Sample Pass: "Old ~vs~ New" Vertical Testings

[CookBot]

I also reviewed it as well. Now you can read my extended thoughts on all 3 iterations in the pass, beyond the comments I have left here.

"Of course, if the vintage enthusiasts weren't happy with Becker's respectful reconstruction, they would be in absolute hateful furor once they smelled the 1999 edition."

Yep, that's me alright.

Gosh, both you and LiveJazz were much kinder to the recent Vent Vert than I expected you to be. I really think it's unspeakably vile. Painful, even. I'd take Pine-Sol over it any day.

 

[Varanis Ridari]

"Of course, if the vintage enthusiasts weren't happy with Becker's respectful reconstruction, they would be in absolute hateful furor once they smelled the 1999 edition."

Yep, that's me alright.

Gosh, both you and LiveJazz were much kinder to the recent Vent Vert than I expected you to be. I really think it's unspeakably vile. Painful, even. I'd take Pine-Sol over it any day.

I didn't find it vile, just annoyingly over-simplified.

The missing components are not replaced, and everything remaining is turned up, with a new Cheez-Whiz base to smooth over hurt feelings.

I'm actually sad this ran for as long as it did, but not sad it is gone. Wearing it grated on me after the drydown hit.

 

[grayspoole]

A woman after my own leathery heart! Bonus points for "OG hirsute patchouli."

Glad you liked that! I enjoyed seeing your bottles of Cabochard, and your insightful comments.

The synthetic, fractionated, cleaned-up versions of “patchouli” typically found in modern feminine pink “chypres” just mystify me. Why call it patchouli at all if only to explain, in the next marketing burble, that this isn‘t hippie or funky or head-shop or skanky patchouli. Heaven forfend!

I think natural patchouli smells amazing, and I think it is infinitely preferable and more interesting than modern replacements such as, for example, Firmenich’s Clearwood—

“Soft, clean version of Patchouli without the earthy, leathery and rubbery notes found in the natural oil” (description from the Perfumer Supply House).

Or, in other words, why bother? Clearwood is yet another creamy, woody amber. Firmenich classifies Clearwood as a “natural” ingredient, developed using “white biotechnology” (the name for actual category of biotechnology, it seems, with rather unfortunate connotations) so it can be described as such by those who like to greenwash (or whitewash) their perfumery descriptions.

 

[PStoller]

The synthetic, fractionated, cleaned-up versions of “patchouli” typically found in modern feminine pink “chypres” just mystify me. Why call it patchouli at all if only to explain, in the next marketing burble, that this isn‘t hippie or funky or head-shop or skanky patchouli. Heaven forfend!

I think natural patchouli smells amazing, and I think it is infinitely preferable and more interesting than modern replacements such as, for example, Firmenich’s Clearwood—

“Soft, clean version of Patchouli without the earthy, leathery and rubbery notes found in the natural oil” (description from the Perfumer Supply House).

Or, in other words, why bother?

While I’m with you in preferring whole patchouli in its many complex variations, there are valid reasons perfumers would want to isolate aspects of patchouli, or any other natural: control and predictability. Patchouli isn’t going to be the entire or defining ingredient in most applications, but it can overwhelm whatever else the perfumer is trying to do.

The thing is, as you point out, many current fragrances, especially “feminines,” are “skank-free” when finished, a sort of olfactory airbrushing. In what I think of as perfumery’s Golden Age (from the synthesis of coumarin to the crackdowns of the SCCS), that was anything but the case. One could layer the sweet aspect of patchouli over earthy, leathery, and/or rubbery notes from other sources to create something three dimensional in the manner of a natural, but of a new character. Instead, we have a plethora of perfumes Barbie might wear.

What I’m getting at is, note isolation needn’t result in accord sanitization. It just enables it, and the questionable aesthetic that goes with it.

 

[grayspoole]

While I’m with you in preferring whole patchouli in its many complex variations, there are valid reasons perfumers would want to isolate aspects of patchouli, or any other natural: control and predictability. Patchouli isn’t going to be the entire or defining ingredient in most applications, but it can overwhelm whatever else the perfumer is trying to do.

