Interview: Konstantin Mihov of "Parfums d'imperfiction"

It is always exciting to learn how a perfumer's mind ticks and Konstantin Mihov is such a case: his mind has creative ideas and searches for techniques that might apply these ideas into tangible reality for the delectation of perfume lovers.
Here at Perfume Shrine we have dealt we his work once before, when reviewing Alice In Wonderland, a fairy-tale creation of mint tea and violets that brings us back to our magical and twisted childhood of Alice and the magical creatures she meets, seeing just how deep the rabbit hole is.

Now, Knostantin Mihov is revealing the thinking that goes behind his creations and the things that fascinate him about perfumery in the first place.
Let's hear it from him...

Talk to us about yourself a bit: what are you involved in, what do you do besides making perfumes?

Talking about myself is perhaps the one thing that takes ages and that I am most clear about (at least when it comes to my current aspirations, ambitions, positions, etc. - if you ask about the past, I can sum it up in 5 sentences). At the moment, I am in my last year of BA degree in integrated social and cognitive psychology and I am currently in the process of finding another university for my PhD degree in theUK in social neuroscience. My aspirations are to stay in academia forever - PhD, postdoctoral fellowship, professorship, research, until retirement (possibly at different places, possibly in different countries - I consider myself citizen of the world). My current research interest varies and will perhaps continue to change and with each step in the academic development I will experience a new field of exciting insight and will probably be switching specialization areas from time to time. Currently, I am very much interested in gender differences in language use,attribution mechanisms, facial expressions and particularly smiles (oh, and yes, we are talking about basic research and not so much about applied research although I have done some applied things as well - currently I am working with several other colleagues on an intercultural competence e-learning programme for a big multinational company with head-offices in Germany).

My other hobbies include piano playing, bookbinding, and photography. For the latter two I haven't had much time lately (no surprise) and probably won't have time in a long time but I do still enjoy taking pictures at some particular events (recently I was taking photographs of a performance of the Vagina Monologues).
The one hobby which is perhaps never going to die whatever happens is piano playing.
I have been performing for the past 8-9 years (which may sound as a long time but I started too late) and I have never had the intention to make a career out of it but it certainly is very rewarding to set up a piano recital once in a while (my next one is on the 20th April), to invite your friends (as well as open it for the public) and donate all the proceedings from the entrance fee to a good cause. It is an extremely rewarding experience to stand in front of an audience and to literally play with their emotions. And although I am far from being a professional making no mistakes (in fact, I make quite many), it is for the sake of passion - and I think this manages to compensate for my mistakes and makes the people come again and again. My next recital, btw, is entitled "Alice in Wonderland: a Story in Characters" and is going to tell the story of Alice and all the people and creatures she meets in terms of musical pieces. The room will also be scented with my perfume Alice In Wonderland(the last concert was dedicated to the Ambient Rose and the room smelled of roses).

Sounds like you have a great time there, Konstantin! Tell me however how have you become involved with perfume in the first place? When did you first realize you liked it?

My entrance in the world of perfumery was "accidental". If it weren't for my aunt who is very much into botanical essential oils, basis oils and all these cosmetics (she makes everything that she uses herself), I wouldn't be doing what I am doing. I have always enjoyed fragrances but I would have never thought of making my own if it weren't for these first experiences.

Uh huh...those formative experiences are always interesting. Was there a specific incidence that inspired you?

My very first fragrance mixtures were made entirely of naturals and I do remember one that I wish I still had the formula for (it got lost in all the move from Bulgaria to Germany 3 years ago when I switch to another computer and lost some of the information I used to have) - it was a very raw green earthy and leathery scent -very much along the lines of Bandit but it was lighter and smoother and less sparkling. And I have been working ever since (that was about 7 years ago). Only about 3 years ago, did I discover the charm and possibilities of synthetically produced molecules (both that occur naturally in some plants and those that do not exist in nature) and have been experimenting with them little by little into rounding formulations, into accenting what is needed, and into providing nuances that could not be achieved otherwise.

