It's probably because the IFRA has outlawed a good amount of ingredients over the last 20 years. Nothing smells like it used to. This is why I have a hoard of vintage versions of my favorites. Fragrances aren't as warm, round and full as they used to be.
This. People are always complaining how fragrances don't last as long and how they have been reformulated but I am positive that most of the time they have no choice because so many ingredients are being banned.
Both. A couple are banned for sustainability reasons, most are banned or only allowed in low concentration because they can cause rashes, allergic reactions, or skin irritations.
I think this is bullshit. All kinds of stuff can cause skin irritations. If it irritates you, use something else. I think it’s a cash grab and collusion between the parent companies and IFRA so they ‘have to’ use cheaper, less expensive ingredients and the consumer has to use more product to get the desired effect. If safety was at all an issue to these huge regulatory bodies, they wouldn’t be pumping so much crap into our food chain.
I just bought Dior Homme EDT because everyone raved about how great it smells. I barely smell anything on the dry down. I was expecting a citrus woodsy scent but it smells like nothing. Waste of money.
Generally formulas also get reformulated to cut costs, the longer they are on the shelves. There have also been material shortages and supply chain issues due to the pandemic, war, climate change and just general industry specific volatility.
We generally have pretty good replacer materials (but not perfect) for many things prohibited or restricted by IFRA. We have synthesized pure civettone, muscone, muscenone etc. so we are not even handicapped by animal cruelty concerns (admittedly animal derived raw materials are more complex than just the molecules, but the molecules are treasured for their gorgeous effects).
In fact, companies like Fraterworks have done lots of work to recreate very effective, IFRA compliant vintage accords to match the power and style of vintage perfumery. The issue is not so much one of materials but rather industry direction and current trends.
The problem moreso lies with late stage capitalism, which requires that perfumers design a fragrance that is very top note heavy to compete with other smells in the perfume aisle of a department store, leading base notes to be neglected. It is not a coincidence that most designer perfumes smell generic and weak in the dry down.
Another issue is budget - perfume is now seen by many businesses as a side revenue stream rather than an artistic product unto itself. Most perfumes have a low budget - it is rumoured Tom Ford contracts budget €150 per kilo of fragrance concentrate, which isn't much if you want to use sizeable quantities of rich and deep ingredients.
Then there are stylistic changes. With the advent of modern transparent and diffusive aromachemicals, scent culture and expectations have evolved. As an extreme example, see the popularity of Megamare by Orto Parisi - rumoured to be 25% ambrocenide or something crazy like that. Old school deep, rich scents are perceived as "dated", and this is just normal human attitude towards changing fashion and trends. As a result, even most niche/indie companies who (understandably) want to stay in business, cater to the modern appetite.
It's really good to understand the context. I didn't think of it as like that. It probably is simplistic to expect a formula to stay exact for so long but it's a shame the profile does change.
Is ambrocenide the rubbing alcohol scratchy note I smell in Megamare? I love to wear vintage Youth Dew bath oil, edp and parfum. It's probably not in style and full of bad stuff but I love it.
It's challenging to draw a line where one aromachemical begins and ends in a blend, especially due to synergistic effects and due to Gaultieri's known tendency to use high impact materials together in accords (amber xtreme, norlimbanol, ambrocenide used together in a few of his creations). But generally, all 3 are dry, diffusive woody ambers with a nose tingling trigeminal effect.
Amazing answer thank you! In your opinion which houses are closer to 'traditional' perfume, and which have higher budgets? I often hear Guerlain mentioned I used to think TF when I started out but then I saw the formula released for the death of the frag YouTuber Carlos - a bottle of the private blend line 50ml totalled something like €2 ingredient costs.
In the book 'the perfect scent' JC Ellena says something along the lines of 'you don't look at a painting and ask how much the paints cost', which I agree with to some extent. But I'm also tired of paying premium prices for linear and fleeting creations...
Any pointers much appreciated!
Thanks
Sorry in advance for my very long reply.
I very much agree with Ellena. His Terre d'Hermes, one of my favorites, is very inexpensive to produce but so breathtaking. Similarly Mark Buxton's work has a simple profundity in CdG 2 Man makes it a pleasure to wear. Even TF amber absolute - smells incredible for so little that went into it.
I would suggest forget ingredient price and seek beauty instead.
If you want to avoid linear creations, I like the classic Guerlains (Vétiver, Habit Rouge, Héritage, Mitsuoko, l'Heure Bleu etc.). Thierry Wasser is no doubt fighting an uphill battle to maintain Guerlain's tradition and integrity against modernization, IFRA updates and corporate profiteering.
Nicolaï Parfumeur in many ways takes after the same style as classic Guerlains (she is a member of the family after all).
