Price is not reflective of longevity. It's valid because other fragrances that are more and less expensive have greater longevity. It's a legitimate complaint.
Thread: complaining about longevity
I find it strange when people, who will happily pay £200+ for a bottle of cologne, complain about longevity of a £50 fragrance.
If you can afford a £200 frag, you can afford to re-apply a £50 frag. Re-apply with abandon would be my advice to these people. I just don't understand how their complaints are valid for the most part.
What do you think?
Price is not reflective of longevity. It's valid because other fragrances that are more and less expensive have greater longevity. It's a legitimate complaint.
Imagine there were no hypothetical situations.
Pomegranate Noir 100 ml, 95% full no box - $90
Contact through PM
If people are not satisfied with the longevity they're getting from a particular scent they should either re-apply it or not purchase that scent again.
Remember that while it is perfectly acceptable to criticize the content of a post - criticizing the poster is not.
Mean spirited, nasty, snide, sarcastic, hateful, and rude individuals don't warrant or deserve other individuals' acknowledgement or respect.
Its not about the money, if any fragrance doesn't longer than 4 hours I'll pass. I also not a person to carry an atomizer in my man bag... if the fragrance is gone its gone.
What coach Rob says determines what I spray
It's really not about the price,a $20 bottle of let's say Ted Lapidus Pour Homme will last longer than some $200 bottles,but if you have a problem with the longevity either re apply or just leave it alone.
Don't believe price has anything to do with longevity. If that's the case, regular body sprays would cost $200.00. There are plenty of cheapies that last twice as long as the most expensive fragrances.
I have scents I like so much that I'll carry around an atomizer if I have to. I'm probably wearing The One for Men today, and may bring an atomizer along -- it's so good that I'll go the extra mile. That said, I do think complaints about longevity are reasonable, regardless of what the user can afford. First, I just plain don't want to carry around an atomizer, especially in summer when I don't have a jacket with extra pockets to put it in, and there are plenty of perfumes I can get where I don't need to. Second, as someone pointed out in a previous thread on this topic, you go to the bathroom to re-apply and now when you come out you've got that super-strong 1-minute-old opening going on, it's stronger than you might want it to be, everyone now knows you've re-applied and we all wonder if it's a "trying too hard" thing.
Not sure that it is correct to presume there is a relationship between price and longevity?
For me, a fragrance has to last more than 4 hours to get a regular wearing - less than this, I may like the fragrance but it will be rarely used regardless of price
I hate hearing ppl complain about it. Hate it more when members trash a good fragrance due to longevity. Or on the flip side, hype up fragrances that are mediocre at best, just cuz it'd take paint thinner to remove. Certain fragrances are not meant to be worn in the daytime, some are meant to be worn at night. Same goes for different seasons. You can maximize performance if the product is used for its intended purpose
Green Irish Tweed
Scandal Pour Homme
Tending to agree with the opinion that longevity and price are often unrelated.
If I'm going to pay Big $$$'s for a fragrance it better last... Thats why most of us sample first... Body chemistry is a major factor in longevity... Diet and medicine can also play a role in longevity or lack of... Price and longevity are often unrelated And that I understand... I think that the general thought is price equals quality and that I understand also... I agree with the 4 hour idea... If a fragrance can't make it 4 hours, I'm not going to be interested...
I don't like re-applying. It's a pain in the ass. Unless it's absolutely outstanding, can't live without the smell amazingness, i don't buy unless the longevity is at least average.
It's 2014. Perfumes keep getting more and more expensive, but there are still longevity issues with many. They really haven't figured out a way to improve this?
Why is it too much to ask a perfumer think about making something last if it is expensive. Men do not carry a bag around so it isnt like it is a easy thing to do to re apply.
Would you drink a beer that tastes good but 1 minutes after it being poured it is flat?
Sorry but reapplying is not a solution always..
Ocean wet wood..in an hour it's gone..yet silver wind wood lasts for hours.
Both cost the same..
Im not rich, but if i really enjoy a fragrance im happy to consider paying £200 for it. Longetivity and all the rest of it is a bonus but thats about it. Theres no doubt in my mind that there are people in the industry desperate to supply brands like Creed and some others with there latest toxic soup, my opinion would be dont do it, because if they did, id stop buying. If Creed ever altered my nice and mellow GIT or SMW into something blatantly transparently synthetic (note, i say transparently, rather than the fragrance doesnt already contain synthetics) then Creed would lose my custom on that one, its as simple as that!
