PERFUME #1:

Butanoic acid, 1,1-dimethyl-2-phenylethyl ester
Benzeneacetic acid, phenylmethyl ester
2H-Cyclopropa[g]benzofuran, 4,5,5a,6,6a,6b-hexahydro-4,4,6b-trimethyl-2-(1-methylethenyl)-
Bicyclo[4.1.0]hept-4-en-3-ol, 3,7,7-trimethyl- [1S-(1-alpha,3-alpha, 6-alpha)]-
2-Propen-1-ol, 3-phenyl, acetate
Phenoxy ethyl isobutyrate
Benzene, 1-methoxy-4-propyl-
2(3H)-Furanone, dihydro-5-pentyl
2(3H)-Furanone, 5-heptyldihydro- ...

Listed above is about just the first few the chemicals identified from a popular perfume (it's currently remaining nameless, until the analysts who produced this list verify a couple additional compounds contained in the perfume).

It's baffling to me how long this list is (click through the link to see the full deal). I'm in no place to verify the accuracy of their list, and I don't know whether it's a conservative or liberal guess at the true composition of the fragrance. Regardless, the multitude of monomolecular odorants put into this fragrance is impressive. Now, I'm wondering about the exact contribution of each of these molecules to the impression of the smell. Do all of them contribute perceptibly to the fragrance, and to remove one is to, however subtly, change the character of the product? Or, do some molecules serve as carriers, whisking others into the air faster or slower? Do these molecules need to be grouped together to give a fairer impression of the creative process, i.e., to get a musky aspect, are 15 different musk molecules added to achieve just the right balance and warmth? I don't even know where to begin learning about this art, but I'm going to try.