Thread: Creed Windsor Returns Fall 2010
^As for the organic/natural thing:
My original intent in sampling thousands of scents, learning of my favorite scents and procuring what I felt to be the best fragrances in the world suited to my particular tastes, was to be able to re-create approximations of them in alcohol-free, or mostly-alcohol-free, organic/natural attars, or pure parfum, however you want to define it. I have come astonishingly close to recreating a small number of them, and nowhere close to a few of my favorite creeds (git, gv, windsor, mi), hence my respect for the house moreso than any other, and my intent has changed where I am now set on keeping many of these alcohol-based scents to scent clothing and serve as a constant comparitive resource to my own experiments...
Thanks equally to the posts of big-uppers and detractors of my favorite scents, with their knowledge of compositions and ingredient knowledge greater than mine at any given time, and serving as a catalyst to my own curiosity, I have learned a great deal in a few short years, and will certainly learn more. So I, given my perspective, view this dichotomy of for/against as a false one. each informed perspective has value, and many times detractors have inherently more value to me than supporters.
Peace everyone, continue being opinionated and true to your own desires.
Anything less is just uncivilised.
Perfume is an extremely difficult art to understand from the outside. Probably one of if not the most difficult of arts to understand as the average persone generally hasno idea how it's done and really have no exposure to the raw materials. They likely never have tried their hand at it like they have with painting or music or writing or any other art. Hence, it is very hard to tell what constitutes true complexity or difficulty in a perfume. There is, for instance, a lot of technical know how in making a long lasting lemon scent - although to the end user they may just say 'bah, a simple and linear lemon, through and through.' The complexity is not apparent as it is in say a four voice fugue or say The School of Athens by Raphael. On the flipside, things that are apparently complex may be rather simple. Many of the bases utilized in scents are complex in and of themselves but simple as they are off-the-shelf solutions, something akin to sampling in modern pop music (although I guess sampling could perhaps better be used to explain the blatant copying of other formulas).
Anyhow, with the complexity of it all I just find it a bit mistaken or even disingenuous to ever say that X is definitively Y. zztop makes the good point that many/most all natural frags fall far short of the mark and I don't disagree. Many all natural oils and absolutes fall short of the mark, individually speaking. I've smelled many all natural rose ottos that are far worse than the synthetic rose notes in Lyric Man or DC1913. Heck, they are worse than the synthetic rose notes in drugstore women's frags.
Is Windsor's rose purely all-natural? I don't know. I don't know that it matters. It really only matters if it smells good. We can speculate if that's because it is real or not, or a combination of real and synthetic (as I believe Lyric Man to be), and that speculation is good and healthy. But for any of us outsiders to make a definitive claim is in error, I believe, as is the act of believing it simply because it was said by someone who has a high post count and some experience with oils, etc. I would never want someone to accept my words on that premise alone. Of course, I try not to speak definitively about perfume despite my rather extensive experience with oils, absolutes and blending, simply because all of this learning has shown me more than anything the extent of that which I don't know. There's a reason perfumers spend years learning their essences, the formulas of major hits and classics, and then spend many more years experimenting and blending and learning. It's a difficult art. I believe we reduce the art when we speak about it definitively. Sure, speak about your subjective experience and opinion definitively, but not the objective elements. None of us know enough to do that. I guess this just really irks me because I so often see the blind leading the blind (no, I'm not accusing Dullah of doing this!) on so many blogs. Go read any* designer review on Now Smell This. Note how if the review is negative 95% of the people will write off the scent with out so much as sniffing it. If it is one of those rare positive reviews for a 'generic' designer or celeb scent, you'll suddenly find a much larger portion saying they intend to sniff it, etc. You also see this often where people will write off designers as cheap chemical concoctions but then completely ignore the same when you've got a name like Serge Lutens attached to it (I'm looking at you, Bois de Violette, and your 65% iso e super).
Sorry for the long and slightly rambly rant. I just often think that a bit of knowledge is worse than no knowledge at all when that knowledge is revered and exalted by lemmings* as being the truth without it being properly questioned. I mostly see this on the blogs, but in many ways I think it is hurting the industry, especially the niche industry. A bunch of *shit* is getting lauded, or, if not lauded at least not as criticized as it should be, simply because of the name on the packaging and a subsequent review or two by a prominent blog that praises the juice that, if it were in a different bottle by a different company, would get endlessly slammed or worse - simply written off as not being worth one's time. And then we wonder why so much niche is junk.
