Dior Cuir Cannage (La Collection Privée)

Posted on June 11, 2014 by Kafkaesque

Cuir Cannage is Dior‘s latest release, mixing florals and leather in a mix that is both masculine and feminine. The fragrance not only reflects a very Serge Lutens approach to its deconstruction of orange blossoms, but is actually extremely similar to Lutens’ Cuir Mauresque.

Source: gheir.com

Cuir Cannage debuted this month as part of Dior’s prestige line of fragrances called La Collection Privée. (It is sometimes called La Collection Couturier on places like Fragrantica and Surrender to Chance, but I will go with the name used by Dior itself on its website.) The eau de parfum was created by François Demarchy, the artistic director and nose for Parfums Dior, and its name refers to the woven technique used on Dior’s “cannage” leather bags. Dior describes the scent as follows:

OPEN A BAG, PLUNGE INTO THE DEPTHS OF A
LIVED-IN LEATHER AND UNEARTH ITS SECRETS Continue reading →

Vintage Bal à Versailles: The Animalic Queen

Posted on June 3, 2014 by Kafkaesque

Brantôme. La vie des dames galantes. Source: etudes-francaises.net

Bal à Versailles… the stories and images for this benchmark animalic floriental are well-known: leather-clad chevaliers peeing in corners of Versailles; lusty courtesans whose heated, quivering bosoms trickle with musky sweat; over-ripe florals competing with the smell of unwashed knickers; and, most of all, the smell of sex in the air. Leather, civet, dark resins all swirling together with indolic orange blossoms, jasmine, rose, sweetened benzoin, Mysore sandalwood, and a plethora of other notes to recreate the smell of Versailles, a rank place where 17th century aristocrats tried to hide their unwashed flesh and carnal pursuits under a heady layer of scented, powdered florals.

That is the legend and those are the stories, but not for me. Vintage Bal à Versailles has never been the rank monster of so many adoring and horrified tales. The very polarizing — indeed, infamous — fragrance has always been about something else for me. I first smelt it when I was 6 years old, and thought it merely a lovely, heady floral with a womanly vibe and incredible glamour. The 1970s were a time of Yves Saint Laurent, Bianca Jagger, half-dressed women with clothes cut down to their navel or up to their thigh, Studio 54, or, in my neck of the woods, sleek women showing off tanned, sun-kissed Mediterranean skin in couture and diamonds at the equally wild Whiskey à Gogo and Jimmy’z nightclubs. Bal à Versailles seemed a perfect representation for the time, and certainly no different than the Opium, Fracas, or Joy on my glamourous mother’s mis à toilette table. They all epitomized sensuality and sophistication to my young mind.

Jerry Hall, 1970s. Source: birkinbagbeauty.blogspot.com

We’re shaped by our childhood influences and mental associations, but I still don’t think vintage Bal à Versailles is the dangerous, rank, horrifying monster of all the tales. Honestly, it’s almost tame as compared to some of today’s animalic niche fragrances. Almost. It may be milder than Masque‘s intense Montecristo, but vintage Bal à Versailles is still not a fragrance that I’d recommend to someone just starting on their fragrance journey or to a perfumista used to modern, commercial perfumery. I wouldn’t even recommend it to more experienced perfume lovers unless they had a taste for strongly animalic, urinous, leathery, balsamic, resinous, indolic florientals with a touch of powder.

Photo: Pinterest. Original source unknown.

It’s a very narrow category but, for those who qualify, vintage Bal à Versailles is a must-try masterpiece that I cannot recommend enough. It is sensual, lusty but soft, sophisticated, edgy, opulent, and often verging on the feral. It is most certainly something that a man can wear. Supposedly, Michael Jackson did so for more than 30 years, stockpiling it in massive quantities. He is admittedly not a shining example of a very masculine man, but, as you will see from Basenotes and elsewhere, many men wear vintage Bal à Versailles without hesitation. One woman even said it was really a man’s fragrance, perhaps because Bal à Versailles has a leathery bent, along with a definite urinous edge from the civet that isn’t always easy. All of this, however, pertains to the vintage version, as the modern one is a ghastly, powdery, synthetic creation that has been compared to “grandmas in mothballs” and worse.

Eau de Cologne. Photo: my own.

Bal à Versailles was created by Jean Desprez and released by his company with the same name in 1962. There are three vintage concentrations, but I am going to focus primarily on the lovely, very affordable, easy to obtain Eau de Cologne with a brief discussion about the stunning, more expensive Parfum. (There is also a vintage Parfum de Toilette formulation, akin to an eau de parfum, but I haven’t tried that in years, and don’t have a sample to update my memory.) I will be basing this review on my own bottle of Bal à Versailles cologne which I believe is from the 1960s, and a sample of the vintage parfum.

Vintage Bal à Versailles Eau de Cologne, made in France. Photo: my own.

According to Fragrantica, Bal à Versailles’ very lengthy list of notes includes:

Top notes: rosemary, orange blossom, mandarin orange, cassia, jasmine, rose, neroli, bergamot, bulgarian rose and lemon;

Middle notes: sandalwood, patchouli, lilac, orris root, vetiver, ylang-ylang, lily-of-the-valley and leather;

Base notes: tolu balsam, amber, musk, benzoin, civet, vanilla, cedar and resins.

Source: Facebook

Bal à Versailles opens with the feral YEEOOOWL of a wild jungle cat in heat. There is no way around that simple fact, especially when you smell the fragrance up close. The word “urinous” is going to be used a hundred times in this review because that very long list of notes up top is dominated by one element above all others: civet.

If you ever want to laugh to the point of hysterical pain, I suggest you read Chandler Burr‘s account of an afternoon spent with the perfumer Jean Guichard in Givaudan smelling, among other things, civet. The incredibly amusing New York Times article entitled Meow Mix talks about what happens when civet was given on blotters to the group:

The owner of the perfume house immediately shouted, “Whoa!” The industry consultant yelled, “Ohmygod!” as if a grenade had exploded nearby. The Abercrombie woman jumped up and crouched at the door like a cornered animal. I think I actually ducked.

Civet. Source: focusingonwildlife.com

“This is civet!” Guichard announced. Civet is a fundamental French perfume material, a historic girder of the industry and the quintessential scent of France. It happens to come, Guichard said pleasantly, “from the anal gland of the civet cat.” [snip the truly hysterical account of the perfumer’s father, civet, “butt cream,” and kissing.] […] [¶]

Since civet is hugely powerful and long-lasting (cats use the odor to mark their territory), and since these are qualities valued by perfumers, it’s not surprising that civet is one of the fundamentals of French perfume. […][¶]

Talk to any perfumer, even American ones, and they’ll say that civet, used in tiny quantities, breathes astonishing life into perfumes, giving them weight and depth. Civet is like adding whole cream to soups or sauces: what could make you gag taken straight up and raw becomes, when underpinning the greater mix, golden and sensual.

The French can tolerate civetlike scents by the gallon. Kouros, an Yves Saint Laurent fragrance for men that’s perpetually on the best-seller list in France, is almost pure animal. It hits you like Wladimir Klitschko’s right hook and smells like his boxing shorts after 10 rounds. That is the polite way to put it. [Emphasis added by me.]

Photo: My own.

Vintage Bal à Versailles does not smell like a boxer’s dirty shorts after 10 rounds, but it does have a potent whiff of urine mixed in with honeyed orange blossoms, skanky raw leather that feels almost as if a lot of castoreum were used, and plush, warm, golden warmth. There is a strong, thick river of sticky, treacly, blackened balsams running through the base, and I would bet that one of the unnamed “resins” on the list is smoky styrax.

The intense, feral bouquet is infused with a plethora of other notes as well. Most noticeable is the bergamot that feels juicy, as if sun-sweetened and hanging thick from the vine. It is followed by crisp lemon, sweet jasmine, dewy lily of the valley, and unctuous, buttery, almost banana-like ylang-ylang. Lurking in much more quiet fashion in the background is the greenness of woody vetiver and fresh, green cedar. And, if you focus hard, you can even detect hints of rosemary flitting about, alongside a faint whisper of herbs. It’s not rosemary, per se, but more like a herbal bouquet with something almost like lavender.

Leather Hides. Source: Fragrantica

Within minutes, the notes rearrange themselves and Bal à Versailles shows other facets. The jasmine surges forward in strength, followed by even more leather and musk. On their heels is bright neroli, and dried, candied oranges. There is a growing touch of roses which smell simultaneously pale and pink, but also like the dried, stale kind that you’d find pressed in a book. In the base, old-style patchouli stirs next to the resins. Its brown, spicy, and slightly smoky aroma is perfectly complemented by the tolu balsam, burnt resins, amber, and a sliver of vanilla.

