naeelah

That's the cocoa absolute. Some chocolate blends have a chocolate component that settles at the bottom and just exists as droplets -- it never emulsifies with the other oils. So you just have to roll it in order to distribute the droplets throughout before applying.

In the bottle it smells rather like Boomslang. Rich chocolate with spicy notes underneath.

Wet it smells like rich chocolate with something salty. I recognize the dark seaweed note from Cthulhu, but if I hadn't already smelled it, I'd probably never guess the salty note was supposed to be sea vegetation. It doesn't smell aquatic at all, though. (I should note, I hate aquatics, but Cthulhu was surprisingly pleasant. I didn't keep it, but it was much richer and nicer than the average aquatic. So, I was not worried about the sea components of this.)

As it dries, the chocolate is less sweet and obvious. It's a dark, rich blend of chocolates, dark seaweed, slight saltiness, and a whole lotta darkness. The seaweed notes themselves are hard to describe. There's something that does smell like actual seaweed -- deep chlorophyll, water, salt, and that weird beach funk. But it's much more pleasant than that. It kind of works like neroli -- it seems to act like a base note and ground the scent, but it has brighter aspects that work as middle and top notes.

It's dark. It doesn't seem to scream dark incense -- yet. IME, dark incense blends start out relatively normal (like any other non-dark incense blend) and gradually deepen with age. (Fresh al-azif, for example, smells like maple syrup and smoky resins on me when fresh, and like blackness with a side of pancakes when aged. The incense in this reminds me of Al-Azif, so I expect it to get darker.)

There's no wood given in the notes, but the base aspects of the seaweeds remind me of teak. They have a slightly herbal character that recalls the 13 blends. So in the end, this is rather like Boomslang, if you added the herbs of 13 blends. If I take a deep breath, then an earthy note lingers on the scent's finish. Kind of like black patchouli.

In a sentence, I might summarize this as, "Dark, salty, rich chocolate incense." It isn't a chocolate blend with some other stuff -- it's much deeper and richer than that, so just as I'd hoped, it isn't particularly foody. In short, it's pretty dang awesome. I look forward to seeing how this one ages.

All of the notes of this scent come together to suggest black musk, to my nose. This is a little bit more like a men's cologne than I'd hoped, but that isn't too say it's too masculine for girls. I think it's definitely unisex.

Wet, I smell leather primarily, with a hint of something earthy. On skin, it immediately rounds out. The black amber is very strong and syrupy, the tobacco is rich and earthy, almost like patchouli, and the oppoponax lends a mild smokiness. The first time I tried this (last week), I felt like it was almost a leather single note, but this time, it's much richer.

Leather remains the strongest note, but it's well supported by the other notes. Totally dry, the tobacco feels less dirty and the amber seems to be blending better. Its sweetness is a good counter to the coolness of the leather. The oppoponax is very smoky and works well to smooth out and bind the other components.

So in a sentence, I might describe this as, "Rich, lightly smoky, quasi-musky black leather."

Something about this reminds me of Count Dracula. If you like this, try: Count Dracula, Black Temple Burlesque, Nanny Asthoreth, among other things...

When I open the imp I smell a whiff of patchouli, but on skin it's a bright and fruity scent with no hint of earthiness -- at first. Apple and rose are strongest, with just a suggestion dry woods. As it dries, the scent slowly fills out and becomes rounder and better balanced. The vanilla emerges and something strikes me as being slightly resinous. I wonder if that's the effect of the neroli, here. I still don't smell patchouli, per se.

Little by little, there's something almost smoky about it, and way in the background, I can smell the black musk. I'm sure that the vague smokiness comes from the black patchouli. Normally, black musk has a strong, masculine, oily quality to my nose, but here it's quite subtle and blends beautifully with the other notes.

Given how many notes there are in this that I'm not so fond of -- apple, black musk, patchouli, etc -- I'm surprised at how nice I think this is. This scent really is greater than the sum of its parts. It's not as earthy or as musky as you might expect it to be. It's a really rich and well-rounded scent, even on my skin (and I tend to amp patchouli and black musk).

In a sentence I might call this "Rich, gently woodsy apple floral with a creamy center."

