Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › Explanation for Turin's take on Jovan Sex Appeal.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Explanation for Turin's take on Jovan Sex Appeal.

post #1 of 44
5/27/08 at 2:19pm
Thread Starter 
In his new book, he says "this is what guys who smelled bad used to smell like. It smells great." That's from page 320. Do you think he means that guys tried to cover up their body odor by using a lot of JSA, and succeeded rather well with this approach? I really can't think of any other interpretation.
Thanks.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 44
5/27/08 at 2:40pm
It was Sanchez that wrote that review I believe, and I would interpret it as a "what happen to the good ole days" sort of approach. Now most guys smell generic and "sporty", and back in the 70's they would actually smell good. Just my 2 cents of course, but I think its all about nostalgia.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 44
5/27/08 at 3:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsly View Post

"this is what guys who smelled bad used to smell like. It smells great."

I think she means bad, as in slightly dangerous, but gorgeous. I'm sure if Ms. Sanchez's nose was as smart then, as it is now, she would have turned it up at those, "bad guys."
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 44
5/27/08 at 3:54pm
Thread Starter 
Yes, it was TS (I still have trouble understanding why she would review some men's frags that he doesn't and vice versa), but the other idea I had after I posted that is that it might mean that in those days guys sweated a lot and the mixture of JSA with "man juice" was an excellent combination (to her nose) but that today most guys are too "clean," and of course everything is air conditioned in the summer, unlike back then, etc. But then this brings up the question about whether JSA is good if you bath often!
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 44
5/27/08 at 3:59pm
What Sanchez says is very true. Sex appeal, as I remember it, was a cheap stinky fragrance. It was not elegant and it never pretended to be refined or soapy. Very musky and woody and it was perfect to cover (cover? I should say blend with) B.O. Kinda like Like Tabu for Man. My father used to wear it . And yet, nowadays it is reminiscent of another era, of a lost tradition, it is an example of a dying family of scents. Back then it smelled bad. Today (because of nostalgia, anachronism and the almost forgotten boldness) it smells great.

Do I sound like a 60 year old? meh, whatever
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 44
5/27/08 at 8:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsly View Post

In his new book, he says "this is what guys who smelled bad used to smell like. It smells great."

I think it means that, back before men's fragrances took a turn toward the antiseptic, the worst men's fragrance was still pretty damn good. I agree.

By the way, I am old enough to remember the 1970s, and no, we didn't sweat more then, we didn't have worse B.O., we did have indoor plumbing, we did take baths, and our knuckles did not drag on the ground when we walked.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 44
5/27/08 at 8:18pm
I agree that she means that JSA is a fragrance that has something to say unlike--and better than--most designer and even some niche scents these days. It's ironic that this thread came up since I was wearing it a few days ago and at the end of the day, I thought to myself, "What a pleasure it was to smell this all day long!"
Keep in mind that it's the only fragrance left from the original Jovan line up (other than Musk). There must be a reason for it. Jovan had countless other titles that were wonderful too but are long gone.
I think JSA is a great amber/patchouli dominant scent (plus sandalwood/musk). It's got projection, sillage, and longevity so you need to apply just enough and not overdo it. It'll get you more compliments than many other scents.
When I compare a variety of amber based scents (from SL, Profumum, IPdF...to L'Occitane), the difference in the quality of the amber note istelf is not much. This, IMHO, makes JSA an outstanding value.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 44
5/27/08 at 8:22pm
Thread Starter 
Hey, I was around back then, and we didn't have central AC like now, and the seats of the cars were mostly vinyl, and many cars did not have AC, etc., so I'm talking from personal experience (not necessarily pleasant, olfactorily). LOL.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 44
5/27/08 at 8:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate View Post

... no, we didn't sweat more then, we didn't have worse B.O., we did have indoor plumbing, we did take baths, and our knuckles did not drag on the ground when we walked.

