Tears of Eros Paul Schütze 2016
7
Helpful Review
Translated
Show original
We Rangers
Well, we Rangers don't have it easy. I didn't say that to get sympathy.
Our favorite remedies are volatile, like ghosts in daylight. Fir, spruce, Swiss stone pine, conifer, juniper (forest?) & Co.: as racy top notes (= genie from the bottle) they overwhelm us and make us believe in eternal fulfilment (= lasting durability). But the beautiful appearance quickly collapses - usually every minute. This is often followed by a grumpy mixture of oakmoss (lasts long, but is actually not very woody), earthy patchouli notes (nothing against it) and/or general woodiness (cedar and family).
But that's not what the Ranger is looking for.
He wants to immerse himself in the shady, damp green under the trees - and he wants to stay there. This may be earthy/mushroomy (but not too much), may be bitter (but not sweet at all), woody green anyway - and may also develop. But it has to remain a forest.
"Tears of Eros" - I won't go into the name at all, see below - offers this: you enter the forest and a beautiful, diverse spectrum of aromas opens up. In the course of time, the little spoon keeps its character, changes too, but also stays strongly on track - with great performance. So, the great world theatre does not take place here - everything remains in the forest. And that is far more than other representatives of the genre can do.
To speak briefly against two curious reservations.
* "Tears of Eros" is a really dumb name. That's what it has in common with what's felt to be 70% of all perfume names. It has long been incomprehensible to me how an industry that belongs to the luxury segment, where actually everything has to be right - packaging, advertising, faces, costumes - so many stupid names are launched. Can you not afford the 25€ for a linguistically creative employee? It remains a secret. However, it also remains incomprehensible to me how one can make such a stupid name the subject of a fragrance review.
* I cannot understand how there is so much talk of "synthetic" ingredients. It is well known that far more than 80% of all fragrances in current perfumery consist of aroma chemical substances - but this is not very noticeable here in ToE (in contrast to 98.5% of all substances marked as "Oud", which are usually 100% synthetic and smell like this). Why especially here "synthetics" are detected - I cannot understand it.
Finally, the information I am often looking for: We are talking about an EdP of which 50ml had the retail price of 155€ (2020.03).
It was worth the price. Also in view of the fact that 19 evaluators were only able to win for a 58% rating. One, in my view, grossly undervalued share.
This is the opinion of a ranger People who prefer to stay in the comfort zone may stay away. It is not for everyone (but it is not extreme in any way).
Our favorite remedies are volatile, like ghosts in daylight. Fir, spruce, Swiss stone pine, conifer, juniper (forest?) & Co.: as racy top notes (= genie from the bottle) they overwhelm us and make us believe in eternal fulfilment (= lasting durability). But the beautiful appearance quickly collapses - usually every minute. This is often followed by a grumpy mixture of oakmoss (lasts long, but is actually not very woody), earthy patchouli notes (nothing against it) and/or general woodiness (cedar and family).
But that's not what the Ranger is looking for.
He wants to immerse himself in the shady, damp green under the trees - and he wants to stay there. This may be earthy/mushroomy (but not too much), may be bitter (but not sweet at all), woody green anyway - and may also develop. But it has to remain a forest.
"Tears of Eros" - I won't go into the name at all, see below - offers this: you enter the forest and a beautiful, diverse spectrum of aromas opens up. In the course of time, the little spoon keeps its character, changes too, but also stays strongly on track - with great performance. So, the great world theatre does not take place here - everything remains in the forest. And that is far more than other representatives of the genre can do.
To speak briefly against two curious reservations.
* "Tears of Eros" is a really dumb name. That's what it has in common with what's felt to be 70% of all perfume names. It has long been incomprehensible to me how an industry that belongs to the luxury segment, where actually everything has to be right - packaging, advertising, faces, costumes - so many stupid names are launched. Can you not afford the 25€ for a linguistically creative employee? It remains a secret. However, it also remains incomprehensible to me how one can make such a stupid name the subject of a fragrance review.
* I cannot understand how there is so much talk of "synthetic" ingredients. It is well known that far more than 80% of all fragrances in current perfumery consist of aroma chemical substances - but this is not very noticeable here in ToE (in contrast to 98.5% of all substances marked as "Oud", which are usually 100% synthetic and smell like this). Why especially here "synthetics" are detected - I cannot understand it.
Finally, the information I am often looking for: We are talking about an EdP of which 50ml had the retail price of 155€ (2020.03).
It was worth the price. Also in view of the fact that 19 evaluators were only able to win for a 58% rating. One, in my view, grossly undervalued share.
This is the opinion of a ranger People who prefer to stay in the comfort zone may stay away. It is not for everyone (but it is not extreme in any way).
6 Comments
Fhfhfh