Oud Biz: Real Talk

#41
Sorry bro but I have never bought a 2500$ Oil. The max I have gone is 750 for some Ensar oils like Suriranka Senkoh and China Sayang. Any 350 substitutes for these bhai ? But which private vendors are we talking about. Anyone specific supported by the two forums ? I have never seen any promotion for private distillers. How do I contact them bro. Please let me if you know any. Thank you very much.
I was giving an example not anyone particular.
 

Ensar Oud

Well-Known Member
#42
The problem I have is Ensar's original statement that upset people....
The truth doesn't care about my standing, X's feelings, your discontent or hers. The truf is the truf, as they say in Singlish. Eventually, people recognize and own it – often forgetting the sacrifices that were made to bring it forth. At times, it will not break out until someone burns at the stake. (Or self-immolates.) As I have stressed over the course of the recent soap opera, there is no war here. Only the contractions of a painful birth.

Whoever is discouraged by the 'business' aspect of the agarwood business – you can start by listening to your nose first. If something smells off, pause. Smell it again. And again. Smell it side-by-side with something from the same region. Smell oils from different vendors on opposite wrists, and you will learn volumes about oud and wood and their grades. A true high-grade oil will strip a look-alike wannabe naked in a matter of minutes. Smell from left wrist to right wrist. Go back and forth. (Do you smell the fermented sock note that wants to appear purple but just at that split second when the neurons are about to connect, all you get is a dirty cloth note?)

Secondly, know that there is no cultivation in Merauke, New Guinea, Tawi Tawi, Maluku, etc. These oils are wild if that's what they're sold as. This is common knowledge. (I experience zero stagefright admitting oils like People's Sultan are co-distillations of wild and cultivated feedstock.)

My teacher won't distill anything apart from Papuan materials for his own use nowadays because he believes most other origins' wood to be compromised.

You pay for the story that comes with the oil like for a rare book.
You have 2 oils not identical but with similar profiles made from exact same wood grade and aged the same time.
Give them as a test to an oud-head and tell him one is from private distiller and the other one is coming from my grand father’s treasure chest who died many years ago.
The oil with the story is 2,500$ and the private distiller oil is 350$ per bottle.
Now you are a doctor tell me which one will have the “oh, wow from another planet oil” and which will be oh it is ok oil very good for the price.
Good book to read:
Sigmund Freud’s Psychopathology of Everyday Life
You seem to have fully understood the point of the video. Now put a swipe of each on opposite wrists and start sniffing! ;)
 
Last edited:

Ensar Oud

Well-Known Member
#43
So the truth is the truth because Ensar said it is the truth and we shouldn't question it. We don't need evidence. Ensar said it is the truth!
Of course it must be the truth.
Have you told us the truth about who Luigi is?
Have you told us the truth about the origins of Suriranka Senkoh?
Quite the contrary. I said you should question it! That was the whole point of our little conundrum, don't forget. ;)

I showed you a 16-minute video full of visual and material proofs which cost me in the thousands to produce without zilch in the way of expected return, which anyone with an open mind can learn from.

I told you Montale wasn't Oud, and someone literally called for me to get burned at the stake on BN. (He somehow connected it to something that was happening in Iran at the time, although I'm not Iranian.) Now you know it isn't.

I called out the muscone in our friend's oil to major uproar and dismay. Later, @Igor01 announced that it may have been the case because some muscone was, in fact, being used in certain concoctions back then.

I was banned from BN for fabricating the emergence of the China Market. To date, I haven't received an apology.

And I'm here to tell you the maggot talk is a potload of horsesh-t. That contemporary Vietnamese oils are for the most part cultivated – and most Cambodians in circulation are not high-grade oud (not to mention kinam).

I would love to hear what you were told about the origins of Suriranka Senkoh. Do me a huge favor and proclaim it to the world. I'm all ears. :D

As for Luigi, he is the man behind the code of this website. I often wondered about the identity of Stuigi myself, but given the nature of the internet, some things you just have to learn to live with. I'd love to know the identities of the folks calling for my resignation over at BN. As well as the ones speculating about my religion. Can you help, perhaps?
 
