Reviews by FragranceFan255

    FragranceFan255's avatar
    FragranceFan255
    United States United States

    Showing 1 to 30 of 37.
    rating

    Banana Republic Classic by Banana Republic

    Francoise_Papiran sums Banana Republic Classic up quite well. A marvel of casual wear that is easy to love and surprisingly hard to put down. An accord like candied oranges drives the fragrance amongst the honeysuckles. This aspect is very similar to the heart of Happy by Clinique. The fragrance as a whole, however, is superior that latter creation. This is a deeper and more complex scent than that extremely linear citrus. All the best qualities and so much more. Marketed unisex and appropriately so. Easily worn by man or woman. Just don't touch my bottle. Sadly I am likely deprived of buying another and must nurse this overlooked gem until it is no more.

    17th September, 2006.

    rating

    Quercus by Penhaligon's

    Smells like a clone of Chrome, which smells like slightly beefed up CK One. I notice both Azzaro Chrome and Quercus released in the same year? Clone coincidence? Complete clone though. Complete.

    16th August, 2006.

    rating

    Castile by Penhaligon's

    Smells to me like Versace's The Dreamer touched with citrus. I believe I prefer this to Dreamer though. The citrus touch doesn't make a big difference but just enough.

    16th August, 2006.

    rating

    LP No.9 for Men by Penhaligon's

    Far, far too much going on in this fragrance for my liking. Nothing harmonizes or flows. It's a droning buzz of cinnamon and cloves and God knows what else. Maybe for a breathmint, but not for skin. I admit I cannot judge on the drydown. I couldn't stand it long enough for that before scrubbing it off.

    16th August, 2006.

    rating

    Mugler Cologne by Thierry Mugler

    Bright and refreshing citrus top followed by a drydown that's eerily similar to Bulgari Pour Homme. Though I somewhat prefer this one to Bulgari, it's such a marginal preference that I'd have to say save some money and get Bulgari Pour Homme. You can find Bulgari for considerably less online.

    16th August, 2006.

    rating

    Allure Homme Sport by Chanel

    Come on now. There's nothing exemplerary whatsoever about this fragrance. Have you all been bumped in the head by the Chanel sledge?

    I haven't smelled a fraction of all the fragrances available. Yet I can say with confidence that I've already sniffed this several times, in better iterations. Bellagio comes to mind, for one.

    There's something about the 'aquatic note' in this that strikes me as overripe melon rinds. It unsettles me and I couldn't wait for the top to go away. Deep within the heart of the scent is a slight floral quality that almost makes it worthwhile. But it's so muted it's almost irrelevant. Bellagio does this much better and without the overripe melon as well. Now Polo Blue was the better iteration of melon/cucumber by a mile.

    I yearn to smell Allure now just to see how it measures up.

    13rd August, 2006.

    rating

    Skye by Geo F Trumper

    At first it smells to me like clean linen covered with jellybeans. Doesn't really transition from that to sun washed sheets until the midlife of the scent. Does smell a bit synthetic, which surprised me considering the source. But Skye is a perfectly pleasant and clean scent. It actually has a bit of character to it. Longevity is atrocious though. Skye seemed to fade on me into the faintest trace in about half an hour. Also gives me the impression of a fragrance that might be more at home on a fellow just old enough to use Trumper's shaving products. Great while it lasts, but it doesn't.

    12nd August, 2006.

    rating

    Armani Eau Pour Homme by Giorgio Armani

    Smells extremely similar to Pour Monsiuer by Chanel. The only differences are pretty insubstantial. Armani is citrus (lemon) with a touch of herbs (lavender, basil) and Chanel Monsieur is citrus (lemon) with a touch of powder (aldehydes presumably).

    While I like them both for what they are. I'd have to say I prefer the Armani. The slight herbal nature of it gives it a certain sharpness that adds a little more distintiveness to the blend. The soft powdery bed the citrus sits upon in Pour Monsiuer simply isn't as exciting. That's a little misleading though, as neither fragrance is particuarly a head turner. Both are simply what they simply are. Understated (and short lived) formal citrus fragrances.

