A fine, aromatic, dry scent. Somewhat minimalist in style. The cedar has a slightly sweet tone and is fairly woody. The incense adds a restrained, resinous-coniferous note. The sandalwood softens the scent slightly with its characteristic creamy aspect.
Sweet, fleshy, nutty -- what I would expect from tuberose. Beaucoup de florals here, feminine in style. Has some interesting green and resinous notes on the side. When the sweetness burns off, the scent improves in my opinion. More green notes, and an amber note which is well done (though I don't particularly care for amber). Not my style, but worth checking out.
Dusky spice and incense-wood. Rich and yet not sweet, in fact rather dry. The rose oxide adds a faint yet lovely rose note. The spices are restrained, gentle hints rather than full-on notes. Everything is lovely and well balanced. I think this is excellent! Some have said "minimalistic" and I agree -- and here it works very well. Hints of a fresh quality as well, but this is not excessive. Bit of pencil-lead from the cumin.
I don't know the original, so I have no basis of comparison.
I don't like this. Brash, too sweet, dense. Initially it smells mostly of wet cardboard (a note I often encounter in inferior modern men's scents). Some spices emerge, although there are none listed in the fragrance notes. No distinguished leather that I can detect, and a very irritating patchouli.
Folks, this is a budget scent, pure and simple. I bought a pack of scent and shower gel for $4 (final discount) at a remaindered shop. I was curious to see what it would be like.
For a budget scent, it is acceptable. A bit synthetic throughout, but not screechy. Moderately dry. Hint of citrus at the beginning. The herbal notes are vague but they are dusky, green and reasonable. Some hints of camphoraceous lavender, and of rootsy, earthy vetiver. No one will be gobsmacked at this. It would make an OK gift for guys who know or care little about scent. :)
A mild thumbs-up for this one. As has been noted, it is understated (surprising from this house). Classic fougere ingredients, conveying a soapy, mossy green chord. The amber here has a slight leathery tang -- I don't entirely care for it but it is a good note and many would like it. Fougere fans should check this out.
This is not the usual sweet bombshell from TM, so I will give it a neutral. Starts off with citrus and touches of green, settles into a mossy base -- so far, certainly in the chypre mode. But as has been noted, there is a gingery metallic tang here (though I did not find any liquorice). That persists, in a cool and rather synthetic way, for the duration of the scent. I knew there was a fruity note, and I now see that it is pear. This does not improve the scent, in my opinion. This would be rather dreadful except the entire scent is understated, and thus the scent overall is tolerable. Perhaps some will like it.
I like it. Darker, not as bright as the new EdT version. More resinous. Drier, much more interesting. The musk is very well done: not heavy or sweet. Bit of a salty tang. Good longevity. I really appreciate its dryness.
It is interesting to compare this to the EdP version. This has a prominent citrus note (kind of orange-lemon) which is bright and at the same time round & smooth. The guaiac word has a spicy-wood note. The honey is of a resinous, honeycomb sort. Pleasant scent, but it has a bit of a "fresh" note which suggests "inoffensive office-pleaser" rather than anything really striking.
This is an interesting, distinctive scent. It doesn't try to smell like a lot of the stuff out there. However, it doesn't quite work for me. The dusky dry pepper and a rather brash bergamot dominate in the early stages. It picks up a hint of rose, and the peppermint is cool but not toothpaste-like. But then a clove note appears, and I have never cared for that. Verging into bay rum territory. The clove combines with some patchouli and I'm not thrilled with the dry-down. I feel this could have been a better scent.
This is without a doubt the WORST scent I have ever encountered, and I have come across some real duds. Super, sickeningly sweet. Utterly faux. Bears no resemblance to concrete or stones or pavement. This is a complete, unmitigated disaster. And, it is an evil demon. It haunted my nose for more than two hours based strictly on a spray on paper and a sniff. I shudder with horror to imagine the hell I would be going through if I had applied it to my skin. Approach this one with extreme caution.
Dusky, a bit sweet. Wet cardboard (briefly) and then violet leaf. Not a green scent.
