QuercusAlbus
Reviews
Filter & sort
QuercusAlbus
Is This a Yellow Perfume?
I do think the colour of the bottle and of the juice itself installs an extremely tenacious preconception of a 'fume. I have ^no^ doubt "whatsoever" though that if I tried this blindly I would conceive of it as yellow! The name of it would also of course have to be withheld in this experiment.
This is causing my estimate of the worth of high-end 'fumes to swing back the other way again! (I recently reviewed BtV ~Ambitious~ after it had convinced me afresh that they ^do^ boot.) I am quite frankly astounded at the nectary-muskiness that is right at this moment baptising my eager olfactory nerves. And all the rest: nice flowers & woods & ting-&-ting, all well-balanced & integrated. I read orris in the notes-list: that's no doubt a major factor in my liking this so much - it's never failed except once (Bella Bellissima's ~Orris Florentina~, which I find incorrigably dull; but I think it might avail to give it another run-out sometime).
But it's that musk that does the trick: I can almost ^feel^ it dripping, dripping, making a little olfactory 'plink!' each time. And in a 'fume of this price-brackett too!
... a few minutes later ...
Apologies: just got to come back this soon: this 'fume is ^amazing^! That muskiness is just ... ! How has this stuff y-slippèn beneath my radar all this time!?
This is causing my estimate of the worth of high-end 'fumes to swing back the other way again! (I recently reviewed BtV ~Ambitious~ after it had convinced me afresh that they ^do^ boot.) I am quite frankly astounded at the nectary-muskiness that is right at this moment baptising my eager olfactory nerves. And all the rest: nice flowers & woods & ting-&-ting, all well-balanced & integrated. I read orris in the notes-list: that's no doubt a major factor in my liking this so much - it's never failed except once (Bella Bellissima's ~Orris Florentina~, which I find incorrigably dull; but I think it might avail to give it another run-out sometime).
But it's that musk that does the trick: I can almost ^feel^ it dripping, dripping, making a little olfactory 'plink!' each time. And in a 'fume of this price-brackett too!
... a few minutes later ...
Apologies: just got to come back this soon: this 'fume is ^amazing^! That muskiness is just ... ! How has this stuff y-slippèn beneath my radar all this time!?
At the Head of a Certain Scale
If you were to ask me which of all perfumes is the best value-for-minlet, I do think I would have to put this one at the head of that scale. Certain of the Al-Rehab 'fumes would be close competitors, but I think this one would just ^have^ to take chief place. It's partly by reason of the ambrette-seed that this one takes my fancy so very particularly, that being a note that I have had a singular fondness for ever since I bought a small (?15ml or so) of an essential oil composition called 'Sweet Musk' fræ a hippy stall many years ago. I bought a second bottle as a gift for a certain couple I knew; and neither my bottle nor theirs lasted at all long - the aroma was so compelling - on several occasions when I visited them the aroma was veritably pouring through their bedroom door!
Wherefore to my perception the ambrette-seed is actually the chief note of this around which the others cluster; and it is a great window of opportunity to me that I can procure this ambrette-seed-heavy 'fume at such modest expenditure relatively. And maugre my love of that note, I still probably would not praise this 'fume if it were not in other respects well-composed, with its sweet & prominent flowery note - presumably mimosa - upholding the ambrette gorgeously (see how ambrette is the fulcrum with me?); and the green-tea note (with the citrus elements in train) - which I ^would^ say is ancilliary in this one, umschweifing about the mightier structural elements.
Wherefore to my perception the ambrette-seed is actually the chief note of this around which the others cluster; and it is a great window of opportunity to me that I can procure this ambrette-seed-heavy 'fume at such modest expenditure relatively. And maugre my love of that note, I still probably would not praise this 'fume if it were not in other respects well-composed, with its sweet & prominent flowery note - presumably mimosa - upholding the ambrette gorgeously (see how ambrette is the fulcrum with me?); and the green-tea note (with the citrus elements in train) - which I ^would^ say is ancilliary in this one, umschweifing about the mightier structural elements.
Like Mowing the Lawn
An intensely green one undoubtedly. A bit like the mowing-the-lawn smell. Said similar things about Gucci's ~Bloom Aqua di Fiori~, but I wouldn't call it exactly similar to that: that one's a lot ambrier & muskier as well. Yes, the green of this one is a nice sharp pungeant green. The previous reviewer captures it quite well, I do deem, with those moss-on-damp-stone figures. Only just applied it - see how it goes.
Just noticed a previous reviewer's called it musky. I wouldn't say that yet myself - but then 'fume-heads know that musk is the most elusive of all aromata. We'll see. Now that the ~Ceylon~ is now more properly passing I might be able to actually appreciate this. I think the ~Bloom Aqua di Fiori~ is very ^heavy^-ambry compared to this one; and it is in that, rather than in muskiness, that the difference consists. And the green of that one is rather more agressive - it is by far the pricier 'fume after-all. The muskiness of this is of the lighter, and somewhat nectary, variety - I'm beginning to °pick-up on it° now.
