I have only found a couple of RD fragrances you could call an 'original'. He's a bit of a magpie imo. The formula for Danger could have come from any decent fougere from the Nineties. The numerous list of notes used is made completely redundant by the denseness of the fragrance -- a lot of his fragrances could do with 'opening up' imo. It seems to solely consist of ambergris, herbs and woods.
However, for all it's flaws, I do love wearing it, so a reluctant thumbs up.
This is my first Roja Dove fragrance on skin, Danger Pour Homme (the EDP, not the parfum), and it's decidedly masculine, a mix of predominantly woods and leather, with a slightly smoky, boozy, and citrus aspect. The opening is brighter due to bergamot and lavender but it settles rather quickly into its masculine character. The name seems unfitting, as it's a relatively safe masculine fragrance, and while there's nothing overwhelmingly special about it, Danger could actually work very well as a man's signature scent.
Performance (again, on the EDP) is decent but not exceptional. Much better in terms of longevity than projection, at least on my skin, though I'm sure once could go the parfum route to achieve a scent cloud.
Danger does not seem all that unique enough to me to merit the Roja Dove costs (the EDP is $325 for 50ml, the parfum is $480 for 50ml), exceeded only by Clive Christian, with the exception of Chanel extraits and other high-concentration special items.
I've not tried Heritage by Guerlain, but the similarities sound strong. I'd recommend trying to find something similar in lieu of the Roja Dove price on this, as it's simply not unique enough to merit the cost.
7 out of 10
Heritage by Guerlain or, to a lesser extent, Zino Davidoff anyone? First thing that came to mind. If I had paid that amount for this I would be *so* pissed off. Anyway... besides being a hilariously pathetic rip-off of the two bottled gents mentioned above, Danger pour Homme is a decently executed woody-spicy scent, dry and earthy, with a slight animalic note (synthetic castoreum) and a general late fougère structure. I smell patchouli, a sort of mossy-earthy camphoraceous base, a dry thin layer of leather, synthetic but pleasantly thick ambergris, aldehydes, spices (a lot of cumin, then cloves) a sweet breeze carrying a spicy-nutty feel (tonka, rhubharb). Which, as I said, strongly reminds me of Heritage and other similar perfumes - whereas Fetish pour Homme plagiarized Moschino pour Homme and vintage Bel Ami, this one is all about early '90s. The scent itself is decent, even if completely lacking in depth, substance and interest, contrary to the vintages it clumsily tries to emulate. Surely better that many other niche scents, I won't argue that. After a couple of hours, so basically on the drydown, there is even room for a nice twist; it arises a fresh, slightly minty balsamic breeze with a subtle sweet-anisic feel, and also the leather emerges better together with a herbal-spicy fougère accord. This "moves" Danger a bit far from that unbearable resemblance to Heritage, which does not disappear obviously, but at least becomes less noticeable. But that occurs too late to make me change my mind. Uncreative, uninspired and pretentious. And even with a below-average persistence.
bought it blind cuz it was cheap (ish) on ebay and i wanted to try a roja dove. i sold it after three full wearing. it was quite sumptuous but utterly mediocre, if that makes any sense. a sort of amalgam of classic fougeres that just didn't say anything. apparently he also did puerdistance M; didn't like that either. i'll stick with duchaufour, jp guerlain, roucel, sheldrake, thank you very much
Ambregris and Vetiver
I don't recommend everyone to try the Eau de Parfum concentration. The beauty of Roja's perfumes lives in the interaction of a sumptuous base with the heart notes, after a bright start (bergamot is the signature usually, bitter but extremely sparkling); to obtain this you should smell, absolutely, the Parfum version.
They are extremely classic fragrances? Yes. They are like balms scents, very complex and rich. If it is not your taste, no one can to object them. If you love this, you've found the Heaven.
Moreover, it is easy to understand that, in his parfums are cited the great classics of perfumery in their ancient version... and that the extremely strong names hide their existence in a subtle way. Why "Danger", pour Homme, in a sparkling and sublime Haiti vetiver?
When I went to London, a month ago, had the opportunity to sniff all his line and I had a "stroke of lightning" (italian linguistic expression) for Danger pour Homme and Enslaved.
DpH (parfum concetration) for me is the finest and most sensual combination between tons of natural ambregris (intense salinity, deep and gently animal), and tons of Haiti vetiver burbon with "grandeur". A sparkling opening of bergamot (as always) dense and palpable with the bright green of galbanum; subtle violaceous nuances of Grasse jasmin and lily of the valley. Finest ingredients made by Robertet in Grasse. I was shocked to percive such that quantity of natural ambregris in a modern perfume, as to keep the salty in the bottom of the tongue and be able to feel it with the taste. So much to fix the drydown for three days on my wirst. Here is the "Danger": a soft, sensual animality with a great depth (ambregris) in a so luminous fragrance with the most souave vetiver that I've smell.