Code of Conduct
Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5 13 14 15
Results 421 to 450 of 450
o
  1. #421
    Basenotes Junkie
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Kuwait
    Posts
    560

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread part 3

    dear peter no need to describe it but if u can get it I'm sure u will be happy and if u didn't like it I'm ready here for u!
    Last edited by Mandeel AlMandeel; 11th July 2016 at 07:44 PM.

  2. #422
    New Member Joel Altman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Siem Reap, Cambodia
    Posts
    13

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread part 3

    Quote Originally Posted by peter4ptv View Post
    Well I don’t see why you find this not similar to other pure oud oils?
    From the notes you are detecting this perfectly can be pure oud:
    1 – “sweet cherry medicine smell” –Many Cambodian ouds have sweet cherry smell, and also all kinds of different regions ouds have the medicine smell.
    2 – “rich and potent smokey incense takes over” -- Any good quality oud oil will have a nice incense drydown note.
    Joel, is there any other notes that you are detecting that possible will give it a way as not pure oud?
    So far from the notes you have describe you get from the KZ85 I don’t see anything strange to make me think that is not pure oud. I personally have never tried the KZ85.
    From your nice description of the 2 Borneos maybe will be nice if you can give a full detailed description of the KZ85 similar to the descriptions of the Borneos.
    Thank you.
    Peter

    First please let me clarify that I am just expressing my own personal olfactory experience. I am not in either the pure Oud or mixed Oud camp on this issue. For me it is not what is important but instead just sharing my experience and learning. What strikes me is that the strong cherry Medicine from the get go, but the main thing is that this note feels rather linear and a tad bit artificial. I usually get waves of multi layered chords through the opening and heart before the dry down. Also I have not smelled this dominant note as the opening of any other Oud from the different species and distillations. I checked my oils and I get a nice cherry feel in the heart of Aku Akira, but it is subtle and transparent. For me the cherry medicine note seems quite opaque in KZ85. I think it boils down to personal taste. KZ85 retains this thick gooey cherry that rounds out in the heart and then dries down into a very strong incense burning. I will try again when I return home in a few days and report back.
    Last edited by Joel Altman; 12th July 2016 at 12:45 AM.

  3. #423

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Thanks

  4. #424
    It's all about the wood
    ListensClosely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    170

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Just been re-reading the last few posts on this thread and, over a year on, the question of the GCMS results for KZ 85 remain unanswered.
    The Basenotes forum closed just before I was able to publish the results and I subsequently promised several people that I would only release them once the forum returned. Much time has passed since this was an active topic of conversation and I do wonder whether this is still something of interest to the community.

    I am mindful that this oil caused a little controversy last year and so would only want to proceed if it still fulfills a genuine interest. I’m also keen that we maintain a civil, dispassionate and academic tone, in keeping with the spirit of this newly-reopened forum.

    So, by way of a digital show of hands, let me know if you’re interested and would like to discuss the results.

    LC

  5. #425

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    As it did cause so much controversy I think it would be best if you discuss with weisheng first and go through your findings. If everyone's happy then by all means publish them
    www.imperialOud.com the home of pure Oud in the UK

  6. #426

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Not interested, unless other vendor Ouds are also tested and discussed.

  7. #427
    It's all about the wood
    ListensClosely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    170

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Hey Faizal,

    Already done: I’ve kept Kyarazen in the loop since receiving the results and he knows that I have always intended to make them public once Basenotes returned.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Dear Floraopia,

    Now I wasn’t expecting that sort of response. FYI, I decided to have this oil tested as I had just bought a bottle second-hand for a handsome price right before concerns started to emerge. I could afford to test it and had a valid personal reason for doing so.

    I don’t want to assume why you would say you’re not interested unless other products are tested. Perhaps if you provide some elaboration then I can allay any concerns you might have.

    LC

  8. #428

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Sorry for not responding as you expected LC! I’m just wondering why the spot light on KZ that’s all. Many 2nd hand bottles go for a handsome price, but I haven’t seen any of them tested.

    Also, GCMS testing a 2nd hand bottle legitimately raises the question of whether the contents have been tampered with or inadvertently contaminated, subsequent to the original purchase.
    Last edited by floraopia; 30th October 2017 at 03:11 PM.

