Nothing special about 88 to me. Smells like an expensive soap. Smells more feminine to than unisex. Not a bad fragrance, just not for me.
A dark, humid, camphoraceous masculine chypre centered on rose, sandalwood, bergamot, with earthy-mossy notes and an overall kind of dusty-musky breeze. Dense and slightly animalic at first, shady and strong, not far from classic stuff à la Cabochard, just less complex, more woody and masculine, and without leather, but that is the mood – a nostalgic, a bit "heavy" and to be honest, boring after a while, austere and elegant fragrance, quite in a decadent meaning. The drydown features mostly a sort of dark-soapy note with nuances of wet dead roses. Not bad, not stunning, frankly a bit plain and monotone (above all because of a general humid "heaviness), but if you like the – few – notes, then it may work for you.
The first few minutes were just as I had expected: a lightly soapy rose, a hint of geranium. Understated and somewhat Edwardian in style. Picture a dandy in a Homburg, a sharp 3-piece suit and a cravat walking down Bond Street on a cool, crisp morning. But as the rose fades away, what gets left behind paints a completely different scene. The dandy has ducked into an alley and found himself at a little Indian spice stall. I'm talking about dirty-earthy-musky vetiver roots and faintly spiced sandalwood. If you enjoy such masculine basenotes, this could well be your holy grail. Alas, I don't.
Advertisement — Reviews continue below
This one has a very oriental aura to me. No 88 makes me think of indian shops, and while i kind of like this aroma, i don`t know if you would feel comfortable wearing it frequently due to this indian shop aura. No 88 starts with a spicy, incensed rose aura. It`s curious that there isn`t spices listed on the pyramid, i do get some mixed with the rose. The rose is sensual, intense, slightly incensed, and it projects over a sandalwood base that is what makes me think of the indian shops. It`s intense at the first 3-4 hours, then it calms down to a soft woody incense aura. This could work amazingly as an exotic incense stick aroma. But for me, on my skin, it doesn`t work so fine.
Smells just like a Rose Joss stick bought from a market. Not bad but not good either.
An incense-rose that, when applied in a quantity I find manageable (so that it doesn’t feel like I have a twelve tonne octogenarian perched on my shoulder), exhibits a geranium-vetiver-sandalwood blend more than anything else. Oddly, I find that at times it recalls the vetiver-vanilla of Molinard’s Habanita.
I just can't get enthusiastic about No. 88, not with Montale's Black Aoud and Frederic Malle's Geranium Pour Monsieur on the market. Geranium is not my favourite note – unless, apparently, it is wielded by Dominique Ropion, whose Geranium Pour Monsieur and Carnal Flower I thoroughly enjoy – and so this review hinges on a petty preference that is not all that helpful to the world at large. Simply put, geranium possesses what feels to me like dissonant impulses of the minty-cool and spicy-warm that I struggle to abide if not handled in a way that settles this competition.
powerful and longlasting floral scent dominated by geranium and roses.It is very aromatic and warm.My first impression was -whow! what a scent, so individual, so special, so different,so incredible complex but within the time it changes.....there is something disturbing, even nerving and bothering and on the other side there is something attracting, inviting.It reminds me of an orchestra playing mozart but suddenly you listen to wrong notes or musicians playing in the wrong key......mozart mixed with bartok and schoenberg.....
it seems to start as a wonderful composition but in between it cracks down .
To my mind it is to powerful and !it disturbs a lot of people complaining about the strange notes.....This company started as bathing business and this scent reminds me of bathing scents.I see it more in a bathroom, being used as room scent etc.Definitely unisex?!- it´s not a scent for a man´s wardrobe.If you like floral compositons go for egoiste by chanel, aramis 900!, encre noir by lalique and bois du portugal by creed, or even Gentleman by Givenchy.Have a look at the classical scents like diorissimo or diorella by edmond roudnitska- these are perfect floral compositions....
I would give a thumbs down but there is something intersting about this scent.
This scent gets a lot of praise and has quite a following. The comparisons to one of my faves, Domencio Caraceni 1913, led me to believe I should love this. I was wrong.
I won't give a thumbs down. I can see why many would like this. There is a lot I DO like about it. But every time I wear it, there is some sort of foul note that periodically pops up to my horror. I'm all for a bit 'o dirty, but this note I can't deal with. I find the same stench within all the C&S scents. They just don't work for me.
A semi-masculine rose scent that is perceived to be dark because of the sandalwood and vetiver in it. It smells very gothic and temple like and thats what makes this hard to actually wear. You can imagine a temple smelling like this but on a person it just seems too strange, especially in a modern office building. It smells high quality and epic but its just not feasible to me. There are a few other rose scents you can try as alternatives if you feel the same way.. Black Aoud and Voleur de Roses are two. Definately try before you shell out the cash.