Yes there it is, undoubtedly, refracting all that bruised-stem stuff through its lovely olfactory lens.
That tendency of the less-pricey 'fumes to seem at least a little rancid & metallic to the wearer with sustained exposure is manifesting to a degree with this one; but it's keeping within reasonable bounds, I would say. Both CK and Elizabeth Arden do a right good service I do adduce, supplying us with these relatively purse friendly 'fumes that are not by any means contemptible. It's kind of like, maybe, riding a bicycle when one doesn't ^really^ need to use a motor-vehicle: a bicycle ride can be really quite an excellent experience. And there are some ^very^ well-made bicycles. So I'll just continue riding my well-made olfactory bicycle for the time-being, and get back to you when I've done a fair few more miles on it.
Can't resist piping-up again sooner than I intended. It's only because I am beginning to really enjoy this. When I come home with one of this heavily discounted CK 'fumes in my bag I think "ought I really to have done that?" & when it comes to testing it it's difficult not to be cluttered by all the baggage of °wanting° it to be a good deal, and on the other hand overcompensating against that tendency; but I am becoming rapidly convinced now that this is a ^really decent^ budget 'fume. The flowery notes are coming through now; and there is no longer any doubt in my mind that this is a bona-fide squeezing of the utmost drop of true perfumery out of a stringently constrained brief. I see that Alberto Morillas is one of the perfumiers, and isn't he one of the °great ones°? This 'fume certainly testifies to its being so.
No grand déja-vu-scapes with this - but then are we really expecting ^that^ here? It °catches° me in the back of the throat. You know that °catching-in-back-of-throat° effect that you get with a good oakmoss- or orangeblossom-heavy 'fume (not that this necessarily contains either), which I know at least ^some^ pœps also get, and which is to my mind a ^strongly^ positive item - it's saying a ^very^ great deal that a 'fume of this purse-friendliness does that atall. And I'm picking-up on the sandalwood now - didn't discern it at first, it fits in there so very snugly. All my doubts about bringing this one home are now completely assuaged!
... late the following evening ...
Just completed a full-day's run-out of this. Well, it was there in my box for ages, and I kept seeing it and thinking "when am I going to properly try that CK ... what's it called again ... that I plucked out of the rough cardboard box at the perfume shop, & it had a handwritten (but really quite friendly) price-label on it?". Well now I have; and all this time it was an unknown gem just sitting there waiting!
Just one last thing: is ~bamboo~ really a note, or is actual bamboo absolute (or whatever) a true perfumery element? I once read a review of Gucci's ~Bamboo~ that mocked the calling it that on grounds that there is no such note.
Just noticed a previous reviewer's called it musky. I wouldn't say that yet myself - but then 'fume-heads know that musk is the most elusive of all aromata. We'll see. Now that the ~Ceylon~ is now more properly passing I might be able to actually appreciate this. I think the ~Bloom Aqua di Fiori~ is very ^heavy^-ambry compared to this one; and it is in that, rather than in muskiness, that the difference consists. And the green of that one is rather more agressive - it is by far the pricier 'fume after-all. The muskiness of this is of the lighter, and somewhat nectary, variety - I'm beginning to °pick-up on it° now.
Yes there it is, undoubtedly, refracting all that bruised-stem stuff through its lovely olfactory lens.
That tendency of the less-pricey 'fumes to seem at least a little rancid & metallic to the wearer with sustained exposure is manifesting to a degree with this one; but it's keeping within reasonable bounds, I would say. Both CK and Elizabeth Arden do a right good service I do adduce, supplying us with these relatively purse friendly 'fumes that are not by any means contemptible. It's kind of like, maybe, riding a bicycle when one doesn't ^really^ need to use a motor-vehicle: a bicycle ride can be really quite an excellent experience. And there are some ^very^ well-made bicycles. So I'll just continue riding my well-made olfactory bicycle for the time-being, and get back to you when I've done a fair few more miles on it.
Can't resist piping-up again sooner than I intended. It's only because I am beginning to really enjoy this. When I come home with one of this heavily discounted CK 'fumes in my bag I think "ought I really to have done that?" & when it comes to testing it it's difficult not to be cluttered by all the baggage of °wanting° it to be a good deal, and on the other hand overcompensating against that tendency; but I am becoming rapidly convinced now that this is a ^really decent^ budget 'fume. The flowery notes are coming through now; and there is no longer any doubt in my mind that this is a bona-fide squeezing of the utmost drop of true perfumery out of a stringently constrained brief. I see that Alberto Morillas is one of the perfumiers, and isn't he one of the °great ones°? This 'fume certainly testifies to its being so.
No grand déja-vu-scapes with this - but then are we really expecting ^that^ here? It °catches° me in the back of the throat. You know that °catching-in-back-of-throat° effect that you get with a good oakmoss- or orangeblossom-heavy 'fume (not that this necessarily contains either), which I know at least ^some^ pœps also get, and which is to my mind a ^strongly^ positive item - it's saying a ^very^ great deal that a 'fume of this purse-friendliness does that atall. And I'm picking-up on the sandalwood now - didn't discern it at first, it fits in there so very snugly. All my doubts about bringing this one home are now completely assuaged!
