Do you agree with this?

No.

No I do not agree with that.

No. But perhaps people who think a lot about smelling nice or interesting (as opposed to those who spend a few minutes in Boots picking out a new fragrance) are more likely to discover niche.

To a degree, yes (sort of).

But that's based on the fact that the question's premise is highly subjective.

many people on basenotes will find your statement politically incorrect or even offensive.

but i find it overall correct. with some exceptions, but overall true.

Yes, in my humble opinion. But as Noirdrakkar has already pointed out, there are exceptions.

No, absolutely not.

This is "painting a with a broad brush" that diminishes the virtues of 100's of classics that have defined what scent is today, and smell just as interesting today as they did the day they came out. And, I am not knocking niche at all. From a Zen perspective, everything is unique unto itself.

I will refer to the metaphor foreshadowed above - all the creations of scent are but dots on a canvas, that make up the incredible world of fragrance (all the shades from light to dark in the spectrum). It is similar to 'Pointillism' and the beautiful & famous painting, A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte by the brilliant artist, Georges Seurat. It was "created" over two entire years, debuting in 1884. He would go back and perfect the work time and time again.

This is the "world of scent" to me - revisiting each bottle (symbolized by a "dot") until we truly understand and deeply connect with a scent...and build associations to it ourselves. We have to remember that each dot is a 'bottle' of unique composition that completes the painting.

I could add more...but will leave my thought at that. Perhaps someone else would like to comment and add their perspective to this.

Cheers,

ericrico

Well, by definintion, niche is a targeted to a small sub-set of users, so there is some truth to that... "interesting" may not sell well at the department store counters if it smells like feet or feces. Where people who are a little "unique" in their tastes can find a fragrance in the niche market to fit any desire (for the most part).Most "mainstream" people want a fragrance to smell nice (clean, etc), and will find that normally in the "designer" realm. But since some non-designer houses also make the generally-accepted type fragrances, your statement is not 100% accurate. But not stereotype or generalization is.

I want my fragrances to smell a bit different but I still have to like them. Whether they be niche or designer is neither here nor there so, whilst I understand where you are coming from, I have to disagree with what you say. I do appreciate that most 'unusual' scents will be, or are more likely to be, niche however.

It is the individual fragrances and not the category that matters

No. I believe it's an individual's preference. Good question though.

I would probably lean more towards agreeing with the second part of the sentence over the first part but I disagree with both.

I agree overall. Designer scents are aimed to please the general consumer while niche houses take more risks in creating something unique.

No.

People buy what they enjoy. I think Light Blue is bland and you may agree, but it's a huge seller. The people who buy it probably like it and find it interesting. People buy what they enjoy. It really is that simple.

Niche houses exist because not everyone's tastes are satisfied entirely by mainstream scents.

Nope.

Smelling nice and interesting often go hand in hand, I'd say. Some of the most disliked stinkers are designer (Kouros, A*Men, plenty of "old man's" scents, I'd assume, too).

Classically I would agree with this, as in the case of vintage stuff I can see this ringing true, but I really can't honestly believe that fragrances in the vein of HdP's Petroleum, MKK, Secretions Magnifiques, Xerjoff's Zafar, Lonestar Memories, Onda, Absolu Poir le Soir, Comme des Garcons 2011, etc. would ever even be considered to be released by the likes of Dior, YSL, Armani, CK, Hermes, or any other designer house in the last 15 years. I would consider those all, much too "interesting" for most designer outfits.

Though the word "interesting" in itself is quite subjective.

The statement does beg for definitions, such as what is meant by "nice", "interesting", "niche".

I think everything I wear is nice, even the ones that aren't especially accessible. There are fragrances I consider nice like Chanel 22, or interesting like Odeur 53 that I never wear.

There is an implication in some of the answers that niche perfumers are trying to be offbeat and wanting to have their market be small, but that's hard for me to believe. I think every perfumer wants to make great, nice, interesting perfume and would love it to be the most popular perfume in the world. That's quite an aspiration in a very competitive marketplace with much of the distribution stacked toward designers. By the same token, even the perfumers who create for the big houses are probably trying to make original compositions that will stand out from the crowd, in a good way, so as to maximize sales while at the same time being interesting. Niche perfumers may have some more leeway to experiment more because their margins are lower, but I still think everyone wants to have a positive return on investment.

Me personally, I order Niche samples every week just because of the art and unique experience within it. I wear niche mainly for myself to enjoy this form of art. However, when i go out, around people, etc.. i normally wear designers. Obviously most designers are more wearable than niche. But, i still wear niche because it also smells good (most at least), not just because its interesting. This is how i would rephrase the statement:

"People who want their frags to smell nice while being easily wearable lean towards designer scents. People who want their frags to smell interesting and nice lean towards niche."

