Henriquatre

In my constant search for old treasures, I recently came across this water thanks to the community. 1960, green-spicy-floral, categorized for both him and her, still available at realistic prices? Must have!

I don't have to write much here. It comes in a bottle that says: I don't need to show off, but I have style. It smells... sophisticated. Soapy. Floral. Not mega-differentiated or noisy, more classic-chypry. And unisex. Before the word even existed. You wear it because it's... beautiful. Sorry for the simple word. But sometimes simple is beautiful.

Sometimes you wonder what there is that has obviously stood the test of time for decades (in this case: for almost 80 years) - and yet you don't find much about it here or elsewhere. The 1946 "Silvestre (Eau de Cologne) | Victor" (not!! to be confused with "Pino Silvestre (Eau de Toilette) | Pino Silvestre" !!!) has been in my possession for about half a year because I thought its big - no, sorry: little - brother (because 3 years younger) "Acqua di Selva (Eau de Cologne) | Victor" was so great. So I had to find out what else the unknown master, who composed THE old Italian perfume per il Signore back then, had created. At the time, I thought to myself: hey, good! Very good indeed! But it fits in with spring or summer. So I mothballed it - and now that the days are getting warmer, I'm looking forward to unpacking it again.

Citrus! That's it for a start, simply a rich bergamot, gently surrounded by a few herbs. The pine and Mediterranean spices quickly join in, but the fresh citrus never quite fades into the background. It continues to follow a fairly linear but recognizable path. The Italian signore, who enjoys his martini with "Acqua di Selva (Eau de Cologne) | Victor" in his jacket at the bar on colder days, takes his drink outside on hotter summer days, unbuttons his shirt and sits in the piazza, while "Silvestre (Eau de Cologne) | Victor" convincingly underlines his gentlemanly aura even on balmy evenings.

OKAY, enough of the pseudo-prosaic images... sure, you have to paint pictures for fragrances (Club10: you know what I'm talking about), because fortunately we're not just made up of noses, receptors and synapses. But to break it down to the technical details again:

What do I get? - Measured against what it can do, in my view a mysteriously underrated Cheapie that can really do something. However, not the often cited "monster" in terms of performance, sillage, compliments etc., but an all-day signature for the warmer seasons, which you should like more than others - because the others might not notice it so much anyway.
For whom? - More for boys, but I think brave ladies can wear it too.
For when? - I like to wear it at work in summer, but it's certainly not wrong in the evening either.
How does it compare with others? - It's just a cologne... in the classic sense: applied directly after shaving, it gives you an aura for 2 hours, which you definitely have something of. That's okay, I think. (You don't necessarily have to measure fragrances by whether you're still making people happy 10 hours later.)
Who is it not for? - Off the top of my head, I would say: for people who expect a perceptible 1m aura and a scent trail through the stairwell from a fragrance, for lovers of the notes that have been popular since 2000 (it's really out of date), for people who expect a "killer fragrance". It is fine and subtle. So subtle, perhaps, that some might think that you could do without it. But, in my opinion, somehow you can't. Because, as is so often the case, subtlety makes all the difference.

Givenchy: Classic French fashion house, founded in 1952, expanded to include perfumes in 1957. So much for a brief classification. I'm not really the fashion type, I wear what suits the purpose. But I wear what I like and what gives me pleasure - so thanks to Givenchy (as in other cases) that a designer house has expanded its fashion, which is completely irrelevant to me, to include fragrance production, which is highly relevant to me.

There are other interesting things to discover - for example, the red Xeryus brother from the 90s, which seems to be even more popular than the original fabric. This one, Monsieur "Xeryus (Eau de Toilette) | Givenchy" , came to me in a mini bottle as a by-catch from a recent souk sale. CRANK GEIL (unlike the main fragrance in the package... but I love that here, that's how you learn). For the first time, I couldn't resist and bought an overpriced old new bottle of a discontinued fragrance online. It had to be! Period. (And I'd rather pay 100+ for 50ml of a discontinued treasure than 250+ for 80ml of a hype niche product, IMO.)

Last 2 things before my actual 2cents on the fragrance: a) The one pictured here as the official fragrance photo was the short-lived 2007 reissue, obviously discontinued again. Dear Parfumo team: The original flacon is wonderfully iconic, the new one can't even remotely keep up with it... if you're interested, take a look at the photos below. b) Why do you flatten such an icon? If I understand correctly, "Xeryus (Eau de Toilette) | Givenchy" was the last fragrance launched directly by Givenchy before the brand was bought by LVHM a year later. Quality is not always that what counts in a big company, how me seems.