Leave that kind of thing to the Hermes and Frederic Malles of the world yeah, because it doesnt belong with some of the houses, thats why certain brands have certain images, to make them stand out from the rest, not so everyone conforms uniformly.
I guess some people like all hamburgers conforming and measured exactly a la mcdonalds and buger king to, well thats not personally me or to my tastes...
Last edited by DMA; 13th May 2014 at 10:31 PM.
^ so are you saying that you think Creed uses all natural and organic ingredients without any sort of chemicals?
Did you read above properly? Anyway, as i was saying my GIT and SMW are fine without it being a freakshow, they are mellow in theme by default, anything else with those 2 in particular would just be straight out of a horror movie, thats why we all have choice...
Maybe some people like horror movies, regular customers from that brand in particualr cleary dont i would imagine...
Solution to poor longevity: Stop killing your nose by spraying on 72 sprays (believe me, no one around you thinks that your frag has poor longevity, they are actually praying that it will stop), give your nose a MUCH needed break, go back to spraying one or two sprays, and, bingo you can smell your fragrance again...and you'll realize that it actually DOES last a lot longer than you initially thought now that your nose isn't going into panic mode because it is being bombarded by extremely intense smells from every angle for so long.
I really do think that people either want their frags to project to the neighboring country, or they want them to last until 2015 by spraying the whole bottle on because they think it's too weak. I smell almost all of my frags almost all day long...even the "poor" longevity one's and I just spray one or two sprays...and I know it can't be just a skin chemistry thing. Do I smell all of them very strongly all day, no, not all of them, but that's ok people, you don't need to have a scent bubble with a radius of 17 miles to consider a frag to have great longevity and projection. Stop over applying and stop killing your nose and you'll see what I mean.
I'm really meaning this tongue in cheek...I'm not being all passionate, and I'm definitely exaggerating, but I think my point is made. Are there stronger frags than others, yes, are there frags that last 10 minutes and then "poof they're gone" heck no...all frags are going to last at least a couple of hours, even though I, personally haven't found one yet...every frag I have smelled has lasted at least 4 hours, every single one of them, most last 6-8, and a few others 10-14, so I have a tough time believing the reviews that say that frags are gone after a few minutes...I think those people need to go get their noses checked or something.
Not just that brand, any brand, if a company has designed a fragrance to be a certain way, then thats the way it is...
BRING BACK OUR GIRLS!
I think anyone seriously into fragrance or at least wearing it everyday is going to be overspraying eventually by default, or there tastes are getting bolder as time goes on.
I dont suffer from those problems, i dont wear everyday, its become strict routine now to ensure 3 sprays is the maximum for me, regardless of how subtle i think it may be.
I don't care about longevity. Why anyone would want to smell the same thing for more than a few hours is just beyond me anyway. Not an issue for me. This is a subjective experience in an aesthetic field, not a miles-per-gallon contest. It's like sorting and ranking Jackson Pollocks by square inches.
I think people are getting some wires crossed here. I don't think anyone is disagreeing here that some perfumes should be lighter in composition. There are many perfumes that pull this off flawlessly. They give you a light airy feeling, but have the lasting power to make you feel nice throughout the day.
Others though are a victim of greedy corporations that want to cut costs and take in every penny whilst delivering an inferior product.
And yes of course some will last longer on those with oilier skin. But for most, it is what it is.
I absolutely must get at least 6 hours out of a perfume where I can smell it on myself without needing to dig my nose into my skin. This doesn't have anything to do with doing a "40 spray horror show" where someone can smell me across town. But I think that's a more than adequate time for it to develop and work for you.
If all you're looking for is an hour or so because you "don't want to smell like the same thing for hours", scented lotion is probably more economical.
Last edited by aphexacid; 14th May 2014 at 01:17 AM.
Many times in the last year I have read critiques of fragrances as being short lived, only to find upon trying them myself that they have better length than the critiques would suggest. I get at least 4 hours out of just about everything I try, and in most instances, much longer. Projection is a different story, thankfully.
I have concluded that many such criticisms about longevity are in reality complaints about projection. And I don't need, or want, much in the way of projection.
^ when I talk about longevity I always mean the time in which it can be easily smelled by at least myself.
Annoyingly though some judge longevity by how long you can smell it in your skin, as in slamming your nose into your arm.
Kybid is right to point out how much olfactory fatigue plays a role in perception of longevity. For all of us, it's a worthwhile experiment to go easier on the sprayer for a few weeks, and see what effect that has on our experience of a fragrance throughout the day. It's much easier to overwhelm and fatigue the nose than we think.