*almost any. This is more prominent on some blogs but it seems to be quite common throughout. Also, I used the word lemmings not strictly in a derogatory sense but because it is the word chosen as a self-descriptor by many perfumistas themselves.
Last edited by SculptureOfSoul; 23rd March 2010 at 03:58 AM.
Iris Pallida 50ml
Ungaro I 75ml
and more! - http://www.basenotes.net/threads/301...n-Man-and-more
SculptureOfSoul, such an amazingly elaborate posting. Thank you for spending so much time trying to educate some of the unthinking lemmings among whom I may be counted or not, I'll never know.
It is perhaps not entirely justified though to presume that some people like a given fragrance so much because of "the blogs," or because following Dullah's (excellent in their own right) descriptions, like "lemmings," rather than because of their own authentic olfactory experience. After all, appreciating a Bach four voice fugue doesn't necessarily entail having mastered Johann Joseph Fux's Gradus ad Parnassum. One can respond to Bach aesthetically, in genuine modesty, without having mastered Bach's art professionally -- which would be unduly arrogant to presume, anyway, just because one's tinkered with Pachelbel's Canon.
Obviously I am one of those who dared to like Windsor very much. Before reading any review of it. It's not only that I enjoyed, post festum, Dullah's review, but I've read all his reviews after that and I have noticed a lot of similarities in what regards our response to specific fragrances, Creed and others. That may classify me as a "lemming". I don't know. Never had to trepidatiously ponder that before.
You claim to "attack the idea of accepting well spoken words as being truth merely based on the eloquence of their delivery". It seems that the hypothesis of "accepting well spoken words" because they express a similarity of response to an olfactory experience, not because of the eloquence of their delivery alone, hasn't even been taken into account. Sadly so, if one may say that.
Similarly, when you say that "I try not to speak definitively about perfume despite my rather extensive experience with oils, absolutes and blending" you somehow defeat the purpose of that noble credo by saying in almost the same breath "A bunch of *shit* [starry emphasis in the original] is getting lauded". It is truly hard to speak any more "definitively" than that. I doubt any of the admirers of Windsor would have gone as far in speaking "definitively" on the subject.
You were kind enough to let us know that "a bit of knowledge is worse than no knowledge at all". Only a master perfumer could afford to write such wise and (somewhat) modest words. Would you be so kind as to let us know which fragrant masterpieces you have created and where they may be sampled? If they are arguably better than (or at least the equal of) Windsor, one is surely looking forward to the experience. Please share. Thank you so very much.
Last edited by Addict; 23rd March 2010 at 06:24 AM.
Last edited by Kevin Guyer; 26th March 2010 at 10:29 PM.
Does anyone else get a really STRONG Erolfa tone from Windsor ?
To my nose it's as if they just took Erolfa and added a little woods to it.
So after owning Windsor for - well, since it was released - I gave it another try a few days ago. A nice dose about five sprays, on the way to my office. I had several compliments. And no, I wasn't really worried that they were "turn that shit down" compliments. The women in my office actually loved it.
One of the problems I had with Windsor in the past was being too shy about spraying. I usually wear it in the evening only, just one or two shots. I think it was Mr. Redneck Perfumisto who advised "don't by shy about spraying it." He's right.
Last edited by mrcologneguy; 15th April 2010 at 01:33 AM.
NO Erolfa connection that I'd detect. (Just my own nose, of course.)
Five sprays, really? Not being sarcastic, but isn't that a tad strong?
^^^Sounds a bit strong, but at least on me the scent wears light enough to probably get away with it. I'll try that next time I wear. Usually use between 3 and 4.
i personally am not a fan of windsor, the rose mixed with sodapop smell (could be the gin) just isn't doing it for me. it is unique and different but i couldnt see myself wearing it.
Oh, and yes, no erolfa connection.
Suspicious though the newer clear bottle batches of MI do have more of an erolfa connection than previous batches. less rich basenotes to cover that geraniol/salt/ambroxan/seeweed saltiness
Last edited by DULLAH; 16th April 2010 at 04:16 AM.
