Top Notes 
Heart Notes 
Base Notes 
03/11/2019
Serenissima
543 Reviews
Auto-translated
Show original
Serenissima
Top Review
20
sympathetic and without any cult!
I had to learn over the years that I had my difficulties with the so-called "cult" scents.
Who likes to admit to not being able to correspond with them.
Not only Yves Saint Laurent's "Opium", but also "Chanel N° 5" can't get me in the mood for the general adoration.
"I had "opium" myself then; for "Chanel N° 5" I felt too young for a long time.
I explained then that it must have been at the beginning of the eighties when I started to look more closely at perfumes: "I'll use it with pleasure when I'm old enough! But not yet!"
Meanwhile I am really old enough; but I never thought that I would develop in a completely different direction: completely away from this Chanel classic.
To the horror of my mother and to the astonishment of many friends.
I've been wearing soft, cuddly wool trinsets for years - some with a pearl necklace: but the always open door of my office also played a role in their choice.
I just needed this warmth.
The classic "Little Black" also hangs in the cupboard; but I was never happy in it: Black is not my colour! Even my hairdresser, who finds black "so noble", agrees with me: he prefers to see me in colours.
A bird of paradise, because I mutated into one that one should not want to trim classically.
Even now, when we are a bit of a selected bird of paradise with some broken feathers, we don't get together: "Chanel N° 5" and me.
For a long time this also affected the other "fragrance sisters" of this "grand lady":
"I bought "Coco" and "Chanel N° 19" myself (probably in the belief that I could get closer to the classic fragrance target); "Allure" my hairdresser gave me at that time for Christmas.
With all three scents it was more a "living side by side" than a "togetherness".
Even the cosmetic products of this brand I can't stand, except for the gorgeous lipsticks.
So I was very pleasantly surprised the other day when I met "Misia".
We liked each other; even made friends until she left. This capricious woman was looking for other challenges: she had already successfully baited me!
Therefore I dared now also to "Les Exclusifs de Chanel 1932": and I am quite taken by this member of the fragrance family!
"Chanel 1932" is light and airy; a fine scent veil, like a garment made of light cotton voile.
Maybe this is why this fragrance needs the support of "Iralia".
This substance from the N-methyl ion family is used in perfume and fabric production; it gives a certain stability, enhances the charisma and elegance of the finished product (according to the Internet).
As Gelis correctly writes in her commentary: Immediately after spraying, the aldehydes begin to fly; they dance and radiate and attract!
Bergamot and the beautiful Neroli aroma are part of this round dance: they all turn in a lively, fragrant whirl. Beautiful, such a prelude!
The almost classic beauties of the fragrance worlds - lilacs in large, fragrant, softly coloured and deep purple umbels with filled and simple flowers; the gorgeous white large-flowered jasmine and the spicy carnation: they are now all bound into a large fragrant bouquet.
Of course, the rose must not be missing either; it adapts surprisingly well to the scent of the fragrance here; does not insist on its otherwise so often dominating position!
Ylang-Ylang, just as swirling and luminous as the aldehyde before it, completes the previous course of fragrance lively and dazzling.
"Chanel 1932" is now a classic woman, but still lacking that certain something.
First she receives a full-body powder shower through the iris: the previous glow is somewhat dampened; the preparations for the erotic, the senses fully awakening scents are completed with this.
Warm vanilla enters, hand in hand with musk, confidently the fragrance stage.
The previously so radiant floridity offers these two a good basis not to become too powerful together with the scent partner Iris.
These three are often a problem for me with powdery fragrances; why we don't harmonize then.
In "Chanel 1932" this troika is so skilfully surrounded by the floral scents and the resins and earthy-dark green elements now appearing, that a soft scented cape forms for me as well.
I like this fine velvetiness very much; it is still wonderfully light and very graceful.
"Chanel 1932" is a little fleeting, which is not surprising for such a light-footed and charming person.
But after-spraying is no problem; just to be able to enjoy the cheerful shimmer of the aldehyde again.
I am happy that I finally found fragrances at this traditional company that I like and that I also like to stay with me.
Both, "Misia" and "Chanel 1932", demand nothing from me; even on a normal "household day", in more or less "robber civilian", they play along in a good mood: they don't sulk, they're not too fine for it.
So here are the "smaller" sisters of the "famous Chanel N° 5", who give me so much joy.
May this still keep the "little black" company in the wardrobe.
