I suppose some of my review information found on this site would, as indirectly broadbrushed by the skeptical in this thread, fall under that category of "BS."
I would like to assure any who may suspect as much, that if I write an aroma exhibits the character of pepper-laced leather or even something as subtle as wet rosewood or steamed clams - as opposed to grilled ones - then indeed I did smell exactly what I wrote. Just as some have a higher uncorrected visual accuity than others; or just as the blind can generally sense a much more subtle variance on surfaces than the sighted, due to a higher degree of touch sensitivity; some noses (AND olfactory memories) are more sensitive than that of other people. Nothing right or wrong, good or bad (a very sensitive nose is much more easily offended by certain ... uh ... personal odors) it's simply a fact. And to dismiss aroma accuracy, in each and every case, is perhaps ... well ... BS!
While normally smoking a cigar for pleasure, I rarely categorize subtle aromas, usually just enjoying an overall experience of combined fragrances. However when reviewing a cigar with pen and notebook, I am constantly dissecting and extracting nuances. It really is not all that easy to constantly be searching my olfactory memory bank for matching aromas to which others may relate. Nor would I take the considerable time to record notes, write a finished piece, proof, rewrite, then prepare for pasting in a thread here or elsewhere as a piece with my name on it, if in the first place I just wanted to make crap up.
Twenty years ago I was a cigarette addict, during which time I did not understand the fascination some had with cigars. That is because, due to the olfactory deadening quality of cigarette smoking, I couldn't freaking smell anything! Food was simply a variety of textured nutrition, necessary for life. Over the past 20 years my nose has come back to life! I have developed a real love for the complexiites of tasting - during which activity accute olfactory discrimination is key.
I understand that few cigar smokers (for any number of reasons) very well might not smell all the aromas I describe in a review. But writing about a cigar, to me, is a poetic love affair. Would a poet describe a soulmate with a pedestrian, "She's nice," so as to not be labeled "pretentious" or overstating the relationship, by the reader? I enjoy writing of aroma subtleties. Since in many cigars they are NOT there, when those subtle variances of fragrances are available in a particularly fine cigar, the better cigar manufacturer should recieve acknowledgement for producing something great, intrinsically interesting, in the product's comments. In my reviews of Brazilain puros (which I plan to soon continue,) if I find that a cigar does not have subtleties, I will not put it in just to sound "cool." I want to share with my brothers in total honesty. But I also find reviews that merely give the dimensions of the 'gar, how the ash looked and the final statement, "I liked it." offer few insights to pique interest. And isn't that what a review should do?
If there were any BS in my reviews ..... I would smell it ..... and tell you so.