TIA1971

…that was a saying my mother liked to use when something we kids did became too much for her, and it came to my mind again today when I unpacked the sought-after fragrance.

I discovered this fragrance in the 80s and, of course, being a "know-it-all," as teenagers sometimes are, I immediately associated the name of the fragrance with this saying and told my mother.

Her dry explanation: “A lot of fuss for something as unimportant as perfume!”

I was momentarily speechless! I was never really silenced back then, but I had nothing to say to that. Perfume! Unimportant??? She can't be serious!? Unimportant! Pah! “Fuss” fits perfectly, the fragrance made a lot of fuss!!! Just right for a loud rebellious teenager like me! So! "Fuss" was my second name back then...I wanted it so badly, but it was too expensive for a student...grmpf...

As I have mentioned here and there, it was, however, unimportant to my mother. A fragrance, only for “special occasions,” that was all she needed.

Now, about Cinnabar itself: I actually liked the fragrance back then, but it always made me dizzy. It was quite strong, a real “punchy scent,” and that’s why I always got headaches from it. I couldn't afford it, and whenever there was a tester somewhere, I would always try it. Later, my beloved Obelisk made its way into my collection, another beautiful “spice scent” that I tolerated better, so Cinnabar was done for me for the time being.

Clove, sandalwood, and for me the cinnamon that is no longer mentioned in the list…simply wonderful. Now that I’ve arrived here at Parfumo, I had to test it again, which I did for the first time in a long time about six months ago. On the way back from the office, I quickly stopped by a perfume store, searched for the bottle and couldn’t find it because it looks different now, but then I discovered it and boom, boom, spray…ugh…Unfortunately, I suddenly didn’t like it at all anymore. How could that be? Maybe too many other scents around me? The tester not in order? Something is not right here. I moved on, as the price is quite steep for me, so fine, let’s just forget about this fragrance. Done, that’s it.

Of course, I then read a bit more closely here, yes, it’s true, the bottle looks different, so the fragrance must also be different today, only the name…sad and unfortunate…well.

Since then, I have always thought that I needed to get a bottle and revisit it. My scent preferences haven’t changed that much, and surely the fragrance isn’t as different as it seemed to me during the “walk-by test,” so I went on a search in the souk. Today, the bottle finally arrived, rip it open and hissing and aaaaah….yes…fine…super….there we go!! My son comes around the corner, a nod of approval, hmmmm….it smells great here! Ha! If my son doesn’t say “stinks” or “ugh,” then that means something, so I feel like I did everything right.

Yes, it does lack something compared to the old version, the sillage fades quite quickly. Yes, it’s missing something, surely the aldehydes, surely something else as well, but: It is unmistakably Cinnabar and I can tolerate it. No headaches, no dizziness…I am newly in love with the new version of Cinnabar!

…there they sit again and chat. The little devil on the left - the naive angel on the right…that’s how I feel as I want to comment a bit more extensively on my second “quick buy” at Dougi and start spraying:

Angel: Hmmmm, delicious mandarin and peach - white peach - yum yum..

Devil: Yesss exactlyyyy! Nonsense!! What are you talking about, you can already smell the chemicals…no way! No one can sniff out what this is supposed to be…sweet fruit mishmash!

Angel: Well, please, I don’t see it that way…smells quite pleasant…

Devil: No, it doesn’t, and you know it very well, you with your embellishments, pah!

Angel: Well, okay, if you say so, but neroli, neroli is always so refreshing in summer and the flowers and….

Devil: Stop! Hold! Out! No, no, no! You call that flowers? No way, really not, and neroli…yeah that real Cologne water is refreshing too, but do you have to walk around with it…in the top note and poof gone, okay, but in the heart? You must be kidding! And if so, then the original and not this…

Angel: Oh come on…musk, I loooove musk and woods…there's cedarwood in here, that’s great!

Devil: Yeah, yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah! I can read too, but I can’t SMELL anything from that…that’s just supposed to sound good...Ceeeedarwood AND white musk…lölölölölö tralalalala..nonsense with (stink) sauce! Enough of that now!

