3
Not too bad - but unfortunately lacks longevity
When it says synthetic-aquatic, that’s usually a reason for me to run away screaming, because searching for something good in either of these genres is like looking for the (non-existent) needle in a haystack. But should I carelessly toss away the samples that were in my package from S. Oliver?
Indeed, the opening is a bit off-putting: I wondered why Sidolin is now available as an Eau de Toilette - from the pre-reformulated era, of course. But that feeling passes quickly, as cardamom and pink pepper have no interest in window cleaning.
The rosemary does quite well here - in a classic way, I like it! I generally have issues with moss: if it's missing, I notice it immediately, but as a single note, it's hard for me to detect; it's a note that forms the network without playing a prominent role. I have the impression that the top and base notes quickly intertwine, or the base note already comes forward early before it retreats again, celebrating the rosemary-moss duo in pure classic style. It’s also interesting that the cedar doesn’t come across as too dry, but adds a slightly resinous note, which is usually never the case with this conifer.
Yes, this fragrance fits the mentioned genre. However, practically everything on the market that is synthetic and/or aquatic is completely overdone in at least one component and thus a real nuisance. Here, however, there is a balanced blend with quite classic references, making it a good all-rounder. However, this guy lacks endurance and projection, and not just a little! Was there simply cost-cutting involved, and should this little aquatic actually be called Eau de Cologne? Or do the synthetics and aquatics have to first be a nuisance in parts of their composition to achieve endurance and projection in the sum? Here, I definitely miss a bit of "pressure," even though this fragrance is truly not to be underestimated.
Indeed, the opening is a bit off-putting: I wondered why Sidolin is now available as an Eau de Toilette - from the pre-reformulated era, of course. But that feeling passes quickly, as cardamom and pink pepper have no interest in window cleaning.
The rosemary does quite well here - in a classic way, I like it! I generally have issues with moss: if it's missing, I notice it immediately, but as a single note, it's hard for me to detect; it's a note that forms the network without playing a prominent role. I have the impression that the top and base notes quickly intertwine, or the base note already comes forward early before it retreats again, celebrating the rosemary-moss duo in pure classic style. It’s also interesting that the cedar doesn’t come across as too dry, but adds a slightly resinous note, which is usually never the case with this conifer.
Yes, this fragrance fits the mentioned genre. However, practically everything on the market that is synthetic and/or aquatic is completely overdone in at least one component and thus a real nuisance. Here, however, there is a balanced blend with quite classic references, making it a good all-rounder. However, this guy lacks endurance and projection, and not just a little! Was there simply cost-cutting involved, and should this little aquatic actually be called Eau de Cologne? Or do the synthetics and aquatics have to first be a nuisance in parts of their composition to achieve endurance and projection in the sum? Here, I definitely miss a bit of "pressure," even though this fragrance is truly not to be underestimated.
Translated · Show original