Un Homme by Charles Jourdan (1980)

Nose: Françoise Caron

Un Homme by Charles Jourdan is an extremely solid, charming and well-made aromatic fougère for men clearly in the same league of Azzaro pour Homme, playing pretty much the exact same main key notes – anisic-powdery notes of lavender and sage on green, flowery-mossy woods. But there’s a twist unique enough to make it worthy having; it smells basically like a sort of wilder, darker, grassier version of Azzaro. “Wilder” not because it is more aggressive or louder, actually in fact it smells really mannered and classy; but because it has some really vibrant, natural quality which makes it really close to the actual smell of wet grass and freshly-cut green branches, also with a nondescript sort of “cloudy” feel, evoking a tense gust of air before a storm. Also spicier and dirtier, with bold notes of cloves and patchouli that provide weight to a feel of subtle dark leather that will gain more and more strength as time passes. So imagine Azzaro pour Homme in its utmost vintage splendour, just wrapped in leather and wet grass. Azzaro pour Homme “The Kinky Gardener Edition”. I also agree to references other reviewers made – Captain Molyneux, Oscar de la Renta pour Lui, Krizia Uomo... dark-green aromatic fougères, that’s the family and Jourdan surely sits on the top of it. Brilliant!

8,5/10

HM by Hanae Mori (1997)

Nose: unknown (to me)

HM by Hanae Mori, not to be confused with the way inferior HiM, is for me hands down one of the most quality and most interesting cheapos ever. It screams fun, versatility, creativity and quality from every side. It is a really playful and quite unique blend of notes which smells at the same time complex and this close to messy, but completely compelling and solid like a really well engineered motor. The key notes which support the composition are citrus, lavender, vanilla and cocoa beans: the zesty freshness of citrus notes, the “masculine” touch of classic lavender, and a gourmand creamy warmth of chocolate and vanilla. There’s many other notes providing depth and “colour” (e.g. spices, something powdery, other herbs, musk), most of which I can’t detect further, but to me it seems these four notes stand out and provide the bone structure of HM. Which is totally brilliant and plain irresistible, as it is at the same time fresh, warm, sweet, creamy but “manly”, there’s dark mellow nuances perfectly balanced with playful fresh top notes and a touch of sweet creaminess.

“Fun” is the word that keeps coming to my head: HM smells happy, lively, fresh and sweet but in no way sweetish or childish, or tacky. It’s like a nice classy comedy movie (say, the funniest Woody Allen’s), which can be hilarious and witty but also totally solid and smart from the point of view of writing and direction (contrary to, say, “teen comedy movies” which may be fun, but technically pure cinematographic crap). HM is quite that, merry and carefree but really solid and “serious” composition/quality-wise. Plus anyway it smells just great, and I am sure I never smelled something so perfectly balancing freshness and warmth, sweet/creamy notes and darker/drier stuff (the kind of composition so many niche scents try to emulate on a regular basis, with half the success and three times the price). It changes a lot, continuously floating between sweet creaminess and freshness, slowly evolving from a more citrus-lavender centered blend, to a more prominent role of vanilla, then switching back to lavender as main character. Lasting crisp and clear for hours. More than just versatile it is purely eclectic. I can imagine anyone pulling this off in any situation, which is nearly the greatest achievement for a fragrance for me. A total steal for the price.

8,5/10

P.S.: review based on the EDT version.

Anubis by Papillon Artisan Perfumes (2014)

Whatever.

