MORE THAN A NICE SCENT!

Newsletter No.58

07.05.26

Welcome Video:

Welcome to the 58th edition of the More Than A Nice Scent

Hello fragrance friends!

I've been thinking about a question lately: what are you actually paying for when you buy a fragrance?

You shouldn't be paying for ingredients. You should be paying for feelings.

If you've ever been curious about quality, and what really separates a $30 scent from a $300 one, my latest essay is for you.

Warm regards,
Scott

Listen here for an AI podcast about this edition's feature essay:

The feature essay:

The Prestige Myth

One of the most prestigious fragrance oils I ever made cost less than most bottles of perfume you'll find at your local drugstore.

Not because I used cheap tricks.

Because I changed how I think about perfumery.

And here's the strange part: it had nothing to do with expensive or rare materials.

That forced me to ask a question I probably should have asked years earlier:

What actually makes a fragrance feel prestigious?

For a long time, I believed what many perfumers are taught: better materials make better fragrances. Expensive materials make more prestigious fragrances.

It sounds logical.

A fragrance with costly naturals, rare woods, precious florals, and beautiful specialty molecules should feel more elevated than something built from simple, affordable materials.

But something didn’t add up.

Because I had smelled expensive fragrances that felt empty. And I had made affordable ones that felt complete.

Here’s what I discovered:

Prestige was never a budget problem. It was a desire problem.

Prestige can be designed, not just bought.

This Was the Success Formula:

Spend big on marketing. Keep it exclusive. Price it high. Polarize.

That was prestige in 1985.

Dior understood this with Poison.

The story around Poison has become almost as bold as the fragrance itself. But whether every detail is fact or perfume legend, the lesson is clear: Poison was not the safe choice.

And that is the point.

Poison did not smell prestigious because it was quiet, tasteful, and expensive-smelling.

It smelled prestigious because it had power.

The formula itself was already loaded.

Damascones (Shock): Extremely potent. Very diffusive. Dark. Fruity. Voluptuous and delicious. Wine-soaked plums. Perfect in heavy orientals. 

Prunol (Addiction): Spicy and dark fruitiness. Forbidden fruits. Dried plums. Raisins. Prunes. Cinnamon. Slightly leathery. Opulent. One of the few historic bases I still reach for today.

Tuberose (Power): It dominates. It fills space. Not a garden flower. A force. Heavy. Narcotic. At this dose, it's polarizing. It's unforgettable.

Three ideas. Fruit, flower, darkness.

Damascones shock you.

Prunol keeps you wanting more.

Tuberose screams.

But together, they became something people had not smelled in quite the same way before.

Not a pretty floral. Not a polite luxury fragrance. Something dark. Dense. Purple. Impossible to ignore.

That was the cultural essence of the power fragrances of the 1980s. Bold. Loud. Unapologetic. Feminine, but not soft. Beautiful, but not innocent.

Spend big. Stay exclusive. Price it high. Polarize.

That was the formula.

But something still didn’t add up.

What Are You Actually Paying For?

Here’s what nobody tells you.

Some of the most expensive materials in perfumery show up in budget fragrances every day.

And some of the most affordable materials?

They are inside some of the most prestigious scents ever made.

I know this because I use both. Every day.

Most people will never know their names. But they’re in almost everything worth wearing.

They’re the invisible building blocks of modern perfumery:

Iso E Super (Calm): Dry. Woody. Ambery. Abstract cedarwood. Transparent and skin-like. Perfect for creating a sense of space and serenity.

Ambroxan (Confidence): Clean. Salty wood. Think sun-bleached driftwood. Radiant. High-diffusion but also an excellent fixative.

Both help create the modern woody-skin effect.

Together? They form what I think of as the Iso-Ambrox accord, the foundation of many modern minimalist scents. And a lot of my creations.

Iso E Super gives body, space, and velvety softness.

Ambroxan gives projection, polish, and mineral cleanliness.

The result?

A feeling of natural, effortless confidence.

One affordable. One expensive.

Similar emotional message: Effortless confidence.

Musk T (Comfort): White musk with a cotton texture. Comforting cleanliness. Not loud. Not showy. One of the most essential musks in modern perfumery.

Helvetolide (Sensuality): Smooth. Fruity. Musky. Slightly pear-like. More polished and rounded than a basic clean musk. It adds warmth, softness, and a gentle glow.

