Perfume Review: Chanel Allure Homme Sport: Eau Extrême

A 100ml (3.4oz) flacon of Eau Extrême

Special thanks to Chanel Fragrance and Beauty Boutique at Chadstone (Melbourne). 

(Review based on wrist and card samples, and use on person from retail bottle and 10ml limited-distribution bottle)

Target Gender: Male; Price Bracket (Aus): Medium ($140+). Type: Citrus/Woody.

In the earlier days of my love affair with all things fragrance, I had tried a few Chanel scents on cards and didn't think much of them. However, a house of such repute wasn't going to be dismissed so easily, and indeed on second encounter with them, I consider this one of my favourite houses.

Allure Homme Sport: Eau Extrême, like most Chanel fragrances released after the early 80s, has been signed off by Jacques Polge as the perfumer, and he's done a bloody fine job with this one.

The first thing I would point out about this scent: The name is somewhat a misnomer. This is not exactly a "sporty" fragrance like Allure Homme Sport, and neither is it an "extreme" version of the latter. It opens like Allure Homme Sport, but settles down to something resembling the male version of Allure Sensuelle with its projection greatly magnified.  If I were to name it, it would be "Allure De La Nuit".

The opening note is a sharp, citrusy accord with mint. The notes pyramid lists orange, mint, sage and cypress. My perception of the citrus is quite prominent, held along nicely by the mint. The top is cold, fresh and sharp, and this is probably the closest this fragrance goes to being "Sporty".

The moment the citrus/mint combo mellow down a bit, tonka bean becomes quite noticeable, and from the mid onwards is the dominant note in the scent. The middle has a distinct pungency (pepper) that blends with the tonka bean shortly after showing up. The Tonka bean gets stronger towards the base, where supporting notes of wood and musk join in. The wood is a mixture of earthy and spicy (cedar and sandalwood as the bottle said in the boutique).

The woods play a supporting role; the tonka bean is by a distance the most dominant note, but it doesn't get sweet enough to be cloying or feminine. The musk is discernible but not a headline note. To me, this is a 2-layer rather than 3-layer scent. The tonka bean overlaps the pepper and wood/musk, which makes it a base note that transforms a bit rather than a distinct mid.

The concentration it's sold in is Eau De Toilette Concentré, which to me is little more than a synonym for an EdP. Longevity is excellent, and so is projection. Samples on my wrist and neck lasted on average about 7-8 hours, and it is noticeable from several feet away for the first few. The scent is versatile, but quite potent and will be perceptible on the wearer from a distance. And this is why I'm personally inclined to label this a night scent. "Easy on the trigger" is another thing to remember with this one.

The bottle is opaque grey, and the same shape as the rest of the Allure Homme range, which in turn is a more squat version of the Allure series (for women) bottle. The atomiser dispenses a well-balanced amount of liquid; it wont have you spraying a dozen times to get a decent dose, but will easily deliver an overdose at anything beyond 3 sprays for a scent of this potency.

As the name would have made it apparent, this one isn't intended to be an intimate, close-range scent. It smells very nice, but it is too strong to be worn when you'll be in very close proximity to someone for an extended period. I recommend it without much hesitation, but if close-range scents are your thing, you might prefer Allure Homme instead.

Ratings:
4.5/5...Interesting composition, well-suited for night-time wear; long-lasting, versatile, and priced well for a Chanel scent.

Prices:

RRP: AU$105 / AU$144 / AU$173 for 50ml / 100ml / 150ml (L/E)

UVP: 50ml $2.1/ml, 100ml $1.44/ml, 150ml $1.15/ml

Click for more information on UVP

Chanel does not allow discounting of their products, and doesn't run GWP offers either. 150ml or larger bottles are occasionally sold as limited editions, and are much cheaper in UVP terms.

Stockists: Myer, David Jones, Chanel Fashion and Fragrance Boutiques, some pharmacies.

Perfume Review: YvesSaintLaurent Elle (EdP and EdT double-review)

A 90ml (3oz) bottle of Elle.
Special thanks 
to MyBeautySpot
for image.

Review based on wrist and card samples from tester bottles.