Dior Couture. Photo: Patrick Demarchelier for “Dior Couture,” a book by Ingrid Sischy, Patrick Demarchelier.

From afar, Bal à Versailles smells like urinous, indolic, over-ripe, honeyed orange blossoms and sweet jasmine, infused with raw leather, juicy citrus fruits, dried roses, a wisp of smoke, and a hint of powdered vanilla sweetness, all cocooned in a musky, resinous, golden, ambered glow. It’s a skank fest that goes beyond the whiff of slightly ripe undies to something much darker. I don’t think of Marie-Antoinette at Versailles, despite the strong vibe of chevaliers dressed in leather that was pee’d upon or women in opulent ball gowns. I think of heated flesh, leather, and sex in a mix that is very modern.

Photo: Photographer: Hans Feurer. Model: Candice Swanepoel. Vogue Australia June 2013. Source: Starstyle.com

This is not grandma’s powdered flowers, not unless grandma happened to be a skanky courtesan in a ball gown with strong dominatrix tendencies. To me, Bal à Versailles feels simultaneously like something classic from the golden age of perfumery but, also, like something that could take its place amongst the niche fragrances of today with their attempts to push the boundaries and to evoke the animal within.

Few of those modern scents can possibly match the complexity of vintage Bal à Versailles. If you took parts of vintage Shalimar, threw in a good dose of Kouros‘ urinous elements, you still wouldn’t have it. One reason why is that there is far more going on with vintage Bal à Versailles than just pee. In fact, I think it is actually less urinous than either vintage Kouros (which was driven more by costus root) or Masque’s new Montecristo. While there is an animalic musk element in Bal à Versailles, I think it smells more like a civet-castoreum mix than the powerful hyrax in Montecristo, the hardcore, intense costus root note in Amouage‘s Opus VII, or the more purely musk-fur-hair combination of Parfum d’Empire‘s Musc Tonkin.

This is probably a good time to provide some contextual definitions. In my mind and to my nose, there is a definite difference between, “animalic,” “horsey,” “urinous,” “barnyard,” and “fecal” — with the progression moving from left to right in terms of intensity, rawness, and brutality. Some people use the terms interchangeably or as crude shorthand for “ass,” but that is misleading, in my opinion, and ignores the definite differences in aroma between the various elements.

In the case of vintage Bal à Versailles cologne, several of those tonalities appear on my skin, though to very different degrees. The one exception is “fecal;” that is not an issue at all. In first place is “urinous,” followed by the much milder “animalic.” The leather occasionally has the faintest touch of something “horsey,” along with the rawness of uncured hides, but both those things stem primarily from the other two elements. Once, for an incredibly brief 5 minutes, there was a suggestion of something vaguely approaching a “barnyard” tonality but it was fleeting and in the background. I have never once smelled a fecal note from Bal à Versailles. There has also never been the smell of sweat, unwashed hair, smelly armpits, or stale body odor.

Photo: My own.

Bal à Versailles is a very well-blended prismatic scent whose opening bouquet of lushly indolic flowers with urinous, animalic, raunchy, leathery, balsamic, citric, and ambered notes changes only by small degrees. The core essence of the fragrance remains largely the same until the final hours, but the nuances and the prominence of certain notes vary over time.

Mysore sandalwood cross-section. Source: vk.com

The vanilla and sweetness grow stronger after 15 minutes, while powder clouds loom on the horizon. Small streaks of Mysore sandalwood appear, accompanied by fresh lily of the valley, and benzoin. The latter’s cinnamon-vanilla aspect melds perfectly with the Mysore sandalwood, creating a mix that is like spicy gingerbread with a growing touch of creaminess. At times, the lemon and bergamot are quite noticeable in the background; on other occasions, the dried roses very much overpowers the jasmine in the forefront. In one test, even the lily-of-the-valley, cedar and vetiver seem quite prominent at the 90-minute mark, while the leathery darkness in the base seemed to soften substantially. The orange blossoms, however, rule them all on my skin from start to finish.

Photo: Ellen von Unwerth for Vogue Turkey, December 2010. Source: http://blog.netrobe.com

Roughly 3.25 hours into Bal à Versailles’ development, the perfume is primarily creamy orange blossoms with urinous civet, sweet jasmine, soft roses, creamy sandalwood gingerbread, and a touch of vanilla in a golden haze. The leathery balsams feel much more muted, and the perfume as a whole is sprinkled with a light dusting of powder. The latter never smells like dated, old-fashioned makeup powder on my skin, perhaps because it is thoroughly infused with benzoin sweetness and ambered warmth. Bal à Versailles now hovers just above the skin, though it is not quiet a skin scent and it is still extremely strong when sniffed up close for many more hours to come.

Source: popularscreensavers.com

It takes a long time for the civet’s sharp yeowl to fade away, but the first hints of that come around the end of the 6th hour. Bal à Versailles is now dominated by creamy orange blossoms with a trace of honeyed beeswax from the sweet myrrh, followed by jasmine and lightly spiced cinnamon benzoin, all lightly dusted with powder. In its final moments, it’s merely a blur of sweet, golden florals with the vague hint of orange blossoms.

Generally, vintage Bal à Versailles cologne lasts between 10 and 11 hours on my skin, depending on the amount I apply. My bottle — like all the cologne versions — is a dab bottle, but I’ve decanted a portion into an atomizer which does increase the longevity. As a whole, the perfume is very potent in strength, but airy, lightweight, and soft in feel. The sillage is initially huge, with 2 good sprays creating an intense cloud that wafts 5-6 inches above the skin. Even when the sillage dropped at the 90-minute mark to about 2 inches, small trails would rise up from my arms whenever I moved, and linger in the air. As noted above, Bal à Versailles became a skin scent on me only at the start of the 4th hour, but it wasn’t hard to smell until the middle of the 8th hour. At that point, I was sure the perfume was about to die, but it clung to the skin tenaciously for several more hours to come. For a mere “cologne,” the longevity is excellent.

Photo: my own.

Bal à Versailles is lovely in cologne form, but it is truly spectacular in vintage parfum. It is deeper, richer, smoother, and more luxurious. There is much more leather, more darkness, and, most of the time, more raunchy brazenness. One of my few problems with the eau de cologne formulation is that civet feels quite sharp at times. That issue is overcome with the parfum, where it is much smoother and more well-rounded. I think the parfum is even more animalic than the cologne, but it’s not quite as shrieking or as obviously urinous.

Photo: my own.

There are other differences as well. On my skin, the eau de cologne is sweeter, thinner, much more overtly and obviously floral, and with a substantially weaker leather element. The vanilla comes out more in the cologne, while the darkly balsamic resins, smokiness, and ambered goldenness are stronger in the parfum. The latter has a much deeper, richer, lovelier drydown with oil-burnished, almost honeyed leather vying with the tolu balsam, incense-y styrax and amber for dominance. The florals seem almost like an afterthought at this point, which is why the parfum feels more masculine than the more feminine cologne. Yet, the parfum is also softer and has less projection on my skin, as is common with extrait versions. It lasts about an hour less than the cologne, but, then again, one generally uses much less.

Source: Tumblr and mindenseges.hupont.hu

I honestly cannot decide which concentration I like more. Sometimes, the sweeter, more floral, more vanillic cologne calls my name. On other occasions, the more intensely animalic parfum feels more appealing with its richer, smoother, deeper elements. Yet, sometimes, it can feel a little too animalic and a little too carnal, while the sweeter, more floral cologne seems easier to wear and more approachable. It comes down to mood, and perhaps to gender. The parfum feels a little more chevalier and opulent, while the cologne feels a little more like a feminine courtesan.

One big difference between the two is price. You can find a 1960s era bottle of the cologne on eBay for roughly $40-$60 in some pretty good sizes. There are always exceptions, with some sellers asking for much more, but it’s not hard to get a 2 oz or 60 ml (like mine) in that price range. I’ve even seen some barely touched 4 oz or 120 ml bottles go for roughly the same amount.

BaV Parfum mini on eBay.

