Top Notes 
Mandarin orange
Orange blossom
Violet leaf
Waterlily
Industrial Marshmallow
Heart Notes 
Champaca
Gardenia
Jasmine
Tuberose
Base Notes 
Cashmere
Frangipani
Musk
Sandalwood
Roveena
123 Reviews
Translated · Show original
Roveena
1
Sexy Velours
Once again, a fragrance has confused me. At the first sniff, I thought, okay...wrong fragrance delivered, this is clearly Kors' “Sexy Amber“. But that can't be, since the appropriately velour-coated little box spat out a typical, square Kors bottle that clearly said “Suede“.
Why could both fragrances be sisters? I suspect that with “Sexy Amber“, only a fraction of the fragrance components were listed, and many of the notes from “Suede“ can also be found there.
It starts off modern and fresh, with a bouquet of white flowers and mandarin. Here too, a rather synthetic but not unpleasant amber accord dominates, even though amber does not appear in the fragrance pyramid of “Suede“. Then comes...uh...nothing. NOTHING? How can that be, where has it gone? I call this an olfactory fail, a nose error, but “Suede“ at least retreats into the background for a good 20 minutes, making it practically unnoticeable.
What then comes back smells somewhat indecisive, a bit of jasmine, a bit of tuberose, but only faintly, with low projection and without the weight or at least the expressiveness that usually accompanies such notes. Again, I recognize clear similarities with “Sexy Amber“, but much more restrained; in contrast, the sister scent seems almost intrusive.
So far, “Suede“ hasn't really impressed me. But then, towards the end of the heart note, a subtle, bright leather note finally emerges, and the fragrance becomes powdery and sweeter, especially when musk and cashmere join in. This then smells very elegant, classic, warm, and cozy. The synthetic aspect has disappeared, and the tuberose from the heart note also comes back into play. The longevity is quite good from here on. I am reconciled again.
Conclusion: Personally, it feels a bit too much like a copy, a bit too little sillage, and somewhat behind its potential. But still a good fragrance that stands out from the crowd and is suitable for all occasions - from the office to evening gatherings.
Why could both fragrances be sisters? I suspect that with “Sexy Amber“, only a fraction of the fragrance components were listed, and many of the notes from “Suede“ can also be found there.
It starts off modern and fresh, with a bouquet of white flowers and mandarin. Here too, a rather synthetic but not unpleasant amber accord dominates, even though amber does not appear in the fragrance pyramid of “Suede“. Then comes...uh...nothing. NOTHING? How can that be, where has it gone? I call this an olfactory fail, a nose error, but “Suede“ at least retreats into the background for a good 20 minutes, making it practically unnoticeable.
What then comes back smells somewhat indecisive, a bit of jasmine, a bit of tuberose, but only faintly, with low projection and without the weight or at least the expressiveness that usually accompanies such notes. Again, I recognize clear similarities with “Sexy Amber“, but much more restrained; in contrast, the sister scent seems almost intrusive.
So far, “Suede“ hasn't really impressed me. But then, towards the end of the heart note, a subtle, bright leather note finally emerges, and the fragrance becomes powdery and sweeter, especially when musk and cashmere join in. This then smells very elegant, classic, warm, and cozy. The synthetic aspect has disappeared, and the tuberose from the heart note also comes back into play. The longevity is quite good from here on. I am reconciled again.
Conclusion: Personally, it feels a bit too much like a copy, a bit too little sillage, and somewhat behind its potential. But still a good fragrance that stands out from the crowd and is suitable for all occasions - from the office to evening gatherings.
