Bat Zoologist 2020

Since the original version is arguably THE concept fragrance of concept fragrances and has been hotly debated, loved or loathed, it is truly difficult to approach the successor with an open mind.
Personally, I have to admit that I was a fan of the original from the very beginning. And that is precisely why I come to the following conclusion:
Perhaps it would have been good for the fragrance - just for the sake of ratings and the damned bias - if it had been attributed to a different animal. I would even go so far as to say that the overall rating for the fragrance would have been much better.

Bat 2020 takes a completely different approach to the original from 2015.
Musty, damp earth and stones, in short: the whole bat-cave-like thing is completely absent at first. I also search in vain for the animalic or even a strong urine note, which is described in some statements and reviews as almost nausea-inducing. Especially in comparison to some other zoologists.
But maybe I'm too accustomed to animals and therefore don't notice them (?)...
Enigma.
When I say that something is "missing", however, that is not a very appropriate word, because if this had been the first edition of Bat, I would have taken the fragrance as it is. The crux of the matter with the naming or a relaunch with different DNA... A bit like the curse of the second album in music.

Bat 2020 fragrance experience:

To start: Fruity and bittersweet... Almost "real" guava clearly dominates. Wrapped in a little brooky mustiness, still, hot air and a nuance that is damn strongly reminiscent of the good old (!) dodo (I'm guessing fern somehow). Incidentally, the dodo is also a Zoologist candidate that was discontinued and re-released in a completely twisted way. Here, too, I would have simply changed the name of the animal... Admittedly, the opening blend is somewhere between wearable without hesitation and a mixture of delightful and initially repulsive. Definitely not a fresh or cool scent and more like a bat enclosure in a zoo than a dark stalactite cave.

The ever-present guava ripens noticeably as it progresses and then, gradually infused with more nature, mud and wilting seaweed, is also quite rotten at some point. Fig and hay do the rest. However, none of the wilting and rottenness is overdosed or pushes itself too far forward, so that the fragrance always remains on the edge of pleasantness.
Now, at the latest, a well-known nuance of the original (perhaps THE nuance of the original) comes to the fore: stone. And this is the first time that the fragrance makes a connection to the (old) Fledermaus that I can compare and creates a small cave association. Even old leather is also in the mix, also in moderation. And above all, this "damp" base note, which still reminds me strongly of Dodo (2019).

Bat 2020 is less concept than fragrance, much less concept fragrance than the original and is probably one of the more pleasing, if not the most pleasing zoologists for me. At first, I had to learn to accept that the whole path is different from the one I loved with Bat (2015). But if you take Bat for what it is and don't penalize it for what it perhaps "no longer" is, you're left with a pretty good, unquestionably innovative, zoologist-worthy and unique fragrance that is much more wearable and less full-bodied than its reputation suggests.