- Messages
- 2,750
Well - looks like I'm kicking off the reviewing of these.
I will say right up front that NONE of these scents is in any sense cheap and nasty. If you did not know they were imitating another scent you would simply take them as excellent scents in their own right.
I'll start with Tobacco Vanille as I am able to compare this with the 'Real Thing'.
I tested with a left forearm-full of the sample and a right of the genuine scent. The original is a fairly linear scent, starting from tobacco and vanilla and ending with tobacco and vanilla. There are other notes in there, but they act as fleeting glances or underpinning suggestions.
Opening. I found the most significant difference was in the opening. The copy scent had a very short-lived but noticeable bitterness. I did not recognise what this was, and I wondered if it might arise from the variety of perfumer's alcohol used, as it was volatile and disappeared almost immediately. This should not put you off. If you smell it at all it will be gone in thirty seconds. I found the clone and the original to be indistinguishable thereafter.
Middle. No great development from either as expected. I think I can just notice a note of cacao from the clone which is not noticeable in the original. This is an acknowledged note in the original, so perhaps it is simply more emphasised in the clone.
Finish. Longevity of the clone is very good. Original gone in about eight hours, clone still noticeable as a skin scent after ten hours.
Verdict. Very good replica. I could tell them apart if presented simultaneously but I don't think I could identify a single version at first sniff. I would buy and use this (and probably will!!).
Next time - Oud Wood.
I will say right up front that NONE of these scents is in any sense cheap and nasty. If you did not know they were imitating another scent you would simply take them as excellent scents in their own right.
I'll start with Tobacco Vanille as I am able to compare this with the 'Real Thing'.
I tested with a left forearm-full of the sample and a right of the genuine scent. The original is a fairly linear scent, starting from tobacco and vanilla and ending with tobacco and vanilla. There are other notes in there, but they act as fleeting glances or underpinning suggestions.
Opening. I found the most significant difference was in the opening. The copy scent had a very short-lived but noticeable bitterness. I did not recognise what this was, and I wondered if it might arise from the variety of perfumer's alcohol used, as it was volatile and disappeared almost immediately. This should not put you off. If you smell it at all it will be gone in thirty seconds. I found the clone and the original to be indistinguishable thereafter.
Middle. No great development from either as expected. I think I can just notice a note of cacao from the clone which is not noticeable in the original. This is an acknowledged note in the original, so perhaps it is simply more emphasised in the clone.
Finish. Longevity of the clone is very good. Original gone in about eight hours, clone still noticeable as a skin scent after ten hours.
Verdict. Very good replica. I could tell them apart if presented simultaneously but I don't think I could identify a single version at first sniff. I would buy and use this (and probably will!!).
Next time - Oud Wood.