Unfortunately, the eBay prices for the parfum version are quite crazy for anything other than a minuscule amount. Most of the bottles offered are roughly the size of a small sample or decant: they’re frequently 2.4 ml or 0.08 oz, and some are 4 ml. The price range for those is generally between $20-$35, which isn’t terrible until you consider how little you’re getting. On occasion, you will see much larger, more conventionally sized bottles, but those come with frightening price tags to match. (There is currently an auction for 4 oz bottle of parfum starting at $875. That makes the $217 bottle of parfum in a 7.5 ml size seem almost “cheap” in comparison.) Slightly less expensive than the pure parfum is the “parfum de toilette” version, which I believe is essentially eau de parfum, though I’ve never tried it and don’t know much about it. Here are some more photos:

1980s Parfum, 7.5 ml bottle. Source: eBay

Parfum de Toilette. Possibly 1980s. Source: eBay.

As a side note, there are bottles of “eau de cologne” shown on eBay which look very different than my own. They are not clear glass in a chiseled flacon, but tall, narrow bottles of opaque white with a gold pattern and, occasionally, the coloured Jean Desprez label that resembles a rococo painting of a 17th century woman. Some of the cologne bottles do resemble mine, but have a blue label instead of a cream one. I can’t date the various bottles, but I believe my bottle is the oldest version, followed by the glass one with the blue label, and then the taller, narrow, opaque white bottles which I remember from the 1970s. Here are some photos to show you the differences:

My bottle of Eau de Cologne. Seemingly 1960s.

My bottle of Eau de Cologne. 1960s, I believe.

Eau de Cologne, perhaps early 1970s? Source: eBay.

Eau de Cologne, perhaps late 1960s, early 1970s. Source: eBay

Eau de Cologne, late 1970s, perhaps? Source: eBay.

I’m no expert at all on these various versions, their dates, or how they may differ, but there is a very useful, detailed analysis provided on Bal à Versailles’ Fragrantica page by the perfume blogger, “Le Mouchoir de Monsieur.” He talks about the history of the various concentrations and reformulations, mentions their packaging differences, compares how they smell, and explains why he thinks Bal à Versailles should be dabbed on, instead of sprayed. He is clearly an expert, so I’ve included parts of his long text almost verbatim, but have broken it up with paragraph breaks to make it easier on the eyes and easier to read:

… following the classic standards of Haute Parfumerie, the original three concentrations that were initially made exhibited a trio of scents, each one different, and designed to sublimate the other two; thus, Jean Desprez himself would have instructed the wearer to splash on the Eau de Cologne with abandon, all over the body, perhaps even using it as an hair tonic. After a time, the Parfum de Toilette would be applied more sparingly, but liberally, on exposed parts of the body: The shoulders, neck, calves and decolletage. Finally, the Parfum, clearly conceived to be dabbed very sparingly on specific pulse points. […] It is my own judgement that BAV is one of the rare scents that truly does benefit from an application by hand, and not by atomizer: To atomize the parfum, for example, automatically distorts it. Remember: At the time of its launch, not one of these concentrations was offered in a vaporizer. The EDC could be then poured on, or applied with a sea sponge, as was often done with this type of “Eau,” (The first issue of this was called merely “Eau Bal a Versailles.”) The Parfum de Toilette, in its lyre shaped flacon, could be “dabbed,” eventually decanted into an atomizer and sprayed, but was most likely intended to be applied by stopper or fingertip. The original packaging of this concentration was clearly marked with the words: “A Fragrance to Compliment Bal a Versailles Parfum.” Finally, the Parfum itself, was very obviously one intended to be slapped on by fingertip with force, to awaken the veins, and to push the molecules of it into the skin.

“Louis d’Orléans Showing his Mistress” by Eugène Delacroix. Source: Wikipedia

As is rarely, if ever seen today, each one of these scents is vastly different. The EDC is a light, rosey musk and incense affair, surely the most wearbale by today’s standards, the PDT is a rich, heady symphony of smoke and resin, this one clearly the most “dated” of the three, heavy with the “Old Lady” connotations with which all of our modern noses are equipped, and finally, the Majestic Parfum, which is a symbiosis of so many elements that it defies any specific analysis in very much the same way many of the Classic Caron scents do. At the time of its advent, Bal a Versailles was the first commercial perfume of the Twentieth Century to out price “Joy,” which previously truly had been “the Costliest Perfume in the World.” […][¶]

Vintage ad. Source: The Non-Blonde.

There was a moment in time when the House of Jean Desprez, still in the hands of its founders, did itself re-formulate this composition, as it was discovered sometime around the mid to late Seventies that certain ingredients it contained were indeed toxic to the human body in the concentrations originally presented. This re-formulation was once again re-enacted in the mid Eighties, Jean Desprez still purely a French perfumer, for other reasons, these having to do with the increasing costs and outright disappearance of some of its second version components. This leaves us with seven French versions of this famed scent, all of which were of top quality, with no expense spared to maintain the integrity of the original vision of Jean Desprez[.] […][Emphasis added by me.]

Are you a little confused? Well, I wouldn’t blame you. I even skipped his detailed discussion about the more recent versions of Bal à Versailles, the two American companies that held or still hold the “Jean Desprez” name and patents from 2002 onwards, and their eau de toilette. If you’re at all curious, I encourage you to read his account. It’s a fascinating history, though convoluted and with an exhausting number of versions in total. (It seems there are fourteen, all in all.)

Suffice it to say, an expert on Bal à Versailles gives a thumbs up to the 1960s cologne as the most wearable by today’s standards, and to the vintage parfum as the truest, most beautiful embodiment of the scent. He also shares my belief that you should stay away from modern versions. I’ve heard that bottles can be found in places like TJ Maxx, and nothing good is ever said about them. People uniformly described the modern, reformulated fragrance as a horrifying, heavily powdered, very synthetic mess. I tried the modern EDT some years ago, and I wouldn’t recommend it.

Photo: Grover Schrayer on Flicker. (Website link embedded within.)

If you want more information on the three, main vintage versions and how they may differ, another Fragrantica reviewer, “Loving the Alien,” offers their assessment:

The Eau de Cologne is a civet-heavy and very powdery oriental in the vein of Toujours Moi and Tabu.

The Parfum de Toilette is a caramelized amber/tolu with deep notes of rose, similar to Avon Occur!, which is clearly inspired by Bal a Versailles.

The Parfum is an intensely spicy and incensey animalic. I can think of nothing similar to the parfum version.

They are all very, very different, although they have the same amber/resin/vanilla/orange blossom theme.

The new ones vary considerably; they are not apparently related to the original scent by much.

Regardless of version, I wouldn’t recommend vintage Bal à Versailles to anyone who didn’t love animalic, skanky fragrances. Fragrantica abounds with almost as many negative reviews as admiringly positive ones, though the perfume’s entry page does not distinguish between the various versions, vintage or modern, so it’s sometimes hard to know which one struck such intense fear and revulsion in people’s hearts. Still, I cannot emphasize enough what a polarizing, terror-inducing scent Bal à Versailles can be to someone who is unaccustomed to civet, its feline yeowl, raunchiness in general, or heavy, potently indolic, vintage fragrances. Some of the descriptions range from the mere “repulsive,” to my favorite: “someone’s overactive musk leather-bound crotch.” There is also talk about cat feces, sweat, “old lady,” and mothballs (undoubtedly from the indoles).

Screenshot from the movie, “Dangerous Liaisons.” Source: the Huffington Post

Even those who love Bal à Versailles use terms to describe it that would be negative in many other contexts like, for example, “filthy/beautiful/sublime.” The blogger, The Perfume Dandy, wrote a review on Fragrantica under the name “Assiduosity” where he lovingly called it “bestial” and “irresistibly repugnant”:

Bal a Versailles is a dangerous, irresistibly repugnant scent for men and women prepared to dance the dance of death. For all its wondrous beauty nothing can disguise the beating of its monstrous bestial heart.

There may be flowers and powder a plenty but this is an unapologetically animal aroma with plenty of tooth and claw.

With silage the size of a herd of wildebeest and longevity the length of an elephant’s memory this is not a commitment to be taken likely.

Accept its invitation and you are bid welcome to the party of a lifetime, but stay too long and you to may succumb to the guillotine’s blade.

But hell is worth the risk!!

Honestly, I think Bal à Versailles is so much tamer than the stream of forceful, intense, alarming descriptions on Fragrantica would lead you to believe. It is not for everyone and may smell dated by some modern standards, but there are far more intensely animalic fragrances out there, in my opinion. If you can wear Montecristo, Opus VII, vintage Kouros, Hard Leather, Serge Lutens’ Muscs Koublai Khan, or Cuir Mauresque, and if you don’t mind a light dusting of benzoin powder added to their debauched skankiness, then you should have no problems with Bal à Versailles. Everyone else, however, beware.