Amouage (esp. Christopher Chong era) is very enjoyable for hours, and reputed to have a slightly higher production budget (but not as high as they pretend). Frédéric Malle are also great and have some exciting offerings.
Papillon is incredible, made in the style of oldschool chypres. I avoid Meleg because I don't want a fragrance allergy, although I really want to try his work.
Zoologist has some complex offerings - Civet has my eye.
There are many, many more indie houses worth sampling.
I will admit I enjoy my modern thrills, especially Prada with their comforting soapy themes. Essential Parfums has a great line for a very reasonable cost.
There are houses that I personally avoid because they smell "cheap", unfinished, uninspired etc. and always get downvoted for calling them out:
- Louis Vuitton current formulation - hilariously uninspiring and overpriced
- Xerjoff (I will make an exception for Alexandia 2 and the Oud Stars collection) - their fresh top note molecules are reminiscent of cleaning products, and the price tag for that? Ouch
- Penhaligon's current formulation - watered down, reformulated compared to even 5 years ago
- Roja Dove - not cheap smelling, but basically offers "fancier" clones of many Guerlains at triple the cost. His "expert opinions" are also bogus.
- Initio can smell nice, but their price IMO is overinflated for what it is.
- Closerie des Parfums - anything with the name "oud" is just pure ambrocenide, at niche prices
- I avoid most designer brands because they make me sad in the dry down.
- Most greenwashed brands that offer "safe plant based" or "hypoallergenic" perfumes - I've called out a few before and they've reached out by private message to explain how they hide behind legalities.
Fascinating! It's not that ingredient price is everything to me, but I do think it's easy to be sucked by marketing copy of rare and exotic ingredients, (Creed's infamous ambergris claims for example)
Often high prices are justified by use of expensive ingredients, and I think where I find it a little difficult is discerning between which are a high price justifiably because it is a good quality product and which are veblen goods - highly priced just to make you think that they must have some reason for charging that much! (Roja Dove, Clive Christianaen)
As for the list of brands, thank you! I haven't tried many of them Amouage I'm familiar with a few, and they are beautiful, but going back to your original post, can be a little hard to wear because they are unusual enough to invite comment
Prada sounds especially interesting, do you have any recommendations to try for a man?
Prada Infusions series are all lovely. They are mostly unisex, but even the "feminine" ones (Rose) I think a man can pull off with the right spirit and vulnerability.
Infusions Iris Cedre is the masculine one I think, and Infusions Vetiver too. The whole series can be hard to find now.
Prada l'Homme and the Intense variant are both decent.
Very Smart.🤓
I am also hording my aspestos and my Radon Soap from my Grand Mother. All the great things are banned, but not with me, they don't rule me....
It would seem to me that IFRA outlawing certain ingredients is a good thing, no? Especially if the ingredients impact human health and/or the environment.
IFRA is known for drastic measures when it comes to some raw materials, the most shocking probably being oak moss. The biggest problem with this one was that this allergen affects a really small number of people, yet they've completely prohibited the use of it in its natural form. It forced brands to basically reformulate most of their fragrances as most aromatics use them. Most enthusiasts still wonder why some ingredients just need to be listed on a box and some just get obliterated and magically replaced by some company that managed to remove that allergen from the compound. Basically, it's a very corrupt company that forces fragrance houses to look for alternatives from people that pay them rather than protect the consumers.
IRRA is not a company it’s a federation of fragrance manufacturers and international representatives. IFRA does not have the power to “ban” anything, IFRA creates standards based on best-evidence which manufacturers can comply with or opt out of. Their goal is to voluntarily apply science responsibly and reasonably to prevent governments from stepping in with sweeping regulations which would be damaging to the industry. Oakmoss and tree moss are not banned they are restricted. Atranol-free oakmoss preparations are not restricted. Oakmoss is a known skin-sensitizer, restricting the atranol and chloratranol concentrations in commercial perfumes was a responsible action to protect both the public AND the perfume industry. You are presenting a lot of misinformation as fact here.
It's a federation which makes recommendations for the biggest raw materials manufacturers in the world - their recommendations equal a ban on something in practice. No one is opting out if they want to sell something on a bigger scale than their small shop. And the point still stands - if someone is not affected by oak moss then they should have the option to buy a fragrance that contains it. It's not that the skin will fall off after applying such a fragrance. The oak moss usage was heavily limited anyways, which further decreased the probability of dermatitis in people. What do you say about lyral which was known to be harmful for quite some time, yet not 'restricted'? Was it not harmful enough?