I remember a thread talking about a special manner in which to roll the oils, and that it was the best way? Not sure how that would work for the cocoa-heavy oils, or for some of the citrus-amber scents like Khrysee and Lilith vs the Giant Crab which have separation in the oils, or the bath oils.

I definitely agree that rolling is a better idea than shaking. And it seems to work fine with the heavy, highly separated oils. I don't shake my bottles because I don't want to introduce air bubbles, but before I put on Boomslang, I give it a vigorous rolling between my hands. Not quite like I'm starting a fire (I don't do it for minutes straight), but definitely more forceful than, like, rocking a baby. And I tip it over top-to-bottom a few times, hard enough to sling all the cocoa sludge to the top. (That method was good for Khrysee, too.).

I like to use wands with heavy oils like Boomslang- - then you can kind of stir it around before you put it on.

ETA: I love all of the discussion of application techniques that come up with BPAL. We should offer certificate programs in putting on perfume.

How does this relate to the admonitions in other threads not to vigorously shake bottles of BPAL? (similar reasons are given - breakdown of molecules)

I've always felt that was kinda BS too. Someone chimed in to say her bottle did change. Maybe if you really shake it vigorously like you're mixing paint, the air bubbles introduced will have some negative impact. I would believe that having a permanent effect.

But just rolling it and shaking it -- like if it falls off the table and rolls across the room... We're not talking super-collider velocities. What do you think happens to your box while it's in the mail? Clearly the lab doesn't think that the jostling damages their product, or they wouldn't be a mail order business.

Which brings me to another tangential point: I think the idea of a perfume needing to "settle" after coming out of the mail can be a little silly. Oils can definitely smell different a week or a day or two after you get them, I'm not arguing against that. But the changes are due to age*, to perception, to temperature... not due to shipping somehow jumbling up the smell.

*natural oils change a LOT when they're first blended. If your bottle is super fresh, then it really might change day by day, until the components settle in. So sure, you can say there's a settling period, it just has nothing to do with shipping (other than shipping introducing your oil in extreme temperatures).

So I dug around in the BPAL forums because if anyone has heard of this, it's you guys (moment of panic: WHAT IF THIS IS SOMETHING EVERYONE INTO PERFUME ALREADY KNOWS AND I'VE BEEN AN UNKNOWING BLASPHEMER FOR 16 YEARS?!) but (thankfully?) I couldn't find anything like this. So I started a thread.

HEATHEN. How do you live with yourself??

I rub my wrists together. Only gently -- I basically just blot them together so that the oil distribution on each arm is the same. It makes me crazy when I have one arm that's smellier than the other.

But I have to agree that this sounds like a bunch of crap. I mean, you can damn near set the molecules on fire and they smell the same. (Sometimes stuff even smells better in an oil burner. *)

I have never noticed in a difference in dabbing the perfume on versus rubbing my wrists together. My daily application pattern uses a combination of both.

So fear not, faithful BPALer. Thou hast not strayed from the path of righteousness, and thou shalt be rewarded for thine devotion to perfume fidelity. (I really wish we had an emoticon that was wearing a miter.)

*Although I should note, I've realize that there's a point where the scent stuff burns out and all you have left is carrier oil, which turns into a gross, smoky mess. So if you wonder why your Snow White suddenly smells like something that's on fire, that's because you're just enjoying the soothing aroma of scorching coconut oil. So go blot the rest of the oil.

I get these notes from Love Me: Jasmine, rose, dragon's blood, patchouli, and sandalwood. (+and cassia, vanilla, frankincense?)

There is probably more going on -- the Conjure Oils tend to have a distinctive herbal base - - but those are the main things I smell. There is possibly some vanilla, but that could just be the combination of the jasmine and dragon's blood suggesting creamy sweetness. I don't smell any cinnamon or spice or smoke at all, but the patchouli does add a certain something that lends those qualities.

This morphs a lot, on me. I smell patchouli when putting it on, but then it instantly disappears. Jasmine and dragon's blood run out to take its place. As it dries, a woodsy base reveals itself -- the patchouli comes back. (I usually dislike patchouli, but here it's subtle and blends well.) It starts out a little strong, but over the course of an hour or two, it settles in nicely. The dragon's blood ebbs and flows slightly, and it's not until a few hours in that I suspect there's vanilla.

eta: nearly 12 hours later, it's still going strong. The patchouli is the strongest note, wrapped in a sweet, creamy cloud. It actually smells remarkably like Snake Oil, from a distance. Under nose I can pick out traces of dragon's blood and jasmine, and I think vanilla.