The thing is, as you point out, many current fragrances, especially “feminines,” are “skank-free” when finished, a sort of olfactory airbrushing. In what I think of as perfumery’s Golden Age (from the synthesis of coumarin to the crackdowns of the SCCS), that was anything but the case. One could layer the sweet aspect of patchouli over earthy, leathery, and/or rubbery notes from other sources to create something three dimensional in the manner of a natural, but of a new character. Instead, we have a plethora of perfumes Barbie might wear.

What I’m getting at is, note isolation needn’t result in accord sanitization. It just enables, and the questionable aesthetic that goes with it.

I agree, if you don’t judge ingredients on whether or not they are more or less “natural” or “synthetic” or, to use the latest marketing buzzword, “clean” (and I don’t) it comes down to different aesthetic choices. Vintage perfumes are usually praised for their complex, smoothly blended accords, and long evolution. It is often not possible, nor was it a goal, to be able to “pick out the notes.” Using a larger percentage of natural and therefore more intrinsically complex ingredients, synthetics such as Guerlain’s famous unrefined and smoky vanillin, as well as the vintage perfume bases that were themselves compounded of dozens and dozens of ingredients shaped this aesthetic.

Flip this, and you can say that vintage perfumes smell murky, heavy, and…to use the most damning critique of all…”perfumey” ( ha!). In many modern perfumes, a different aesthetic is operating, focusing on simplified accords and distinctive notes. Molecule 01, marketed as a “pure scent,’ is a vivid example. Linearity is not a bad thing, and many modern perfumes seemed designed to have an immediate powerful impact when tested and to maintain a consistent smell for an extended period of wear (or disappear in a half hour).

Our vertical testing exercise offers us ample opportunities to reflect on these differences, and perhaps find some positive aspects about the modern reformulations. I don’t think anyone has quoted Turin & Sanchez’ account of Vent Vert yet. Here, the aesthetic valuations are obvious: complex = good and simple = bad.

Because Cellier used to fill in her stark accords using lots of bases (ready-made modular compositions), which were getting increasingly hard to source. When Becker was given the original formula, she unfolded it into its components by looking at the composition of each base (some of it re-entrant: base A used base B and vice versa). In the last analysis, she found that the original Vent Vert contained upward of eleven hundred components, which she reduced to thirty-odd. The 1991 Vent Vert, while less symphonic than the original, had some of the charm of familiar music played by a smaller ensemble: the newfound clarity made it possible to appreciate the tune to the fullest. Not the real thing, but a very good effort. In 1999, the formula was changed again by Nathalie Feisthauer and this time completely defaced. Instead of a three-course meal, you get an airplane tray. Everything comes at once, and all in miniature. Vent Vert (version three) has become a linear perfume, with little time evolution save a terrible cheapening of the formula as time goes on and the money runs out, a sort of dollar dance in reverse.

The funny thing is, 1947 Vent Vert smells pure and simple to me, despite its eleventy billion ingredients. I have put it on many times with the idea that, this time, I will really, really focus on the note breakdown. And I usually fail, because the whole composition is what beguiles me, not the parts, and I just want to enjoy it. The 1991 Becker smells good to me too, perhaps cleaner and sharper, somewhat sweeter and more floral, but enjoyable.. Haven’t tried the Feisthauer yet.

 

[CookBot]

Using a larger percentage of natural and therefore more intrinsically complex ingredients, synthetics such as Guerlain’s famous unrefined and smoky vanillin, as well as the vintage perfume bases that were themselves compounded of dozens and dozens of ingredients shaped this aesthetic.

Does anybody know exactly why the perfume industry stopped regularly using such prefabricated bases? It seems like it would be very cost-efficient, and lord knows the bean counters have ruled the day since the turn of the current century.

I realize the classic bases became untenable due to ingredient restriction, but it seems like they could have come up with law-abiding ones to take their places.

Haven’t tried the Feisthauer yet.

