Abercrombie Fierce formula, latest information as of 2022

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
Since new articles have come to light in more recent years, this is the latest information on what exactly is in the formula for the fragrance "Fierce".
"Fierce" was a fragrance commissioned and marketed by the company Abercrombie & Fitch. It is a very classic fragrance, and brings back memories from the early decade of the 2000s.

Unfortunately the fragrance was later reformulated, which did not smell as good, and the fragrance has long since been discontinued. But was such a classic fragrance and left such a lasting impression that perfume enthusiasts still remember it. It's somewhat of a tragedy that it is was discontinued, all the more reason to want to get a better understanding of the formula.

I know much has already been written about this in this forum, but I thought I would try to summarise it.

GCMS analysis has found that the original formula contains around 40% Iso E Super. It was obvious to anyone smelling this that it contains an overdose of Iso E Super.

Then there was that alluring grapefruit smell, which not everyone even recognised in the fragrance, but I did.

Using my nose, I believe I have identified Pamplefleur as the specific AC that is responsible for this note. Pamplefleur strongly reminds me of the sort of pungent and cedary grapefruit note I seem to be able to pick up in Fierce. It is not a "clean" smell. It is a mouth-puckering rhubarb smell, very slight fake vetiver nuance, Ruby Red grapefruit, dirty, sexy. It contributes the "seductive" quality to the fragrance.
Pamplefleur is pretty potent, so not much would be needed, but I do think it adds one of the instantly recognisable notes in Fierce.

One of the perfumers who originally developed the fragrance, Christophe Laudamiel, was interviewed many years later and, although it was entirely from his memory, he did list the following ingredients:

1-2% Bacdanol
0.2 to 1% Polysantol (possibly, but it might not be in there, he could not remember)
Evernyl 0.2-1% (in pure form)
Dihydromyrcenol 4-10%.
Cashmeran
only a little bit of Ambrettolide, less than the Cashmeran
quality clary sage oil
a bit of nonadienal (cucumber smell)
Hedione, maybe 1.2-3%, or perhaps even more.
damascone alpha (this is moderately powerful so not much would be needed)
Scentenal
salicylates
citronellol
coumarin

He said it was a short formula of about 25 ingredients.

source: https://web.archive.org/web/2020012...interview-with-perfumer-christophe-laudamiel/

In another interview about the fragrance Fierce, he additionally mentioned that he had used:

pino acetaldehyde (fresh, like an ocean breeze, as a possible finishing touch)
a touch of lemon
lavandin grosso

In that second interview, he mentioned in the opening about how he developed the idea for Fierce, that he had first been playing with Grisalva, Cashmeran and Iso E Super to develop the base. It's not entirely clear from the interview that there is Grisalva in it.

source: I'm the Perfumer Who Created the Scent You Love to Hate - Abercrombie & Fitch's Fierce, Andrew Fiouzi, Mel Magazine


In addition to these ingredients, some believe there may also be methyl pamplemousse, fir EO, cardamom, petitgrain, and possibly vetiver or vetiveryl acetate.

(All of these ingredients listed so far would add up to a total of 25)
 

Saraiva

Basenotes Member
May 26, 2018
Since new articles have come to light in more recent years, this is the latest information on what exactly is in the formula for the fragrance "Fierce".
"Fierce" was a fragrance commissioned and marketed by the company Abercrombie & Fitch. It is a very classic fragrance, and brings back memories from the early decade of the 2000s.

Unfortunately the fragrance was later reformulated, which did not smell as good, and the fragrance has long since been discontinued. But was such a classic fragrance and left such a lasting impression that perfume enthusiasts still remember it. It's somewhat of a tragedy that it is was discontinued, all the more reason to want to get a better understanding of the formula.

I know much has already been written about this in this forum, but I thought I would try to summarise it.

GCMS analysis has found that the original formula contains around 40% Iso E Super. It was obvious to anyone smelling this that it contains an overdose of Iso E Super.

Then there was that alluring grapefruit smell, which not everyone even recognised in the fragrance, but I did.

Using my nose, I believe I have identified Pamplefleur as the specific AC that is responsible for this note. Pamplefleur strongly reminds me of the sort of pungent and cedary grapefruit note I seem to be able to pick up in Fierce. It is not a "clean" smell. It is a mouth-puckering rhubarb smell, very slight fake vetiver nuance, Ruby Red grapefruit, dirty, sexy. It contributes the "seductive" quality to the fragrance.
Pamplefleur is pretty potent, so not much would be needed, but I do think it adds one of the instantly recognisable notes in Fierce.

