ScentNebula
Reviews
Filter & Sort
Detailed
Interesting & evocative but too sweet
2 out of the 3 times I've worn this, I've sadly had to scrub it off as it started to nauseate me. I think it's just too sweet and too dark with nothing to lighten or elevate it, and it becomes very heavy.
Despite this I find it an interesting scent. There's something kinda buttery like a shortbread note (the "biscuit" I guess) but the main thing I smell is a really super sweet hot cocoa. Not cappuccino, hot cocoa. Milky, chocolatey and very very sweet. It's also a bit woody in a very dark, slightly resinous way. It does remind me of having refreshments after a church service. I can't wear it but I wish I could.
Despite this I find it an interesting scent. There's something kinda buttery like a shortbread note (the "biscuit" I guess) but the main thing I smell is a really super sweet hot cocoa. Not cappuccino, hot cocoa. Milky, chocolatey and very very sweet. It's also a bit woody in a very dark, slightly resinous way. It does remind me of having refreshments after a church service. I can't wear it but I wish I could.
I’m not paying this much to smell like clean sweat!
This is probably the most disappointing paper vs skin experience I’ve had with a fragrance.
In the bottle and on paper, this is an incredibly evocative scent for me. It’s a very dry, woody, dankly resinous, musty, almost animalic scent that transports me to a specific childhood memory (an antique pedal organ, old wood soaked with years of incense smoke).
Now, I don’t know what it is about my skin, but it turns Cardinal, and the nearly-identical
Series 3: Incense - Avignon, into something resembling clean sweat. A very light, airy, slightly mineralic, fresh and humid impression of human skin musk that ultimately resembles a faint odor of chlorine. I actually really enjoy such a scent, but it’s not what I wanted or expected from this perfume. I would question if the ambergris is responsible, if not for the fact that I’m regularly exposed to real church incense smoke and have noticed that from a distance, in small quantities, it also takes on this clean-sweat quality, so it’s not just my skin chemistry or the particular notes used here, but my perception of small quantities of frankincense that is the problem. I have also smelled incense fragrances that do NOT go sweaty on my skin, so it clearly depends on the composition (large amounts of labdanum seem necessary).
Where Avignon remains airy and sweaty throughout, Cardinal does become woody and vanillic in the drydown, but it’s a generic, inoffensive woody-amber profile, not the dank stinky deliciousness that I get on paper. The performance is also really poor, I can barely smell this fragrance unless I stick my nose right up in it (Avignon does a bit better in that respect). Weirdly, the drydown of Cardinal sticks around on my skin for ages and won’t wash off in the shower, even though I can’t smell it unless my nose is right up against my skin.
I definitely don’t need both Avignon and Cardinal as they are so similar on my skin, and of the two I would choose Avignon because of the better performance. It’s also quite a bit cheaper, and there is no way I would pay over $200 for a barely detectable fragrance that smells like perfumified BO.
In the bottle and on paper, this is an incredibly evocative scent for me. It’s a very dry, woody, dankly resinous, musty, almost animalic scent that transports me to a specific childhood memory (an antique pedal organ, old wood soaked with years of incense smoke).
Now, I don’t know what it is about my skin, but it turns Cardinal, and the nearly-identical
Series 3: Incense - Avignon, into something resembling clean sweat. A very light, airy, slightly mineralic, fresh and humid impression of human skin musk that ultimately resembles a faint odor of chlorine. I actually really enjoy such a scent, but it’s not what I wanted or expected from this perfume. I would question if the ambergris is responsible, if not for the fact that I’m regularly exposed to real church incense smoke and have noticed that from a distance, in small quantities, it also takes on this clean-sweat quality, so it’s not just my skin chemistry or the particular notes used here, but my perception of small quantities of frankincense that is the problem. I have also smelled incense fragrances that do NOT go sweaty on my skin, so it clearly depends on the composition (large amounts of labdanum seem necessary).Where Avignon remains airy and sweaty throughout, Cardinal does become woody and vanillic in the drydown, but it’s a generic, inoffensive woody-amber profile, not the dank stinky deliciousness that I get on paper. The performance is also really poor, I can barely smell this fragrance unless I stick my nose right up in it (Avignon does a bit better in that respect). Weirdly, the drydown of Cardinal sticks around on my skin for ages and won’t wash off in the shower, even though I can’t smell it unless my nose is right up against my skin.
I definitely don’t need both Avignon and Cardinal as they are so similar on my skin, and of the two I would choose Avignon because of the better performance. It’s also quite a bit cheaper, and there is no way I would pay over $200 for a barely detectable fragrance that smells like perfumified BO.