  9. #429
    It's all about the wood
    ListensClosely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    170

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Floraopia,

    These are legitimate and reasonable concerns.
    First, I must reiterate that I selected this particular oil for testing due to buying it and then quickly hearing concerns being raised about its purity: just imagine how annoyed I was to hear all that stuff literally a couple of days after paying for it! I only hope you can trust that I had no other agenda going on. I can’t speak for why others haven’t paid to have other products tested, save for the fact that it costs about the same as a bottle of Oud to have it done!! Personally, I would certainly consider testing other products in the future if I had a strong personal reason to do so (like I had with this KZ85).

    Certainly in principle there are increased risks when testing a 2nd hand product. However, I wouldn’t have spent my own money on this test unless I thought those risks to be low in this particular case. By my own assessment, the product I bought was undoubtedly genuine: It matches every description given by others. It also came in a container identical to those used by Kyarazen.
    Would someone have contaminated it for any reason? My judgment based on inspection and reasoned judgment is that, in this case, this is unlikely as I can’t think of a compelling motive for the seller to do such a thing. It certainly wasn’t sold to me for testing purposes so there’s no chance of it being deliberately tampered with for the purpose of throwing a test.

    Please do feel free to ask any further questions of me: I will answer them fully and honestly.

    LC

  10. #430

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Seeing as we JUST got this forum opened back up, do you think we could refrain from stirring the pot and posting messages that could be considered inflammatory and negative?? Please. I love this forum and this is the kind of crap that closed things down.

  11. #431

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Oshaunasy View Post
    Seeing as we JUST got this forum opened back up, do you think we could refrain from stirring the pot and posting messages that could be considered inflammatory and negative?? Please. I love this forum and this is the kind of crap that closed things down.
    Completely agree... hence my post. I honestly don’t think it helpful or constructive too resurrect controversial topics. I don’t know where this is going, but there are plenty of things people could then bring to the forum in the forum of evidence about this or that vendor or individual.

  12. #432
    It's all about the wood
    ListensClosely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    170

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Oshaunasy,

    Completely with you on this. Trust me, I would not want to see this forum close again, and you can count on me to conduct myself appropriately and encourage others to do the same. But surely we mustn't shy away from asking and answering difficult questions for fear that they will be subverted by those with personal agendas.

    Floraopia,
    This is, and alway has been, about one product from one vendor. Plenty of people had plenty of diverse opinions on it at the time but what made it so divisive was a lack of facts upon which to base sensible informative discussions. The Oud scene is plagued by a lack of facts and evidence; it's partly what breeds the sort of skulduggery we've seen in the past (and to this day). To deny these test results would be to give in to the dismal business-as-usual of tit-for-tat accusations and hearsay.
    I'd encourage you not to be tempted to second-guess the results either: I think everyone will learn something from them.
    ...and lastly, if anyone chooses to hijack this thread to make this about personalities then I feel they are no friend of our Oud community. I took views on KZ85 from a great number of sources and some of them turned out to be way off the mark. However I will not be calling out any of them, in public or in private. Instead, I hope we can regard this as a rare chance to look at some real evidence, challenge our own prejudices and assumptions, and perhaps understand oud better by the end.
    How about it? Can I count on your constructive support?

    LC

  13. #433
    Basenotes Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    41

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by jensz View Post
    @ListensClosely, I couldn't agree more about everything you said. To be honest, I'm pretty new to oud oils (~6 months) and haven't felt like I had standing to pipe up about the recent controversies. But certainly the very thinly-veiled personal aspersions without any backup are not productive. The repetition got so tiresome that I stopped visiting the forum and dreaded the "new post" notices. And considering the spiritual connection many of the oud vendors (and users) have to oud, it would be a little heartbreaking were one to take such remarks seriously. And then, by contrast, a vendor polls whether there's interest in a kind of very special private blend and he gets slammed for sales-pitching! I'm relieved the vendor was vindicated but it would be too bad if he and others would now feel discouraged from engaging.