I'm too lazy to reapply so no matter what the price is, if I cannot smell it after 8hrs then I'm keep complaining
There are plenty of inexpensive aromachemicals that can be thrown into a composition to extend the life of the thing and they are used by companies across the industry spectrum - 'cheap' mainstream and 'expensive niche'.
Frankly, using price as any sort of guide to what is actually in the bottle is a risky proposition - you need to look at a lot of factors* and then draw your own conclusions based on the juice in the bottle and sometimes (not always) on the brand profile.
*Some questions worth asking yourself, as they affect price.
Does the brand use 'standardised' bottle design or create special bottles for individual perfumes?
Does the brand advertise? Print? Posters? TV? Cinema?
Does the brand 'profile' the perfumer or just shop the work out to one of the majors and then slam 'a story' on it?
What sort of distribution does the brand have?
And last, but not least, what is actually in the bottle? It is a lot easier now to get information online from serious reviewers and industry sources, or at least make an informed deduction about what has gone into the perfume based on where a company sources materials.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
― Isaac Asimov
Where is the op? Nearly 2 weeks and 30 replies later, do you understand the relationship between cost and longevity better now?
Cost has nothing to do with longevity, nor a hell of a lot else. As mr reasonable said, there are plenty of cheap and plentiful longevity giving aromachemicals used in fragrances of all kinds, regardless of price.There are plenty of expensive niches that don't last, plenty of mainstream that do, and vice versa. There have been a hell of a lot of fragrances made over the last hundred years. Most people here haven't smelled 3% of them. They just think expensive is better. They're "...seduced by beautiful bottles and boxes, high price tags, exclusivity, lush official descriptions, and promises..." and the deep pockets behind a lot of the niche enterprises know it. :-)
Some cheapies have great longevity, some expensive ones have poor longevity: I know that.
I'm talking about the following scenario:
Member x - "I love the smell of D&G The one, but longevity sucks so I haven't bought it. I've just bought Mona di Orio Oud"
Why deprive yourself of a cheap frag you like because of poor longevity when you're not short of cash and can afford to get through a bottle quicker through re-applying?
Some people say they don't like or want to re-apply, if that's the case, stay away from eau de toilletes, and stick with EDPs or pure parfums; There's a reason it cotains the word toilette: It's where you go to freshen up. i.e. re-apply.
There's people that understand projection and longevity and people that do not. Go with what the majority of people are experiencing with the fragrance. I've been guilty of this myself because I test a fragrance and my nose might not be as sharp that day. Testing it again I get what others are experiencing. I find 2+ hours of decent projection and 6 hours of longevity is acceptable. Someone else might think a fragrance should last 12 hours so they base everything around that. Then you have the people that say it lasts 20 minutes and then it's gone. I also agree about the comment that people can become anosmic by spraying too much or in the wrong spots.
Last edited by silentrich; 14th May 2014 at 02:15 PM.
This might be tongue in cheek but I agree completely. I never spray more than 4 sprays and usually only spray twice with 85% of my collection. I am known for smelling good. No one runs away from me and I never have to reapply. I usually wear one fragrance in the morning and a different one in the evening. I don't want to smell the same for 48 hours. I don't need that type of longevity.
My top 5 changes like the Tennessee weather.
It's not about the cost of reapplying. It's about the convenience. Who wants to walk around with a decant or bottle all day so they can reapply later? Or who can even remember to bring one? Not me.
But anyway, I think longevity complaints are blown out of proportion. Give me 6 to 8 hours and I'm good to go. Even 5 is acceptable for lighter city's based fragrances. But there are many whose first comment is about longevity. "I love this one....it's got great longevity!"Or how many posts have you seen "Give me something with great longevity!" Really? How about something that smells good first.
About longevity though, I fall into the camp that wants the scent to last most, if not all day, regardless of how much it costs. I wear fragrances for me mostly so I just want to be able to catch whiffs of them throughout the day. I don't need the 5 mile scent bubble. That said, when I buy FBs, performance is a huge factor for me. If I like a frag but it doesn't perform well after extensive testing, then I search for a similar alternative that does.
I have also learned that absolutley, SOMETIMES less is more. (6 sprays-couldn't smell it a short while later, 2 sprays-lasted most of the day.)
I also agree that for a lot people re applying is not so convenient. (carrying atomizer, the initial strong burst, perfume development/drydown)