Both help create the modern second-skin effect.

But they do it differently.

Musk T gives clean cotton softness.

Helvetolide gives warmer, smoother skin sensuality.

One feels freshly washed.

The other feels quietly attractive.

One affordable. One more expensive.

Similar emotional message: Soft intimacy.

Hedione (Allure): Fresh. Airy. Jasmine-like. Almost invisible on its own. But inside a fragrance, it makes everything feel more alive, open, and radiant.

Jasmine Absolute (Desire): Rich. Warm. Floral. Narcotic. Heavy. Unmistakable. One of the most beautiful and expensive natural materials in perfumery. It gives body, depth, and warmth.

Together they create the perfect floral presence.

One costs almost nothing. The other costs a fortune.

Similar emotional message: Magnetic beauty.

All of these materials are used in perfumes people love - affordable scents or crazy expensive niche creations. Some are relatively affordable. The others are expensive. They are not identical. But they can move a fragrance in a similar emotional direction.

Here's the message: You shouldn't be paying for ingredients. You should be paying for feelings.

Here’s what twenty-five years has taught me.

A great fragrance is not about budget. It is about decisions.

I’ve made many cheap formulas that smell better than my expensive ones. Not because expensive materials are bad, but because expensive materials can still be used badly.

A good perfumer should be able to make a beautiful fragrance on a tight budget.

Some of my best work comes from constraints: a limited palette, or a tight budget. Because when money is tight, there are no cheat codes or shortcuts. You have to think harder.

Every material has to earn its place. Every note has to carry weight. Every choice has to be justified. 

That pressure?

That is where great fragrance often begins. Not with the price tag. But with the choices.

The Formula Changed.

I noticed it in the briefs first.

“Powerful” became “refined.” “Fill the room” became “be remembered.”

Nobody announced the shift. It just happened.

The power fragrances of the 1980s entered the room before the person did. They were loud, unapologetic, and designed to be noticed. You knew when someone wearing Poison walked in.

Today, the brief sounds different.

Less Poison. More signature. More quiet luxury.

The goal is no longer just to be impossible to ignore.

The goal is to be impossible to forget.

Niche isn't always prestige

Every house has a "niche" line now. Every mall has a niche counter.

At this point, niche often just means expensive.

But expensive is not prestige.

Rare ingredients are not prestige.

Small batches are not prestige.

A strange name on the bottle is not prestige.

I have seen "niche" briefs asking for copies of popular scents.

That is same-same-but-different in a more expensive bottle.

That is not niche. And it's not prestige.

From inside, the pattern is clear: a lot of what gets sold as niche is just luxury packaging around an ordinary idea. The price climbs. The story gets stranger. But the fragrance underneath is doing the same thing every other fragrance is doing.

So if prestige is not the price, not the materials, and not the marketing? What is it?

Prestige Starts Before You Open a Bottle.

This is how I see it:

Prestige is not a formula. It is not the materials either.

Same goes for niche.

Both should start with the same thing:

A person.

Not a demographic. Not an age group. Not a mood board.

A real person with a real emotional need.

Who are they becoming?

What are they reaching for?

What do they want to feel when they walk out the door?

After three years of developing my EFD thinking, one rule has become non-negotiable:

No persona, no formula.

If the brief does not include one, I create it myself. I need to know who the fragrance is for before I choose a single material.

Because without that, I am guessing.

And guessing is how you make nice scents.

Not perfumes people love.

When I understand the person, the formula has direction. The person is the heart of the story. And the story is no longer something added at the end. I am telling a true story.

Prestige is not the price of the materials.

Niche is not the size of the batch.

Love is not created by accident.

The materials, techniques, and formulas are the craft.

The intention is the work.

And the emotion?

That is what makes it priceless.

If "no persona, no formula" is the rule that changed my work, my upcoming book is the rest of the story. More Than A Nice Scent: A Perfumer's Perspective on Emotional Fragrance Design. Coming soon.

Just for fun!

Join the Conversation!

Now I want to hear from you: have you ever paid a lot for a fragrance and felt nothing? Or paid almost nothing and felt everything? Comment below!

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    >

    Discover more from More Than A Nice Scent

    Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

    Continue reading