Vintage Bal à Versailles is not only for women. One Basenotes thread entitled “Can a man wear Bal a Versailles” had numerous men chiming in enthusiastically about the scent, including Mark Behnke of Colognoisseur. For one chap, Mike Perez, the vintage Eau de Cologne had a similar feel to some famous leather fragrances:

I finally found some vintage EdC today and bought it for a great price.

The EdC has, as a few other threads suggest, a similar leather feel to Knize Ten and (dare-I-say) Tabac Blond.

I think the comparisons to L’ Air de Rein by Miller Harris are credible, although this one hints at a much more orientalized feel. [Emphasis to names added by me.]

I can definitely see why he’d mention Knize Ten, though I personally don’t find it to be animalic. I think a closer analogy might be to an animalic version of Knize Ten Golden.

The eau de toilette bottle, which looks like a larger size of the parfum, so be careful and check the concentration on the boxes. Source: Basenotes

In that same thread, another chap compares the non-cologne formulations, and echoes the very common refrain that the EDT is the least appealing of the lot, though it is unclear to me if he’s talking about vintage versions:

I currently have the Parfum de Toilette and EdT. The Edt is kinda ho-hum to me. The Pdt is much better (richer and darker) but the parfum is my favorite. I went through a tiny bottle of the parfum in no time. It’s has a vague kinship to Kouros, but much more wearable. [Emphasis to name added by me.]

The bottom line to all this is that vintage Bal à Versailles is a legendary masterpiece in its genre. It is not for everyone, but if you have any love for raunchy, animalic, heady, powerhouse orientals, then it is something that you should try at least once in your life. I think it is beautiful.

Versailles. Photographer: Raul Higuera. Source: latinfashionews.com/

DETAILS:

Cost & Availability: You can use find vintage Bal à Versailles on eBay at the following links: cologne and parfum. If you want to sample before you buy, Surrender to Chance has the vintage Cologne starting at $3 for a 1 ml vial. The vintage Parfum de Toilette starts at $4.99 for a 1 ml vial. The Perfumed Court has the vintage Parfum starting at $6.94 for a 1/2 ml vial. It also offers a duo of the vintage pure Parfum and vintage Eau de Parfum (parfum de toilette, I believe) for $19.99 for 1 ml vials of each. I don’t see the cologne version on their site.

SHL 777 Rose de Petra: Desert Rose

Posted on May 30, 2014 by Kafkaesque

Source: Pinterest

The ancient temple of Petra soars high in the sky before a vast desert whose sands are stained pink and red with the blood of roses. The flowers are dusted with fiery spices, then nestled in a cocoon of green mosses and dry woods. A soft ambered hue hangs above them matching the gold-pink-red of the caves near the temple, while down below trickles a dark stream of smoky styrax, balsamic resins, and a touch of leather. A woman walks quietly in the shade, veiled in rose-red, her dark eyes watching the incoming shadows as the dusty desert wind brings sand, dryness and whispers of wood from distant lands. She wears Rose de Petra by Stéphane Humbert Lucas.

Every time I wear Rose de Petra, its desert inspiration and its layered, spicy dryness always make me think of Sting’s famous song, “Desert Rose“:

I dream of rain
I lift my gaze to empty skies above
I close my eyes, this rare perfume
Is the sweet intoxication of her love

I dream of rain
I dream of gardens in the desert sand
I wake in pain
I dream of love as time runs through my hand

Sweet desert rose
Each of her veils, a secret promise
This desert flower
No sweet perfume ever tortured me more than this

Sweet desert rose
This memory of Eden haunts us all
This desert flower, this rare perfume
Is the sweet intoxication of the fall.

Source: cn.forwallpaper.com

Unlike poor Sting, Rose de Petra doesn’t make me feel tortured or pained, but it does indeed call to mind the desert rose that hides its “gardens in the sand” behind veils, each layer like a secret promise of more to come, before revealing its soft, sweet heart. I’m not particularly fond of rose fragrances, but I thought this one was very refined, wonderfully smooth, and really lovely. Yes, even “intoxicating” at times, just as the song says, though not because of the actual rose note, in my opinion.

Rose de Petra is a fragrance from the Paris niche house, Stéphane Humbert Lucas 777 (hereinafter just referred to as “SHL” or “777“). Monsieur Lucas was the in-house perfumer for SoOud and Nez à Nez, but launched his new house in 2013. There were originally seven fragrances, one of which was Rose de Petra, followed by several new releases this year. They are all officially listed as being eau de parfums, but are really extrait or pure parfums with at least 24% concentration.

Rose de Petra. Source: SHL 777 Facebook page.

Until last month, all the 777 creations were exclusive to Europe, Russia, and Middle Eastern, but they are now carried in America at Luckyscent and Osswald NY. Monsieur Lucas kindly and graciously sent me samples of his entire 11-piece collection, from the jaw-dropping, spectacular, monster amber, O Hira (which blew my socks off), the smoky new Oud 777, the gourmand Une Nuit à Doha, and the superb Black Gemstone which was love at first sniff for me. This is the final review of the series.

Al Khazneh Temple at Petra. Source: Wikimedia

Monsieur Lucas has a genuine love of the Middle East, from its majestic ancient buildings to its philosophical mysticism, and he uses both as the inspiration for all the fragrances in his new line. For Rose de Petra, he was moved partially by the magnificent, famed temple of Petra in Jordan, but also by “rose du sable” or the “desert rose.” As Wikipedia explains, those are colloquial names given to a desert crystal made partially from sand in a formation which resembles a rose. Sands and rose… that should give you a small idea of Rose de Petra’s nature, but its core essence is something very different in my opinion.

The fragrance is essentially a chypre-oriental hybrid, though you’d never guess that by looking at its official notes of its notes or the press release description provided to me:

Source: galleryhip.com

Philter of Bulgarian rose,
red epithem, sensual and pungent.
Generous, silky and mystical rose.

Notes:
Rose Oxide – Pomegranate – Litchi
Bulgarian rose
Pepper – Cardamom – Cumin seeds.

Regular readers of my 777 reviews will know by now that the official list given to places like Fragrantica or to distributors is merely a highly abbreviated, thumbnail synopsis. The lists are never complete, and leave off what I’d estimate to be 40% to 70% of the elements, depending on the fragrance. (In the case of O Hira, the one note “list” omits 99% of the actual notes.) Monsieur Lucas has told me candidly that he wants people to be moved emotionally by what they smell, not to be fixated on the details. He believes that perfume should be about a journey, almost a transcendental experience or escape. The minutiae detracts from what he wants you to feel.

Saffron. Source: FoodandFarsi.com (Website link embedded within.)

Well, I’m far too OCD about details for such abstract esotericism. I like to know what’s in a scent, especially when I detect a lot more than what is listed. In the case of Rose de Petra, I smelled saffron, patchouli, styrax, a balsamic resin, cedar, vanilla, tonka, a tobacco-like leatheriness, a leafy greenness, and an oud note. So I wrote to Monsieur Lucas, and it turns out that many of those things are indeed in Rose de Petra, though not the oud which he was happy to hear about and which he said was a sort of “mirage” that he’d intentionally sought to create.

The list of notes in Rose de Petra is actually closer to the following, though Monsieur Lucas hinted that even this is not complete:

Essence of Bulgarian rose, rose oxide, litchi, pomegranate, pepper, cardamom, cumin, saffron, cinnamon, patchouli, leather, Peru balsam, styrax, vetiver, cedar, oakmoss, tree moss, labdanum [amber], coumarin, and vanilla.

One of the visual inspirations for Rose de Petra, and its rose note. Source: Stéphane Humbert Lucas.

One of the visual inspirations for Rose de Petra, and its fruity Bulgarian rose note. Source: Stéphane Humbert Lucas.