Last edited:

Shabby

Well-Known Member
#44
Everybody is seeking the truth, Sidi, whether knowingly or unknowingly; and that is why the truth must be beautiful. That is the axiom upon which all philosophy rests.

When the 'truth' is haphazardly flung out through allusion, innuendo and fluffy statements, it appears to be anything but. When a tirade ensues with demands for appreciation, it looks more like a cloud of passion and confusion which is consuming the one inside it.

The video was very informative, and perhaps expected for any trade where a precious raw material is involved. It is certainly a familiar sight to anybody involved with the gem industry, for example.

It sadly answers nothing with respect to the kinds of specific things you were saying earlier. There is nothing concrete to support them, even though a lesson about the oud scene in Vietnam has been learned. For the information I am grateful, but for the manner of your previous statements and claims I am not, since it pollutes an already tainted industry. There are still no facts accompanying your specific statements, only your general impressions of the availability of oud in Vietnam, and the lack of discernment between cultivated and wild wood, which I could happily accept as true.

It is a great privilege to have teachers, but it is perhaps a greater privilege, and hence responsibility, to teach. I am not saying anything more than what I have concluded based on my own personal observations and reasoning. I wish you would put forth your points in a clear and reasonable manner, and in a language which a person of your talent should be easily capable of producing, and not simply provoke reactions for your own amusement and engage in literary triviality.

I hope that since people here seem to appreciate 'straight-talk', you will see what I have said as such. I am always hoping and do pray for your well-being.

@AZsmell likewise I hope you have concrete information which would support your claims.
 
#48
I am not making any claims. I just want to know the truth.
Too bad, but the real truth is that most people don't really want the Truth. They just want constant reassurance that what they believe is the Truth. Some are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness.
 

Kruger

Well-Known Member
#50
Everybody is seeking the truth, Sidi, whether knowingly or unknowingly; and that is why the truth must be beautiful. That is the axiom upon which all philosophy rests.

When the 'truth' is haphazardly flung out through allusion, innuendo and fluffy statements, it appears to be anything but. When a tirade ensues with demands for appreciation, it looks more like a cloud of passion and confusion which is consuming the one inside it.

The video was very informative, and perhaps expected for any trade where a precious raw material is involved. It is certainly a familiar sight to anybody involved with the gem industry, for example.

It sadly answers nothing with respect to the kinds of specific things you were saying earlier. There is nothing concrete to support them, even though a lesson about the oud scene in Vietnam has been learned. For the information I am grateful, but for the manner of your previous statements and claims I am not, since it pollutes an already tainted industry. There are still no facts accompanying your specific statements, only your general impressions of the availability of oud in Vietnam, and the lack of discernment between cultivated and wild wood, which I could happily accept as true.

It is a great privilege to have teachers, but it is perhaps a greater privilege, and hence responsibility, to teach. I am not saying anything more than what I have concluded based on my own personal observations and reasoning. I wish you would put forth your points in a clear and reasonable manner, and in a language which a person of your talent should be easily capable of producing, and not simply provoke reactions for your own amusement and engage in literary triviality.

I hope that since people here seem to appreciate 'straight-talk', you will see what I have said as such. I am always hoping and do pray for your well-being.

@AZsmell likewise I hope you have concrete information which would support your claims.
With all due respect, Sidi, the truth is seldom beautiful. Unless you’re talking about God’s Grandeur, or some ultimate metaphysical Truth, I don’t see how beauty is the cornerstone of philosophy, or axiomatic in its pursuit. Or even relevant at all times. Hobbes’ truth that life is (or could be) solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short isn’t exactly a display of beauty—not immediately perceivable, at least. The fact of suffering, which I believe to be far more axiomatic in much of philosophy, is also not a matter a beauty, but often of truth. In fact, many a philosopher would strongly disagree with the idea of philosophy resting on any axioms at all… :rolleyes:

