Oh, great. Yet another wax to try.

[Gretchen]

UMMMM; What's so different? Seems to me that as the years tick by, the directions for any of them get longer. That's pretty understandable just assuming that we are all learning a bit more as time goes by; right? I don't know; I think we all basically know that consistency in our temps (all of them) make a huge difference in the end product. Maybe those facts weren't so spelled out as recently as a few years ago, but; well you know what? I won't be ordering a pallet right away.

Here's what seems strangely familiar to me; remember when the first round of CBA came out and many of us loved it. Then they 'improved' it, except they failed to tell us other than the enhanced label on the side of the box, and it was garbage; and then then they slid back to the 'original' before the riots. See I was caught up in that; didn't shower for two days because I was SO caught up in trying to get my candles to actually burn again, because they had still failed to admit they 'tweaked' it. What part of that seems reminiscent to what's going on now? The 1200 pounds of CBA I'm sitting on that is obviously not the same wax as the previous 1800 pounds I poured through. Up until a month ago, I loved CBA. I'd love to love it again. Soon. I'm getting tired of this. It was good. It was fine. It didn't need to be improved, or revamped, and it didn't need the newly designed label for the side of the box. When I noticed the label had changed, I'll admit a little voice in my head said 'oh shit!', but then quickly followed with 'nah! It'll be fine'. HA! Why is that little voice always right?

[Gretchen]

BTW- many of you commented it took you too long to get where you are with the wax you're currently using. Mind saying what your combinations are? Wax, container size, wick type & size?

[topofmurrayhill]

Here's a warning sign to send chills down your spine:

Due to its advanced technology, it is important to work with the fragrance manufacturer to use fragrances specifically designed for CB-XceL.

Looking under the Fragrance Program, the ones recommended for the new wax are almost exactly the same subset that are recommended for CBA.

[Stella1952]

you know what? I won't be ordering a pallet right away.

I hear ya, Gretchen... There HAS been a lot of product tweakin' just in the 5 years I have been making candles. Wild claims are made by companies, people rush out to test the "New Best Thing" only to find it's not "all that." While improvements have happened, they have been slow and inconsistent. I started out with EZ Soy and quickly jumped ship to NatureWax C3 where I remain. C3 has had some ups & downs reported since Elevance took over, but I have found it to be a pretty consistent, reliable product. It isn't a perfect wax by any means. I've learned that I have to pay close attention to procedure to get the most reliable results from it. When I have trouble, nearly always the problem is on my end and not anything remarkably different with the wax. I don't expect this new product from Nature's Gifts to be the perfect soy wax we've all been looking for... just reading the instructions tips me off to that but I'll probably test a few pounds just for grins.

Wax, container size, wick type & size

NatureWax C3, 8 oz. wide mouth canning jar, CDN 12-14 (depending on FO)

Here's a warning sign to send chills down your spine:

Eeeoooooo... I missed that little tidbit. Now THAT'S scary...:shocked2:

[Gretchen]

Just curious; and directed at the more 'seasoned' in our craft; how many years before this kind of stuff stops pissing you off?

[Judy, USMC]

Just curious; and directed at the more 'seasoned' in our craft; how many years before this kind of stuff stops pissing you off?

Once you get out of the "testing phase" and have decided what works for you. Getting something new (wax or wick) to make your product better is tempting to all of us sometime. But many a time it's not as good as presented by the manufacturer. Investing a little time and money may work out well ... but only if you have the time and money to take a chance on something that may or may not work ... and if you are not satisfied with your product yet.

Personally, I relied on my testers feedback. Once they were satisfied I knew I had a combo I could sell. Customers like the product and I haven't gotten any complaints from them. My attitude now is - it's not broken so I don't need to fix it.

[soychic]

Hi ,

I am have only been making candles for almost a year but, I have started using C3 a few months ago and have problems with white crystallizing spots appearing on the sides or bottoms of some of my candles. I get the white spots even if I didn't use dye!! Prior to C3, I used a soy blend and had no problems at all. But, my candle supply store stopped selling it and so I switched to the 100% soy-C3.

At my local candle supply store, he called the white spots "blooming'. He said this new wax shouldn't have that problem. He is getting it in next week.

