Well, Cetalox, (admittedly) one of the Romano Ricci's favorite ingredients, effectively just an ingredient (yes pure, artificial, transparent, "post-industrial"), it seems a chemical aqueous cedarwood with a touch of anisic musk and calone. Yes, Cetalox is for this fragrance what ambroxan (in a different way) represents for Molecule 02. The aroma is close to a sort of postmodern detergent due to remove make up and to clean up the face's skin. It's curious that I can't catch anymore the Not a Perfume's aroma on my skin after a while, the scent seems appearing and disappearing systematically. Close (more than to D&G Light Blue as many declare) to a sort of ideally less "minty" and earthy KenzoAir. Anyway, minimalism? I would say ghostly experimental un-artistic (cosmetical) simplism. A boring medium rating just cause there is far worse around.
When did this idiotic trend of selling mono-molecule fragrances start? "Good for layering"? It surely is, that's why they use it for making perfumes, it's an ingredient and so it should be marketed. But for God's sake, do we need Juliette has a Gun passing off a bottle of that at 10 times the price of its only ingredient – for "layering"? That does not make sense to any extent. It's like paying 100 EUR a bottle of water because it's good for layering with your lunch. Unworthy any review (like Molecule 01 and similar pathetic phenomenas). And by the way it's cetalox, not ambroxan, bit different (cheaper, less complex, more on the clean/white side, they use it for floor cleaning products).
I don't get it at all..
I do not wish to look up Ambroxan either..
a plain and uncomplex light-airy scent that is unisex..
Stays close to the skin but is delightful..
Not FB worthy..
Cons: why bother"
Review by thanks sixx
If this product is acknowledged for what it is.....diluted ambroxan, and nothing more......and if one asks oneself if they like the smell or not....the argument is over.
I, personally, LOVE this scent. It doesn't matter to me that it is a single molecule. It is overpriced, if one wants to purchase plain ambroxan and dilute it. Some folks might not want to go through the trouble. The perfumer here, in my opinion, has the concentration just right.
I like to spray it on my skin, then apply a drop or two of real ambergris 3% solution over it. This rounds out the note and makes it more creamy and luscious.
Not A Perfume can smell a bit strong on the skin at first, perhaps even clinical. It quickly settles down into a feminine, soothing skin-scent. It is reminiscent of ambergris, being one of the molecules found in natural ambergris. But here the comparison ends, as ambergris is a complex wonder of nature.
Like any scent, either you like ambroxan or you don't.
Personally, I love it.
Like it says on the tin.
Ricci got so excited by the synthetic amber Ambroxan that he decided to bottle it (in the right dilution, of course). Now Ambroxan is not without its virtues. Andy Tauer writes of it thus: ‘Ambroxan is a single molecule, but is smells very complex (amber, vibrant wood, floral tobacco) and not cheap like other synthetic ambers that you find in washing powder.’ It has a soft and polished satin-like feel about it. So far so good.
However, most synthetics on their own – even fairly complex ones – don’t have the variability over time that makes naturals exciting and lively. This is like a musical chord prolonged for hours on end stripped off any of the harmonics that would normally begin to dance around it. Or as my non-perfume-wearing partner announced rather bluntly: ‘quite insipid’.