Favorite musk centered scents for men

[Shahbaz_2009]

Abdul Samad Al Qurashi Deer Musk

Serge Lutens Muscs Koublai Khan

Yves Saint Laurent Kouros

Best Regards.

 

[ImaFedec]

I do not know any Musk that is mostly targeted for men but:

For a straightforward musk: Kiehl's Original musk

Or, not as straightforward but still very present,

Rosendo Mateu - n5
French Lover by F.M.

 

[motorcade]

Nasomatto Silver Musk

 

[L'Homme Blanc Individuel]

Maurice Roucel: There sometimes is a misconception that Frederic Malle Musc Ravageur is my “musk” fragrance. This is not true; there is no musk in it at all, it is an animalic oriental. Helmut Lang Eau de Cologne is one of the muskiest perfumes on the market and is my musk masterpiece.

Thank you for posting that.

I've never understood why it was named "Musc" Ravageur. They should have simply named it Ravageur. It's not a musk scent... and it's further proof of what I've said a million times on this forum: too many people smell with their eyes instead of their nose. Ignore the name. Smell the scent. Musc Rav is not musky.

Helmut Lang Eau de Cologne is really good and it is indeed musky. To me, it smells like baby oil made into a masculine 'cologne' style scent. Cleaner than clean skin. It has an almost perplexing innocence to it, and yet it smells manly.

 

[L'Homme Blanc Individuel]

I don't know if it qualifies as musk centered scent or not, but Bortnikoff Musk Cologne is terrific.

Yeah, I have to give this one an enthusiastic thumbs up too! I know what you mean when you say "I don't know if it qualifies as musk centered scent or not," because it's quite a complex scent... but to me, after the first hour or two, it becomes all about the musk - a warm rich & round musk. It's extraordinary.

 

[imm0rtelle]

Thank you for posting that.

I've never understood why it was named "Musc" Ravageur. They should have simply named it Ravageur. It's not a musk scent... and it's further proof of what I've said a million times on this forum: too many people smell with their eyes instead of their nose. Ignore the name. Smell the scent. Musc Rav is not musky.

Helmut Lang Eau de Cologne is really good and it is indeed musky. To me, it smells like baby oil made into a masculine 'cologne' style scent. Cleaner than clean skin. It has an almost perplexing innocence to it, and yet it smells manly.

There are so many misconceptions and misinformation that keep being parroted by enthusiasts that actual perfumers would probably laugh at what people say about their creations.

So far Musc Ravageur has been brought up twice already as a musk fragrance. I predict more will continue to list it in this thread.

 

[L'Homme Blanc Individuel]

There are so many misconceptions and misinformation that keep being parroted by enthusiasts that actual perfumers would probably laugh at what people say about their creations.

So far Musc Ravageur has been brought up twice already as a musk fragrance. I predict more will continue to list it in this thread.

Absolutely.

Names can be misleading. Take Creed's Royal Oud, for example. It smells more like cedar or sandalwood. Maurice Roucel created Musc Ravageur, but Frederic Malle probably came up with the name. Maurice Roucel says there's no musk in Musc Rav, and he'd know.

Notes can be even more misleading. People act like notes are an ingredients list, but they're not. Notes are the marketing department's impressions of what they want you to get from the scent, or what they want you to notice in the hope that you'll then buy it.

And to make matters even more complicated, perfume websites screw up listings all the time. Check out Fragrantica's page for Tabac Rouge. They forgot to list tobacco in the notes even though tobacco is the most prominent note in the scent. And, hilariously, because Fragrantica didn't list tobacco in the notes, you'll find reviews there which say there's no tobacco in it, even though if you smell it, tobacco is the most prominent part of what you smell.

Human beings are sensually lazy creatures. Most people pay more attention to what they see than to what all of their other senses tell them. Musc Rav has no musk, but they see the word Musc, so they convince themselves they smell it. Tabac Rouge is a tobacco scent, but some doofus at Fragrantica forgot to list tobacco in the notes, so reviewers there swear they don't smell tobacco in it. Too many people try to smell with their eyes.

 

[midsbloke]

Chanel 1957 is a favourite musk fragrance of mine

 

[theaveragecologneguy]

Kristiansand New York

 

[Larry Hoover]

Thank you for posting that.

I've never understood why it was named "Musc" Ravageur. They should have simply named it Ravageur. It's not a musk scent... and it's further proof of what I've said a million times on this forum: too many people smell with their eyes instead of their nose. Ignore the name. Smell the scent. Musc Rav is not musky.

Helmut Lang Eau de Cologne is really good and it is indeed musky. To me, it smells like baby oil made into a masculine 'cologne' style scent. Cleaner than clean skin. It has an almost perplexing innocence to it, and yet it smells manly.

There are so many misconceptions and misinformation that keep being parroted by enthusiasts that actual perfumers would probably laugh at what people say about their creations.

So far Musc Ravageur has been brought up twice already as a musk fragrance. I predict more will continue to list it in this thread.

Absolutely.

Names can be misleading. Take Creed's Royal Oud, for example. It smells more like cedar or sandalwood. Maurice Roucel created Musc Ravageur, but Frederic Malle probably came up with the name. Maurice Roucel says there's no musk in Musc Rav, and he'd know.