I am going to try it because the white spots are driving me crazy.

I couldn't figure out why it was occurring on some of the candles.

Do you think pouring the wax when it is slushy might help prevent the white crystallization? I usually pour at approx 120-140 degrees.

I use the turkey fryer method and pour it at 200(so it says) and then I color and add fragrance let sit for a bit and then pour.

I am going to check out the link to the website of the new wax.

janine

[Stella1952]

That is frosting or bloom. It happens because soy wax is polymorphic - meaning it has several different crystal types it can form. The white ones are a type you don't want. FOs can make the problem worse and so can dyes. Temperature when melting, tempering, pouring, cooling and storing are critical.

Do a search of the veggie wax forum for "frosting" and you will find a LOT of information and different ideas for how to minimize this issue that is common to nearly all soy wax that is not blended with paraffin (parasoy). There are recent discussions about this that are easy to find - my best suggestion is to read, read, read.

Good luck!

[soychic]

thank you Stella for all of your helpful information.

Now that I know what my problem is called, I can try to fix it.

I will look up frosting and read more.

Maybe I won't have to worry about any of that if I use the new wax X-cel???? Wouldn't that just be too easy!:rolleyes2

[HeavenScentU]

That is great to hear...It sounds like the perfect wax. Can't wait to try it.

[kimmeroo]

I can't wait to hear the results..:smiley2: I loved CBA but only certain fo's threw for me..so I have settled with C3..lol..which is the very first wax I started out with..in soy. Have fun ladies and gents trying this new wax..I may try a sample if the reviews are good.

Kim

[JacquiO]

Now if they could only come up with a decent soy pillar wax.

[Judy, USMC]

The wax manufacturer was kind enough to list fragrance manufacturers and the throw in certain waxes they produce: http://www.ngiwax.com/resources/fragranceprogram/ac.html#bell

It appears the FOs that will work in the new wax may be as finicky as the Advanced.

This would be great information if the suppliers would divulge which manufacturers they buy from ... but that information has been extremely hard to get from them. Even working the other avenue ~ calling the manufacturer to see which suppliers buy their oils ~ has been futile.

So I expect it still will be hit or miss on what oils will "work."

Edited January 31, 2010 by Judy, USMC

[Stella1952]

Now if they could only come up with a decent soy pillar wax.

You don't like the Ecosoya PB, Jacqui? I kinda like it... but I haven't made a lot of pillars with it (mostly votives), so I may not have discovered it's ruder points yet...

Edited January 31, 2010 by Stella1952

[topofmurrayhill]

Maybe this is their lastest attempt at a new and improved CBA, after that mess 3 or 4 years ago. It will be interesting to see what the reality turns out to be, but that fragrance oil list really brought my hopes down. It all kind of makes me expect CBA with a higher melt point, maybe better glass adhesion, and still no throw.

[soychic]

I looked at the NG manufacuturer site and it seems that CBA already had extreme resistance to bloom. Did anyone find this claim to be true??

"EcoSoya® CB-Advanced Soy has extreme resistance to bloom (white frosting) and “wet spots”. It contracts slightly to produce a uniform beautiful appearance, requires only one pour, has good scent throw with fragrances, and a creamy white appearance."

EAC is getting their shipment in this week and I need more wax anyway, so I am going to try it.

I will let you know how it works.

Since I am still in testing phase for wax anyway and having a problem with the "frosting", Excel will be good for me to try.

I just hope it has an "excellent' throw because I never had too much of a problem with throw.

4oz hex jar-C3/ HTP 83

10oz hex jar C3 HTP 104

8 oz jelly jar C3/UC -but may try htp 93 to decrease the mushroom

[topofmurrayhill]

I looked at the NG manufacuturer site and it seems that CBA already had extreme resistance to bloom. Did anyone find this claim to be true??

Yes, the results are pretty but it doesn't throw worth a damn.

[Stella1952]

I looked at the NG manufacuturer site and it seems that CBA already had extreme resistance to bloom.

Many folks have reported that CBA is more resistant to frosting and is much smoother during the life of the product. It's a pretty wax for sure. Unfortunately, it is also widely reported that it just doesn't possess strong HT properties.