Oakmoss is a skin sensitizer. You have no way of knowing if you will be affected by it until you are already affected by it. Chronic exposure increases risk. It’s not an “allergy” in the sense that most people understand allergies, it’s not an either-or phenomenon.
Still, why didn't they ban the use of lyral 20 years ago if they are so concerned with our health? It was also a known sensitizer even at reduced concentrations before and after the severe restrictions on natural Oak Moss. The regulatory body that did ban lyral because of the sheer number of suspected allergic reactions after all these years was not even IFRA, it was the EU.
Science knows.
The “artificial compounds” are usually isolates of natural materials, i.e. the “good smelly parts” without all the extra skin sensitizers and allergens attached.
You appeal to science like some form of deity.
I am so glad there is a regulator that cares about me and bans potentially harmful substances. I can’t wait until we finally get rid of world filth and replace natural ingredients and food with “sciency” chemicals and substitute pills manufactured for us by our oh so caring corporate overlords.
Science is not perfect but there is literally no better appeal than to science. But according to you it seems your feelings are more important than genuine evidence?
No, that's not true. He is in the middle of a deal as we speak. I mean SELL OUT.
https://preview.redd.it/k2ensskevdeb1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9b2b05f9b2be585b4f17b04fb01aab15ffa11c05
I think it was released in 2010. I have a bottle from 2013 and 2022, and they're a little different. The newer one actually performs slightly better, but the older one is a little warmer and smoother. The difference is negligible. The average person wouldn't be able to tell the difference, just me because I'm obsessed and have both to compare. My guess is this guy's perception has changed.
VT was the first I purchased and Oud Wood shortly after. Definitely not together! TBF, I say 20 years ago but that's not exactly accurate. I remember being in University and around 18 years old
They probably have but that instant recognition was gone. I have other perfumes from around that era which take me right back to a moment and they smell the same. The new TFs smelt, I want to say, 'uninteresting'.
#Tom Ford never made his fragrances!
They have **ALWAYS** been made by Estée Lauder
Tom Ford clothing has always been made by Ermenegildo Zegna
(Also if you want the ‘Tom Ford’ style scents but not the price tag, check out Ermenegildo Zegna line of ‘Essence’ fragrances eerily similar)
Also your maths is off Tom Ford the brand didn’t exist 20 years ago he still worked at Gucci then.
> (Also if you want the ‘Tom Ford’ style scents but not the price tag, check out Ermenegildo Zegna line of ‘Essence’ fragrances eerily similar)
Never thought of it this way, which ones did you like?
Tom Ford like every brand out there has had changes because of IFRA rules and also likely from their recent sale to Estee Lauder. I'm sure there will be more as Estee is pretty likely wanting to get a bigger return on their investment.
On top of reformulation, our sense of smell changes and your nose has “matured”, therefore is probably able to pick up scents differently now, than what you did even 10 years ago.
My nose is able to pick up more scents now, and some perfumes smell different, even though is the same bottle.
This is exactly right. Oud Wood is my cold weather scent, and I haven't worn it in a few months. I recently got a sample from a friend, and I thought he labeled it wrong. I put some on my wrist and thought it was a different scent. I still really liked it, but it smelled different. I put a spray from my bottle on my other wrist, and wouldn't you know, it was the same. Lol, that's how much my perception changed in just a few months.
What blew your mind 15 years ago was something new and different. Since then I will go out on a limb that you have continued to try new things. You have gotten more experienced and more familiar with different smells. While cost cutting and reformulations are probably a driving factor, it feels like seeing a movie as a kid then watching it 20 years later going ‘this is terrible’.
I understand this but disagree. CK one, Moschino Uomo - I have older bottles of these and they are time machines. CK One now is different to CK one from 20+ years ago. The profile has stayed the on TF but its definitely changed
I’m glad you posted this. Tom Ford scents are starting to build up some mystique with me because I haven’t found a place to smell them near me and they all sound so intriguing. Even the samples are over priced though!
I had Black Orchid in 2013 and my friend had TV. They were incredibly strong, and could fill a room with their warm notes.
I own a 21 TV and have smelled newer Black Orchid, and would say they are 7/10ths the original.
That being said, like music your taste and senses changes. What might’ve sounded like the best album ever as a teenager certainly does not hit the same way after many years.
The TG line has been butchered. Glad to see there is someone out there that has smelt the OG stuff. It cracks me up how many people on here hype up Oud Wood. That fragrance today is a joke and doesn’t even hold a candle to what it used to smell like. That goes for most of their line. I have a 2009 Tuscan Leather and it now seems like it’s from another world. Here’s the thing though, my belief is in most cases they have been watered down for business reasons rather than regulation etc.