Angel: Hm…could be that…well, maybe you’re right…

Devil: Of course I’m right! It worked! You got it! Unbelievable! This stuff annoys like ice cubes in a blender, is as pointless as low-carb bread with peanut butter, and besides: If she sprays that on, then we BOTH have to (endure) it and I’m not up for that - BASTA!! Throw it in the bin!!

Angel: Okay, but we could still pass it on…a good deed every day…maybe someone else will like it…so for free, of course…

Devil: Are you kidding???? If it absolutely has to be, then to someone here at Parfumo, who comes from at least another city, better yet from another state or straight abroad, although, if they find it while hauling it across the border…no, but well, throwing it in the bin isn’t right either, that’s pollution and just leaving it somewhere for someone to take could, if we’re seen doing it, be charged as bodily harm later on...and of course FREE… I don’t want to be sued again, like with that other so-called “fragrance”…then we’d end up with a damage claim on our hands…although…still better than this scent, I’d say, harharharharharhar…. ;-)

C o m p l a i n t


of the EdT Bloomy Heaven, available: at the Turquoise and thus in every reasonably sized city

- Plaintiff -

represented by the attorneys Grapefruit & Bergamot, white flowers and aquatic notes, etc., Sub-representatives: Attorneys Vanilla & Musk

a g a i n s t

TIA1971, available multiple times a week on the website parfumo.de

- Defendant -

In the name and on behalf of the plaintiff, we request that the defendant be condemned to refrain from

referring to the plaintiff as a terrible, aquatic little water of the cheapest category and
to never again purchase this and to insult it due to its scent, longevity, and
sillage, because the defendant is simply to blame and this blame cannot be attributed to the plaintiff. The defendant must duly apologize to the plaintiff.

Justification:

The defendant simply wanted to go shopping again and spend money to satisfy her perfume addiction. Therefore, on the evening of June 14, 2018, she went to one of the many branches of the aforementioned perfumery to browse. What then happened can only be described as absolute foolishness on the part of the defendant:

After she had been sneaking around the store for several minutes and had to realize that she was familiar with all the fragrances available for purchase and either already owned them or deemed them unacceptable, she allowed herself to be approached by a saleswoman for "consultation," which set the disaster in motion. Ultimately, however, the defendant was solely interested in expanding her fragrance collection, and so she had the plaintiff's scent sprayed onto a testing card and found it quite acceptable.

As is generally known, this is by no means an adequate test, and the defendant should have known and recognized from her years of membership in the Parfumo community what the outcome would be. Alongside this fragrance, another one, also from the private label of this perfumery, was selected almost in seconds and paid for immediately, because the defendant believed that one must absolutely leave a perfumery with a fragrance. The price and the practical sizes of the bottles are further evidence that these are also not adequate selection criteria, which need not be mentioned further and are sufficiently known.

Since that day, the defendant has not missed an opportunity to insult and defame the plaintiff. Longevity and sillage would not be bad for an EdT, but due to the absolutely dreadful scent itself, it is indeed a significant disadvantage. Furthermore, the defendant repeatedly criticizes the absolutely prominent aquatic notes, which left no room for the vanilla or musk, not to mention the insult of the top note as "nothing special."

However, since the defendant is literate and hates aquatic notes - as is well known on parfumo.de - she could have simply looked at the packaging of the plaintiff's fragrance and realized that it would be absolutely unsuitable to accompany her or to move in with her permanently.

Due to the aforementioned circumstances, it is in no way the plaintiff's fault that he does not meet the demands of the defendant's nose and is now being defamed by her. The defendant had ample opportunity to inform herself about the plaintiff and to decline a purchase. The plaintiff enjoys some popularity among other customers of this perfumery and community members on parfumo.de, which is why the defendant should be condemned in the sense of the complaint to apologize for this absolutely self-inflicted wrong purchase, to refrain from such purchases in the future, and to not publicly embarrass the plaintiff in any way whatsoever.

