Condorpilot1

Ah yes - I actually don't like leather fragrances. I often find these scents too old-fashioned, rough, and dry. However, I have refrained from this so far. An exception was actually the long-standing Mercedes-Benz Black Leather, which is mainly young and sweetened up, making it quite mass-appealing. Now, Rasasi La Yuqawam (LY) is also in my collection and represents the second Rasasi in my collection alongside Hawas.

I actually came across La Yuqawam through research on well-known perfume clones. This fragrance is said to be a very convincing clone of Tom Ford's Tuscan Leather (TL). I had heard about Tuscan Leather several times before but had never tested it. At least I simply believed that I wouldn't like this type of scent simply because of the name "Leather." How wrong I was...

As fate would have it, about a year ago, I visited a perfumery that happened to sell both Rasasi La Yuqawam and Tom Ford Tuscan Leather at the same time! This fit perfectly into my research on perfume clones. So I seized the opportunity to test both in direct comparison, each on one arm. More on the comparison later.

From the very first spray of LY, I knew that this would be a scent like no other. It will have uniqueness. Of course, the leather is already noticeable, and it can quickly assault the nose. But the beast is immediately tamed by a fruitiness, complemented by oriental spiciness. La Yuqawam feels distinctly more oriental and not, as TL might suggest, elegantly Italian. Fruitiness and leather engage in a duel at eye level in the first minutes. However, I find that the berry in the top note is more of a blackberry than a raspberry. This note really lasts a long time and is always perceptible throughout the fragrance's development. Although - sometimes a hint of raspberry does come through, but it feels as if it has been candied - yet this raspberry holds back quite a bit.

When the top note fades, there is a continuous interplay between spiciness, smokiness, and really pleasant leather. The leather does not immediately overshadow everything around it but steadily accompanies the other components. And that is probably why this leather scent is more than bearable for me. I don't just smell dry, rough leather. I constantly smell the blackberry in the background, incense, and slightly charred wood. Very masculine, a bit animalistic but not too aggressively intrusive (maybe just a little) but still really noticeable.

Speaking of perceptibility: I believe there is not a single fragrance in my collection that I smell on myself for as long as La Yuqawam when I wear it. I'm talking about around 7-8 hours, during which I inhale a little cloud of scent repeatedly. Honestly, I think it's great because it constantly confirms that this perfume easily carries you through half the day. Overall, the scent is perceptible on the skin for more than 10 hours, so I can only agree with the other comments regarding this. Such longevity is, of course, a dream.

Now for a brief comparison with Tuscan Leather. In the top note, I find the most significant difference. The fruitiness of the blackberry/raspberry in La Yuqawam is much more pronounced than in Tuscan Leather. There, the berry is noticeable, but much more subtle, so the scent in Tom Ford focuses more on the leather accords. However, these appear somewhat softer and more refined from the start than in Rasasi. Nevertheless, after a while, these two scents are practically indistinguishable (or only marginally so). Rasasi has done a good job when it comes to copying. But its stronger fruitiness is what I actually prefer a little more than in Tom Ford.

I can recommend the perfume if you are really looking for a powerhouse for autumn or winter, best for autumn. La Yuqawam is more casual to wear, as it appears a bit less elegant than Tuscan Leather. However, I would only consider a blind purchase if you have the Tuscan Leather DNA firmly in mind and want a scent that comes close to it, pushes the berry more to the forefront, and also offers a very good price-performance ratio. Then I think you can't go wrong. I, for one, am more than happy with La Yuqawam!

If I remember correctly, Dunhill London was the second or third perfume I owned as a teenager - alongside the timeless classic Cool Water. I first encountered Dunhill London about 8 years ago on a cruise. At that time, this perfume was available for purchase in the onboard shop. I had no idea about perfumes back then, but I simply liked the name "London" because I love the city and thought the fragrance might be good too. From the very first sniff, I was in love; the price was affordable, and it was purchased. However, a few months later, while traveling again with the scent in my luggage, my Dunhill London bottle broke in my suitcase, probably during the flight handling, leaving quite a mess. My clothes and suitcase smelled of the fragrance for up to three weeks.

Naturally, I was quite sad about the loss and had to reorder. The scent has always left me with a feeling of classic elegance. In terms of style, Dunhill London has always had a certain Armani and Hugo Boss vibe for me, which I still feel today. Although I couldn't quite figure out which notes it contained, I didn't care at all. I knew I would smell good with it, and different from others my age.