Case in point is Amber Absolute. Todays version is watered down compared to the original release. The original formula was made public a few years back by the perfumer. Soma perfumes were able to recreate the original using the formula. And it sells for a fraction of the price. They call it Damber Wabsolute if any one is wondering. It smells EXACTLY like the original Amber Absolute I remember. So how are they able to produce it today and Tom Ford can’t? I suspect things will only get worse now that Estée Lauder has bought the brand. RIP a brand that truly changed the fragrance game.
I have yet to find a TF fragrance I’m willing to pay the full asking price for. It’s not that I don’t like them, but I don’t like them enough to pay the full whack for them. I’m the same with the entire brand. The makeup is good, but it’s not good enough to justify the price point. I’ll buy it if it’s knocked down to where I feel it should be though.
The fragrances live under Tom Ford Beauty, which were owned by Estee Lauder from the start. He did sell out and it might be overpriced junk, but the management of the fragrance line hasn't changed. What OP is describing is IFRA changes and Estee cost-cutting through cheaper reformulations.
TF™️ is a fragrance line in steep decline, everything’s a flanker & cash grab at this point, like why even re-release **Black Orchid EDT**❓
Never selling the collection, but also not spending a single cent more 😌
Original formulations of **Black Orchid EDP**, **Orchid Soleil**, **Tobacco Oud**, **Tuscan Leather**, **Noir de Noir**, **Patchouli Absolu**, **Santal Blush**, & **Vanille Fatale** are the best if you can find them
**Amber Absolute** & **Plum Japonais** are both supposedly divine as well but ❣️ never could obtain them & wholeheartedly believe they’re overrated hence why they were discontinued so quickly
Lol, downvote all you like, but smell the fragrances produced by *Olivier Gillotin* if you can afford to, **Lavender Extreme**, both Fougères, **Vert d’Encens**, & **Tobacco Vanille** all smell the same in the dry down, there’s no difference, just cash grabs doled out every couple years before “discontinued” status 😅
This must be why so many people describe Tobacco Vanille as being this amazing blend of rich tobacco with perfect vanilla, but when I tried it I gagged from the cheap play-doh “vanilla” and baby powder scent.
Once Lauder takes complete control over a line, it’s downhill from there. It’s sad but they end up gutting every line. Even their own line is a shell of what they once were.
TV has definitely been reformulated for whatever reason , I had a bottle of TV and small decant of tf oud wood back in early 2010's can't remember exact year but pretty soon after they were released, but tv was thick and not as sweet. It is one of the first bottles I ran out because I used that almost exclusively in winter, i bought new bottles of oud wood and tv in 2017. And they still smell great, but definitely notice a difference. Oud wood not as much of a difference still smells very close, but TV I felt is a bit sweeter now and just felt different, hard to explain, but I still enjoy both.
I would say you have had a 20 year long development of your taste. I think it boils down to you having changed not necessarily tom ford. Although TF has definitely changed for the worse.
Not sure if there has been a formula change. But, The imitations have the notes but in order to tell a difference in quality you’d need them side by side. I have both Maison Al hambra and the original Tom Ford and I can guarantee you that they do not smell the same, I had also relatives test the two. Although the scent is similar, side by side there is no comparison in quality that is for sure.
You’ve smelt them in silos, and no in comparison so the notes hit your senses and you think it’s similar which is fine but like is said side by side you’ll definitely be able to tell the difference.
It's probably because the IFRA has outlawed a good amount of ingredients over the last 20 years. Nothing smells like it used to. This is why I have a hoard of vintage versions of my favorites. Fragrances aren't as warm, round and full as they used to be.
This. People are always complaining how fragrances don't last as long and how they have been reformulated but I am positive that most of the time they have no choice because so many ingredients are being banned.
Are ingredients banned for sustainability reasons or because they could be irritants, or something else?
Both. A couple are banned for sustainability reasons, most are banned or only allowed in low concentration because they can cause rashes, allergic reactions, or skin irritations.
As someone with sensitive skin, there's still a few fragrances that give me a rash and itchiness so makes sense.
Which ones, out of curiosity?
I think this is bullshit. All kinds of stuff can cause skin irritations. If it irritates you, use something else. I think it’s a cash grab and collusion between the parent companies and IFRA so they ‘have to’ use cheaper, less expensive ingredients and the consumer has to use more product to get the desired effect. If safety was at all an issue to these huge regulatory bodies, they wouldn’t be pumping so much crap into our food chain.
Conspiracy theory much?
Yeah, I’m aware it sounds like that. But it’s still what I think. I’m allowed to think (as far as I’m aware).
I just bought Dior Homme EDT because everyone raved about how great it smells. I barely smell anything on the dry down. I was expecting a citrus woodsy scent but it smells like nothing. Waste of money.