Notes can be even more misleading. People act like notes are an ingredients list, but they're not. Notes are the marketing department's impressions of what they want you to get from the scent, or what they want you to notice in the hope that you'll then buy it.

And to make matters even more complicated, perfume websites screw up listings all the time. Check out Fragrantica's page for Tabac Rouge. They forgot to list tobacco in the notes even though tobacco is the most prominent note in the scent. And, hilariously, because Fragrantica didn't list tobacco in the notes, you'll find reviews there which say there's no tobacco in it, even though if you smell it, tobacco is the most prominent part of what you smell.

Human beings are sensually lazy creatures. Most people pay more attention to what they see than to what all of their other senses tell them. Musc Rav has no musk, but they see the word Musc, so they convince themselves they smell it. Tabac Rouge is a tobacco scent, but some doofus at Fragrantica forgot to list tobacco in the notes, so reviewers there swear they don't smell tobacco in it. Too many people try to smell with their eyes.

I understand you two are holding on to what Roucel said in that interview about Musc Ravageur not having any musk in it. But that's quite strange since there was a video on Youtube where Roucel shortly described how Musc Ravageur was created (it was shot in black/white). Instead, there is this video about Dans Tes Bras:

He says at around 0:50 - ''There's lots of musk, more than Musc Ravageur''.

If there's no musk in MR at all, how can the perfumer himself make such a statement? There is a thread about that same interview immortelle referred to and I agree with a member on there. There is definitely a synthetic musk somewhere in MR. Could be the Tonquitone for all I know, but it's there. Yes, you are correct, there is no ''real'' musk in MR, but there certainly IS synthetic musk in MR.

What about this one?

Roucel says at 2:05 - ''Very musky notes, I'd say the animal note of musk''. Surely he means synthetics to emulate the note of musk. So knowing this, why would it be misinformation if one would describe Musc Ravageur as a ''musk'' fragrance, if the perfumer himself insistst it at least emulates the smell of ''the animal note of musk''? It doesn't make sense. Any person who is at least familiar with different musks knows MR contains some type of synthetic musk just like in Kiehl's musk to give off that slight ''dirty'' accord. We all know using real deer musk is unheard of in modern mainstream perfumery (I say mainstream cause I understand some artisans like Bortnikoff use the real thing, but that's a very niche market).

 

[Deleted member 26264036]

Roja Musk Aoud, Ensar Oud EO2 & Private Blend, Chanel 1957.

 

[pluran]

Muskiness in MR is apparently civetone.

 

[Nastka]

I'd add Boss Collection Wool Musk and Labdanum 18 to scents that have been already mentioned.

I'm not a fan of Musc Ravageur or it's dupe Meharees because they turn out to be very stifling on my skin.

MKK and L'Ombre Fauve are winners in my book.

 

[JON RODGERS]

Helmut Lang EDP (vintage). Don't give a damn about the marketing - it's glorious :thumbsup:

 

[NighthawkAtTheDiner]

There are so many misconceptions and misinformation that keep being parroted by enthusiasts that actual perfumers would probably laugh at what people say about their creations.

So far Musc Ravageur has been brought up twice already as a musk fragrance. I predict more will continue to list it in this thread.

I suspect we have a different idea of what musk smells like, because I distinctly smell muskiness in MR. Whether it is real musk, synthetic musk, some accord that gives off the impression of a musk doesn't really matter.

What really surprises me is how the idea of "notes" is taken so seriously - aren't most concoctions built with chemical accords anyway? And different facets are highlighted in different ones, hence the numerous different accords to approach a particular note? And, in another interview, Roucel has spoken about how MR is musky, and it's easy to see why. It opens with a distinct dirtiness which my nose perceives as Musk too.

 

[imm0rtelle]

If we take the really pedantic route then almost every fragrance is a musk fragrance, because they almost always contain musks. However, different musks have different facets, and I'm sure not everyone would agree that the fragrances that will be listed below smell particularly "musky". Regardless of all this, one thing is for certain, Maurice Roucel considers Helmut Lang Eau de Cologne, not Musc Ravageur, as his musk masterpiece. As stated below, this means Maurice Roucel considers Velvione as the de facto "musky" musk. He wouldn't even really consider the musk he used in Musc Ravageur as "musky" as Velvione.

Cosmone contributes to the warm musky foundations of “Moschino Pink Bouquet” (Moschino, 2012) or “Be Jewelled” (Vera Wang, 2013).

The 15-membered ring Exaltenone (Musk Z4, 337) contributes to the animalic aspect of “Cologne Indélébile” (Frédéric Malle, 2015).

Nirvanolide is featured in “Bleu” (Chanel, 2010) by Jacques Polge and and Polvolide in “Un Jardin Sur La Lagune” (Hermès, 2019).

16-membered macrocycles display warmer, more animalic tonalities of musk (Figure 27). In “Mon Guerlain EDT” (Guerlain, 2017), Velvione (340) is combined with ethylene brassylate (344), Ambrettolide (345), Helvetolide (383), Habanolide (343) as well as with 5-Muscenone (373).