One of the perfumers who originally developed the fragrance, Christophe Laudamiel, was interviewed many years later and, although it was entirely from his memory, he did list the following ingredients:

1-2% Bacdanol
0.2 to 1% Polysantol (possibly, but it might not be in there, he could not remember)
Evernyl 0.2-1% (in pure form)
Dihydromyrcenol 4-10%.
Cashmeran
only a little bit of Ambrettolide, less than the Cashmeran
quality clary sage oil
a bit of nonadienal (cucumber smell)
Hedione, maybe 1.2-3%, or perhaps even more.
damascone alpha (this is moderately powerful so not much would be needed)
Scentenal
salicylates
citronellol
coumarin

He said it was a short formula of about 25 ingredients.

source: https://web.archive.org/web/2020012...interview-with-perfumer-christophe-laudamiel/

In another interview about the fragrance Fierce, he additionally mentioned that he had used:

pino acetaldehyde (fresh, like an ocean breeze, as a possible finishing touch)
a touch of lemon
lavandin grosso

In that second interview, he mentioned in the opening about how he developed the idea for Fierce, that he had first been playing with Grisalva, Cashmeran and Iso E Super to develop the base. It's not entirely clear from the interview that there is Grisalva in it.

source: I'm the Perfumer Who Created the Scent You Love to Hate - Abercrombie & Fitch's Fierce, Andrew Fiouzi, Mel Magazine


In addition to these ingredients, some believe there may also be methyl pamplemousse, fir EO, cardamom, petitgrain, and possibly vetiver or vetiveryl acetate.

(All of these ingredients listed so far would add up to a total of 25)
Good Morning
Your opinion on this formula is very interesting.
It talks about Ambrettolide, but which Ambrettolide, there are several, this confuses a little.
I read on Facebook, the following dialogue by Arcadi Boix Camps:

""Arcadi Boix Camps:
To buy it from Ventós is wasting your money. You can buy it for the group that purchased Synarôme and it is NOT any Cis Iso-Ambrettolide but the real "Ambrettolide" present in Ambrette seed oil (7-cis-Hexadecen-16-olide) because what we commercially call Ambrettolide this should be named iso-Ambrettolide (9-Hexadecen-16-olide) or "isoambrettolides" since they sell as Ambrettolide also (6-Hexadecen-16-olide). Everybody is confused or know nothing about that. We use the real Ambrettolide for the last 15 years and buying in batches of 100 kilos every time and not precisely from Synarôme. As usual, we are not interested in reselling chemicals. Anyway the real Ambrettolide is Scentolide, also called "Ambrettolide Vrai"-, captive and much, much better than Synarôme's "scentolide" which is much less purified. Scentolide and Ambrettolide Vrai, although the same molecule is like night and day. "Ambrettolide Vrai" is the jewel and not Scentolide. We will never buy "Scentolide" but "Ambrettolide Vrai" and what we call Ambrettolide should be named "Isoambrettolide" The "isoambrettolides" are much weaker and having less charm and less difusiveness. In other words, the isoambrettolides have much less character as compared to the real Ambrettolide. Accords of "Ambettolide Vrai" with "Angelicolide" are amogst the best I have ever made on the Musk bases. Our Bases Musk Gris 40740-2/D and Musk Extraordinaire 40740-3/D are full of Ambrettolide Vrai and Angelicolide.
9-Hexadecen-16-olide and 6-Hecadecen-16-olide should not be called Ambrettolide but "Isoambrettolides". This is a commercial lie, I don't know why accepted! This only confuse perfumers!
Of course 6-Hexedecen-16-olide and 9-Hecadecen-16-olide are very different and bad, they are weak like water!!!...Many top fragrances contain the real "Ambrettolide Vrai" (cis-7-Hexadecen -16-olide) but when people try to copy them, they use "Isoambretolides" since the mass spectrum is the same but the smell they get it is not the same! Many top, top, top fragrances contain "Ambrettolide Vrai" amongst them the most successful fragrance for men nowadays.
Of course they are different, and very different. This is like the fabulous musk Ambretone (5Z)-Cyclohexadec-5-en-1-one and its isomer Globanone (Cyclohexadec-8-en-1-one). They have a very similar if not identical mass spectrum but do they smell the same? Of course not, they don't. I believe that only (cis-7-Hecadecen-16-olide should be called "Ambrettolide" and not the other isomers that should be called "Isoambrettolides" but one thing is the correct thing to do and another are the "Commercial" strategies that only confuse perfumers.""