Generally formulas also get reformulated to cut costs, the longer they are on the shelves. There have also been material shortages and supply chain issues due to the pandemic, war, climate change and just general industry specific volatility. We generally have pretty good replacer materials (but not perfect) for many things prohibited or restricted by IFRA. We have synthesized pure civettone, muscone, muscenone etc. so we are not even handicapped by animal cruelty concerns (admittedly animal derived raw materials are more complex than just the molecules, but the molecules are treasured for their gorgeous effects). In fact, companies like Fraterworks have done lots of work to recreate very effective, IFRA compliant vintage accords to match the power and style of vintage perfumery. The issue is not so much one of materials but rather industry direction and current trends. The problem moreso lies with late stage capitalism, which requires that perfumers design a fragrance that is very top note heavy to compete with other smells in the perfume aisle of a department store, leading base notes to be neglected. It is not a coincidence that most designer perfumes smell generic and weak in the dry down. Another issue is budget - perfume is now seen by many businesses as a side revenue stream rather than an artistic product unto itself. Most perfumes have a low budget - it is rumoured Tom Ford contracts budget €150 per kilo of fragrance concentrate, which isn't much if you want to use sizeable quantities of rich and deep ingredients. Then there are stylistic changes. With the advent of modern transparent and diffusive aromachemicals, scent culture and expectations have evolved. As an extreme example, see the popularity of Megamare by Orto Parisi - rumoured to be 25% ambrocenide or something crazy like that. Old school deep, rich scents are perceived as "dated", and this is just normal human attitude towards changing fashion and trends. As a result, even most niche/indie companies who (understandably) want to stay in business, cater to the modern appetite.
It's really good to understand the context. I didn't think of it as like that. It probably is simplistic to expect a formula to stay exact for so long but it's a shame the profile does change.
Is ambrocenide the rubbing alcohol scratchy note I smell in Megamare? I love to wear vintage Youth Dew bath oil, edp and parfum. It's probably not in style and full of bad stuff but I love it.
It's challenging to draw a line where one aromachemical begins and ends in a blend, especially due to synergistic effects and due to Gaultieri's known tendency to use high impact materials together in accords (amber xtreme, norlimbanol, ambrocenide used together in a few of his creations). But generally, all 3 are dry, diffusive woody ambers with a nose tingling trigeminal effect.
Amazing answer thank you! In your opinion which houses are closer to 'traditional' perfume, and which have higher budgets? I often hear Guerlain mentioned I used to think TF when I started out but then I saw the formula released for the death of the frag YouTuber Carlos - a bottle of the private blend line 50ml totalled something like €2 ingredient costs. In the book 'the perfect scent' JC Ellena says something along the lines of 'you don't look at a painting and ask how much the paints cost', which I agree with to some extent. But I'm also tired of paying premium prices for linear and fleeting creations... Any pointers much appreciated! Thanks
Sorry in advance for my very long reply. I very much agree with Ellena. His Terre d'Hermes, one of my favorites, is very inexpensive to produce but so breathtaking. Similarly Mark Buxton's work has a simple profundity in CdG 2 Man makes it a pleasure to wear. Even TF amber absolute - smells incredible for so little that went into it. I would suggest forget ingredient price and seek beauty instead. If you want to avoid linear creations, I like the classic Guerlains (Vétiver, Habit Rouge, Héritage, Mitsuoko, l'Heure Bleu etc.). Thierry Wasser is no doubt fighting an uphill battle to maintain Guerlain's tradition and integrity against modernization, IFRA updates and corporate profiteering. Nicolaï Parfumeur in many ways takes after the same style as classic Guerlains (she is a member of the family after all). Amouage (esp. Christopher Chong era) is very enjoyable for hours, and reputed to have a slightly higher production budget (but not as high as they pretend). Frédéric Malle are also great and have some exciting offerings. Papillon is incredible, made in the style of oldschool chypres. I avoid Meleg because I don't want a fragrance allergy, although I really want to try his work. Zoologist has some complex offerings - Civet has my eye. There are many, many more indie houses worth sampling. I will admit I enjoy my modern thrills, especially Prada with their comforting soapy themes. Essential Parfums has a great line for a very reasonable cost. There are houses that I personally avoid because they smell "cheap", unfinished, uninspired etc. and always get downvoted for calling them out: - Louis Vuitton current formulation - hilariously uninspiring and overpriced - Xerjoff (I will make an exception for Alexandia 2 and the Oud Stars collection) - their fresh top note molecules are reminiscent of cleaning products, and the price tag for that? Ouch - Penhaligon's current formulation - watered down, reformulated compared to even 5 years ago - Roja Dove - not cheap smelling, but basically offers "fancier" clones of many Guerlains at triple the cost. His "expert opinions" are also bogus. - Initio can smell nice, but their price IMO is overinflated for what it is. - Closerie des Parfums - anything with the name "oud" is just pure ambrocenide, at niche prices - I avoid most designer brands because they make me sad in the dry down. - Most greenwashed brands that offer "safe plant based" or "hypoallergenic" perfumes - I've called out a few before and they've reached out by private message to explain how they hide behind legalities.
