Sharing thoughts - Le Labo

Just a round-up of reviews of some fragrances by Le Labo (here I already wrote about Oud 27).

Cuir 28

Easily one the nicest leather scents on the market at the moment, at least for the “straightforward leathers” part of the family. What I enjoy more in Cuir 28 is the perfect, “round” simplicity of the leather accord, which has basically nothing around “disturbing” it: it is indeed a bit tending towards freshness more than “dark harsh heaviness” like other leather scents, but overall it smells really bright, realistic, “purely leathery”. There’s vetiver, cedar, darker woody notes to provide a stout base with also a slight medicinal feel (like oud), then spices (cloves), a subtle veil of warm and dusty vanilla adding the right amount of “softness”, the usual aromachemicals used to build leather accords, a sprinkle of bright citrus, and that’s it. These notes are tightly blended to create “the” leather accord par excellence: a sharp, neat, meticulous “figurative” depiction of leather. A really well-balanced scent which is not too harsh, not too dry, not softly suede-ish, not excessively “smoky”, not “openly” synthetic... yet a bit of all of them: just soft, rich, high-quality finished leather. And ironically, Cuir 28 is so austerely simple, that (for the almighty power of “less is more”) it smells more interesting and fascinating than most of other contemporary leathers which almost always try to “add” something to leather (tobacco, fruits, flowers, oud...). It does not resemble to any leather scent; yet it does a bit to all of them, as if it was “a leather of leathers”, a sort of patchwork of all the leather notes taken from all leather scents (I get I am starting to write nonsense, be patient, it’s almost over). Plus, note that “simple” here doesn’t mean minimalistic or thin: Cuir 28 is rich, complex, fulfilling, almost “materic” in its realistic power: it smells solid and full of nice nuances, all perfectly connected to leather. Literally providing that feel you get by wearing and touching your favourite high-quality leather jacket: that warm, “masculine”, elegant, soft feel. It is obviously a bit dark, but dont’ imagine anything gloomy or dry: it’s dark in a warmer, laid-back, yet sophisticated meaning. Anyway: really good. Two flaws: much linear, and quite costly. But a must try for all leather fans.

7,5-8/10

___________

Lys 41
You know what this smells like? Sleep. And I mean that both because it’s a terrifically boring scent, but also because it is so yawn-inducing it becomes fascinatingly soporific (that cozy, intimate, and obviously terribly pleasant feeling you have just before falling asleep). So in the end, not a completely negative kind of boring. Almost a creative take on it. Anyway, Lys 41 is basically a really simple, graceful and quite plain white floral scent with a woody-amber base and sweet-dusty nuances, with also something that reminded me of suede, but I guess it must be the musky note. Don’t think of anything too powdery or sweet, it’s rather a delicate haiku played on creamy-woody notes, as much pleasant as a bit dull and plastic. The evolution if basically non-existent, but the persistence is good and the projection is unexpectedly quite sharp. On one side, you can smell here the peculiar way of Le Labo of playing around common accords and notes with a sort of “modern” and kind of suspended, ethereal, aseptic treatment: but also, I think they sort of “crossed the line” a bit with this, meaning that the mild, “lunar lab” discreetness becomes just more plain dullness here. Or well, just this close to it. A synthetic candy worthy a try, but nothing more in my opinion. I completely agree with deadidol’s take on this!

6/10

___________

Ambrette 9

Ambrette by Le Labo is a cute and graceful scented thingy gently and carelessly revolving around amber, musk, ambrettolide, ambroxan, with something fruity on top and a pleasant anisic-floral breeze providing a watercolour silky touch all over. Cozy, sweet, lively, as much pleasant as completely unsubstantial to me, as it basically smells like the drydown of a whatever floral-fruity feminine scent from the late Nineties. Feeble, nerveless, and short lived. Meh...

5,5-6/10

___________

Vetyver 46

If a hypothetical “Gucci pour Homme Vetiver” from 2003 existed, it would have smelled exactly like this. Vetiver by Le Labo is literally Gucci pour Homme I (I get this one closer than the CdG) with all its distinctive incense-cedar-pepper structure, just topped with (good) vetiver. A proper “flanker”. Surely nice overall, with also a remarkable persistence, but really too derivative for me.

6/10

___________

Iris 39

A nice, solid, pleasant iris scent opening with just the right amount of rooty-waxiness and a bold prominent “lipstick” note, well scented with spices, a hint of zesty freshness, woody nuances well blending with the powdery richness of iris petals. I honestly don’t get any civet, at any point, but I do get some slight camphoraceous feel on the very base. Overall a simple, almost mystical scent in its floral-rooty simplicity, as it basically smells like iris with notes enhancing its different facets (woods, spices, other flowers, ginger-carrot for its rooty side). I appreciate in particular the work around the rooty-earthy side of iris, with a beautiful sort of “darkening” that starting from the initial bright freshness slowly takes Iris 39 down to a darker and darker earthy path, dusted with a sophisticated powderiness. Really pleasant, refined, versatile, somehow as “cold” and distant as earthy and rich, as iris often manages to smell – that is part of what makes it a fascinating material. Honestly though, I also get an unpleasant sort of cheap aftertaste here and there, a little metallic perhaps, which is something I wouldn’t expect at this price. I may be not that good in assessing the quality of iris (which is a note I admit I don’t know that well), but frankly and despite being surely pleasant and compelling, this smells a bit overpriced to me (like most of niche scents, though).