If "eating marmalade toast in a warm cafe" was a classic chypre
This one has taken me a while to come round to. I’ve tried to wear it several times and each time, I go “oh, nope, this is not my kind of scent” and then hours later when it’s dried down, I find myself thinking “this is quite nice actually…” and then I put it back in storage and don’t touch it for a year. Rinse and repeat.
I think I’ve finally matured enough as a perfume enjoyer to say with confidence that I do in fact like Civet. I don’t love it, because it still doesn’t feel quite like me, but it’s a very beautifully crafted perfume with lots of interest.
The opening is a blast of old-fashioned floral soap - what I perceive as heavy, scratchy aldehydes and a pungent blend of white and yellow florals (I mostly get tuberose, but not for long). What makes this different from many other vintage floral soap-type perfumes (a genre of which I’m quite fond) is the strong and sticky-sweet orange note, which I think is the main reason I don’t totally connect with this fragrance - I'm not a huge orange fan.
As the fragrance dries down, a resinous ambery quality emerges, and this is when the orange starts to take on the quality of marmalade on a piece of buttered toast. Why buttered? Well, there's something kinda creamy in here. Which sounds like it shouldn't work, but does. I'm not sure if this quality is coming from the (at this point inconspicuous) florals or something else.
The drydown is my favorite phase of the perfume. While I don’t get a coffee note, an image is nevertheless conjured for me of curling up in a cafe on a cold rainy winter’s day, eating marmalade toast and enjoying the shelter from the elements. The drydown is incredibly cosy and warm, matching the color of the juice perfectly. It’s comforting and fuzzy, like a favorite sweater. A perfume which gives me a similar feeling, albeit more animalic upfront, is
Velvetine (2021).
I assume it’s the civet that gives it this unique warmth and fuzziness - but I wouldn’t describe this fragrance as animalic. The civet is used in a classic vintage style, to lend depth to the other notes, not as the main focus of the fragrance. I understand why people would be disappointed in this after hearing the name, having maybe come to expect something more challenging.
I think I’ve finally matured enough as a perfume enjoyer to say with confidence that I do in fact like Civet. I don’t love it, because it still doesn’t feel quite like me, but it’s a very beautifully crafted perfume with lots of interest.
The opening is a blast of old-fashioned floral soap - what I perceive as heavy, scratchy aldehydes and a pungent blend of white and yellow florals (I mostly get tuberose, but not for long). What makes this different from many other vintage floral soap-type perfumes (a genre of which I’m quite fond) is the strong and sticky-sweet orange note, which I think is the main reason I don’t totally connect with this fragrance - I'm not a huge orange fan.
As the fragrance dries down, a resinous ambery quality emerges, and this is when the orange starts to take on the quality of marmalade on a piece of buttered toast. Why buttered? Well, there's something kinda creamy in here. Which sounds like it shouldn't work, but does. I'm not sure if this quality is coming from the (at this point inconspicuous) florals or something else.
The drydown is my favorite phase of the perfume. While I don’t get a coffee note, an image is nevertheless conjured for me of curling up in a cafe on a cold rainy winter’s day, eating marmalade toast and enjoying the shelter from the elements. The drydown is incredibly cosy and warm, matching the color of the juice perfectly. It’s comforting and fuzzy, like a favorite sweater. A perfume which gives me a similar feeling, albeit more animalic upfront, is
Velvetine (2021).I assume it’s the civet that gives it this unique warmth and fuzziness - but I wouldn’t describe this fragrance as animalic. The civet is used in a classic vintage style, to lend depth to the other notes, not as the main focus of the fragrance. I understand why people would be disappointed in this after hearing the name, having maybe come to expect something more challenging.
The atmosphere of an ancient crypt
Everyone compares this to 
Ambre sultan Eau de Parfum, and I’ll admit when I first smelled it on paper, I thought it was virtually indistinguishable from the SL classic, with only the drydown being subtly different (more transparent and vanillic, less woody). However, now that I’ve worn it properly on skin, I actually think the two scents are different enough that I can’t fairly compare them. They conjure up very different emotions and associations for me.
Where Ambre Sultan is a rather literal portrait of cistus labdanum (accurate and specific enough that it immediately brings me back to walking past a literal rockrose hedge that grew near my house), Ambra Aurea - despite having a similar scent profile - feels far more atmospheric.