No matter what the case may be , everyone wants their frags to smell NICE!

No.

No. There's nothing interesting about having to spend a huge amount of money for a bottle of cologne.

I started to believe that more often than not so called niche is just an inflated balloon with some exceptions ( say Lutens which actually is Shiseido) I 've found more masterpieces in the designers' scents area, IMO

Yes, overall I DO agree. it's not factual, but it does loosely describe my opinion.

Let's cut to the chase; I started out with designer scents but I'm leaning toward the niche market because I know that most "Joe Blow's" aren't going to pay premium dollar not to smell like everybody else in my quest for the "holy grail" (which I'm quite sure I will never find).

usually Joe Blow wears his body odours proudly!

I don't agree at all, Nice and Interesting shouldn't be mutally exclusive.

The idealogy of something smelling 'nice' is down to the perception of the person smelling it. The vast majority of designer scents may not be interesting to people with years of experience as they will either be made to a budget and the general quality isn't there or as an offshoot of them being created to chart well the notes will be familiar. There are lots of exceptions and many excellent designer scents.

If none of my niche scents smelled 'nice' I wouldn't even bother wearing them. I think the biggest problem with generalisations is the divide from the people who try a little too hard to wear a designer and dismiss niche like some kind of badge of honour vs the people who don't even bother with designer scents.

The answer to your question for me is a big No. Interesting doesn't have to be challenging and Nice doesn't have to be safe.

I disagree. People like what they like. Doesn't really matter if it's from niche or designer. There are interestingly complex designer fragrances as there are simple nice smelling niche. You just need to be more discerning. And cast that net wider.

In a word, "no".

As a broad idea that is not even trying to capture all the cases, I'd say yes. But asking a question like this only leads to hundred people coming here and telling you that it's all subjective and that there are exceptions. Of course, this is trivially true. But that kind of statement can still make sense to a certain degree.

Not exactly, but there is more variety within the niche market and the niche market is where you're going to find the real oddball scents or very specific scents. At the same time there's plenty of "nice" frags within niche as well. So I think you can say that people looking for unusual scents or very unique ones will lean toward niche. But when I just want to smell nice I look at both. I may start with designer for the simple fact that its cheaper, but not because its more likely to have frags that smell "nice."

I will admit I do try to buy niche when I can for the "rare" factor, but I want to smell good no matter designer or niche. Yes niche does in my opinon, push the envelope when it comes to more exotic smells, but there is really no limits when it comes to what niche houses use in the development of a fragrance.

Saving the money some of us spent on niche perfumes that smell like sweaty reproductive glands?

Maybe they're on to something lol

Ha ha ha. No. Not even a little tiny bit. I think that's along the lines of dismissing any art that doesn't have a recognisable figurative subject in a popular style as "not attractive", and saying that people who buy Thomas Kinkade or Robert Bateman want art that looks "nice" and people who buy Julie Mehretu want art that looks "interesting".

The most significant thing about actual niche perfumers, to me, is not expense or exclusivity, but the fact that they are not so confined by the demands of shareholders and marketplace, and thereby restricted to what is popular, or what does well in focus groups, or what is defined as the "global fragrance trend of the year" by (coincidentally!) the companies that make the artificial esters used in fragrance. A genuinely niche company or independent perfumer has the liberty to follow her or his own instincts and tastes, and to play with combinations that may not be sanctioned by tradition or fashion. And sure, sometimes that may end in a place that is more interesting than pleasant -- but just as with modern or experimental art, a lot of it will be beautiful as well, if perhaps in an unexpected way or a way that hasn't been done before.

And then that will be appropriated by the popular market, just as modern art was and is -- to the point that you can see abstract "art" prints on the wall of your local McDonalds.

(My opinion, of course, may be highly influenced by the fact that I don't, actually, find most popular fragrances smell nice or even pleasant to me -- indeed, I find the vast majority of them unbearable.)

(Moreover, I think a lot of people who buy name-brand fragrances aren't even buying them because THEY think they smell nice. They buy them because of the name, or because all their friends have bought them, or because the beauty blogs they read flog them hard and they want to stay on trend, and they don't particularly think about the actual scent as long as they don't find it actively offensive. I used to do this in high school myself, trying to fit in; the trouble was that I would then find the fragrance offensive when it was in close proximity to my person.)

No, because that's implying that generally niche isn't nice and designers aren't interesting.