    Let's face it: the oud forum is very different from all the other forums here because its membership is small, the number of products is simply tiny compared to all fragrances, oud is more than "product", and to everyone's benefit some vendors themselves contribute! Think about that: the people commissioning oud expeditions, sometimes *personally* going on those expeditions in all sorts of adverse conditions, investigating distillers, monitoring distillations (a 24-7 job), and/or traveling all over the place, etc., resulting in our access to these life-altering pieces of art, actually care enough about their customers to respond here, and at length. This is amazing. Maybe my world is limited, but I haven't experienced any other circumstance in which the vendors/artisans themselves give as much time, trust, and respect to their customers as those here on the Oud Forum. The amount and kind of information the vendors/artisans share (exact tree type, location, age, distillation method and materials, amount of aging, etc., etc.) are details that would be vigorously protected as trade secrets in other realms! I have been totally shocked by the openness! To me, this suggests not only good faith but downright love. Maybe vendors share this info because the market demands it, but bottom line is they share it and at least with our artisan vendors, there is little to complain about with regard to transparency.

    Anyway, I thank you people with long-standing who are trying to refocus the forum. To my surprise, I've experienced the oud forum as a genuine community (as a cynic, I'd be the last to use the word "community" haphazardly), and have been really moved a few times at the kindness and generosity of members. I hope we continue to cultivate that.
    Truer words haven't been spoken. Worthy of re posting one a week.

  14. #434

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by ListensClosely View Post
    Oshaunasy,

    Completely with you on this. Trust me, I would not want to see this forum close again, and you can count on me to conduct myself appropriately and encourage others to do the same. But surely we mustn't shy away from asking and answering difficult questions for fear that they will be subverted by those with personal agendas.

    Floraopia,
    This is, and alway has been, about one product from one vendor. Plenty of people had plenty of diverse opinions on it at the time but what made it so divisive was a lack of facts upon which to base sensible informative discussions. The Oud scene is plagued by a lack of facts and evidence; it's partly what breeds the sort of skulduggery we've seen in the past (and to this day). To deny these test results would be to give in to the dismal business-as-usual of tit-for-tat accusations and hearsay.
    I'd encourage you not to be tempted to second-guess the results either: I think everyone will learn something from them.
    ...and lastly, if anyone chooses to hijack this thread to make this about personalities then I feel they are no friend of our Oud community. I took views on KZ85 from a great number of sources and some of them turned out to be way off the mark. However I will not be calling out any of them, in public or in private. Instead, I hope we can regard this as a rare chance to look at some real evidence, challenge our own prejudices and assumptions, and perhaps understand oud better by the end.
    How about it? Can I count on your constructive support?

    LC
    I certainly have no agenda, but I do know KZ to be a decent and honourable individual.

    You asked for a show of digital hands and I have responded accordingly. As this is solely a one vendor GCMS result, if that vendor (KZ) is ok with it, then that would definitely be fine by me too. I think that a GCMS thread should be opened up on here with results for all such tests in the future. I understand KZ also has results for a whole host of oils that he hasn’t released.

    This GCMS result you have. Has it been analysed, or is it just a graphical output with no analysis of the peaks?
    Last edited by floraopia; 31st October 2017 at 12:27 PM.

  15. #435
    Dependent peter4ptv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    L. A. California
    Posts
    1,344

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by ListensClosely View Post
    Just been re-reading the last few posts on this thread and, over a year on, the question of the GCMS results for KZ 85 remain unanswered.
    The Basenotes forum closed just before I was able to publish the results and I subsequently promised several people that I would only release them once the forum returned. Much time has passed since this was an active topic of conversation and I do wonder whether this is still something of interest to the community.

    I am mindful that this oil caused a little controversy last year and so would only want to proceed if it still fulfills a genuine interest. I’m also keen that we maintain a civil, dispassionate and academic tone, in keeping with the spirit of this newly-reopened forum.

    So, by way of a digital show of hands, let me know if you’re interested and would like to discuss the results.