Now that you mention Bandit...What were the perfumes that you held as prototypes or inspirations in your mind before becoming involved in perfumery? The perfumers who influenced you most?

In the very beginning of my perfumery obsession, I was familiar with the usual department store fragrances. And I always had the tendency to go for thicker, oriental type of fragrances although I did enjoy occasionally musky, woodsy scents. But as soon as I was introduced to Serge Lutens fragrances, I was fascinated beyond comprehension. And I still am - there isn't perhaps a single fragrance from his collection that I would not love to have a bottle of - they are all in their own right personal and in terms of the entire collection they create perhaps the most coherent and yet innovative palette that is on the market. And I am still inspired by his creations - his new ones (which show a certain change from the earlier ones)
as well as from the old ones with their magical connotations. I am also very much enchanted by Jean-Claude Ellena's minimalist style which is unattainable for me (I tend to have a less patience in the fragrance exploration that he does). I also admire the vision of Edmond Roudnitska - not so much the fragrances per se; rather the fact that he took his time in the careful evaluation of his fragrances and his critical evaluation of publishing only 16 in his lifetime.
I also must pay due respect to Andy Tauer who has also been an inspiration esp. considering the size of his small business and his reliance on natural ingredients much as I do.

Very heartening to hear for Andy who is a great person, no doubt about it. Speaking of ingredients, what ingredients do you mostly use and why did you choose to work with those? Is sourcing them hard to do?

I have a particular interest in flower absolutes as well as animalistic notes. With each perfume I have created so far (and maybe I should say that of all the mixtures variations, etc, I would consider only 3 to have been completed) there is a very different line explored in each. Alice in Wonderland relies on the synthetic representation of violets enhanced by natural woods, green essences and fresh citrus. Eleven Minutes (a perfume that was created specially for an exhibition) was centered around green absolutes with exploration of a particular citrus line in it. And O Alquimista (perhaps the next perfume that I will release) was an 8-month venture in exploring tobacco absolute, rose absolute, amber and plums to end in a typical Oriental fragrance with a touch of transparency and certain wetness - characteristics that are not typical of any of my other creations.
And this is what I find particularly enchanting and educating - the exploration of different nuances, different characteristics, different tastes.

Do you find there is a different aesthetic working with naturals or synthetics? Why? The topic seems to be somewhat controversial.

I would not really make a difference between synthetic and naturals when it comes to the aesthetic creation of the scent per se. There are naturals that smell absolutely vile and poisonous in their raw form but so do some synthetics. On the other hand, there are naturals that smell divine in their raw form and so do some synthetics. There are some effects that cannot be achieved with natural ingredients - for example, the creation of a musky note is challenging; velvety amber, suede, and some floral accords are unthinkable without the synthetics. And since I have never been driven by the idea of creation a scent with either natural or synthetic excluisively, I am treating them with equal respect - for me they are just part of the palette - and I use the entire range of the palette that is available to me. Alice in Wonderland would have been unthinkable without the synthetic violets or the coumarin.

Coumarin...it's going to be a restricted commodity if that IFRA restriction thing prevails. But to return to Alice in Wonderland : it makes use of ionones for violet notes, you say. Did you find them easy to work with? What problems did you face, if any?

There are 3 types of ionones in Alice in various concentrations. Ionones are very diverse - the differences are very small but they can influence a mix
greatly. I find them really lovely to work with because they add a certain smoothness to a composition. On the other hand, they do not have any sparkle of their own and sometimes, it can be hard to create a sparkle without destroying their character. For Alice, I think the two types of Cedarwood (Virginia and Atlas) did the trick as well as the minute quantities of coumarin, vanillin, amyris and ambroxan.

It deeply impresses me that you openly talk about what goes into your perfumes. Why do you think there is such secrecy in the perfume world, in general, though?

I believe the secrecy is guided purely by the commercial grip that surrounds the perfumery world - in particular, it is amazing that commercial successes will get copied in all forms and shapes. And this is what drives the secrecy I believe. SinceI never envisioned this into becoming a large scale endeavor, I do not feel particularly threatened. Esp. when I do not aim at creating commercial successes (because that would mean that it is liked by many and I would in fact prefer if my perfumes are liked only by few but also not just liked but loved). And if a perfume works like a vision for some, this is all that matters to me. Besides, from purely statistical terms, the chances of recreating a formula given the initial ingredients are very low - and they get lower the more complex the formula is.