It's sweet, rich, and round. It projects but also clings to the skin and invites you in. More than any other conjure oil I've tried, this is simply a gorgeous perfume. I've smelled someone's ancient 10 mL, and this stuff ages fantastically, so if you like it, you won't regret getting a whole bottle.

Try it if you like: Dragon's Milk, The Presence of Love, Morocco...

--

eta: 8/27/10 - now that my imp is well aged, this scent is even more amazing, and it has gotten much spicier. I'm sure that one of the additional notes in this is cassia. Wet, I can still smell a lot of patchouli, but this is immediately overtaken by a wood and cinnamon-like note. The cinnamon note blends back in as it dries and seems a part of the wood notes, so I think it might be cassia rather than cinnamon -- but it's always possible both are present. It reminds me very much of Morocco, without the musk. Morocco with a ton of jasmine. I LOVE it.

There's also a slight smokiness that I couldn't smell when it was fresh. It's still pretty faint on my skin, just a slight haze in the base notes. It isn't sharp, it's a slightly earthy resin, so I'm guessing it's frankincense or something in that family.

Black Heart and Black Death are so cute! I almost want Black heart now just for the label (well, naturally I was tempted by the perfume, too...)

And TwilightEyes, I know I don't mind your signature on the images! It's a good idea, if people are stealing them for ebay. People shouldn't put up pictures of perfume without saying that it isn't the actual bottle. If I see a pic, I'm going to assume it has the same oil level and label condition.

Beth -- ahh, so that's why Ode to Ares was SFW! I was really surprised that it wasn't a man butt fest.

This is everything I hoped it would be. I don't often wear foody scents as perfume, but I love spice blends, and ever since moving to NYC, I'm infatuated with the scent of the sugared nut carts. That's one street smell that I don't mind being so ubiquitous.

And Pfancy Pfefferneusse smells essentially just like the nut vendor carts. At its core, it's a soft, warm, sugar-cookie like scent, but it has powerful spices heaped all over it. The spices are dry enough and fiery enough that although the scent is always sweet and cookie-like, it has a good sense of balance. I can definitely smell the pepper, and I swear I can smell a hint of fennel.

The spice blend is not cinnamon heavy, nor does it just smell like gingerbread. It's unique and it has bite. Pepper and nutmeg are heavy. I don't know if it has any ginger. Cardamom is often fairly bright and green for me, but it doesn't call attention to itself here. Everything blends nicely.

As for the nuts, it feels like blanched almonds. I don't smell hazelnut or peanut -- it's just very smooth and round. It doesn't smell like the lab's usual almond note, it smells like a can of whole almonds.

This scent also lasts a good, long time. Hours later, even when I felt like it had faded, I was aware of a faint cloud of sugar cookies around me. It's pretty great.

The lab has so many of these sexy red musk blends, and they're all a little bit different, so it's awfully hard to predict how they'll turn out on the skin. Some of them I've loved, others I've been very "meh" on.

I wore this without looking at the notes. I remember it has red musk, caramel, and patchouli, but the rest was a mystery. Like all caramel blends, initially, the caramel is very strong. With very few exceptions, caramel (as well as almond) tends to burn off almost right away -- at least, on my skin it does. It never completely fades away from this blend, but it balances out very well, so even though I'm not a huge caramel fan, I really enjoy it in this blend.

The rest musk is bold and powerful, and it's one of the primary notes, for me. It has neither a latex edge nor a flat Dr. Pepper quality. It's just fabulous. The patchouli is also very strong, on my skin. (It's the fresh and light smelling patchouli as in the Grindhouse ladies.) Bizarrely, I LOVE it. Normally I hate patchouli. And I'm very worried, because any blend with strong patchouli that I like fresh tends to age into something that just ends up smelling like a single note Dirty Hippie. What can I say -- patchouli clings to me. I amp it like it's a pheromone that will get me free Phish tickets. (I don't even like jam bands!)