This is a delightful, well-designed vetiver. It has a perfect balance between the dry, grassy vetiver and cypress notes and the softness of the milk and very slight sweetness of the vanilla. Normally I don't endorse vanilla, but it works very well here. In the early going, the creamy accord is almost like coconut milk, but that does not last long. The vetiver is very well done: earthy, grassy, root-like, with a slight smoky note in the dry-down. Wears well, has good longevity.
This is an interesting scent, definitely in a really old-school style. I can appreciate its depth and richness, but find it too sweet to suit me. It is in the mode of some of the vintage Crown Perfumery scents.
Has a very spicy citrus opening. The spices dominate for a while. The honey adds a really rich, deep and sweet note. Then, an animalic musky note emerges. A bit skanky but in a pleasant, interesting way. The sweetness diminishes but the richness persists.
Finally, the scent settles into its hay-like fougere aspect, with a smokey, leather twang.
Not a green fougere, and as I said quite old-school. If a super-vintage style appeals to you, then check it out.
This is a very nice scent, and it comes in an attractive, pretty bottle.
The main ingredients are simple and few, and all well done.
The lemon is bright, refreshing, and of great duration.
The clary sage is very lightly applied, really the merest hint of an herbal note.
The vetiver is lemony-bright, with its characteristic earthy-soapy quality.
This is a summery spritz, bright and cheery. It reminds me very much of Givenchy Vetyver -- indeed, one would not need to have both scents.
This has a very good opening of dry, grassy vetiver. That phase is regrettably brief. Then, a nutty space and carrot seed chord appears. Almost toasty at this point. Then, back to the vetiver, which persists this time. Low-key, unisex, distinguished.
Mild thumbs up. Interesting style, though not something I would commit to. Others have noted the industrial/concept opening and the pleasant dry-down, and I agree. First stage is cityscape: dirty ashtray, concrete, car fumes. Dry-down is the typical gorgeous incense-wood of many CdGs. Worth a try.
A serviceable green scent. Starts off well: fresh and lively with a bit of dryness. Gets a bit sweeter in the dry-down. Nothing objectionable here, gets a mild thumbs-up for its green style.
Sweet, generic in style. Unremarkable.
It is OK, not bottle-worthy for me. Very green, in a leafy-herbal way. Could be a bit more dry. Everything blends together and it is hard to pick out notes. Some may enjoy that. Green fans should try it.
Not impressed. Sweet, floral. Not a garrigue (herbs on a warm breeze) scent. Not particularly distinctive.
I find this to be very light, even in the Parfum version. A refreshing spritz but not a knock-out. Very subtle, citrus, light woods, a creamy-rosemary note with a hint of rose.
This is a good scent. Perhaps not remarkable, but quite pleasant. Light incense and light suede combine to create a masculine but not heavy/macho scent. The spices are good and smoothed out by the milk accord. The florals are not sweet. Despite a fir balsam absolute note listed, I did not detect a distinct coniferous note.
This is a very good scent. It definitely picks up on the salty, green notes. The aquatic note is fresh and pleasantly dry, not the usual sweet ozone. Hints of leather from the styrax. The oud is very muted at first but slowly develops. I like this.
Lemony, green to start. Develops a mildly earthy chord of the spices, tobacco, patchouli and coffee. Should be more interesting.
Mild thumbs up. Starts as a gorgeous EdC in the classic style of citrus and herbs. Beautiful petitgrain note in the middle. This continues for a while. Then, the tuberose makes things a bit heavy, and the ylang-ylang makes this a bit rich, sweet and heady.
Nothing wrong with this, just not my style. But a lovely scent.
The cardamom registers as clove on my skin, and thus this scent delivers a perfect rendition of a pink carnation! Not at all what I was expecting. I found the wood notes to be quite weak, and likewise the vetiver.
Not neroli or orange blossom or anything in that vicinity. Bergamot? Whatever it is, it is sweet, unpleasant and a real scrubber.
This is an amazing, beautiful scent! Rose, leather and oud are in absolutely perfect combination. All the notes are gentle and attractive. It is a joy to wear.
Spicy pepper and incense dominate, with some grassy vetiver in the dry-down. Good depth.