Nose: Liz Moores

Double boring alert – for the fragrance, and for my review. Anubis by Papillon is a balsamic suede-incense scent infused with a pleasant, albeit hilariously dull sort of classic floral chypre bone-structure; jasmine, benzoin, something vanillic on the very base, and a hint of something boozy which may be just a side-effect of resins and jasmine. Shortly a soft leather scent with a classic vibe, sort of a hybrid between contemporary suede scents à la Cuir Ottoman by Parfum d’Empire crossed with any cheap resinous/myrrh fragrance and topped with that hipster “neo-chypre” wave which seems in fashion lately (Bogue etc.). Sadly, kind of taking the worse features of both. You can easily imagine how this smells then; artisanal, boozy, slightly “carnal” and animalic, at the same pleasantly balsamic, inoffensively leathery, terribly déjà-vu as regards of the materials used, with a whole palpable feel of velvety floral darkness smelling as much pedantic as enjoyable. It is decently wearable, but for the price, the quality seems really mild for me, not to say mediocre. I get a lot of cheap nuances out of Anubis, and in general - and again, as in so many other similar indie scents - the texture and the depth seem really dull for me. Shortly: completely lacking in creativity, and not even that nice aside from that.

I smell here the exact same issue I smell in other trendy leather-chypresque recent scents; it decently emulates some leathery chypre for some 20-30 minutes, then it’s all a rapid descent into flatness, and cheapness. Like a sort of attempt, or an exercise to create a certain type of fragrance with way insufficient materials and talent. Don’t get me wrong, this smells nice, the kind of “congrats for your final essay” nice, which for the price is beyond preposterous. It seems we’re getting used to pay 5 star prices for inconsistent amateurish exercises, and given the hype they get, no surprises that any novice feels launching any concoction he or she manages to put together. Just get any Molinard Habanita and the likes (even current: mentioning vintages would be really like shooting fish in a barrel here), half the price and ten times the quality of this clumsily derivative stuff.

5/10

Very Valentino for Men by Valentino (1999)

Nose: Harry Fremont
Year: 1999

Very Valentino is an extremely compelling, refined and classic – almost old-school - fragrance for men, excelling both in quality and class. It is sadly discontinued and seems pricey these days, I won’t take the responsibility to encourage you to spend too much for this (it’s really good for me, but not a masterpiece) but if you happen to find some nice deals, then it’s worth it, even blind. At first it may resemble to many other masculine designers from the late 1990s-early 2000s, as the bolder initial notes are basically sandalwood, lavender, resins and something slightly floral on the “dark” greenish side (carnation), so think of a sort of sweet-aromatic Oriental blend mostly centered on woods and lavender – like many others, as I said. But at the same time, a couple of features make it clear there’s much more, and more unique, going on; first, the quality of the materials seems to me decidedly higher than in the average mainstreams. It’s hard to explain why, it’s a matter of richness, texture, nuances which are most of the times completely absent in cheaper concoctions. It’s that same fulfilling feel many vintages give you, contrary to the boring flatness of many contemporary scents. Then, I think the composition is really accurate and clever, if not almost outstanding: the notes smell clear, neat, quality, some of them are even contrasting yet the blend is impressively tight and consistent. Dark and refined, but also sweet and gentle. Discreetly safe, but unique. One of those (rare) scents you can wear and forget about them, or keep sniffing them to enjoy nuances and transitions – something you can’t really do with cheap stuff.

Sweet, almost “candied” ambery resins brilliantly give weight and warmth to a really enjoyable and breezy top accord of aromatic herbs, something minty-anisic, the bitter-floral greenness of carnation, the masculine whiff of classic lavender enhanced by sage. Dark and bright, classic but modern. Tobacco is a key note here, and for once it’s a really crisp and substantial “real” tobacco note, leafy and earthy, the mellow, dry, “virile” aroma of grounded tobacco (and not that idiotic, juvenile sweet nonsense so many “tobacco” fragrances are entirely based on). Probably the best mainstream tobacco note I’ve ever experienced. The drydown comprises an amazing transition towards a darker, earthier blend more centered on mellow amber, lavender, a (quite conventional) musky base, smooth dry woods (something really aromatic and slightly exotic, part sandalwood and part something else I can’t detect) and tobacco. Even if the notes are different, I keep thinking of Gérard Anthony style, especially Azzaro pour Homme and Cristobal Homme by Balenciaga, with also some connections with vintage Hermès Equipage. I think there’s quite something in common with all of them (probably tobacco and the masculine aromatic-anisic fougère notes of lavender and sage). By Man by D&G? Sure a bit of that too, incomparably better here. Full support, and shame on Valentino for discontinuing this. And now for the bad news... The persistence is a bit crap. It doesn’t last that long, and it is quite a skin scent. But this is sophisticated mature stuff to enjoy intimately, so that fits the style of the fragrance. Recommended!

