Woman III (1986) (Eau de Toilette) by Jil Sander (1986)

DieLora 2 years ago

1

I was also a bit bothered by something in the base. Otherwise, it's a nice one.

Translated · Show original

Salander 2 years ago

1

In the 90s, I wasn't part of the target audience, so I appreciate their scents even more today. A bit of "German Chanel." :)

Translated · Show original

Neptuna 2 years ago

1

I got to know it in 1985, herbal and quirky.

Translated · Show original

Stulle 2 years ago

1

I don't think that note would bother me much...

Translated · Show original

Ttfortwo 2 years ago

1

It's been a while... But I remember it fondly.

Translated · Show original

Misca 2 years ago

1

I’m not familiar with the collection, but it’s been recommended to me multiple times. Sounds good from your description too!

Translated · Show original

R3mt9 2 years ago

1

I loved that one back then. It's the only one I really miss.

Translated · Show original

Smartopal 2 years ago

1

Oh yes, a great love from the early 90s and a big regret that it’s not available like that anymore.

Translated · Show original

Greenfan1701 2 years ago

1

I love this scent. It's such a shame that it's only available at astronomical prices now. (But I do have a bottle) ;-)

Translated · Show original

Pinseltown 2 years ago

1

Oh, I think I might like that...

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

The base is also superb! Sandalwood in its natural form...

Translated · Show original

Andrula 2 years ago

1

... also a special old fragrance gem :)

Translated · Show original

Kajsa5 2 years ago

1

It's bombastic and complex, but the animalic notes were too intense for me.

Translated · Show original

SchatzSucher 2 years ago

1

Absolutely fantastic. The old Jil Sanders had real class.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

Yes! The sandalwood-honey base is so lovely, natural, and unobtrusive. That's why this fragrance gets 8 points, despite the 'animal' note in between.

Translated · Show original

Petra66 2 years ago

1

I found it very nice. It didn't have the animalic note for me.

Translated · Show original

Floyd 2 years ago

1

Sounds good.

Translated · Show original

Danny264 2 years ago

1

sounds quite pleasant....nice

Translated · Show original

Rieke2021 2 years ago

1

The "aftershave" vibe would bother me more...

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

Luckily, I didn't have that association.

Translated · Show original

Theris 2 years ago

1

Animalic can unfortunately often be the party pooper.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

Yes, especially with classics. In modern fragrances, it's often Oud that doesn't suit me...

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

Because of the beautiful, subtle sandalwood-honey base, it still gets 8 points, despite the 'animal' notes in between.

Translated · Show original

JonasP1 2 years ago

1

I think it's beautiful... I once got lucky and was able to buy a bottle with a little bit left in it at a flea market for - I think it was 3€.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

1

The base is great too, sandalwood still smells natural... For 3€? I really need to hit up a flea market again ;-)

Translated · Show original

Gold 2 years ago

1

I just love this note, herbal and leathery. I would include it in my top 20. It's such a shame that it's no longer being produced.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

According to Basenotes, there's castoreum in it...

Translated · Show original

Gold 2 years ago

1

🤔 I don't find it animalic... but I guess I'm not that sensitive to it. I just love the scent.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

1

It's definitely good! But I'm sensitive to animalic notes.

Translated · Show original

Marieposa 2 years ago

1

I've been curious about this one for a long time.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

It's really good. The base also shows how experts handle sandalwood and coconut: soft harmony instead of cloyingly sweet artificiality!

Translated · Show original

ExUser 2 years ago

Could be a scent to my liking 🤔

Translated · Show original

Salva 2 years ago

1

But still an 8 😊

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

Definitely! It's a special scent of high quality.

Translated · Show original

Eggi37 2 years ago

1

I increasingly prefer dry scents over moist ones.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

Yes, it's beautifully dry-spicy-floral. Every now and then, a subtle, unique creamy note comes through, adding a bit of softness. Really well done!

Translated · Show original

ParfumAholic 2 years ago

2

At the time, it was a kind of "must-have," but I get what you mean. Still, it's a great scent for me.

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

Yes, it definitely is!

Translated · Show original

Ponticus 2 years ago

1

Animalic rarely works for me in a fragrance; it usually dampens my enjoyment as well!

Translated · Show original

Schoeibksr 2 years ago

1

Back in the day, they didn't hold back on kittens 😁

Translated · Show original

Seta 2 years ago

In that case, it's probably a beaver ;-)

Translated · Show original

Log in

Woman III Jil Sander 1986 Eau de Toilette