7/10

___________

Patchouli 24

The opening of Patchouli 24 is rough, dry, dark, tar and smoky, an ultra-dry and sour birch woody accord, quite synthetic in a way (a good way: synthetically "post-industrial"), but at the same time rich, thick and realistic, with a nice and almost ghastly nuance of "smoked meat", like alfarom noted below. I also detect the patchouli note but it's quite understated and restrained, hiding behind this exhaust campfire of black woods, yet creating a nice and elegant contrast between its velvety, dusty, slightly cocoa-earthy feel (the patchouli, I mean) and the woody-ashy overall mood. On the very base, just a thin "rounding" layer of vanilla. Much refined and utterly pleasant with its austere and sophisticated look, just a tad artificial, but nice, a contemporary vision of "black" like Bois d'ascèse or CdG Black. After a while it starts to "warm" and open up, becoming softer and gentler, with a smooth and soft yet dark leather note arising - and at this point, while the similarity with the abovementioned scents becomes weaker, the closeness to La troisième heure by Cartier becomes quite evident. It's exactly the same structure: smoky, mellow, dark leather blended with dusty vanilla. Perhaps there's no leather and it's the birch wood, still that's the smell. Pure class and pleasure for sure, although nothing new. Plus, the patchouli (which was barely detectable at the opening) is completely vanished at this point, so bear this in mind in case you came here mostly for patchouli. Nonetheless, the scent is much good even if the main character is missing: it's pleasant, sophisticated, a bit overpriced and not that unique (the Cartier is not the only "reference", basically any other contemporary leather-vanilla scent would work), but "it works" quite well. I enjoyed wearing it and – for what it's worth – I'd wear it happily if I had a bottle. I wouldn't pay for this, but I'll do my best to have someone buy this for me (lucky me, Christmas is not that far).

7,5-8/10

___________

Labdanum 18

Labdanum opens with a pleasant, warm, dusty ambery accord, with perhaps patchouli on the very base, aldehydes, a subtle and discreet vanillin-tonka accord and a well-executed heart of civet and musk, animalic and camphoraceous. Boozy-sweet breeze all over. Almost geometrical in its simplicity, but bold and clear, a journey among nostalgic souvenirs of dusty chypres, just "deprived" of any notes except patchouli, animalic accords and amber. Modern, mature, elegant, simple and most important, smelling good, clear, high quality. The evolution is quite linear but I guess it is part of the concept, and being so pleasant, it is surely not a minus. Bravi!

7,5-8/10

___________

Dusty corners - Bally Masculin

Year, nose, notes are unknown. All I know is that this smells great.

What a great surprise, and allow me to sincerely thank user “easyfish” on Basenotes for the sample of this ultra-rare – and ultra-forgotten - little gem. The opening is fantastic: a graceful, manly, slightly sweet herbal-smoky-leather accord with a peculiar and irresistibly elegant soft and velvety substance (not the usual “raw” leather you often get in vintage masculine scents; rather sharp, clean, soft finished leather), a fresh-balsamic breeze, subtle fruity hints, and a “classic” fougère base of patchouli, woods (mostly vetiver) and the leather accord. Dusty shades and earthy echoes complete the look of Masculin. Think of the discreet European elegance of Bally leather goods and shoes, Masculin perfectly translates that into a perfume. What amazed me is how the opening was similar to vintage Bel Ami: perhaps lighter, brighter and sweeter, and also less complex here, but truly quite similar – how can you not be sold to that? Then it progressively moves away from the Hermès, leaning towards herbal-woodier territories, finally reaching a cozy and totally refined drydown with gentle smoky leather-vetiver-herbal notes. Terribly pleasant, sophisticated and solid, with a quite distinctive fresh, understated, bright yet smoky refinement, and quite different from many other masculine scents of its era – mostly for this kind of “modern” sweet-ambery-aromatic “roundness” juxtaposed to its invigorating herbal-balsamic freshness (which is more “herbal” than predictably “piney” as it was in fashion back then). Discreet, mild and elegant close-to-skin persistence. Hard to find, completely underrated, totally worthy a “rediscover” for me.

8/10

Ephemera - a project by Unsound + Geza Schoen

So, here's the first "highlight" of 2015 for me. A new cross-disciplinary project curated by the guys at Unsound Festival (Poland), in collaboration with perfumer Geza Schoen. You can find all the information online, but basically the Ephemera thing is about three perfumes - Bass, Noise, Drone - connected with three prominent underground electronic musicians (Kode9/Bass, Tim Hecker/Drone, Ben Frost/Noise). They wrote some kind of "brief" each and created three short raw pieces of music, each with its own short video, which served Schoen as a starting poin to create scents inspired by them. I know what you're thinking, as it was what I thought too: this can turn either into complete shit, or something *really* interesting and new. Well... here's my report about this.

Now, I must start by remarking that this is a totally peculiar project which I guess and understand may “divide” peoples and opinions due to its peculiar nature, but as a form of respect for the people involved in it (which are all totally respectable in their fields), it needs a sort of “suspension” of the usual parameters one uses to consider perfumes (not hard to do that: I am usually so skeptical, presumtptuos and snob, if I managed to do it, you can do it too). It’s not the usual launch of just another new brand or a line of perfumes entirely belonging only to the perfume market, where the “visual” stuff is just part of the marketing. It doesn’t even start in perfumery actually; the guys at Unsound just called a nose, so the whole thing starts there into another world other than perfumery; and so one shall put oneself in that position – “accepting” that world with a positive curious attitude – before judging these. In other words, I think this Ephemera thing requires us to take into account all the frame, as an important a mandatory step needed to get a better idea of them. Which means considering – with your mind opened at your best - the sounds, the videos, the textes, the musicians’ words as tools on the same level of usefulness and importance (and if possible, to get familiar a bit with the musicians themselves). This is a proper inter-disciplinary project which can be enjoyed at its best by considering with the same interest all aspects of it. Which makes it possibly a true example of “niche”, as it kind of “cuts-out”, or at least puts off quite a lot of people, and for once, not only for sad RRP policies.