    10th August, 2006.

    rating

    Eau de Santal by Floris

    I'm inclined to agree that this scent, while perfectly pleasant, doesn't really stand out in any way. It doesn't say anything rude or poorly, but it doesn't say anything distictive either.

    The similarity to Envy is a fleeting one and this is a much more gentle and reserved scent in every regard. A light bodied oriental, if you will. Warm, cordial, and well mannered. It's a gentleman of gentlemen's scents. It just doesn't have that certain 'something' to capture my heart. But it's definitely worth trying. Your mileage may vary.

    8th August, 2006.

    rating

    Eucris by Geo F Trumper

    I don't understand all the negative reviews here. This isn't some dime a dozen citrus. You do have some obligatory citrus on the top, but it's soon the vetiver that drives the fragrance. Somehow they've managed to retain the best parts of vetiver oil and eliminated, or at least blurred, the bad parts. Namely the harsh acrid nature of raw, untamed vetiver oil. And yet, there's no mistaking the note the rest rally upon.

    Vetiver by Guerlain is a great fragrance. But I never felt it was a definitive expression of vetiver as I knew it to be in it's pure form. Guerlain Vetiver is essentially an old school citrus built upon vetiver with a weak back. You can notice it's there. But you also notice it's not in charge either, as the name Vetiver leads you to believe.

    But within Eucris, they have managed to coerce the vetiver to hold hands in harmony with the rest of the notes in the fragrance. Not relegated to being sat upon. It's front and center, but it never envelopes or drowns. A tangible tension of herbal sweetness keeps in it its place, giving it an exciting personality.

    And the funny thing is, I didn't even like vetiver. Oh, I like Vetiver. But it wasn't until someone sent me some of the essential oil that I came acquainted with it in all of it's acrid and soilish glory. I couldn't imagine how someone could warm up to that. Now I do and I'd buy the t-shirt. I'll definitely buy.

    8th August, 2006.

    rating

    JF by Floris

    Another fragrance riding on the coattails of Green Irish Tweed. J.F. comes much closer in spirit to GIT than Cool Water, however. The bright lemony opening to this scent is really about all that differentiates it. Any debate beyond that would simply be niggling. I can't say as I give it any higher marks than GIT for longevity. That alone would give it an edge. Otherwise, it's hard to knock one of my favorite scents on earth. Definitely worth a look if you've missed on sniffing GIT. Worth a purchase if you don't have GIT. And probably not worth your time if you do have GIT.

    7th August, 2006.

    rating

    Chanel Pour Monsieur by Chanel

    Definitely old school and aldehylic. I have to agree that it does smell a lot like lemon furniture polish initially. It's not particuarly offputting to me but it's not a good thing either. However, once the top notes burn off it becomes quite a bit better. No longer expensive smelling Pledge, it has quite a bit going for it. For one it actually smells like a proper cologne, and a pretty nice one at that. The scent is predominantly a powdery citrus smell. I can't pick up much beyond that. To me many of the notes are lost in a pillowy haze not unlike the way notes are blurred in Chanel No. 5.

    It is a rather classy smelling scent and wouldn't be a great match for blue jeans and a t-shirt. An older man would feel more at home in this than a twenty-something such as myself. The longevity for decent sillage is pretty short, but it remains a close skin scent for a fairly long time. Despite this I cannot resist reaching for it on occassion. I find the scent to be quite comforting.

    7th August, 2006.

    rating

    Obsession for Men by Calvin Klein

    To my nose, Obsession is Gucci Envy for men minus the evergreens. I was tempted to say that it's minus that with incense added, but seems Envy has it too. I'm more inclined to think Envy is frankincense taking place for the myrrh in Obsession.

    Though I liked Envy, now that I've spent some time with this (yes, I have crawled out from underneath the proverbial rock) I have to say I prefer it. Evergreens have never been popular for me (i.e. Polo) and I always felt like that note was bothersome in Envy.

    While both could be called smooth, Obssesion also manages to be a little more mellow and reserved than Envy. Mindful that Obsession is a sillage monster that punishes the heavy trigger finger and the noses nearby. This only bumps Envy into sillage Godzilla territory!

