With an argument "ad hominem" a person is attacked in a debate as unqualified to represent their view of things. This comes very indelicate and is of course inadmissible according to pure doctrine, because it (deliberately) aims beside the point and is only intended to distract from the actual topic.
I have quite thought about what value (if any) should be given to the argument "ad hirschidem" in the present review. Allegedly, 'Russian Musk' namely contains real Siberian deer musk. And the supplier's assurance that this comes solely from limited, approved shootings by licensed hunters is likely to bring tears to the eyes not only of those who know Russia, but also of those who merely follow the news from there. In this respect, I am actually glad for the time being that the batch is all gone, the comment as well as the "ad hirschidem" problem therefore a good deal theoretical. And in the end I have the test at least still a good "in the matter" for me - and perhaps likewise for others - abgewinnen can.
But now finally to the fragrance. He reminds me in the nature of his appearance amazingly long time to 'XPEC Original'. This seems at first not at all close. The two are also anything but twins - and it took a good while before I came up with it. After all, in 'Russian Musk', the animalic is by far predominant, in contrast to the "Floranimalik" or "Plantalik" of the elder. Moreover, the Russian seems phasenweise almost neroli-betont fruity-floral, almost like a nimm2-Bonbon.
Nevertheless, the lush bouquet of powerful ingredients simply resembles each other in the massive style of the composition, without pointing to flat note parallels. On the contrary, as soon as I want to get to the bottom of my involuntary impression aroma-wise, supposed, say "formal" limits and differences open up - I must therefore leave it in the following mostly with the appropriate feeling.
Under the unquestionably needle-like prelude of 'Russian Musk' suggests itself briskly flower closer. The link there is the citrus, but this becomes clear to me only in retrospect. On the special importance of neroli refers to the manufacturer himself, so his great contribution can not be surprising.
Oddly enough, the central animalic, the musk, seemed more present to me on the first day of testing than on the second. May be a matter of habituation. A dangerous thing, because in the external effect 'Russian Musk' has quite Schmackes - and my this diagnosing favorite colleague is certainly not squeamish. In contrast, the XPEC is downright gentle, was her conclusion to this phase of my parallel test.
The perceived similarity fades, however, as the Younger undergoes a gradual transformation to an amber scent. Sweetness comes through, dabbed with honeyed smoke. The fact that the statedly diverse oud varieties largely hide from me, meanwhile, does not sadden me: whoever uses real musk will hardly be squeamish about oud.
To the back out is admittedly a waxy, fruity-floral note (I now think primarily of orange blossom) well noticeable and plausible throughout that I thought of 'XPEC' as a sparring partner. Should I choose, my choice would also fall apart from the keyword "ad hirschidem" on the latter. The remains consistently true to its idiosyncratic lineup - and if I already decide to smell so extraordinary throughout the day, irritates me an amber-dominated, comparatively dinky second half rather.
Nevertheless, 'Russian Musk' is a successful fragrance.
I thank Garcon for the sample.
Once again on the subject of musk in the overriding sense. The test of 'Russian Musk' may have demonstrated to me for the first (and perhaps last) time real musk. Therefore, my conclusions are possibly to be taken with a grain of salt. Nevertheless, I personally cannot (honestly!) extract from today's candidate that added value of musky-animalicism that could be the last bastion to justify the use of the natural substance. My conclusion is that the range of laboratory substitutes is in any case for this particular livestock so large that other would have worked equally without odor trade-offs.
After all, scents like Lutens' 'Muscs Koublaï Khän' or Malles 'Musc Ravageur' show that more or less sublime stench without a contribution snatched from the incarnate deer goes. In his impressive commentary on Lutens, the esteemed colleague Couchlock comprehensibly states exactly that. Let's believe him.