Polo minus the cigar ash. A masterpiece of clean smelly man-ness. You're probably not worthy. Your dad probably was.
Polo Crest by Ralph Lauren, 1991
Rated #142 in Fragrances
Polo Crest is a dry wood child of the magisterial Polo Green. Crest opens with a citrus, herbal mix that is not as sharp as Polo Green. Basil, juniper, and caraway are front and center in Crest. The distinctive pine note of Polo Green only peeks around the corner in Crest. The heart notes in Crest are floral, which lead directly to the oakmoss and patchouli base notes, with a dash of leather, amber and cedar. Crest is a refined fragrance that can be worn in many occasions. Longevity is excellent and projection is admirable. These are the fragrances my nose pines for, masculine, self-assured, somewhat edgy by today's watery standards. Even if you despise Polo Green, I recommend you give Crest a try. In the case of Polo Green and Crest, the child is much better behaved than the rambunctious father.
I have had a bottle of this in my collection for nearly 20 years but only today whipped it out of the cupboard to see how it has held up. Polo Crest opens with a very green and herbal mixture with just the faintest hint of lemon that more than passingly resembles its more famous and successful classic sibling, original Polo. Crest is definitely smoother than original Polo and does not have the strength of its sibling. That said, it features a beautiful oakmoss in its heart that is near impossible to replicate with today's regulations on the ingredient. Crest appears to be missing most of the birch tar note that original Polo features prominently in its base notes, adding a larger dose of patchouli instead, though not so much that it turns overly sweet. Longevity and projection are both regrettably average to below average. Let's face it, original Polo is by far the best the line has ever had to offer, Crest included. That said, out of all the various "other" releases from Ralph Lauren over the years I think Crest may be the next best in the line (or was, as it has long-since been discontinued). It is missing the potency and spunk of original Polo, but it distinguishes itself in its smoothness, class and sophistication, while never forgetting its classic roots. I prefer the raw masculinity and power of the original and reach for that one, but those looking for a smoother alternative that retains a lot of the original Polo's best qualities could do much worse than Polo Crest. I'll give Crest a well-deserved "very good" rating of 3.5 to 4 out of 5 stars.
I like this scent very much. It is classy and very satisfying to wear, and attractive in all its phases. The opening has an appealing herbal-lemon chord. Quickly some nice spices appear (not too heavy). The scent is not sweet nor is it heavy. The dry-down becomes mossy and this works well with the dry spice notes. I don't get any coniferous notes here, just herbal ones. Very well done.
I've only done one dab-to-the-wrist sampling. For the first couple of hours, it seemed quite similar to Polo Modern Reserve, then it took a sharp turn towards the smooth and sweet, like amber had come to the for, with some patchouli too. I guess that would be the reason to pay the current prices for it, because if you just want that first two hours, then either Polo or Modern Reserve would be better, because they last longer with that kind of scent. I like this, but I don't know if it's a "must have." Longevity and projection/"sillage" are at least very good, it seems.
Bought a bottle of this back in 92 and still long for it today. More wood smell than the original, very addictive. Talk that the modern reserve is actually Polo Crest, not sure if that's true, have to pick up a bottle of modern reserve and give it a go.
Similar to Polo Green, but different enough to claim its own character and feeling. It mostly retains Polo Greens rawness and masculinity, but it is toned down and smoothed out some. It opens with an herbal / spicy green note with a sharp, light aromatic tinge that I like very much. I especially enjoy the caraway element in opening it adds an additional spicy / aromatic element to a basic Polo Green opening broadening the opening to a cooler aromatic accord. The opening doesnt seem as aggressive as Polo Greens its more herbal and less resinous. I prefer Polo Crests way of introduction less explosive, broader, and more refined. The difference between the middle notes of the two Polos is subtle but important. I think that the florals take over a bit more in Crest than in Green. I wouldnt call Crests middle strongly floral but it is smoother and less herbal. The base is where the real difference lies. In Crest, the leather is greatly reduced, and the incense and woods come through more strongly. Like the original Polo Green, Polo Crests accords are masculine, distinctive, and long lasting. The sweet in both fragrances lies in a continuum somewhere between minimal and nonexistent. Because of having similar coniferous notes juniper, pine, and cedar in each level of the pyramid, I find both fragrances somewhat linear, but still, I see Polo Crest as having less intense coniferous notes than Polo Green. I do prefer the drydown of Crest. Of course, the sillage and longevity of both are excellent, and both are thumbs up fragrances.
A sweet but no-nonsense bright green scent. I think there's a little mint and cilantro which tend to remind me of the original, but I can handle this version, whereas the original is just a spitefully bitter green to me, and has assured me that it does not want to be my friend. (unfortunately, the Crest bottle is just as tacky and dated as the original). Other than losing its slight lemon edge after the top dies, I don't find much change over time with this one. The herbs noted earlier keep the brightness a little more under control than in Bowling Green, whose brightness persists too far into the base and wears on me a little bit later in the day. One problem with Crest is that, even though I don't recall the exact smell of Pine-Sol, some of the sharpness on certain isolated sniffs makes me suspect what people refer to as Pine-Sol in other scents. Maybe it would smell a little more empathetic and less authoritarian if it had just a smidgen of Paco Rabanne-style soapiness? Still, it sure beats the fanatical in-your-face drill sargeant of the original Polo.
I can't believe they discontinued this fragrance. I lighter, more sophisticated version of Polo. I love the original Polo, but everyone and anyone owned it in the 80s. This is more distinctive.
Among the range of Polos, it is one of the best, with a pronounced herbal opening along with sweet jasmine and deep earthy notes. I like its distinctiveness. It is in no way watery or wishy-washy. My other favorite is the original green bottle. I give it a neutral because it is too masculine for me, a woman.
Polo Crest by Ralph Lauren, 1991
By: Ralph Lauren
|Top Notes||Citrus, Basil|
|Base Notes||Patchouli, Oakmoss|
Start a guide on Polo Crest by Ralph Lauren, 1991!