This feels like Snake Charmer's sister, on me. Where Snake Charmer has a dark, smoky resin core, Now Winter Nights has a warm, spicy wood core. I'm surprised to see there are no wood notes in the scent, because this has a very wood-y quality on me. It's earthy without smelling like earth, it that makes any sense. (It must be the combo of patchouli, nutmeg, petitgrain and galbanum.) It's quite different from other scents with earthy roots.

I didn't even register that it had champaca, and I don't pick out the honey over the caramel. It's pretty well blended. I can be iffy with petitgrain, but here it seems like it's the magical binding ingredient -- bright and sweet enough to pull in the honey and champaca, but rooted and grainy enough to pull in the patchouli and resin.

And this lasted forever. It went pretty strong all day, with none of the notes completely fading away. I fear for the way the patchouli will age, but as it stands, I LOVE this and hope that it will continue to be gorgeous.

I'm not much of a fan of metallics, so I was pretty safe from the anniversary blends this year. But something about Lead appealed to me. I knew it really would smell like lead, but most of the notes (tobacco, plum, resins) are things that I love, and that age beautifully, so if ever there was a metal I'd like, surely it would be this one.

Wet, it certainly does smell like lead. (Or, for something I'm more familiar with, pewter.) It's soft and grey with a cold, sharp edge. I can smell the cypress as a part of this cold edge, but I wonder if there's also some penny royal. Something just smells minty.

After a couple of hours, the metallic, cold, minty quality wears down and the sweet plum and tobacco core warms up. Once you get past the initial application, it really doesn't smell so much like a metallic scent. It's certainly doesn't have the lab's usual metal notes. It's cool and strong on the outside, but soft and sweet on the inside.

It has a very slight fuzzy smoky quality. It doesn't strike me as being like incense, but there is a haziness. The cypress continues to lend a cool top quality that does feel slightly metallic in context. The plum is also a little bit tart. The tobacco is slightly sweet and rich, but it's not strong. Nothing in this blends dominates, to my nose. It's a fairly even blend of cold, warm, smoky, and sweet.

This has none of the ozone, vetiver, or aquatic notes of typical metal blends, so it's well worth trying just for comparison. As I'd hoped, this suits me much better than any other metal blend I've ever tried.

Very curious to see how this one ages!

Thanks for sharing the reply. That is indeed very detailed.

At risk of causing confusion, I just want to add that nothing here actually means they're using synthetic fragrances. I think it's just the confusion of different meanings of the word "natural" -- the civet is not "natural" because it's a synthesized scent. But as he explains, these bouquets are comprised of plant-derived ingredients.

He lists the different sources (EOs, CO2s, etc), and all of those are naturally obtained. Concerning the musks, I don't know enough about them to know if he's saying they don't use *any* synthetics or they don't use unsafe synthetics.

Also, the atmosphere sprays likely use alcohol in the base, so that may be another reason they don't want to make a blanket statement of "all natural".

lord, that we can get such detailed replies and still think there's ambiguity! However I do think it's pretty clear that their scent components (possibly with the exception of some musks) are naturally derived.

i just want to know in the future, if there are any oils that are

not all natural if the lab would let us know, that way i would only wear those oils in

my scent lockets,as opposed to wearing on my skin.

I would assume that they would, since they like to keep people informed of changes and potentially sensitizing ingredients, and they know that their customers care about these things. The only synthetic scent so far was blatantly advertised as such, so I don't think there's anything to worry about.

But there again, only BPAL customer service can give you a definite answer.

It has been discussed, opinions and experiences have been offered, previous posts have been quoted. There is nothing more solid that this community can offer you. It can go on and on and on ad nauseum, but black and white answers can only come from the lab and if that is what you actually want, that is where you should be directing your questions. You can repeat the question here all you like, but only the lab is equipped to give you the degree of specificity you require.

I heartily second everything yvaine said -- especially for people with serious health concerns

However, I just wanted to add generally that the lab HAS replied here and has replied to an intrepid person's e-mail, as quoted up thread from Aug '08. Jayne absolutely should e-mail the lab with further questions, but I will not be surprised if she receives the same FAQ answer that someone got a year and a half ago. That is the answer.

that's actually part of what's been bugging me about this all day. even if they were pre-blended, they aren't just being dumped in a bottle. it's like being upset with someone for using pre-packaged dyes or pre-prepped blanks for indie dyed yarns...it's what you do with it that matters*.