    LC
    1976 - Yatagan Caron
    1977 - Snuff by Schiaparelli
    1981 - Kouros YSL
    1988 - Fahrenheit Dior
    1980 - Patou Pour Homme
    1987 - Lapidus Pour Homme
    1981 - Quorum Antonio Puig
    1993 - Insense by Givenchy
    2014 - Dior Homme Parfum
    1987 - Ho Hang Club Balenciaga

  16. #436
    It's all about the wood
    ListensClosely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    170

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    @Rasoul Salehi
    Yeah, jensz knocked it out of the park that day; a great post

    @floraopia
    Given the circumstances regarding my engagement with KZ, this isn't an issue in this particular case.
    However I would perhaps be concerned if we felt obliged to seek the blessing of a vendor before discussing GCMS results. Certainly I think some prior notice would always be appropriate though, as a matter of courtesy.
    Might I suggest it would be otherwise unreasonable to expect a person to commission a range of GCMS tests (presumably covering a range of vendors) simply to inform an evidence-based discussion of a particular product. It must surely be a consumer's right to freely investigate a product they have bought or wish to buy? (and discuss the results openly, sticking to the facts and not libelling the vendor/producer of course)
    I think at this point, given the implications I have read into your concerns, I feel compelled to lay a few things out on the table; things that are there whether or not we speak about them:
    I appreciate and openly acknowledge that the subject of KZ85 and this GCMS test became a proxy for the broader schism in our community. Parties on both sides were using discussion of KZ85 ,and the impending GCMS, as a vehicle for their own narrative that spread far wider and deeper than just an oil and a vendor. I always assumed that I must be regarded as a person taking one side, and also assumed that some would regard my actions as part of some shady tactics. Indeed, the forum was shut down the very day I announced that I had sent off the product for testing. I admit that, at the time, I felt concerned that the timing of the shut-down was perhaps more than a coincidence. With this in mind, I feel compelled to state categorically that I bought the product in good faith, with no knowledge of the rumours that had begun to spread about it. I also made the decision to get it tested entirely off my own back. Nobody whatsoever influenced my decisions and it is with this clear conscience that I want to close the book on this topic and, (perhaps it is hoping too much), if we do this in the right way maybe we can heal some of the divisions that exist.
    Time has passed now and, although the the conflicts continue, they have at least become established away from Basenotes. My intention is certainly not to bring them back here. What I hope is that the move has effectively depoliticised Basenotes to the point where we can discuss something controversial, all come away having learnt something and be a better community for it.

    I agree with your suggestion that we create a new thread to hold this and other discussions regarding GCMS and will set one up if one doesn't already exist.

    Finally, in preparing to answer to your question, and for the benefit of those who know little of GCMS testing, there are levels of analysis that apply to GCMS:
    - First there is the scientific test itself that produces raw data relating to the chemical signatures of multiple fractions of the heated sample, and their relative concentrations: On its own, this reveals reveals very little.
    - Second comes the analysis against a database of the chemical signatures of many known compounds: This produces a list of known compounds, along with their relative concentrations in the sample. The quality of this stage of analysis depends crucially on the quality, relevance and extensiveness of the analyst's database.
    - Finally comes the (usually) human interpretation of the database matches to draw broader conclusions about the nature of the sample.

    In this case, the results have been matched to a database that covers a broad range of aromatic and essential oil compounds, along with common contaminants.
    The analyst has also offered some narrative conclusions based on his own experience of essential oils.

  17. #437
    ★★★★★
    PEARL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Shomolu
    Posts
    638

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by ListensClosely View Post
    Personally, I would certainly consider testing other products in the future if I had a strong personal reason to do so (like I had with this KZ85).

    LC
    @ListensClosely you had a strong personal reason to test KZ85, you had no reason to doubt the seller of the oil and you undoubtedly had no reason to adulterate the oil yourself as you wanted a true result for yourself. You paid your cash, got the result and now you have your answer. Any man that has any reason to GCMS an oil can do so. Your case was one of genuine concern and as you pointed out, much can be learned from the result of GCMS that may be educative to members and readers. So in that I say yes to GCMS.