Even today, I feel that sense of elegance when I wear Dunhill London. Fruity-synthetic (perhaps) green apple in the opening, which lingers for a while. Along with a slight oriental spiciness and citrus freshness that hints at cardamom, this rounded scent offers an excellent combination. After about three-quarters of an hour, the perfume tends to take on floral tones. Definitely white-floral. Unfortunately, the fragrance fades too quickly, softly and elegantly. To be honest, I can't perceive sandalwood in the base, but I do catch a hint of vanilla and maybe a bit of tonka.

The longevity of the perfume on my skin is a maximum of 5 hours, and the sillage is moderate. I wish the performance were stronger; this scent truly deserves it! But I don't want to complain too much at this price, as the scent DNA is great and will appeal more to younger men. In my opinion, Dunhill London is best suited for autumn or spring and can be worn casually or a bit more elegantly. I give it a recommendation to buy, and even with a blind purchase, you can't go too wrong. Only those looking for something with more performance will unfortunately be disappointed here. Associations with often rainy England or the city of London do not arise with this scent DNA. For that, something completely different would need to be created. The perfume would need to be a bit more old-school with a modern twist. However, Dunhill has created something modern-timeless here.

As a little conclusion to the story: I had grown so fond of Dunhill London back then that I used it as my "Scent of the Evening" for my graduation ball. The bottle from that time still stands in my closet :)

I’ll be honest: I hardly dare to write a suitable comment on Molecule 01 (M01). The reason is simply that I find it difficult to have a truly fitting opinion about this little fragrance. A few months ago, I found it at a good price at TK Maxx and decided to buy it. Mind you, it wasn’t a blind purchase; I still remembered what the perfume triggered in me during my first testing: namely nothing but many big question marks in my head. However, since I had in the back of my mind that this scent is very suitable for layering to give weak perfumes a performance boost, I treated myself to Molecule 01 after all.

In one of my favorite perfumeries, I once had a conversation with a knowledgeable, friendly saleswoman about "molecule scents." The term was still quite new to me at the time, and I didn’t quite understand it. In any case, the saleswoman told me that one should (ideally) never wear molecule scents on the skin, but only on clothing. Unfortunately, I can’t remember the exact reason for this statement, but I found it interesting. After all, one usually wears perfume on the skin, especially when using it for layering like M01, as it can fully unfold through the warmth of the skin... Oh, and sometimes it’s even said that Molecule 01 can’t even be classified as "perfume," but only as "scent" (not in the sense of a synonym).

So much for the introduction. Now I have used M01 several days in a row again - either on its own or as a base layer for weakly projecting perfumes. For example, I bought a cheap perfume from a local brand ("Mythos") in Greece that smells like cardamom. It has a pleasantly fresh scent character, but hardly any longevity. And indeed, I believe that Molecule 01 has given this cardamom scent a boost in longevity and sillage. I then tried the same with Bvlgari Man Extreme. Here it’s astonishing that Bvlgari Man Extreme seems to be completely swallowed by M01. After a short time, nothing of the actual Bvlgari is perceptible at all. What remains is the subdued character of M01.

But how does the character feel on my skin? This is the crux of the matter with Molecule 01! Everyone here in the fragrance community has a completely different experience and feels different associations with this scent. My subjective perception is artificial light wood on the skin, unfortunately paired with a hint of sweat. This makes me ponder whether I really want to wear something like that and subject my environment to it. However, the fact is that the environment can perceive this scent quite differently. Additionally, like most others, I have also experienced that I often only perceive M01 in individual bursts. Most of the time, I can’t smell anything on my skin at all. It’s a strange feeling when you can’t smell your own perfume, but the people around you can. Nevertheless, I do notice, due to these bursts, that the scent has a very decent longevity. It lasts about 8-9 hours. However, I didn’t really notice a difference between applying M01 on my skin compared to applying it on my clothing. But on clothing, it doesn’t smell bad at all; in fact, it even smells pleasantly clean.

