Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › Azzaro PH (old formulation) vs Azzaro PH (new formulation)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Azzaro PH (old formulation) vs Azzaro PH (new formulation)

post #1 of 26
11/10/11 at 12:41pm
Thread Starter 
What are the differences in smell, longevity, sillage?

Are those differences highly noticeable?

I own a full bottle of the current version (and love it). It's has such a complex, dense/thick aroma and its soft too.

Is it worth it to buy a bottle of the older formulation?



Lastly .....what are some other fragrances (that came later) that are a definite nod to this classic in terms of scent (obviously) and overall quality?
Reply
Reply

Features on Basenotes

Petals Falling From The Sky - A Report From The Cote d'Azur's Bataille De Fleurs
Basenotes Reader Awards 2013 - Finalists Announced.
Greatest Hits: Annick Menardo
post #2 of 26
11/10/11 at 12:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jclaxton78 View Post

I own a full bottle of the current version (and love it).

Is it worth it to buy a bottle of the older formulation?

Only you can judge whether it's worth it or not. I have the original release in my collection and like it quite a bit. My nose couldn't detect any significant difference in the versions.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 26
11/10/11 at 1:25pm
the vintage formulation, a powerhouse, had better sillage and longevity ...
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 26
11/10/11 at 1:37pm
Old is better, new is fine.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 26
11/10/11 at 3:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluran View Post

Old is better, new is fine.

+1

The older version has a more aromatic, richer base. That might be due to the availibility of higher quality ambergris and oakmoss back then.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 26
11/10/11 at 6:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jathanas View Post

+1

The older version has a more aromatic, richer base. That might be due to the availibility of higher quality ambergris and oakmoss back then.

I agree!
I have both and just did again a side by side comparison and the vintage one has a way better and richer opening (top notes). This works on in the heart and base which leads to better sillage and longevity.
The first 1.5 hour this difference is most significant, after that they are about the same but the vintage just lasts a little longer.

New one is still perfect, just spray a little more!
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 26
11/12/11 at 6:16am
Thread Starter 
Thanks everyone.

I have one more question.....are you comfortable wearing this in public immediately after applying it? I read so many comments about not going in public for the first hour with this. Are the top notes really that offensive to people?
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 26
11/24/11 at 11:09am
IMO there are three different & distinct formulations of Azzaro, the original vintage with the oval cap with silver & black sticker, then as I like to call it, the mid vintage with the more familiar cap with silver & black sticker and last but not least the current formulation with the embossed bottle. The original version is much stronger & heavier/thicker in the top notes, the mid vintage is a little lighter & fresher than the original at the top and the current version's top notes are even lighter......all three a distinctly Azzaro pour homme in the dry down which is where it counts. Also, I don't believe this has been mentioned before, but those who are complaing of longevity problems with the current formulation should look at the atomizer which differs from the prior formulations, the portion within the bottle is much thinner and sprays with more of a lighter mist, the older version is more a heavier stream when sprayed.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 26
11/24/11 at 12:37pm
Hey, jclaxton, you´ve declared the vintage hunt open haven´t you?
The vintage PH (smaller cap) is much deeper, denser, longer lasting,....
Try to fetch one; it´s worth it! Good luck!
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 26
11/24/11 at 2:22pm
Worth Pour Homme Haute Concentration is one you should get, since it's selling for next to nothing on ebay now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jclaxton78 View Post

Lastly .....what are some other fragrances (that came later) that are a definite nod to this classic in terms of scent (obviously) and overall quality?
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 26
12/31/12 at 3:11pm
To those who have the boxes of older Azzaro pH formulations, could you list the stated ingredients and maybe the year it was sold? I have the current version and there's no Oakmoss (Evernia prunastri) on it.

2012 Ingredients: Alcohol, Parfum/Fragrance, Limonene, Linalool, Hexyl Cinnamal, Citronellol, Geraniol, Benzyl Alcohol, Coumarin, Citral, Eugenol, Alpha-Isomethyl Ionone, Cinnamal, Butyl-Phenyl Methylpropional, Benzyl Salicylate, Hidroxycitronellal, Benzyl Benzoate, Anise Alcohol (C0780F)
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 26
12/31/12 at 3:29pm
I have the current version. Love the scent, but longevity seems slightly suspect for a "powerhouse." I will keep working with it, maybe spray a little more as Slayerized suggested, and see how it goes.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 26
12/31/12 at 10:22pm
IMHO, it is a weaker blend than it used to be in terms of sillage and longevity.