Then, the scents can obviously also be viewed “per se”, as I did too in fact; but limiting to the perfumes in my opinion, and with no offense to anyone, would be a bit miopic and quite derogatory towards all the creativity involved in this project, mostly because people here worked to give you something which has to be used and considered the way they imagined it. It may be hard to consider the whole thing especially if you aren’t familiar with these musicians or, in broad terms, with this “world”, or if you don’t like them, but well, then it would be better to simply stay away from it.

Overall anyway, always referring to the whole Ephemera project, I honestly find this a solid, consistent, interesting and clever project about synesthesia. It could have been so worse, more shallow and more cliché-y, while it isn’t. The only fact that it involves 3 fantastic prominent names of underground electronic music, which is something I would have never thought to see linked to perfumes, is more than enough to have at least my “sympathy”. Perfumery needs this creative experiments to cultivate its “fresh” experimental side, and this one went particularly well in my opinion, considering how rare these projects are. Most of the times, “avantgarde” in perfumes is either self-referential, or just bare pretentious and random marketing shit. While here, at least there's is indeed “something” around perfumes – there’s real musicians, real music, real work, a whole group of real people. I am an enthusiastic fan of Kode9 in particular, and seeing his name linked to a perfume - which means my other big passion - is just thrilling and enticing for me. The same for Tim Hecker, although personally I was kind of disappointed by the quality of Drone.

Now, the scents. Bass and Noise are surely more than good for me, considered “per se” and related to the project and their respective inspirations; while Drone, I personally find it weak, boring, a bit “rushed” and “easy” – too “eas y” to be compared to its far more creative and compelling brothers.

More in detail (yeah, that was just the introduction...) :

***

BASS

The standout for me here. The more complex, more solid, more fascinating as a perfume itself, and also the more appealing and “versatile” among this line in my opinion. I find that Schoen has been really clever here to put in Bass all the “bass” he could, from any point of view, starting from a really nice, generic olfactory depiction of bass frequencies, to the actual smell of sound apparels (some kind of “electric” smell I can relate to wires, amplis, woofers), to – more in particular – Hyperdub’s “urban” mood, to – even more in particular – Goodman’s specific brief about his personal memories and suggestions, that cracked vacuum thing with its “dusty bass sound”. Bass smells of synthetic, dusty, plumbeous “subwoofer” blackness still including cracklings and mellow-sweet nuances melted with darker heaviness – as bass frequencies sound in fact, and correctly recalling Goodman’s words. Finally, speaking as a fan of Hyperdub, I think it perfectly gets all the features of Kode9’s music – Kode9 basically took a couple of decades of UK’s underground rave music, rewriting it with a sharp, nocturnal and futuristic cold digital vibe, still dark and “urban”, just digitally polished and “contemporarily” aloof. I think Schoen quite got into Kode9’s world and sensitivity with this. Speaking as a perfume “per se”, I find this much good the same: it’s a well-crafted, complex and fascinating woody-resinous-herbal fragrance with a really dry, bitter post-industrial vibe all over, it’s dark and rich with, in my opinion, quite some interesting contrasts between dark mellowness and sharp-sour angles and cracklings. It’s obviously much synthetic (as all the three scents here) but I don’t see the problem as long as it fits its context frame and smells nice.

8/10

***

NOISE

I find this a bit more “easy” composition-wise as regards of Bass, but it quite nails the point the same. If you read Frost’s brief and look at the audio-visual part, Noise perfectly captures it all. It’s “predictably” quite harsh and grayish-black, but with quite some interesting notes more on a mellow-hypnotic side. I am quite sure many other noses – more naif, less sensitive or just less interested in this world – would have done something far more boring, more “generically harsh”. While Schoen, I think he was smart and attentive enough to include also softer, almost “watery” nuances which add a sort of nostalgic “glow” feel to the scent. The contrast with the violent harshness of other notes perfectly nails the feel of “confusion” you get in both Frost’s text (which juxtaposes unrelated memories, images, smells) and in his music. The music is made of clashes and glitches, but also refrains, hyper-slow dilated sounds, and so is the perfume. So kudos to Schoen for having been quite “tuned in” to this. And like for Bass, personally I find this a really nice scent totally wearable and not challenging at all; a woody-roasted futuristic concoction with a colder vein of gassy-mineral nuances but also a warmer ambery shade, showing overall a kind of lunar, faded feel, with a nice evolution towards greener-softer woody territories. I find this “moody” in a way which quite fits the concept.

7,5-8/10

***

DRONE

Here’s the “no” for me of this line – or well, the “meh”. I can accept and appreciate the (not that creative, honestly) correspondence between the lactonic-airy texture of the scent (more than hedione I actually get a dusty, “gassy” and kind of cloying blast of aldehyde C12, with just something milkier below and greener on top) and its sort of plumbeous staticness with “narcotic” anisic sweet nuances, with Hecker’s audio-video part and in broader terms with this musician’s world and soundscapes: yet... well, in my opinion it all feels a bit more naif, rushed, less creatively related to it. Drone honestly smells to me like a quite predictable and stereotyped interpretation of that world, “easily” recreating its more evident aspects (that sort of suspended, hypnotic, uterine mood). The thing is that in both Bass and Noise I sense like a “contact” between Schoen’s world and the musicians’ ones, I think I get something deeper and more intimately connected with them. While here I don’t get that, and I don’t think it ‘s my problem as I am a fan of Hecker too – actually that is why I say this, because I know “much else” has been kind of “left out” the fragrance. To me, this feels more like just a professional, shallow work on a brief made by someone who doesn’t really care that much about it (or doesn’t “get” it). And this in my opinion kind of undervalues all potentialities of Hecker’s part in this project. Finally, taken as-is unrelated to the project, Drone smells just, well, plain boring and dejà-vu to me, although I admit I am not a fan of these particular notes/materials.

