And to which fragrance family do you think it belongs (citrus, fougere, chypre, oriental)?
Thread: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E06
Judging by the color only Obfdhr is the right color (picture on the F-site). However, the descriptions everywhere make me think of more green grass and then sweetness. Some reviewers note great longevity too. Nobody ever remarks about the daffodil element in it. How do you guys feel about the floralcy of 06?
Thank you to RN for your offer to send me a little drop for a sniff.
And to which fragrance family do you think it belongs (citrus, fougere, chypre, oriental)?
I think there could definitely be saffron + citrus in this, which I could be interpreting as orange when it is some other citrus. But if there is any daffodil, I'm not finding it. The fragrance doesn't strike me as floral.
Also, I have a mild dislike for gbaxn, so unless the perfumer used it so skillfully it was disguised, I think the warmth in the base is due to other notes. I agree that irgvire plays a big role in the fragrance, but by the time it dries down and warms up on my skin, its the warmer notes that I notice.
I have to say again this is a wonderful fragrance, and I continue to be grateful to Chandler for bringing these scents to my attention. This was forcefully demonstrated to me by a sample I received yesterday (that will remain nameless) that was so terrible it made me wish I was anosmic. There are definitely some ham-handed perfumers out there.
Does the new day bring any new developments with 06?
OK, now that we are speaking about the genre, do you think it is marketed for women or men? I would also like to hear some asnwers to Irina's fragrance family question.
Any imagery/associations evoked by it?
I tend to think of it as a citric irgvire fragrance - I hesitate to call it oriental, because it's not spicy, but it is warm, and to a degree that might even deserve the term "ambery". Without being an amber fragrance, if that makes sense.
I think this feels very unisex, but I could see it being marketed to either gender or neither. The fact that is seemed like Gbz Sbeq Terl Irgvire at first says masculine, but the similarity to Irgvire Gbaxn would mean unisex. And the overall vibe is like a more feminine version of Raper Abver (of which I have not smelled the feminine flanker, and which this could be). More masculine than Irgvire Cbhe Ryyr, too.
I'm also thinking this may have a lot of pnfuzrena in it. In fact, that's the image I associate with it, and why it's so perfect for the holidays. It's like the warmest pnfuzrer scarf or sweater one can imagine. It's not Pnfuzrer Zvfg - it's much less upscale and restrained. More like Pnfuzrer Ninynapur, an imaginary fragrance created by perfuming snowboard chicks!
There is a toasty element in it that almost reminds me of Wrhk qr Crnh, but it's much less - just a strong facet, not a predominant theme.
I'm going to recommend that people buy a bottle of this sucker!
Actually I was referring to Michael Edwars fragrance wheel: http://www.fragrancesoftheworld.com/fragrancewheel.aspx
E06 sounds like a woody oriental?
Also as the 30 ml offered on Open Sky is priced at $50 we're looking at a niche fragrance priced at least $180 a 100 ml bottle right?
I was re-reading Gilbert's 'What the nose knows' and realized what a huge bias these blind sniffs carry within them with a huge placebo effect because of the shared imagery, notes and such, it's impossible for the brain to not play that 'pattern recognition' cognitive game filling in the gaps and leading us by the nose
Is is anything like Znunenavu?
I have Znunenavu, and S01E06 is nothing like it IMO.
Definitely NOT Raper Abver pour femme, which is a light and sort of non-descript white floral with very little irgvire if any at all.If we are, however, looking for a lighter version of Raper Abver, a few reviewers on the F-site point towards Ybrgr 7.
Speaking of numbers: somehow I am thinking more of CT07 Tenaq Fvrpyr (of course the nose behind it is almost 15 years younger than CB, but who is counting?).
Last edited by Twolf; 23rd December 2012 at 03:35 AM.
Thank you, RN (Neil), for your generosity in sending me a sample of this to sniff. I'm glad I had the opportunity, even though I'm afraid my comments are going to be a bit of a rant . . .
