1932 (2013)
    by Chanel






    1932 Fragrance Notes

    Reviews of 1932


    + Add your Review

    Showing 1 to of 5 reviews.

    alfarom's avatar
    alfarom
    Italy Italy

    Show all reviews

    rating


     

    Opens with the typical aldehydes / iris combo signature of many Chanels to then quickly evolve into a prettified green-jasmine soliflore built around a woody-vetiver base. Nice and overpriced. It could have been a winner if just released in their regular range instead of the Les Exclusifs.

    Too little.


    01st November, 2013

    Diamondflame's avatar
    Diamondflame
    Singapore Singapore

    Show all reviews

    rating


     

    A Chanel lacking in distinction.

    I don't like 1932. It feels 'forced', a square peg jammed into the round gap somewhere between No.22's white floral radiance and 31 rue Cambon's diaphanous opulence. The classic Chanel house notes are all represented but in 1932 they don't harmonize as well as they should - the jasmine note seems more than a touch strident, the aldehydes aren't exactly helping in this the case. Although it settles down to a warm mildly creamy orris with soapy nuances I simply cannot warm up to it. In this I'm not alone.

    Perhaps the problem with 1932 is it tries to do too much without finding its own voice, borrowing instead elements from the other Les Exclusif that make each one of them distinctive individuals. While Diptyque hit a home run doing something similar with 34 Boulevard St Germain, Chanel unfortunately struck out.

    Pros: Pretty enough...
    Cons: ...but not particularly attractive."

    30th September, 2013

    Francop's avatar
    Francop
    Spain Spain

    Show all reviews

    rating


     

    I Love this delightful Iris creation; most impressed!

    Well worth a bottle!

    Great Longevity & Sillage!

    Thumbs up!

    27 March, 2013

    Lacisne's avatar
    Lacisne
    United States United States

    Show all reviews

    rating


     

    This is a lovely scent, but it did not last on my skin for very long at all. I found myself sniffing furiously at my wrist trying to catch a whiff, but could not smell but the faintest inkling on 1932 about 20 mins after application. It is a nice scent though and I wish it lasted longer. This is definitely one to reapply often. This would be a nice work scent since it is not overpowering, as well as a Spring fragrance due to it's lightness. Personally, it is too light for me. I like a bit more power - especially in longevity. I will enjoy the sample, but not splurge for a FB.

    20th March, 2013

    iivanita's avatar
    iivanita
    Croatia Croatia

    Show all reviews

    rating


     

    i would love to be in that mode again to fall under spell fo the name:) and buying the Chanel phantasy....but i am tired of making up, thinking, when there is nothing to think about :)

    this is such a pale, thin, watered down creation and synthetic centred around jasmine.....

    ok not that other scents of the line are much more natural but at least the entrance is different from anything you have smelled before (bois des iles, no 18, la pausa, sycomore, cuir russie).....this smells like very elegant generic

    there is very little or no flesh(if roses became so pale?), the drydown smells powdery and nice, a little bit sweet, jasmine is pale....its like reading small print letters.....

    14 March, 2013

    Add your review of 1932

    You need to be logged in to add a review

    Related 1932 products on eBay