S-ex (2004)
by S-Perfume

A subtle skin scent was the last thing I expected from S-Perfumes after the olfactory assault of their 100% Love, but that’s exactly what S-ex is. S-ex opens on a blend of proudly synthetic floral and aquatic notes, with the instantly recognizable plastic-melon tang of calone at the head. The calone and clean chemical florals persist, but are joined – or perhaps I’d better say opposed - by a smoky, dark leather accord. “Opposed” because the two accords confront one another without blending, or even overlapping. The effect is very much of smelling two entirely different fragrances at once. This standoff generates a tremendous sense of tension that sustains interest in what is essentially a quiet, close-wearing scent. That the development is linear is an advantage in this case, since having either of the two opposed olfactory blocks become clearly dominant would extinguish the driving force behind the scent.

About the name: if like me, your idea of a seductive fragrance is something like Muscs Koublaï Khân or Oud Cuir d’Arabie, S-ex is not a sexy scent. The powerful calone note wraps S-ex in a capsule of cool, clinical detachment, and even the smoky leather accord is devoid of animalic warmth. In this respect S-ex closely approaches some of Marc Buxton’s work for Comme des Garçons, and if scents like CdG 2 Man or Scent 71 appeal to you, this will too. I can't help but find it too clean, too artificial, and hence a little bit alienating. Also, I'd rather my leather scents not be eunuchs.

An unusual one… so much in S-ex seems neutral to me: Neutrally sweet, neutrally aquatic, neutrally green, neutrally floral, neutrally musk, neutrally sensual, and neutral in its movement and progression. It has average sillage and longevity. Besides all that, it’s unisex. To give an idea of how neutral this scent seems to me, I usually dislike leather notes in fragrances but these leathers are neutral to me. I am unable to slap a descriptive label on to that neutrality except that it doen’t seem to be the well-known cardboard accord, nor is it a hairspray accord or a metallic accord. “Salty” is about as close as I can get, and yet it isn’t exactly salty. It does has a certain suggestive S-ex-ual innuendo that I find engaging but not vulgar or even obvious.

It’s interesting... but for me it doesn’t reach “intriguing.” I wouldn’t call it unpleasant. It is certainly unique. It’s not high on my list of future purchases, but I can understand why others enjoy it. ( Edit of the 12 November 2008 review.)

Man this is light. I was worried that my nose was broken but now relieved to read that everyone else has the same experience. I get little out of this but it's a nice light scent that stays close to you. It's very bland with little identifiable scent. Very avant guard like CdG and the like. I used to think that the abstract perfumes were amazing but from the top to the bottom S-ex doesn't get any from me.

Sex, huh? I have a hard time imagining a less sexy fragrance, though I suppose Secretions Magnifiques takes the price! S-ex starts out very faint, cool and vaguely salty/metallic/aquatic, reminding me of CdG's Synthetic series or abstract Odeurs. It gets worse after that. Much worse. Allow me to disclose the truth hidden behind the ludicruous official list of notes: dead things washed up on the shore, compost, cucumber soap and feces of fruit candy on a base of fake leather. There. Thank god it doesn't have the strength and lasting power of Secretions Magnifiques, although it has an alarming tendency to grow stronger with time!

I would rather smell this fragrance on a woman and not on myself. For me, it is more than a little too feminine from top to bottom. I even had TPC send me another sample just to make sure I had the correct fragrance - I did. I'm normally not ultra-sensitive about such things, but as I wore this out in public I couldn't help but think, "EVERYONE THINKS I'M WEARING PERFUME!!" Insecure much?

On the positive side, it really doesn't smell "bad," but it does undoubtedly smell cheap and synthetic. I don't know, maybe my nose isn't evolved enough to enjoy or appreciate this. I can't even pick out most of the notes; all I can perceive is a general impression of soft suede/leather mixed with a gargantuan dose of pleasant, albeit headache-inducing chemicals. FWIW, it is verrrrrry long-lasting.

As I implied, I believe this could be very s-exy on the right female, though there is a drugstore or designer scent that smells very much like this - laugh all you want, is it White Shoulders...? I have frequently caught a whiff of it on average women shopping in Wal-Mart, malls, etc. I'm certain that literally none of them would ever pay a premium for S-ex (pun intended).

I could imagine Beverly d'Angelo wearing something like this.

I should know by now : never, never, ever order a sample of anything which Luca Turin has given five (or four) stars while mentioning sex somewhere in his review. Not unless you are interested in his psychobiography, that is. Others have noted how quickly its chill and bracing top-notes are overcome by smoky malted musk. In my case, it takes 10 seconds, and that counts as premature ejaculation in my book. The body of the scent is a waxen cistus, with hints of rancid butter, odd, spooky and not quite sickening. Actually, it has the head-turning, queasy-stomach effect of amyl nitrate thrust on you by someone you didn’t really fancy in the first place and have now gone Right Off. But most of all, this is the smell of CB I Hate Perfume’s M#3 November – pumpkin pie. Of course, calling it S-ex was a good idea, it got all the perfumistas whirring away, but S-plat or S-quidge would have been nearer the mark.