ErhanSaceros

It doesn't take many words to describe this fragrance and I'm not in a writing phase right now: you can mainly smell vanilla out of it.
However, the vanilla is not creamy, thick or even (too) gourmand. Rather transparent and somehow there is also something "dark" about it. I can only speculate here: I can't really smell the "oriental woods" in the base note. But I think that these woods add a slightly dark, masculine note to the vanilla
Lavender keeps the extremely present vanilla perhaps only for the first two hours before it quickly fades away. Cardamom, with its nutty-spicy scent, is of course only very present at the beginning. Nevertheless, in the heart note it still lends the fragrance a subtle, smooth "nuttiness".

There are probably some fragrances that smell more or less like this. But this fragrance is very concrete, so it comes quickly to the point and does not occupy the wearer with three full phases of a fragrance. It's almost like spraying on a "basic scent" right away, which is well constructed and quite simply knitted.

But what convinced me more is that the fragrance is not intense/thick/bulky, but still has a far-reaching, transparent sillage. So you are perceived, but not in a very penetrating way. Fortunately, a very voluminous, suffocating sweetness was avoided here. That the perfumers have managed to do this, I find praiseworthy and worth mentioning.

This time thus eliminates a few dozen sweet scents on the ordinary designer shelf, as it brings out from all what is needed in a mainstream sweet fragrance. It owes its uniqueness to its simplicity. But not everything that is simple can be recognized.

...and on every level that doesn't even exist. I'd be annoyed by that smell too, if it didn't exist. Yeah, almost before you had the idea to mass produce and market such creative stuff. Oh yeah, you business people up there make me so horny with your decisions. Yeah, the consumers buy everything from you anyway. Mwhahar!

At the beginning you can smell a typical masculine, fresh deodorant with apple and a little nutty. And speaking of deodorants, of course the synthetics should not be missing. :)

A short time later something wonderful seems to reveal itself. A slight "woodiness" in the bottle. Subtle, ecclesiastical resinous notes, paired with subtle notes of coniferous forest.

But this phase does not last long and already this fragrance also collapses: it becomes a bit bitter-sweet, shower-gel like with a synthetic veil, paired with clary sage or fir balsam muff. All this is rounded off nicely after all.

Everything I have perceived here so far has been relatively weak. Nothing really wanted to come to the fore. It feels as if all the notes briefly greeted my nose one after the other and disappeared again. All in all there was a lack of structure and above all a lack of purpose.
This Night Vision has about as much recognition value as... Oh, no, this fragrance is unparalleled in that regard. But what am I saying? No, buy it. There are hardly any creative fragrances on the designer shelf that are available as alternatives

I will also buy it, because after all my criticism it is now a very serious fragrance after all. I even work overtime now so that I can buy as much of it as possible. What a spicebombastic scent!

A flanker that I didn't see coming after "Eros Flame". So I was very excited about the new Eros. Especially because of the leather note, which is listed in the pyramid.

But the year 2020 (even if we are only describing luxury problems here) simply does not manage to meet my expectations: My favourite band from my youth has started producing music again after 10 years. Unfortunately, not very creative songs came out until now
And now Versace brings out an EdP of one of my favorite scents. The EdT is the reason why I chose fragrances. So I had high expectations for the EdP.

I don't want to make comparisons about durability and sillage between EdT and EdP. I am too bad for that myself. A couple hours more or less, a couple inches more or less... i don't care anymore

Basically the two fragrances are very identical. There are small differences, which are unimportant for the masses, but for us fine noses are decisive.

This makes the mint leaves look even more authentic and tangible on the EdP than on the EdT. "Candied apple" should not scare off anyone here. The note is rather discreet and does not extend to the heart note.
With EdT it starts to get sweeter after only 10 minutes, while with EdP mint still dominates. But in both cases the woody notes are already noticeable from this point on.

Talking about the heart note is just as difficult as talking about the EdT. It's more like they're both made up of head and base. The only thing that might be noticeable from the heart note in EdP, but only comes to light in the base, is the Muscat Sage (maybe also vetiver?).
I can only speculate here, but in my experience, there is something sour and musty about this note. I noticed the same with Valentino - Uomo Intense. This note also reminds me of fir balsam, which I also like to call sour and musty.

At EdT, the vanilla in the base has the upper hand. Here, at EdP, transparent, woody notes dominate, but with this very note described in the last section. This time the sweetness is rather secondary.

