Clive Christian's "C" and "X": If price were no option...

Let’s start with one over-arching statement: This is an article about a perfumer who touts unabashedly that one of his creations is “The Most Expensive Perfume in the World“. Let’s step backward from here to the real beginning of this story to understand the background that led to the Clive Christian line.

Prior to the perume business, Clive Christian had been a designer of luxury kitchens and bespoke furnishings, a business maintained to this day. In 1999, Christian purchased what was then the Crown Perfumery (link to history), re-branding it and retiring most of the legacy fragrance line to concentrate efforts on producing a purely luxury-based line of scents. By 2001, the legacy line-up was retired in favor of new scents, and by 2002, any trace of the former Crown had been obliterated. At present, the line of products consists of only 8 fragrances: 4 for men, 4 for women. One of those is “No. 1“, a perfume created without regard for the cost of ingredients. This article will not focus on that fragrance, leaving that for a future discussion.

Instead, let’s discuss two similar fragrances, both in composition and price-point: “C” and “X” for men.

“C” for Men (2010):

Is it possible for something to simply ‘smell’ expensive? When considering “C”, there are a few aspects to keep in mind. First is the price point, which for the 50ml bottle cradled in a satin-lined box is $375 USD. Second is that it is a ‘pure perfume’, roughly double the concentration of an eau de parfum. The concentration of fragrance is approximately 30% of the total volume. Third is that the focus is on natural materials to reach the end product. Few if any artificials enter the mix.

That said, there is a lot going on here. We begin this with the top notes: White thyme, tea, green leaves, lemon, mate, elemi (resin with honey/grassy/minty aroma) and finally mandarin. All at once, this starts resiny, cut with mate, green, and a mild portion of citrus. Strongest of all, you should pick up in the opening resins and balance of citrus and spices. Any green hints are not of a vetiver variety, but more of a faint background, barely detectable but there all the while.

After a little time, which will vary but won’t be immediate, the heart notes will transition slowly in: Jasmine, rose, cardamon, raspberry, cinnamon, clove, cistus (rock rose), saffron and orris. This is the very spicy, berried heart of the entire composition. The choice of pairing the deep raspberry with clove, accompanied by cinnamon and cardamon is bold, and the rose — while there — is again a footnote present in the background. Orris manages to hold the bind the scents together in such a way as to make the combination feel rational and pleasant to the nose, while still keeping to the woody and resiny theme of the composite fragrance. After some considerable time, we move on and transition as the fragrance begins to soften.

At the base notes, we encounter the following: oudh, amber, cedarwood, tobacco absolute, musk, vanilla, leather, cypress, treemoss, styrax, costus (snow lotus), tonka bean, olibanum (frankincense) and guaiacwood. There are more than enough critics who will focus almost single-mindedly on the snow-lotus portion of the scent, though for me it’s lost within the richness of the other elements; it neither adds nor detracts from the experience. But mind you, this is a very heady ride, though thankfully short of being a cloying or suffocating event. What you smell is leather and tobacco, tempered by soft amber and tonka bean, with enough wood in the base to make the combination interesting. The musk simply adds the extra pique of interest and brightness among an otherwise very mellow and deep combination.

“Magnificent” is the best description I could give this. It is a fragrance that has incredible longevity – literally, you could smell it well into the next day — and almost perfect sillage. Spraying this on a wrist pulse point or the back of a hand will have you enjoying this throughout the day as the warmth and combination of ingredients alter and change on skin.

My first words to my wife were “this is almost $400!” I distinctly recall saying that for only slightly more, I could have a flacon (250ml) of Tom Ford Private Collection Tuscan Leather. Both would be correct statements, and here’s why I won’t encourage you to agree with them. First, Tuscan Leather is an eau de parfum, not a pure parfum; the differences in longevity and sillage are surprising, despite being able to purchase nearly five times the quantity. Second, there is a lot more going on here, and despite there being some glancing similarity, the differences become less subtle over time. This isn’t taking anything from Tuscan Leather, which I believe is a great fragrance in its own right. Rather, it’s explaining simply just how remarkable “C” truly is. And admittedly, I sampled this a number of times before I added it to my personal collection, continuing to come back to the proposition of the price-tag and whether it truly was “FBW” (full-bottle-worthy). You’ll note my decision above.