Target Gender: Female; Price Bracket (Aus): Medium-High ($140+ for EDT, $160+ for EDP). Type: Floral/Fruity/Spicy. YSL Beauty is a brand of L'Oreal.

Elle (2007) (French for "She") is the brainchild of Olivier Cresp and Jacques Cavallier, who have an impressive portfolio of scents to their credit, both individually and collaboratively. Between them, they're responsible for fragrances like Magnifique (Lancome), the near-legendary Bvlgari Aqva (Bvlgari), L'Eau De Issey (Issey Miyake), and a fair few more. Obviously, my expectations were high approaching Elle.

(Special thanks to MyBeautySpot for permission to photograph the bottle on their premises, and providing a number of samples on card and wrist. Also, thanks to YSL at David Jones)

Elle (the EdP) opens with a burst of fresh fruit, which is quite mellow and not synthetic or very sweet. Right off the bat, the coldness of patchouli is evident, although the top is a nicely done medley of just a hint of citrus, and a white floral to go along with the lychee. Even though YSL says it's got peony, it's not very discernible. The most prominent notes at the top are Lychee and patchouli. Both the lychee and patchouli feel quite natural, and dont have the synthetic hippie-shop or candy-floss feel.

The middle is where it gets interesting. The patchouli gets a bit toned down, the pink pepper really shines here, and a mixture of florals starts becoming more obvious. There's hints of jasmine, the sweetness of rose, and the green, slightly peppery freesia which accentuates the pink pepper. The middle retains patchouli's cold undertone.

The base also retains patchouli, but gets somewhat musky. However this is not pure musk like what Parisienne L'Essentiel carries (the perfume pyramid says ambrette). The key feature of the base is vetiver though. The slightly smoky, musty and slightly damp woody feeling of a good vetiver note is quite a nice touch here. The base also gets a bit of dry wood in it. But I would reiterate...in between the dance that vetiver and ambrette do while holding hands around the wood, patchouli is still a definitive note.

The EdP and EdT are broadly similar, but they're not exact analogues of each other. The EdT has much less patchouli, the dominant notes being pink pepper and freesia instead. The top doesn't have much lychee either; it's a white floral (peony) with a hint of citrus. The middle gets easily discernible jasmine, and the bottom has noticeable muskiness and vetiver in it. The key difference to me between the two is the lessening of the patchouli, removal of the lychee, and more prominence for freesia and pink pepper.

Elle is not meant to be, and does not feel like an intimate scent. It doesn't have a suggestive vibe, and the ads made no effort to that effect either. The fluid is not vividly coloured, but excessive doses can get overwhelming because of the substantial amounts of patchouli, and the pepper and vetiver, which can get slightly cloying if over-done.

The EdP (90ml/3oz bottle)

Longevity and Projection/Sillage are both very good for the respective concentrations. Wrist samples of the EdP lasted about 7 hours on my hands, and the projection is well beyond arm's length. This is a strong scent, and will be quite noticeable when worn. The EdT took about 4-odd hours to wear off to a point where it was a skin scent, and projects to about arms' length.

The design of the bottle follows the very feminine, youthful design language, being  tall, vividly coloured and ornately decorated with a large golden plate with the YSL logo cut out.Visually, this fragrance has one of the prettiest bottles I've seen in a long time. 

My Recommendation? It's a very elegant, rather young fragrance, but at the same time it is sharp, loud and noticeable, especially the EdP. I recommend it whole-heartedly, but not as a blind buy. It is another scent I think should be given a proper test on skin before making the decision to buy. This is a versatile, all-weather, all-day scent, but not everyone will be able to pull this one off. 

The EdT (50ml/1.7oz bottle)

Ratings:

3.8/5 (EdP); Strong, fresh, long-lasting, versatile, but pricey, and not everyone can pull this one off. Gorgeous bottle design.
3.5/5 (EdT); Mild, versatile, and unobtrusive, but over-priced for the lasting power. Gorgeous bottle design.