    I won't say that Obsession is better than Envy. Mainly I simply dislike evergreen notes and it's obvious that many (ahem, Polo) do. I was happy to see that even among the snobbiest scent hounds it has a place in their heart or at least, collection. Say what you will about the 'quality' of other Klein fragrances, but this is a quality product of quality materials.

    In summary, if you to branch out into the oriental family here is a perfect beginning. Also, if you're not the evergreen type I'd rally that you try this before diving into Envy.

    6th August, 2006.

    rating

    Escape for Men by Calvin Klein

    Romance for men with some fruit. Much like Romance for men this one has a weird habit of going bongo on my skin and turning into something pretty wretched. Not the clean, uplifting scent I felt promised. Not for me, no.

    5th August, 2006.

    rating

    Soul by Curve for Men by Liz Claiborne

    Definitely the best to build off the Curve base, essentially.

    It's actually fairly interesting if not, as one put it, "earth shattering". The longevity and sillage are average, at best. The leathery/spicy notes (though I don't see any leather) bring to mind what was done with Romance in it's conversion to counterpart Silver. They're definitely on level playing ground with one another.

    I'd probably never buy it, but it would be a decent choice for casual wear.

    4th August, 2006.

    rating

    Fleur de Peau by Keiko Mecheri

    Ewwwwwwwwww....That pretty much sums it up for me. I don't believe I've smelled an actual perfume this off putting. Even the handful of eccentric niche scents I have smelled otherwise haven't came close to this abomination.

    I 'think' I smell the leather in there, maybe jasmine. But they're lost in an extremely heavy incense-like cloud. I can't judge on longevity because I washed it off in about 20 minutes after applying. I attempted to give it fair chance to settle in and become something at least tolerable. No such luck. The sillage, however, is unbelievable. My swore that after 2 thorough scrubbings with Palmolive detergent that she could still smell it hanging in the air and I could easily detect it on the application area. Of all the frags to have this kind of sillage. It breaks the heart.

    Avoid this at all costs. If not for yourself, for those around you. For I must believe that for every person that would enjoy this must be met by a hundred that would not.

    4th August, 2006.

    rating

    Citrus Bigarrade by Creed

    Very pleasant citrus fragrance. All the notes of the various citrus are well blended. No sharp spikes to these oranges and lemons, however. Everything feels very smooth and well rounded to the nose. All this and the Creed house note floating within'.

    Poor longevity and sillage to this though. Doubt I would ever buy something so fleeting for soo much. Very well done while it lasts.

    4th August, 2006.

    rating

    Romance Silver Men by Ralph Lauren

    Much preferable to the original Romance. All the best qualities of the original minus the ones I disliked. This one never 'sours' on me like the original has a tendency to do.

    The scent is much as described. Essentially a spiced up, slightly woody version of Romance. The spice in question, however, is not dramatic and restrained sufficiently to not cross your eyes from olfactory impact. This quality is also it's chief weakness. Sillage is average for the life of the scent, but the longevity is poor. I've known other scents to fare worse in their lifespan, but not many.

    As a whole the blend is both comforting and refreshing. The scent is well blended and the notes quite harmonic. Though essentially homogenous in nature, it isn't 'boring' as some tend to be.

    If not for the poor longevity and consistently high prices on Ralph Lauren fragrances, I would buy it in a heartbeat. An excellent addition to one's daywear. But disregard the name. There really isn't anything romantic about it all. Save for between it and I.

    3rd August, 2006.

    rating

    Cool Water Deep by Davidoff

    I am at a loss. This 'version' of Cool Water smells nothing akin to it's progenitor beyond the base notes. It might as well be an entirely different scent.

    This is a much more boring scent than Cool Water. I continually read that Cool Water is boring. There is nothing boring about Cool Water. There's quite alot going on there, frankly. But this smells like just another fresh/aquatic scent without anything to make it standout or have character. It's certainly pleasant. And by the midlife I actually rather liked it. But I wasn't moved in the least by it anymore than a pleasant smelling bar of bath soap. There is no art to be found here.