The claims have now gone beyond mere "extreme resistance" now that they've coined the term, "Molecular Blueprinting™."

All EcoSoya™ soy waxes are engineered with Molecular Blueprinting™ to control polymorphism. Our blueprinting process is the basis for the quality and consistency of EcoSoya™ premium soy wax.

• Molecular Blueprinting™ overcomes natural variations in soy and the polymorphic characteristics of soy crystallization, resulting in a more stable, balanced soy wax

• Our Molecular Blueprinting™ technology sets us apart from other manufacturers by controlling polymorphism

Just as their "botanical oils" raised my eyebrow and caught in my throat, this rates a big WTFITS? from me... What the heck is that anyway? A little explanation would be nice... please, NGI, dazzle me with some brilliance and ease up on baffling me with bulldoody!! While I understand that proprietary secrets are kept for the financial concerns of a particular company, sharing knowledge generally is what allows industries to take quantum leaps in quality and performance so that everyone can benefit.

Now they are claiming that ALL their waxes have overcome polymorphism, thanks to their "Molecular Blueprinting™," especially if you use only fragrances from manufacturers participating in their "Fragrance Program" (as if suppliers are gonna tell us from whom they are purchasing the FOs they sell to us, and with what and how much they are modifying those fragrances once they purchase them before they sell them to us).

Uh huh.

We'll see. :whistle:

[topofmurrayhill]

I don't understand the interminable bellyaching over botanical oils. There are conversations here all the time about adding coconut oil, palm oil and whatever to soy wax to influence how it burns and sets up. The industry literature has plenty of information about that and deals with all the same oils we talk about here. There are just a few other common ones, like the hydrogenated cottonseed oil that's in GB 435 and EcoSoya CB-135. None of this stuff is a huge mystery.

Everyone knows that you can control polymorphism by blending oils, by adding certain triglyceride fractions, by using certain additives. Nature's Gifts doesn't know anything the rest of the industry doesn't know, but they've invested a crapload of money applying it to candle wax, some of which is also expensive to produce. I'm not sure how many more specifics about it you would consider adequate, beside handing out the formula so that bigger companies can replicate the products for free and NGI's employees can look for other work.

"Blueprinting" is a reasonable word for controlling polymorphism in vegetable fats. It means they've produced a material with an inherent tendency to solidify in a more predictable and stable way. If they want to have snazzy trademarked catchphrase, that's just how business and marketing is done. It don't do you no harm.

They certainly do seem to have a handle on it as far as candle wax is concerned. Now if only they could get the scent throw part to work.

[Stella1952]

I don't understand the interminable bellyaching over botanical oils

Then lemme explain it to ya mo' betta.

The term, "botanical" is hype. "Vegetable oils" would have done just as well and not lead the customer to believe that what is being added is something somehow more marvelous than mere vegetable oil (like the dreary ol' cottonseed oil other companies list as an additive)... maybe it's from the rain forest or something... purer, more all-natural, more wonderful...bah humbug!!! :rolleyes2

Everyone knows that you can control polymorphism by blending oils, by adding certain triglyceride fractions, by using certain additives.

Everyone does NOT know this nor is it particularly easy to ferret out this information and understand it. If everyone knew all this, then everyone would discuss things like an oleochemist. We're mostly home candlemakers & soapers here. I don't recall too many conversations here about "triglyceride fractions." We use common terminology like "coconut oil," "palm oil," etc. because we are NOT oleochemists and do not speak or think in those terms. Even if most of us did use the term, how many people actually UNDERSTAND what it is? You can throw stuff like that around as much as you want, but I doubt if the term "triglyceride fractions" is ever gonna appear in the average candlemaker's head while making candles.

"Hmmmm.... maybe I should add some extra tryglyceride fractions..."

"Hand me the triglyceride fractions, dear."

"I don't like the color of these triglyceride fractions... wonder if they come in blue?"

"Blueprinting" is a reasonable word for controlling polymorphism in vegetable fats. It means they've produced a material with an inherent tendency to solidify in a more predictable and stable way.