Too true. Which is your favourite essence to work with? What aspects of it do you like?

I particularly love Ambroxan - it is a synthetic molecule that has a very peculiar wet cardboard, leather, amber nuances and extreme diffusive power. I also like a lot guaiac wood concrete which has a very doughy quality which I adore. Rose and Jasmine absolutes are also favourites of mine along with benzoe and beeswax absolute. From the synthetics, I am always fascinated by melanol for its extreme strength and its ability to create the impression of water - pure water in a perfume. Tobacco absolute was a love at first sniff but it is difficult to work with. For example for my O Alquimista, only about 0.6% of the entire formula (of the concentrate) consists of tobacco absolute but it is so strong. And I used a lot of benzyl-benzoat to soften it (I found this combination to work quite by accident) and it works. I also like a lot some tinctures, in particular castoreum tincture which has a
fantastic leathery and quite animalic character as well. I also employ quite a lot of propolis tincture in my mixtures (there is a lot of it in O Alquimista and in Eleven Minutes) although it does not really have a strong smell - to me it adds a touch of density, smoothness and rounded sweetness. Propolis is one of the most wonderful things that I have smelled and I still dream of creating a fragrance that captures its facets (and beeswax absolute is very different).

What are your plans for the future? Do you see yourself expanding the line?
The line may expand little by little with inclusion of new scents from time to time but since this is not my day job if at all, any expansions will be problematic. I would of course dream of finding a cooperation with a small perfume producer or a company that can handle the publication of one or two of my perfumes but I personally would not have the capacities esp. with respect to the pursuit of an academic career. I see the whole adventure as a slow progression, a bottle here, a bottle there, a new perfume once in a while, perhaps retirement of old ones until requested again. The whole process may be also problematic in the coming year or so due to my probable moving to the UK and the need to find new suppliers and settling in the new place. So, the whole process is not going to be a smooth progression by any means.

Let's hope for the best. On another note, do you have any advice on those starting in perfumery?

Don't try to please everybody - if you make one person love your perfume, you should be proud. And aim at intellectual creations - something that tickles your brain - whether it will be the combination of notes, or the name in conjunction with the perfume, or the bottle - perfumery is rather an intellectual experience (I think it was Luca Turin who also said that perfumery is about chic and intelligence).

You are correct and I agree with this view. If you had one wish for the perfume industry what would that be?

The one wish I would have would be to break free from the consumerist society. However, as a psychologist (and someone not so blank in market economy as it may seem) I know that this is not possible in my generation. So, more realistically, I would simply request aesthetics (which is not the case for most of the 600-800 fragrances launched every year).

Thank you very much Konstantin for the interesting interview and honouring me with your time.

Thanks for giving me a chance to air my views.


Please visit Konstantin Mihov's site clicking here.


Artwork "Amateur Philosophers" by Jack Vettriano courtesy of Allposters.com

The bittersweet smell of laurels: 300 Spartans

Today I chose to include an adored poem that really depicts best of all just what the sacrifice of those tragic and noble 300 Spartans really meant. In an age when anyone can interpret facts any way one wants and present them for the sheer monetary gain at the box office, let's pause for a second and think how some things in life do mean much more and how not everything is for glory but sometimes it's for honour.
There is a difference.

The ancient epigram/epitaph by Simonedes, friend of Megistias (the Acarnanian seer, who foretold the death of Leonidas and his warriors) is immortal.
It went like this:
"Stranger passing by, go tell the spartans that here, obedient to their laws, we lie."

The poem I chose is much more recent, it doesn't pertain to the olfactory, yet it does evoke the bittersweet smell of laurels. The laurels of noble defeat...
Written by my favourite poet Constantine Cavafy, whom I have also reference while talking about Mitsouko.
It's called "Thermopylae" and is inspired by the famous battle as a lesson in life in general.
I leave you to enjoy it by yourselves.