5/10

____________________

Final conclusion: I would perfectly get the skepticism about this project but I find it (the project) consistent, interesting, well developed enough, and above all worthy our support even just for the idea and the efforts – like has been already said above. Niche perfumery is nowadays so little creative, so static, so stuffed with boring stuff, this Ephemera project is a healthy breath of fresh air. Nevermind if these aren’t masterpieces, at least there’s real skilled people and talents working together on something new, trying to proof perfumery can step out its own boundaries. Not just another wealthy “Mr. Nobody” quitting his whatever profession and deciding it’s time to invest money in perfumes, then hiring a couple of copys to put together some random arty-fartsy marketing stuff for the scents. This is obviously different, this is a concrete project and I like it even only for the fact they tried to establish an actual bridge between perfumes, music and visual art.

Final-final conclusion: they’re too costly, though.

Horoof Otriyah by Arabian Oud

Great, great stuff here. Horoof is a velvety, woody, sweet, extremely pleasant scent with an irresistible sensual vein; it’s smoky and gently spiced, with mellow amber-resinous notes and a veil of black soft leather. The smokiness here is provocative, sophisticated, and more than captivating thanks to the (non-gourmand) touch of dusty sweetness. The blend is quite simple actually, as it’s all about wood, smoke, light sweet stuff (candied-fruity), sweet spices and leather; but it smells pretty much unique to me, much Eastern somehow, as far as my limited knowledge can tell (mostly based on clichés): it’s something really cozy and warm but also enigmatic, luring, mysterious, shady and almost “narcotic”. But just next to all this charming and sophisticated side, it also has a fantastic laid-back bright side, which makes it just plain gorgeous to wear: that type of carefree “good” which puts a smile on your face and just goes great with any outfit, in any situation, with any mood, and by no means smelling “generic”. It’s an “easy” scent apparently, but with something making it more fascinating, memorable and irresistible than it may seem. Plus, it smells totally “expensive”: the notes are warm, rich, bright, sparkling, with a luscious velvety smokiness which you may find in Amouage or Lutens’ scents. At a fraction of the price here. Much linear though, but being so good, it’s totally fine. Solid and gratifying.

8/10

L'Homme Ideal by Guerlain (2014)

Before finally getting a sample (I don’t really hang out in perfume shops) I read a lot of reviews about this, mostly negative, but I was quite sure I would have like this the same, even taking into account its mediocrity, as I admit I have a bit of a “penchant” sometimes for mainstream scents with this type of pyramid – I mean: woods, leather, Guerlain, in the worst scenario it will be just ok. Well, I was disappointed: L’Homme Ideal is less than mediocre for me. Basically it smells of spicy-sweet wood, something reminding of a couple of late (shit) Gucci's, a thin note of synthetic leather, vetiver, a sprinkle of citrus and not much else. A generic spicy-fresh “boisé” to any extent similar to others which you may find at cheaper prices, as much pleasant as uninspired and dull. What disappointed me the most is the actual quality of materials, as far as I can tell: this smells just utter plastic to me. I won’t say it is hideous however, as it isn’t, it obviously smells “decent” in the less fulfilling and interesting meaning ever (artificial, static, linear, in a word: exceedingly boring). The thing in my opinion is that this is stuff Burberry or Ferrari would do, not bloody Guerlain. It’s a “Christmas perfect gift” for your 20-something brother which works at the gym and is running out of 1 Million. Zillions of miles away from a scent standing on the same shelf as Habit Rouge, Vetiver, Derby, Mouchouir de Monsieur, not to mention the glorious feminines or I’ll start to cry. Unworthy its price per se, and surreally depressing for being a Guerlain. For whom may think this represents Guerlain’s ability of taking a “trend” and giving it a “Guerlain’s treatment”: hell not. Where’s the treatment? I only see the (bad) trend.

4,5-5/10

Christopher Street by Charenton Macerations (2013)

Nose: Ralf Schwieger

My day with Christopher Street: tested, loved, wishlisted, bought. What a great scent! The opening is totally intriguing from the very first sniff: smoky, “campfire” woody-leathery notes cleverly juxtaposed to a slap of juicy, aromatic, fizzy and mellow bergamot-citrus notes. A bold contrast, which works just perfectly here, mostly because of the really clever and creative “gradient” between the two opposites: a blend of earthy-mossy-spicy-floral notes comprising green stuff, carnation and crisp, rich tobacco (a duo – carnation and tobacco - that strongly links Christopher Street to vintage Equipage by Hermès in my opinion), then patchouli, cloves, other woods... “synesthetically”, I’d define this a vibrant “black-brownish-orange” gem. Or in other words, a spicy-woody fresh-aromatic Oriental leather scent with a bold zesty-aromatic side, sweet nuances from tobacco to cinnamon. All so bloody well blended. A sharp, rich, unisex, totally creative modern scent that for me quite clearly takes inspiration from some vintage green fougères, without smelling like a ripoff of them (see? Sometimes...). The creative and modern side of Christopher Street mostly lies in something just... “playful” going on here, a touch of fresh colour, something crisp and vibrating that makes Christoper just totally, well, “contemporary” - I don’t really know how to put it. Another “avantgarde” touch here is a sort of ammonia-metallic vein which isn’t the usual “aromachemical-driven” metallic aftertaste, rather an actual smell of aseptic metal; it’s there, but tamed down enough to blend just perfectly with the rest, so don’t think of any unpleasant “clash” of notes. Overall I find this a terribly refined scent exuding talent, class, fun, creativity. History rewritten. Incredibly versatile too, as it’s really not that challenging; it’s fresh yet dark, formal yet impudent. Just a precious balance of inventiveness, quality and good taste - plus it lasts for hours and projects loud and sharp. So great. Try it!