"Molecular (don't forget that!) Blueprinting" is more marketing hype. They have developed a manufacturing technique (no clue as to what it REALLY is... maybe just large scale tempering?) that makes their product more stable (than what? for how long? under what conditions? how much more stable?). It sounds more like frankenfood industry hype to me. Are they actually messing with molecules? Do they rearrange them like Lego blocks? Is this like genetic engineering? Does what they do look like the blueprint of my house? Is it vegan? Or what? It's a term crafted to sound "all that" and tell you absolutely NOTHING about what it really means all at the same time.

"Hey, MY soy wax is better than yours because it's got Molecular Blueprinting."

"I don't want any of that ordinary soy wax that hasn't been molecularly blueprinted."

If they want to have snazzy trademarked catchphrase, that's just how business and marketing is done.

Yeah, you right. And that's why most folks have no freakin' idea what's really in their food, their cleaning products, their carpets, their plastics or any of the zillions of products they use daily. They have been BAFFLED BY BULLSH*T. What was once considered to be misrepresentation, deliberate confusion and outright fraud, is now accepted business practice, to the detriment of all (except the greedheads who make money off misleading people).

It don't do you no harm.

Hype does everyone harm (except the greedheads who make money off hyping people and than the few insiders who know what's behind the curtain) because it misdirects, obscures or misrepresents the actual reality of something. It is designed to manipulate people's opinions to believe something is better (or worse) in some way than it really is. It's the oldest marketing trick in the book. We would all be better served for businesses to simply tell the unvarnished truth without the bull.

And that's why the "interminable bellyaching" has gone on, goes on now and will go on in the future. You understand this perfectly well when people refer to things as "all-natural" or someone mentions a wick treatment you think is "overhyped," but somehow when it comes to other things about which you feel more protective for whatever reason, your understanding leaves you adrift.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Stella1952

[topofmurrayhill]

The bellyaching does get a little silly when it's just about candle wax. It's not like they're asking you to eat the stuff. It seems more like just a diatribe against capitalism, directed against a harmless soy wax manufacturer.

If look at the context, what I meant by "everyone" is people in the industry who work with oils and fats. They know what the approaches are; NGI just invested more into applying them to candle wax. The details aren't important or meaningful to the consumer (you pointed out yourself that nobody knows or cares what a triglyceride fraction might be), but it's important for competitive advantage when you have big companies that can easily crank out a hydrogentated soy product.

Not that you would know, since you haven't even tried CBA, but they have the most innovative product of its type on the market. With the new introduction, they have the two most innovative products. But they aren't allowed to have a marketing catchphrase, because only "greedheads" have those. They aren't even allowed to say "botanical oils" (meaning oils that come from a plant) when they could say "vegetable oils" (meaning oils that come from a plant).

It's just "power to the people" much ado about nothing. If you want to complain about hype that's actually relevant to the folks here, talk about the scent throw problems. I certainly don't overlook that.

[Stella1952]

you pointed out yourself that nobody knows or cares what a triglyceride fraction might be

I didn't say no one cares - I personally would like to learn and understand a LOT more of this stuff, but I also don't have time to go on a digging expedition through dusty research and patent papers to glean a few tidbits of barely decipherable information that I don't know how to tie together and I don't have the money to get a degree in oleochemistry just because I like to make nice candles as supplemental income. Explaining technical stuff is an art and I would love to see more experts practice that to help educate people.

I recently complimented NGI on the information on their website that DOES explain some important things in layman's terms (I provide links to that information frequently), and remarked that I wished more manufacturers sites did so, and you had something arched to say about that, too...:rolleyes2

more like just a diatribe against capitalism, directed against a harmless soy wax manufacturer

Nope. I was advocating for customers (I refuse to call people "consumers" - makes them sound like macrophages or something). Big Business and marketing (a profession I worked in for many years) has gone too far in its deliberate manipulation of ordinary people for monetary gain. Having good products and marketing them does not have to include fairy tale landscapes and hype. If a product is good, a simple, down-to-earth description, supported by the performance and value of the product, will suffice.

NGI seems to be a good company. They obviously try to be accurate and informative. They don't have to resort to hype just because it's an "accepted business practice"... unless the new product turns out to be as problematic as the last over-hyped product, CBA. Then they might need some BS to entice people to buy the stuff...

