By  on March 17, 2017

The Score: 3.9The Verdict: Some judges were at the outset impressed by this spicy tuberose scent, though most of the praise turned to criticism after the top notes faded. Our panel cited unoriginality and lack of inspiration as its primary sins.“Not interesting, commercial, no signature. Even if the [staying power] is not bad, what does this fresh, spicy tuberose scent bring to the market?”Innovation score: 4.5Artistic score: 4.5“Functional, synthetic and cheap-smelling…best suited to a bathroom hand-soap.”Innovation score: 1Artistic score: 1“Smells good quality, but very ordinary signature and déjà vu.”Innovation score: 5Artistic score: 4“When I spray the fragrance on my skin, it smells extremely good. It is not creative, but always pleasant. The problem is it does not go very far.”Innovation score: 4Artistic score: 5“A diluted version from the better tuberoses of the Eighties and Nineties.”Innovation score: 2Artistic score: 2“Interesting, melodious woody-fruity jasmine start. Solid but unexciting thereafter.”Innovation score: 6Artistic score: 6“I do not dislike this fragrance, however I do not love it. I wish it had one more facet to keep me interested.”Innovation score: 3Artistic score: 3“Ah, the start intrigued me. Sadly, it faded to a pleasant but undistinguished mélange of white flowers.”Innovation score: 7Artistic score: 5Editor’s note: In this Smell Test and in all Tests going forward, fragrances will be given two scores: An artistic score, based on creative merit and an innovation score, which replaces the previous technical score. The panel has deemed the technical score to be too subjective — instead, the innovation score will be awarded based on the newness and originality a fragrance brings to the market.

To continue reading this article...

load comments
blog comments powered by Disqus