Niche fragrances and projection/longevity?

Depends on the brand.

Montale, Bond, Lutens, Tom FOrd usually lasts veeery long
Creed and Annick Goutal usually are short lived.

Off course that there are exceptions inside the brand (Bois du Portugal and Songes lasts a very long time)

Depends on the individual fragrance.

I've noticed this as well. A sort-of-niche example is the les exclusifs, which are beautiful but hardly project at all.

(I think that is a good thing really. So much better to have something that wears close to the skin. Something a bit naff about a lot of projection. )

An exception to this would be a lot of the Malle perfumes (think Une Rose and French Lover for example - sillage MONSTERS)

Does a frags sillage and longevity necessarily go hand in hand? I think it does, although there may be exceptions you BN-ers know about.

All-natural fragrances tend to be rather ephemeral and mild unless they're based around heavy base notes, e.g. patchouli, immortelle, vetiver. Even then, they tend to have gentler scents than others.

Niche does not necessarily mean more naturals or higher quality, though it tends to mean more freedom of creative expression, especially when it comes to one-person artisanal niche lines like Tauer, Neil Morris, Ava Luxe, Vero Profumo, etc.

It all depends on the perfumer, their style, and the fragrance in question. Andy Tauer is very niche, yet, most of his last half-way to forever.

*** Double-Post - Delete ***

Longevity tends to be driven by big, stable molecules. Things like the synthetic musks & other such heavy base notes. Sillage is more complex - big molecules on the whole tend not to rush out into the air as much as little ones hence the longevity - so sillage will tend to be be driven by smaller, more energetic molecules. However the other factor is stability - some synthetic molecules never really break down in the environment, also they can often be detected by the human nose in very tiny quantities, so even if not much is coming off your skin it can be smelt from further away and for longer. Most natural materials this isn't true of (though there are exceptions as ever) with those it's more likely to be one or the other - though of course most natural materials are not single molecules but a complex combination of aromatic molecules and compounds . . .

The science is so complex it almost might as well be art!

Thanks Chris. It's a fascinating art form that combines science and art in equal measure and then taps into out most primitive sense. The more I discover the more I want to know.

I agree exactly - a totally addictive subject that has quite taken over my life - and I'm not complaining

Projection and longevity are dependent on skin chemistry and varies between fragrances. Marketing ploys are irrelevant.

As variable, as with most designer scents

But Creed, Knize, several frags by ADP and by Lutens are definitely among the most intense in terms of projection/longevity

I don't think a generalization can be made here in answer to OP's question.

What the gentleman said!

When you use the word aromatic are you using it in the chemistry sense? If so, I have to disagree. No one wants to smell like aromatic hydrocarbons... Well, outside of gasoline huffers.

And frankly the chemicals responsible for musk scents are rather small molecules.

I don't think the issue is size or stability but rather volatility.


My interest lies in structural activity relationships.

This and this




Most compounds used are aromatic compounds (their resonance structures provide stability) so stability isn't the issue.

Yes, generally speaking, niche fragrances are poorer than designer fragrances in terms of projection and longevity.
And equally poorer in attracting any form of positive comment.
Regards,
Renato

As others have stated it varies depending on the particular fragrance in question.

Mind you the longest lasting and most projecting fragrances I've found are all considered niche.

I can't speak for all niche lines, but Laurie Erickson's fragrances for Sonoma Scent Studio are of high quality, incorporating both natural and synthetic ingredients, with excellent complexity, longevity, and sillage. (I'm not affiliated, just a fan!).

I hadn't noticed this when it was posted back in July, but just in case anyone was confused by it:

Oddly enough, this being a perfume forum and everything, I was using the term aromatic in the sense it is used in perfumery - which also happens to be my area of expertise.

As it happens the chemistry sense of the word also applies to the majority of natural perfumery materials and the aroma chemicals that they are composed of as well as to most of the synthetic aroma chemicals that are used in the industry. Most of them are mono or poly-cyclic compounds composed of hydrogen and carbon, often with oxygen or nitrogen in substitution. What was it that you thought aromatic meant in chemistry?

So lot's of people do indeed want to smell like aromatic hydrocarbons and indeed many of the synthetic materials use in perfumery are derived from the same petrochemical base that gasoline (petrol to those of us on this side of the Atlantic) is derived from . . .

Size matters: to describe something as large or small requires a context as these are relative terms. The context in this case being perfume and perfumery, you need to know that there is a practical upper limit to the size of molecule that the human nose can detect.

That being a molecular weight (mw) of 296 (the mw of labdane, the largest known odourant). This context is slightly complicated by the fact that at the upper end of the weight limit anosmia (inability to smell a particular odourant) increases - so the bigger the molecule the more people are anosmic to it. In the case of Galaxolide for example - mw 244.38 - it is thought that roughly half the population are anosmic to it. Hence in the context of perfume synthetic musks are large - amongst the largest molecules that you can smell at all in fact.

There is a good article on Wikipedia concerning the structure of synthetic musks (although it erroneously describes only three major structural classes, it does go on to describe the four most important, only missing non-nitro aromatic musks).

There is also a good exploration of the science involved, and the limitations of the use of quantitative structural activity relationships to odour perception, in this article by Luca Turin. Though I should say that most experts in the field do not agree with Luca's conclusions, his overview of the science, up to about page 7, is uncontroversial.

I don't mind having my statements contradicted - that's how I increase my learning - but I do prefer it if you check your facts first.

I see no distinction when relating lasting power/sillage to niche/designer.

From my experience with CdG, Creed, Eau d'Italie, A. Goutal, L'artisan and other, niche fragrances are poorer than designer fragrances in terms of projection and longevity.