9/10

Domenico Caraceni 1913 Eau de Toilette

Oh, what an underrated gem. Possibly the best masculine rose scent ever for me (yes, taking into account Amouage, Czech & Speake and others). The opening of 1913 is surprisingly pleasant, with a bold barbershop/“antique grooming toilet” feel mostly centered on rose, carnation and tobacco, posed on a dark, camphorous, dusty and slightly indolic base (jasmine?) like in many old masculine chypres. The floral accord is dark and lascivious, quite more bold than usual for this kind of “traditional” masculine colognes, and gives 1913 a really peculiar and distinctive austere but irresistibly sophisticated grace; a sort of decadent, shady, vaguely “dandy” kind of refinement, mixed to an austere feel reminding me of classic Italian aftershaves – kind of more nutty and floral, no citrus-lavender-leather “Britishness”. Extremely classy, mature and pleasant, slightly “outdated” in a totally positive way; one of the very few Italian perfumes which indeed speaks Italian to me, meaning that it makes me think of the dusty, cozy, shady, kind of shabby and modest beauty of barber parlours and small tailors’ ateliers – the kind of places where our beloved Italian heritage of elegance was born and is still being kept alive (nothing fancy or luxurious, I rather think of understated, shabby boutiques). “Penhaligon’s Sartorial”? Meh... this is possibly the closest fragrance to my concept of “gentleman” I’ve ever tried - and that surprises me given that I usually tend to associate vintage scents to that idea. The drydown is just fantastic and irresistibly classy, rose and dry tobacco. Persistence is everlasting, just a bit cloying after a while, but really solid. Great (and obviously, discontinued).

8,5/10

EDIT (05/2015): If anyone's interested, they relaunched this scent recently. Different bottle, slightly different juice, but totally good the same for me. It is already available at some local Italian shops, I guess it will be available online as well at some point.

Cheapos worth having: Noir by Reminiscence (2009)

Horrible packaging, fantastic juice. No wonder that Flori is the nose behind this.

Nose: Jacques Flori

Noir by Reminiscence opens with a really powerful and hyper-dark blend, somehow fresh somehow stale and dusty (and also fairly harsh initially), in a way similar both to many niche scents, and several vintage masculine scents (Arrogance, Trussardi Uomo...). Basically it’s a really gloomy concoction comprising bitter-minty herbs (eucalyptus), balsamic woods, patchouli, incense, a shady and sour resinous base with a bold indolic-urinous musky aftertaste, softened by a subtle ambery-resinous accord and brightened by a light citrus-floral accord which is barely perceivable initially. I think I also get something salty (vetiver?), and perhaps something like leather too. Basically Noir can be roughly defined in my opinion as a really dark herbal-woody-resinous Oriental fragrance mostly tending to mossy-earthy-incense territories, and for a while with quite a bold indolic-roasted note underneath, well contrasted by a refreshing quite bitter citrus-minty head accord. It reminds me of several fougères as I said, but with a decidedly contemporary texture – so shortly, don’t worry about smelling “outdated”: this is a modern, sharp, polished scent. The drydown is really pleasant, more tending towards soft, velvety notes of smoke, incense, resins, sandalwood, still dark overall but less raw. It also emerges better the soapy-dusty accord of violet and rose. All smells solid, rich, and also quite unique in a way: I named a couple of scents as a rough reference, but actually Noir smells much “new” to me to many extents – new, yet nostalgic in some way. It’s interesting because it can easily be pulled off by fougères nostalgics as much as “niche-heads”, which I guess makes it a particularly solid scent. Surprisingly creative, although a bit linear once it enters the (endless) drydown. Another cheapo (I forgot to mention that; 35 eur/100 ml here) easily surpassing so many expensive scents quality & creativity-wise. Addictive!

8-8,5/10

(almost) new line: Monotheme Black Label

Monotheme: Black Label is a sort of "niche" line launched in 2013 by Monotheme, an ultra-cheap Italian brand of perfumes produced by Mavive (which is the house behind popular supermarket scents like Pino Silvestre, Police, Zippo and so on). The line comprises four scents allegedly inspired by "Oriental" fragrances, while to me they look more like inspired to what's trendy at the moment - but it's fine. They are possibly among the most inexpensive fragrances on the market here in Italy. And guess what? They're almost all quite nice, taking the price into account.