Thermopylae

Honour to those who in life they lead
define and guard Thermopylae.
Never betraying what is right,
consistent and just in all they do,
but showing pity also, and compassion;
generous when they're rich; and when they're poor,
still generous in small ways,
still helping as much as they can;
always speaking the truth,
yet without hating those who lie.

And even more honour is due to them
when they foresee (as many do foresee)
that Ephialtes will turn up in the end,
that the Medes* will break through after all.

1903 by Constantine P. Cavafy (Kavafis)

*Medes (plural of Mede) is another name for Persians en masse (historically they were an older tribe who intermingled and interbred with the Persians)



Pic of classical statue of mid4th century BC courtesy of greeklandscapes.com.
Painting of Leonidas at Thermopylae by Jacques Louis David courtesy of wikipedia.

Eau de Cologne from Chanel Les Exclusifs: fragrance review

Eau de Cologne from Chanel is just what the doctor prescribed for those lazy, hot summer days when you don't have the mental energy to think straight and pick a scent that won't clash with the humidity and the heat.

And it is now as good a time as any to dispel the myths around this type of scent named Eau de Cologne. Usually it is what men in the United States say they use. This is actually a tradition that has to do with avoiding the unpleasant connotations of the term Eau de toilette and not an accurate rendition of what they put exactly on their skin. Too many times you will hear men saying that and in fact what they use is Eau de toilette. The notion of why this is so undelicate a concept to grasp dawned on me after a discussion on the correct etiquette on asking to use a toilet in someone's house. I had been told that it's customary to say "bathroom" even if you're not going to actually bathe in there. Suffice to say that this particular delicasy of phrase has escaped my more sturdy european ears and we do use the term toilet aplenty. However faire la toilette is also the french term for preening and in that regard Eau de toilette fits in really well, as it is part of the ritual (hence the name of course).

Another type of mix up happens because Eau de Cologne is not just a concentration of a scent at the counter of any fragrance line, but also a special type of scent recipe, harking back to 1370 and the first alcoholic perfumed mix prepared for the Queen Elizabeth of Hungary. This got named Hungary Water and is still around today. However it took it a couple of centuries more, to become the Eau de Cologne that became famous in 1792 under the name 4711 Echt Kolnisch Wasser, after the homonymous town in Germany (Koln/Cologne) where it was produced. The house that produced it is called Muelhens (although now 4711 is owned by Wella), the name comes from the original address of the Muelhens shop and they claimed they got the recipe from a Carthusian monk nammed Farina who gave this as a wedding gift to William Muelhens. Its first name was "aqua mirabilis" (water of miracles) due to its stimulating, antibacterial properties that warded off disease and acted as a tonic. A different story attribues the origins to Farmaceutica di Santa Maria Novella in Florence (which was founded in 1612) where the monks manufactured the Aqua della Regina (water of the queen), made for Catherine de Medici who upon coming to Paris inaugurated the tradition of perfumery to the french capital. There suppossedly the recipe was copied by Paul Feminis and the vogue for eaux de cologne flourished well into the coming years. [You can read the history of Eau de Cologne on this link. ]

The classic recipe of Eau de Cologne includes bright citrusy notes of bergamot, petitgrain (the essence from the stems of the bitter orange tree) along with neroli and some fruit rind's expressed oil (such as lemon or orange), garlanded with herbs such as lavender and rosemary, the odd floral note (rose for instance, as is the case in 4711) and a light underpinning of a more sturdy base note that would anchor the scent so it doesn't evaporate into thin air too soon.

In Chanel's case the given notes for its new Eau de Cologne are:
neroli, bergamot, citrus, musk, vetiver.