    However, as much as can be learned from GCMS there is a major shortcoming of GCMS. GCMS does not know which oil it is testing and therein lies the ease of "hanging papers". Case in point, Oil #1 can be submitted for testing and the resulting papers can easily be hung on Oil #2 and nobody excepting the submitter would be the wiser. What would happen when the consumer's result reads adulterated and the vendor's result reads pure? Would the consumer and vendor both accuse each other of "hanging papers"? Yes. What would be the final result? Mayhem, chaos and deterioration into nothingness except maybe thread closure. So in that I say no to posting the result of the GCMS for KZ85, not that I think papers were hung but rather it sets a precedence for publicly posting GCMS reports. And no to publicly posting any result of GCMS for any oil, too much room for endless confusion.

  18. #438
    LostboyR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Clearwater, FL
    Posts
    743

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    I look forward to the results and discussion of your test results. I have no agenda or prejudice in regards to this subject other than the acquisition of knowledge. the Oud community can only benefit from the analysis and possible clarity that this opportunity offers. I realize that tests like this will never remove all concerns and pre conceived ideas but any and all information should be welcomed.
    Currently wearing: Genre by Edward Bess

  19. #439

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Can you post the results? I have zero doubts it's not a pure oud oil.

  20. #440

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    I am for revealing the test results.
    If there are essential oils in KZ85, I wanna know what they are, that way we can learn from it and concoct our own Oud substitutes. Just Imagine how much money we can save by swiping some good Oud substitute instead of the real thing.
    But can a GCMS test be valid when it comes to Oud. Doesn't Oud mimic the aroma of so many natural fruits, flowers, plants, seeds, oils, etc. A test of a Walla Patta oud might show signatures of Banana aroma molecules, but can we conclude that it was introduced into the oil and did not occur naturally?
    Someone please tell me if I'm way off base here ��

  21. #441

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Oudamberlove View Post
    I am for revealing the test results.
    If there are essential oils in KZ85, I wanna know what they are, that way we can learn from it and concoct our own Oud substitutes. Just Imagine how much money we can save by swiping some good Oud substitute instead of the real thing.
    But can a GCMS test be valid when it comes to Oud. Doesn't Oud mimic the aroma of so many natural fruits, flowers, plants, seeds, oils, etc. A test of a Walla Patta oud might show signatures of Banana aroma molecules, but can we conclude that it was introduced into the oil and did not occur naturally?
    Someone please tell me if I'm way off base here ��

    That is the issue - can the judgement of the analyst be relied upon? Anyway, LC is committed to releasing the results so a show of hands request was neither here nor there. Let's see what the results say and maybe we can all learn and benefit from this. This will create a precedence however.

    For the record, the Ouddict forum has a GCMS thread already where test results for Ouds were planned to be posted, but given the controversy and strife surrounding the Oud community, we have backed off for now. Maybe LC is right and we should publish results without fear.

  22. #442

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Another point worth considering is that ......if KZ85 was an extract, then the test results should be compared to other agarwood oils that are extracts also. There may be compunds formed in reaction to the solvent that may be different to compounds formed in water or steam.

    One thing may be certain though, a test can show if there are known toxic compounds.

  23. #443
    It's all about the wood
    ListensClosely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    170

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    @Pearl
    Whether or not I publish these results, someone could pull the sort of stunt you described.
    The question that arises though is, why hasn't it happened already? There's been plenty of animosity and paranoia going around and feelings have been running very high. Perhaps someone could be motivated to do something so dastardly.
    However, when I play the war-game out to its conclusion, one can foresee a risk for the perpetrator that the truth would out in the end. The likelihood is moderate but the impact would be catastrophic, for the perpetrator. Certainly there would be some short-term turmoil, what with there being two contradictory test results for purportedly the same oil. However, a test by a 3rd party would be likely to show evidence of which side was fabricating. Yes, of course the perpetrator could collude with others to corroborate the false result but maintaining the lie would become progressively harder over time.
    I contend that it is unlikely that someone will push the button on publishing a falsified test result; the eventual outcome is highly uncertain and it is not in their control to maintain the lie.

