Fragrance families and the fragrance wheel: classification explained in English

Want to say more than “I like it” or “I don’t like it”, but keep encountering unfamiliar words in descriptions? This page suggests starting with a map: choose one classification system, understand its terminology and only then move on to a specific fragrance. You do not need to learn all the families at once. It is enough to understand the style you are currently exploring and have a clear place to return to when you need to clarify a concept.

The first part introduces two named systems and explains how they differ. It is followed by a concise table of seven families, an explanation of how to read the separate wheel, and links to more detailed encyclopedia topics. At the end, there is a practical approach to taking notes: how to distinguish a description you have read from your own assessment, and what to ask if two labels seem incompatible. This is an editorial learning suggestion, not a completed consumer study.

If you are already looking for products, choose from the catalogue categories listed below. Their purpose differs from that of this text: here we explain concepts; there you continue choosing. Do not treat a category name as automatically assigning a particular bottle to a family in any international system. Before making that assignment, you would need to check the same product in the chosen database. This page contains no product rankings, measured durations in hours or results from shop customers.

Michael Edwards explains families as groups with a distinctive scent character. In this guide, a family is a reference point for language and searching: first establish which term a particular source uses. Then compare other labels within the same system. This helps you avoid comparing a broad category in one list with a narrower style in another and mistaking the difference for an error.

We suggest keeping three separate spaces in your notes: one for the source term, one for a brief explanation of it and one for your personal impression. For example, you could copy “Woody Amber” exactly into the first field, note which system it came from in the second, and use your own words in the third. Such a note does not pretend to be an expert product assessment and lets you check later where the family name came from.

Do not choose a family as though answering an exam question. If you want to check your understanding, ask: “Which word in this description is unclear to me?” This is more useful than trying to fit your entire list of favourite fragrances into a single box straight away. The aim of this approach is clearer comparison, not a promise that you will necessarily like your next choice.

In this source, Fragrance Foundation France presents seven families: citrus, floral, woody, fougère, chypre, oriental and aromatic. Michael Edwards presents a different system organised as a wheel. This is a comparison of two specific sources, not a claim that there are only two possible ways to classify fragrances.

When reading a list, first look at its title and author. Is it described as a list of families, a glossary of notes, retail categories or a fragrance wheel? We do not conflate these different purposes on this page. In the table’s “source term” column, we retain the original label so that the English explanation can be linked to a specific place in the source. Translating a label should not obscure its origin.

In practice, we suggest comparing only entries at the same level. If one guide shows a diagram of a few broad groups while another gives detailed subdivisions, start by noting the difference in detail. Do not conclude that an author has forgotten a family simply because a table has fewer rows. An exact comparison between two systems would require an explanation from their authors or a clearly labelled editorial interpretation.

Below are Fragrance Foundation France’s terms, their English equivalents and a few descriptive pointers. The table is not a collection of recipes. The examples describe the source’s terminology; they do not establish the composition of an individual product on sale. Historical claims and claims about market size and longevity found in the source descriptions have not been carried over into this table.

For your first reading, choose one row. Check its original term and note whether you need an explanation of the word or an example of a specific fragrance. If you need to understand the concept, continue through the encyclopedia links. If you need a product, go to the catalogue and read its individual description. A single family row does not replace that extra step.

Fougère and chypre are retained here alongside clear explanations in English. We do not try to replace them with arbitrary literal imagery. When learning, it helps to remember that you are reading a classification term, rather than thinking of the supposed scent of a plant or place. If a term is unfamiliar, its dedicated encyclopedia article is the next reading step; this table simply helps you find it.

On Michael Edwards’ wheel page, Amber, Floral Amber, Soft Amber and Woody Amber appear separately. Citrus, Water, Green and Fruity are also separate labels there. His questions and answers page refers to fourteen families. These entries should be read as parts of this author’s system, not as a translation of Fragrance Foundation France’s seven rows.

Start with the exact label on the wheel that you found in the source. If you see “Amber”, keep that exact wording in your notes and add an English explanation alongside it. If another page uses “oriental”, do not assume that the terms are automatically equivalent for every product listed there. This page openly shows the difference in terminology; it does not transfer any particular product from one system to another.

We suggest using the wheel as a navigation map, not as a diagram of exact ingredient quantities. If you want to explore one of its entries in more detail, open the author’s original page and return to that same term. We do not redraw or publish Michael Edwards’ wheel illustration: it belongs to its author. To see it, open the original page.

Explore this topic in the guide: Amber in Perfume: How Does an Amber Accord Differ from Ambergris?.

Choose a section based on your unanswered question. If you need general vocabulary, start with The ABCs of fragrance. If you want to understand a description of notes, choose the article on notes. If you already understand the family name and want a deeper explanation, use the cards for individual styles below. This sequence is an editorial navigation recommendation.

You do not need to open every link at once. Choose one question and one page that should answer it. Write the answer in your own words, keeping a link to the source. If the article does not yet exist or its title does not match its content, treat the link as incomplete rather than filling the gap with a guess.

A scent-style card in this guide is a route to a topic. It does not mean that the style has only one definition across all classifications. It is therefore useful to include the system’s name in your reading notes. When you return a few weeks later, you will know whether you were comparing one author’s terms or explanations from different sources.

Explore this topic in the guide: Perfume Notes: How to Read the Pyramid.

We leave product selection to the catalogue. This page provides explanations and three category cards selected from saved catalogue records. The cards help you decide where to continue your search; they do not certify all the products in those categories under the Michael Edwards or Fragrance Foundation France systems. No individual product was separately classified for this article.

Before opening a category, write down two things: which style you are looking for and which description you want to avoid. Use your own words. Then read the information for a specific product and see whether it answers both questions. If it does not, do not try to infer the answer from the category name alone. Leave the question open or ask for clarification.

For example, we suggest the category “Sweet perfumes for women” as a shop navigation point in this map. We do not add it as an eighth Fragrance Foundation France family. Apply the same distinction to other adjectives in the catalogue: first establish whether you are looking at a retail grouping or a term from a particular classification system. Your search will then be consistent, and commercial pages will retain their intended role.

We suggest clearly distinguishing “the source states” from “my impression was”. In the first section, record the verified label and its source. In the second, use your own words and record the date of the note and the testing conditions. If you do not yet have an impression, write “not tried”. Reading a description does not count as trying a fragrance in this suggested worksheet.

Use the same note format for both fragrances when comparing them. Descriptions with different levels of detail make your own decision harder: if you record only the family for one and an entire story for the other, it is difficult to understand what you are actually comparing. This advice is an editorial approach to taking notes, not the result of a scientific methodology. Publishing conclusions about longevity would require a separate validated protocol and real data.

Your personal notes can also contain a contradiction. If the source’s label does not help you describe what you experienced, record both without changing the source’s wording. Later, you can check whether you were referring to the same product, the same version and the same classification. Uncertainty is a valid starting point for another question.