Trafalgar and Blenheim
- Thread starter pcb01
- Start date
I do not have any Trafalgar handy, but I would not have thought so. Blenheim is a favorite of mine and I have had samples of Trafalgar in the past.
Last edited:
I'm sampling/testing both of them currently and I don't find a lot of similarities, though every nose and brain is different. For me, I give the nod to Trafalgar over BB. In fact, I've come to the conclusion that I like the T&H overall line and "style" better than Penhaligon's.
Of course, you have to buy what you like and what your significant other will put up with!
Cheers,
C
Of course, you have to buy what you like and what your significant other will put up with!
Cheers,
C
They're both very different to me. BB is lime and pepper, Trafalgar is orange and jasmin. Trumper's Wellington, Astor and Curzon colognes all have a kinship with BB for me, but there's nothing much like Trafalgar out there apart from (at a real stretch) Terre D'Hermes.
I was very fond of both, but SWMBO disliked BB, and for some reason Trafalgar started to make me sneeze, so they had to go.
I was very fond of both, but SWMBO disliked BB, and for some reason Trafalgar started to make me sneeze, so they had to go.
I don't see any similarity. Interesting how much sniffers differ.
But also scents can differ very drastically from person to person!
Of the samples I've tried, those 2 are both up near the top of my list, but I honestly don't detect much similarity.
I don't smell any similarity.
Apples and oranges.
I've had these two colognes for years, and until reading this thread, it never occurred to me that the two might be similar. Honestly, it still doesn't. Blenheim Bouquet smacks one in the nose with its intense opening lemon/lime/lavender top note blast and pepper and pine base notes, and only gets more intense and austere in the dry down. Trafalgar is much sweeter with its jasmine top notes, warmer in its spicy middle notes, and its cedar base notes are a lot more ingratiating than Blenheim's pine. This isn't to say one is better than the other (although I prefer Blenheim), but I really don't see any similarities between the two.
Wow, that was well-written. There is something about Blenheim Bouquet that utterly intrigues me, and you seem to express it as well or better than anything else I have read. Folks always seem to think of it as aggressive and arrogant/aristocratic, and I suppose that the wearer transmits that attitude. Folks are exactly right to my mind. But it is hard to explain why a lemony flowery edt that dries down to pepper and pine could possibly come across that way. I think you just did. There is something uncompromising and in your face at that edt. (It ought to be a polar opposite in so many ways, but a more recent obsession of mine, Knize Ten, smells very differently, but sure has some of that right up in your face flavor. I would say that BB and K 10 are both power colognes. I guess the BB is a bit more civilized.)
I think I like Grafton more than Trafalgar, but Trafalgar has its charms. Again, your description is really very good. Sweeter and more ingratiating than BB. Trafalgar "wants to be liked."
Does that make Trafalgar a bit more Bill Clinton than Winston Churchill?
Interesting comparison of the "attitudes" of Knize 10 and Blenheim. Obviously the two are very different, but I agree with you in that K10 is uncompromising in its stance and totally unapologetic, similar in attitude to Blenheim. I guess that's why I'm still a bit flummoxed by the comparison between Blenheim and Trafalgar - not only are they different in scent notes, but also in attitude. True, Trafalgar is a type of power fragrance, as the OP mentioned, but it's the way it wields its power that makes it what it is. And like you say, Trafalgar seems to want to be a much more likeable power wielder, like an MBA exec who specialized in motivation management at Harvard, as opposed to the old guard leaders who understood that nothing worth a damn gets done except by force, or the fear of it.
(Geez, I'm really starting to sound like one of those self-important, over-analytical snobs over at Basenotes. I should cut it out - but it's too much fun, so I probably won't.)
Indeed!
You really do have a knack for this. (I would like Basenotes a lot better if they were a lot more accurate over there! At least most of the time the folks on that forum do not seem to be able to accurately describe a scent to me.)
Tralfagar is a lot more like Bill Clinton than Winston Churchill. That is perfect. Although I am sure that WC could be charming, too. Tralfagar is a power scent because it smells rich and of expensive things. (Really stretching the memory here!) It is polished and even. The smoothness and "warmth" (great word for it) from the top notes, through the middle, through the dry down. A pretty far ways away from something like Axe, for instance. Classy in an easy to sense way. But affable. Like you and I both said, Trafalgar wants us to like it.
BB, on the other hand, hasn't even noticed that we exist.
And K 10 is not looking to be popular. But does not want to pass through unnoticed either.
BB and K 10 just intrigue me no end.
Fun stuff. It probably is fantasy land.
HoratioCaine,
I thought of a pretentious basenote-type follow-up to our above metaphoric discussion:
If Tralfagar is Bill Clinton, Knize Ten is Rahm Emanuel, and BB is someone like, say, James Baker.
To me the Rahm Emanuel one is such a good fit that I wonder if RE actually wears it!
(Actually Baker would probably wear something more American or Texan. Are there any Texas edt designers? Brooks Brothers might be a possibility, but it seems too far toward middle class. Anything that smells both barn-yardy and like a gin and tonic?)