Similarities:
Midnight Poison (Dior), Zen (Shiseido)

Prices:

EDT: AU$105 / AU$140 for 50ml / 90ml

EDP: AU$125 / AU$165 for 50ml / 90ml

Unitised Volumetric Price (UVP) (Click for more information):

EDT: 50ml $2.1/ml, 90ml $1.56/ml

EDP: 50ml $2.5/ml, 90ml $1.83/ml

Stockists: David Jones (official YSL stockist). Myer no longer seem to carry it, and availability is hit-and-miss at other outlets, especially for the 90ml bottles.

Perfume Review: YvesSaintLaurent Opium

A 90ml EdP bottle of Opium

(Note: This is not a review for Belle D'Opium or Opium Vapeurs De Parfum, and neither does this review consider Opium for Men)

Target Gender: Female; Price Bracket (Aus): Medium-High ($150+ for EDT, $180+ for EDP). Type: Spicy/Oriental. YSL Beauty is a brand of L'Oreal.

I have something going for the house of YSL. Yes, it's one of L'Oreal's darling child brands with all the tinkering around that the corporate giant is famous for, but it remains responsible for some very nice fragrances. YSL does now have the habit of releasing enough flankers for scents that do well that Parisienne could be a house in itself, and L'Homme could be diagnosed with uncontrolled flankeritis (although this is by no means unique to them). But overall this house remains among my favourites. 

Let's have a look at one of their flagship fragrances, the very aptly (and controversially in its early days) named Opium. The formula appears to have undergone a change or two since its launch in 1977, and the bottle design has changed a fair bit since launch, but the fragrance retains its warm, oriental soul.

At first spritz, it opens with significant warmth, and has a faintly bergamot-dominated, citrusy top with just a hint of florals quietly making their way in. The notes pyramid lists both bergamot and orange, although I personally feel it's much more of a spice-infused, warm top with a hint of bergamot and some flowers. Amber and incense make their presence felt, but don't show their full intensity yet.

The middle starts to get much more ambery, with the warmth of the amber soon joined by incense, and that is the framework for the entire scent around which all the other notes congregate. There is a slight but distinct jasmine undertone as well around the middle, coupled with what's probably carnation, because the jasmine doesn't stay solo for much. The amber gets even stronger towards the base, and the two flowers give way to a very slight hint of patchouli. 

Even though listed in the notes pyramid, I don't get a very pronounced vanilla element in this scent. The vanilla does come through as a balancing element of sorts, making it a smooth transition from one note to the next. However, this is not by any means a creamy fragrance like Manifesto (YSL).

Current Bottles EDT on left, EDP on right; 

As far as the concentration goes, the EdT and EdP smell much the same, except the EdP projecting further and lasting longer. A sample of the EdP on my wrist lasted about nine hours (impressive), while the EDT lasted about five hours (very good for an EdT in my opinion). I personally love this scent, but this one is a polarising fragrance. Few people will say they are indifferent to it...the ones who like it will love it, those who don't like it will stay well clear.

Opium does have a vibe of moderate intimacy, but it's not as suggestive or seductive as the ads might imply. It may evoke feelings of some intimacy up close, but this isn't a Chanel Allure or Lauder Sensuous. This isn't intended to be a skin scent either like Floral Romantique (Guerlain Elixir Charnel), and will make its point without the wearer needing to be proximate with people. Overall, a versatile scent that can do well in a variety of settings, but at its best at night-time, particularly in colder weather.

My recommendation? I don't recommend this as a blind buy. This is a very nice scent, but it's not a particularly "safe" or mainstream one. Its potency and loudness may be unsettling for some. Try it on the skin, and smell it over a few hours, as this fragrance transforms a fair bit over its life. The top is the loudest part, and while the middle and base are still loud, the perfume does get a tad bit subdued after a couple of hours. Even in that state, it is noticeable from a distance.

From an Australian context, this is a pricey perfume, and can be difficult to locate at substantial discounts.

Ratings: 3.9/5...Powerful, warm, elegant, beautiful, but at the same time a polarising scent that not everyone will be able to pull off, and not incredibly versatile either. Pricey to add to the mix.

Disclosure: Review based on both wrist and card samples. No affiliation or compensation was involved.