    There's a slight fruitiness to it in the heart, perhaps the cactus sap(?). This is the most interesting part of it to nose out, but nothing special.

    Would be excellent for the easily offended or unitiated. Would be a 'safe' choice for work or casual wear. But it carries no distinction whatsoever.

    3rd August, 2006.

    rating

    Green Irish Tweed by Creed

    Cool Water ripped this one off. No doubt about it. But when I can get 4.2 oz. of Cool Water for 25 bucks compared to the sky high prices of Creed products. Well, let's just say I appreciate Davidoff just the same.

    I'd agree with other reviewers that the drydown does set GIT apart from Cool Water. But only marginally in the midlife of the scent and not being obvious until the fading basenotes.

    And it didn't take very long to reach those fading basenotes of distinction either. Certainly not a plus for any scent no matter how wonderful it may be.

    Despite preferring the drydown of GIT over Cool Water, all things being relative I'd have to lean to Cool Water. Price and longevity keep this one second. And I do hate to say that as there very well would never have been Cool Water without Creed.

    29th July, 2006.

    rating

    Romance for Men by Ralph Lauren

    Despite a deep love for Romance Silver, this scent has proven an odd bird for me. Sometimes it smells very nice. Very clean and pure. Like I'd just been "starched and pressed" to hear my mother in law tell it. But some days it immediately takes a turn for the worse exuding a very bizzare and distressing set of notes. I don't know so much about any 'urine' note. But it certainly is a very different animal on these days. I cannot determine what regulates these days from any other.

    So that's the justification for a neutral. On the good days it's a very pleasant and silky scent. I would agree with other reviewers that there isn't anything particuarly 'romantic' about Romance. But it would make a fine addition to one's daywear category. That is unless you are plagued by the problem I have with it.

    27th July, 2006.

    rating

    Polo Sport by Ralph Lauren

    On first use Polo Sport brought to mind one horrible olfactory image native to me here in the Old South. Freshy tobacco 'juice'. To my nose someone just as well had spit a wad upon my wrist. After the top notes died down I did start to smell something that was akin to Cool Water. Well, Cool Water and tobacco 'juice'. I'll stick to the Cool Water for this fix, Mr. Lauren.

    27th July, 2006.

    rating

    Miracle So Magic! by Lancôme

    A fairly light and airy floral scent. Not as young smelling as, say, Lucky You but it's definitely for a younger crowd. My main problem with it though is it just doesn't have anything special about it. It plays it a little too safe and ends up being a bit vapid in character. But there's definitely worse things out there.

    8th October, 2005.

    rating

    Echo by Davidoff

    I want to like this stuff soo much it hurts. It's definitley very synthetic in nature, but the note descriptions make that pretty clear. The best comparison I can compare this to would be the scent of some fresh dryer sheets I've smelled. It even seems similar to some of the "odor-eliminators" on the market. All of which are infused with synthetic sexless scents. Doesn't sound like something you'd want on your skin does it? Well, the top is pretty sharp and will make your eyes cross if you draw in deeply near the applicaton site. But with a little time, especially on the skin, it mellows out to something much more organic. It is sharp, it is soapy, and it's definitely man-made. But it's not bad either. A fine choice for the uninitiated for daytime or office wear. It's inoffensive, but for all the marketing savvy note descriptions, it lacks that certain something to make it stand out.

    8th October, 2005.

    rating

    Swiss Army by Swiss Army

    Cool Water with a touch of Curve. That's the most immediate response I had/have to Swiss Army. Of course, that's the first impression with all notes in chorus. But as it settles down you can sniff out the differences. After the top is gone, the lavender note is very apparent and the drydown is quite different from either of the two previous comparisons. Slightly more heavy and musky then either. Best thing going for this though is it's longevity. Neither Cool Water nor Curve have any staying power whatsoever with me (or most anyone else it seems). This stuff lasts very well without ever being obnoxious. No, it's not the most "riveting" scent as one reviewer put it, but it's darn good for the less initiated that haven't sniffed a hundred bottles of Fleur de this and Fleur de that.