And now just a few words about this creation that are out of proportion to what has gone before. But that's all we need. We have a water here that starts off green-lavendery, but you can tell right from the start that there's something else mixed in. I think I can smell thyme as well as citrus at the beginning (not listed). The opening is a mega-successful gentlemanly splash that wakes you up and shows others who you are. But the gentlemanly side prevails, unlike other candidates from the 80s, e.g. "Lapidus pour Homme (Eau de Toilette) | Ted Lapidus", which are more intent on showing where the hammer hangs.

The fragrance undergoes a linear, complex yet harmonious development. It slowly recedes more and more until a herbaceous, earthy base remains at a high level. In my opinion, it is never intrusive, but always confidently restrained and yet perceptible to others. Lovers of the bangers from the 80s may find it relatively discreet.

I think we have a damn classic here that is on a par with "Jules (Eau de Toilette) | Dior" (but a little more lavender), "Aramis (Eau de Toilette) | Aramis" (but a little more complex) or "Antaeus (Eau de Toilette) | Chanel" (but a good deal more subtle). Unlike these stately classics, however, it has been killed off. Why? Well, the market just wanted it that way. Which goes to show: The market is sometimes an A**.

Dunhill. Originally a London tobacconist who sold his cigarettes (the over 40s will remember them from parties and the discount store checkout) to British American Tobacco back in the 1960s. Since then, they have been making clothes, watches, handbags, etc., and the company now belongs to a larger group along with others. Business history excursion at the end.

But now to this water. Spicy-fresh supposedly, nutmeg and citrus at the beginning, floral notes in between, fir, tonka and vetiver at the end. At least that's what the pyramid says. Sounds pretty ordinary, doesn't it?

So much: the pyramid is right so far. But: the top note starts off with citrus and nutmeg that really pops. Right from the start, this results in a herbaceous, slightly dirty first impression that has NOTHING, but absolutely nothing to do with current smelling habits. But it's cool. The flowers in the middle add a subtle, subliminal note. Fir and vetiver create a final impression that picks up on the initial play of herbs and transforms it into something a little different. Without the citrus and nutmeg saying goodbye.

1984? I would never have guessed it in a blind test. Sure, there are certain parallels to the green-herbaceous power fragrances of the 1980s. But here, the whole thing has been realized in a completely different way. The fragrance is more reminiscent of the candidates who co-founded the chypre game in England in the 19th century (!), "Marlborough (Cologne) | Geo. F. Trumper", for example, or "Astor (Cologne) | Geo. F. Trumper" . Here, they still dared to work with disruptive notes such as nutmeg, caraway or similar spice cabinet ingredients, which today make you think: "Huh? Of course!"

Completely out of the question, not for every day. Will probably be discontinued soon. Let's enjoy it while it still exists.

Sodele, jetzadle... this is my second review of this refreshingly floral fragrance for the elegant gentleman of today, whose unusual profile lends its wearer a captivating aura of androgyny.

No, I am not an AI. So let's start again:

I know the "Uomo? (Eau de Toilette) | Moschino" for a few weeks now. Not so long ago, just when I had my first contact with it, I wrote a review about it, which I was not satisfied with for several reasons. Why? Among other things, it was described as "old school", "with 80s influences", "soapy". I don't recognize any of that now. And at the same time, here is a small masterpiece, whose symphony of kumquat, clary sage and musk emphasizes the masculinity of its wearer...

So, and now, without any more chatter, with or without AI.

I'll be brief. This stuff is AWESOME. The Moschino fashion house has played with conventions from the very beginning and at the same time deliberately subverted them. This is also the case here. The "Uomo? (Eau de Toilette) | Moschino" has a question mark after it, because it's not a masculine fragrance. But not a feminine one either. For 1997, I would describe it as really bold - it probably helped start the wave of unisex fragrances.

Spray: It starts with... yes, with what actually? What does kumquat actually smell like? I have no idea. But it's very flowery and green, and not too little skillful synthetics show us at the same time that this is art and not an imitation of nature.

A few minutes later: it becomes softer, rounder, smoother. I can well understand the associations with "fine hotel soap" below. A warm, flowery, green, cultivated, synthetic cloud surrounds you, but not penetrating, rather subtle.

It slowly fades away after about 4 hours.

Point 1: This is an exceptional water. Various ingredients have been perfectly combined to create something very, very special. The fragrance has no "twin", which would be unimaginable. It is completely outside the usual categories. (BTW: You often read that a fragrance is 80% fragrance X and 20% fragrance Y. I personally find that rather confusing. This one is 0% something else - and that's how a fragrance should ideally be.)

Point 2: What occasion? In my opinion, this is an excellent daily driver, even in the so-called office. Who should not wear it: Men who want to say with their fragrances: Hey, I'm a guy, or hey, I'm a suit wearer, that's why I smell like one (Kouros, BDC). You have to want to be different from others. Somehow I don't see it on women, but maybe that's just my bias: girls, let's have a fragrance that's out of the ordinary and belongs only to us.

Point 3: Please don't buy it. Please let it remain an insider tip.