Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Fragrance DIY › Natural versus synthetic musk - back to the topic
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Natural versus synthetic musk - back to the topic

post #1 of 11
1/29/13 at 6:31am
Thread Starter 
Hello,
I generally go for fixolide and galaxolide. I'd use more ambroxan, but I'm still saving up.
For me there is no discussion to be had for and against. There's no smell in the world good enough to justify killing an endangered deer to carve out its smelly bits for human use. No matter how beautiful it smells, it's meant for other deer.
We've enough lovely materials to work with, without using animal products, haven't we? (And I'm not even a vegetarian.)
Is what I think.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 11
1/29/13 at 6:49am
Agree completely. Unfortunately the deer is hunted for chinese medecine where it commands an incredibly high price. Sadly it will probably be hunted to extinction regardless of what we do as perfumers.

The interest in l-muscone here I think, is in that it is, I gather, close to the natural in smell. Still waiting for my sample and ill report back when i get it.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 11
1/29/13 at 7:01am
I have a few synthetic musks for learning curiosity and will report back with a comparison sniff test later.

Natural musk is one of the most compelling and hauntingly beautiful smells I have ever encountered. There isn't a synthetic musk that I have yet smelled that even comes close... I haven't smelled that many synthetics though.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 11
1/29/13 at 7:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4160Tuesdays View Post

Hello,
I generally go for fixolide and galaxolide. I'd use more ambroxan, but I'm still saving up.
For me there is no discussion to be had for and against. There's no smell in the world good enough to justify killing an endangered deer to carve out its smelly bits for human use. No matter how beautiful it smells, it's meant for other deer.
We've enough lovely materials to work with, without using animal products, haven't we? (And I'm not even a vegetarian.)
Is what I think.

Sarah, I just spotted your mention here of Ambroxan - can I suggest you consider Ambrofix instead? I wrote a long detailed comparative evaluation of these and Ambrox DL on here somewhere and Ambrofix came out of it very well indeed. I'm guessing from your posts elsewhere that you are currently buying Ambroxan from SAFC - if so I promise Ambrofix is a better bet even if you buy it through me with my markup - contact me if you want details.

On the question of muscone, l-muscone, iso-muscone and muscenone:

There are three different molecules with similar names Muscone, Iso-muscone and Muscenone although they all smell musky.

Most muscone made is a mixture of isomers, the l-Muscone is only made and sold by Takasago so far as I know and was introduced to me by a Takasago salesman as 'a good way to make an expensive product even more expensive' - Takasago specialise in Chiral materials and what they have done is to separate out the laevo isomer, which is present in the mixture (actually that's misleading because it's manufactured in a completely different way, but you get the idea). The important point about the l or laevo isomer is that it's the very same form of the very same molecule that gives deer musk it's scent. That is not to say it smells identical with the natural product of course - the relationship is like that between vanillin and vanilla.

In olfactory terms the laevo is slightly stronger, slightly more animalic and erogenic than the mixture.

For reference I've done a quick summary of a number of the musks available in this blog post.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 11
1/29/13 at 8:23am
Chris I think your ambrofix vs. ambroxan is here: http://www.basenotes.net/threads/311637-Ambergris

but I thought your conclusion was that they were similar with only subtle differences?
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 11
1/29/13 at 8:45am
Neither is very much like the real thing. They are a bit 'clean'. I wonder if it is that there are too many natural variants for any synthetic to come that close to animalics. I'm curious about this l-muscone to smell it for that very reason, but even as a natural perfumer, I agree with the no cruelty aspects and prefer to use kindly gathered animalics or just use something else entirely in blends. There are plenty enough whiffs to not need them.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 11
1/29/13 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ariodant View Post

Chris I think your ambrofix vs. ambroxan is here: http://www.basenotes.net/threads/311637-Ambergris

but I thought your conclusion was that they were similar with only subtle differences?

That's correct, that was my conclusion: but Ambrofix works out cheaper, even to buy from me, than buying -(-)Ambroxide from SAFC - currently £77 for 25g +VAT.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 11
1/29/13 at 12:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mumsy View Post

Neither is very much like the real thing. They are a bit 'clean'. I wonder if it is that there are too many natural variants for any synthetic to come that close to animalics. I'm curious about this l-muscone to smell it for that very reason, but even as a natural perfumer, I agree with the no cruelty aspects and prefer to use kindly gathered animalics or just use something else entirely in blends. There are plenty enough whiffs to not need them.


Yup, the single molecules, and in the case of Laevo Muscone, a "slice" (stereoisomer), if you will, of a single molecule, cannot compare to an original natural material, simply because of the number of molecules included in a complex natural substance...

Natural musk is deeper/darker/more complex than say, Muscone. And so for that note, and not to keep killing Deer, these materials are where I have to go to mimic the natural. Since extinction is not the preferred path, we as a world have to abandon the use of the natural, and simply accept what we can use instead, and accept the inherent weaknesses of it, if one compares it to the natural. And then again, natural musks have a different profile then as well.

The choice of the right brush to paint the vision of the Perfumer is at issue, within the acceptable self imposed limitations.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 11
1/29/13 at 12:42pm
I thought ambroxan is not the same as -(-)ambroxide...
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 11
1/30/13 at 1:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ariodant View Post

I thought ambroxan is not the same as -(-)ambroxide...

It is the same molecule, just one is a brand name and the other a chemical name. However the manufacturing process might be different between suppliers which can lead to different impurities that alter the performance slightly. The SAFC product is at a particularly high level of purity, which probably influences the price.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 11
1/30/13 at 2:53am
Surprising that anyone should think of Ambroxan as having a musk like smell; but then again, smell is so subjective.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Fragrance DIY
Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Fragrance DIY › Natural versus synthetic musk - back to the topic