    8th October, 2005.

    rating

    Romance by Ralph Lauren

    A delightful woodsy-floral from Ralph Lauren. Never in my life would I have thought they'd find good use for marigolds in a fragrance, as I think they are absolutely vile smelling things. But Romance gets off to a good start nonetheless, and I'm glad to say that if there are marigolds in the top, I can't smell 'em. The life of the top notes are a lot of fun to whiff off the wife, but the good character of the heart and base are what I wait for. Romance has a pretty good balance that is only slightly cloying if a little more than appropriate is used. Well into the drydown the woods become very distinguishable among the flowers. Perhaps it's the woods and it's neighbors in the base, but I swear it smells very akin to Perry Ellis 360 for men but more subdued and without the spice riding with it.

    11th August, 2005.

    rating

    Lucky You for Women by Lucky Brand

    When my wife wears this I want to assault her in the nicest way. This scent makes two words pop in my head every time I smell it. "Innocent-Sexy". This is the scent of the ubiquitous girl next door in her blue jeans and sneakers. And as a result, this stuff is sex incarnate to me. You can keep your glam and starlets with stockings, girls next door reign. Lucky You resides within an attractive, but understated, pink bottle with the Lucky Brand shamrock embossed into it. It's a crisp floral/fruity sort of scent that's pretty straightforward in it's purpose. I never noticed much evolution in the scent and it pretty much smelled the same on my wife's skin as out of the bottle. The floral notes are of an airy sort that aren't in the least bit cloying like Tresor or White Diamonds. I can detect a fruitiness in it, but the two blend to an almost homogenous bouquet. No, it's not very sophisticated and my 30 year old wife says she feels it's a bit on the "young" side for her. Poppycock! A very clean daytime scent (evening too, if I had my way) that does what it does well without pretension or prissiness. A fine example of the girl next door.

    11th August, 2005.

    rating

    360 Degrees for Men by Perry Ellis

    Another blind purchase because the price was right. Was pretty enamored with it initially, though I was put off by the harsh assualt of the top notes and still am. Must have been no more than a fling cause it gets passed over for other scents these days. But for some reason I still have a soft spot for it and intend to wear it once in a while. After drydown and the top notes are pretty much expended it shows a new, much more attractive face. Warm and spicy with a prevailing woodiness through and through, there is no doubt you're wearing a masculine scent. Though it sounds like a negative remark, I don't mean it be so when I say that the more time that passes it continues to get better. Not because of the fact of it fading out, but it flat out just becomes nicer. It remains warm to the end, and that's a good thing. Yes, I have a soft spot for this like you might for the stray dog that wanders into your yard day to day. Give it a shot and you might be more inclined than I to adopt it outright.

    10th August, 2005.

    rating

    Amarige by Givenchy

    A rose based floral that in my experince is in the vein of Liz Taylor's White Diamonds but not soo cloying or overpowering while still making a big presentation. You definitely smell the roses, but they ride on a sweet current that is more appealing and gentle than White Diamonds. My wife really liked the sample vial of this, but I told her every time I smelled it I pictured my mother. Suffice to say, it would more at home with a lady of middle age or older. Not being snide, but it has a patriarchal quality about it. Quite potent, so use with caution.

    10th August, 2005.

    rating

    White Diamonds by Elizabeth Taylor

    Not a bad perfume at all so long as it's used with moderation, as it can be very heavy and very cloying. Thus, very headache producing. But in modest amounts, this is pretty nice stuff. Off the top you're bombarded by a floral wall of scent. In between the flowers there is a spit of fruitiness to it that I (from the note list) assume must be the Neroli and/or the aldehydes. Rose and jasmine dominate the heart of the scent fading to a feminine musk for the base. More in line to those of the age range of it's namesake, but I could imagine any woman 30+ pulling it off. The closest scent to this I know is Amarige by Givenchy, which I prefer with its slight balancing bitterness. Again, be modest in application to avoid the "old lady" vibe.

    10th August, 2005.

    Showing 1 to 30 of 37.

Latest Threads

Partners


  
Useful Links

Read, View, Friend, Follow

Get in touch

Basenotes.net
BCM Box 1111
London WC1N 3XX
United Kingdom