Helmut Lang was a big fan of Velvione, and Maurice Roucel incorporated a lot of that into the Helmut Lang's Eau de Cologne and Eau de Parfum.

In 1998 while working with Master perfumer Maurice Roucel to recreate “the scent of his lover's sweat …erotic, musk, skin”, the designer fell in love with the musky floralcy of Givaudan's Velvione©, that was profusely poured into the base of Helmut Lang eau de parfum and cologne, both launched in 2000.

But how does Velvione smell? A macrocyclic musk developed in the Givaudan labs, velvione© is inexpensive, alluring and above all musky in the best possible way. Think of that addictive baby skin scent everybody loves. Moreover velvione© is only barely animalic and favors a petal velvetiness that blends well in floral bouquets adding a captivating glow, so it perfectly fits the ‘90s cerebral clean vibe in fragrance. The prominent powdery radiance has a vintage connection, close to the retro elegance of nitromusks like must ketone (think of vintage a sheer Chanel No. 5 muskiness) which is an extension of Lang’s sober palette.

Since Maurice Roucel considers Helmut Lang Eau de Cologne as his musk masterpiece, and that he overloaded Velvione in it, it means that he considers Velvione as an actual "musky" musk, rather than the musk he used in Musc Ravageur.

Helvetolide (383) with levels of 36 % and 40 % in “Les Sables Roses” (Louis Vuitton, 2019) and “La Nuit Trésor Musc Diamant” (Lancôme, 2019).

Romandolide (384),301 which was featured at 40 % in “Valentina Pink” (Valentino, 2015)

Serenolide (385), prominently featured in “Artisan” (John Varvatos, 2009). Serenolide is about 6 times more intense than Helvetolide (383) and 17 % of it formed the white musky counterpoint to the green galbanum accord in “(untitled)” (Maison Martin Margiela, 2010).

Sylkolide (388) had its debut in “Oh, Lola!” (Marc Jacobs, 2011), and is also prominently featured in “Toy Boy” (Moschino, 2019).

Edenolide (389) possesses a prominent apple note. It can be found at 5 % in “Spicebomb Extreme” (Victor & Rolf, 2015) and in “Fiesta Carioca” (Escada, 2017).

Cashmeran (417) has become very popular lately, and high levels of 25 % were used in “Dans Tes Bras” (Frédéric Malle, 2008), and in “Duro” (Nasomatto, 2007).

Musk odorants can, however, also blend into woody notes. Selective hydrogenation of the γ,δ-double bond of 409 completely eliminated the musk character, and 413 (Figure 30) smelled similar to the fully hydrogenated 414 but with the woody-agrestic character of 415.

Despite losing the "musk" smell, these molecules are still considered musks.

Sinfonide (421) was featured in “Rose Magnetic” (Essential Parfums, 2018), and together with Ambertonic (422) and another Cashmeran derivative by the name of Nebulone (423)321 in “Polo Ultra Blue” (Ralph Lauren, 2018).

In Ambertonic, the woody-ambery tonality is in the foreground, while the musky side is in the background.

Nebulone (423) was the first of a series of Cashmeran acetals and ethers and has been used at 5.7 % in “Miracle Forever” (Lancôme, 2006).

More popular, more potent and far more ambery is the gem-dimethyl analogue Amber Xtreme (425). It was used in “Invictus” (Paco Rabanne, 2013), where it is accompanied by the unsaturated ketal analogue Operanide (426), imparting a woody, mossy connotation.

Operanide was used at 3 % in “Y Eau de Parfum” (Yves Saint Laurent, 2018).

While Amber Xtreme is a musk, the authors of this paper did not list Ambrofix/Ambrox/Abroxan in the musk category despite people feeling it has "musk" qualities. So depending on the aromachemical, a musk can smell nothing like a musk while a non-musk can smell like a musk. There's also new classes of musks where they don't even need to be the traditional big rings anymore.

 

[Brian5701]

+1 Kiehl's Original Musk

 

[hednic]

Musc by LT Piver

 

[NighthawkAtTheDiner]

Thanks for the detailed explanation, but what Roucel considers his “musk masterpiece” doesn’t concern me. I’ve never once said anything about that perfume, one way or the other. All I did was recommend Musc Ravageur as a “musky perfume” for men and you go ahead and post a fairly dismissive post about how it doesn’t in fact contain any musk and fragrance enthusiasts are merely parroting what the brands tell them, which frankly was uncalled for. But this 4 post exchange has gone on for 3 posts too long, so let’s drop it here.

 

[deltasun]

Thanks for the detailed explanation, but what Roucel considers his “musk masterpiece” doesn’t concern me. I’ve never once said anything about that perfume, one way or the other. All I did was recommend Musc Ravageur as a “musky perfume” for men and you go ahead and post a fairly dismissive post about how it doesn’t in fact contain any musk and fragrance enthusiasts are merely parroting what the brands tell them, which frankly was uncalled for. But this 4 post exchange has gone on for 3 posts too long, so let’s drop it here.

Good post, completely agree. :thumbsup: