About two years ago, during a purchase at an AF in the Souk, I picked up "Buddha Wood" as a sort of "additional buy" while browsing through the other offerings. I liked the name, I found molecular scents intriguing, sandalwood (or so I thought back then) is always a good choice, so why not?
So, I sprayed it on my skin, but no, that was not "my" sandalwood, too synthetic, somewhat sour... Nope, not for me. And so the AF disappeared into the depths of my perfume cabinet among the samples and AF clutter.
Back then.
Recently, one evening, I finally decided to do a bit of decluttering. Everything went onto a large tray to sort through the jumble of samples and decants calmly at the big table in the living room, to check my notes, update my lists and folders, and select the unnecessary to soon contribute it to the general Parfumo cycle through a giveaway...
And then I stumbled upon the "Buddha Wood" AF. No, I didn't spray it, just smelled the sprayer, but somehow a tiny amount got onto my fingers.
And I was blown away. Absolutely!
I spent the night with my fingers in my nose. OK, not quite, but I just couldn't get away from this scent...
Accordingly, the next day, a full test was on the agenda.
What do we actually have here?
A fragrance from a Danish manufacturer of molecular scents. OK, I know a bit about molecular scents, the infamous "Molecule 01" from Escentric Molecules is in my cabinet, acquired to play around with a bit, but ultimately I found it rather boring, too pale on its own, and as a "scent enhancer," it felt more like glutamate in food to me. You can use it, but you can also skip it, I don't need it.
And what does the creator of "Buddha Wood" say?
Ah yes, the scent develops only on the wearer's skin, individual aura, a unique scent signature for each individual, etc... blah blah blah... heard it all before, molecular scent after all, pure synthetic.
I actually have nothing against synthetics; I am well aware that even in the bottles of those who advertise with "natural fragrance materials," there are not just the purest natural essences. And of course, I also know that many "synthetic fragrance materials" come across as purer and clearer than the original essences, and I generally like purity and clarity. In fact, I don't even care whether a scent is produced synthetically - as long as it smells good on me.
Synthetics certainly have their advantages; Zarkoperfume highlights them by explicitly stating that the scents are 100% cruelty-free, 100% vegan, sustainable, and resource-saving. I find that appealing. That synthetic fragrance materials might be better suited for sensitive skin and allergy sufferers, I acknowledge, but since I am hardly affected, that doesn't earn any extra points.
Enough of the theory - how does it smell, this molecular scent, more precisely: How does it smell on me?
What had I noted down two years ago? How did I comment on the scent back then?
"Sour-synthetic-fluffy," I wrote back then, and that it wasn't "my" sandalwood.
And today, after testing numerous sandalwood scents without finding "my" sandalwood?
"Synthetic-fluffy," yes indeed, and I love it! It radiates, it shimmers, glimmers, and shines, I find it stunning! I wrote that there was no development two years ago. True. But it doesn't need to develop significantly because, like with Iso-E-Super, I perceive it in recurring waves that envelop me, and I like this effect. It is really strong; even though I didn't spray much, it feels like I am surrounded by a wonderful cloud of pure, bright, lovely sandalwood, as if I just came from a Buddhist temple where I became one with the universe through meditation. I am floating! Simply beautiful...
And what about that sour undertone that bothered me back then?
I don't perceive it that way anymore today; could it be that my nose, my perception, and sensitivity have evolved with all the testing? There is something alongside the sandalwood, that's clear - but I can't define it, it actually leans towards a fruity direction that I can't really name, and I even find it beautiful, although I rarely like fruity notes in scents. I am thrilled.
Just for fun (hahaha!), I check Idealo, just to see what it costs... An orange "Sale" blinks at me. Providence? Must be...
My clicking finger hovers over the shopping cart for about an hour while the Swabian in me whines and asks annoying questions. Ultimately, it twitches - not a second too late, because the 55% has long turned back into only 12% while the scent was already in my cart...
Earlier, I received the email that my package is ready for pickup at the parcel shop.
Now it stands before me, in its shiny white cardboard tube made of recycled material; I find the whole presentation very nice, the shape and design successful, even if the cap doesn't quite match the otherwise high-quality impression.
I am happy - and once I have taken a picture and weighed it, I will apply this wonderful scent again and float through the rest of the day in unity with the universe...
*
Addendum:
Upon closer inspection, I must, however, lower my rating of the bottle.
I find the shape and design very successful - unfortunately, the workmanship is less so; the presence of a seam in the glass, for example, shouldn't have been necessary, and the fact that the label is stuck right there emphasizes it unfortunately.
I would have expected a bit more. The scent, of course, is not affected by this, but it is a bit of a shame.
Cashmere wood
Musk
Australian sandalwood
Yatagan
Heikeso
UntermWert
Silvi222
Gaspari
Ergoproxy
DaveGahan101
Rieke2021
Kitho
DieLora