You know from Prophetic narrations that all things in this dunya are accursed, save the remembrance of Him. Likewise, that merchants are the exemplars among classes of criminals is a truth that I don’t see as intuitively beautiful. President X’s misconduct is not a thing of beauty, neither is it a lie. Whether my living room carpet is green or red isn’t a matter of beauty, but of fact. Just as there is little beauty in the truths of Bad Pharma, there is nothing beautiful about the truths of the agarwood trade, apart from perhaps the scent of agarwood :)

Anyway, seeing how Ensar is the one taking all the hits, with everyone clearly being against him, and everyone’s personal truth convictions already established, do we really need to keep pushing the issue?

Please bear in mind that as we told you before, we never intended for this to turn into a public tribunal. Ensar gave his opinion on the oils in question, which is the same thing he did at the London OudFest when you asked for that opinion. I find it surprising you didn't ask for proof then. Turning things into a public court hearing is not our style, and the onus to document the wood used in a distillation lays on none other than the original vendor. We are nothing more than perhaps a bunch of overzealous perfumistas. What we say is our critical appraisal of the work in question. I hope you can finally take in the beauty of that.

The video was never intended as a proof of anything. It’s us documenting what’s happening on the ground, in Vietnam, at the moment. It is not intended as a roundabout way to prove an unrelated dispute. That’s a different thread.

As for this thread, here is the second installment. Please enjoy.

 

AZsmell

Active Member
#52
Anyway, seeing how Ensar is the one taking all the hits, with everyone clearly being against him, and everyone’s personal truth convictions already established, do we really need to keep pushing the issue?

Please bear in mind that as we told you before, we never intended for this to turn into a public tribunal. Ensar gave his opinion on the oils in question, which is the same thing he did at the London OudFest when you asked for that opinion. I find it surprising you didn't ask for proof then. Turning things into a public court hearing is not our style, and the onus to document the wood used in a distillation lays on none other than the original vendor. We are nothing more than perhaps a bunch of overzealous perfumistas. What we say is our critical appraisal of the work in question. I hope you can finally take in the beauty of tha
No one is against Ensar. All we ask for is proof and evidence to back up his statements.
Accusing someone of using cheap wood for their high priced oils is NOT an opinion.
When a person makes accusations against another person which harms their reputation, the onus of proof is on the accuser. Otherwise this is slander.
 
#55
With all due respect, Sidi, the truth is seldom beautiful. Unless you’re talking about God’s Grandeur, or some ultimate metaphysical Truth, I don’t see how beauty is the cornerstone of philosophy, or axiomatic in its pursuit. Or even relevant at all times. Hobbes’ truth that life is (or could be) solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short isn’t exactly a display of beauty—not immediately perceivable, at least. The fact of suffering, which I believe to be far more axiomatic in much of philosophy, is also not a matter a beauty, but often of truth. In fact, many a philosopher would strongly disagree with the idea of philosophy resting on any axioms at all… :rolleyes:

You know from Prophetic narrations that all things in this dunya are accursed, save the remembrance of Him. Likewise, that merchants are the exemplars among classes of criminals is a truth that I don’t see as intuitively beautiful. President X’s misconduct is not a thing of beauty, neither is it a lie. Whether my living room carpet is green or red isn’t a matter of beauty, but of fact. Just as there is little beauty in the truths of Bad Pharma, there is nothing beautiful about the truths of the agarwood trade, apart from perhaps the scent of agarwood :)

Anyway, seeing how Ensar is the one taking all the hits, with everyone clearly being against him, and everyone’s personal truth convictions already established, do we really need to keep pushing the issue?

Please bear in mind that as we told you before, we never intended for this to turn into a public tribunal. Ensar gave his opinion on the oils in question, which is the same thing he did at the London OudFest when you asked for that opinion. I find it surprising you didn't ask for proof then. Turning things into a public court hearing is not our style, and the onus to document the wood used in a distillation lays on none other than the original vendor. We are nothing more than perhaps a bunch of overzealous perfumistas. What we say is our critical appraisal of the work in question. I hope you can finally take in the beauty of that.