...but we did wear ghastly buccaneer shirts, open to the bottom of the rib cage, with tight bell-bottom jeans, waffle stompers, and belt buckles the size of Rhode Island. We wore Brut, drove drunk, and "watched" movies at the drive-in theatre with girls who had every single hair hanging directly toward the center of Earth.

Who said cave men weren't civilized!!? ;-)
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 44
5/27/08 at 10:04pm
Hey, I wasn't here in the 70's (though I remember mexico's late 80's which makes it pretty much the same)
but the point is that I believe back then people weren't a bunch of clean freaks...

During the 80s: I am wearing kouros. I smell like urinal cake and I like it!
Different paradigms.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 44
5/27/08 at 10:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by irish View Post

...but the point is that I believe that back then people weren't a bunch of clean freaks...
During the 80s: I am wearing kouros. I smell like urinal cake and I like it!
Different paradigms.

Definitely. I wore one of my old scents (Givenchy Gentleman) to work recently, even below 1970's levels, and it was still weirding out my coworkers. I've eased off on them recently, wearing light scents. But I'm going to wear Kouros soon. I'll just put a warning sign on my door! Danger! Serious Fragrance at Work!
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 44
5/27/08 at 11:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redneck Perfumisto View Post

Definitely. I wore one of my old scents (Givenchy Gentleman) to work recently, even below 1970's levels, and it was still weirding out my coworkers. I've eased off on them recently, wearing light scents.

Same sort of thing happened to me recently. Only in my case it was Safari. Way too heavy to be enjoyable according to my present taste and this one is not even THAT old.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 44
6/29/09 at 4:14pm
Jumping into a conversation that started awhile back: first, Sex Appeal for Men, IMO, is not a "cheap, stinky fragrance" and never was. Inexpensive yes. If men sprayed it all over their bodies...that's another story. The word "cheap" gets applied by in their book to something like Brut...and even Obsession (which I agree with, a kind of "intentionally cheap" in defense of that CK creation). As for "stinky," I find 1-2 shots of the cologne excellent in the office or anywhere even at a barbecue. It has an overall cool sense to it, not a punch in the gut spice. The intelligence of this oriental is not to go to powdery or vanilla or cinnamon or even into a patchouli meltdown...but a kind a sandalwoord herbal slight patchouli...which I can even pull off wearing even in warmer weather...in some ways, I consider it a kind of "bay rum" not in its composition (obviously minus a strong clove which even a Pierre Cardin retains) but in its intentions of building on "balanced spice" with herbal accords and the patchouli toned down...it DOES build on that tradition including the old Old Spice...it evolution is balanced...I would say that on first application there is a sort of fleeting root beer scent I get...but Sex Appeal is not the dizzying Halston Z-14, also excellent in Perfume...I prefer Sex Appeal... all the way through...

BTW, Obsession for Men is rated a cheap Oriental vs. an herbal Oriental and gets a 3 to Sex Appeal's 4.

One basenotes reviewer describes Obsession for Men as "campy" and I think that adjective is apt. Frankly I think oriental fragrances are one of the hardest types to pull off (and to wear)...

A belated ditto for Renaissance Man's fine treatment of this fine scent. And yes it is great to wear this stuff all day...
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 44
6/29/09 at 11:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ortho123 View Post

Jumping into a conversation that started awhile back: first, Sex Appeal for Men, IMO, is not a "cheap, stinky fragrance" and never was. Inexpensive yes. If men sprayed it all over their bodies...that's another story. The word "cheap" gets applied by in their book to something like Brut...and even Obsession (which I agree with, a kind of "intentionally cheap" in defense of that CK creation). As for "stinky," I find 1-2 shots of the cologne excellent in the office or anywhere even at a barbecue. It has an overall cool sense to it, not a punch in the gut spice. The intelligence of this oriental is not to go to powdery or vanilla or cinnamon or even into a patchouli meltdown...but a kind a sandalwoord herbal slight patchouli...which I can even pull off wearing even in warmer weather...in some ways, I consider it a kind of "bay rum" not in its composition (obviously minus a strong clove which even a Pierre Cardin retains) but in its intentions of building on "balanced spice" with herbal accords and the patchouli toned down...it DOES build on that tradition including the old Old Spice...it evolution is balanced...I would say that on first application there is a sort of fleeting root beer scent I get...but Sex Appeal is not the dizzying Halston Z-14, also excellent in Perfume...I prefer Sex Appeal... all the way through...

