Susanne Lang has introduced the Couture Blend Kit, with ten 5 ml bottles of Eau de Parfum to experiment with layering and blending.
The scents include No. 1 Grapefruit Yuzu, No. 2 Neroli Citrus, No. 3 Aqua Marine, No. 4 Himalayan Rose, No. 5 Tuberose Absolute, No. 6 Vintage Patchoul, No. 7 Nude Musk, No. 8 Opulent Spice, No. 9 Amberwood and No. 10 Vanilla CO2.
A funnel and atomizer are included. $95 at Luckyscent.
This intrigues me somehow, though it has overtones of being an expensive “Chemistry Set” for adults. I've been curious lately about Susanne Lang's fragrances; some of them sound really nice and I enjoy her packaging. Some of the accords in this kit sound appealing on their own, even without going into that messy layering and blending business.
I would, however, like to teach the Luckyscent copywriter that the plural form is “EAUX de parfum.” Haha.
Many of the SLs I've tried are simply too sweet for me, although I've liked a few and was sorry to see the line disappear from Barney's — it was a fun counter to play at.
I use Eaux de Parfum, but not sure it is really correct in English usage. See:
http://cephalogenic.blogspot.com/2007/11/red-whine.html
Thanks for the link to pyramus's site. I guess I'd almost be more forgiving even if they wrote “eaus de parfum”, but I just can't wrap my head around forms like “eau de toilettes.”
It is a great site, although I often read it with a sense of foreboding: gosh, I break an awful lot of usage rules!
You know, this perfume-blending thing is just not for me. Other people might be a whiz at concocting something individualistic *and* great smelling, but for me everything turns into Downy. Not great with mixing lipstick either. Bobbi Brown say you just need a red and a pink lipstick and some foundation and you can make all the shades you need, but for me it's just a ruin of some good lipstick.
I like to mix nail polishes (another matter altogether), but not terribly interested in DIY perfume although once in awhile I'll layer.
Never even tried to mix lipstick. Lots of brands make the shade I like, and I buy them all even though they're identical.
“Eau de toilettes” isn't wrong. It's the usual way we make plurals in English, by simply tacking the letter “-s” onto the word, and it's entirely acceptable. (The plural of “Strudel” in German–all nouns in that languages have a capital letter–is also “Strudel”, but why should we care about that in English? The correct plural of “strudel” in our language is “strudels”.)
I prefer “eaux de toilette” because I think it's nicer, but either is correct. In fact, Merriam Webster (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/eau+toilette) says there are three: the two I've listed above, plus “eaux de toilettes”, which seems like overkill to me, so don't use that one.
I am glad you like the website. As for your rule-breaking (which I haven't actually ever noticed), I'm incredibly strict on some matters and thoroughly lenient on others, and in any case I am not the boss of you (as they say) so you may break them to your heart's content. I give bloggers all sorts of leeway: I only really start to snarl when I'm reading professionally written and edited material (such as things in print, or in websites such as Salon and Slate): the people in charge of that sort of thing are paid to make sure their writing is letter-perfect, and it had damned well better be.
Anyway, I love your website, so I would never criticize it.
LOL @ “I am not the boss of you”…and please, criticize away. I'd rather be told when I'm doing something wrong! But I will stick with my “Eaux de Toilette”. When I remember. I just did a search, and I have in fact used “Eau de Toilettes” in the past, so apparently I'm not even consistent. Argh.
Pyramus, in *my* style manual, “eaux de toilette” will always have primacy. Haha! Others (including Luckyscent) may do what they wish, I guess….
I know this is OT, but I'm with you on being alternately strict and lenient (I tend to be a non-prescriptive grammarian, mostly because I really get off on language change). However, I'm heavily biased in favor of my Chicago Manual training, so I sometimes find myself editing on the sly shared documents written coworkers — I claim it's “for consistency within the office.” I'm sure they love me…. I may need to start browsing your blog more often!