Prices:

EDT: AU$120 / AU$160 / AU$170 for 50ml / 90ml / 125ml

EDP: AU$135 / AU$185 for 50ml / 90ml

Unitised Volumetric Price (UVP) (Click for more information):

EDT: 50ml $2.4/ml, 90ml $1.78/ml, 125ml $1.36/ml

EDP: 50ml $2.7/ml, 90ml $2.06/ml

Stockists: Myer, David Jones (both official), some outlets of MyChemist and its sister stores (Chemist Warehouse, MyBeautySpot) may also stock it. 

Eau De Toilette, Eau De Parfum, Eau de what!?

I've asked the very same question plenty of times when I was new to the world of perfumes, and I get it plenty of times now from others. A vast majority of perfumes even today are made in France (or may have roots in France even if made elsewhere). Even for perfumes made outside of the Francophone region, a few things still remain convention to label in French.

Most perfumes will label ingredients in both French and English, referring to water as "Aqua", and the fragrance oils that give the mixture its scent as "Parfum" for example. However, the most visible and ubiquitous use of French terms is for concentration. The relative concentration of the aromatic oils and compounds in a given fragrance is what the "Eau De" term indicates. Generally, the higher the concentration, the longer a perfume will last on skin, and in many cases may have stronger notes.

The terminology is quite imprecise, and the only reasonably straightforward comparisons are between two concentrations of the same fragrance, from within the same house. Here's the most common terminology I've come across:

Eau De Cologne ("Water of Cologne" in literal translation), abbreviated to EdC is generally the most dilute form of a fragrance with a proper term for it. It may be anywhere between 3-8% aromatic compounds. Typically, Eau De Cologne concentration is used for male fragrances, and these will usually not have a very long life on the skin. Many colognes tend to be based on citrus accords.

Eau De Toilette (EdT) is the next one up. And this is where things get really interesting. EDTs can contain anywhere from 5-15% aromatic compounds, leading to a huge amount of variation in their potency and longevity. They overlap EdC on the lower end, and EdPs on the upper end of their concentration.

Eau De Parfum (EdP) is the next concentration in line. These can have between 10-20% aromatic compounds, and hence the overlap between EdPs from some houses and EdTs from others. Generally, EdP is a concentration seen for most female fragrances, although a few exceptions exist on the masculine side too, such as Essenza (Armani), Dior Homme Intense (Dior), Terre D'Hermes Parfum (Hermes).

It would be misleading to say EdTs don't as long as the higher concentrations as a generalisation. While a lower concentration of the same fragrance from within the same range will necessarily be less potent than a higher concentration, the same cannot be said when comparing across houses or ranges. For example, Chanel's Antaeus for Men is an EdT, but is much more potent in my perception than Armani's Essenza, which is an EdP.

For male fragrances,  manufacturers seem reluctant to use the term Eau De Parfum, even though many are potent enough to be more than a match for most EdPs. For example, Chanel's Antaeus and Eau Extreme are both strong enough to be labelled EdP were they feminine. Whether it's a case of the makers fearing the "EdP" term being associated with feminine fragrance and perception of less masculine character in the scent by the buyer, or simply intertia, I can't say.

Essense De Parfum (ESdP) is a seldom-seem concentration that sits vaguely in between Pure Parfum and Eau De Parfum. These can have 15-30% aromatic compounds, and generally this concentration is always more potent than a corresponding EdT or EdP. This concentration is rare to say the least; so far in mainstream fragrances, I have only seem J'Adore L'Or (Dior), Miss Dior Le Parfum (Dior) and Parisienne L'Essentiel (YSL) in this concentration.

Pure Parfum or Extrait De Parfum can have anywhere from 15% to 40% (or even higher) aromatic compounds. Usually sold as dab-ons (most commonly seen in my experience in Chanel, who sell extrait versions of a fair few of their fragrances), these are generally very potent, and have the longest life on skin compared to lower concentrations of the same scent. These also tend to be very pricey (Australian UVPs can exceed $20/ml), and don't evaporate on exposure to the air very quickly.

There's another couple of concentrations used by some manufacturers that don't make appearances often enough to be common usage.