The video was never intended as a proof of anything. It’s us documenting what’s happening on the ground, in Vietnam, at the moment. It is not intended as a roundabout way to prove an unrelated dispute. That’s a different thread.

As for this thread, here is the second installment. Please enjoy.

This was great, thank you for sharing.
 

Shabby

Well-Known Member
#56
@Kruger Are you really equivocating:

‘this oil is nice/mediocre’ (I.e opinion)

with

‘I have proof I can go to the grave with that ‘x’ oil is made from $25/kg wood’? (I.e verifiable fact)?

This is very basic stuff. The burden of proof is on you. The second statement is not an opinion.

At Oudfest Ensar said certain oils were nice/mediocre; he said absolutely nothing about the quality of the wood. I repeat, absolutely nothing. You will not get very far by testing my memory. I think very poorly of the fact that you are pretending that this point was addressed.

I hate oud-related drama, which means I hate the cause of oud-related drama. Again, the cause of this dramatic episode is none other than this statement of Ensar’s (paraphrasing):

‘I have proof I can go the grave with that ‘x’ Cambodi oil was made from $25/kg wood’.

Meaning that the cause of the drama is you, unless you can prove that it is not drama. I have no interest in pursuing this, except to weed out this recurring cause.

Either cough up the information, or don’t make such statements, and for Heaven’s sake don’t pretend that this is a generous opinion that was offered by a benevolent ‘straight-talker’. It is not opinion in the first place.

P.s in your reading of and agreement with Hobbes, you have forsaken Socrates, Plato and Plotinus, who were the founders of Western philosophy. Any truth must come from the metaphysical Truth, otherwise it is not the truth, or Truth is not metaphysical. And ‘Beauty is the splendour of the True’.
 

Ensar Oud

Well-Known Member
#58
@Kruger Are you really equivocating:

‘this oil is nice/mediocre’ (I.e opinion)

with

‘I have proof I can go to the grave with that ‘x’ oil is made from $25/kg wood’? (I.e verifiable fact)?

This is very basic stuff. The burden of proof is on you. The second statement is not an opinion.

At Oudfest Ensar said certain oils were nice/mediocre; he said absolutely nothing about the quality of the wood. I repeat, absolutely nothing. You will not get very far by testing my memory. I think very poorly of the fact that you are pretending that this point was addressed.

I hate oud-related drama, which means I hate the cause of oud-related drama. Again, the cause of this dramatic episode is none other than this statement of Ensar’s (paraphrasing):

‘I have proof I can go the grave with that ‘x’ Cambodi oil was made from $25/kg wood’.

Meaning that the cause of the drama is you, unless you can prove that it is not drama. I have no interest in pursuing this, except to weed out this recurring cause.

Either cough up the information, or don’t make such statements, and for Heaven’s sake don’t pretend that this is a generous opinion that was offered by a benevolent ‘straight-talker’. It is not opinion in the first place.
You paraphrase wrongly in order to suit your agenda. What I said was, I would never give an assessment that an oil is made from low-grade wood without personally having witnessed either the distillation site, or met the broker where the materials were purchased, was shown similar materials, and have olfactory evidence in the smell of the oil as being from such materials. What concerns you is my assessment. Where I got my proof, what that proof is, etc is my problem. And it is a very big problem if that proof is not substantial because we take all of these things to the grave with us, and shall be asked about them. My assessment of the oil you showed me remains the same as I told you at the London OudFest. I don't owe anybody proof, or evidence, or whatever else you may be dreaming about. If Taha had any objections to make, they would have been voiced by now. That is the best I can do. And that is for Taha's sake. Not mine.
 

AZsmell

Active Member
#60
Ok guys I am done with this forum. Some good people on here but unfortunately my enjoyment of discussing oud on this forum has evaporated.
It was good to know you guys. Made some good friends here.