""Justus Reule:
Arcadi, is Ambretone the same as Velvione?""

""Arcadi Boix Camps:
Yes but the Japanese quality for my appreciation is much better
They discovered and Givaudan copied. According to my taste, Anbrettone It is one of the most elegant macrocyclic molecules
Not now.
My advise, if you want a treasure do not use Velvione, use only Ambrettone. Although officially they are the same, they are not. Ambrettone is pure Cyclohexadecen-5-one while Givaudan's Velvione contains some Cyclohexadecen-6-one... They copied from Takasago, company that badly invented it
In all these molecules the 5 isomer is best. Same as Muscenone. The active isomer is Cis-3-Methylcyclopentadecen-5-one. in fact this is the key although in regular Muscenone there is only 50%. In Captive Dextro Muscenone, there is 99.9% of Dextro cis-3-Methylcyclopentadecen-5-one. The regular product besides it is racemic and not right handed. Captive right-handed Muscenone has only one peak. Naturally is much stronger and much longer lasting"

For a beginner like me, I was in doubt if any of the products accessible to perfumery amateurs are really the same as those used by big factories.
I really can't smell the ambrettolide I have, possibly it has nothing to do with the real thing.
This made me sad and discouraged, after all I have made sacrifices and spent money to buy products that are no good.
(Perfumery is a very expensive hobby for a Portuguese).
What is your opinion Dear Friend Parker?
Thank you very much.
Best regards.
José Saraiva
Portugal
(sorry my english is half done by me and half done by google translator)
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
It talks about Ambrettolide, but which Ambrettolide, there are several, this confuses a little.
The perfumer worked for IFF at the time, so it would probably be IFF Ambrettolide. (This is the synthetic, not the natural)
The common low cost commercial Ambrettolide.

I really can't smell the ambrettolide I have, possibly it has nothing to do with the real thing.
You are a beginner. Musks like ambrettolide often do not really have much of a distinct strong smell. They have more of an effect on the fragrance. It would be normal if you feel you are not able to smell them.
If you're smelling it at pure concentration, it is probably overwhelming your nose and you cannot smell anything.

If you are complete beginner, even if you knew exactly what all the ingredients were, I think it is unlikely you would have the skill to be able to know how to balance them to get anything that comes close to the smell of Fierce. Trying to recreate Fierce is not a good project for a beginner.
 

Saraiva

Basenotes Member
May 26, 2018
The perfumer worked for IFF at the time, so it would probably be IFF Ambrettolide. (This is the synthetic, not the natural)
The common low cost commercial Ambrettolide.


You are a beginner. Musks like ambrettolide often do not really have much of a distinct strong smell. They have more of an effect on the fragrance. It would be normal if you feel you are not able to smell them.
If you're smelling it at pure concentration, it is probably overwhelming your nose and you cannot smell anything.

If you are complete beginner, even if you knew exactly what all the ingredients were, I think it is unlikely you would have the skill to be able to know how to balance them to get anything that comes close to the smell of Fierce.
In this case it's spending money for nothing, I believe, the same thing happens with other products.
They keep what's good, sell what's no good or what's weaker, it must be to prevent them from competing with them.
The secret is the soul of the business, I believe.
I smell it on the 10% scent strip, but I can barely smell it.
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
This should be obvious and go without saying, but perhaps I need to mention it in this thread, above percentages are for the perfume concentrate, not the final fragrance dissolved in alcohol. (No one should be spraying a solution of 40% Iso E Super directly on them) Fierce might have been around 18% perfume concentrate in alcohol (just a total guess, based on its price range and strength), possibly as high as 22%.

