Perfume Directory

Frank No. 2 (2005)
by Frank Los Angeles

Advertisement

Frank No. 2 information

Year of Launch2005
GenderMasculine
AvailabilityIn Production
Average Rating
(based on 99 votes)

People and companies

HouseFrank Los Angeles

About Frank No. 2

Frank No. 2 is a masculine fragrance by Frank Los Angeles. The scent was launched in 2005

Reviews of Frank No. 2

Chino Show all reviews
United States
This review is for the vintage EDT formula that I've owned since the late 2000's: Warm, spicy and I get the cognac, plum and musk notes which I find well blended. A linear, slightly-gourmand, oriental frag that it's sillage I feel is too potent so I usually spray 2x at most. Good lasting power, I usually get 8 hours of wear time. Prefer to wear this during cold weather. Thumbs up.
12th May, 2020
Imagine a warm, spicy California wind blowing down through the piñon pine trees that then blows past one of Los Angeles' hottest night spots. That gets you close to what Frank No. 2 offers, a warm, sweet, boozy fragrance.

There's lavender and green notes here, but Frank No. 2 Los Angeles is pretty far from the original intent of the fougere. With its boozy plum, it's close kin to Michael for Men, and with its sweet pine, it's reminiscent of Perfumes of the Desert's Pinon. It's not better than either, but can stand proudly alongside both.
21st March, 2020
My skin devours the green and pumps out the sweet honeyed rum-tobacco notes after about 35 seconds. It's sweet, sweet, sweet on me but light. Not heavy like a Tom Ford Tobacco Vanilla clone. Very pleasant. At first I wanted to write that it was lightweight but it's not. It has some of the buttered sweetness of Lubin's Korrigan without the lower register heavy vetiver. I've seen the Fougere comparison in the bergamot// lavender opening but it's like a child's butterscotch dream of his father's Fougere. If you were five years old and sitting on the highchair at the barbershop and they handed you a Werther's instead of lathering your face up, this might be your impression of a barbershop scent. Fun!
29th May, 2019
There is something extremely interesting in this that I can’t put my finger on, and I’ve never smelled that particular note before. To me, it is in the same realm as Endymion, as there are a lot of similarities to me, but probably more bright and fresh. It lasts a good long while, but only moderate projection. I am glad to own a FB though!
15th February, 2019
The second entry by Frank Los Angeles is definitely more discussed than the first. No. 2 is a fascinating combination of bergamot, lavender, cognac, coffee, plum, maple, teak, and musk.

The opening certainly focuses on the bergamot and lavender, and the rest of the experience is dominated by the coffee, cognac, and plum, rounded out with teak and musk to give it a smooth finish.

Lanier Smith points out that it's seemingly an oriental and an aromatic, and I would further complicate it by offering that that lavender makes it a bit of a fougere---certainly not as much as Frank No. 1, but in the vicinity nonetheless.

Performance is decent but is arguably slightly disappointing for its pricing, the same as No. 1, at $130 for 100ml (EDP), so you'd really need like it a lot in order to buy it. While I don['t personally know of any similar fragrances (the coffee/lavender vibe is the prominent balance of the discontinued Armani Attitude, for one), several reviewers describe this as being close to Michael Kors' Michael for Men, though I'm not tried it in recent memory.

Still, this could be a good buy, signature scent, and one trick pony for some men. I'll have to give it further thought as far as buying a bottle.

8 out of 10
25th October, 2016
Frank of Los Angeles is an obscure niche house in my part of America, and so this is their first fragrance I have sampled, having read about it on Luckyscent. While the fragrance has many positive reviewers on the retail site, my first impressions are this is pretty synthetic smelling, and that I've smelled this before somewhere back in time.

#2 has a distinct 80's fougere vibe to it, including the large dose of lavender paired with a light bergamot, followed by a very masculine resinous accord. I get hints of fir, balsam and perhaps a soft cedar, but they don't seem authentic, instead give off a chemical resin. Underneath it all there's something sweet and powdery, but again there is a synthetic feel or effect more than any actual olfactory note. A modern twist of light floral is added but it's difficult to distinguish over the plastic conifer notes. Better than average sillage and average longevity have me again wondering what I'm smelling?

Finally it hits me, Frank #2 is actually a toned down, chemical version of Polo Green by Ralph Lauren. It has all the classic Polo elements, only #2 has smoothed out the spicy bite, softened the projection and brightened the synthetic nature with a bit of floral in the middle.

All in all, it's O.K., but nothing close to the Lucky Scent reviews. Are they selective as a website to sell more product? Older BN reviews say this scent is a steal at $65, then $100, and now Lucky Scent lists it at $120. I don't think this bottle worthy at all and won't fall in for it, but it's not the worst fragrance I've sampled either. Neutral.
03rd February, 2016 (last edited: 08th February, 2016)

Add your review of Frank No. 2

You need to be logged in to add a review

Shop for Frank No. 2 products online

Some of the links we use are affiliate links, meaning if you click the links and make a purchase, we may receive a commission, which helps us keep the site running

Search on eBay


Member images of Frank No. 2

You need to log in or register to upload images

Private Notes

You need to be logged in (or register here) to use Private Notes.

Advertisement

Advertisement