Indeed as one sprays the succulent juice on the skin a burst of bright, sunny, slightly bitter citrus fruits explodes and envelops the wearer in a sunny vignette of times gone by. Like people dressed in striped maillots preparing for a swim in a cosmopolitan beach, eau de cologne always brings to my mind a memory of lazy languid summer days of yore when parents and granparents started for the beach with panache and straightforward style. Think those classic Breton matelots and you're there. Soon the whole sweetens and obtains a rounder neroli and musky ambience that is supported by a light yet sensual backdrop. It does not last too long alas, which is of course the nature of such fleeting things, like a quick dip in the refreshing blue waters, but it does provide so much enjoyment while it does.
The gigantic 400ml bottle is prefectly made for lavishing this on with reckless abandon.

Pic by Nick Moschos courtesy of eikastikon.gr

No.18 from Chanel Les Exclusifs: fragrance review

When I fist heard about the new line by Chanel, officially termed Les Exclusifs, or affectionately termed Les Prétentieux, the one which I was most in anticipation of was no.18. Named after the number of the Chanel fine jewelry boutique at Place Vendôme it is a scent based on ambrette seed , a vegetal and very costly ingredient that natural perfumers use for substituting real and synthetic musk in their perfumes.
I had envisioned a whole scenario of soft smooth aromas in my mind, lured by the promise of musk that is one of my top favourite notes in creation in most of its nuances and incarnations. Not even the prophet Muhhamad has been so entranced by the promise of musk as I have!

However my impression of ambrette seed largely derives from the oil distilled and the absolute used in perfumes which I have had the rare pleasure of smelling and not the unshelled variety of the seed which I later found out goes into the production of no.18.
Hibiscus Abelmuschus, aka ambrette seed, is a plant of the hibiscus family whose names derives from the Greek ibis (a kind of bird that supposedly eats it) and the Arabic Kabbel-Misk (which means grain of musk). Usually the seeds of the plant when they “hatch” are pressed for their precious oil which takes on a soft, sweetish, skin-like aroma. According to Mandy Aftel the smell is sweet, rich, floral and musky all at once.

Imagine my surprise and dare I say a little disillusionment when I actually got my decant and sprayed the precious juice on my skin. An acrid, pungent smell first hit me that was not the richness and powderiness I anticipated so eagerly.
In fact it reminded me of an anecdotal story I want to share with you. While still little I had a penchant for mixing brews and potions and generally messing with spices, aromas, pomades and yes, perfumes. I found the whole concept of it fascinating and wanted to see how different smells could be combined and nuanced. Spices and cooking are a logical introduction and having been blessed with a mother who cooked well and kept a lot of interesting stuff in the kitchen cupboards I took them out one by one and started experimenting. Once it was the cloves: crushing them, then burning them (they do produce a different, very smoky aromatic sweet smell when burned). Then the pimento and saffron: experimenting with boiling them or immersing them in oil like I had seen women do with basil, rosemary and thyme for aromatizing olive oil (and yes, this is a valid practice that produces mouthwatering results). The stage that really did me in was mace. It was a spice I loved sprinkled on creams and cookies and in meat dishes. It gave a rich oriental, middle-eastern flavour to everything and I loved its ambience. Little did I know that upon burning the unshelled nut in the fireplace (which is quite a hard light brown one) the pungent smell would pervade the house to a point of suffocation and produce fumes that would take eons to clear out rendering my parents furious at me and me nauseous of that smell for life.

Sadly, it was that bitter childhood memory that the initial impression of burned pickles emanating from my no.18 sprayer produced in me. Of course I might be exaggerating because the effect is not nearly as strong as all that, although the whole scent is obviously orchestrated around the solo violin player of ambrette seed, there is no doubt about that.
The effect is certainly not ordinary at all and it only bears a slight resemblance to some oudh fragrances I have smelled and the likeable weirdness of Timbuktu by L’artisan Parfumeur.
Maybe this is an omphaloscopic post and I am analyzing this too much. The point is this medicinal, strange element deterred me from appreciating the full spectrum and possible beauty of no.18. I braced myself for the development, which soon came in the form of sweetish woody and fruity notes of a non-descript nature that in my humble opinion deter from the more daring opening that although repulsive to me personally due to the associations might be a strong pull to people who are interested in the adventurous, distinctive and different. The base is also a little synthetic smelling as if the natural aspect of ambrette seed is anchored with materials invented wearing a white robe, which is a bit antithetical to the promise of a rich vegetal smell.
The modernization of the concept so that it would not recall a natural artisanal perfume, but one issued by a pedigree great house does not work to its favour I think.