In his correspondence with me, Monsieur Lucas said he sought to make a fragrance that highlighted contrasts. The fruitiness and gaiety of the Bulgarian rose; the heat, spices, stoniness. and mystery of the desert; the sandy beauty of the “Rose du Sables” or desert rose; and the striated stone of Petra. He wanted a composition that was “chaud et froid,” hot and cold, with small touches of various mosses and “green” fresh cedar counterbalanced by the fiery spices, the rich Peru balsam, dark leather, and smoky styrax. And, to demonstrate the contrasts, he shared the photos which inspired him and which represent the visuals of Rose de Petra in his mind:

“Rose du Sables,” Desert Rose rock crystal. Source: Stéphane Humbert Lucas

Source: Stéphane Humbert Lucas

Rose de Petra opens on my skin with pink roses that are dewy and wet, simultaneously pale but rich. For all their delicacy, they are heavily sprinkled with spices from nutty cardamon and dusty cumin to the fieriness of black pepper and red-gold saffron. Sweet cinnamon follows in their trail, then the fruity tartness of pomegranates. The liquidy dewiness is a subtle, muted touch which stems from the lychee (or litchi), and it is quickly overwhelmed by a heaping dose of very fruited, purple patchouli which turns the rose from pink to blood-red.

Source: banoosh.com

There are other elements noticeable as well. As the spices grow stronger on top, the first hints of the dark base appear, almost like a shadow falling over the background. There is a subtle, tiny streak of smoky leatheriness from the styrax, while the Peru balsam adds both an undercurrent of sticky darkness and a full-bodied richness to the scent. Lurking at the edges is a tangy sweet-sourness, accompanied by a leafy greenness. It goes beyond mere pomegranates, and I initially wondered if a tiny dose of cassis had been used as well. At a much higher dosage and quantity, those notes reveal themselves to be oakmoss.

I’ve tested Rose de Petra a number of times and, while the overall parameters of the opening are largely the same, the perfume really shines if you apply more of the scent. My sample atomizer had a very wonky, temperamental spray that gave out little dribs and drabs, so the first time I applied roughly the equivalent of one decent spritz from a bottle. On subsequent occasions, I doubled and even tripled the dose and… good heavens, the oakmoss really shines forth. In some fragrances, moss notes can smell pungently mineralized, grey, fusty, dusty, or akin to dry tree bark. Here, however, it is lushly green, rich, and smooth.

Source: 1ms.net

These richer elements transform the rose in less than five minutes. From the delicate, pale, dewy, little thing of its opening, the rose now feels drenched in a darkly fruited liqueur, as if a rich cordial had been poured all over the velvety petals. Fieriness lies just underneath from the spices, while a subtle, tart tanginess from the pomegranates weaves in and out of the top notes like tiny, little fireflies. The whole thing likes on a base that is plushly green from the oakmoss, but overcast with black shadows from leathery, smoky, balsamic elements.

Photo: David Hare. Source: open.az

I know some of you are cumin-phobes who shudder at the mere mention of the word, so let me reassure you here and now: you needn’t worry. Nothing in Rose de Petra smells fetid, sweaty, food-like, or reminiscent of stale, unwashed body odor. Rather, each and every time I’ve tested the fragrance, the note is more like an abstract, spicy dustiness. To be honest, the cumin is a really subtle, minor note in the opening, hardly detectable on my skin next to the saffron, liqueured fruits, oakmoss and rose. And, as time passes, it grows even more abstract, like a mere suggestion of dustiness left at the bottom of an ancient spice drawer.

Photo: Joel Ryan/Invision/AP for Vivienne Westwood, London Fashion week, 2013. Source: Salon.com

At the end of the day, the rose and only the rose is the star of this soliflore. Rose de Petra feels like one, big long aria by a rose wearing different costumes, shedding the chypre-like mosses and patchouli veils of its opening to show its more purely oriental skin later on.

It is like Salome and the Dance of the Seven Veils, but it also reminds me of something else: Frederic Malle‘s famous Portrait of a Lady (“POAL”). I wasn’t keen on the latter which was a gooey, rose-patchouli explosion on my skin with virtually no oakmoss to imbue it with any real chypre character. Rose de Petra’s opening feels like a spicier, substantially less syrupy, much deeper and richer version of the Malle scent. There is a greenness and subtle tanginess to the 777 fragrance that POAL lacks, and more dusty spiciness than the Malle ever demonstrated on my skin. Rose de Petra also feels much more concentrated, at least at first.

Source: pinterest

20 minutes into its development, Rose de Petra grows even spicier, and begins to resemble another famous fragrance. As fieriness and dustiness take over the blood-red, velvety flowers, Rose de Petra is slowly turning into what most people seem to experience with Amouage‘s Lyric Woman. On my skin, the latter was largely all about the ylang-ylang with very little spiced rose, so perhaps I should compare Rose de Petra to Lyric’s sister from the same nose: Epic Woman. The latter was definitely all about spiced, dusty, woody roses on me, but the very jammy richness of the flowers probably makes Rose de Petra closer to the conventional interpretation of Lyric Woman. The bottom line, though, is that the 777 creation starts off on my skin with similarities to Malle’s Portrait of a Lady, then turns into a combination of the Malle with one or both of Amouage’s famous rose fragrances. To be sure, there are differences, but the kinship is there.

Cedar. Photo: Brett Stewart, with permission. Source: http://instagram.com/bstewart23

Thoughts of Epic Woman come to mind again at the end of the first hour when Rose de Petra loses some of its jammy sweetness and chypre accords. The perfume turns woodier, drier and slightly balsamic as the base elements begin to rise to the surface. The oakmoss retreats, the subtle touch of tartness from the pomegranate dies away, and the individual spices turn more amorphous and indistinct. It’s no longer easy to pull out the cinnamon, black pepper, saffron, or even the dustiness of the cumin; everything has melted into each other, as the notes overlap seamlessly. Even the very concentrated denseness of Rose de Petra softens, with the sillage changing to match.

Rose de Petra starts off as quite a strong, robust scent with decent projection. Using the equivalent of 2 tiny sprays from an actual bottle gave me 2 inches of sillage, while 3 small sprays gave me 3 inches. However, those numbers soon drop, and Rose de Petra’s concentrated, rich opening bouquet turns quite airy and soft roughly 75 minutes into its development. At that time, the sillage drops to an inch above the skin, where it remains for the next few hours. So, when taken as an average whole, I would say that Rose de Petra is generally an airy, light scent with soft, almost intimate projection.

Source: YouTube video of Desert Rose, posted in full at the end.

At the start of the 3rd hour, Rose de Petra shifts again. The dry, woody tonalities grow stronger, and there was a definite suggestion of oud on my skin when I used a lesser quantity. At a higher dose, that was not as evident, though the cedar most definitely was. In both cases, however, and regardless of quantity, the perfume takes on a darker quality as the woods and smoky styrax rise up from the base to envelop the rose. Even the leather grows faintly more noticeable, though it is still mostly a subtle suggestion on my skin.

Photo: my own.

Rose de Petra now demonstrates a chiaroscuro effect, a play of light and dark, as the darker shadows are contrasted by a glow of warmth from the labdanum amber and by a definite streak of creaminess with a slightly powdery touch that speaks to the tonka and vanilla. (The note list mentions coumarin, but, for me, that often has a hay-like characteristic that I don’t detect here. Plus, coumarin comes from tonka beans, and that’s what I detect, so that’s what I’m going to call it.) Rose de Petra continues to be spicy, but it remains largely abstract, though once in a while a more distinct whisper of cardamon and pepper does pop up.

Rose de Petra has lost a lot of its thick richness, both in terms of the jammy, velvety rose and the perfume’s body itself. It feels much airier and softer than it did in the first hour. As a whole, Rose de Petra is now a spicy, dry, woody rose, lightly flecked by a dark resins, a suggestion of smokiness, a golden warmth, and creamy vanilla. There is a whisper of something almost like oud, but only a minute, lingering patina of jammy, patchouli sweetness or oakmoss.

Rose de Petra turns wholly abstract by the middle of the 4th hour. It is the merest wisp of a soft, slightly spicy rose with woodiness and tonka vanilla. Though there is a touch of sweetness, the perfume’s dryness and the occasionally sandy, powdery feel of the vanilla call to mind the desert sand of its inspiration. Sting’s “Desert Rose,” indeed. It’s very pretty, but it’s also a complete skin scent on me by this point.

The perfume continues to subtly shift, as the tonka vanilla grows stronger with every passing moment and vies with the woody tonalities for second place. By the start of the 6th hour, the lightly spiced rose is infused with as much creamy tonka as woodiness, all in a gauzy wisp that coats the skin like translucent pink silk. On occasion, a lingering hint of pomegranate floats by to startle me, almost like red dandelion fluff in the wind. Once in a blue moon, a hint of something darker follows it, but, for the most part, Rose de Petra has shed its dark shadows, opting for vanilla instead of balsamic, leathery, smoky elements. In its final moments, the perfume is a blur of sweet, dusty, pale pink roses with vanilla and the faintest suggestion of something woody.