 

*i am and always will be a fiber nut if the fact that i keep gravitating towards those comparisions are any suggesting.

Exactly! But now we know without a doubt that the lab makes all its own accords, so we can bask even further in their awesome 1337 skillz.

(And I guess you haven't run into too many crazy quilt artists! Some of those people act like you're a total hack if you don't harvest the berries to craft your own dye and do everything short of weave your own fabric. )

I hate that you had to reply, but thanks for clarifying, beth. Your reply should answer all questions and doubts that newcomers might have.

Even i'd wondered about pre-blended accords, so it's nice to have that mystery unraveled. Not that I ever thought bpal used mass market pre-fab blends, or ONLY used accords purchased from other blenders, but for all I know, you know an indie blender who makes a fabulous amber accord, and using it helped control cost -- know what I mean? (And even if that were true, who cares? The quality and artistry of a bpal product speaks for itself.)

Oooh right, On Darkness! I knew I was forgetting something. I agree, that one is gorgeous! For me it's not so lavender heavy - it just has a well blended, purple smoke character -- but it's definitely worth checking out on a quest for smoky lavender.

I've just remembered another LE: Under the Harvest Moon. It doesn't have any incense notes so it may not be smoky but it does have a dusky quality. It's a recent LE so it should be easy to find. It has white and blue musk, lavender, leaves, white amber (I think) and some florals. It's dusky but it does have a pale, round aspect also.

Erebos is only softly smoky. It's more of a floral scent with vanilla and a hint of melon.

Hmmm. I hope bpal makes a scent with the notes you mentioned, because that sounds great. I'll have to check it out.

Hell, as long as we're giving recs:

Check out the Erebos room spray (which I am currently obsessed with). The main notes are lavender and smoky vanilla. It's gorgeous and you could use it as perfume if you mist it over your clothes and hair (although it can stain fabric so take care). You could also use it in a scent locket.

I guess it comes down to worrying or at least feeling like I'm being cheated or deceived. I want to buy products from people who care about excellence, not price or prolific production of a new perfume every other day. I don't want to be fooled by creative copy. Maybe Beth is spending day in and day out in the lab dutifully mixing her own essential oils to create violet, musk, amber or sandalwood from scratch. Maybe you all are right. But the blog comments planted a pretty big seed of doubt that I'm having trouble uprooting.

And you will only uproot it by giving the product a fair chance and allowing yourself time to experience it.

I think you've hit the crux of what makes folks around the forum so defensive (and make them suspect trolling) -- I don't think most of us give a rats ass about whether anyone likes the product. It's no concern of mine what you do and don't like. But BPAL really is a community. Beth and the other lab staff are active forum members. They hang out with customers every month at will-call. We are well acquainted enough with the people who make the product to know their motivation and their passion for what they do. And they're incredibly warm and giving people to boot, so we feel protective.

Whether you like the product is entirely up to your own tastes. Whether you think the business owners are cheating you is something else. If you do spend some time around here, I think you'll learn better.

You know... I would really take what you said more seriously if BPAL didn't produce hundreds of fragrances every year for the exact same (very low) price. The people on Luca Turin's blog had a point about the basic logistics/economics of it all. I'm trying to do the reading suggested by some very nice commenters but so far I'm still left uneasy.

But those of us who are familiar with BPAL know that Beth does take a lot of time in developing scents. Unreleased prototypes are often made available for testing (and occasionally for purchase) and it is apparent that many of them are in development for years. Most of them don't take quite that long, but she doesn't just whip them up a month before hand.

Some scents she can and has made quickly (such as the Crumpet Rebellion for a fashion show a few years ago -- she only had 2 weeks notice). Personally, I take this as a sign of her expertise. She has enough experience to know what will and won't work. I've heard her discussing scent ideas with people in person, and again, it's apparent that she has a good idea of components that do and don't work well together.

You'll see that many scents are similar. She produces a lot of variations on different themes. So, here she has a lot of experience with blends in particular families and I suspect she can craft a new variation more quickly than she could something completely new. [1] Also among the hundreds of scents that are released each year are literal repeats -- Snow White, for example, comes back winter after winter, as long as the components are available. So, the sheer volume does not speak of hundreds of new scents.

