s fragrances are usually a cut above the other contenders.

Applied: Lavender on the opening with a hit of citrus. The lavender here is used rather well though it’s definitely not some of the best quality lavender. Still, I can applaud Lovely for having the guts to use the note. Some lavenders wind up too strong, tending to smell medicinal if not used right. I actually like Lovely’s interpretation as it’s a woodsy, clean scent with a twist of herbal. The lavender seeps into the mid-stage as the fragrance introduces a hint of amber and woods as Lovely warms up quite a bit. There’s a certain soapiness to this that keeps things clean and accessible, which only impresses me further. The fragrance is so far being rather risque for a celebuscent but it manages to skirt the territory between highbrow smell experiment and department store safe. The fragrance ages down to a woodsy lavender musk. I dare say this stuff smells almost elegant.

Extra: Funny enough, my first experience with Lovely was in a book. A tester strip of this stuff was wedged into the back of Chandler Burr’s The Perfect Scent. The strip the fragrance was squished onto also makes a great bookmark.

Design: Egg-shaped, pink, easy to hold and use bottle. I don’t know what else I can say about this stuff. The shape is pretty generic and the bottle looks very unassuming. I neither love it nor hate it.

Fragrance Family: Aromatic Woodsy

Notes: Lavender, mandarin, bergamot, rosewood, orchid, patchouli, amber, cedar, musk.

Score another one for the celebuscent team. I try to maintain an open mind about fragrances no matter whose name is on it and I feel like the more I smell, the less impressed I get with celebrity perfumes. It’s because the great majority of them smell generic and synthetic. But once in a while something like Lovely or Cumming proves me wrong and I’ll happily accept that.

Reviewed in This Post: Lovely, 2010, Eau de Parfum.


Donna Karan Pure DKNY

So here we go, Pure DKNY was slated to be one of the finalists for the 2011 FiFi Awards. Now, I don’t put too much weight into the FiFi awards as a means to determine “best” and “worst” as fragrance preferences differ a lot from person to person. But the FiFi’s certainly are a spectacle. But when Pure DKNY popped up in the ranks I set the spectacle aside for a bit and had to wonder why. Why Pure DKNY? There were other Luxe fragrances released this year that did things so much better.

Pure DKNY

In Bottle: Waifish is probably the best word I can come up for the in bottle experience. This is a light airy vanilla floral treatment that lacks body and personality.

Applied: Bit of creamy sweetness to open up with the vanilla note that quickly devolves into a floral breeze. There’s not enough words in the English dictionary to describe how light this fragrance is. It’s so light that there’s barely an opening, a mid-stage, and drydown. I got the impression of vanilla opening and there is vanilla there but it’s so fleeting and light that it might as well not be there–just like the rest of this fragrance. The mid-stage has a hint of jasmine, something rosy with that bed of vanilla and the drydown is a single burst of air from someone fanning a branch of sandalwood at you. Everything about Pure DKNY is light and waifish. It’s not just a delicate, quiet, little lily of a fragrance in the bottle but it’s also an invisible force on the skin.

Extra: The interesting part about Pure DKNY is the use of Ugandan vanilla which is sourced by a humanitarian organization called CARE that fights poverty. The CARE organization’s goals and visions are fantastic. This perfume is not quite so fabulous.

Design: Pure is bottled in a clear bottle with a clear liquid and the simple word, “Pure” written on the glass. It resembles a bottle of water and the design of the fragrance is fairly decent for what it is and definitely imparts the concept of “pure”.

Fragrance Family: Sweet Floral

Notes: Ugandan vanilla, flower petals, lotus, Bulgarian rose, jasmine, freesia, orchid, amber, sandalwood, vanilla.

Now I like light fragrances but Pure DKNY, for what it costs, should at least smell like something more than vague sweet flowers and vanilla. Make no mistake that while I’m not at all partial to Pure DKNY, I appreciate the humanitarian visions that CARE strives to achieve. Check them out, but skip this fragrance.

Reviewed in This Post: Pure DKNY, 2010, Eau de Parfum.


Calvin Klein Euphoria

I know Calvin Klein’s been curiously overlooked in this blog for a while and here’s why–I don’t really like anything in their line. Even the hallmarks of Calvin Klein fragrances; Obsession and CK One. But I kept seeing Euphoria around and I’ve smelled it a few times before and decided to just get a few reviews out there because I know a lot of people love CK.

Euphoria

In Bottle: Sweet synthetic apple and berries smelling up top. The sugar isn’t mixing well with the pomegranate or the berries to my nose and it’s turning things into a bit of a cough syrup factory.

Applied: Syrupy sweet berries and a really obnoxious synthetic apple note on the opening that digs into the middle with the same syrupy sweet quality. The middle stage is marked with a series of banal florals, all of which are sweet and clean and try to clean up the sugary mess in the opening but all I get is sugar florals, sugar violets particular, trying to do what they can with a dewy green and clean note supporting them. Peaking up in the mid-stage is also a woodsiness that makes the mid-stage even more appealing. I think I would have liked the mid-stage of Euphoria a lot more if it was just the florals. Cut out the fruity sweetness in the opening and see how things go from there. But since we’re playing up the sweet, Euphoria’s end stage heads into a floral, warm and woodsy closer. Rather nice closing on this fragrance, actually.

Extra: There, I know a lot of people really like Euphoria but it did nothing for me. While the sweetness did not get to cloying levels, I felt the sugar in this fragrance was largely unnecessary.

Design: Euphoria’s bottle always manages to get knocked over every time I go hear it. The bottle itself is a purple glass shaped into a sort of abstract leave. The cap is a tall metallic rectangle that sticks up from the leaf. The design is interesting but the cap and how tall it is really annoys me.

Fragrance Family: Fruity Floral

Notes: Apple, berries, green leaves, rose, lotus, orchid, violets, woods, amber.

Euphoria’s not bad when you consider its mid-stage elements and dry down. It’s a pretty good scent if you can ignore the sugar. I just found the sugar particularly irritating in this fragrance because it really didn’t need to be in this. Or maybe I’m just bitter because this didn’t work as well on me as I had hoped.

Reviewed in This Post: Euphoria, 2007, Eau de Parfum.