BTW, Obsession for Men is rated a cheap Oriental vs. an herbal Oriental and gets a 3 to Sex Appeal's 4.

One basenotes reviewer describes Obsession for Men as "campy" and I think that adjective is apt. Frankly I think oriental fragrances are one of the hardest types to pull off (and to wear)...

A belated ditto for Renaissance Man's fine treatment of this fine scent. And yes it is great to wear this stuff all day...

Wonderfully said ortho123.

I happen to love JSA also - although I've been looking for a vintage bottle of it online, as the new stuff (on the shelf at Target) has much less longevity.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 44
6/30/09 at 12:06am
Great thread. Buuuuut...

Look how we're all going meta-level on the meaning of the scent. If anything makes me want to break out a scent and give it a run for my nose, it's this fine and thoughtful review! I've got JSA around somewhere, time to break that stuff out!

I know Aromi is going to be with me!
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 44
6/30/09 at 12:20am
JSA was, and will always remain a great frag. Cheap to buy, yes. But not "cheap" in character.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 44
6/30/09 at 3:16am
I picked up a bottle of the 3 oz cologne recently for $10. As far as longevity, 2 shots lasts for me fine.

I have to say that in the current "tradition" of a plethora of "clean" scents what we have are cologne offerings something in the realm of "I like this very similar $50 or more dollar scent better?" ... and it's not that human beings are becoming capable of more and more subtlety...
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 44
6/30/09 at 8:08am
Damn Sex Appeal is some vile stufff... along with Brut it's the only cologne to make my eyes water.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 44
6/30/09 at 12:45pm
Thread Starter 
I'm the OP, and I was just trying to figure out what the author was getting at, because it didn't make sense to me. It really wasn't meant to be about the frag itself. I don't really care what was meant at this point, to be honest, because I now realize that this is too "rough" a formulation for my olfactory sensibilities. If I were to try and calibrate to it, it would "warp" my ability to appreciate other frags, which is something I didn't know at the time I began this thread. Whether it's "good" or "bad" in some "objective" sense is really not all that interesting a question to me now ( though again, that's not what this thread was supposed to be about).
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 44
6/30/09 at 1:17pm
Fine, Big Punisher, there are folks that don't like Polo as well.

Biglsy, I'm inclined towards Ruggles' interp but feel free to post more of Tania Sanchez's blurb...
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 44
6/30/09 at 1:29pm
Thread Starter 
Well, that's why I like to use quotation marks. In this case, I would've written "bad" if I were her, or using parentheses, done this: (bad meaning tough, macho, whatever).
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 44
6/30/09 at 2:00pm
I know what you mean...is that the whoe statement about JSA? If so it is an ambiguity since "bad" is not such a part of usage to not require quotations...

Howvever, in The Elements of Style approach to writing one is encourgaged to eschew the use of quotes...
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 44
6/30/09 at 2:13pm
Thread Starter 
Yes, I know that italics are the "professional" way to go, and if there was a key on my keyboard that was like the quotation keys but instead put the word in italics, I would certainly do that. The academics need to adapt to computer keyboard realities! LOL.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 44
6/30/09 at 2:22pm
So that's the whole blurb on JSA?

By being correct accordng to Strunk we're left with all ths...bittom line she likes the smell and gives it an excellent rating, a 4...

the Creedfolk are not the biggest fans of that book...
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 44
6/30/09 at 10:00pm
Thread Starter 
No, she also says that JSA is what cheesy guys smelled like, before a great cultural change occurred, or something like that. Anyway, there are frags that probably meet her JSA criteria being produced these days (or still available and really cheap), such as the KISS Him frag, which I find much better blended and actually interesting and wearable.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 44
7/1/09 at 12:05am
As I came from behind of Iron Curtain, I`m not sure if JSA would fit - but nowadays bloody sexy thrash of 80`s came back (into fashion, at least - stiletto heels, leopard skins, crazy prints, etc.).