But they aren't allowed to have a marketing catchphrase, because only "greedheads" have those. They aren't even allowed to say "botanical oils" (meaning oils that come from a plant) when they could say "vegetable oils" (meaning oils that come from a plant).... If you want to complain about hype that's actually relevant to the folks here, talk about the scent throw problems. I certainly don't overlook that.

Of course they are "allowed" to - there are no laws against bullsh*t!! Lotsa folks don't like vegetables, but botanical sounds so much better - even though they ARE the same thing!! That's HYPE defined! Many people here get snowed by marketing hype. They work hard for the money they spend and I personally don't like seeing people manipulated.

It's just "power to the people" much ado about nothing.

Yeah, perhaps it IS a little "power to the people," but considering how people get screwed by business every day to such an extent that many don't even notice it any more (it's an "accepted business practice"), I don't consider it much ado about nothing - it's a huge money-making racket! I consider it very important and will always advocate for the rights of customers to be accurately informed about the products on which they spend what little money they still have.

If you want to complain about hype that's actually relevant to the folks here, talk about the scent throw problems.

Top, I talk about what I think is important. I'm entitled to express my opinions and perspective same as you or anyone else. I cannot address scent throw problems which have not been demonstrated to me, but I CAN put my 2¢ worth in on a product marketing scheme that may or may not be all it's promising. It certainly doesn't seem to have been with CBA. We'll have to wait and see if Excel is "all that."

[Gretchen]

Sometimes it's fun when you guys 'fight nice'. I'll admit, this time I didn't read every line. It's late, I'm tired, and frankly I'm still really angry (sounds better than pissed) at the fact that I am still sitting here with over 1000 lbs. of CBA that doesn't burn. They make great wax; period. However, this time (just like the last time) something got tweaked and they failed to pass that fact on to those of us that use the stuff. THAT'S what pisses me off. Not answering my email, pisses me off. Not returning my calls (when I've left messages) pisses me off. Having industry reps not call me when requested to do so by their distributors, pisses me off. Basic communication is all I've asked for. See, from my perspective, since they did the tweaking, they should have a clue or two that might actually help us out here. That might be a reach, but certianly they should be a bit more responsive to us, the end user of their product. Seem reasonable? I love the finished product I get with their wax. Or, I did. And you know, as far as scent throw; nope, doesn't put out like a Yankee, but I still managed to muster up 30+ scents that sold well enough, so I was pretty ok with that. If it didn't throw, I didn't pour it. Not a deal breaker.

OK; I'm done ranting over this, but I will keep an eye for posts about their waxes and hope for insight and the end to this issue. In the meantime, I'll be drafting a letter to NGI about customer service, and about working WITH those of us using their products. Seems pretty reasonable coming from someone who been carrying on about this for so long.:smiley2::smiley2:

[chuck_35550]

Well hell, let me jump in here and throw my two pennies around. This is what happens when you have no industry standards to protect the consumer. I mean, 1000 pounds of wax and zero acknowledgement from any rep whatsoever? I think that amounts to fraud. The company purports that product to be so wonderful and it doesn't meet the standard set by their own literature? This happens to all of us. A bad batch of 6006 or a bad batch of whatever and we just bitch about it on this forum. I would contact an attorney and explore your legal options. Make these folks accountable for their products. They have just as much responsibility to the consumer as anyone else. I guarantee you that a letter from an attorney would get you prompt action.

Steve

[realmarcha]

Gretchen, I totally agree with the above post GET AN ATTORNEY to write the letter. Big business responds to "legal" action...simple as that.

As far as this new "excel" wax, well I have been using soy for 10 years now, and have tried mostly every soy, parasoy, additive, etc. to perfect my candle line, and guess what? I now use the soy wax I started with even with all its "natural wax" idiosyncrasies. Great looking candle, great scent throw, and NO color to worry about since I do not use it. I have had no problems selling my product without all the ADDED BS such as additives, not to mention no color which will complement any room decor. Will I try the new wax? probably not, those days of spending hundreds of dollars to find the "perfect" soy wax is over for me! In my humble opinion, there is no such thing as a PERFECT wax, whether it be soy or paraffin. Guess I should change my saying too...Scrooge is gone till the end of the year