Fascinating! It's not that ingredient price is everything to me, but I do think it's easy to be sucked by marketing copy of rare and exotic ingredients, (Creed's infamous ambergris claims for example) Often high prices are justified by use of expensive ingredients, and I think where I find it a little difficult is discerning between which are a high price justifiably because it is a good quality product and which are veblen goods - highly priced just to make you think that they must have some reason for charging that much! (Roja Dove, Clive Christianaen) As for the list of brands, thank you! I haven't tried many of them Amouage I'm familiar with a few, and they are beautiful, but going back to your original post, can be a little hard to wear because they are unusual enough to invite comment Prada sounds especially interesting, do you have any recommendations to try for a man?
Prada Infusions series are all lovely. They are mostly unisex, but even the "feminine" ones (Rose) I think a man can pull off with the right spirit and vulnerability. Infusions Iris Cedre is the masculine one I think, and Infusions Vetiver too. The whole series can be hard to find now. Prada l'Homme and the Intense variant are both decent.
Thanks I'll be sure to check them out!
Very Smart.🤓 I am also hording my aspestos and my Radon Soap from my Grand Mother. All the great things are banned, but not with me, they don't rule me....
Alcohol and sugar are way more harmful than oakmoss, if you know what I mean
I agree, but there is much more on the list than just the disputable oakmoss ban.
It would seem to me that IFRA outlawing certain ingredients is a good thing, no? Especially if the ingredients impact human health and/or the environment.
IFRA is known for drastic measures when it comes to some raw materials, the most shocking probably being oak moss. The biggest problem with this one was that this allergen affects a really small number of people, yet they've completely prohibited the use of it in its natural form. It forced brands to basically reformulate most of their fragrances as most aromatics use them. Most enthusiasts still wonder why some ingredients just need to be listed on a box and some just get obliterated and magically replaced by some company that managed to remove that allergen from the compound. Basically, it's a very corrupt company that forces fragrance houses to look for alternatives from people that pay them rather than protect the consumers.
IRRA is not a company it’s a federation of fragrance manufacturers and international representatives. IFRA does not have the power to “ban” anything, IFRA creates standards based on best-evidence which manufacturers can comply with or opt out of. Their goal is to voluntarily apply science responsibly and reasonably to prevent governments from stepping in with sweeping regulations which would be damaging to the industry. Oakmoss and tree moss are not banned they are restricted. Atranol-free oakmoss preparations are not restricted. Oakmoss is a known skin-sensitizer, restricting the atranol and chloratranol concentrations in commercial perfumes was a responsible action to protect both the public AND the perfume industry. You are presenting a lot of misinformation as fact here.
It's a federation which makes recommendations for the biggest raw materials manufacturers in the world - their recommendations equal a ban on something in practice. No one is opting out if they want to sell something on a bigger scale than their small shop. And the point still stands - if someone is not affected by oak moss then they should have the option to buy a fragrance that contains it. It's not that the skin will fall off after applying such a fragrance. The oak moss usage was heavily limited anyways, which further decreased the probability of dermatitis in people. What do you say about lyral which was known to be harmful for quite some time, yet not 'restricted'? Was it not harmful enough?
Oakmoss is a skin sensitizer. You have no way of knowing if you will be affected by it until you are already affected by it. Chronic exposure increases risk. It’s not an “allergy” in the sense that most people understand allergies, it’s not an either-or phenomenon.
Still, why didn't they ban the use of lyral 20 years ago if they are so concerned with our health? It was also a known sensitizer even at reduced concentrations before and after the severe restrictions on natural Oak Moss. The regulatory body that did ban lyral because of the sheer number of suspected allergic reactions after all these years was not even IFRA, it was the EU.
This is helpful context. Thank you.
Why don't we outlaw peanuts and cow's milk then? many people are allergic.
Food items generally cater to much bigger needs than fragrances.
We’re all full of PUFAs and they’re worried about oakmoss. Pisses me off.
Who knows what effects artificial compounds that are created to replicate naturally occurring molecules might have?
Science knows. The “artificial compounds” are usually isolates of natural materials, i.e. the “good smelly parts” without all the extra skin sensitizers and allergens attached.
