Code of Conduct
Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,476
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default high longevity is not ideal

    i personally don't see why a fragrance should get points for lasting 10 to 20 hours.

    as a person with many fragrances, i like to wear a different one each day. i never like to mix different scents unintentionally. i hate when fragrances like Le Male force me to not wear fragrance for most of the second day.

    actually, i like short longevity, because it allows me to wear several fragrances in one day without them overlapping.

  2. #2

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    That's an interesting point of view. Short longevity allows for more variety in a day. I can understand how that could work for you. The reason why it doesn't work for me is I only want to apply fragrance once in the morning. Lugging fragrance around with me during the day is just to much of a pain in the ass for me. So in the end, longevity is extremely important to me.

  3. #3

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    I understand your point. To me, it depends on the activity and mood of the day. Some days you want to wear more than one frag and some days you are comfortable with just one. After the gym, I like to switch up. Good point.

  4. #4

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Tenacity doesn't equate to 'good'. The worst fragrances are often hard to scrub off. Conversely, if I paid a lot for a fragrance, I would like it to last all day at least. I'm happy with one a day -- I mean where would it end, change fragrances every hour?

  5. #5

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Agreed about shorter longevity. I mean, if a fragrance slopes off after an hour and never returns, it should be noted though not necessarily written off. I would pay more money for an interesting or well put together fragrance, rather than one that lasts and lasts and lasts and doesn't go anywhere. And if it's something by the likes of say, Jean-Claude Ellena, I suspect the fragrance is going to waft back in a most tantalizing way just when I think it's gone for good.

  6. #6
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Philly Tri-County Area
    Posts
    353

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Quote Originally Posted by thebeck View Post
    That's an interesting point of view. Short longevity allows for more variety in a day. I can understand how that could work for you. The reason why it doesn't work for me is I only want to apply fragrance once in the morning. Lugging fragrance around with me during the day is just to much of a pain in the ass for me. So in the end, longevity is extremely important to me.
    I agree with this. I don't want to have to maintain my fragrance throughout the day.

  7. #7

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Longevity is one factor when choosing a fragrance for a certain situation .
    Say I want to go and meet some friends then I want to go clubbing .
    Meeting friends will last about 1-3h , I choose something with moderate longevity so that when I'm done with friends I can put on another scent for clubbing that will last until the next morning .

    SO , there is no type of ideal longevity . Both high and low longevities are good for certain events .

  8. #8
    hednic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    McLean, NYC, & Búzios
    Posts
    84,301

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Longevity that lasts me the whole day until the next shower is ideal.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,476
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Quote Originally Posted by hednic View Post
    Longevity that lasts me the whole day until the next shower is ideal.
    what about longevity that's still there after that shower?

  10. #10
    Basenotes Plus
    senore01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    NEW YORK CITY
    Posts
    3,854
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Exactly. I want a fragrance that lasts. After all, fragrances are more expensive than they were years ago. They should last longer.

  11. #11

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Quote Originally Posted by hednic View Post
    Longevity that lasts me the whole day until the next shower is ideal.
    +1

    Can't say I've experienced the problem of a scent surviving a shower.

  12. #12
    Basenotes Plus
    Diamondflame's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,759

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    I happen to share OP's point of view. For me 4-6 hrs is decent. 6-8 is good. Things get tricky when a fragrance goes beyond 8 hrs as I prefer to take a 2nd shower, a change of clothes and an SotE before heading out for evening events. Tenacious fragrances that survive a round of scrubbing don't rate too highly in my books. It's a happy situation for me as I seldom get hung up over longevity issues.

    Neither do I subscribe to the notion that a fragrance should last longer just because it's expensive. That's probably just your (battered) wallet talking! Longevity has more to do with volatility of fragrance material than it does with its cost. That more expensive material lasts longer is simply wishful thinking. If you do want legs on your frag I reckon you're probably better off with the cheaper, chemically loaded stuff like Bogart pour Homme. A bottle of it could see you through your ripe old age.
    Last edited by Diamondflame; 9th January 2013 at 03:12 AM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    For myself longevity matters quite a bit as I live in a warmer climate. You also have to take into account that everyone has different schedules and some might need a fragrance to last 2 hours while others might work 12 hour days. Different strokes for different folks.
    Last edited by silentrich; 9th January 2013 at 06:43 AM.

