7
Helpful Review
Artistry in minimalism
Baccarat Rouge 540 is like Nirvana (the band, not the concept in Buddhism). Even if you don't like it, you have to admit that it was massively influential and ushered in a new era of perfumery.
I personally find it wonderful, and a real "unisex" fragrance. Of course, fragrance doesn't have gender, but what was done here was a meshing of traditional feminine and masculine notes perfectly: ambroxan and oakmoss on one side, and floral notes and sweet notes on the other. And these 4 descriptors are pretty much the entire fragrance — quite literally.
If you are not aware, and I think even many die-hard fragheads are not, Baccarat Rouge 540 is a combination of pretty much just 4 very cheap aromachemicals: ambroxan, hedione (a light floral scent), veramoss (a synthetic oakmoss), and ethyl maltol (a sharp, sweet scent). There are a couple of saffron aromachemicals (safranal, safraleine) at very low concentrations, but that's pretty much it. This is what makes it such an easy base to build upon. You can add some oud to it and you get Oud for Greatness Eau de Parfum. Add some leather and you get Spirito Fiorentino.
A lot of people might consider it unfair in some way that such cheap juice commands such high prices, but I don't. The price should be based on the artistry and skill required to make the composition, not the addition of the price of all the materials that it takes to make it. A painting is worth much more than the paints used and the canvas it sits on. After all, folks pay hundreds for Molecule 01 or Molecule 02, and while that is more extreme minimalism, I actually appreciate the minimalism in BR540 more. It's an actual composition, a scent with development and character, that even manages to appeal to both men and women, and be utterly unique. It's unfortunate that women have sort of co-opted this one for themselves, as I think men would really enjoy it if it weren't for the societal connotation nowadays that this is a women's perfume. And it doesn't smell like anything else. Not even remotely like anything found in nature; it's what I call an "abstract" perfume like Ganymede Eau de Parfum where it is not necessarily meant to invoke anything in particular, just be a great scent.
For me, Baccarat Rouge 540 is bigger than "I like it" or "I don't like it." It's important to the history and heritage of perfumery. I personally can't stand N°5 Parfum, but I can't deny its sheer importance and magnitude. In a few decades, people will undoubtedly say the same about Baccarat Rouge 540.
I personally find it wonderful, and a real "unisex" fragrance. Of course, fragrance doesn't have gender, but what was done here was a meshing of traditional feminine and masculine notes perfectly: ambroxan and oakmoss on one side, and floral notes and sweet notes on the other. And these 4 descriptors are pretty much the entire fragrance — quite literally.
If you are not aware, and I think even many die-hard fragheads are not, Baccarat Rouge 540 is a combination of pretty much just 4 very cheap aromachemicals: ambroxan, hedione (a light floral scent), veramoss (a synthetic oakmoss), and ethyl maltol (a sharp, sweet scent). There are a couple of saffron aromachemicals (safranal, safraleine) at very low concentrations, but that's pretty much it. This is what makes it such an easy base to build upon. You can add some oud to it and you get Oud for Greatness Eau de Parfum. Add some leather and you get Spirito Fiorentino.
A lot of people might consider it unfair in some way that such cheap juice commands such high prices, but I don't. The price should be based on the artistry and skill required to make the composition, not the addition of the price of all the materials that it takes to make it. A painting is worth much more than the paints used and the canvas it sits on. After all, folks pay hundreds for Molecule 01 or Molecule 02, and while that is more extreme minimalism, I actually appreciate the minimalism in BR540 more. It's an actual composition, a scent with development and character, that even manages to appeal to both men and women, and be utterly unique. It's unfortunate that women have sort of co-opted this one for themselves, as I think men would really enjoy it if it weren't for the societal connotation nowadays that this is a women's perfume. And it doesn't smell like anything else. Not even remotely like anything found in nature; it's what I call an "abstract" perfume like Ganymede Eau de Parfum where it is not necessarily meant to invoke anything in particular, just be a great scent.
For me, Baccarat Rouge 540 is bigger than "I like it" or "I don't like it." It's important to the history and heritage of perfumery. I personally can't stand N°5 Parfum, but I can't deny its sheer importance and magnitude. In a few decades, people will undoubtedly say the same about Baccarat Rouge 540.