Calvin Klein Obsession for men

I just did a quick comparison among Obsession, Tiffany, and Must de Cartier. Â*I had a hard time of it because my SOTD is Gucci Nobile and that scent may have intefered with with my test. Â*First, cross out Must--I think it's a completely different fragrance. Â*I does seem to rely on a smooth musky delivery which is very different from Obsession's. Â*Smoothness doesn't seem to be a part of Obsession's intent, also, the notes are quite different--Obsession heads toward green and Must goes toard spice. Â*Obsession has a heavy reliance on corriander and pine where Must seems to have nothing that interesting. Â*

There's a little similarity between Obsession and Tiffiny, primarily in the commonality of rosewood and patchouli and amber. Also the tonka of Tiffany partially makes up for its lack of vanilla. Â*I do catch the rosewood/patchouli similarity, but that's where the similarity ends IMO. Â*The impact of the two is totally different. Â*Tiffany is definitely a solid wood Oriental very masculine and concrete. Â*Obsession lacks the sandalwood so its power goes in a completely different direction--more abstract. Â*Obsession is quirky, Tiffany isn't, and Must is so straight it's quite boring IMO. Â*

I'm not good at comparisons between fragrances, so keep that in mind: Â*I really haven't come across anything quite like Obsession. Â*It's as unusual as Opium but in a smoother and darker and sneakier way and Opium has had its imitators--Obsession hasn't to my knowledge. Â* Milamber says its message is because of the tension between its gormand notes and its green/pine and I think he's absolutely right. Â* Obsession glorifies in its tension.

As far as being masculine--I think it is, but if you are wearing Egoiste and Tiffany and English Leather, Obsession for men certainly won't be a problem for you.

Good luck.

My perception of Obsession for Men is it's not an evolving fragrance at all. I feel some kind of oriental layering but it looks more like a characteristic of a single, steady accord which you get from the beginning all the way through. Obsession is sweet and a bit powdery with an edge, but it's not a spicy edge. They broke new ground with this fragrance, so it's quite difficult to make a description. I can see it's an aldehydic frag so maybe the key is in there.

For some reason, I don't think it is quite as good as it used to be, as if the formula has weakened or been altered. It smelled of high quality back in the day and not it almost smells cheap to me? Perhaps it is me?

no way Ikkitosennomusha, you never smell cheap!

I agree with Ikkitosennomusha. Although, todays Obsession smells the same, it doesn't have the same potency as the original bottles from the 80's.

My first bottle of Obsession was purchased in 1987. It was silage king. Two sprays was you needed.

Obsession is an indiscreet Amber scent with some spice notes struggling to emerge. Although there are hints of musk and patchouli, the aggressive and lingering sweet amber is strong and unchanging. It does subdue pleasantly in drydown.

The recipe is not complex enough to describe as an Oriental, but its dry down is cozy and tasty, literally tasty, reminsiscent of sweets or pastry. But like everything else that tries to reveal itself in this fragrance, even the edible notes are overpowered by the ever present amber. And this is not a subtle or complex amber. I think the scent is too unsophisticated for an older man to wear out.

I use my spray as a room freshener. In very small doses I find the aura of Obsession for Men soothing and pleasant. Apply it very sparingly. Do not use it as a cologne but as a touch of spice.

I don't often agree entirely with Luca Turin, but I think he summed it up the best: Obsession For Men = Cheap Oriental. So take your best oriental fragrance in the entire history of oriental fragrances, and now downgrade every single ingredient from being way up here (elevates hand above head), to aaaalllllll the waaaayyyy dowwwnnn heeeere (hand below the belt).

Now that it's been sufficiently cheapened, add a few extra ounces of perfumer's alcohol, edit out the most dynamic notes, and throw in some amber coloring to give it that deep, rich look that we associate with heavier, spicier frags of yesteryear.

Voila! You now have Obsession For Men.




...