This stuff is weird. It opens with a soapy rose which seems almost candied, but like Middle Eastern or East Asian candies that taste unmistakeably "different" from western candy. (I can understand why people say it's a masculine rose, though.) Then within a few minutes comes a deep, sharp woodiness, which feels heavy, dirty and chemical when combined with the remaining rose. It starts to become a big mess where I'm not sure I can pick out anything in particular. There's something in there similar to the old-rubber-band accord that I get from my newer Heritage decant. It just feels tacky for some reason...I think the piercing rose stays just intense enough to annoy me with its sharp pointiness. By the end, a little arid wood (cedar?) comes into the picture to cut some of the sweetness, and you're finally left with a vague incenceyness. I guess I just don't understand what the perfumer was going for, though I won't deny the quality of the ingredients. To me, it's mostly just a vase of wilting flowers. Could be interesting on a woman, though.
A high quality scent but definitvly not for me. It's seem that the fragrance react strongly to the chemistry of my skin, making it projection enormous maybe too enourmous for me.
As every review talk about his scent, I will not but I will suggest not to blind buy this fragrance but to test it before.
Also, I would suggest to wear it for formal occasion if you are in the 20th. You may be able to wear it everyday if your older. As teflondog said, it's not a chicks magnet and I strongly suggest you don't wear it at a club. My experience told me that club chick don't appreciate that fragrance because it can be a little soapy or too sophisticated.
I would have gave a thumb down but I think my body chemistry make it worst than it is and someof you might really enjoy this fragrance.
It may be a beautiful scent but it smells like every headshop on the West Coast of the USA. Very cheap incense producers have copied this scent perfectly or is the the other way around?
Some basenoters commented that this scent evolves memory of a visit to a Chinese temple. And they are right! Speaking as a Chinese who used to pray at the local temple, the surprise of No. 88 is that it smells like stepping into a Chinese temple with the soft whiffs of incense mixing with the thick aroma of exotic flowers on offering. And that itself might not be a good thing. For me at least. I don't want to smell as if I just stepped out of a temple. Or a church for that matter. But the rose note in this scent I can live with. More so than the heavy rose in, say, Alain Delon's Iquitoes or Paco Rabanne's Tenere. So, yes, do not buy this blind!
Advertisement — Reviews continue below
I smell patchouli and roses. Has a strange urine-like note right there in the beginning but it's easily ignored. Though, the rest of it is dark, woody and surprisingly masculine. The rose smooths everything. More of a night-out scent. It's good but not my style at all.
Drakkar Noir disguised as the Scarlet Pimpernel. Or is it the other way around? It's a Foppish powerhouse scent. Yes, I know, another 'Wow what a contradiction' review.
Allright, mate. You figure this one out!
One of these days I'll understand the army of thumbs up for Bois du Portugal, Tam Dao and this one. Scents which I find to be OK, but no great shakes. Then I shall attain satori, or write a book like Luca . . .
29th March, 2007 (last edited: 06th July, 2009)
Very Nicely made scent, but not quite my thing. I've worn this scent a few times, from a decant, and on my body it seems very floral and feminine, with a very slight musk to it. I believe this scent has a wonderful smell to it, but it makes me feel like I'm wearing feminine Men's cologne, or a masculine perfume, rather than actually wearing a Men's cologne.
I have the same sort of respect for this fragrance that a school boy has for the bully that kicks his ass every day.
High quality scent but not my cup of tea. Smells like roses in the morning after a long rainy night. It might be perfect for you if you like the smell of roses, but for me it lacks the sweetness that I crave in fragrances. It lasts long for a fresh scent due to its high oil content. Oh, and in case you're wondering, it's not a chick magnet or something you would typically wear to a club IMO.
The Baron de Charlus once told me: 'I recall the time when I was a house guest at the country estate of Ozzie Osborne (or Osbert as I insisted on calling him for reasons of decorum). He gave us each a bottle of Czech & Speake No. 88.
"De Charlus, you old c***," croaked the poete maudit of rock music turned national treasure, "what the f*** do you think of this f****** fragrance? Is it good shit, bad shit, or indifferent?" "My dear Osbert," I responded, "what we have here is poetry of the coffin laced with infinite solitude and emptiness. It would not be erroneous to describe it as embodying a metaphysical menace. You have to admire its evocative qualities, this strange, left-handed cousin of Messe de Minuit, itself a fairly odd and deathly scent. Personally I would shudder to wear either. I also feel that it is totally inappropriate for your good self. Given your curious combination of histrionics, vagueness and blokeishness, I feel you would be far better suited by a combination of Joop, Latitude Longitude and Marbert Man. Then you would smell like a proper f****** c***."
My host, I fear, was distinctly unimpressed by judgement and proceeded to unleash on me his whole menagerie: wife, cats, dogs, children, musicians and bats out of hell.'