• About
  • Login to comment
    • Bluesky
    • RSS
    • Twitter

Now Smell This

a blog about perfume

Menu ▼
  • Perfume Reviews
  • New Perfumes
  • Archives

What We Do Is Secret Monoscent G & E ~ new fragrances

Posted by Robin on 28 March 2016 19 Comments

What We Do Is Secret Monoscent G & E

What We Do Is Secret has reissued Monoscent G in a coffret with the new Monoscent E:

A molecular masterpiece and a molecular legend are paired for the first time: Monoscent G, featuring the airy, almost laundry-like transparent aroma of Galoxolide Super,1 and Monoscent E, featuring the velvety futuristic woody scent of Timbersilk,2 two state-of-the-art aromachemicals directly from IFF.

What We Do Is Secret Monoscent G and E are $90 for the two 60 ml bottles, and can be found in the US at Luckyscent or Twisted Lily.

(quote via luckyscent)

1. About 29% of those tested are anosmic to Galaxolide.

2. The IFF description: "Smooth and spacious natural woody note with refined cedar and amber facets. Timbersilk™ is an excellent foundation for producing strength, volume and tenacity for the majority of end use applications."

Possibly of interest

What We Do Is Secret Monoscent G ~ new fragrance
S-Perfume Himiko, Musk S, 1499 & Kamakura ~ new fragrances
A Lab on Fire Oxymusc ~ new fragrance

Filed Under: new fragrances
Tagged With: s perfume

Advertisement


19 Comments

Leave a comment, or read more about commenting at Now Smell This. Here's our privacy policy, and a handy emoticon chart.

  1. meredifay says:
    28 March 2016 at 11:36 am

    5 gm of Timbersilk is $5.00. Hmmm.

    Log in to Reply
    • Robin says:
      28 March 2016 at 11:52 am

      Yeah. That is how it works with Escentric Molecules too.

      Log in to Reply
      • Supersmell says:
        28 March 2016 at 6:07 pm

        Maybe this Monoscent E contains a refined version of Timbersilk, just as the Iso E Super used for the Escentric Molecules scent is a racemate, i. e. a more purified Iso E Super solution containing a higher concentration of the Gamma isomeres.

        This Gamma Iso E Super isomer gives a smell due to its special three dimensional molecular construction. The non-Gamma isomer doesn’t smell at all.

        In the usual Iso E Super mix you’ll find the Gamma isomer as well as the non smelling type, which makes the whole of it smell less strong.

        Obviously, the isomer separating process is complicated and thus quite costly.

        But taking into account the price explosion for perfumes which has taken place during the last few years, every scent on sale might be highly overpriced.

        Log in to Reply
        • rickbr says:
          29 March 2016 at 10:23 am

          Timbersilk is already more or less like a refined version of Iso E Super. Iso E Super is a group of the isomers of the same molecule: alpha, beta and gamma. What is used in Escentric Molecules is a version richer or pure (i’m not sure) in the Gamma isomer. It’s not because it’s expensive that you cannot reproduce it, it’s because it remains a captive, which means that only if you work with IFF you have acess with it. Timbersilk is more or less like an intermediate of Iso E Super and Iso Gamma Super, having more of the gamma isomer than Iso E but not the same as the Gamma version.
          Also, the fact that when you purchase a fragrance, if 20% of what you are paying is the formula itself it’s already something rare nowadays. So you are paying for a lot of other things, even when you are purchasing a scent (supposedly) made of one synthetic. I say supposedly because Juliette Has a Gun This is Not a perfume, for instance, was advertised as a pure ambroxan creation and in the technical analysis showed to be a full composition made of several things. So, until someone analysis it, we have a concept of a solimolecule which might or not be made of a single aromachemical.

          Log in to Reply
  2. Scentalicious says:
    28 March 2016 at 12:58 pm

    What they do is getting to be less and less of a secret!

    I feel sorry for the generations for whom this sort of thing will is now/will represent fine perfumery.

    Laundry musk and spiky woods is what they’ll think of like we think of Shalimar, Mitsouko, Joy, No 5….

    Log in to Reply
    • Robin says:
      28 March 2016 at 2:22 pm

      LOL — good point on the secret 🙂

      Log in to Reply
    • rickbr says:
      29 March 2016 at 10:49 am

      Just like our modern world 🙂 We give at a lot of moment datas and clues of what we like, what we are and how we behave. Secret is not exactly a modern characteristic (which can be scary if you start to think about it).

      Log in to Reply
  3. Ede97005 says:
    28 March 2016 at 1:56 pm

    This sounds so Star Trek! Honestly, don’t you think that Spock would wear a tiny discreet splash of Monoscent E?

    Log in to Reply
    • Ede97005 says:
      28 March 2016 at 2:02 pm

      But seriously though- this is just so strange and nonsensical to me. The components have no context, unlike essential oils from flowers, seeds and plants, so it really does not seem to make that much sense to me? Plus, about 1/3 of the people won’t be able to smell G, if I remember correctly.