  14. #14
    Overcome By Fumes
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    3,378

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Interesting thoughts. If I can't smell something I've applied 2 or three hours before, that's generally a major negative, even if it smelled wonderful at 90 minutes. I generally am not in a position to reapply or wear something new throughout the day. Sometimes I will reapply in the evening or late afternoon if activities are planned, if needed.

    On the other hand, although most fragrances last pretty well on me, generally there is no hint of remaining fragrance from the previous day after a morning shower. I actually like that little release of whatever remnants persisted when I take the shower. But then I can start anew with fresh skin and a new fragrance to enjoy for the whole day hopefully.

    The only fragrance I can recall persisting for more than one washing was Cuiron, and I don't really have or wear that.

  15. #15

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Quote Originally Posted by thebeck View Post
    That's an interesting point of view. Short longevity allows for more variety in a day. I can understand how that could work for you. The reason why it doesn't work for me is I only want to apply fragrance once in the morning. Lugging fragrance around with me during the day is just to much of a pain in the ass for me. So in the end, longevity is extremely important to me.
    I basically agree. It's my pet peeve of most fragrances made and sold today. Martin (Puredistance M fan)

  16. #16

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    For the majority of this I thought you were talking about excessive longevity preventing you from wearing perfume the same day, but later on in the afternoon or evening. But then I read you were inferring to the next day.

    Wheres you shower?

    - - - Updated - - -

    I also like wearing more than one perfume in the day. On some weekends I can even manage up to 4 perfumes in a day. One when I wake up early in the morning (yeah I like to wake up early on weekends ), then another from around lunch time to afternoon, then early evening to the end of the day but some times I can do an afternoon to early evening and then early evening to bed time making it 4. Three is usually more common than 4 though. I shower between perfumes though. But if I'm in a hurry I'll soak a towel in soapy water and clean my neck and chest area till the perfume is gone then spray on the next one.

    for swap/sale:





  17. #17
    Basenotes Plus
    ericrico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,128

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    This is personal topic and highly subjective. If you are away from your collection or only have a small travel atomizer you can put in your pocket to refresh your scent - longevity is desirable.

    However, if you have a lifestyle & profession that allows you to be around a selection of scents daily...shorter longevity can actually be fine.

    Also, climate is subjective. Extreme weather can mean that scents don't last as long (which can be true in hot, humid climates as well as cold, wet and windy ones).

    This may sound like a politician's answer - but, I actually like a broad range of longevity and each scent is unto itself, unique in how it wears. My preference is to only make sure that I enjoy the wearing...that I get the full effect. The only time I am unsatisfied with a wearing is when I put on a light/moderate wearing and then I am unable to refresh it when I want to. I take care in making sure that is not the case...

    The length of time we have with a single application with a lot of fixatives reduced in modern fragrances/formulations is, inherently, shorter. Once we come to accept that...longevity becomes less important. For those of us who adore Vintage fragrances, we can enjoy the oakmoss that is no longer acceptable under IFRA regulation...

    Cheers,

    ericrico
    “Some perfumes are as fragrant as an infant’s flesh, sweet as an oboe’s cry, and greener than the spring; While others are triumphant, decadent or rich; Having the expansion of infinite things, like ambergris and musk, benzoin and frankincense, which sing the transports of the mind and every sense.”

    ― Charles Baudelaire, The Flowers of Evil & Paris Spleen

  18. #18

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    For me the ideal length of a scent should be 6-8 hours. Long enough to last you all day at work, or all evening. But not so long that you have to wash it off to put something else on after you get home and before you go out for the night. I dunno about you all, but the scent I wear to work is very likely not the same scent I wear out at night. But that's me!

  19. #19

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    I strongly second Alain and ericrico's points. Longevity, high or low, is neither ideal or unideal in any absolute sense. That would be like saying music in a major key or minor key is ideal, or that red is ideal and blue is unideal or something equally inane. There are times when high longevity is ideal, and to my taste, certain styles of scent seem to benefit from high longevity (a strong, very complex arabic themed scent should not fade in a few hours imo, just like you might prefer unnatural 'bigger than life' sound effects in a bigger than life movie. Sorry, random analogy, I know.) just as there are times when low or moderate longevity is ideal.

