Springfield Harry Lehmann

First, some general remarks about my experience with the fragrances from the Lehmann house. I am a fan of this shop, even though I only recently stumbled upon this gem in Berlin (of course through this informative community) and until now have only had three blind purchases sent to me. My conclusion about these three fragrances is somewhat mixed overall, but I wish this provider many more new as well as loyal repeat customers.

My acquisitions were:
100 ml of New York, Eau de Cologne. This is a top fragrance in my nose, but unfortunately, it is almost completely absorbed by my skin and neither its longevity nor sillage is acceptable for me. While this may be typical for a cologne, I had hoped for a somewhat better performance based on the descriptions and reviews. However, I have experienced similar issues with other perfumes (see my comment on Icon by Dunhill).

10 ml of Russian Leather. My favorite, and it will surely be considered with a comment and a rating, if not now, then definitely later. The scent, longevity, and sillage are all at a very high level.

10 ml of Springfield, which is what I will discuss next.

I deeply regret that I am not in Berlin more often, but I hope to arrange a visit to Kantstrasse next time. My phone order was received very kindly by the owner and sent with an accompanying invoice. The handling alone is worth the order. No email, no call center, no advance payment. And just like the handling, I perceive the characteristics of all three fragrances I purchased. "Old-school" in the best sense !!!!!

The headline indicates the direction of my comment. As Konsalik already noted, most of what needs to be said about the essence of this fragrance has already been said. Essentially, Dior doesn’t need advocates, and Lehmann surely appreciates every good word that is expressed here and hopefully translates into sales.

Nevertheless, I must unfortunately conclude that in my nose, Paris is ahead of Berlin in this direct comparison.

When I wore Springfield for the first time, I was immediately thrilled and thought this fragrance could replace my beloved Eau Sauvage when the bottle eventually runs out. The reason for this was not the price (which is about the same at 60.- per 100 ml), but that Springfield shows a bit more endurance (and possibly also sillage). However, today I conducted a direct comparison on each arm and am extremely astonished by the result.
Eau Sauvage is significantly more vibrant, fresher, without losing depth compared to Springfield.
Without a doubt, Eau Sauvage appears more coherent, less layered. That alone wouldn’t be an advantage, but Springfield has this warm spicy note coming from the orange peel that almost repulses me in comparison. Somewhere I read "almost animalistic" - that is not it for me, and I can understand that many find it exciting in combination with the lemon freshness, but for me, it strongly leans towards cumin and thus quite clearly into the musty corner.
What is quite astonishing to me is that this impression only arose during the comparison and not before. This tells me again that my nose still needs a lot of practice and experience. Why not, after all, I have not been infected with the perfume virus for long.
Without comparison, Springfield would easily have scored an 8.5, but now it unfortunately remains at a 7.0.