8/10

Crap mainstream/designers roundup

I have a penchant for mainstreams, but still...

(sorry, no bottle pics - just this for all)

In Leather Man by Etienne Aigner (2003)

In Leather Man by Aigner is hands down the worst leather fragrance I’ve ever tried. Even taking into account the really cheap price, for me it is still just desperately obnoxious, and completely unworthy any price. It opens with a harsh, extremely artificial nondescript smell which I think should be aimed at evoking leather, while it clumsily smells more like a car under the sun – not a particularly rusty or dirty one, just a normal car with that really boring smell of plastic, metal, rubber, cheap imitation leather. I think I get some musk, some components similar to what other manufacturers know better how to use for leather accords, and something ambery; it may sound decent, but the result is just a disaster for me. It’s not leather – actually for me this is really nothing at all. The drydown arrives quickly, light and sweaty. Until now I used to consider as the “worst leather fragrances” the ones which just uncreatively reiterate the same usual aromachemicals (e.g. suederal, safraleine ecc.), but at least, they smell “leather”. This smells just nauseating nonsense for me. If you want to stick to this brand (God knows why) I recall Aigner Black being a little more decent and more similar to an actual leather scent.

4/10

______________

1000 Miglia for Men by Chopard (2013)

The composition seemed interesting to me, especially that promising “asphalt-suede” combo, so I approached this with slightly more enthusiasm than usual, although I am not really a fan of Chopard fragrances, and well, I was wrong – in being slightly more enthusiastic than usual, I mean. Utter cheapness and boredom in a bottle. The opening comprises mostly a contemporary aromatic fougère bone structure of wood, lavender, citrus scented with tobacco, some subtle smell of coffee, a dusty-sweet feel (amber and violet) and a little sad suede aromachemical lying in the shame corner. 1000 miglia reminds me of a cheaper, subtler, more boring version of woody-coffee scents like Rochas Man crossed with Lanvin’s Arpège pour Homme and similar “violet woodyambers”; just more generic, with more lavender, more (depressingly synthetic) wood, a bit more zest, a hint of green. Basically a dull, slightly confused and more generic version of both (or similar ones) with a persistent sort of soapy-musky-woody feel drowned in plastic. Tragically uninspired, too cheap to be at least “mediocrely refined”, one of those scents you have to sniff constantly to remind how they smell, and probably regret having bought them. Plenty of better options for this non-genre.

5/10

______________

Eternity for Men by Calvin Klein (1990)

Desperately bad on every level. Basically a musky citrus-lavender fragrance smelling like a fizzy warm burp after drinking cheap Limoncello. Deadly everlasting persistence. Gross and discomforting.

4/10

______________

Dunhill Black by Alfred Dunhill (2008)

A really bland and sharp woody-violet fragrance mostly built on musky notes, synthetic cedar, something slightly fruity reminding me of blackcurrant, a subtle minty head accord and not much else. Nothing “black” for sure, the mood is rather bright and cold. Tons of other similar designers come to mind, but while most of them at least try to smell different, Black instead feels so lazily generic it almost smells like an archetype of woody-violet fragrances. The strong feel of harsh synthetic cheapness doesn’t really help – adding the “unpleasant” to the “boring” factor.

