Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › Your favorite Gourmand
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Your favorite Gourmand - Page 2

post #61 of 77
Bond No. 9 New Haarlem
A*Men Pure Malt
post #62 of 77
Not exactly a gourmand frag, but for me it will be Cacharel pour l'Homme. It is the only one among several gourmands i own that actually evokes memories of edible matter. The nutmeg in CplH is so authentic it reminds me of a local snack here called chin chin - basically deep-fried dough pellets with lots of grated nutmeg in the mix. When my mum used to make it at home the grating of nutmeg was always my duty. Wearing CplH always brings back those literally sweet memories.
post #63 of 77
Dior Homme Intense eau de parfum
post #64 of 77
I perceive gourmands as fragrances that project rather prominently notes/accords from the edible variety. Whether the actual structure is fougere, oriental or whatever is a technicality that should not interfere with the enjoyment of a fragrance.

Some of my favorites:

Musc Ravageur by Frederic Malle
Hypnotic Poison by Dior
1969 Revolte by Histoires de Parfums
Five O'Clock au Gingembre by Serge Lutens
Arabie by Serge Lutens
Russian Caravan Tea by CB I Hate Perfume
Sipario by Hilde Soliani
post #65 of 77
1969 Revolte by Histoires de Parfums
post #66 of 77
Rochas Man
Hanae Mori
Casual Friday
Dior Homme Intense
La Nuit
post #67 of 77
How does one determine what is a Gourmand? Could Yatagan (celery) or Burberry London (english tea) be included?
post #68 of 77
Ambre Narguile
+1 New Haarlem
Back to Black
Mazzolari Alessandro
post #69 of 77
Gourmand fragances works well in layerings

also I like spice fragances like Bel Ami , Ogriginal Tabac ,
Neil Morris Patchoulis
layering with Vanilas , Chocolate, Coffee gourmands...
( Fumerie Turque, Amour de Cacao , A Men , Pure Coffee )
very funny experiences
post #70 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamp View Post

How does one determine what is a Gourmand? Could Yatagan (celery) or Burberry London (english tea) be included?

If you favor a relatively strict definition of these things, the gourmands are a sub-family of the orientals. From this larger family they inherit a focus on rich, non-floral notes such as amber, musk, vanilla, incense, and spices. Add notes traditionally associated with food/drink such as chocolate, caramel, coffee, or rum, and you get a gourmand. Usually these distinctive notes are on the sweet side, either intrinsically (caramel) or in familiar edible preparations (sweet coffee) -- savory/herbal/salty/sour/bitter notes are less characteristic of the family.

This doesn't fully answer your more specific question. Opinion is divided on how to classify Yatagan -- the H&R Genealogy places it among the woody chypres (which makes sense to me because of its herbal and leather aspects), while Michael Edwards calls it a rich woody oriental. In either case, the absence of sweet, edible notes probably disqualifies this one if we're committed to the strict definition.

Edwards calls Burberry London a crisp woody oriental. The port wine note (if you detect it) is a gourmand touch, but the absence of "edible" notes in the base of the composition makes this one unlikely to count as a gourmand.
post #71 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulSC View Post

If you favor a relatively strict definition of these things, the gourmands are a sub-family of the orientals. From this larger family they inherit a focus on rich, non-floral notes such as amber, musk, vanilla, incense, and spices. Add notes traditionally associated with food/drink such as chocolate, caramel, coffee, or rum, and you get a gourmand. Usually these distinctive notes are on the sweet side, either intrinsically (caramel) or in familiar edible preparations (sweet coffee) -- savory/herbal/salty/sour/bitter notes are less characteristic of the family.

This doesn't fully answer your more specific question. Opinion is divided on how to classify Yatagan -- the H&R Genealogy places it among the woody chypres (which makes sense to me because of its herbal and leather aspects), while Michael Edwards calls it a rich woody oriental. In either case, the absence of sweet, edible notes probably disqualifies this one if we're committed to the strict definition.

Edwards calls Burberry London a crisp woody oriental. The port wine note (if you detect it) is a gourmand touch, but the absence of "edible" notes in the base of the composition makes this one unlikely to count as a gourmand.

Your explanation is very informative and helpful. Thanks!
post #72 of 77
More than likely most of my wardrobe !!!
post #73 of 77
Musc Ravageur
post #74 of 77
Givenchy Pi.
post #75 of 77
Musc Ravageur.
post #76 of 77
Guerlain L’Art et la Matière Tonka Imperiale
TF Tobacco Vanille
post #77 of 77
Chanel Allure pour homme, Thierry Mugler A*Men.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: MFD Archive
Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › MFD Archive › Your favorite Gourmand