The original Obsession had a built in spray cap, and was much richer, and had greater depth. Was less sweet, and had more of an Oriental vibe to it. The year it was reformulated I can't seem to remember. Seems to me it was somewhere around 1990? I could, and am probably wrong, as I was not a big fan of this fragrance, even the original. I do remember smelling this fragrance every where I went. It was for sure a winner for Calvin Klein.

WOW! A shout from the past.

I would like a bottle of the vintage, anyhow.

For some reason I can't bring myself to take a sniff of this.
I last smelt it maybe in the early 90's and I can recall it being the "BIG" scent in the late 80's.
I think I can do w/o for a while longer.

Same here.

For me Obsession for men (EDT) flirts between masculine and feminine so I thing you will have no issue wearing this. To my nose it's a brown, smooth, round oriental. It's closer to Opium (for women) than any of the others you mentioned. Considering it's so cheap I think it's worth a try. I haven't tried the EDP - didn't know there was one.

I got a bottle way back in the 80s--it seemed like a vanilla bomb to me. I grew to like it but never replaced it. Then, I got the new one in a coffret set. I couldn't believe they were using the same name, and I was completely turned off. Just last night, I tried it again. I needed a pretty heavy application. It has an interesting complexity, and a vibe like an old 'Oriental' curiosity shop, or maybe a fake fortune teller's perfume. So, I like it better now, but still the weakness is disappointing. In the drydown, it starts to smell a bit like YSL Opium PH (= good).

The limited edition Must de Cartier Eau Fine smells exactly like vintage Obsession for Men, only lighter and of better quality.

Obsession is an ok scent, but IMO it hasn`t passed the test of time..

I agree that it isn't the same as when it came out. It's definitely different and inferior.

As someone whose not familiar with the original I've been pleasantly surprised with the current version. I'm probably not a good judge of a fragrance smelling dated though as it's of no personal relevance to me, in fact I sometimes enjoy fragrances smelling of a particular time.

You will smell like a sordid, middle aged teacher, who's leering at young students, touching their shoulders from behind with sweaty hands. It's creepy stuff.

Sure, I agree. The vintage juice was magic. I remember it vividly. I would own it if it still smelled like that. The current is not bad but is merely a shadow of the former.

The original bottle looked totally different.

Agreed. I bought a bottle today. A question; How many sprays do you recommend to get the best effect out of it?

It is not bad but very sweet.

One on the chest and one on each forearm is enough for me. I enjoy the gentle warm wafts of fragrance this way and I'd be worried about it being cloying if much more was applied.

Agreed. 3 sprays is enough with this one.

It was my SotD, and it smell great. But I think the sillage and longevity wasn`t so good as I had expected. I had expected a "monster", but it wasn`t. Maby the new formulation has been thined out. After 4-5 hours I could almost not notice the scent on my skin, and I used 3 sprays. Maby I have to upgrade the amount ;-)

Yes, it is thinned out. Try3-5 sprays.

I bought a 30 ml bottle and the juice inside isn't the one that used to be in the past. There's no spiciness and mo sweetness - i'm so disappointed. Guess i grabbed a reformulated bottle. Ugh!
The Vintage used to be sweet or not?

I like the current Obsession for Men, still figuring out whether to wear it regularly. OP, is this tough to get in Scotland? CK is a marketing juggernaut in the USA, can find testers of this pretty easily.

[QUOTE=Le Grand Duc;2141032]Why the BIG text?![/QUOTE

I also asked myself about that: I reached the conclusion that Moondeva had bad eyesight and she refused to wear glasses...


I noticed the same after buying a replacement bottle. It took me a year and a half to ask myself about the female version, and to my surpirse, and IMHO, it is much better than the actual men's version if applied carefully. I've been complimented a number of times after wearing this.

This is an old thread - when it was originated, the forum used a different program. Now our current forum program doesn't read the font-size numbers the same as the old program. She probably was just stepping up the font-size one step.