Unfortunately I could not even fantasize a little leather into it. That disappointed me the most. I was always interested in a more mature version of Eros. I thought that you could do that with a decent amount of leather. Pity! Then I'll do it myself

I really don't know what the EdT smells like these days. But I like my 2017 bottle better than the EdP. So the EdP is superfluous for many who own the EdT. Unless you like the above mentioned small differences that I noticed with my poor perception.

Well, and that's it. Versace Eros, as usual fresh-sweet-synthetic, unique, polarizing. A seducer and conqueror of hearts. But in this case also a disappointment (My motto this year: "I'm not surprised, but disappointed"). And is still unfortunately stamped as "CluBdUfT". I like to use it in all premises that are not called a club. The Riakschonz are always and everywhere jut!

Our dear Mantus has already described the differences between the current and the older version in detail below. I'd like to be brief here, because there were some things that didn't fit into the statement box.

I compared a vintage miniature with the old Davidoff lettering and a sample produced 5 years ago according to the batch code. Well, so it's not really a comparison with the "current" version. But there are still big differences.

The vintage version is much spicier than the current version. Whether it's rosemary or coriander, I don't know. But it looks almost a bit oriental, because it has a certain bitter sweetness and also appears a bit warm. The spicy note makes this all look very distinctive. In addition, there are fresh, tart and green notes, which are, however, rather calmer and give the spice considerably more space.
In comparison, the vintage version also looks much less soap-aquatic. Actually, almost not!
A certain synthetics is also present, but not necessarily too artificial, but rather rough and blurry. I often think I perceive it that way with lavender notes.
After an hour, the spicy notes are slightly dimmed, but still there. More woody tones also appear afterwards. At the latest from the heart note, the vintage version comes only a little closer to the current version. So the DNA is present in both, even if less than expected. In the end it gets a little woodier and warmer. Nevertheless I searched in vain for aquatic tones, because...it's called Cool Water.

The current version, on the other hand, clearly shows aquatic features. But there is no spicy note at all and the green notes are more hidden than in the vintage version. A subtle sweetness cannot be ignored with the current version. While the old version is more striking, the current version seems looser to me. Nevertheless, I find that both versions suit almost all age groups well.
One could almost think when comparing that the new version is a different fragrance, since a soapy note clearly dominates here. The whole thing combined with aquatic notes, but I never had to think about shower gel. Had rather "wet" associations.
The soapy note looks a little dry/woody. Like the soap I used when I was a kid when I thought it was poop.
The synthetic note is also present here. A little stronger, but not disturbing. And then it ends all at once, as if there were no base note.

The current version lasted me about 5 hours, with a very close Sillage. Only up to the second hour one can be perceived a little and afterwards it is quasi a skin smell. (Sill.: 4-5)
The vintage version lasted a little longer: 7-8 hours, although I found the Sillage a little better. (Sill.: 5)

In summary, I can say that the old version for me is a spicy-freshly distinctive fragrance, while the current version is rather soapy-freshly-aquatic.

Often I have ignored fragrances that have appeared on this page for the first time. I always look at the scents and sort them out. For example, if I read mint, ambroxan, Iso-E-Super and cowshed oud in a new fragrance, it will definitely not be on the watch list. But I never really know in what proportion these notes are contained in a perfume. Could be that only Cowshed Oud is perceptible. Then the scent, if I knew and accepted that before, would have made it on my watchlist. :)
This "thinking error" was revealed to me with this smell.

Vanilla...Rose...Oud...

If you read this (over and over again), then you may sort out the scent immediately. I would have expected a typical rose oud scent with a little more sweetness. But I was wrong. These notes are included, but not as present as I expected. Because it is according to my nose rather a Tonkanillerosenduft.

Across the Ocean starts slightly fresh, sweet-floral and discreetly woody-oriental. Here you can already see that the oud is not the keynote. It doesn't show up in the heart note either. I do not perceive the citric notes indicated.

After 15 minutes there is a fabulous harmony of sweet notes and roses. The whole thing doesn't look too feminine, because the roses don't look old-fashioned or soapy, but rather tender and lovely, and are dosed in moderation. How much I smell of tonka or vanilla, I don't know. All I know is these notes don't smell squeaky, sticky, nutty, creamy or gourmand. Rather balanced, fine and gentle. I would estimate the ratio of the sweet notes and the rose at about 7 to 3. In addition, the fragrance has a kind of clean, light freshness most of the time. It makes the sweetness light but not necessarily fresh like a summer scent.
And so the scent remains until the end. No big change, although the scent then becomes paler and paler.

By and large a simple fragrance. Not necessarily innovative, but unique, because the relationship between the two main components has been successful.

And what did I learn? I am not allowed to come to an assumption because of the indicated scents and must always consider the possible quantities/ratios of the scents.