(If you try it with the higher percentage, probably try increasing the percentage of Iso E Super and decreasing the percentage of all the other things because they can be very potent. At least at the time it was released, it was highly unusual for a fragrance to have so much overload of Iso E Super, but this was an unusual fragrance, since at one stage of the design process the perfumers were starting from just a base to try to please their client, only later adding a few touches to it, so the fragrance very likely is base-heavy. Totally crazy as it sounds, you might even try as high as 55% Iso E Super if the perfume concentrate is at 22%. That is if we are attempting to exactly replicate the original fragrance, but there are several reasons why that may not be a desirable thing to do. I have not tried playing around with this and these are just some thoughts. These thoughts are only for this specific situation and would not be a good idea for putting together any other fragrance. Fierce may have practically been sort of like an early version of Molecule 01 )
 

JBChi33

Super Member
May 6, 2018
Since new articles have come to light in more recent years, this is the latest information on what exactly is in the formula for the fragrance "Fierce".
"Fierce" was a fragrance commissioned and marketed by the company Abercrombie & Fitch. It is a very classic fragrance, and brings back memories from the early decade of the 2000s.

Unfortunately the fragrance was later reformulated, which did not smell as good, and the fragrance has long since been discontinued. But was such a classic fragrance and left such a lasting impression that perfume enthusiasts still remember it. It's somewhat of a tragedy that it is was discontinued, all the more reason to want to get a better understanding of the formula.

I know much has already been written about this in this forum, but I thought I would try to summarise it.

GCMS analysis has found that the original formula contains around 40% Iso E Super. It was obvious to anyone smelling this that it contains an overdose of Iso E Super.

Then there was that alluring grapefruit smell, which not everyone even recognised in the fragrance, but I did.

Using my nose, I believe I have identified Pamplefleur as the specific AC that is responsible for this note. Pamplefleur strongly reminds me of the sort of pungent and cedary grapefruit note I seem to be able to pick up in Fierce. It is not a "clean" smell. It is a mouth-puckering rhubarb smell, very slight fake vetiver nuance, Ruby Red grapefruit, dirty, sexy. It contributes the "seductive" quality to the fragrance.
Pamplefleur is pretty potent, so not much would be needed, but I do think it adds one of the instantly recognisable notes in Fierce.

One of the perfumers who originally developed the fragrance, Christophe Laudamiel, was interviewed many years later and, although it was entirely from his memory, he did list the following ingredients:

1-2% Bacdanol
0.2 to 1% Polysantol (possibly, but it might not be in there, he could not remember)
Evernyl 0.2-1% (in pure form)
Dihydromyrcenol 4-10%.
Cashmeran
only a little bit of Ambrettolide, less than the Cashmeran
quality clary sage oil
a bit of nonadienal (cucumber smell)
Hedione, maybe 1.2-3%, or perhaps even more.
damascone alpha (this is moderately powerful so not much would be needed)
Scentenal
salicylates
citronellol
coumarin

He said it was a short formula of about 25 ingredients.

source: https://web.archive.org/web/2020012...interview-with-perfumer-christophe-laudamiel/

In another interview about the fragrance Fierce, he additionally mentioned that he had used:

pino acetaldehyde (fresh, like an ocean breeze, as a possible finishing touch)
a touch of lemon
lavandin grosso

In that second interview, he mentioned in the opening about how he developed the idea for Fierce, that he had first been playing with Grisalva, Cashmeran and Iso E Super to develop the base. It's not entirely clear from the interview that there is Grisalva in it.

source: I'm the Perfumer Who Created the Scent You Love to Hate - Abercrombie & Fitch's Fierce, Andrew Fiouzi, Mel Magazine


In addition to these ingredients, some believe there may also be methyl pamplemousse, fir EO, cardamom, petitgrain, and possibly vetiver or vetiveryl acetate.

(All of these ingredients listed so far would add up to a total of 25)
Great recap, Parker. You've clearly done a good bit of studying on this. Much appreciated! I go back and forth on the methyl pamp. Sometimes I'm convinced it's in there and sometimes I convince myself it's not. I've seen a GCMS calling for the nonadienal you mention and it's diluted at .1% and the small amount of Pino acetaldehyde is diluted to 10%. It also includes the lavandin grosso you referenced.
 

Big L

Super Member
Nov 23, 2019
I am a very big fan of Christophe Laudamiel and although I didn't like this fragrance when it first appeared on the market, I defiantly appreciate its genius and historical value. It was the top-selling men's scent in the US for about two decades.

