A gently sweetish biochemistry-laboratory generic wood impression, very close to my skin, with soft sillage and two hours of longevity. A very interesting concept, but alas I am smelling scents, not concepts. And as scent it is not good enough.
I really wanted to like this, what with all the hype and its 'cleverness'.
I duly tried a sample, and found that I was one of the 'lucky' people that could actually smell this. I got that generic synthetic sweetness-which of course claims to have something to do with cedar/wood in general. Not at all unpleasant, but I have a problem. You see, I know this smell... yep, that's right, this is exactly the same perfume that saturates Ann Summer's 'intimate' wipes.
So instead of enjoying this simple sweetness, I keep thinking 'cheap' and 'something to do with bedroom hygiene'. Not really the sort of thing I want to share with others. Definitely not the scent I want to define me.
If you do happen to like the smell though, you may be 'lucky' like me, and have it lingering for many many hours.
I was very hesitant about Molecules 01 considering it's nature and the varied reviews, but thought I'd try it for myself.
I get a very light, primarily woody (cedar) fragrance on my skin, which isn't overbearing nor 'heavy' and it drifts in and out throughout the day. There also is an occasional and pleasant sweetness I detect, which I can't put my finger on. It's longevity is outstanding on my skin, +12 hours. It does remind slightly of the old Guuci Pour Homme, without the 'harsh & heaviness'.
The thing I love about this fragrance is it's fantastic and gorgeous sillage, which is light, not overpowering, and has many invading your personal space to inquire what it is you're wearing. I do receive many positive compliments when wearing it, and haven't been told it's too much or over bearing. Women love it! It's certainly become a signature scent.
I haven't tried the eBay version ISO E Super, so I can't compare, but I'm happy with the Molecules version considering the price I paid.
Overall, a wonderful fragrance. I'd highly recommend, however considering it will be different on each person, I can only say, sample before committing, to avoid possible disappointment.
15th June, 2015 (last edited: 23rd June, 2015)
I got a sample of this from Luckyscent as part of a gift certificate that I got. As has been said before, this is pure ISO E Super diluted in perfumer's alcohol - and nothing else. It smells fine on its own (on my skin, a light woody smell), and would work great layered with other fragrances.
But it's US$135 for 100 ml of ISO E Super, a low-cost aromachemical, that is then diluted in perfumer's alcohol. And that is why I cannot recommend Molecule 01 - given the cost involved, it is a very poor value to the consumer. I'd say that a bottle of this fragrance costs $1 to make, plus 50 cents for packaging, and another buck to ship from the UK to the US. That leaves a profit margin that would make HP's printer-ink division envious. Sure, you could layer it as I suggested. But spending $200+ on an underperforming high-end niche and then another $135 when you could have just bought a better-performing high-end niche for just $200 is just plain ridiculous. There's a reason why I choose to simply buy better-performing niche fragrances regardless of price (well, except if it's Roja Dove, who charges prices so high that I won't even sample his products).
However, if you really want to add more ISO E Super for layering, you can easily make your own similar, if not identical fragrance for a fraction of the cost. Just buy some ISO E Super and some denatured perfumer's alcohol.
This perfume is an art project complete and innovative.
Many fundamental questions of craftsmanship versus mass production are always related to niche perfumery! The relationship of usefulness and beauty, the practical purpose of formal beauty in a commonplace object could become a real discussion.
When I read that some perfumers create fine perfumes because focused on the value of the liquid, I think that the niche has become a sort of meeting place for provincial people who do not know the value of an idea. Reducing a simple concept to the craftsmanship of a perfume (defined as liquid) is nonsense. As it is equally foolish to talk about quality of the raw materials. Do you want jasmine? Use jasmine, although it will cost you a fortune and it would be a trivial version of the “idea about jasmine”! Even the packaging is an integral part of the artistic value of a fragrance.
About Molecule 01, when they decided to remove the cap in this standard bottle, they told a choice! The exact same choice to create a single-themed scent! This is art, this is an idea! This is a symbol: how to create a perfume anti-snob! The entire project is brilliant!
But who cares farmer's jasmin! I do not hear my favorite music because it has better sounds (but simple !!!) and I do not fall in love with a painting because blue is very nice and the author chose an economic framework. This means to be radical-chich. This attitude often is identified with a certain conviction of cultural superiority, as well as the persistent manifestation of this "high" culture, or cured sloppiness in dress and, sometimes, to the refinement in gastronomy and tourism; loving also certain artists and it counters that, reduced to mere appearance, lose any substance which indicates the label snobbish.
Art is the beauty of a concept, is a promise and it is also a lot of words spoken or unspoken! Perfume is the art of seeing what is invisible to others. Let them be stupid, they need time to see!
This reviewer may have conflicts of interest