As salaamu alaykum
@Alkhadra &
@Ensar
IMO you both hit the nail on the head; I respect both views but the explanations were short sighted without further consideration.
It is true that words have a finite, precise definition; as they lay inactive and dormant in a dictionary or in a vacuum. Consider, when they come off of the tongue or are written they take flight and become a living thing, often taking on other formal, informal, literal and contextual meanings. The most important thing is that we as the user of words, the receiver and the transmitter, seek to understand and be understood.
Yes I've worn Oud Shuayb, beautiful oil, I especially like the fecaliscious yumminess tempered by ambergrisified fossil, it's a highly resinous oil yet ethereal oil with great horizontal and vertical complexity that doesn't suffer collapse~that make absolutely no objective sense. Some of the words I used aren't really words at all but rather have come into the lexicon of discourse in this thing of ours. Despite the informal, misuse and bastardization of the words used, the great majority here know exactly what I'm talking about. Likewise, if I say I'm going to burn some oud today vs I'm going to wear some oud today, we understand that in the first instance I'm going to burn agarwood and in the second instance wear oud oil. For those that want to make themselves finite and limit themselves only to the objective, you go right ahead. But stop ridiculing and seeking to find fault with those who can think, relate and communicate outside of the box.
Most everything about oud from distillation to appreciation is subjective. If you think not just reduce it to the objective and strictly technical by building some type of scanner that selects the different grades of wood, then a computerized distillation unit distills each grade under one set of permutations for each grade, the resultant oils to labelled indicating and dictating what notes you will get and what experience you will have; computerized, note on-note off, binary oils. Even if such a system existed it would still be programmed with the users subjective parameters for selecting wood grade and what parameters to use, going right back to being subjective.
There was a beautiful story relayed by the wonderful young master distiller, Zak from Agarwood Assam, whose Hastakshar Kalakassi I've given praise public and private,
"Recently, me, my uncle and Abba we all three in bright morning were sorting the chips from the lot. To be honest I was just observing their practice. And they would pick pieces one after another so respectfully and so nimble in action with precision of grading at same time. This was so rapid with them. I felt like a ritual happening. Abba is 74 & my uncle 62. My father gave sorted chips to uncle and said see if these are up the quality we were sorting. Uncle said it will be a disgrace to verify your sorting. My pardon I will not. To that my father replied I had cataract operated last year. Are you sure still? And a big laugh in the room. That's how it is. It's not about my father experience it was about RESPECT we share. Btw the chips were spot on sorted."
There were a few things I took away from the story, among them are that each man may indeed sort his chips differently. The most poignant, prolific and befitting thing I took away from it was just as Zak said; That each individual, knowing they may differ, had RESPECT for the way the other sorted his chips and the knowing that it is disgraceful to attempt to verify the other. May Allah subhana wa ta'ala bless them all with vigor, health and prosperity.
@Taha as salaamu alykum habibi, we welcome your return,
You came openly and willingly, you defined ideas and words and put them into our lexicon. You stated long ago in post #13 how you used "oleoresin" in context with,
"For LOT/MOTA oud oils, all these things are irrelevant. Because the aim is to excise and isolate the purest expression of the oleoresin's scent, untainted by auxiliary notes (and techniques/parameters)".
Some actually read it and "got it". With others it's obvious that they cared not to read it or if read it, misunderstood it. Some assumed to know what you were talking about and made erroneous assumptions and negative criticism. It's all distraction away from the oils. And why not seek to distract away from discussion of the oils when the distractors oils aren't discussed as much as and with the same reverence and honor as yours and a few other vendors. Likewise they'll say the stories and only the stories are responsible for sales, when their oils don't sell or maintain the same value as well. All distraction from the oils and condescending to boot. Of course they'll say you don't distill your own oils, but let's assume you didn't; they fail to realize that he who hand selected the ingredients, gave the recipe and parameter under which the dish is cooked is in reality more influential on the dish than who stirred the pot. There's no failure, many got it and learned from it. Maybe a little discretion, not necessarily on what you share but rather who you share it with, because just as
@Ensar pointed out many times you end up with clones, mini me's, that try to use your own information that they learn from to discredit you.