... late the following evening ...
Just completed a full-day's run-out of this. Well, it was there in my box for ages, and I kept seeing it and thinking "when am I going to properly try that CK ... what's it called again ... that I plucked out of the rough cardboard box at the perfume shop, & it had a handwritten (but really quite friendly) price-label on it?". Well now I have; and all this time it was an unknown gem just sitting there waiting!
Just one last thing: is ~bamboo~ really a note, or is actual bamboo absolute (or whatever) a true perfumery element? I once read a review of Gucci's ~Bamboo~ that mocked the calling it that on grounds that there is no such note.
Outflanking Spice Manœuvre
This may mislead one at first into deeming it a rather bogstandard spice-bomb & "that,'s all folks!". But no! Do have patience with it. A little will do. It unfolds into a really ^very^ rich & solid 'fume - amply pungeant, & with plenty of balsamic-woody-muskiness going on. Yes, the ginger ^is^ very prominent; but casting the "gingerbread" appellation at it fails very substantially to do it justice. I'm even getting a touch of soapiness - wouldn't expect soapiness to fit in here, but somehow it does.
Some say the sheer heft of this falls short of the Serge Lutens standard. I don't think it ^falls short^, but rather it presents somewhat °obliquely°. And why ought it not? I don't think it's incumbent on SL to make ^every^ one of their 'fumes a full-frontal charge of the heavy horse, just because most of them are! It's a pleasant change, this one: not ditching the heft, just directing it more flank-wise than is their wont.
And it's holding up ^astonishingly^ well against the remnants of the weekend's ~Ceylon~ broaching!
... a couple of hours later ...
I'll tell you what this reminds me of - and some people will be aghast, I think, at my saying this - but this ^is^ distinctly the superior 'fume, & I'm not just saying so because it's the more expensive, it ^is^ the superior 'fume - but this one that it reminds me of ^is^ one that I do like, and deem much better than a certain fashion for doing it down would have it -- and the 'fume is this - ~Obsession~ (lady's (nominally)) by Calvin Klein. Both have a certain °dry smokiness° that I really enjoy (provided it's not ^too^ often!) in a 'fume.
There isn't a touch of civet in this, is there?
Some say the sheer heft of this falls short of the Serge Lutens standard. I don't think it ^falls short^, but rather it presents somewhat °obliquely°. And why ought it not? I don't think it's incumbent on SL to make ^every^ one of their 'fumes a full-frontal charge of the heavy horse, just because most of them are! It's a pleasant change, this one: not ditching the heft, just directing it more flank-wise than is their wont.
And it's holding up ^astonishingly^ well against the remnants of the weekend's ~Ceylon~ broaching!
... a couple of hours later ...
I'll tell you what this reminds me of - and some people will be aghast, I think, at my saying this - but this ^is^ distinctly the superior 'fume, & I'm not just saying so because it's the more expensive, it ^is^ the superior 'fume - but this one that it reminds me of ^is^ one that I do like, and deem much better than a certain fashion for doing it down would have it -- and the 'fume is this - ~Obsession~ (lady's (nominally)) by Calvin Klein. Both have a certain °dry smokiness° that I really enjoy (provided it's not ^too^ often!) in a 'fume.
There isn't a touch of civet in this, is there?
Æry-Watery
I am astounded by the previous review! I understand the analogy of °olfactory ice°, tending to agree with it as far as it goes; but to then proceed to say that this is an ^extremely^ agressive perfume that is capable of seriously discomfiting one's olfactory faculty for an entire day is to my mind ... well ... paroxysmal, quite frankly! Of course, I ^do^ appreciate that different persons have different sensibilities, olfactorily, often _very_ different; but that anyone react so _very_ strongly to this 'fume is to me nothing less than an epiphany in this principle, as I actually perceive it as really very delicate and gentle. To me it is a fine example of an æry-watery 'fume - a sort of °gossamer° or watery °filigree° of a 'fume - indeed, somewhat evocative of ice & a cool breeze. I love that kind of 'fume, and I was very pleased to discover this one.
I have had just one other disagreement as strong as this - over ~Orris Florentina~ by Bella Bellissima. I find that one to be an ^extremely^ mild 'fume - it seems to me to be basically a bit of orris & pretty much nothing else; but she in her review described it a 'fierce', and went to considerable lengths to emphasise this.
Unfortunately I hear that this lady is now extremely unwell. There has been some rallying on her behalf on the ~Fragrantica~ website, on which she is known as 'lada1947'.
I have had just one other disagreement as strong as this - over ~Orris Florentina~ by Bella Bellissima. I find that one to be an ^extremely^ mild 'fume - it seems to me to be basically a bit of orris & pretty much nothing else; but she in her review described it a 'fierce', and went to considerable lengths to emphasise this.
Unfortunately I hear that this lady is now extremely unwell. There has been some rallying on her behalf on the ~Fragrantica~ website, on which she is known as 'lada1947'.