Jacques Polge has revealed in an interview that this is his favourite of the line-up and I can see how a person who doesn’t like oakmoss (as discussed before) and is an oriental lover would prefer this. It is certainly the most innovative of the lot and I dearly wish I had the virginal mental and olfactory make-up to really appreciate no.18. As it is, I am unfortunately unable to. It would be like uprooting a mighty tree out of my brain.




Art photography by Chris Borgman courtesy of his site.

31 Rue Cambon from Chanel Les Exclusifs: fragrance review

The Chanel perfume from the line Les Exclusifs that goes by the address tag 31 Rue Cambon is named after Chanel's main boutique in Paris and also the day-time appartment above it that she used as a study and reception room for friends.
The contrast between the baroque apartment and the more austere composition of this scent is intentional according to Jacques Polge who created it, as he did with the whole new line.

31 Rue Cambon is an experimental chypre that omits the classic oakmoss note of the standard chypre composition and is touted as a "dry, musky, nutty scent." I think Serge Lutens tried a similar stunt with his Chypre Rouge, last autumn, which does not smell particularly chypre to me.
Here the formula starts indeed with a dry element that is sparkling and radiant. The substitution of oakmoss has resulted in a novel iris-pepper accord that according to dr.Turin is used here for the first time to render the impression of sensuality and powderiness that would normally be provided by the sensual backdrop of oakmoss and married to different batches of patchouli for the mossy feel. According to an interview of Polge in French paper Le Figaro, Polge is not a great fan of oakmoss anyway, because he finds the smell bitter. A self-proclaimed oriental lover, mr.Polge had to search for exotic varieties of patchouli growth to substitute the moss element that is needed in a chypre composition and came up with a new style. Which is not really chypre smelling either. In fact I would call it a chypre-oriental, if pressed to classify it and you will see why as you proceed.

The green spicy burst at the start gives way to softer accents following the herbal notes and the bergamot-rich top. The iris note here is neither earthy nor ethereal, as we’re sometimes used to perceiving it. Instead it hangs there twisting and turning in little waltz quick steps with the spiciness of the first olfactory hits when you spray the juice to your skin. The piquancy of pepper is very welcome and never overwhelming which suggests a restrained hand.
As it stays on it starts to develop more powdery and flowery aspects like –seemingly- hyacinth with rose and jasmine that remind us of the traditional heart of a classic chypre, yet the whole is based on a woody ambience of sandalwood and possibly amber that reminds me a lot of the soft sweetish echo of other perfumes in the line, like
28 La Pausa and Coromandel. Despite their initial claim that “we tried to do fragrances which are very different from one another” I think they also tried to lend a homogenous quality in them that would identify them as Chanel. I don’t think that could be very doable in so diverse a collection, but it does have familiarity with those and with other Chanels,as discussed before.
The lingering base of patchouli is as far away from headshop and earthy varieties as possible and certainly less pronounced than in Coromandel which seems a little more current and sensual in feeling.
In fact 31 Rue Cambon is quite Chanel in style as it aims at timelessness and probably the most elegant of the new lot.
Maybe because of those elements of wood and amber the lasting power in this one is not bad. It’s definitely not fleeting like the green fairy of Bel Respiro or the pretty posy of 28 La Pausa, but then it isn’t as satisfyingly lasting as Coromandel either, which is a pity.

The general effect is slightly aloof and certainly elegant, which will account for its marked success with people shopping Chanel and wanting to complement their expensive clothing and accessories with something fragrant in completely magnetic bottles (and I utter that last bit both figuratively -as the caps close magnetically- and figuratively).
Whether it is the best chypre in the last 30 years, as it had been initially hailed almost a month ago, remains to be judged upon subsequent applications and the test of time. I think it was rather an ambitious claim to begin with.


Art photography by Chris Borgman courtesy of his site.