    The one thing I do want to state emphatically, as it bothers me to no end seeing this correlation all the time, is that great longevity does not mean a scent is using objectively better or "higher quality" materials. In fact, none of the pricey naturals last nearly as long as many common, very cheap, synthetics. Shit like Stetson or the Bogarts or any other number of cheapies last all day (and then some). I really really wish reviewers (YT reviewers especially) would stop figuring longevity into their ratings. Yes, mention the longevity - but don't use moderate to low longevity to down rate a scent. It would be like lowering your rating on a folk band's latest release because they didn't use heavily distorted guitars. Silly and ridiculous.
    ***For sale:

    Iris Pallida 50ml

    Ungaro I 75ml

    and more!
    - http://www.basenotes.net/threads/301...n-Man-and-more

  20. #20

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    What about the time the fragrance projects at an acceptable rate before it becomes a skin scent. That's time so it's part of longevity.

  21. #21
    Basenotes Plus
    Diamondflame's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,759

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Quote Originally Posted by silentrich View Post
    What about the time the fragrance projects at an acceptable rate before it becomes a skin scent. That's time so it's part of longevity.
    Great point. A distinction many reviewers fail to address in their reviews. Perhaps one of the problems is different people define 'longevity' differently?

  22. #22

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Quote Originally Posted by SculptureOfSoul View Post
    The one thing I do want to state emphatically, as it bothers me to no end seeing this correlation all the time, is that great longevity does not mean a scent is using objectively better or "higher quality" materials. In fact, none of the pricey naturals last nearly as long as many common, very cheap, synthetics. Shit like Stetson or the Bogarts or any other number of cheapies last all day (and then some). I really really wish reviewers (YT reviewers especially) would stop figuring longevity into their ratings. Yes, mention the longevity - but don't use moderate to low longevity to down rate a scent. It would be like lowering your rating on a folk band's latest release because they didn't use heavily distorted guitars. Silly and ridiculous.
    Good point!

    And I agree with many of the views that there is no ideal longevity. I shudder at the day when even eaux de cologne used to refresh up becomes tenacious for 24 hours!

  23. #23

    Default Re: high longevity is not ideal

    Quote Originally Posted by noirdrakkar
    high longevity is not ideal
    "high longevity is not ideal" for you. That's an important distinction. To suggest that greater longevity isn't ideal for perfumery, period, is silly.


    Quote Originally Posted by silentrich View Post
    What about the time the fragrance projects at an acceptable rate before it becomes a skin scent. That's time so it's part of longevity.
    Excellent point. I've always enjoyed reviews that state how long the reviewer experienced each stage of the perfume. Even though I know better than to expect the exact same results on my skin, I still find that to be really helpful info.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by SculptureOfSoul View Post
    I strongly second Alain and ericrico's points. Longevity, high or low, is neither ideal or unideal in any absolute sense. That would be like saying music in a major key or minor key is ideal, or that red is ideal and blue is unideal or something equally inane. There are times when high longevity is ideal, and to my taste, certain styles of scent seem to benefit from high longevity (a strong, very complex arabic themed scent should not fade in a few hours imo, just like you might prefer unnatural 'bigger than life' sound effects in a bigger than life movie. Sorry, random analogy, I know.) just as there are times when low or moderate longevity is ideal.

    The one thing I do want to state emphatically, as it bothers me to no end seeing this correlation all the time, is that great longevity does not mean a scent is using objectively better or "higher quality" materials. In fact, none of the pricey naturals last nearly as long as many common, very cheap, synthetics. Shit like Stetson or the Bogarts or any other number of cheapies last all day (and then some). I really really wish reviewers (YT reviewers especially) would stop figuring longevity into their ratings. Yes, mention the longevity - but don't use moderate to low longevity to down rate a scent. It would be like lowering your rating on a folk band's latest release because they didn't use heavily distorted guitars. Silly and ridiculous.
    Absolutely. Specifically addressing the use of longevity in ratings, especially on YouTube... many of those reviewers also use projection as part of their rating, downgrading for less projection. And that's equally silly. Ill informed is probably a better way to put it. It shows ignorance to say more projection is always good and less is always bad. For a clubbing scent, more projection is good. For a scent for intimate occasions, less projection is good.
    "Follow your nose. It always knows." -- Toucan Sam

Similar Threads

  1. What's your ideal fragrance?
    By Teach13 in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 6th December 2012, 12:46 AM
  2. Ideal Man's Wardrobe
    By noirdrakkar in forum Fashion and Style
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 13th October 2012, 08:11 AM
  3. Your ideal fragrance
    By DavidBond007 in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 31st March 2010, 05:32 PM
  4. ideal shelf life
    By squirrelmilk in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 30th December 2006, 02:13 PM
  5. Ideal fragrance?
    By snoopy104 in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 13th October 2005, 05:15 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Loving perfume on the Internet since 2000