The word Légère is sometimes added to the concentration to indicate a lighter version of a fragrance. For example, Opium Vapeurs De Parfum (YSL) is listed as an "EdT Légère", which means it is lighter than what an EdT would otherwise be for the the same fragrance from YSL. Similarly, Lancome's La Vie Est Belle Légère is a lighter (softer) version of the same fragrance. A Légère EdP would be roughly in between what an EdT and EdP would be for the same perfume.

The world L'Absolu is the opposite in perfume terms of Légère. It indicates the more concentrated, or more often the version of a fragrance with more intense notes. Tresor L'Absolu (Lancome), and J'Adore L'Absolu (Dior) are prime examples. Both are more potent and have differing, stronger notes than their "normal" counterparts.

Armani and a few other houses use the term "Intense" after the concentration for fragrances more potent that the classification would typically indicate, but not enough to move up a notch to the next in line. This is a very grey area though; what Armani calls EdTI (EdT Intense) might be an EdP if another house were to sell it. Armani's Privé lineup has the black bottles labelled as "EdP Intense", which are again more potent than other Armani EdPs, but well short of being EsDPs.

Chanel uses the term EdT Concentré for Eau Extreme, which to me is a synonym for an EdP. I strongly suspect the only reason it's labelled as such is to keep the EdT terminology across their male lineup, even if in variants to avoid going the EdP way of labels. In terms of strength of the fragrance and its longevity, it blows most EdPs clean out the water.

While the common perception that extraits will be more potent than EsDPs, which in turn will be more concentrated than EdPs, which will be stronger than EdTs and EdCs is not necessarily false, it is not entirely true either when it comes to EdP and lower potencies. While an EdP of one fragrance will be stronger than an EdT of the same fragrance, it may not necessarily be the case across different fragrances.

Concentration has a direct relation to price; usually the higher the concentration, the more expensive a perfume will be. Which is partially explanatory towards female fragrances (generally EdPs) being costlier than their male counterparts (which are usually EdT).

In concentrations lower than extrait, EdPs and EdTs have plenty of overlap, and just being an EdP will not necessarily mean better projection or longevity. Moreover, sillage/projection (how far a scent trails around you) and longevity (how long it stays on the skin once applied) are not related to each other. It is very possible to have a fragrance that has very long life on the skin but doesnt necessarily project too far away from you; L'Instant De Guerlain (Guerlain) is a prime example. On the other hand, you can have fragrances that project very well but wear off very quickly.

Unitised Volume Price (UVP): Simplifying the Myriad of Bottle Sizes

Once you've settled on one (or more) scents, then comes the question of which one to get based on value for money, or more often, which size of the package to choose. What makes this less than easy is the fact that there is no standardised bottle sizing used by manufacturers. There's a myriad of sizes, ranging from 20ml to 200ml and beyond, and almost everything in between.

Even more complexity arises from the different bottle sizes within houses and brands. For example, YvesSaintLaurent's female perfumes in the EDP concentration have bottle sizes of 30ml, 50ml, 90ml, whereas the male perfumes generally sell as 50ml or 100ml EDTs. Guerlain uses 30ml and 50ml for Shalimar, but L'Instant De Guerlain (EDP) has 30ml, 50ml and 80ml bottles. Almost every brand has a similar story.

So how exactly do I put them all on level footing to compare price? Simple: I unitise the volume and then price it. This gives a price figure for a single unit volume, and then I can compare prices without having to worry about different container sizes. The index that I get from this, I call it UVP (Unitised Volumetric Price). Essentially, UVP simply tells you what you are paying per unit volume for a product, regardless of brand and/or container size. 

To get the UVP, simply divide the price by the number of volume units in a bottle.

The most commonly used unit in Australia is the ml (millilitre), and that is my choice to standardise. So 100ml of perfume in a bottle that costs $200 has a UVP of $2/ml, and in my blog, I would say a UVP index of 2.

The lower the UVP for a given product, the more perfume you get for each dollar.

For Example :

Chanel's Coco Mademoiselle (and indeed most of their feminine EDPs) retails for AU$159 for 50ml, AU$234 for 100ml and AU$350 for a 200ml limited edition bottle. The 50ml bottle therefore costs $3.18/ml, the 100ml bottle costs $2.34/ml and the largest one (200ml bottle) costs $1.75/ml. The 200ml bottle offers the best value for money of the three, because you only pay $1.75 for each ml of perfume, whereas if you were to purchase a 50ml bottle, you'd pay $3.18 for each ml.