Photo: my own.

All in all, Rose de Petra lasts between 8.5 and 9.5 hours on my skin, depending on how much I apply. It has the shortest longevity of any of the SHL line on my skin, and it also feels like the softest of the 11 fragrances. Like almost all of Monsieur Lucas’ creations (minus the 2022 Generation Homme which I despise with a passion), Rose de Petra feels very smooth, expensive, and refined. It’s hardly the most revolutionary, unusual, edgy scent around, but then few rose soliflores are.

In fact, I have to say, I liked it a lot more than I thought. Rose perfumes aren’t generally my thing, especially when they’re gooey and overly sweet, but I find very mossy or spicy versions much more appealing. Rose de Petra is what I had hoped both Portrait of a Lady and Lyric Woman would be on my skin, combined into one scent. I really liked the fiery bite that briefly resembled chili peppers at one point when I applied a greater dosage, along with something verging almost on a tobacco undertone from the mix of dark resins, labdanum and leather. The combination of dry dustiness, jammy sweetness, and fiery spices was particularly nice when contrasted with the oakmoss.

Even the fruitchouli was well calibrated so that it didn’t take on Portrait of a Lady’s purple, syrupy excesses. Actually, I think Rose de Petra’s heightened degrees of spiciness and background woodiness that really helped in that regard, along with the subtle touch of pomegranate. All three things ensure that the patchouli remains as a sort of tart, tangy liqueured cordial, instead of revoltingly sweet molasses. The pomegranate may not have been hugely noticeable in its own right, and I would have preferred much more of it, but I think it works subtly and indirectly to help keep the balance.

Photo: my own.

In the subsequent stages, the interplay between the creamy vanilla, the leathery base, and the warm ambered glow is truly lovely, especially when counterbalanced by the woody dryness. I can’t rave enough about the strongly balsamic, darker elements. They seep into everything, transforming the rose from the chypre of its opening into something purely Oriental, but none of it is sharp. All of it feels smooth and velvety soft, even the leathery, slightly smoky styrax. By the time the final stage rolled around, Rose de Petra frequently reminded me creamy, golden petals, thanks to the lovely vanilla tonka.

My only quibble with the fragrance is that it’s too soft and airy, with sillage that is a little too intimate, but all that is a matter of personal preference. It’s also not a hugely distinctive scent, except in terms of its quality. There, I think it stands neck and neck with offerings from Amouage or Frederic Malle. As a whole, I think Rose de Petra is a refined, approachable, uncomplicated but luxurious scent that could be worn on a variety of different occasions, including the office after the first hour has passed. I also think it is unisex, thanks to the darker, drier, and woody elements.

Rose de Petra is one of the more affordable creations in the 777 line. It retails for €148 or $220 for a 50 ml bottle of pure parfum. I think it’s definitely set at the right price. As a side note, Rose de Petra costs less at $220 than a comparable 50 ml bottle of Lyric Woman which retails for $280, and it is fractionally cheaper than Malle’s $230 Portrait of a Lady. If you love either of those fragrances, you should give Rose de Petra a sniff.

In the meantime, I leave you with an unofficial video for Sting’s Desert Rose. Its desert imagery, stunningly vivid colours, and romantic mood feel like a perfect fit for Rose de Petra in my mind.

Disclosure: Perfume sample courtesy of Stéphane Humbert Lucas. That did not influence this review. I do not do paid reviews, and my opinions are my own.

DETAILS:

Cost & Availability: Rose de Petra is an Extrait or pure parfum that is only available in a 50 ml bottle and costs $220 or €148. In the U.S.: Osswald NY carries the 777 line, and sells Rose de Petra for $220. Luckyscent also has 777 fragrances, and sells Rose de Petra for the same amount. Outside the U.S.: Currently, the Stéphane Humbert Lucas’ website is under construction, and doesn’t have an e-store. The best online resource is First in Fragrance which has all the SHL 777 line, including Rose de Petra. In London, you can find the collection at Harrod’s Black Room, while in Paris, they are exclusive to Printemps under the name 777. Zurich’s Osswald also carries the line, but I don’t think they have an e-store any more. The Swiss perfumery, Theodora, also has SHL 777, but no e-store. In the Middle East, Souq.com used to have 6 of the earlier fragrances, but I no longer see them on the website. In the UAE, the SHL 777 line is available at Harvey Nichols and at Bloomingdales in the Dubai Mall. In Russia, SHL 777 is sold at Lenoma. Ukraine’s Sana Hunt Luxury store also carries the line, but they don’t have an e-store. Samples: In Europe, you can order a sample from First in Fragrance. In the U.S., none of the decanting sites currently carry this fragrance, but Luckyscent and Osswald NYC sell samples. Osswald’s Sample Program has a 3-order minimum but free domestic shipping. Pricing depends on the cost of the particular perfume in question. They range from $3 for a 2 ml vial, up to $9 for fragrances that cost over $300. Given Rose de Petra’s $220 price, a 2 ml spray sample should cost $6. It’s a better deal than Luckyscent’s $5 price for a small 0.7 dab vial. You can call Osswald at (212) 625-3111 to order, or use their website.

Robert Piguet Knightsbridge (Harrods Exclusive)

Posted on May 21, 2014 by Kafkaesque

I generally try to avoid covering fragrances with unbearably limited distribution, and Knightsbridge by Robert Piguet certainly qualifies for that description. It is a scent that is available in only one place on earth, now and forever. Harrods London. In a happier universe, Harrods would ship worldwide, but it doesn’t, which makes reviews like this mostly an exercise in curiosity, masochism, or both.

Source: robertpiguetparfums.blogspot.com

Unfortunately, intellectual curiosity is one of my besetting flaws, and there has been some talk in perfumista circles about of this elusive, supposedly incomparable fragrance. Mark Behnke, a chap I respect, found it to be the best release of 2013 when he was at CaFleureBon. And a dear friend of mine seems to love it. So, when a Paris friend was travelling to London, I asked if he would get me a sample to assuage my curiosity. He sent me a lovely portion, which I’ve been testing and I thought I’d share my conclusions. (I also ended up with samples of Harrods’ exclusive Creed and Bond No. 9 creations, too. I don’t cover Bond No. 9, so that one will never be reviewed, but the Creed might be, perhaps.)

Knightsbridge is an eau de parfum that was created by Aurélien Guichard and released in 2013. According to Mark Behnke’s full review, Robert Piguet’s Creative Director, Joe Garces, asked Mr. Guichard to create a fragrance that replicated the scent of Harrods at 2 a.m. Personally, I’m not sure I want to smell like a department store after hours, since my imagination does not conjure up good things, but rest assured that Knightsbridge does not smell like a cleaning crew swiping down counters with Windex or industrial disinfectant.

Harrods interior. Source: boards.cruisecritic.com

Harrods describes Knightsbridge as follows:

In tribute to Harrods of London, Robert Piguet has created an exclusive new fragrance. Composed of some of the most expensive fine fragrance elements, Knightsbridge de Robert Piguet is sure to dazzle wearers with its opulent presence.

The perfume opens with creamy notes of nutmeg and rose before a sumptuous heart of sandalwood and orris transitions into a rich base of leather and tonka bean.

Fragrantica categorizes Knightsbridge as a “leather” fragrance, and confirms that its list of notes is:

nutmeg, rose, sandalwood, orris, leather and tonka bean.

Source: winemag.com

I’ve stared at that list of notes repeatedly, and like a crazy person, blinking in utter bewilderment because what I detect emanating from my skin for the first 5 hours smells neither like a “leather” fragrance, nor what that list led me to expect. The main and immediate thing that I smell when Knightsbridge opens on my skin is…. booze. Massive amounts of boozy cognac infused with fruit, to be precise. In fact, to be really specific, massive amounts of boozy cognac infused with dark fruits and Concord grapes that smell as though a methyl anthranilate synthetic had been used or fruited, purple, patchouli molasses.

Methyl anthranilate. Source: Wikipedia

I don’t understand any of it. I’ve tested Knightsbridge 3 times now, and every single time there is a powerful boozy note that runs through a good portion of the perfume’s development on my skin. None of the reviews or comments that I’ve read for the fragrance mention it. And nothing in the notes should warrant either cognac nor fruitiness, let alone Concord grapes, fruit-chouli, or the spiced apples that later appear. The list doesn’t include any amber synthetic to trigger a cognac-like warmth, and I don’t believe roses naturally carry methyl anthranilate. I checked with my friend who obtained my sample, and there is absolutely no doubt that he got Knightsbridge, not some other fragrance by accident.