5/10

______________

Agua de Loewe by Loewe (2000)

I’ve tried hard to be patient and wait the obnoxious opening to change into something more agreeable, but I really can’t. I mean, I did, but just for your information – it is not really worth it. I don’t believe that much in “skin chemistry” variations but I guess I should start to, because unlike other reviewers experienced, the first minutes of Agua de Loewe are hideous on me. A painful journey through a horrific harsh accord of heavily pungent and synthetic citrus notes, something oddly spicy-nutty, something musky-watery-stale and a really unpleasant whiff of orange, vanilla and maybe sandalwood, adding a hint of nauseous aromatic warmth to that screechy mess. These latter notes would be even nice themselves, but it’s like smelling a slice of pie while you are in the middle of a stomach flu. Loud, plastic – “wrong”, shortly. And bloody haunting like your own shadow. Then, after a while it naturally starts to tone down a bit, entering a more enjoyable phase in which it still smells cheap, but at least it does it more smoothly and discreetly. Also, it smells progressively less citrusy and more woody-herbal-tea still with a whiff of orange and musk, and a general “fresh” feel. A bit more decent, still kind of loud and a bit cheap, however unworthy the first nightmare phase for me. Don’t bother.

5/10

______________

Contradiction for Men by Calvin Klein (1998)

For me, Contradiction for Men has always been one of the several epitomes of “insignificance in a bottle”. But the main flaw here is not even the uncreative dullness, which is still perfectly acceptable as not all audiences need creative stuff; rather the quite evident cheap quality of the fragrance itself. Not tragically cheap, but quite cheap for me. Basically this is a fresh, office/gym/club-safe citrus-woody-musk fragrance playing some modern chords on a traditional “eau de cologne” scheme, with a slight balminess and a painful similarity to a window detergent, sitting halfway smelling “almost pleasantly natural” and “annoyingly synthetic” – far enough from both qualities though, sitting in the exact nonsense middle between them. Neither an “avantgarde synthetic fragrance” (which may likely smell crap, but that would be post-modernly “ironic”), surely nor a particular true to life and natural one. Just exactly the worst type of mall/drugstore fragrance trying to emulate some sort of natural notes with really cheap materials. Which makes Contradiction almost a bit tacky, as it does not show even some slight sort of generic understated cleanliness. It is actually rather bold on the contrary; that would be a plus, if the smell was nice. And quality aside, the fragrance isn’t still worthy any attention for me, as I find this just plain dull and indistinguishable from dozens of others – likely better – lemon-woody-musk fragrances. Perfectly interchangeable with any of them, and chances are for the better. I am a big fan of designer fragrances so this is not really a matter of being mainstream, just plain negligible regardless of the label.

5/10

______________

La Nuit de l'Homme by Yves Saint Laurent (2009)

La nuit de who? This is la nuit de le 12 years old sipping a Diet Coke and smoking puff cigarettes. A disappointing, juvenile and cheap lavender-cardamom-woody-tobacco “club scent” smelling like YSL L’Homme layered with Declaration, Lanvin Avantgarde and/or Armani Code, inexplicably relating “night” with a bright, sweetish, teenish vibe. Lasting like a fart - which is good, though: the barely-perceivable drydown is almost enjoyable. If “ladies love this” then either I don’t understand a thing about women or we agree to disagree on the concept of “ladies”. Meh!

5/10

______________

Eau Parfumée au The Vert Extreme by Bvlgari (1996)

I am not familiar with the original edition of The Vert, which seems quite appreciated. All I know is that this Extreme version smells... this close to a nightmare, for me. I get a really little “tea” note out of this, but it’s entirely drowned in an unbearably plastic and harsh blend with coriander and cardamom above all, something citrusy, something synthetically greenish and a bunch of really pungent spices. And just other stuff I can’t recognize. This smells at the same time complex and really simple, harmonically screechy and completely disgraceful on skin. More than “notes”, it’s just olfactive noise, a weird and rough spicy-sweet-green-tea mess. I can’t explain why, maybe is just a subjective issue, but this really makes me physically sick. Tremendously bold and linear, and as if wasn’t enough, also tragically persistent. A proper “scrubber” for me.