As for the economics: I don't pretend to know anything about BPAL's costs, but major perfumer prices are pretty consistent, within a brand, so I think that's a poor argument. Looking over a page of Guerlain EDPs, for the same size, they're all nearly or exactly the same price. Bpal varies from $15 to $27.50, which is a pretty big variation, percentage-wise. So, it's not as if their prices do not reflect varying costs in production.

[1] Whereas your typical perfume house doesn't want to make that many scents a year. Personally I like this repetitive aspect of BPAL because if you want to like a particular scent but it just doesn't work for you, if you're patient, a similar scent that *does* work will eventually surface.

------

ETA: Awww, YOU GUYS -- this thread was becoming nice again. We obviously have different opinions, but let's not bicker and argue about who killed who. (I still don't think she's a troll but you certainly won't inspire her to give BPAL and the forum a fair shot by insulting her.)

Lastly: I'm pretty sure I'm going to pick up some velveeta on the way home and make a grilled cheese for lunch. MAN, the powers of suggestion!

I was really hoping to find a smooth smokey lavender but I didn't want to risk it early on without being more educated.

That would be a good topic for the recommendation forum! In fact, there might already be a lavender recommendation thread. (Your thread has been merged into the FAQ thread so I won't go into detail here, but there are not so many lavender blends in the GC. The more complex ones tend to be LE.)

The top 10 sorts of scents, you'll notice, tend to be vanilla heavy. Whether they're smutty or modest and girly, creamy vanilla tends to be a favorite quality. So if you hate vanilla, you may be out of luck in your first imp pack -- BUT everything you ordered tends to get better with age, so keep them and try them again a few months after they arrive. They'll change a lot.

I agree with people who say I need to give the samples a try before freaking out. Maybe I've been overreacting.

 

Speaking from a fragrance perspective, the thing with oils is that you need a trial-and-error-period to figure out what works on your skin and what doesn't, and in accordance to that which notes are really "you". For example, I know honey turns out beautiful on my skin while my chemistry turns many types of jasmine to instant cat pee. When you do get your imps, have the note lists handy in front of you while you test them and jot down what's working and what isn't; then you'll have a better idea what you might want to swap for.

Right. And this can change even from month to month. Honey used to be awful on me, but now I looove it. Natural based perfumery is more susceptible to change than big house traditional perfumery, because it lacks the stabilizing fixatives and synthetics, so there is a LOT of trial and error.

Try your first samples and see what you think. When you're ready to try more, you can always ask in the Recommendations forum for advice on your next order. You'll find that lots of us are eager to help others pick out scents. We've all been n00bs and we know how overwhelming the catalog is at first.

Mainly, read forum reviews. They're a great resource. Hate Jasmine, worried how strong it is in a scent? Read the reviews. You'll find lots of other people who hate jasmine who comment on how the blend is either intolerable or surprisingly nice. Review threads can get quite long, so I tend to read the most recent 4 pages or so. That gives you a good variety of opinions and will clue you in to recent batch variations (or tell you how a scent has aged, if it's an LE).

I guess I've just been immersed in the world of traditional perfumery for awhile. People take a lot of pride in craftsmanship, on assembling their perfumes molecule by molecule or using the finest essential oils. Maybe I am being a bit prejudiced...

I do think this is an unfair bias. Many perfumers take pride in building from the molecule up, yes. But as I mentioned before, that isn't Beth's style. Also, Beth has said that she would rather focus on make products that are kept to an accessible price point. Building molecule by molecule would drive the prices way up. Instead of being $15 a bottle, they'd be $80. I think it's more important to Beth to be able to indulge her incredibly prolific creative impulses than focus them into a few masterpieces a year, like the major perfume houses would.

And have no doubt that there is a lot of craftsmanship involved in what BPAL does.

But just as Beth has her preferences for making perfume, you're certainly entitled to your preferences in what you like to smell. They're different styles and they suit different people. Just don't judge it until you've tried it. A few disparaging remarks doesn't mean that the hundreds of us who love BPAL are just raving psychos with no taste.

(For the record I'm not getting troll vibes from Jayne. Maybe I'm wrong, but, meh.)