I am *so* looking forward to your appraisal of it.

 

[LiveJazz]

Does anybody know exactly why the perfume industry stopped regularly using such prefabricated bases? It seems like it would be very cost-efficient, and lord knows the bean counters have ruled the day since the turn of the current century.

I realize the classic bases became untenable due to ingredient restriction, but it seems like they could have come up with law-abiding ones to take their places.

I feel like the standard AC combinations we see now are de facto prefabricated bases. They're just the IP of the manufacturers as opposed to specific houses. The better to extract rent on their IP, I presume. Since the relevant aromachemicals are patented or otherwise locked up, I'm sure there are legal reasons houses can't truly "own" a prefabricated combination that is unique to them, or market an accord as "theirs".

Adding: I'm curious, though...do the likes of Firmenich create unique compounds specifically for houses, if requested and paid appropriately? If so, those compounds could be contractually linked to just that house. I wonder if that's part of their business model, or if it's more "here's this new scent we created, who wants to use it?"

 

[grayspoole]

I feel like the standard AC combinations we see now are de facto prefabricated bases. They're just the IP of the manufacturers as opposed to specific houses. The better to extract rent on their IP, I presume.

This is an interesting way to think of it. Some bases are still being produced using captive ingredients, in what seems to be more a way of marketing the captive ingredient by presenting it as part of a usable accord than an attempt to sell the base. And there are archival independent perfumers (such as Jamie Frater, Paul Kiler, active on our DIY Forum) who produce their own bases.

This Fragrantica article focuses on new “de Laire” bases offered by Symrise. I would love to know if and how often these are used, or if they are are just for demonstration at perfume expos:

New Face of the Legendary De Laire

I often imagine Cellier pouring in one vintage de Laire base after another into a beaker, cigarette in hand.

 

[IsoESuperman]

I often imagine Cellier pouring in one vintage de Laire base after another into a beaker, cigarette in hand.

...and then ashing into the beaker of Bandit and saying, "Parfait!"

 

[CookBot]

I feel like the standard AC combinations we see now are de facto prefabricated bases. They're just the IP of the manufacturers as opposed to specific houses. The better to extract rent on their IP, I presume.

Makes sense.

Adding: I'm curious, though...do the likes of Firmenich create unique compounds specifically for houses, if requested and paid appropriately?

I just assumed they were doing this, since quite often now you'll see "supplier" (IFF, Firmenich, etc.) listed below the name of the perfumer/nose.

 

[PStoller]

I just assumed they were doing this, since quite often now you'll see "supplier" (IFF, Firmenich, etc.) listed below the name of the perfumer/nose.

I think that means the company supplied the perfumer under contract, not just the materials.

 

[CookBot]

I think that means the company supplied the perfumer under contract, not just the materials.

Oh really! I had no idea. So like loaning out an actor to a different movie studio, eh? (If we were in the 1930s.)

 

[Couronne de Violette]

The synthetic, fractionated, cleaned-up versions of “patchouli” typically found in modern feminine pink “chypres” just mystify me. Why call it patchouli at all if only to explain, in the next marketing burble, that this isn‘t hippie or funky or head-shop or skanky patchouli. Heaven forfend!

Have you tried Ravel Faun? Nice combination of bergamot and patchouli, almost a date/prune aspect - dark brown depth, although no hippy girl funk. Stays close to the skin and is interesting despite its simplicity.

 

[PStoller]

So like loaning out an actor to a different movie studio, eh? (If we were in the 1930s.)

Not quite like that, because Firmenich, IFF, et al. don’t operate as retail perfumers. The arrangement (as I understand it, which could be inaccurate) is more vertical than lateral. Many houses who do not maintain an in-house roster of perfumers, or don’t rely exclusively on such a roster, may contract with the relative handful of big suppliers for perfumers and formulae. These companies and perfumers haven’t always been credited—and may still not be, depending on the terms of the contract.

Someone more knowledgeable about the business of perfumery can confirm or deny my notion of how it works.