As I’ve mentioned, I suffer from intellectual curiosity (and an even bigger case of OCD), so I did some research, and eventually found Robert Piguet’s company blog. There, tucked away in the archives, was description of a luncheon held at Harrods to celebrate Knightsbridge’s release. Specifically, talk of a dessert that included a Calvados crème anglaise sauce to symbolise or parallel the perfume:

The luncheon menu was created to link the ingredients in each course with the notes in Knightsbridge de Robert Piguet. The first course of Cornish crab and mango salad with raspberry and chervil dressing, followed by the entrée of roast brill with courgette piperade, spinach and nutmeg sauce and ending on a sweet finale of spiced apple bread and butter pudding with Calvados anglaise was designed to highlight Knightsbridge de Robert Piguet’s top note of nutmeg and rose, middle note of sandalwood and orris and base note of leather and tonka bean. [Emphasis added by me.]

Calvados apple brandy. Source: NYTimes.

Calvados is a golden liqueur like cognac that is made from apples, while crème anglaise is a vanilla sauce. I definitely smelled the latter from the middle to end phase of Knightsbridge, along with the spiced apples that took over the cognac’s undertones. So, whatever is actually in Knightsbridge, at least Robert Piguet itself seems to recognize red fruits, spiced fruits, and cognac as elements similar to those in the perfume. In short, perhaps the company has followed the path of several other houses (Profumum and Stephane Humbert Lucas 777, I’m looking directly at you!) in having a very truncated, abbreviated list of notes. It’s either that, or I truly am crazy.

“Bleeding Rose” by April Koehler. Source: redbubble.com

Getting back to Knightsbridge, there are other elements interwoven in the unexpected blast of cognac and dark, syrupy fruits. Iris is threaded lightly throughout, smelling buttery and, on occasion, slightly powdery. Much more significant, however, is the rose which feels very fruity and dark, thanks to that grape-y molasses or patchouli. Small hints of tonka vanilla dart in and out, adding a softness to the strongly boozy bouquet. The nutmeg is equally muted, smelling more like an occasional whiff of abstract spiciness than anything else.

Source: JAR Facebook

The most interesting thing for me initially is the iris, and how it plays off the other notes. It’s a very cool element, almost like the “cold stone” description that a friend of mine sometimes uses to describe iris scents. Yes, there is a buttery element, but that fades quite a bit after the first few minutes pass, leaving a stony coldness that contrasts greatly with the heated warmth of the fruited cognac, as well as the undercurrent of spicy richness.

From afar, Knightsbridge’s opening bouquet on my skin is a very saturated, deep bouquet of boozy, fruited cognac with jammy, blood-red roses, lightly flecked with cold, stony irises, abstract spices, and a touch of tonka vanilla. There is no leather on my skin — either actual or the abstract suggestion thereof. Instead, there is a very sticky, thick and dark undercurrent that runs through the fragrance. The extreme fruitiness of the scent makes it feel like a very molasses-like, purple patchouli, but there are also occasional, tiny flashes of something darker, possibly resinous, as well.

Source: stockhdwallpapers.com

For all its richness and strength, Knightsbridge doesn’t feel opaque, but airy and lightweight. I applied the equivalent of 2 small sprays from an actual bottle, and Knightsbridge initially wafted a good 4 inches above my skin in the opening moments. Using the equivalent of 1 spray (or 2 spritzes from my little atomizer), the opening sillage was only a bit less. In all cases, however, the strength of the perfume’s boozy cognac blast comes across very strong, heady, and rich. And, in all cases as well, the sillage soon drops, resulting in a fragrance that has only moderate projection when taken as an overall whole.

At times, especially when smelt from afar, it seems as though Knightsbridge’s opening bouquet doesn’t change for quite a while, but, if you pay close attention, you will notice small changes. 30 minutes into the perfume’s development, the vanilla grows stronger and, by the end of the first hour, it rises up fully from the base. At the same time, the Concord grapes become substantially weaker, and even the boozy cognac takes a small step back. That allows some of the other elements to shine forth in a more individually distinct way, like, for example, the roses which leap forward in strength. The nutmeg also becomes a little more prominent, but the stony iris seems to have largely disappeared.

Source: RGPeixoto on Flickr. (Website link embedded within photo.)

At the end of the first hour and the start of the second, the overall impression from afar has changed. Instead of cognac leading the way, Knightsbridge’s main focus now seems to be a very rich, heavy rose fragrance infused with syrupy, sweet, dark fruits and fruited booze. I can see why the scent is so popular in some quarters, but little of it is my personal cup of tea at this point other than the cognac. In the absence of any leather, and only a momentary, minute, tertiary flash of iris, the first hour is merely another boozy fragrance with patchouli-like jammy roses and dark fruits — and lord knows, there are plenty of those about.

One of the reasons for my early unenthusiasm is that I detected a distinct whiff of synthetics on two of my three tests of the perfume. I’ve struggled greatly with some of Robert Piguet’s new or newly reformulated scents because they seem to use a lot of synthetics, including cheap musk. I’ll spare you a recount of my trauma at the hands of Mademoiselle Piguet with its juxtaposition of bug spray, painfully bitter greenness, and excessive sweetness, but that was not the only fragrance with which I have struggled. (Baghari was extremely unpleasant and synthetic as well, and I was not keen on Calypso, either.)

Concord Grape Jam. Source: Tasty Yummies blog. (Link to website embedded within photo.)

Knightsbridge is a much higher quality, more luxurious smelling fragrance than several of its siblings (especially the utterly heinous Mademoiselle Piguet), but it was occasionally a problem when sniffed up close for too long. In fact, in my first test, I was quite literally cross-eyed at one point from a migraine. At first, I couldn’t figure out if the issue was a white musk (always one of my bête noires in high doses) because there is a very subtle whiff of cleanness underlying Knightsbridge’s opening hour. I think that may actually be the iris note, and that the real problem is perhaps the methyl anthranilate or whatever causes that grape-y nuance.

Interestingly, though, the synthetic aspect was not a problem when I applied much more of the fragrance. At a higher dosage, the aromachemical that caused me grief was not at all apparent. This is something that I’ve noticed with a good number of other fragrances that contain synthetics: they smell significantly better with larger doses, because that amplifies the other accords and lets them shine forth, thereby hiding the problematic elements in the base. The same trend applies to Knightsbridge as well. However, as I always try to make clear, I’m much more sensitive than the average person to synthetics, and many people don’t even notice them, so you probably won’t have any issues at all.

Source: Normann Copenhagen. (Link to blog site with recipe for mousse embedded within photo.)

While Knightsbridge’s opening stage left me utterly unimpressed with anything but the cognac, let me say clearly and bluntly that the rest of it is lovely, especially the drydown. At the start of the 3rd hour, the tonka vanilla becomes almost as prominent a note on my skin as the generic, jammy, dark rose. In fact, it is largely thanks to the vanilla that the rest of the perfume is so wonderfully appealing. Long before I read the Robert Piguet luncheon description, particularly the dessert that they chose to parallel Knightsbridge, I wrote in my notes that the tonka was positively silky, and like a coating of smooth, rich vanilla sauce made from real Madagascar pods mixed with fluffy, airy cream. When I read about the Piguet dessert having a crème anglaise sauce, I had to smile because that is exactly the aroma (and taste) that I detected as well.

Photo: my own.

At the start of the 3rd hour, the vanilla hovers just on the edge of overshadowing the rose, but it isn’t quite there yet. Instead, it blankets and coats the jammy, fruity, red petals, and slides into the booze. The latter has started to change as well, losing almost all of its grape-y undertones and taking on a distinct whiff of spiced apples. It is as though the liqueur has turned into Calvados, instead of mere cognac. The end result is a bouquet of vanilla-rose jam, lightly spritzed with Calvados, and holding the promise of more vanilla to come. None of it feels gourmand to me, by the way; Knightsbridge may be too fruity for my personal tastes, but it’s not sweet enough to fall anywhere close to the dessert category. Instead, it is simply a very rich, luxurious smelling fragrance with a truly stunning tonka note atop a dark, boozy base.