UVP is best used within a particular brand to compare value for money across different packaging sizes. However, it can also be useful for comparing and choosing across brands. If the buyer is equally satisfied with the scents and is making a decision purely on which one is better value, the one with the lower UVP should win out. 

This is the inherent limitation of UVP; it is simply a measure of how much you're paying for each unit volume of the fluid, and hence is only a quantitative metric for value for money. It does not factor in other influences, and indeed, most perfume purchases would be based on scent preference first and then value.

That said, I believe UVP is a useful tool to assist decision-making, particularly when deciding package sizes within a particular scent, or deciding between two similar scents from different houses in different package sizes. UVP immunises the measurement of value for money from both brand and package size, but is only true for the given price/size combination. Any sales/discounts should be taken into account for spontaneous comparison across brands or bottle sizes.

UVP is even more useful in skincare products, where choices can be made much more comfortably on price and value compared to fragrances.

Wait! But I use Ounces!

Most perfumes list their volume in both US fluid ounces (roughly about 30ml each, and this is the measure of conversion used by most houses) and millilitres (ml). Converting UVP from $/ml to $/oz is very simple. Just multiply the number by 30.

For example, Les Exclusifs De Chanel No. 22 sells for AU$220/75ml (UVP $2.93/ml) and AU$350/200ml (UVP $1.75/ml).

To get the UVP in $/oz, divide the price by the number of ounces. In ounces, 75ml is 2.5oz, which means at AU$220, it has a UVP of $88/oz. Similarly, the 200ml bottle , which is 6.8oz, has a UVP of $51.4/oz at its retail price of AU$350.

It does not matter whether you use US fluid ounces or millilitres; the relative proportion of the UVP values will be the same (i.e. $2.93/ml and $1.75/ml differ by the exact same proportion as $88/oz and $51.4/oz). However, make sure the units are consistent. Comparison of a dollar per ounce price with a dollar per ml price would make no sense whatsoever.

If you multiply a $/ml price by 30, it may differ slightly from the figure you would get by dividing the price with the number of ounces listed on the packaging. This is because a US ounce is not exactly 30ml (the exact value is about 29.574), and the bottles list rounded values.

The most common sizes encountered are (these are based on empirical observation of packages): 10ml (0.33 or 0.34oz), 15ml (0.5oz), 20ml (0.67 or 0.68oz), 30ml (1oz), 50ml (1.6 or 1.7oz), 75ml (2.5oz), 80ml (2.7oz), 90ml (3oz), 100ml (3.3 or 3.4oz), 125ml (4.2oz), 150ml (5oz) and 200ml (6.6, 6.7 or 6.8oz).

Perfumes: Unique experiences, exotic journeys, and personifications...

I've always had an affinity for certain things. Some things always get me intrigued for one reason or the other. Sometimes it's the complexity and/or precision of how it is put together, such as watches (or a pen such as Lamy's Swift). Sometimes it's the delicate and precise construction of things like fountain pens, and the experience they provide compared to lesser offerings. And sometime's it's the journeys to exotic places that scents can take you on, or transform and enhance, and even speak for the personality of someone.

I see perfumes as having characters and personalities of their own...some loud, some understated, some happy, some sublime, but all of them have feelings they evoke. And that is what makes me fascinated with them.

While I've written reviews for a number of different things in the past (airline services, retail services, electronics, mobile phones and sometimes software), perfumes are an altogether different, and much more challenging beast to tackle. The reason is rather simple: it is incredibly difficult to review them objectively. Reviews for perfumes cannot be based on numerical concentration(s) of their ingredients, but instead on personal perception.

I will review in this blog both male and female scents, acquired through a variety of channels. While not quite a connoisseur or collector, my affinity for perfume does mean I have a fair few of the Pour Homme variety in my wardrobe, and the Pour Femme variety I encounter mostly through sampling before acquisition for gifts to family or friends, or collecting the odd one out that is rare enough.