So should be 80`s frags - like Obsession for men CK, Kouros, etc. Let`s take our pseudo-vintages from the closets!!! we are trendy again!!!
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 44
7/1/09 at 11:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsly View Post

In his new book, he says "this is what guys who smelled bad used to smell like. It smells great."

Is there a great scent for guys who want to smell bad now?
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 44
7/1/09 at 12:01pm
Thread Starter 
Okay, I think the other line was: "When will cheesy guys ever smell this good again?"
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 44
7/1/09 at 12:14pm
Thanks for going the distance on this one, Biglsy...
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 44
7/1/09 at 12:21pm
Thread Starter 
Now I'm thinking that what she meant was that JSA is the kind of frag certain kinds of guys used to wear to cover up their nasty smells. Presumably, these were the guys who didn't shower daily, nor care all that much about how they smelled. They just sprayed on that JSA until they thought it "covered" everything up. Anyone have an alternative view?
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 44
7/1/09 at 12:52pm
This may be a question to submit to Luca Turin to submit to Tania herself... and I'm not joking here or being sarcastic.
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 44
4/25/11 at 1:56am
My take is that fragrances in the 80s were termed "powerhouses" because of their extreme sillage and lasting power. This stems from the fact that fragrance houses (at that time) were trying to beat one another to come up with a great fragrance with no expenses spared with regard to using quality ingredients (that's why they smell so strong). It was a matter of establishing a brand name as well as for prestige reasons. Unfortunately, nowadays it is all about corporate profits and margins. Hence, we are left with non-descript chemical-smelling watered-down perfumes today (where cheap ingredients is key). It often makes me smile when i keep seeing people asking fragrance houses to resume production of a certain perfume. They would not for two reasons: To make the exact same perfume is difficult given how much more expensive the same ingredients will cost today (compared with 20 yrs ago), not to mention availability (eg. civet, ambergris..). Also, to even approach similar quality and sillage, and try to keep prices sane, it will only mean thinner profit margins. Companies are way better off making cheap perfumes and making them look expensive through packaging.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 44
4/25/11 at 2:41am
Seems like TS was implying that JSA was basically the Axe/Lynx of its time period -- only that unlike Axe it didn't smell completely like crap.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 44
4/25/11 at 2:47am
I was silly enough to trust the review, only to deeply regret my purchase. Thankfully, after Coty Germany made E-Bay close my auction down twice, I was able to sell it off.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 44
4/25/11 at 4:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rüssel View Post

I was silly enough to trust the review, only to deeply regret my purchase. Thankfully, after Coty Germany made E-Bay close my auction down twice, I was able to sell it off.

Lucky you!
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 44
4/25/11 at 6:21am
Yeah, good riddance! Really didn't agree with me.

I understood the review in the sense that guys who smelled bad then (meaning guys who bought cheap, not highly regarded, perfumes, with a silly image that would appeal to cheesy guys, e.g. Sex Appeal) smelled good compared to today's cheesy guy's panty dropper fragrances. Which I don't know if it makes any sense in the context of the book as surely Cool Water or A*Men would be popular cheesy guy favourites and both received high ratings.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 44
4/25/11 at 8:07am
I'm so weary of these alleged masterpiece, drug store brands. Stetson also comes to mind, initially they smell great, due to the novelty of being so anachronistic. But the materials used in their construction and reformulations are so poor that they become tedious within minutes of applying.
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 44
4/25/11 at 9:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Guyer View Post

I'm so weary of these alleged masterpiece, drug store brands. Stetson also comes to mind, initially they smell great, due to the novelty of being so anachronistic. But the materials used in their construction and reformulations are so poor that they become tedious within minutes of applying.