It smells like dirt and musty old church and censers that haven't been cleaned in several hundred years. There’s a kind of sour, damp note that specifically conjures up the image of an ancient crypt. There’s dust and cobwebs and papers mouldering in neglected wooden cabinets. Actually there’s quite a lot of mould in this crypt.
Despite these haunting associations, Ambra Aurea is a relatively light, transparent fragrance, ultimately drying down to a quiet but stunning and very delicate frankincense. What little sweetness there is comes from the natural sweetness of that incense - no heavy vanillas here.
As much as I think it’s unfair to compare this with Ambre Sultan, I will always favor a haunting atmospheric, so I think I can at least say this one will be getting more wear.
By the way, this smells EXACTLY like the incense they burn at my church. I've said that about a few fragrances, notablySeries 3: Incense - Avignon, but I don't think any have quite captured the complexity, warmth and smokiness of that scent like this one does. IT'S SO GOOD.
P.S. there must be an incredibly high concentration of resins in this because it literally crystallises on the outside of the atomiser. The cap is hard to get off cause it's so sticky.
Ambre sultan Eau de Parfum, and I’ll admit when I first smelled it on paper, I thought it was virtually indistinguishable from the SL classic, with only the drydown being subtly different (more transparent and vanillic, less woody). However, now that I’ve worn it properly on skin, I actually think the two scents are different enough that I can’t fairly compare them. They conjure up very different emotions and associations for me.Where Ambre Sultan is a rather literal portrait of cistus labdanum (accurate and specific enough that it immediately brings me back to walking past a literal rockrose hedge that grew near my house), Ambra Aurea - despite having a similar scent profile - feels far more atmospheric.
It smells like dirt and musty old church and censers that haven't been cleaned in several hundred years. There’s a kind of sour, damp note that specifically conjures up the image of an ancient crypt. There’s dust and cobwebs and papers mouldering in neglected wooden cabinets. Actually there’s quite a lot of mould in this crypt.
Despite these haunting associations, Ambra Aurea is a relatively light, transparent fragrance, ultimately drying down to a quiet but stunning and very delicate frankincense. What little sweetness there is comes from the natural sweetness of that incense - no heavy vanillas here.
As much as I think it’s unfair to compare this with Ambre Sultan, I will always favor a haunting atmospheric, so I think I can at least say this one will be getting more wear.
By the way, this smells EXACTLY like the incense they burn at my church. I've said that about a few fragrances, notably
Series 3: Incense - Avignon, but I don't think any have quite captured the complexity, warmth and smokiness of that scent like this one does. IT'S SO GOOD.P.S. there must be an incredibly high concentration of resins in this because it literally crystallises on the outside of the atomiser. The cap is hard to get off cause it's so sticky.
Mystery fruit!
My initial impression of this perfume is actually of a note not listed - there's something about this that turns very fruity (in a lovely fresh, crisp way) on me. It might possibly be the chamomile, which can have a fruity quality when concentrated, but combined with the resinous greenness of the conifers in this, it very much gives the impression of a fresh juicy orange at close range (I am strongly reminded of 
White Fir), and further away, of something else, possibly a green apple (I am faintly reminded of 
Akero). Compared to White Fir, this is more of a classic, sweet, syrupy "christmas tree" pine scent rather than a green and woody one, but the two scents are certainly cousins, if not siblings.
On a second wearing, I can't say I'm getting any tea, lavender, or "campfire". It's all pine and that fruity chamomile(?) note. However, with how much I'm struggling to figure out exactly what is responsible for the fruity note, it could well have something to do with those other notes that I can't detect in isolation. I think there's a fair bit more going on here than meets the eye.
This is a pretty weak scent compared to White Fir and Akero. I can only smell it quite faintly unless I move about, and it requires a significant amount of body heat to "activate", otherwise it just hangs close to the skin.
White Fir), and further away, of something else, possibly a green apple (I am faintly reminded of Akero). Compared to White Fir, this is more of a classic, sweet, syrupy "christmas tree" pine scent rather than a green and woody one, but the two scents are certainly cousins, if not siblings.On a second wearing, I can't say I'm getting any tea, lavender, or "campfire". It's all pine and that fruity chamomile(?) note. However, with how much I'm struggling to figure out exactly what is responsible for the fruity note, it could well have something to do with those other notes that I can't detect in isolation. I think there's a fair bit more going on here than meets the eye.
This is a pretty weak scent compared to White Fir and Akero. I can only smell it quite faintly unless I move about, and it requires a significant amount of body heat to "activate", otherwise it just hangs close to the skin.