4/10

______________

Paul Smith Man 2 by Paul Smith (2010)

Completely derivative but (barely) decent enough citrus-sandalwood-lavender Oriental fragrance ten years later on the trends. Smooth, soft, slightly “dark” and quite sweet, a bit powdery and mildly spicy (sweet, “round” notes of tonka and cardamom), reminding me of so many other fragrances I have a hard time staying focused on it. Trying to blend the crisp Oriental elegance of Declaration & friends, the “feminine” powderiness of Dior Homme & friends, and the “archetypal alpha male coworker” feel of Armani Code & friends. With echoes of Body Kouros too, and maybe Bulgari Man. The only note which doesn’t smell plastic is tonka. A bit juvenile and depressingly cheap but there’s worse around – anyway I think it’s discontinued, so nevermind (and don’t bother looking for it).


5/10

Carven pour Homme by Carven (2014)

Nose: Francis Kurkdjian and Patricia Choux.

Carven pour Homme, which has little to do with Carven Homme from 1999 (I won’t say “nothing at all” though), perfectly nails the intent Carven expressed about this new launch. I read on the press they aimed at offering an unpretentious, discreet yet elegant, quality and pleasant everyday scent for “a brother and a soulmate” or something like that, shortly they seemed uninterested in referencing to more trite marketing themes behind most of masculine fragrances (women, seduction, sport cars, yuppie douches having a swim ecc.), tending more to offering a crisp scent for a man who just wanto to smell nice for himself. Now, they nailed all that because Carven pour Homme is indeed – and sadly, nothing more that – a really decent, pleasant, lively and versatile woody fragrance with a subtle hint of creative distinction, mostly lying in Kurkdjian’s signature note of orangle blossoms. Nearly unperceivable, but it’s there and provides a touch of zest, a slightly “feminine” pastel sweetness to an otherwise classy but kind of dull 30-something office-safe look – an aromatic blend of wood, spices, violet: you can easily guess how this may smell, pick any mainstream woody scent from the recent years. That ephemeral and quickly-vanishing floral-orange whiff is still obviously not enough to make Carven pour Homme something significantly more interesting than a really conventional yet quality sweet-spicy woody-violet fragrance, but it surely adds a touch of interest. Overall I admit that this fragrance smells more quality and more natural than others: you won’t feel wearing the most creative scent around, but you will feel and smell really nice. Probably pointless if you’re a collector owning dozens of (probably superior) fragrances, but a well worthy option if you’re not that into perfumes and are just looking for a new signature scent. So yes, I can’t say I dislike this: maybe “nicely mediocre” and maybe slightly overpriced for the quality, but still solid and probably one of the safest and nicest “perfect gifts” for brothers, dads and boyfriends.

6,5-7/10

P.S.: No similarity with either Cool Water or Green Irish Tweed for me, it’s obviously the same league in broad terms, but there’s very little room for comparison

Insensé by Givenchy (1993)

Ah, the Nineties...

Nose: Daniel Molière

Insensé is one of the many fragrances I shamefully underrated for a long time, I guess for my lack of experience and proper taste. I always misjudged this in the past, always trying it quickly from samples or decants, and always ending up in considering it only a really nice albeit a bit boring and kind of heavy sort of “overly feminine fougère”; I am really glad I grabbed a deal recently and got a small 30 ml bottle of this some days ago, so that I had the chance to wear this at its fullest and give it a proper chance. And I got, as they say, a true “epiphany” about this – from mild enthusiasm to sudden devoted worshipping. It is indeed the hyped masterpiece many rave about, and the hype is fully justified. Actually, no, it even gets way less hype than it should. For me, Insensé has now jumped straight on top of the – however limited – chart of the best floral fragrances for men ever made, because it is hands down one of the best, if not the best one ever. And easily among the best masculine offerings in general ever made. Luca Turin once mentioned two key features of this, which perfectly reflect what I also strongly felt while full wearing this the first time: “melancholy and mystery”. It is exactly how I also view Insensé: this a dramatically romantic, rich and slightly decadent scent which stunningly blends decades of masculine and feminine perfumery in an enigmatic, completely new, clever, breathtakingly creative and above all, irresistibly good unisex floral blend. Which indeed smells mysteriously “different” from anything else. Like a prism, it reflects echoes of perfumes ranging from Cristalle, to Diorella, to Caron’s 3rd Man.