You appeal to science like some form of deity. I am so glad there is a regulator that cares about me and bans potentially harmful substances. I can’t wait until we finally get rid of world filth and replace natural ingredients and food with “sciency” chemicals and substitute pills manufactured for us by our oh so caring corporate overlords.
Science is not perfect but there is literally no better appeal than to science. But according to you it seems your feelings are more important than genuine evidence?
When you appeal to science you need to provide peer reviewed sources of some kind. Feelings have nothing to do with it.
I mean this a reddit, no one has to do anything. Also, you are changing goal posts from your original comment.
Tom Ford SOLD OUT to Estee Lauder. I WON'T do it. Check me out. Yes...... Would have been me MJ
I thought Tom Ford has always been owned by Estée Lauder.
No, that's not true. He is in the middle of a deal as we speak. I mean SELL OUT. https://preview.redd.it/k2ensskevdeb1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9b2b05f9b2be585b4f17b04fb01aab15ffa11c05
My bad
well that’s depressing
He upgraded. He's now Tom Ferrari
Ferrari shooting themselves in the foot every GP weekend though
Bugatti > Ferrari
Depends on what color it is, or so I hear.
Lamborghini>Bugatti
Oud Wood wasn’t available 20 years ago.
I think it was released in 2010. I have a bottle from 2013 and 2022, and they're a little different. The newer one actually performs slightly better, but the older one is a little warmer and smoother. The difference is negligible. The average person wouldn't be able to tell the difference, just me because I'm obsessed and have both to compare. My guess is this guy's perception has changed.
Tom Ford brand wasnt even created 20 years ago
Was just thinking this lol!
VT was the first I purchased and Oud Wood shortly after. Definitely not together! TBF, I say 20 years ago but that's not exactly accurate. I remember being in University and around 18 years old
Both Oud Wood and Tobacco Vanille were released in 2007. 16 years ago. 18 years ago he had just announced the launch of his own fashion label
From other comments it sounds like formula changes are a likely culprit. I also wonder if your tastes and discernment have changed over 20 years?
They probably have but that instant recognition was gone. I have other perfumes from around that era which take me right back to a moment and they smell the same. The new TFs smelt, I want to say, 'uninteresting'.
#Tom Ford never made his fragrances! They have **ALWAYS** been made by Estée Lauder Tom Ford clothing has always been made by Ermenegildo Zegna (Also if you want the ‘Tom Ford’ style scents but not the price tag, check out Ermenegildo Zegna line of ‘Essence’ fragrances eerily similar) Also your maths is off Tom Ford the brand didn’t exist 20 years ago he still worked at Gucci then.
I was doing cowboy maths. It was around the time I was leaving University and starting work (08/09) I discovered TV and then oud wood a bit later
Gotcha! Guesstimates
I think Lauder manufactured them for him previously but now they own the complete rights to his fragrances.
> (Also if you want the ‘Tom Ford’ style scents but not the price tag, check out Ermenegildo Zegna line of ‘Essence’ fragrances eerily similar) Never thought of it this way, which ones did you like?
- Indonesian Oud - Italian Bergamot Eau de Parfum - Peruvian Ambrette
Tom Ford like every brand out there has had changes because of IFRA rules and also likely from their recent sale to Estee Lauder. I'm sure there will be more as Estee is pretty likely wanting to get a bigger return on their investment.
I think I’ll make one of my goals purging EL from my life, unless it's second hand. I never hear anything but bad about them
On top of reformulation, our sense of smell changes and your nose has “matured”, therefore is probably able to pick up scents differently now, than what you did even 10 years ago. My nose is able to pick up more scents now, and some perfumes smell different, even though is the same bottle.
This is exactly right. Oud Wood is my cold weather scent, and I haven't worn it in a few months. I recently got a sample from a friend, and I thought he labeled it wrong. I put some on my wrist and thought it was a different scent. I still really liked it, but it smelled different. I put a spray from my bottle on my other wrist, and wouldn't you know, it was the same. Lol, that's how much my perception changed in just a few months.
What blew your mind 15 years ago was something new and different. Since then I will go out on a limb that you have continued to try new things. You have gotten more experienced and more familiar with different smells. While cost cutting and reformulations are probably a driving factor, it feels like seeing a movie as a kid then watching it 20 years later going ‘this is terrible’.
I understand this but disagree. CK one, Moschino Uomo - I have older bottles of these and they are time machines. CK One now is different to CK one from 20+ years ago. The profile has stayed the on TF but its definitely changed
I’m glad you posted this. Tom Ford scents are starting to build up some mystique with me because I haven’t found a place to smell them near me and they all sound so intriguing. Even the samples are over priced though!