The biggest challenge in reviewing scents is the variation of how they are perceived. Different people get different intensities of the notes in a scent. Some people will not discern a particular note, while others may perceive the presence of notes that the scent does not necessarily intend to carry. This makes recommendations particularly hard. What I recommend based on my perception of notes and accords may well turn out to be a very differently behaving fragrance for someone else.

What might be not so attractive to me might be good for someone else, and vice versa, and everything in between. Prime example is Hypnotic Poison (Dior). While an excellent fragrance by all means, my nose seems to have a proper vendetta against it, and indeed many fragrances strong on vanilla or cream (such as Diesel's Loverdose). Similarly, fragrances with very "cold" tops (most of them are patchouli-heavy or blackcurrant scents) such as Midnight Poison (Dior) or Tresor: Midnight Rose (Lancome) send my nose into a fix, and it never even bothers waiting for the mids before turning away, with my mind following suit. 

However, as a comforting factor to readers of the blog, my nose tends to be rather well-behaved with perfumes, and I generally pick the accords broadly as they're listed in the notes pyramid for most scents. I usually don't perceive florals as soapy, or woods as carpets. However, I can sometimes point out the synthetic nature that some perfumes will exhibit. Also, my wrists/forearms react well with scent, and generally I have very little issues with body chemistry turning scents off or acrid, or destroying longevity. A potent scent will get quite close to its advertised longevity on my wrist/arm (sometimes even longer, and some scents will survive several hand-washes on my wrists) and that is where I sample majority of the scents.

There's quite a number of scents that I think are good; I don't necessarily discriminate based on the broad type of notes in a fragrance, although I do tend to avoid overly exaggerated notes of any type.I don't necessarily have a hierarchical ranking in mind when I consider them. My choices are predominantly influenced by scent, potency and longevity, the monetary outlay I'm willing to put up with, and the intended recipient of the product, all considered in varying, case-specific combinations.

Just because a fragrance smells good doesn't mean it's suitable in all contexts. The rationale for this originates from what ideas and/or emotions the fragrance evokes in my mind. Some fragrances, such as Estee Lauder's Sensuous, Chanel's Coco Mademoiselle and Allure and the pricey boutique-exclusive No.22, Lancome's now-discontinued Magnifique, YSL's Manifesto and Parisienne L'Essentiel smell too "intimate" to me to be versatile and detached.

However, there are perfumes which are exceptionally pleasant as fragrances, and don't have the "intimacy" element in the notes. Prime examples that come to my mind would be Acqua Di Gioia (Armani), Red Door Aura (Elizabeth Arden), Idylle (Guerlain) to name a few. Make no mistake, I think they are all very good fragrances, but they don't necessarily smell particularly suggestive or intimate. The one that stands out the most in this lot to me is Miss Dior (formerly Miss Dior: Cherie), and Dior Addict: Eau Delice (both Christian Dior).

Which is why I reiterate, every single review here is a personal, individual take, and while factual, is still largely opinion, as will always be the case for something like fragrances. Read on, enjoy reading, but I won't recommend blind buying for a fair few scents.

Before I delve into full-fledged reviews, I would bring to readers' attention a few things. Because I'm based in Australia, I use Australian Dollar RRP prices, which depending on the exchange rate may differ significantly (usually higher in Australia) from prices elsewhere. Moreover, I usually calculate price indices based on the largest bottle size available in Australia. I will, where possible try and obtain prices for all flacon sizes and mention them.

The standard disclaimer for prices applies: prices are only correct as of the time the blog is written, and while I try my level best to ensure accuracy, I take no responsibility for their accuracy into the future. Prices can (and will) change over time, and I won't go back and update prices once a post is published in most cases.

Australian prices can be significantly lower at street level than RRP at some outlets, but to keep a level playing field, I will calculate price indices using list prices, and mention street prices independently. 

And before I wind up this post, I highly recommend you read my post detailing Unitised Volumetric Price (UVP). UVP is my method for making price comparisons more straightforward, across brands, and much more so within brands when deciding which bottle size offers better value.

Happy Reading, and Happy Sniffing :)