My first impression was simply, "Is Chandler having a laugh at our expense?" I understand that there are many perfumes he obviously can't throw our way, but is contemporary perfumery so bereft of ideas and creativity, that this is all he can come up with?
Upfront, I get a huge blast of grapefruit, followed by the rest of the lunchroom can of fruit cocktail, followed by something vaguely floral, followed by . . . dead air. Both times I applied this, it went from 110 mph to nothingness in about 10 minutes. Its over all impression is of something created as the ne plus ultra of a by-the-numbers blueprint of how to construct a fruity floral. Not that I necessarily mind the genre--Calyx for one is brilliant. But this ain't no Calyx.
In fact, I'm struggling to figure out what, exactly, it is. Once again, I find myself in an Emperor's New Clothes position, struggling to come up with the "there" there.
Last edited by PerfumePorMoi; 24th December 2012 at 08:15 PM.
Not again, darn it! Will check my mailbox today, will let you know, OK?
Fortunately, I have to say that Burr's *individual artistic* appreciation and his *art historical* appreciation are clearly two different things. The only line you could possibly draw through the scents in the Art of Scent exhibit, would be the curve of greatest and earliest advance of the art. The scents in the exhibit are truly myriad in their diversity, and are clearly not selected according to Burr's likes or dislikes.
Got my sample today. Totally agree with RNP that this is what Encre Noir pour Femme should have been smelling like, not what they got us.
Right off top of the bat: designer, not niche. Or, weird niche with no projection and 1 hour longevity (remember everything lasts on me). Initial blast (timid one, pastel watercolor) made me think masculine, the development is sort of unisex.
Notewise, I got NO oranges at all, it is a bitter citrus (bergamot would be my best bet) and some aldehydes. In combination, they produce that fizzy tickling sensation at the start. Then there is sweet green vetiver, a little bit of plain jasmine (sambac, not grandiflorum), and something sweet and creamy -- almost like gardenia. What some of the sniffers perceive as fruit is, in fact, something vegetal -- I will not be surprised if it were listed as "celery seed" or an herb (tarragon?) or something else in this venue. Dries down in one hour, to musk and that sweet nothing with higher-pitched cedar. Among the existing fragrances, I would say Caleche Delicate Triple Legere (it does not exist of course) with added vetiver would come close. No, not Pierre, not his style. Not JC Ellena -- not his expressive means.
Overall, happy cheery light scent, spring-like rather than Christmas, positive but lacking energy to deliver. More like a blueprint, etude, not the finished product. Will not go out of the way to wear it on a regular basis.
Will think some more on it, OK?
When do they reveal? End of the month? What are our suggestions besides the ones suggested?
Great observations! Totally with you on almost everything - except that I'm lucky to get some skin scent longevity out of the deal.
The reveal is normally the last day of the month/first day of the next month - depends on the day of the week and Chandler's personal schedule, as well as logistics if he's doing a video, too.
I'm no longer concerned with what it is - just what it is that I like (or don't like) about it. I may try to do one last post about that, before the reveal.
PMed you with a few ideas.
Guys, what about the art & emotional response with this one?
Heh, I'm not concerned about what it is, either, because it smells to my nose like so much of what is currently being produced. I'd love to smell something vegetal in this--but after four applications, all my nose gets is fruit cocktail, book-ended by a sharp grapefruit note to start and some woods to finish. Its not offensive, and in fact it seems over all rather well made, but it's just not all that interesting.
What IS interesting to me, however, is what it says about Burr's particular taste--and its consistency.
Emotional response: Disinterest
Art work analogy: Modern, blends into any decor. http://www.wallartdecorstore.com/art/sleek/
Emotional response: noisy youngsters in the park ready to go on a few rides. Happy, chewing gum, eating junk food. Rides are noisier though. Some of them are even scary, but the fragrance is about the youths, not the heavy machinery.
I was also thinking that the wood we thought was cedar, got that slightly unpleasant undertone, not synthetic, but in addition to cedarwood it might be rosewood.