      Log in to Reply
      • Robin says:
        28 March 2016 at 2:24 pm

        It’s nonsensical to me too, but they’re not the only brand doing it. In addition to Escentric Molecules, Juliette Has A Gun also released something, can’t remember what now — ambrox? It’s like paying to NOT have perfumers do the work for you.

        Log in to Reply
        • sweetgrass says:
          28 March 2016 at 5:45 pm

          Yeah, it was called Not a Perfume, and I believe it was just ambroxan.

          Log in to Reply
        • rickbr says:
          29 March 2016 at 10:27 am

          Robin, see my comment bellow. Not a Perfume was supposedly only made of ambroxan, but in fact was a full composition. I would be very surprised if they had made a scent of only ambroxan since it’s quite an expensive material (1 kg is around 1000 dollars).

          Log in to Reply
          • Robin says:
            29 March 2016 at 11:01 am

            Thanks!

  4. Jalapeno says:
    28 March 2016 at 3:24 pm

    I have the JHAG sample set, and the “scent” in question is called Not A Perfume. The specific aromachem is Cetalox, which is described as a synthetic ambergris.

    Log in to Reply
    • Robin says:
      28 March 2016 at 4:15 pm

      Thanks.

      Log in to Reply
    • sweetgrass says:
      28 March 2016 at 5:46 pm

      Heh.. beat me to it.. which I would have realized if I had read the rest of the thread before responding. lol

      Log in to Reply
      • Jalapeno says:
        28 March 2016 at 6:33 pm

        No worries, Sweetgrass.

        Log in to Reply
      • rickbr says:
        29 March 2016 at 10:43 am

        Cetalox is also a type of ambroxan, sweetgrass. It’s called a synthetic reproduction of ambergris since the natural ambergris do have the ambroxide molecule as a important part of this aroma. They tried to reproduce as close as possible this molecule in laboratory and called it Ambrox. I tried to find who is the responsible for the ambroxan name, but i don’t know. What i know is that the research and development of different versions of Ambrox is a Firmenich work. It’s not responsible 100% for how ambergris smell but plays an important role. You have three different qualities of ambrox: ambrox, ambrox dl and cetalox.

        Log in to Reply
  5. rickbr says:
    29 March 2016 at 10:48 am

    This is not something new, just becoming more trendy now. Helmut Lang has made this with his 2001 limited launch called Velvione. I believe that this is becoming more recurrent now because it seems to be very adequate for the generation that i’m part of (and don’t necessarely identify myself with): the Millenials. This kind of fragrance doesn’t require too much thinking or commitment. You either like it or not. In a world loaded with information from all the sides, probably the average person doesn’t want to think too much or commit too deeply for a fragrance. And even niche brands are not more focused on the perfumista public, which doesn’t behave like the public who make those brands profitable.

    Log in to Reply

Leave a reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Advertisement

Search

Recent reviews

Atelier Cologne Love Osmanthus
Moschino Toy Boy
Arquiste Misfit
Diptyque Eau Capitale
Zoologist Bee
Parfum d’Empire Immortelle Corse
Comme des Garcons Series 10 Clash
Frédéric Malle Rose & Cuir
L’Artisan Parfumeur Le Chant de Camargue
Yves Saint Laurent Grain de Poudre
Régime des Fleurs Chloë Sevigny Little Flower
Chanel 1957
Gallivant Los Angeles
Amouage Portrayal Woman

Blogroll

Bois de Jasmin
Grain de Musc
Perfume Posse
The Non-Blonde
More blogs...

Perfumista lists

100 fragrances every perfumista should try
And 25 more fragrances every perfumista should smell
50 masculine fragrances every perfumista should try
26 vintage fragrances every perfumista should try
25 rose fragrances every perfumista should try
11 Cheap Perfumes Beauty Outsiders Love

Favorite posts

The Great Perfume Reduction Plan
Why I Love Old School Chypres
New to perfume and want to learn more?
How to make fragrance last through the day
Fragrance concentrations: sorting it all out
On reformulations, or why your favorite perfume doesn’t smell like it used to
How to get fragrance samples
Perfume for Life: How Long Will Your Fragrance Collection Last?

Upcoming

List of upcoming Friday projects

15 March ~ swapmeet

3 April ~ damage poll
26 April ~ splitmeet

3 May ~ spring reading poll
17 May ~ Haiku challenge!

 

Back to Top

Home
Archives
About Now Smell This :: Privacy Policy
Perfume Reviews
New Perfumes
General Perfume Articles
The Monday Mail

Glossary of Perfume Terms
Perfume FAQ
Perfume Books

Noses ~ Perfumers A-E :: F-K :: L-S :: T-Z

Perfume Houses A-B :: C :: D-E :: F-G
H-J :: K-L :: M :: N-O :: P :: Q-R :: S
T :: U-Z

Copyright © 2005-2025 Now Smell This. All rights reserved.