________________

Leather

This fragrance is apparently known for being one of the nicest and more faithful clones of Tuscan Leather, and if you want to skip my boring review, heres my opinion on that: it is. It's almost identical to Tuscan Leather, pretty much as Golden Boy by Dueto, but at a far cheaper price, which makes it more appealing to me. Monotheme Leather sells here in Italy for the quite unbelievable price tag of some 15-16 EUR for 100 ml. And the bottle & packaging are even quite nice to be honest. Well, anyway: the same exact suederal-safraleine polished and clean leather note you smell in so many contemporary leather scents, smoky and urban, well sweetened by fruity hints providing a pleasant, warm and velvety feel, on discreet woods and warm, sweet-dusty resins. Pretty much all, for hours. The fact that it smells undoubtedly similar to Tuscan Leather does not mean obviously that this is a masterpiece scent they stupidly sell off at ridicolously low prices; on the contrary, rather it's a (unnecessary, in my opinion) evidence of how Tuscan Leather is crazily overpriced. Monotheme Leather kindly shows you how something like Tuscan Leather can be produced and sold at a (literal) fraction of the price. Projection and persistence are totally compelling, it lasts for hours and projects just sharp and clear. On the drydown it gets drier and darker, more woody and austere, with just a bit less sweetness and warmth. Now, obviously there is some differences with Tuscan Leather if you are still interested int that comparison: I said they are almost identical, but Monotheme Leather smells just a bit more synthetic, less rich and less smoky than Ford's, and is also a bit more linear overall. But these details and differences wouldn't really justify the enormous price gap for me: unless you're really obsessed with Tom Ford, just take this Monotheme Leather and you'll be happy with a totally decent, classy, well-made and solid contemporary leather fragrance (or Dueto's Golden Boy if you feel ashamed in buying ultra-cheap scents). At this surreal price, totally worthy the blind buy for me, even just as an easy-going office scent. Kudos to Mavive for producing such a decent scent at a totally humble and honest price.

7-7,5/10

________________

Rose Oud

As the name goes, Rose Oud is a more-than-decent rose & oud scent, soapy and dark, with a zesty-candied touch and a musky, slightly camphorous base. And oud, obviously, that type of woody-rubbery synthetic note we’ve been so used in the recent years. Overall a bit plastic and not that original (not to say mediocre), but honestly, in my opinion acceptably pleasant to wear, especially if you like that sort of “glamorous” dark refinement of rose-oud scents. The thing is, and I say that after having tested countless cheap (but costly) niche scents with the same accords, that Rose Oud is identical - and I mean it literally - to pretty much any “mid-level” niche rose-oud scent, so think of any Montale, or Mancera and similar products. Mostly Montale: I instantly thought of so many of their “Aoud Whatever Petals” fragrances. It smells exactly like that, to any extent: but (as for Leather by this same brand), this costs ten times less than them. And this to me “allows it” to be a bit mediocre and synthetic: at least you get what you pay for, quality-wise (no, actually here you even get more value than you pay for). I always criticized Montale and similar brands mostly because of the quality/price issue, while now, I’m giving this a higher rate just because I see something with, finally, a fair price. Actually even too low for the quality. Rose Oud is nothing extraordinary, but it’s well-made, smells nice (even quite classy), lasts long and is totally unpretentious: a perfectly compelling, more-than-affordable and valuable alternative to so many synthetic rose-oud scents currently cloying the market.

6,5-7/10

________________

Black Oud

Among the four offerings in the Black Label range, this is by far the worst of them all. Total “no” for me: even for such a low price, it’s completely tragic in my opinion. Basically, I get neither “oud” (not even the most synthetic one), nor the “black”. Black Oud is on the contrary a sort of white-gray gourmand, quite soapy and heavily synthetic, which smells something halfway a cheap bath soap, glass cleaner liquid, and one of those “mixed flavours” bags for cakes in which there’s vanillin, cinnamon and so on. It’s a bit powdery, a bit resinous, a bit woody, a bit clumsily close to many “white” musky gourmands, with a horrifying plastic heliotrope note – never smelled such a bad one in my experience (the same for carnation, as soon as you get it). Plus, it’s much powerful, and cloyingly persistent for hours. On the (heavily linear) drydown it pops out at some point a sort of oudish whiff, but it’s barely perceivable and smells more just like a hint of rubber. Cheap to any extent and unworthy the price, even if it’s too low.

4/10

________________

Amber Wood

Despite its name, Amber Wood is much more dark and dry than it may seem. I would have called it “Leather Wood”, or even “Leather Oud”: it opens with a really bitter and dark leather accord with smoky woods (birch, vetiver, and something even more nutty-rubbery, like synthetic oud), and almost nothing else except a faint, yet perceivably warm resinous base accord, and a note which reminds me of violet, with a dirty aftertaste of earthy patchouli. A salty (and quite “niche”, if you ask me) hint of ambroxan evokes the “ambergris” smell and “rounds” the blend with a musky-grey touch. On the drydown, vetiver takes a prominent place with leather, labdanum and other woody debris. Basically I would place this somewhere between some mainstream violet-leather-smoky scents (like Jil Sander Man), a couple of vintage dark fougères (like Arrogance pour Homme EdP, mostly for leather and patchouli), and finally, as for Rose Oud by this same brand, a lot of Montale scents – especially their “dark” range (Dark Oud, Black Oud and so on). It’s much, much similar to them in fact, overall syntheticness included. Don’t expect any masterpiece, but it’s fine, actually not bad at all: it’s bitter, dark, smoky, dirty and much “black”, perhaps a tad tacky and clumsily trendy, with surely an overall barely decent quality; but it works. For all lovers of dark leather/oud scents, an extremely cheap and affordable alternative (this cost me 12 euro for 100 ml, worth having just for fun). The same opinion I expressed for Rose Oud applies here too: if it was a niche scent (and believe me, it could totally be) with a niche price, I would have rated it with a 5 on 10, or even less, because for me the price and the market positioning are part of the product, and must be taken into account. While here, you can’t really argue on the price, which is more than honest – and that is enough for me to respect Amber Wood (but anyway, it smells nice too).