 

[grayspoole]

Have you tried Ravel Faun? Nice combination of bergamot and patchouli, almost a date/prune aspect - dark brown depth, although no hippy girl funk. Stays close to the skin and is interesting despite its simplicity.

I have not. I should look into it, but “hippy girl funk” might be exactly what I am looking for. (For the record, I want to point out that punk rock girls, like I was, also wore patchouli with our Dr. Martens and motorcycle jackets. Can’t let the hippies have all of the patchouli…)

I‘ve been feeling lately that I should have a patchouli-focused scent, just for fun. Claire V recently did a “tournament of patchoulis” on her blog (she’s reposting many of the reviews here), and she gave high marks to Santa Maria Novella’s Patchouli, so that’s another one I want to try.

Claire V’s posts are always good reading…

Personal Pantheon of Patchouli Perfumes, Part I
Personal Pantheon of Patchouli Perfumes, Part II

 

[LiveJazz]

I have not. I should look into it, but “hippy girl funk” might be exactly what I am looking for. (For the record, I want to point out that punk rock girls, like I was, also wore patchouli with our Dr. Martens and motorcycle jackets. Can’t let the hippies have all of the patchouli…)

I‘ve been feeling lately that I should have a patchouli-focused scent, just for fun. Claire V recently did a “tournament of patchoulis” on her blog (she’s reposting many of the reviews here), and she gave high marks to Santa Maria Novella’s Patchouli, so that’s another one I want to try.

Claire V’s posts are always good reading…

Personal Pantheon of Patchouli Perfumes, Part I
Personal Pantheon of Patchouli Perfumes, Part II

SMN Patchouli definitely qualifies as "hippy girl funk", though I have to say it's very, very similar to a good patchouli oil. As Claire says, there are just a few other nuances, and so as good as it is, I have to wonder if it's worth the extra price when the overall effect is 95% "I am raw patchouli, hear me roar".

I have a decent amount and can send you some. Would be curious to read your thoughts. I really do like it (because I like the smell of raw patchouli), but I have mixed feelings on recommending it broadly as per above.

 

[grayspoole]

SMN Patchouli definitely qualifies as "hippy girl funk", though I have to say it's very, very similar to a good patchouli oil. As Claire says, there are just a few other nuances, and so as good as it is, I have to wonder if it's worth the extra price when the overall effect is 95% "I am raw patchouli, hear me roar".

I have a decent amount and can send you some. Would be curious to read your thoughts. I really do like it (because I like the smell of raw patchouli), but I have mixed feelings on recommending it broadly as per above.

Oh that is very kind of you! I would love to try a tiny bit. I was waiting to visit SMN on my next trip to NYC since they don’t do samples, as far as I can tell.

 

[Varanis Ridari]

I have had to pause the sampling after my Vent Vert trio due to work, lack of time after it, and a brief bit of sinus pain.

If my holding of the samples grows too long for the group, I'll cancel mid-way and ship off, denoting what I tried and what I didn't.

In fact, I can skip the Fahrenheit and Or Black comparisons because I already did them years back, if that helps expedite things.

 

[PStoller]

I have had to pause the sampling after my Vent Vert trio due to work, lack of time after it, and a brief bit of sinus pain.

If my holding of the samples grows too long for the group, I'll cancel mid-way and ship off, denoting what I tried and what I didn't.

In fact, I can skip the Fahrenheit and Or Black comparisons because I already did them years back, if that helps expedite things.

I’m not sure how the route is configured, but as a fellow west-coaster, I might be next, and I’m traveling next week, so I’m by no means in a rush to receive. My vote is you rest your sinuses and return to active duty when the pain subsides and work permits.

 

[CookBot]

I’m not sure how the route is configured, but as a fellow west-coaster, I might be next, and I’m traveling next week, so I’m by no means in a rush to receive. My vote is you rest your sinuses and return to active duty when the pain subsides and work permits.

Seconded.

and a brief bit of sinus pain.

I'm blaming that 1999 version of Vent Vert.

<Joking/Not joking>