I feel like we're stuck in a very particular room in a very particular wing of a museum and we're being made to look at every single work in a very particular genre. Everything is very clean and all the decor is white and gray and sleek. There's no risk of offense in any of the art. I feel bored and antsy.
I really want something that shows some risk. Something that people might not like. Something where my immediate response isn't "yes, yes. quite nice. smells like the last 5 but a little different."
I feel like I understood and learned to appreciate a lightness and airy-ness after the very first release and I wish we could move on and bump up the diversity.
Then again, maybe this is what *s01* is and when the time comes for *s02* we'll change gears.
I'll probably get the next bottle as well, but if that's just another light, slightly this, slightly that scent... I'm out.
I just returned from my holiday travels to find Neil's kind sample. Again, I've tried not to read people's impressions, so I hope you all will be OK with this being a naive response.
This is my second wearing, and after 5 spritzes on the back of my hand (3 did not last long enough when I tried it yesterday), my first response was......yet another Chandler frag. Slim, elegant, refined, and nothing particularly exciting or challenging about it. I can see both men and women wearing it, but it's another one of those things a person might wear if they weren't interested in leaving any particular kind of an impression.
Not to say that it's not relaxing, because I do think it is. And from the emotional impression standpoint, I do get a mental picture of languid mid-morning on a warm spring day. Which is a nice enough picture I'll admit.
But if I am going to wear something for myself, rather than to make an impression on others, I suspect that even on such a morning I'd want something that's a little more foreword and with some ongoing projection. Something that brings me back to smelling my wrist as time passes, rather than something so non-intrusive that I'd find myself quickly forgetting that I was even wearing it. Which I'll shamefully admit was what happened when I wore it yesterday.
I know Chandler said this one was "rich", and perhaps it does have a little more breadth to it than some of the previous ones, but it's still got a very long way to go before it approaches the richness of the things that I tend to apply that label to.
Call my nose coarse and crude, and you may be right, but it really does surprise me that after six of these editions, we still seem to be stuck in the same esthetic chapter.
I don't mean to be getting down on this fragrance, because it is pleasant in a....pleasant sort of way, and I do believe I would be giving it a lot more chances, if only my first impression had not been "Oh, another one of those."
- - - Updated - - -
OK, after reading some of the comments, I'm back.
In response to which, if I remember correctly, he got kind of defensive and said "No no no !".
But if that's *not* what he is trying to tell us......what exactly is he trying to tell us ?
I keep hoping the message will be something wider in scope than "I'm Chandler, and this is the particular style of things that I personally like."
Last edited by Birdboy48; 1st January 2013 at 11:19 PM.
OK - maybe that would be a bit much. But I honestly feel like we're comparing skyscrapers, and it's hard to work up tears on number 6. They're all big, beautiful, sleek, and very commercial. Commissioned by rich people. If we passed an adobe home, or even better an "Occupy Perfume" encampment, my
eyesnose would be wandering, sister!
It's not that these aren't great works of art/design - I honestly feel that they are. But the approach isn't so much diversity as repetition.
One thing that Birdboy and PPM said that I agree with is that maybe this is showing us a single concept - a certain sort of sleekness and olfactory simplicity and continuity. Maybe it's a certain style of modern olfactory art. THAT I can buy. And that IS something which I feel is the core competence of "high-industry" fragrance, and less common in the more "artisanal" stuff.
On the other hand, maybe that other stuff just doesn't feel compelling to Chandler. It's his show - if he thinks it's unworthy, so be it.
I don't know. Maybe it's just the holidays messing with us.
I don't know Red; perhaps his intention actually is to educate people about this one narrow segment of perfume, but if that's his mission, why doesn't he just come out and say so ?
Sometimes I think somebody needs to sneak up behind him, throw a bag over his head, and as with the old chloroform-on-a-rag thing, make him sniff some Lutens !