Source: dailymail.co.uk

The real changes and beauty of the scent arise after the start of the 4th hour. Knightsbridge turns gauzy and thin, with reduced sillage that lies just above the skin, though the perfume is still strong enough for avoid the “skin scent” label for a little while longer. To my surprise, the rose has faded quite dramatically, and now trails behind the vanilla and Calvados as the main note. There is still no leather of any kind on my skin, and the spiciness has retreated to the sidelines. The booziness, however, has made a major comeback on my skin, and it’s really lovely with the vanilla.

Lurking deep in the base is something new. There is a note akin to brown patchouli which appears about 4.5 hours into Knightsbridge’s development, the sort of patchouli that I love. It’s red-gold-brown in visual colour, while being spicy, warm, and lightly woody in smell. There is the tiniest suggestion of a tobacco nuance underlying it as well, just as in old-school, conventional, brown patchouli.

Photo: Randy Mayor. Source: myrecipes.com

Knightsbridge continues to grow softer and more abstract. All lingering traces of the rose vanishes at the end of the 5th hour, while the rest of the notes blur into each other, and the subtle nuances fade. By the middle of the 7th hour, Knightsbridge is a boozy, warm, vanilla crème anglaise with whiffs of spiced apples emanating from the cognac. To quote that description of the dessert meant to parallel Knightsbridge at Robert Piguet’s celebratory luncheon, it is “a sweet finale of spiced apple bread and butter pudding with Calvados anglaise[.]” And it truly is a lovely sweet finale, one filled with coziness, softness, and comforting warmth. It’s not a particular strong scent at this point, merely a sheer, light one, but Knightsbridge isn’t too hard to detect if you bring your nose to your arm.

Knightsbridge remains a Calvados vanilla scent for the rest of the drydown. In its final moments, it is nothing more than a blurry smear of boozy sweetness. All in all, Knightsbridge lasted roughly 10.75 hours with a larger dosage, and 9.5 with a smaller one. The overall sillage varied between moderate and soft, depending on how much fragrance I used. While the opening bouquet always had excellent projection for the first hour or so, and while scent felt very robust at that point, I wouldn’t use my “Wagnerian” classification to describe Knightsbridge as a whole.

Source: wallpaperscraft.com

As noted earlier, I haven’t seen anyone describe Knightsbridge as a boozy fragrance in the few reviews or comments that are out there. In a Basenotes discussion thread that was created upon news of the Knightsbridge’s release, there is only one commentator who describes how the perfume actually smells. “Kagey” writes:

Knightsbridge has a definite Visa-like feel to it – that smooth leather with a creamy backdrop of vanilla, with iris and something else – it smells almost like fruit or spiced flowers. It’s nice but I don’t think I need it.

Over at CaFleureBon, Michelyn Camen describes Knightsbridge in much the same way, but she joins Mark Behnke in putting the perfume in first place in their annual, year-end post on the best fragrances of 2013. There, she writes:

I was enthralled by the rich leather at the base, (the best buttery leather accord I have smelled in years and don’t get me started on the creamy sandalwood). Knightsbridge’s opulent orris heart stole mine. This is the best fragrance from Perfumer Aurelien Guichard for Piguet since Visa and in my opinion his best work to date.

Iris. Photo via free-desktop-backgrounds.net, then edited by me.

I haven’t tried Visa in order to compare, but I do have a general memory of another fragrance to which Knightsbridge has sometimes been compared: Dior‘s Homme. According to that Basenotes’ discussion thread that I quoted earlier, “word on the street” has it that the two fragrances are similar. Now, my memory of Dior Homme is admittedly a little faded, but I don’t think Knightsbridge is similar based upon what happened on my skin. For one thing, Dior Homme is not a scent that I would describe as heavily boozy. For another, on me, Knightsbridge is not an iris-centric fragrance, there is no cocoa or patchouli, and it’s not leathered in any way at all.

Getting back to other people’s experiences with Knightsbridge, Mark Behnke’s earlier, full review describes the scent in terms of an imaginary stroll through Harrod’s:

[A]s I walk towards the Haute Parfumerie the last lingering persistent note of a day of perfumistas sampling the wares is that of a rose. The rose has a bit of nutmeg to accentuate the spicy facets within the rose. As … I pass through the beauty section I smell the iris in the powder. M. Guichard has something richer in mind and he captures the iris with a completely decadent orris butter that is so rooty and opulent you just don’t want it to end. Paired with a creamy sandalwood this is what luxury means as this feels like the finest silk sliding through my hand with a frisson on my fingertips. Before I get to the front of the store I stop and breathe deep at the Louis Vuitton display and the smell of the finest leather meets me. I try on a pair of gloves and bring it to my face inhaling deep. The choice of tonka to support the leather accord makes a perfect ending to my night alone in Harrod’s.

“Red Orange Rose Yellow Abstract” by LTPhotographs, Etsy Store. (Link to website embedded within photo.)

On Fragrantica, there are only two reviews for Knightsbridge, and both are positive.

Absolutely stunning. Has a really classic yet modern feel to it. The rose is prominent at the start with a warm spicy background. It develops into a warm, balmy concoction that pleases my nose. Surprisingly it’s mildly reminiscent of ‘Calypso’ but much more rich and slightly more masculine. I’m a man who is more than happy to wear a ‘woman’s’ perfume(I hate the labels, if it smells nice I say wear it), but with this I feel there is finally a woody, balmy floral that most men could wear.

this fragrance has the soul of other Piguet’s fragrances such as the creamy accord of Baghari, rose accord from Rose Perfection, Woody accord of Futur, and Animalic accord of Bandit. [¶][…] one note that is particularly noticeable is Iris and it is the closest to the iris accord in dior homme of any fragrance i have smelled so far..but there is a twist..the iris in Dior Homme is sparkling whereas it is resinous in Knightsbridge.

Well, all I can say is that I obviously had a very different experience from everyone else. There was nothing animalic or Bandit-like at all about Knightsbridge on me, almost nothing woody, very little iris, and definitely no leather. I also had a different longevity issue than some of the people on Fragrantica, where Knightsbridge has one vote for “poor” longevity, and another one for “weak.” On the other hand, I can see why the majority votes for sillage are tied between “soft” (2 votes) and “moderate” (also 2 votes).

As a whole, I think Knightsbridge is a good, solid scent with a lovely drydown, but I don’t share the wild love for it that I’ve seen amongst some people I respect. I can’t think of a way to put things diplomatically, so I’ll just say that we all have different skin and experiences — and my experience would not qualify Knightsbridge for my Top 10 of the year. What I smelled was very enjoyable at times, but I don’t find anything particularly interesting, original, clever, or unique about either jammy, fruit-chouli roses with cognac, even if they are lightly flecked with a light touch of iris for about 40 minutes. And lord knows, there are plenty of nicely done, boozy vanillas on the market.

In all honesty, I think some of my feelings are — consciously or subconsciously — influenced by Knightsbridge’s extremely limited accessibility. The thing is, I simply did not experience anything distinctive or superlative enough to go to great lengths to obtain a bottle from Harrods. The perfume costs £150 which comes to roughly $253 at today’s rate of exchange, so to harness the efforts of a perfume mule who will buy it blindly for you and lug it back in their suitcase seems like the sort of effort warranted only for a truly exceptional, unique fragrance. Knightsbridge does not rise to that level, in my opinion.

It would be different if Knightsbridge were widely available. In that case, I’d definitely encourage everyone who loves roses, tonka, and booziness to give it a passing test sniff, especially in light of its lovely drydown. I wouldn’t wear Knightsbridge myself, but I think a good number of you would enjoy it very much, even if you didn’t think it was the most spectacular perfume you’d tried all year. Unfortunately, given Knightsbridge’s exclusivity and Harrod’s refusal to ship outside the U.K., I don’t think the fragrance is really worth substantial effort.

All of that is a subjective, personal valuation, however. Those who love the notes in question — whether the ones that I encountered, the Dior Homme concoction, or Mark Behnke’s rose-iris-leather-vanilla combination — may feel very differently. In which case, I hope you know someone who is travelling to London and willing to be your perfume mule.

DETAILS:

Cost & Availability: As noted, Knightsbridge is exclusive to Harrods, now and forever. The perfume is an eau de parfum that comes in a 100 ml bottle and costs £150. Harrods does not ship (“export” in their words) outside of the U.K., and the perfume will never be offered at any other site, not even Robert Piguet’s own website. I have not seen Knightsbridge offered on any of the American decanting sites. My own sample was a gift from a friend.