6,5-7/10

New Italian niche: Gabriella Chieffo

Based in Lecce, in the sunny south of Italy. Sadly not a gram of the beauty of that area ended up in these fragrances, all presented in 2014.

Lye

Mere guess: to me, Lye is all about ambroxan (a real “fil rouge” among all the fragrances of this line), at least another smoother and warmer ambroxide aromachemical, Iso E Super or something similar (incense), suede, light woods (like cashmeran, if you are familiar with it) and a faint powdery note of iris and/or violet. Not saying I think these materials are contained, but at least that is what I smell - those, or something similar to them. All quite “thin”, dusty and powdery, with a sheer and metallic texture. A thin, cold, silver and “nordic” contemporary scent which tries to play the minimalist card; but more than a clever work on a minimalist texture, it’s just more about throwing a bunch of aromachemicals as-they-are right out of their cans. Plus, it’s annoyingly salty and synthetic, while heavily reminding me of a couple of more renowned scents (a couple of “bois” more precisely... one of which made by Dior, just saying). It doesn't smell bad at least, but in my opinion Lye is heavily uncreative, clumsy and pretentious, pretty much like the rest of this line.

4,5-5/10

***

Camaheu

Camaheu: a powdery and soapy white musks note, dusty and slightly sugary, as much silky as completely “plastic” (ketones and synthetic bath soap, shortly), with a stout base of (again...) amber and most probably ambroxan, unrelated and quite annoying salty-metallic notes hanging around, a spicy accord halfway cumin and nutty, heavy synthetic mossy notes. No patchouli for me, but something musky-earthy on the very base, which can be anything. As if that wasn’t enough, a heart of floral notes halfway soap and gingerbread which oddly reminded me of a couple of the most tragic Mona di Orio scents (Lux and Jabu for instance). Like the other two scents by this line I’ve tested so far, in my opinion this is just... weird and clumsy. And annoying. An uncreative and uninspired scrubber sticking to your skin for hours (it survived a shower), completely identical to itself, where the “itself” is the abovementioned synthetic concoction. The only nice aspects for me – taking them per se – are vanilla, amber, ambroxan, and the jasmine note as long as you can smell it. But it’s just like finding clean clothes or an edible slice of pizza in the back of a rubbish van. Somehow close to the worse masculine aromatic-musky fougères of the ’90, mostly for the mossy notes and the metallic-salty aftertaste. Just my opinion, but a complete “no” for me.

4/10

***

Ragù

Well, how to start with this... the opening of Ragù (which means “meat sauce” in Italian, for whatever obscure association with the scent) is a completely synthetic and kind of harsh galore which – involuntarily, I guess – reminded me of some of the least interesting “post-industrial/dark-contemporary/synthetic-avantgarde” scents of the recent years, like some CdG/nu_be and that type of fragrances, but with much less consistency, sophistication and ability. Basically I only get a pungent citrus-based head note, a load of eugenol (cheap raw cloves) on a base of dry, musky-woody quinolines (sort of leatherish, but more a roasted-rubbery smell which eventually is needed to build leather accords), something dark and greenish like a sort of shady, sour laurel note, a load of ambroxan like in Hystera by the same brand, and a – again – much dry and synthetic woodish base accord (that type of smoky-dusty-musky and astringent woody notes like tar). That’s it: dark plastic woods, rubber, dusty-musky stuff, for hours: in my opinion, an annoying scrubber rich in indefinite, uncreative greyness. More than a perfume, this seems a sort of clumsy “divertissement” made by someone which received a bunch of aromachemicals from Perfumer’s Apprentice, and just boringly played with them. I am not against “bad-smelling” scents per se, as long as they’re creative or provocative: but this isn’t the case, for me. Creativity aside, I find it however frankly quite unpleasant, mostly because of a persistent feel of annoying “chemical” harshness. I am sorry to “bash” a newborn brand, but this is seriously unworthy any attention for me.

4/10

***

Hystera

The opening of Hystera is an ambroxan (or other ambroxide aromachemicals) galore with a bitter-roasted undertone, a subtle amber accord, green “dark” aromatic notes (sage, perhaps angelica or artemisia too), on a base comprising – to me – patchouli, woods (and ambroxan). It shows initially quite a similarity with some Tauer’s works, notably his “Tauerade” base accord of ambroxan and spices – same sort of synthetic, dusty, slightly smoked-dusty grayish feel, just perhaps greener and woodier here. After some 50-60 minutes it emerges a central dark earthy yet slightly floral note which kind of reminds me of rhubharb, taking Hystera far from Tauer and closer to works like L’art de la Guerre by Jovoy, and that type of “new fougères”. So, halfway that and L’air du désert marocain drydown. It shall contain iris too, but I don’t really get much of that – just perhaps get a generic, plain and quite dull powdery-sweet feel after a while. Mostly it’s all greenish-woodish ambroxan to me. The drydown is pretty much identical for hours, increasingly sour and rubbery. Bit boring, plain and dull, and quite trendy (also quite late, actually). Another “new Italian niche sensation” we didn’t really need. Meh...