Sure, I hear ya on that one. Although sadly it's not just the drugstore fragrances that smell unbearably cheap
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 44
4/26/11 at 12:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsly View Post

In his new book, he says "this is what guys who smelled bad used to smell like. It smells great." That's from page 320. Do you think he means that guys tried to cover up their body odor by using a lot of JSA, and succeeded rather well with this approach? I really can't think of any other interpretation.
Thanks.

I'm not a native speaker, so take care: JSA was back then considered cheap and cheesy, not at least because of its pubertic "sex" approach. But - from todays perspective the smell of JSA is quite pleasing compared to todays faceless sporty frags.

Guys who didn't care much (or cared too much, but were cheapskates) back then smelled as good as JSA, while guys of that type today smell of nasty aquatics, pretending to be "fresh". I think TS wonders how well old cheap and carelessly bought frags compare to todays releases of that kind.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 44
4/26/11 at 1:08am
I have JSA and it smells quite pleasant to me. Nice fresh, powdery lavender. Smells similar to Lagerfeld Classic.
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 44
4/26/11 at 6:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Guyer View Post

I'm so weary of these alleged masterpiece, drug store brands. Stetson also comes to mind, initially they smell great, due to the novelty of being so anachronistic. But the materials used in their construction and reformulations are so poor that they become tedious within minutes of applying.


Exactly.

JSA is an okay scent. Ms. Sanchez also laments the passing of the original Sung to reformulation. My nose detects Sung as being the same synthetic screechy floral that it always was.

I just don't know about The Guide.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 44
4/26/11 at 11:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Guyer View Post

I'm so weary of these alleged masterpiece, drug store brands. Stetson also comes to mind, initially they smell great, due to the novelty of being so anachronistic. But the materials used in their construction and reformulations are so poor that they become tedious within minutes of applying.

I'm with you almost in lock step. But there are some great cheapies. The Bogarts, bowling green, Eau de grey flannel, 4711, etc. But full cosign on jovan sex appeal...it's a scrubber after the ironic laugh. Ginseng NRG on the other hand, I still have a soft spot for.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 44
4/26/11 at 12:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DULLAH View Post

But there are some great cheapies ..., bowling green, Eau de grey flannel, 4711, etc.

Dullah, no love for regular Grey Flannel?

I agree though there are a few that are worth it, for me Grey Flannel is one, Quorum is another. Most are not good.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 44
8/14/12 at 7:54pm
I concur as well with ortho123! It has nice balance as an Oriental, although I do get nice spices in the heart including cinnamon and a nice touch of cloves (but as you said - not too much of one thing). The sandalwood is more apparent in the Vintage formulation, along with a key note of amber (that is even more pronounced in current formulation with less sandalwood). The spicy/herbal/patchouli top notes transcend the entire wearing with the wood and amber coming in on the base. In Vintage, the patchouli is definitely richer along with the depth of the fragrance.

Current formulation, while is lacks in longevity, does retain most of the notes and definitely the same vibe. It is a regular in my rotation and I actually like how it works in warm weather - just a lighter application. Touching up is easy as a small splash of this on your neck, chest and hands...you're set.

While all the Vintage Musks reign superior to current formulation - Jovan has come back with a nice bottle of Sex Appeal. Try the latest White Musk for Men as well. Totally different composition, but even current formulation (for the price) is very good, although the Vintage I have is excellent! I just picked up a current formulation 6oz splash bottle for around $13-14 and I already had a NIB Vintage 4oz. I'm set.

My collection of Vintage Musks is a delight to wear - but, Jovan Sex Appeal has a "special" touch to it that makes it really a wonderful scent and composition. It is definitely going to be one I reach for...often.

Cheers & great post in this thread!

ericrico

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeperez23 View Post

Wonderfully said ortho123.

I happen to love JSA also - although I've been looking for a vintage bottle of it online, as the new stuff (on the shelf at Target) has much less longevity.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: MFD Archive
Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › Explanation for Turin's take on Jovan Sex Appeal.