I was working on a formula some time ago (I don't have it in front of me, will have a look later and try to share it). The main ingredients in mine were Iso E Super (of course), Evernyl, and similar to you, Parker, also Pamplefleur. Though I am still not completely sure if the Pamplefleur is exactly what's in there, or just the closest thing I got.
 

emrego

Super Member
Aug 4, 2016
Since new articles have come to light in more recent years, this is the latest information on what exactly is in the formula for the fragrance "Fierce".
"Fierce" was a fragrance commissioned and marketed by the company Abercrombie & Fitch. It is a very classic fragrance, and brings back memories from the early decade of the 2000s.....

I don't know why you took the entire discussion and contributions from all other Basenoters of the original thread with zero credits and posed it as if they are your own findings, but there was absolutely no need for this thread. It just creates an unhygienic content spam - and you've already posted repeatedly to the original thread with very long (and mostly pushing for the grapefruit in Fierce you keep talking about, where nobody else seems to be getting). I'm not one to tackle these things normally but your posts and now seeing this thread really struck me...Hope you take this as a fair remark.
 

Big L

Super Member
Nov 23, 2019
It is probably a matter of taste/forum etiquette. I don't like this resurrection of old threads. I would consider this lengthy summary added to the other thread to be spam. So I appreciate that Parker decided to move it to its own thread. Fierce is important enough to have more than one thread on this forum.

Also, I, for one, do get the grapefruit aspect in Fierce.
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
I go back and forth on the methyl pamp. Sometimes I'm convinced it's in there and sometimes I convince myself it's not.
The "grapefruit" smell is mainly coming from pamplefleur. That's not to say that there is not more methyl pamplemousse in the formula than pamplefleur though; pamplefleur is much more potent in the strength. Both are used in very small amounts, perhaps slightly less than 1%. That's what my nose says, anyway. This is based purely on my nose (and concerns the original version of the fragrance), I could be wrong. I've smelled a great deal of different grapefruit ACs and materials and written a long thread discussion about it.
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
Though I am still not completely sure if the Pamplefleur is exactly what's in there, or just the closest thing I got.
I have done plenty of internet research on this. I feel pretty confident that I am aware of all the different "grapefruit" materials that exist. Pamplefleur is the only one that would have the mouth-puckering "red" grapefruit smell, which is the primary "grapefruit" note I pick up in Fierce (not that grapefruit is really a "primary" note in the fragrance).

The only other thing that might possibly be in there, as far as I know, is some sort of grapefruit thiol or mercaptan, in extremely tiny amounts, or possibly even a trace of dimethyl sulfide. But I have two or three reasons to be very doubtful about this. I will concede that I'm not really expert or qualified enough to really be able to comment on this specifically, that's not really an area I have any perfume expertise on, but I just thought I would quickly mention that, for completeness. I suspect the thought of this would just be going off on a pointless wild goose chase, so I'm not suggesting you try to experiment with this.

If any trace of vetiver were used, that could also contribute to this "grapefruit" smell effect a little bit, blending with the notes of pamplefleur. I'm skeptical about any actual vetiver being in this fragrance, in part due to its expense and it not being the sort of material they like to use in mass marketed commercial fragrances, but there might perhaps be a little vetiveryl acetate (derived from vetiver, but chemically altered so they can use a very cheap grade of vetiver). What amateur perfumers have to realise is that, while these chemicals might be more expensive to you than naturals, when it comes to a massive large scale of production, they are much cheaper. Also, quality control for naturals gets a little complicated when you are dealing with massive large scales of production, trying to maintain batch consistency. In a fragrance like this they would want to keep any naturals down to a minimum, and not use any natural that was too expensive. It's reasonable to assume there might be a little bit of lavandin grosso in there, because that is only a tiny part of the fragrance and this material is far cheaper, and available in large bulk amounts, than something like vetiver.

I was working on a formula some time ago. The main ingredients in mine were Iso E Super (of course), Evernyl, and similar to you, also Pamplefleur.
I do suspect he used grisalva in this, because Iso E Super, Cashmeran, and evernyl by are, by themselves, not adequate enough to recreate all the smell of the base, from what I can smell.
I am not really sure about that though. Maybe 3 to 5%.