5/10

Vintages, again! Three masculine picks

Jacomo de Jacomo by Jacomo (1980)

Jacomo de Jacomo opens with a hyper-black, hyper-dry fougère blend dusted with an intoxicating, overwhelming dose of dry and bold spices, notably cloves – pungent, harsh, almost rough. Really modern, if you ask me: the structure is of a classic masculine cologne (leather, patchouli, oak moss, woods, etc.), but this ultra-dry, black, spicy fog is pure “future baroque” for me. A really creative variation on the theme. Can’t really describe the smell exactly, but it’s really pungent, sour, dry and as I said, quite harsh. Together with oak moss and leather it creates a threatening and austere feel, like crashing on the dusty arid soil of a black planet (any Sisters of Mercy fan out there?). Think of some dark powerhouses like Krizia Uomo, Krizia Moods, Smalto PH, just with a crazy dose of cloves. Then however, quite soon a bit of the charme fades away; after one hour or so, as the spices tone down, it emerges the bone-structure of Jacomo, which is a more conventional and softer “barbershop” scent: woody, herbal, mossy and soapy, still spicy, dry and dark but a bit more friendly, lighter and more wearable (but also slightly more dull in a way, as without that crazy initial blackness it becomes more close to just another “generic” barbershop scent like many others – still good and still different, just with a bit less of that “special” added value). Anyway: an austere, creative and shady take on the classic masculine scent, fascinating and quite ahead of its time for sure, well crafted and a must for any “gloomy fougères” enthusiast.

7,5/10

++++++++++

Pour Homme by Francesco Smalto (1987)

Smalto pour Homme is a great powerhouse, much more peculiar and original than it may seem (or well, than it seemed to me). Basically it opens with a balsamic-citrus accord on a gloomy base of smoke, bold tan leather, oak moss, woods (vetiver, perhaps sandalwood), with a peculiar sort of "outdoors" herbal-anisic-tea breeze going around (I guess due to fennel and tarragon), together with other unusual and really well-played notes: I get something boozy, licorice, a colorful blend of spices and herbs. Somehow it’s a conventional “dark smoky fougère”, but it does just a step further, showing quite an interesting set of unique features: it does not have all the raw, austere, dry shadiness of many leathers like Knize, it’s not a skanky animalic scent like Ungaro II, not an oak moss beast like Quorum, and not only a herbal-aromatic fougère like Tsar... yet it has something of all of these, reshuffled in a an interesting, pleasant and recognizable way. It has something raw and playful, but at the same time it show a manly dark sophistication, really classy in its own way. It’s a powerhouse fougère, but it’s not similar to any other in particular, except for the names I mentioned above (Smalto basically smells like their hippie homeless cousin). And actually, for as much weird it may sound, it reminds me also of some contemporary niche scents, mostly for the unusual contrasts, the creativity, and the fact that it manages to smell not outdated at all. It’s much bold though, and after a while it may start to smell a bit boring (also because of the load of harsh spices you get on the drydown, similar as Jacomo de Jacomo for instance). As many powerhouses, it projects like a devil and lasts for ages. To rediscover!

7,5/10

++++++++++

Fendi Uomo by Fendi (1988)

Fendi Uomo opens as a fresh-herbal aromatic fougère with an tamed down leathery-woody base, quite soft but “virile”, and an overall sharp barbershop feel (lavender, carnation, citrus notes, leather...). Fairly pleasant, clean and well made, but frankly also quite conventional, at least initially and for a while – in a “boring” meaning, much similar to many other fougères from the ‘80s in the same kind of leathery-herbal style (no powerhouses, no civet/leather bombs, rather just “dad’s classy aftershave”). Nonetheless, during the evolution it becomes more interesting, more unique and quite more fascinating: it gets darker, drier, losing a bit of its formal understatement and becoming more smoky, more austere, more sophisticated and shady. Fans of recent Amouage leather-based scents like Journey Man may like this (just compare the drydowns). It’s still somehow conventional, therefore still a tad boring honestly, but good. Overall I’d consider it a solid, compelling, understated, not-that-exciting “all-year-rounder”, unworthy any high price or chase, but worth a try for any herbal-leathery fougère fan.

6,5-7/10

Sexmagic by House of Matriarch

Nose: Christi Meshell

Sexmagic opens with a fantastic, gloomy, austere and almost “mystical” blend comprising a breathtaking contrast between a peculiar herbal-leather accord which is extremely soft and mellow yet really “black”, and a ghastly breeze of thin floral notes and something almost “candied”, blended together with something reminding me of galbanum and mossy notes, providing a distant echo of traditional masculine fougères. The charme of Sexmagic is really powerful and unique: I am not actually sure of the reason why, but it is. It’s extremely dark, but in a sort of softer, more sensual, more enigmatic way than usual, managing to make also airy-colorful notes smell somehow gloomy and creepy. I would define this as almost “grotesque”, like a baroque “vanitas” painting: the smell of a dusty still life, of something once aristocratic and now dead – actually, there’s a feel of “death” in fact here. But much carnal and sensual too, I really get the Crowleyan inspiration behind the name of the scent. Feelings aside, it’s a really good and solid scent, with a perfect and clever composition, and great materials, as far as I can smell. The evolution is really peculiar, as the “pyramid” of the notes smells almost inverted: it’s like if the mellow, soft and hyper-black leather-herbs accord was on top, and then you get the lighter, fresher, woodier notes. The leather accord is great and rich, with a unique sort of plushy, velvety and gloomy texture that I rarely found elsewhere, fascinatingly wrapped into a balsamic, ambery-resinous, slightly floral sort of dusty shade. The drydown is sadly not that great in my opinion, as it’s a bit dry, thin and linear, but still really nice – basically almost only leathery-woody. A nondescript, clever, fascinating, extremely sophisticated gem which finally gives some sense and credit to the word “niche” (taking all this into account, the price is still completely crazy).

8-8,5/10