"Chanel 1932" and me, we make ourselves happy and upbeat and see what we can still do beautiful things.
Who likes to admit to not being able to correspond with them.
Not only Yves Saint Laurent's "Opium", but also "Chanel N° 5" can't get me in the mood for the general adoration.
"I had "opium" myself then; for "Chanel N° 5" I felt too young for a long time.
I explained then that it must have been at the beginning of the eighties when I started to look more closely at perfumes: "I'll use it with pleasure when I'm old enough! But not yet!"
Meanwhile I am really old enough; but I never thought that I would develop in a completely different direction: completely away from this Chanel classic.
To the horror of my mother and to the astonishment of many friends.
I've been wearing soft, cuddly wool trinsets for years - some with a pearl necklace: but the always open door of my office also played a role in their choice.
I just needed this warmth.
The classic "Little Black" also hangs in the cupboard; but I was never happy in it: Black is not my colour! Even my hairdresser, who finds black "so noble", agrees with me: he prefers to see me in colours.
A bird of paradise, because I mutated into one that one should not want to trim classically.
Even now, when we are a bit of a selected bird of paradise with some broken feathers, we don't get together: "Chanel N° 5" and me.
For a long time this also affected the other "fragrance sisters" of this "grand lady":
"I bought "Coco" and "Chanel N° 19" myself (probably in the belief that I could get closer to the classic fragrance target); "Allure" my hairdresser gave me at that time for Christmas.
With all three scents it was more a "living side by side" than a "togetherness".
Even the cosmetic products of this brand I can't stand, except for the gorgeous lipsticks.
So I was very pleasantly surprised the other day when I met "Misia".
We liked each other; even made friends until she left. This capricious woman was looking for other challenges: she had already successfully baited me!
Therefore I dared now also to "Les Exclusifs de Chanel 1932": and I am quite taken by this member of the fragrance family!
"Chanel 1932" is light and airy; a fine scent veil, like a garment made of light cotton voile.
Maybe this is why this fragrance needs the support of "Iralia".
This substance from the N-methyl ion family is used in perfume and fabric production; it gives a certain stability, enhances the charisma and elegance of the finished product (according to the Internet).
As Gelis correctly writes in her commentary: Immediately after spraying, the aldehydes begin to fly; they dance and radiate and attract!
Bergamot and the beautiful Neroli aroma are part of this round dance: they all turn in a lively, fragrant whirl. Beautiful, such a prelude!
The almost classic beauties of the fragrance worlds - lilacs in large, fragrant, softly coloured and deep purple umbels with filled and simple flowers; the gorgeous white large-flowered jasmine and the spicy carnation: they are now all bound into a large fragrant bouquet.
Of course, the rose must not be missing either; it adapts surprisingly well to the scent of the fragrance here; does not insist on its otherwise so often dominating position!
Ylang-Ylang, just as swirling and luminous as the aldehyde before it, completes the previous course of fragrance lively and dazzling.
"Chanel 1932" is now a classic woman, but still lacking that certain something.
First she receives a full-body powder shower through the iris: the previous glow is somewhat dampened; the preparations for the erotic, the senses fully awakening scents are completed with this.
Warm vanilla enters, hand in hand with musk, confidently the fragrance stage.
The previously so radiant floridity offers these two a good basis not to become too powerful together with the scent partner Iris.
These three are often a problem for me with powdery fragrances; why we don't harmonize then.
In "Chanel 1932" this troika is so skilfully surrounded by the floral scents and the resins and earthy-dark green elements now appearing, that a soft scented cape forms for me as well.
I like this fine velvetiness very much; it is still wonderfully light and very graceful.
"Chanel 1932" is a little fleeting, which is not surprising for such a light-footed and charming person.
But after-spraying is no problem; just to be able to enjoy the cheerful shimmer of the aldehyde again.
I am happy that I finally found fragrances at this traditional company that I like and that I also like to stay with me.
Both, "Misia" and "Chanel 1932", demand nothing from me; even on a normal "household day", in more or less "robber civilian", they play along in a good mood: they don't sulk, they're not too fine for it.
So here are the "smaller" sisters of the "famous Chanel N° 5", who give me so much joy.
May this still keep the "little black" company in the wardrobe.
"Chanel 1932" and me, we make ourselves happy and upbeat and see what we can still do beautiful things.
6 Replies
Shojoid