There are definitely those who bash the popular "scent for the masses" only b/c "average people" like them...see the Paco Rabinne 1 Million thread for examples. AND those who follow the masses and praise whatever is popular. There are also those who Praise any piss that a popular Niche house may put out. BUT for the most part, people like/dislike based on their honest preferences. I lose respect for those who say they wouldn't wear a fragrance b/c a teenager also happens to like it. OR who praise the worst smelling most boring Creed/Tom Ford, etc. as "Wonderful!"

There are too many personal tastes, preferences etc., as well as too diversified fragrance houses, both niche and designer, to agree with this particular statement.

Possum-Pie, that's the worst reason for not respecting people I've heard in a long time - perhaps ever. Why should everybody think like you and just wear what they thinks smell good?

We just happen to live in a social world and wearing a certain fragrance is a statement of sorts. Wearing Le Male is not a statement I want to make. Just like I wouldn't wear Ed Hardy clothes. Realizing that our decisions are not simply about "liking" something, but they carry other meanings, only help us understand ourselves better.

Double that No.

Double that No.

So you wear/don't wear things b/c of social pressure? I refrain from certain fragrances that don't fit an occasion, but I won't not buy something I like b/c of what people may think. I would never wear slacks and "1 Million" to meet the queen, but I also wouldn't buy a fragrance b/c it was "trendy" I would wear my tuxedo, and choose an appropriate fragrance from my collection...One that I like. I have fought phoniness all my life with people who try to impress others with big name clothes and fragrances that they don't like, but imply "money" I met a VERY famous gentleman a while back, and he was wearing "Cool Water" I have to admire his choice to wear what he likes.

I have more than hundred fragrances available, most of which are very unusual. I wear little amounts, to my personal enjoyment. I wouldn't say I try to please people around me.

I just don't see myself as Le Male wearing person. I also might be kind of elitist: I don't want people to smell that on me. Not the connotation I want. I also wouldn't wear Chanel No. 5 for the same reason. It's not the statement I want to make. Maybe all this makes me phony.

I'm just trying to understand my own motives behind my choices and I believe they are not just about what I like.

Maybe he was wearing Green Irish Tweed

I disagree. I'm on a fixed income and can't afford FB of some "niche" frags. Thank God there's that's why splits an samples were created . I find that "interesting" doesn't mean I don't care for the scent. Sample,sample, and then sample again.

In general, I agree but there are exceptions but I agree.

I disagree. Im on a fixed income and cant afford some FB niche scents Ive tried through samples and decants. Thats why God created samples and decants. Interesting to me can be either I like it or dont. Sample,sample, and then sample some more. Then again I just had my psyche meds adjusted yesterday.

Depends upon the assumptions made behind the terms used...

repost

Since when is "nice" in opposition to "interesting"? How about this breakdown instead?

People who want to be interesting for the sake of being interesting, put less value on aesthetics than they do on how others perceive them. On the other hand, those who appreciate beauty wherever they find it, even in the unlikeliest of places, will be able to find nice things where others don't bother to look.

sorry repost

I think this is really the key to understanding the OP's statement, and how the question is to be interpreted.

No. Absolutely not.

I don't think this applies to fragrances. So called interesting fragrances are usually very personal thing. I've come to find that wearing fragrances that basenoters would find "interesting" are usually perceived as incomprihensible by most people. Kind of like some atonal art music to an uneducated ear.

O yea

I disagree. I think people who are curious and open-minded smell anything from niche to designer to vintage...

I was thinking in terms of fragrances specifically for the sake of this thread. You lost me at "So called interesting-"

How about this: People who want their frags to be expensive lean toward niche.

There are plenty of interesting designer frags, though everyone's nose/tastes are different

One can't really agree or disagree with the statement unless it is more carefully specified, particularly
a.......... smell nice to whom? and
b.......... smell interesting to whom?

If it were to smell nice to one's self and to others vs smell interesting to one's self, but of zilch interest to others, then I'd agree with the statement generally.
Cheers,
Renato

No matter what side of this 'arguement' is taken, a most provocative question. I have to admit I have no idea as to why (most) people lean toward the frags they do other than they like them personally or follow the crowd.

The love of fragrances for some seems to end up to becoming a race to whomever smells the most exclusively like nobody else in their vicinity. And in some cases, just add snobbery and scoffery.

The OP statement is overall something I'd agree with. Most people adopt fragrances to "smell good". And since those are very broad terms, the criteria is pretty broad. But niche, narrows the playing field. This would be almost analogous to people that own cars to people that own cars (designer fragrances) and actually buy super sports cars (niche fragrances). And the people that go deeper into the art of perfumery and scents, well they might go the way of the bicycle, unicycle, or penny-farthing. In a way, it's all connected, it's all a form of transportation in my analogy, but the manner they get you to wherever you wish to go, but the routes are all different.



Bah. This sounded way better in my head before typing it.