The interview did suggest that this fragrance is probably extremely base heavy. Everything else was added in small amounts as just a finishing touch. Getting the smell of the base right would, I think, be the main priority.
(by "base heavy" I am not only referring to the Iso E Super)

Cashmeran though gets overwhelming real quick, so I suspect that might only be at around 5 or 6%. (Just a total guess. I don't have experience to really be able to say)

I don't really pick up much of a salicylate smell from this fragrance, but it probably is there, in the background, altering the feel of the fragrance.
(I have no idea how much salicylate was used. Maybe 1 to 2.5% ? Something like the normal isoamyl salicylate would be consistent with what I smell and would be appropriate in this fragrance, though I really don't know what he used)
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
I've seen a GCMS calling for the nonadienal you mention and it's diluted at .1% and the small amount of Pino acetaldehyde is diluted to 10%.
I am not sure what you mean by this. Did you mean pino acetaldehyde would work out to be 10% of the fragrance concentrate??
I would be extremely surprised if it was that high. That cannot be right.
Any additional detail you have about this could be very helpful.

It's true pino acetaldehyde is often sold and used diluted to 10%, but that would have nothing to do with what would be revealed from GCMS.
I'm going to assume your statement about the GCMS was completely separate from your statement about the pino acetaldehyde. Your sentence really should have had a comma punctuation mark in it, or even a semi colon. I'll guess English is not your first language.

I've seen pino acetaldehyde used at 3% in a formula, but that was a marine fresh fragrance! It might be even lower here.
(and that is already 10% diluted that was then used at 3% in the formula)
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
I don't know why you took the entire discussion and contributions from all other Basenoters of the original thread with zero credits and posed it as if they are your own findings, but there was absolutely no need for this thread. It just creates an unhygienic content spam - and you've already posted repeatedly to the original thread with very long (and mostly pushing for the grapefruit in Fierce you keep talking about, where nobody else seems to be getting). I'm not one to tackle these things normally but your posts and now seeing this thread really struck me...Hope you take this as a fair remark.
I addressed your comment about the grapefruit in the other thread. (post #80 I think, also see post #52)

To be fair, I did post both of the links to my sources. If you are referring to not giving credit to other members for finding those sources... I was the one who found one of those two sources; and I was writing the post (in that other thread) at the same time the other member was writing his post that included his post. It was just a coincidence that he posted his message a few seconds before I posted my message. (You can check the time stamp on the post to verify this) Given that, there is no way for you to even be sure that I did not find that second source and was writing about it to post it to that thread before he did! So your comment about "zero credits" is not even logical, if you were referring the majority body of my post. The only thing you could be referring to me not giving credit to other members for is the GCMS analysis that showed high amounts of Iso E Super, but that is by now regarded as common knowledge in this forum, and was only a small part of my post. This criticism from you that I gave "zero credits" to other members is, I think, most entirely unwarranted.

I started this new thread because all the good stuff in that other thread was on page 2, and a lot of people might not be likely to read through 55 to 75 posts. I was trying to distill down all the good stuff in that thread into a single post, as the opening post in a new thread. Trying to concentrate all the information that I thought would be most useful, and conveniently present it for others to easily be able to read. Given that, I don't think what I did was inappropriate.
Like another poster already mentioned, the subject of trying to recreate Fierce is an important enough topic to have more than one thread about. Fierce is not just some obscure unimportant fragrance. The company sold over $200 million in this specific fragrance in the first 7 years after it was released, so that does not even count the later reformulation. Many members in this forum have been trying to recreate it. It would be the same with another important fragrance like Aventus. Do you have any idea how many threads there are about attempting to recreate that?

In my view, it would be "spamming" this forum less to start a separate thread to post all my very long thoughts and musings to about a subject, that people might not want to read. Some people might prefer I start a separate thread and not spam their thread with excessive long posts.


Back to the original topic of this discussion...

I found one source that claims Iso E Super was exactly 48% of the original Fierce formula. But IFRA changed their rules and regulated Iso E Super down to a maximum of 21% some time around 2010, and that was basically the death of Fierce. There was one other ingredient in the fragrance that the new rules affected too.
But I don't think the change in IFRA rules was really the main real reason why the reformulation smelled worse. I think (strongly suspect) they may have also at the same time modified the formula to try to make it cheaper, thinking no one would notice. This is just speculation, I do not know for sure.
 

ourmess

Basenotes Junkie
Apr 25, 2018
I found one source that claims Iso E Super was exactly 48% of the original Fierce formula. But IFRA changed their rules and regulated Iso E Super down to a maximum of 21% some time around 2010, and that was basically the death of Fierce.
IFRA restrictions are on the final product. I have no idea what the concentration of the final product is but even if it's at 20%, then 48% of the formula is only 9.6% in the final product - far below the IFRA limit. A 21% limit is damn near unrestricted for all practical purposes.
 