The smell is complex but seamlessly beautiful: there is a rich heart symphony of green herbs and flowers refreshed by a subtle fruit-pine breeze, contrasting a deeply dark, smoky base accord of woods and aldehydes which provide “weight” and baroque gloominess to flowers and herbs. The overall feel is soapy, smoky, lightly waxy, aldehydic to the bone, floating between a nostalgic green-chypre powderiness and a fresher, more austere balsamic-woody feel of many classic fougères. Not simply a juxtaposition of different styles, just a true rewriting using selected key notes and accords from all those inspirations. It may sound simple or boring, it’s definitely not: as I said it’s truly a sort of triumphant gathering of decades of perfumery blending together to compose this incredibly handsome, unique mosaic. Distinctive, bracing and sophisticated in a quite peculiar, decadent way to say the least, probably also quite “gothic” to a certain extent: surely “not for the faint of heart”. Totally worthy the high prices. Leave that shitty niche boutique and save your money for this.

10/10

P.S.: obviously I refer to the vintage version of Insensé (pictured above).

Aquaman by Rochas (2001)

Nose: Jacques Cavallier

I would have never thought I would have liked this, but as they say, one must never judge the book by its cover. And that applies in particular with perfumes. So don’t get fooled by the lame superhero name, the kind of cheap (yet wonderfully handy and ergonomic) bottle, the shiny blue colour, and overall that juvenile MTV Summer Chart kind of esthetics. The fragrance is way more complex, darker and fascinating than it may seem. And above all, phew! - it smells really nice. To my nose Aquaman is an extremely pleasant Mediterranean blend of aromatic notes of grass, balsamic-green “dark” herbs (like sage and olive tree leaves, that kind of “dark”, dry, aromatic greenness), something slightly floral-anisic on the barbershop side (lavender or similar, or maybe sage again) pepper, nutmeg and a spicy-woody base. Shortly an aromatic fougère brilliantly translated into summer-aquatic terms but using balsamic-herbal “words” instead of calone or fruits, slightly close to Fendi Thereoma Uomo's kind of league but more catchy than that. All smells unexpectedly true-to-life (I won’t say “natural”, but I don’t get anything particularly synthetic-metallic), and also surprisingly “watery” indeed, albeit in a more unusual way: a sort of humid, sultry muskiness which does indeed convey a feel of luke warm azure water. Nothing salty and nothing “ozonic”, rather a liquid, somehow even dark smell of condensation water stuffed with bracing balsamic-peppery-herbal nuances. Nothing heavy though.

What I enjoy the most here and what actually led me to consider this fragrance with more attention is that Aquaman has just a really good sillage, something inexplicably pleasant to feel around you, slightly different from what you smell close to skin. It’s like a whiff of extremely realistic “medicinal balsamicness” you feel around yourself. Truly nice. For some reasons this smells way more herbal and Mediterranean than many other fragrances clearly associated to that inspiration – and at the same time, it has very little to do with the “synthetic aquatic family” it can be easily compared to judging by the bottle and the esthetic. I like these little gems hiding these nice unexpected surprises. I think Aquaman can still be found for cheap, so if you’re looking for a less generic option for something fresh and balsamic, give this a chance. You’ll smell nice and (fairly) different.

7-7,5/10