Problem with two abstract noun usages describe a perfume [closed]

To say A has "a touch of B" means "just a little bit". Like if you say, "This drink is mint-flavored", that would mean that it tastes like mint, period. The overall taste is mint. But if you say, "This drink has a touch of mint flavor", that means it is mostly some other flavor, but there is a little bit of mint in it.

Making "touches" plural just increases it slightly. So "This drink has touches of mint flavor" is a little more minty than "... has a touch". In some contexts it may mean several different kinds. Like if you say, "This book has touches of Lord of the Rings", you probably mean that it has several elements that might remind someone of Lord of the Rings. But it's pretty vague and abstract.

So "... touches of lemony freshness" would mean that it does not smell like lemons, but it has some hint of lemon smell, mixed in with other smells.

"Wooded tunes" doesn't make a lot of literal sense. Maybe they're trying to say that it brings to mind the sound of music played on wooden instruments, or on woodwind instruments?

This is very poetic language, so it's not clear how literally to take any of it.

When describing sensory experiences, writers sometimes conflate the inputs of different senses. The resulting style could be described as synaesthetic, after the condition synaesthesia, in which affected individuals experience a blurring of what for most people are distinct senses. This is especially common when discussing music - e.g. among certain enlightened circles one often encounters talk of tone colours, sounds having a texture, or occasionally of notes having a fruity sound.

However, as others have mentioned, this is quite separate from the well-established idiom 'a touch of', which simply means a little of something, although I suspect that it evolved from a similar origin, perhaps as an extension of 'a pinch of' and other similar phrases.