JBChi33

Super Member
May 6, 2018
I am not sure what you mean by this. Did you mean pino acetaldehyde would work out to be 10% of the fragrance concentrate??
I would be extremely surprised if it was that high. That cannot be right.
Any additional detail you have about this could be very helpful.

It's true pino acetaldehyde is often sold and used diluted to 10%, but that would have nothing to do with what would be revealed from GCMS.
I'm going to assume your statement about the GCMS was completely separate from your statement about the pino acetaldehyde. Your sentence really should have had a comma punctuation mark in it, or even a semi colon. I'll guess English is not your first language.

I've seen pino acetaldehyde used at 3% in a formula, but that was a marine fresh fragrance! It might be even lower here.
(and that is already 10% diluted that was then used at 3% in the formula)
Haha thanks for your comments on my writing and punctuation. I was born in Pennsylvania, USA, if you must know. English is my first language. Didn't realize this was an English/grammar forum. Sigh.

What I meant was, well, what I said. I have a GCMS that calls for nonadienal DILUTED TO .1% and Pino Acetaldehyde DILUTED TO 10%. I said nothing about the percentage of the fragrance concentrate. The Pino I have from PA was sold to me at 100%, not at 10%.
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
IFRA restrictions are on the final product. I have no idea what the concentration of the final product is but even if it's at 20%, then 48% of the formula is only 9.6% in the final product - far below the IFRA limit. A 21% limit is damn near unrestricted for all practical purposes.
The IFRA limit for Iso E Super for the finished product in "fine fragrances" is 20% (as of 2020 ).

The original Fierce did have a massive overdose of Iso E, and by that I mean a massive massive overdose.

But that does seem bizarre. If that IFRA limit I looked up is really correct, it means the fragrance concentrate could be diluted to 20% (pretty normal in a perfume and a fairly high amount) and still have a formula 100% composed of Iso E. (Unless I am getting confused and not properly understanding something. I am not really an expert in this)
Maybe Iso E is was not actually one of the ingredients in this fragrance that the new regulations affected.

Perhaps they reduced the amount of Iso E Super later for other reasons, at the time of the reformulation, not having to do with changes in regulations.
(The obvious reason I would presume would be that it was a massive dose and they considered a level that high not really appropriate)
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
What I meant was, well, what I said. I have a GCMS that calls for nonadienal DILUTED TO .1% and Pino Acetaldehyde DILUTED TO 10%.
That's still confusing. How can a GCMS, which is an analysis of the end result of the total formula, take into account the percentage concentrations used in the starting materials?
I think maybe you are using the wrong terminology. Maybe you mean to say "formula" rather than GCMS ?

A GCMS won't be able to tell if you added something into the batch in 10% concentration or in pure form.
GCMS involves a big and very expensive machine.
 

JBChi33

Super Member
May 6, 2018
That's still confusing. How can a GCMS, which is an analysis of the end result of the total formula, take into account the percentage concentrations used in the starting materials?
I think maybe you are using the wrong terminology. Maybe you mean to say "formula" rather than GCMS ?

A GCMS won't be able to tell if you added something into the batch in 10% concentration or in pure form.
GCMS involves a big and very expensive machine.
How about a formula derived from a GCMS.
 

parker25mv

Basenotes Dependent
Oct 12, 2016
How about a formula derived from a GCMS.
That might make a little more sense. You can see how that would be very confusing.
You shouldn't have used the word "GCMS". It misleadingly implied that those percentages numbers had something to with the GCMS.

(other than the fact that both were used in extremely low amounts, which was probably your point)
 

JBChi33

Super Member
May 6, 2018
That might make a little more sense. You can see how that would be very confusing.
You shouldn't have used the word "GCMS". It misleadingly implied that those percentages numbers had something to with the GCMS.

(other than the fact that both were used in extremely low amounts, which was probably your point)
My bad. Thanks for setting me straight.
 

Latest News

Whatever your taste in perfume, we've got you covered...

catalogue your collection, keep track of your perfume wish-list, log your daily fragrance wears, review your latest finds, seek out long-lost scented loves, keep track of the latest perfume news, find your new favourite fragrance, and discuss perfume with like-minded people from all over the world...

Top