In the end, just like the legend, Winston Churchill may be the perfect match for BB. I am wearing it today. Love this stuff, particularly on dry down, but it is aloof and self-contained to an extreme, or really extremes, given that it evolves on its own time table.
I thought of a pretentious basenote-type follow-up to our above metaphoric discussion:
If Tralfagar is Bill Clinton, Knize Ten is Rahm Emanuel, and BB is someone like, say, James Baker.
To me the Rahm Emanuel one is such a good fit that I wonder if RE actually wears it!
(Actually Baker would probably wear something more American or Texan. Are there any Texas edt designers? Brooks Brothers might be a possibility, but it seems too far toward middle class. Anything that smells both barn-yardy and like a gin and tonic?)
In the end, just like the legend, Winston Churchill may be the perfect match for BB. I am wearing it today. Love this stuff, particularly on dry down, but it is aloof and self-contained to an extreme, or really extremes, given that it evolves on its own time table.
I don't get BB or Trafalgar, to be honest, and think other scents from both houses are far superior.
I'm wearing Endymion today, which I like quite a bit. Of the T&H fragrances, I think 1805, Grafton, and Spanish Leather are all superior to Trafalgar.
Just another example of why scent preferences are very personal, I guess.
I'm wearing Endymion today, which I like quite a bit. Of the T&H fragrances, I think 1805, Grafton, and Spanish Leather are all superior to Trafalgar.
Just another example of why scent preferences are very personal, I guess.
< I think 1805, Grafton, and Spanish Leather are all superior to Trafalgar. >
Completely agree. In my very limited experience most folks either like Grafton or Trafalgar one way more than the other. Trafalgar is okay with me. I much prefer Grafton and the other two to Trafalgar, though.
I pretty much like everything from Pen's that I have had much experience with. I find the samples, even Pen's, which are a little larger than most, kind of limiting, but maybe just enough to tell. And I find that the shaving creams are rather different than actually having the edt to play around with. But no doubt, as a house, I like Pen's a lot.
I can actually remember not liking BB at first and what it smelled like to me. It has not been all that long ago. But I am very taken with it these days. It drew me in for some reason. I can sure see why it would generate strong opinions. Why would anyone want to smell like lemon pledge. pine sol, and pepper, with almost no mid notes, and transitions that do not seem at all smooth? But it truly pushes some kind of internal buttons in my head.
What do you think of the Hammam's, another utterly controversial Pen's product?
I never smelled it, but I hear the original T&H Spanish Leather was really something - much more in line with Trumper Spanish Leather, but a bit bolder and more earthy. The reformulated version seems to me to be quite sweet and one-dimensional. Not my cup of tea. Say what you will about Trafalgar - at least it is the same now as when it came out. The same cannot be said about either T&H's Spanish Leather or Freshman. Pity. I prefer Trumper's approach: if you want to make a new fragrance, make a new fragrance, and leave the old ones alone.
See this from the T&H forums. Seems to say that all T&H have been reformulated over time. When did Trafalgar come out?
http://www.truefittandhill.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=240
Trafalgar came out in the mid 80s, and my understanding is it has not changed from its original formulation. Of course, this is just my understanding, from what I pick up here and there. I would defer to anyone who has specific, verifiable data to the contrary. I know West Indian Limes also changed not too long back, although I do like the current version. I'm not aware of the history of all of them, but I do know that Spanish Leather, Freshman and Clubman, all old T&H classics, were quite radically reformulated just a few years ago, which purists and the faithful found quite unsettling. That only leaves 1805 and Grafton unaccounted for; Grafton was introduced only slightly earlier than Trafalgar, whereas 1805 was actually brought out in the late 1990s. So whether or not they were reformulated, or have remained unchanged during their short history, I can't say. At any rate, I guess we can say that all of T&H's current offerings were recently formulated - that is to say, in the last 25 years or so - whether they were reformulated or not.
The administrator's comment on the T&H forum intrigues me: "We are however exploring the idea of re-introducing some of the more, popular scents in the year to come." I wonder wich ones. And by "re-introducing," do they mean they might bring back the older formulations of the ones they altered, or are they referring to others (of which I'm not aware) that they simply stopped making, but didn't change? There's a ray of hope in there somewhere, but given T&H's trend toward modernization over the last decade, I won't be holding my breath. Perhaps, though, they really have seen the error of their ways, similar to the way Penhaligon's has. It's a nice thought, at least.
The administrator's comment on the T&H forum intrigues me: "We are however exploring the idea of re-introducing some of the more, popular scents in the year to come." I wonder wich ones. And by "re-introducing," do they mean they might bring back the older formulations of the ones they altered, or are they referring to others (of which I'm not aware) that they simply stopped making, but didn't change? There's a ray of hope in there somewhere, but given T&H's trend toward modernization over the last decade, I won't be holding my breath. Perhaps, though, they really have seen the error of their ways, similar to the way Penhaligon's has. It's a nice thought, at least.