So, is it possible for something to ‘smell expensive’? Yes. ”C” is really costly. It’s also really bloody good and an experience that someone seeking a deeper, richer, more sophisticated scent will appreciate. Rating: 5/5. Highly recommended.

“X” for Men (2001):

Can the whole become more than just the sum of its parts? In the case of “X”, one can see the heritage that led to the creation of the more recent “C” in the subtle combination of ingredients. “X” lacks the same amount of complexity of “C”, which doesn’t necessarily result in a poor outcome. It maintains a simple yet elegant composition without nearly 30+ ingredients. Similarities and comparisons are notable, yet they maintain vastly different characters.

The caveats given to “C” also apply to “X” — this is a pure perfume concentration, has superior longevity and fantastic sillage, and the focus again is on natural components.

Where in “C”, the leather, tobacco, dark berries, woods and musk are stars of the show, “X” takes a much different path. Let’s begin with the top notes: bergamot, spices, cardamom, ginger, and juniper berry. Yes, there is some common ground seen in “C”, albeit the spices begin the experience in “X” rather than “C’s” being supporting players. The heart notes of sambac oil, jasmine hedione, pimento oil, and orris are a pleasant and subtle transition into the final dry-down to come later. The common elements of jasmine and orris play similar roles as in “C”, and the outcome is predictable: A very settled, subdued, and calming combination that balances the heavier oils that form the heart of this scent.

This leads us to the final dry-down at the base notes: amber, vetiver oil, cedarwood, moss, cinnamon, and vanilla. The amber, moss, and cedarwood play the key roles in differentiating “X” from similar attempts, with vetiver, cinnamon and vanilla adding warmth. Thankfully, the cinnamon and vanilla are defined to the end warmth versus becoming overpowering in a candy-coated ending that could have been far too sweet. Their presence is enough of a balance and reminder that the fragrance is there to be enjoyed, but it still retains a masculine character of its own.

There is an “X-factor” that makes this fragrance shine as more than the simple sum of its relatively common components. The elements are all there, just as they exist in so many other fragrances with very similar olfactory pyramids. “X” is no different in many of those aspects. The X-factor exists in how they’re arranged and the manner in which they play out when applied to skin. It balances the fine line between spicy and sweet, woody and resiny. Where you would notice the leather, deep berries and tobacco applied more liberally in “C”, they don’t take the stage in “X”, which is a good thing in many ways. Consider also this.

Based on the origin of “X”, it’s become the de facto reference standard for so many other wood and spice combinations that have since been released in a resurgent market. That in itself deserves some measure of recognition. In the final outcome, it isn’t the components of “X” that make the statement, but the execution of those components in something elegant and understated. The comparisons to “C” are only natural, but where the younger sibling plays a more over-the-top role, “X” takes a somewhat subdued and controlled stance that knows its place well and is well rehearsed.

The whole can be more than the sum of its individual parts, and ‘X’ proves that well.

Pricing: 50ml for $355 USD.

Rating: 4.5/5. Highly recommended.

Bottom-line: It appears that the maker of the world’s most expensive perfume hasn’t simply pulled our leg, but delivered on at least 2 fragrances of truly superlative quality, both being standouts and (in my view) both being FBW. Expensive? Yes. Over-the-top? Perhaps. Unique? Well-executed? Without a doubt, and I say that recognizing the difficulty in dropping nearly $400 a bottle to simply — in some people’s view — “smell nice”. In this case, it’s about the personal experience and enjoyment more than about the exclusivity or price. If one truly believes in quality, here are two examples of undeniable craftsmanship worthy of recognition.