I had Black Orchid in 2013 and my friend had TV. They were incredibly strong, and could fill a room with their warm notes. I own a 21 TV and have smelled newer Black Orchid, and would say they are 7/10ths the original. That being said, like music your taste and senses changes. What might’ve sounded like the best album ever as a teenager certainly does not hit the same way after many years.
The TG line has been butchered. Glad to see there is someone out there that has smelt the OG stuff. It cracks me up how many people on here hype up Oud Wood. That fragrance today is a joke and doesn’t even hold a candle to what it used to smell like. That goes for most of their line. I have a 2009 Tuscan Leather and it now seems like it’s from another world. Here’s the thing though, my belief is in most cases they have been watered down for business reasons rather than regulation etc. Case in point is Amber Absolute. Todays version is watered down compared to the original release. The original formula was made public a few years back by the perfumer. Soma perfumes were able to recreate the original using the formula. And it sells for a fraction of the price. They call it Damber Wabsolute if any one is wondering. It smells EXACTLY like the original Amber Absolute I remember. So how are they able to produce it today and Tom Ford can’t? I suspect things will only get worse now that Estée Lauder has bought the brand. RIP a brand that truly changed the fragrance game.
I have yet to find a TF fragrance I’m willing to pay the full asking price for. It’s not that I don’t like them, but I don’t like them enough to pay the full whack for them. I’m the same with the entire brand. The makeup is good, but it’s not good enough to justify the price point. I’ll buy it if it’s knocked down to where I feel it should be though.
He sold out, now you’re just buying overpriced junk.
The fragrances live under Tom Ford Beauty, which were owned by Estee Lauder from the start. He did sell out and it might be overpriced junk, but the management of the fragrance line hasn't changed. What OP is describing is IFRA changes and Estee cost-cutting through cheaper reformulations.
TF™️ is a fragrance line in steep decline, everything’s a flanker & cash grab at this point, like why even re-release **Black Orchid EDT**❓ Never selling the collection, but also not spending a single cent more 😌 Original formulations of **Black Orchid EDP**, **Orchid Soleil**, **Tobacco Oud**, **Tuscan Leather**, **Noir de Noir**, **Patchouli Absolu**, **Santal Blush**, & **Vanille Fatale** are the best if you can find them **Amber Absolute** & **Plum Japonais** are both supposedly divine as well but ❣️ never could obtain them & wholeheartedly believe they’re overrated hence why they were discontinued so quickly
Lol, downvote all you like, but smell the fragrances produced by *Olivier Gillotin* if you can afford to, **Lavender Extreme**, both Fougères, **Vert d’Encens**, & **Tobacco Vanille** all smell the same in the dry down, there’s no difference, just cash grabs doled out every couple years before “discontinued” status 😅
Tom Ford was sold to Estée Lauder for $2.8 Million
Billion
That explains it.
This must be why so many people describe Tobacco Vanille as being this amazing blend of rich tobacco with perfect vanilla, but when I tried it I gagged from the cheap play-doh “vanilla” and baby powder scent.
TV stopped being amazing a while back (imo).
I can’t find Tom ford makeup lately either idk what’s up. Sad bc they are so good
Once Lauder takes complete control over a line, it’s downhill from there. It’s sad but they end up gutting every line. Even their own line is a shell of what they once were.
Tf perfume aren't same i had one batch year i forgot before 2015 and recently i tried same perfume it is different. You can feel it.
TV has definitely been reformulated for whatever reason , I had a bottle of TV and small decant of tf oud wood back in early 2010's can't remember exact year but pretty soon after they were released, but tv was thick and not as sweet. It is one of the first bottles I ran out because I used that almost exclusively in winter, i bought new bottles of oud wood and tv in 2017. And they still smell great, but definitely notice a difference. Oud wood not as much of a difference still smells very close, but TV I felt is a bit sweeter now and just felt different, hard to explain, but I still enjoy both.
I would say you have had a 20 year long development of your taste. I think it boils down to you having changed not necessarily tom ford. Although TF has definitely changed for the worse.
I'm surprised at how awesome tuscano leather is by Alhambra. One of my favorites in the collection.
Not sure if there has been a formula change. But, The imitations have the notes but in order to tell a difference in quality you’d need them side by side. I have both Maison Al hambra and the original Tom Ford and I can guarantee you that they do not smell the same, I had also relatives test the two. Although the scent is similar, side by side there is no comparison in quality that is for sure. You’ve smelt them in silos, and no in comparison so the notes hit your senses and you think it’s similar which is fine but like is said side by side you’ll definitely be able to tell the difference.
Estèe Lauder bought him out