Just kidding of course, but it's almost as though he doesn't recognize the existence of such things, and if there happen to be people who are uneducated about perfume who have joined the project with the hope of being presented with a good cross-section of what exists within the world of perfumery, it worries me that they are being kept in the dark about the many exciting stylistic approaches that make perfume so interesting.
Whatever the intent of the choices, Chandler has most certainly succeeded in getting people to talk about perfume!
I do think that the choices have been advantageous in terms of getting us to move our focus off of the "notes" themselves, and onto the melody and harmony. He seems to have chosen things which don't have too much complexity in terms of details, and which show off their larger structure more easily. Perhaps he tried to keep things simple? That would also explain why he hasn't exactly gone out of his way to explain the reason behind the choices. People generally don't like being told that they're working on the "elementary" track!
Yes, Burr is applying his own aesthetic to the selection of scents not only for the Untitled Series but also for the Art of Scent Exhibit. Did you expect anything else?! If you missed it, we spent the month of October (S01E05) delving into relationships between existing art movements and olfactory art. A person has the responsibility for "curating" collections. Certain pieces are excluded, deemed not to fit the collection. That doesn't mean they're bad, it just means they're not right for this particular aesthetic. For example, have you ever created a station on Pandora? You start out with a concept: e.g. Van Morrison Radio. Pandora then suggests songs by other artists that it considers stylistically similar. But in this case, its grouping The Rolling Stones with Van Morrison, and while I love the Stones, I don't want to hear them as part of my "Van Morrison Radio station". So I give them the "thumbs down" every time one is suggested, in order to fine-tune the criteria for my station. If you can't see the frame I'm applying to my selections, you don't know why I'm including Otis Redding and excluding The Rolling Stones. I'm guessing that for some reason Burr doesn't feel Lutens scents fit the Untitled Series aesthetic, but we don't know that for certain. He could choose Jeux de Peau as his next Untitled!
Maybe Burr could be doing more to explain his frame of reference, but I think people as enthusiastic about fragrance as we are should at least give him the benefit of the doubt and try to understand what he's doing. I haven't come anywhere near understanding or internalizing his frame/model/aesthetic, but I was hoping some of the other people playing along on the Untitled Series would have insights that I'd learn from. I think this is what Burr intended for both of his projects -- to get people thinking differently about scent, to propose the association of scent characteristics with existing art movements. I think its an interesting and worthwhile endeavor, if you're ready to go beyond simple categorization by notes and fragrance families. And think how it might influence olfactory artists to translate a concept from one realm into new scents!
He gave us Eau de Lierre as the Literalist, Photo-Realistic exhibit. The Art of Scent Exhibit give us twelve more examples of his classifications:
02 Abstract Expressionism
Chanel No. 5
03 Early American School
07 Photo Realism
Annie Buzantian, Alberto Morillas
08 Kinetic Sculpture
Carlos Benaïm, Max Gavarry, Clément Gavarry
You don't have to agree with his classifications - if you disagree, maybe Burr will learn something from you. (Note that we could talk about how the two photo realistic examples are alike/different.) But it feels like everyone else is throwing the towel in on this. Yes? No?
Last edited by Perfume_Addict; 3rd January 2013 at 02:07 PM.
I don't think I'm throwing in the towel, myself. I did see the exhibit in NYC, and my impression was that the scents therein were generally more clear-cut and more obvious members of their classifications, than what we got in the Untitled series. For example, calling Untitled by Daniela Andrier either Brutalist or Post-Brutalist makes sense when you smell it. The fragrance is (to my nose) constructed from olfactory cinder blocks - yet somehow made beautiful. Angel - Surrealist - no problem. And most of the others - they make sense. I still don't get Eau de Lierre as Photo Realism, but that's a tough call, IMO. I'm curious why Chanel no. 5 is not in your list - it was in the exhibit (also Abstract Expressionism, IIRC). Again - that and Jicky - no problem. In fact, the whole exhibit made sense, in its chronological change of styles.
But I would be much more hard-pressed to call the predominant artistic movement on any of the scents in S01. Much less obvious to me.