Total Reviews: 9
i dont know which formula i have tried, it is said to be better then the most recent one,
it opens up like grand dame of classic aldehydic scents, serious cold aldehydes and floral! much more floral then Chanel no.5.which is not my genuine love, but very soon, the sharp/cold aldehydic note is gone and scent transforms into warm, sweety and just a touch powdery floral. This was like 180 degrees change, the sweetnes of the base takes over! It is like serious lady in her 50s turned into young lady in her 30 s:), all is nicely balanced a little thin, but i blame it on reformulation maybe
that drydown is unmistakenly similar to classics like Tabu, Ball a Versaille in a way that its dense, complex, a little powdery, Arpege doesnt have animalic notes but leathery one , and is like office scent version of Tabu :) less sweet, more floral, but they all share DNA of classic style perfumery :)
staying power and sillage is not huge, very medium
l don't know how many different formulations of this there have been, but l had mine in the eighties. l remember it as an aldehydic, powdery, woody floral with a very smooth drydown. lt was probably a little too mature for me then & it wasn't one of my favourites. Maybe l'll get around to smelling the current version soon, but there's so many others l want to try, l'm in no hurry.
I'm torn between giving this a thumbs up or a thumbs down, so I gave it a neutral. I give the original version a thumbs up, but the new stuff gets a thumbs down. I tried vintage bottles of Arpege Ray de parfum that belong to my mother. I used to dab myself with it when I was a child playing with her perfumes. She still has them. Recently I purchased a new bottle of the spray edt. I was extremely disappointed to find that Arpege today smells nothing like the original. With aldehydes and musk oils being replaced by synthetic ingredients, the new formula lacks the heady, intoxicating warmth and the mystery of the original. The new formula has a headache-inducing cloying powdery quality that doesn't mellow out once it dries down. Perhaps the new eau de parfum formula is closer to the Arpege that I grew up with, but for now I'll stick with the vintage formula.
Advertisement — Reviews continue below
thats perfume for grandma... oldschool.
I am very sad to report that there seems to have been yet another reformulation of Arpege since the nineties. I was one of those who had never smelled the vintage original, but loved the reformulation I bought around 1997. It was a bracing bright, brassy bergamot, aldehyde, and oakmoss fragrance that could hit your nose like a whiff of too fizzy Champagne. It was a little weird in a medicinal way, but it was absolutely addictive, and unlike anything else I have ever smelled.
Sadly, the bottle I bought last year is a strange aquatic powdery floral, with new dry musk notes like in Narcisso Rodriguez and SJP Lovely and that chalky, leathery stinging aspect of Anais Anais, that bares no resemblance to the earlier one i had loved. I used it once in a while, but I certainly wouldn't purchase it again.
I can only conclude that the restrictions on oakmoss and bergamot have totally ruined Arpege. I'm absolutely appalled at the loss of an entire fragrance family including such important gems as this one.
Curious as to how a 1927 fragrance survived to this day, I got hold of ARPEGE. My curiosity quickly turned to surprise and then disappointment. Perhaps the sample had gone 'bad' but the scent felt rather masculine and reminded me of the ubiquitous prayer attar used by Muslim men. While the drydown is pleasant enough it can't seem to shake off the dowdy character. Nonetheless I would take this review with a healthy pinch of salt as earlier reviewers have highlighted the poorer notes coming from the smaller samples. As it stands this classic deserves a neutral at best. At least until I get hold of a larger sample.
I have to agree with treazurekitten on the leathery quality. Arpege starts strong on me and dries down to a very soft and subtle leather-with-flowers scent. I'm honestly not sure I like it or not. It's a tar-like leather, very resinous and dark, with that clinging sweet waft of floral. It's definitely what I'd call a historic scent and it lasts FOREVER. A dot of EDP put on in the morning lasted all day, through my evening shower and into the next morning.
hi there--this is my first review, so bear with me. I own the Arpege EDP an parfum, and I feel very lukewarm about them now. I don't find it exceptional--I would call it my little girl notion of a "French" perfume, almost a stereotype of one. At the same time, if you were looking for a very nice fragrance to give4 someone whose relation to perfume has been restricted to the drugstore, this would be a respectable choice. I certainly don't mean to disagree with anything anyone has said--funny thing is, I have been a devotee of the early Guerlains now for two years, and until I came to Basenotes I thought I must be crazy. I thought maybe I was just being stubborn in not branching out more. They have so much more character than even my first experience of a real fragrance house with the Chanels, which I am sad to find I tire of, except Coco...I'm coming to understand the reasons for these reactions now, thanks to this site. Thank you all for the erudition and extraordinary level of scholarship. I'm overwhelmed!
I've only recently tried Arpege. It is soft, with elegant rather than animalic musk. There is a leathery quality, I think the bergamot, coriander create this impression. The florals are quite restrained with violet, rose, maybe a hint of carnation. And it is mildly salty, like My Sin, also by Lanvin. Overall too restrained for me to feel passionate about it.