The Attorneys

signed Vanilla Musk

Well, since I have been able to call this fragrance my own for a few days now, it hasn't gone off, and there is no comment on it here, I'll just dive in, because going without a comment really isn't an option ;-)

In this case, I initially just sniffed, took notes, and then compared it with the pyramid. Then I thought about what came to mind regarding other fragrances with identical ingredients, and now here we go ;-)

I was initially surprised by the gardenia, as I usually find it very overpowering when it's present. Here, it didn't come to mind at all at first, but later, when comparing it, for example, with "Gardenia" by Liz Taylor, I must say that I can agree, but it is very, very subtle in this fragrance, just like everything else - indeed a cologne, albeit ULTRA ;-))

Iris, rose, and jasmine, yes, I would have let that pass, it's simply a very well-balanced floral blend - there could be anything else in there, nothing dominates, and nothing pushes itself to the forefront, so it can't be annoying. Very good!

With the mango, I was thinking of a peach - but at least it's a yellow fruit, that's fine by me. Clearly recognizable for me - sandalwood and oak moss. Right from the first sniff, it's unmistakably an old-schooler, and these ingredients always contribute to creating that impression for me. I think it could easily have a few more years under its belt, when I rummage through my memories of even older fragrances.

All in all, a floral, slightly fruity old-schooler with a clean-soapy touch - resinous-animalic wouldn't have come to mind - but well, perhaps some of the ingredients in the test material here have indeed lost a bit of their essence, even if it still stands out perfectly otherwise.

You could still wear this well today if you don't really want perfume but just want to come across as fresh and clean. The sillage is minimal, but I didn't expect anything different; the longevity - hmmmm, after a maximum of 1.5 hours, you really have to know exactly where you applied it and press your nose to it to catch a whiff of it, with a lot of luck. Upon closer consideration, due to its delicacy, I’m sure some gentlemen could also enjoy this fragrance.

In the last few days, I had to repurchase a fragrance again, nothing wild but well. Off to the website of a well-known online retailer, searched, found, shopping cart, and then the usual. With the inexpensive fragrance I chose, the shipping costs left a bad impression. But wait, there was something else. Yes, that's right, not much more is needed and the whole thing will be "shipping free." Well, just type in "fragrances," okay..., sort by "price ascending"... okay... and - oops! Marbert Woman? Is that still available? What’s the price? I blink, am I seeing this right? 100 ml for 7.50 euros? So inexpensive (no, it really doesn’t smell cheap). They can't be serious! I had completely forgotten about it, but now the memory came back. It was such a beautiful, warm, classic scent, slightly chypre-tinged, spicy... just the way I like it, but it's hard to find these days. I think of "Obelisk," one of my favorites... another spicy scent that can only be found on the drugstore shelf, and the EdT from "Cabochard" - the Marbert also went in that direction somehow... but it definitely fits into this "category"!

So I bought it immediately and not only saved on shipping costs but also accidentally found a great fragrance (again).

It still smells to me like it did back then, maybe not quite as strong anymore, but that was a long time ago... Back then as today, it is an EdT, and that is certainly better for this fragrance. I love it, but I wouldn't want it as an EdP or - just imagine - Extrait around me. No, this is good, let it stay this way.

For me, it’s the woods, especially sandalwood, slightly more fruity than floral, that absolutely define the scent. A "clean" fragrance, but with "character" - not just simply "clean-soapy"... That there’s supposed to be patchouli in it... fine by me, but I don’t think it plays a big role in this case, and the leather is really well integrated, but in these classics, that has always been the case in my opinion. Nowadays, it often seems too "loud" to me, somehow placed in the wrong amount - not here.

The longevity is as I expect from an EdT, the sillage is absolutely average, the price is unbeatable, so you just spray again if that’s how it should be.

As I see here, production is apparently already discontinued. Maybe that’s where the price comes from, the last ones who still have this fragrance in stock want to get rid of it, it just takes up unnecessary space...?
So test it while it’s still available! At that price, it’s a "MUST." However, I wouldn’t recommend the fragrance to the very young clientele; it’s not necessarily something for "young noses," they are used to something different, I think, and will surely put this fragrance back in the "grandma" drawer. But it really doesn’t deserve that!