Oscar de la Renta Pour Lui: Original vs. Reformulated (PICS).

First of all, the original bottle. I obtained one from the early 1980s (3 ounce). It says "Oscar De La Renta Pour Lui" towards the top of the front of the bottle (no ovals anywhere). The type face is bolder, and looks more "70s like." Towards the bottom it says "Eau De Toilette 87°." Underneath that it says "Spray Naturel." All of the letter are in capitals. The cap is different from the new one. It is a heavy duty, rubbery plastic rather than the flimsy/thin new one. It also has a star symbol on top, which the new one does not have. The sticker on the bottom is brown, not transparent, and it has no serial number, as the new one does. The newer one just says Pour Lui on the top of the front, so it must be the new formulation. There is "Oscar de la Renta" on the bottom, and on top of that, "Eau de Toilette" (see http://www.skinstep.com/product_imag...2956640705.jpg, for example).

About the scent itself. The thing that struck me the most was that the new one comes across as a bunch of notes forced together, almost like an EdP formulation that was, however, somehow not made any stronger than the EdT. In the original one, the notes seem to have more separation from each other, and there is a sense of "transparency." I can see why some say it is very similar (the smell itself is), whereas others say the new one is not good at all. The new one certainly seems to be less "artfully" made. I just sampled the original today (on my ankle) because I had already applied a different frag to the chest, so I'll have to give it a full wearing within the next week and then I'll post back here.

Okay, second wearing of the original formulation. I'm surprised that it's definitely not any stronger than the latest formulation, and that while it seems to be the same scent, the notes are articulated better in the original one (as I said in the first post). I'll just add that I also noticed a similar construction in Cuba Green Jeans, though I don't know if this is a copy of any particular frag. In both of these, the notes seem to be squeezed together, but the smell the "natural" and pleasant. In this kind of construction, which I'm guessing is cheaper to do, there is a bluntness to it. It's the opposite of "transparency." The sillage is not very strong in the original Pour Lui that I have, but that may be due to how it was stored over the years. I would say that they are different enough (at least to the aficionado) that it may be a good idea to have both, if you like the smell of course.

However it is best described, sampling these two is a really good fragrance lesson. Like I said, the new one reminds me of an EdP formulation. I wear some "women's" EdPs, such as Magical Moon and Escada Collection, and they have a "rounded" quality, even though they are very strong. Yet in those, the notes seem to be more articulated. Could it simply be that the new one is blended more? In the old one, there seems to be "space" between the major notes, and it is this space that gave me the idea of "transparency," though not being a fan of transparent frags, I would certainly defer to someone who said that the old one should not be classified in this way. One thing that did cross my mind is that when notes are compressed like this, it might create the "hairspray" comments that you sometimes read about in reviews.

Here is a pic of the really old one:

The newer release has a more generic base, so if you like that base then the new one is for you. The old one's base, however, is considerably richer, though perhaps not as strong.