Unfortunately.
You are now able to log into the forums and post
Unfortunately.
This is, unfortunately, true about many things in the perfume industry:
I couldn’t agree more. I have three sandalwood oils in my collection that showcase 3 different profiles and I know with certainty if people smelled them they’d have a different opinion on sandalwood.
agree, most consumers dont value or take into consideration the quality ingredients a perfumer may be using in the perfume. perfumers understand and appreciate precious materials in a more significant way, and this can be said also for some consumers, for those that want more than a good scent. But mostly perfume really is about the art of scent, if it smells good , even thought it may contain 80% AC's and has a cheap compound, alot of consumers could buy it, on the other hand if a perfume could have expensive ingredients and is more expensive, but does not have a mass appealing scent, most consumers dont care and wont but it.
All fine fragrances are made to be worn on skin and clothes, not to be sniffed from blotters in ideal conditions. All of the great perfumes were composed to be manufacturable and are remembered because they were wearable. Wearable means, as one of the factors, that they had good projection from skin. That’s where most of the minuscule nuances are already gone. That’s physics and psychology of perception, and they are a part of the perfumery technology.
This is completely counter to my own experience with different sandalwood materials, which smell quite different from one another & can be used to create distinct effects in compositions.
How do they smell from skin at typical concentrations? I mean a typical perfume spray dose is 70 ul, typical concentration is 25%, for a typical use of sandalwood let's take 5%. How different are 0.875 ul of different sandalwood essential oils after application on skin, at a distance of one foot? That's the whole question. At best you will sense santalol.
I have no idea why you're telling me about blotters or undiluted concentrates. By "can be used to create distinct effects in compositions" I precisely mean in the context of EtOH-diluted & sprayed on skin.
And in the context of ethanol diluted and sprayed on skin there will be no difference at all.
This is not at all consistent with my own experience.
I am with you 100% on this and your observation is correct: we are dealing with two different worlds of perfume right now. It is why there are conflicts over IFRA and other regulations also. Regulations are needed in a world of mass production fragrances. But what about those of us focused on artforms and moderately used beauty? The price of a fragrance with 25% sandalwood almost acts as a kind of use-restriction in itself - most people will use a light touch. But an $80 cologne loaded with galaxolide and cheap synthetics? Go wild!
I recognize there are sort of two conversations going on here. One is “what difference does it make to put a really high quality material into a chemical mixture when the consumer won’t know the difference?” Another is about finding sublime olfactory experiences.
So for this comment:
“Sandalwood smells mainly of santalol. You can persuade yourself that its molecules somehow change after ageing (no), or that minor components are the most valuable (no), but in the end people surrounding a wearer would not be able to tell a difference from its sillage, especially if the sandalwood essential oil is used in the perfume composition sparingly.”
This is true on one level, but is just wrong about “persuading yourself” etc.. I feel like there’s an experience that you have not had and you’re persuading yourself that the cheaper knock off is some kind of substitute.
a little research on Sandalwood chemistry reveals there are a variety of secondary molecules that develop overtime as santalols oxidize. Slow ambient pressure distillation produces a more complex oil with a complex multi layered aroma that evolves over time.
You will not experience this with a generic steam distilled Sandalwood oil or with any sandalwood oil if it’s mixed at low% with other materials.
I feel the very best sandalwood oils are a near perfect perfume in themselves. Multi layered complex top notes with woody, confectionary and animalic aspect; a warm clean fuzzy heart; dries down to a warm, clean, very appealing dry base that lasts for 6-8 hours on the skin. and my friends have told me the scent is noticeable in a subtle way so it does perform, it just doesn’t scream.
You might as well say that the finest malt scotch has nothing to offer other than a “scotch note” and it only has value in mixed drinks that are pleasant and can be consumed in a big glass with ice so that the appeal to the most people. Scotch in itself is a sublime experience
The fact that sandalwood is not a powerhouse and doesn’t project does not fit the image of something someone wears trying to show off their wealth. How is wearing a fragrance that only be smelled if someone is giving you a hug flexing your wealth?
Approaching perfumery from the perspective of making some popular juice with a large blast radius on the cheap is ok if that’s your thing (not saying that anyone in this conversation is literally saying this but it is a theme I see here this forum)… it is really just a symptom of our toxic industrialized approach to things and a weird kind of hidden inflation.
There is profound aesthetic beauty in the raw materials however… it is a shame that “highly processed” culture seems to extend to and co-opt the idea of perfumes. I think it’s a false illusion of luxury, like a plastic tiara, or like commercial food filled with additives and chemicals that really are unnecessary beyond serving to make a mediocre product cheap and inoffensive / easy to consume. Just gross. .
This brings to mind that other mortal sin of the 1970s and 1980s: cooking wine 🤮🤮🤮
80$ for a cologne is way too much. i have seen a cologne with lemongrass and grapefruit for 75$. this is absurde and outrageous. i think it had been in the shelve for more than 3 years.