All of this from the previous paragraphs leads me to still find it difficult to express an opinion. What emotions can one have when you can hardly smell the scent yourself? Isn’t that what makes perfumes appealing, that you find them nice on yourself? But with Molecule 01, one apparently has to trust blindly that the scent is well received by others and doesn’t bother anyone. When I give a review here on Parfumo and write a comment, I am always aware of two things: 1) The perception and assessment of perfumes is always subjective, and different perfumes can evoke different emotions in everyone. 2) One should still try to maintain a certain objectivity to make a review more tangible and fair for a reader. The nice thing is that our tastes are so different. Some people find Dior Sauvage awesome, while others do not. Some find Creed Aventus amazing, while others do not. The reasons may vary widely. However, from an objective standpoint, the majority has perceived the same scent character in these perfumes - people know that Sauvage is a synthetic perfume with a lot of Ambroxan, and they know that Aventus is known for its pineapple, combined with bergamot and smoky birch.

But Molecule 01? Here, everyone has truly had a different experience. So what should one advise an outsider? Certainly not a blind purchase. And certainly not that the product is a must-have. One can only encourage everyone to test Molecule 01 as soon as they have the chance, preferably even multiple times. Personally, I am still at a loss with this scent.

And the moral of the story? I still don’t have a real opinion.

Anyone who follows the fragrance YouTubers on YouTube, especially Jeremy Fragrance, will have noticed that Jeremy holds this cheapie in high regard. It is marketed as a simple, well-rounded office scent. "Fresh, luxurious fabric softener with a raspberry touch," is the classic quote from the aforementioned YouTuber. Additionally, Montblanc Individuel is considered a fragrance that resembles Creed Original Santal. If anything, Creed must have drawn inspiration from Montblanc, as the scent was released two years after Montblanc Individuel ;-) The two do indeed have a certain similarity, but Montblanc smells fruitier.

Individuel truly smells like freshly washed clothes. However, I find it very difficult to distinguish the individual nuances of the fragrance pyramid; it seems to contain a bit of everything, which merges into a very soft, pleasantly smelling casual perfume. Only the raspberry really stands out, but not in a penetrating way, rather spring-like and delicious.

Now, onto the problem. When I scroll through the comments, it seems that everyone has a different perception of this perfume. Unfortunately, it has been reported multiple times (and I truly believe that this is not nonsense) that the perfume smells heavily diluted and soapy. Apparently, Individuel has a significant reformulation issue. The question is, when did the scent seem to change so quickly? In terms of pure scent character, I can only say good things about my version! Okay, the longevity is a bit poor; the scent struggles to last beyond the 4-hour mark on the skin, but it fights. I can overlook that a bit. Otherwise, the perfume is exactly what I expected.

What is actually interesting are the batch codes of my bottle: the batch code on my packaging differs from that on the bottle. According to Checkfresh, my packaging indicates that it is from a 2010 batch, while the batch on the bottle is dated 2014... quite strange. Oh yes, I purchased the scent back then at Notino. The question is, which production year is correct? Anyway, it seems that I got lucky with my batch. With all the comments, I don't know if I should use up my bottle quickly, as apparently the new batches are not good. Therefore, I actually find it difficult to make a recommendation and to consider ordering this perfume again.

Some time ago, I wrote a brief comment about Creed's Green Irish Tweed (GIT) and also mentioned that I switched to the well-known clone Armaf Tres Nuit (since Creed exceeds my budget). Now, I would like to share my subjective assessment of Armaf's version.

Tres Nuit was initially a blind buy; especially for the low price, I thought I couldn't go wrong. During the first testing, I was initially disappointed: somehow I remembered GIT quite differently - I had a juicy green grass note in mind that reminded me of freshly mowed grass. And this freshly mowed grass feeling was simply absent in Tres Nuit; instead, the scent came across as significantly more synthetic and herbal. I didn't find it that bad, but it just didn't trigger a wow effect for me, so I couldn't say, "This is a really well-done clone." When I tested GIT on my skin again after a long time, I did notice that the similarity isn't actually that far off. Maybe there were different batches involved here.

The bigger problem with my Tres Nuit is unfortunately really the issue of longevity. I was positively surprised by GIT, as the perfume lasted quite a long time on my skin, even though it is a fresh scent. Unfortunately, Tres Nuit is the absolute opposite. The perfume lasts for me exactly 2 hours... after a short time, it is only perceivable as a skin scent, and the trail fades more and more. After two hours, practically (almost nothing) is left to smell. The same goes for the sillage. I don't know if I just got a bad bottle, as the other reviews seem to be overwhelmingly positive. However, Tres Nuit disappoints me almost entirely, and this is despite the fact that I really like the GIT character. Yesterday, after over a year, I applied Tres Nuit again, and my opinion hasn't changed. A repurchase is unfortunately out of the question for me.