Hi Dullah, I've repeatedly asseverated I don't have a nose equal to yours in what regards DETAIL.
However, I agree with your comment about M. I., on an intuitive level.
The first renditions I sniffed (~2001 or earlier) were A LOT better than ANYthing I could find now. A lot more citrus... high quality citrus... that "dream" citrus most men look for (and find ASPECTS of it, in Creed BdC or CB or the various Eaux de Guerlain or in Hermes concoctions etc.) and never find it AS A WHOLE.
The only citrus superior to the BEST M. I. I have sniffed was the long discontinued Les Hesperides de la Grande Serre from L'Artisan... which used to be a non-surprising citrus masterpiece - best five citrus oils, lemon, bergamot, grapefruit, neroli, orange (I think they didn't add any lime) "fixed" through a hint of light musk... everything rendered better through the quality of the ingredients rather than the originality of the composition...
Nowadays M. I. smells to me on the mediocre side... better than the epitomical Bergner cologne, yet not at the level of (mostly deserved) Creed reputation.
I prefer Citrus Bigarrade (or Bois de Cedrat) - weak sillage and relative simplicity assumed.
Tell us more about your experiments with Windsor... are you serious about the "32"????? What were the comments??????????
The one Creed I feel gains from "excessive" spraying (IF you do it at least an hour before going out) is GIT -- is it the violet leaf thingy? What are your (always interesting) comments on this particular fragrant element?
The only successful Windsor layering I can report: Citrus bigarrade + W. However, Windsor still smells better by itself, in my opinion.
Last edited by Addict; 16th April 2010 at 05:47 AM.
Five sprays, really? Not being sarcastic, but isn't that a tad strong?[/QUOTE]
Five was about right for me. I've worn Windsor several times, with no notice from anyone around me. I find it disappears quickly on my skin. So yes, I ramped it up, and bam -- worked very well. I wouldn't wear that much in close quarters, though. Not to a movie theater, for example. But Mr. Perfumisto was right - don't be too shy about Windsor.
Speaking of inimitable things... of which Green I T is one (no matter how many times it's been imitated, and all this is in my opinion of course) - what is that extremely enticing note on the dry-down? Is it violet leaf absolute? If yes, where else is it used prominently? Thank you.
Last edited by Addict; 18th April 2010 at 07:17 PM.
I gave this a full wearing the other day (Windsor)
I was not impressed at all, it did smell very unique, but somewhat reminded me of a spicier drier eau de italie
Off-Site Decants =) (updated 05/16/12)
Also I finally tried Windsor. Something I had been putting off mostly because of the insane price tag and limited supply. Now I wish i would have bought a bottle or at least gone in a split.
WOW!, 32 sprays wow. that must be a record.
Last edited by Futami; 30th April 2010 at 07:12 AM.
I tried Windsor today. Initially, I did the wrist smudge. It smelt really old-school. Like a splash cologne you'd find in a bathroom of an expensive hotel or restaurant with a guy in a suit ready to wash your hands. The citrus and pine notes heavily remind me of a combination of the Truefitt & Hill colognes. I could see it being a little cheap smelling....like a bottle of aftershave. It's got that vibe if you testing it from a vial. It's better if you spray it.
Eventually, I did two sprays to my inner elbow and it comes off smelling a little aquatic/calone-y in the opening. A very fine fragrance, I like it a lot. A little classic, reminds me a bit of Kouros in a strange way, the overall vibe, not scent. Not much rose, but I get the pine, gin and lime a lot with cedar and eucalyptus in the background.
It's very well blended and the quality of notes are good but aren't superb for a $600 fragrance. It would be reasonably priced in Creed's regular line-up and I wouldn't hesitate to purchase some but at that exclusive price, I'd probably wouldn't go out of my way. It's not opulent enough though defiently something I could see a Duke wearing. Refined...but I don't know if I could pull it off. I nor act or look like a Duke.
Each & every time I wore Windsor from my sample (which I finished last week) I experienced something new...it is one of those scents that takes several wearings to wrap your head around. I love the way the notes interplay with each other and yes, it has a whiff of royalty to it that kind of fits in with scents like No. 88 and/or Vintage Tabarome.
Last edited by mikeperez23; 17th May 2010 at 03:51 AM.