    @floraopia
    I've heard that there are unpublished test results lurking about. It is a good question to ask why they haven't yet been published. I won't mention here what I presume to know about the subject and gist of those results because it amounts to hearsay and that would be beneath this forum (and possible untrue in any case!). I will say this though: I think it is essential to have a pure and honourable motive when commissioning and publishing these sort of tests. I also think a vendor/producer should have no business publishing tests of any products other than their own. I appreciate this is completely unenforceable; a test can be passed to a 3rd party to publish if required. It remains a point of principle for me though, and I'm happy to say here that I would take a dim view of any seller who published, or facilitated the publication of, a competitor's products. Testing, I believe, should be consumer led (unless a vendor wants to publish data on their own products) as something that can help empower us to make informed choices about the products we buy and use.
    If further tests emerge after this, I'll be looking for crystal clear transparency as to the source of and motives for the test. I'd want to know the who, when and why (something I hope I've provided to most people's satisfaction in this case), then I'd make my own judgment as to whether to they get my attention.
    There's a great deal I might want to say about the appropriateness of publishing GCMS tests on ouddict.com but I'm not going to stray on to that on Basenotes save to say that, based partly on my own observations of recent discussions there, and elsewhere, I think I'd automatically start from a position of scepticism, regardless of the truth. Of course you're free to post GCMS on ouddict.com but I hope you can see that the atmosphere that it has cultivated up until now makes it an unhelpful place to host controversial GCMS discussions.


    @oudamberlove
    You said 'But can a GCMS test be valid when it comes to Oud. Doesn't Oud mimic the aroma of so many natural fruits, flowers, plants, seeds, oils, etc'
    Oud doesn't mimic other things per-se: It is that our olfactory sense finds it reminiscent of things we've smelt in the past. This might happen because it contains an identical chemical but this doesn't have to be the case. The nose, and the part of the brain that process its signal, are not perfect detectors of unique molecules. When smelling, the nose creates an impression of the mix of chemicals that pass through. It produces something akin to a resonance and this is what is analysed by the brain, comparing the signal to previous data. Where a chemical mix is rich and complex, or otherwise unfamiliar, the brain searches frantically for previous experiences that most closely match the new or complex experience. It's like staring at white noise on a TV and seeing familiar shapes appear. Bringing it back to smell, this can explain why people often say they find the aromas of many diverse fruits, herbs and other things in a fine wine. It is made only from grapes which can and do contain some molecules found in other things but this does not explain the diversity of smells that can be perceived in a fine wine, nor how different people say they smell different things in the same wine. Fermentation and maturation multiply the complexity of the chemical mix in a fine wine, causing it to perplex and entertain the brain, making it reach for all sorts of comparisons. Oud is at least as complex as the finest wines and so it has the same effect.
    To (finally!) get to the point I'm making in response to your first post, I don't foresee problems with finding identical natural aroma chemicals on GCMS results and being concerned that they occurred naturally. If they're listed, and in significant quantities, I'd likely assume they've been added. Conversely, If I tested a known-natural oud that was thought to be reminiscent of rose, I wouldn't necessarily expect to find the specific chemical that gives actual roses their characteristic smell. It would just as likely be due to another chemical producing a similar effect in the nose, or a combination of different chemicals doing the same. (Much like how many artificial sweeteners are chemically unrelated to natural sugars, yet taste convincingly sweet.)
    Your second post leads to a couple of points that are very relevant to this test; we should return to it once the results are published.


    Finally, as to the whereabouts of these results, I apologies for keeping everyone waiting. It is not my intention to string this out.
    I am in the middle of preparing a supporting statement to accompany the results document. The reason for this should become clear once the results are published but, essentially, there are several things that are not clear-cut about them and some context upfront regarding the discussions I had with the tester and with Kyarazen will be helpful to shortcut any initial confusion or misinterpretation. I also need to digitally redact my name from the test document (it will be clear where I have done this): My name is (unfortunately) a unique identifier so it's something I avoid making public on the internet in general.
    When it's all ready, I'll put it straight in to a new thread and we can continue there.

  24. #444

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by ListensClosely View Post

    @floraopia
    I've heard that there are unpublished test results lurking about. It is a good question to ask why they haven't yet been published. I won't mention here what I presume to know about the subject and gist of those results because it amounts to hearsay and that would be beneath this forum (and possible untrue in any case!). I will say this though: I think it is essential to have a pure and honourable motive when commissioning and publishing these sort of tests. I also think a vendor/producer should have no business publishing tests of any products other than their own. I appreciate this is completely unenforceable; a test can be passed to a 3rd party to publish if required. It remains a point of principle for me though, and I'm happy to say here that I would take a dim view of any seller who published, or facilitated the publication of, a competitor's products. Testing, I believe, should be consumer led (unless a vendor wants to publish data on their own products) as something that can help empower us to make informed choices about the products we buy and use.
    If further tests emerge after this, I'll be looking for crystal clear transparency as to the source of and motives for the test. I'd want to know the who, when and why (something I hope I've provided to most people's satisfaction in this case), then I'd make my own judgment as to whether to they get my attention.
    There's a great deal I might want to say about the appropriateness of publishing GCMS tests on ouddict.com but I'm not going to stray on to that on Basenotes save to say that, based partly on my own observations of recent discussions there, and elsewhere, I think I'd automatically start from a position of scepticism, regardless of the truth. Of course you're free to post GCMS on ouddict.com but I hope you can see that the atmosphere that it has cultivated up until now makes it an unhelpful place to host controversial GCMS discussions.

    Thanks for your detailed response. Regarding the GCMS tests I was referring to, they are of my own Oriscent oils that I purchased as a customer back in 2007-2012. I hope that is crystal clear enough - having said that, I am very confident that the oils are pure. A lot of cash was spent and given the recent issues and revelations on Ouddict (caused by the same party who was banned from this forum) I am checking every aspect of my relationship and product received with that vendor with a fine toothed comb metaphorically speaking.

    Look forward to your write up on KZ1985!

  25. #445

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    @ListensClosely

    You're correct. I recall sniffing Oud Yusuf right after sniffing Arabian Oud Kalemat Wood Oil, and I got a grape candy note. I realize that there is no grape note in Oud Yusuf, therefore, a GCMS test should reveal any added known essential oil.

  26. #446
    It's all about the wood
    ListensClosely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    170

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    OK, the new thread is up. Download the test results there and let me know what you think.

    ...and we can let this thread go back to doing what it does best!

  27. #447

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by ListensClosely View Post
    OK, the new thread is up. Download the test results there and let me know what you think.

    ...and we can let this thread go back to doing what it does best!

  28. #448

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    @flo Are the Oriscent oils clean as per gcms ? Would love to have your inputs even if you want to keep private. Thank you.
    Currently wearing: Musk Aoud by Roja Dove

  29. #449

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    Quote Originally Posted by exoticscents View Post
    @flo Are the Oriscent oils clean as per gcms ? Would love to have your inputs even if you want to keep private. Thank you.
    Hi... I do not have any results to hand, but I am personally certain they are pure due to my past experiences with Ensar. I have heard that Oud Sultani was tested and a member on Ouddict forum has the results. I also think that there is another individual who has had some of the recent Ensar Ouds tested, but I will let him reveal any results should he wish to publicise them.

    I honestly doubt that any vendor who sells Artisanal Oud has suspect Oud in their inventory and if they do, it might be due to cross-contamination and perhaps in a rare case they may simply be unaware - very unlikely, but within the realms of possibility.

  30. #450

    Default Re: Agarwood oil thread, part 2

    I know Im two years late in this reply. Your Subitism in a box is really cool. A cross between James Bond and Wild Wild West (or wild Wild West meets east.)




Similar Threads

  1. Agarwood (oud) oil!
    By Maxwell in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 1258
    Last Post: 7th December 2016, 04:02 PM
  2. Agarwood oil thread. (Part 1)
    By MrP in forum Oudh Ud Aoud <3 erz
    Replies: 11550
    Last Post: 12th March 2016, 10:25 AM
  3. Agarwood thread
    By faheem in forum Oudh Ud Aoud <3 erz
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 30th May 2015, 04:43 PM
  4. Replies: 115
    Last Post: 29th May 2011, 05:22 AM
  5. How to upload photos on profile and as part of thread ?
    By david in forum Community Centre Archive
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 9th September 2007, 07:21 PM

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