Frankly, I don't know if it is because of reformultation or if it is because it has been "updated" - namely, a former powerhouse for youngsters hitting the discos that nowadays are respectable pater familiae. As a matter of fact, there is a flanker that is supposedly a lighter version, which, to my nose, smells closer to what I remember it used to be...
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 26
12/31/12 at 11:30pm
I've had both versions and found the original to be better in terms of naturalness and potency, though not to an outrageous degree (with Acteur, on the other hand, naturalness was shown the door). The thing about even the original version is that it comes across as what I perceive to be an "amateur effort," which one also finds in Paul Sebastian Fine Cologne. What I mean is that there is one huge central accord that doesn't let up for a long time, and after a while it gets irritating. There are several other fougeres that feature strong anise, perhaps the best of the bunch (that I've tried), technically-speaking, being IL by Lancetti. Rive Gauche Pour Homme is quite nice at first but that aspect of it doesn't last long enough for me, especially considering the mediocre drydown. My favorite right now is Grigioperla, but that one is very nicely balanced and would seem to subvert the idea behind APH. If you are seeking a balanced scent, no version of APH may be for you. Don't think that if you don't like APH that anisic fougeres are not for you !
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 26
1/1/13 at 10:12am
I only smelled the original on a mouillette (last Esxence, courtesy of L'Osmotheque) and found it much more potent, in a "'70s moustachioed macho" kind of way - nothing wrong with it of course, since the same felling is very present in the current formulation (which I own and regularly wear). I don't know if I'd choose the vintage, though, unless I found a very good deal - I believe sometimes less is actually more.
As for possible alternatives, YSL Rive Gauche PH is definitely playing at the same game and possibily in the same ballpark, but it's definitely more civilized and "clean", something you'd wear to a bankers' meeting rather than a police station (ApH is definitely Sam Tyler's cologne - while Gene Hunt clearly wears Aramis).
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 26
1/1/13 at 6:23pm
What kind of longevity are you guys getting on current formulation?
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 26
1/1/13 at 8:14pm
Older versions list only alcohol, fragrance, and water as ingredients.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 26
1/1/13 at 8:32pm
I have the newest version and really like it. I haven't smelled the original for years but I never liked it when I was younger. I think this is one that I "grew into" over the years since it is a mature masculine for sure.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 26
1/1/13 at 9:09pm
I am not sure I can even tell the difference. I wore the new version last night to a party and received a fabulous comment on it.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 26
1/1/13 at 11:00pm
The vintage is fuller and more balanced. I'm considering getting a backup of the vintage.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 26
1/1/13 at 11:11pm
They smell pretty much the same, but the old lasts longer. That's ok; just spray more! It's cheap enough!
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 26
1/2/13 at 7:11am
In my experience, longevity for the current version ranges between 5 and 8 hours, depending on weather - this is with a couple sprays on the chest, under the shirt, a spray on each wrist and a spray on the nape. After that, I only get the faintest whiff of the base notes.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 26
1/2/13 at 6:25pm
I found a vintage bottle of APH in an old wardrobe. This was from an a great person passed away in 1999. It's hard to wear a fragance that was intended for a much better person than you...

But it is better to use it than to let it perish; I´ll do my best, blocks behind...

Well, It is clear to me, not an expert, than the vintage formulation is milder and balanced and the current one is more pretentious and drier. The vintage is softer, lavender driven. The current is, as said, drier, with more anisic vibe. The older is better. The marketing, second order quality, was also better in the older version. Also the bottle, and so on...

Try RGPH in older (tin can) version, and the cheap but very pleasant Quorum!
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 26
1/3/13 at 1:11am
Someone once made a not-so-pleasant comment on Azzaro, and then complimented me on the vintage. They are quite different.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 26
1/3/13 at 2:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthazar View Post

Someone once made a not-so-pleasant comment on Azzaro, and then complimented me on the vintage. They are quite different.

That's possible, especially beyond the top notes. I don't really like it and never did a side by side comparison. Now I only have the vintage because I swapped the new version away. Next time I wear it I'll try to avoid as much of the top notes as possible and see what I think at that point.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 26
2/23/13 at 8:23pm
I received the new formulation as a Valentine's Day gift (the one with Enrique plastered all over the box.)

After a side-by-side comparison, I conclude (after 3 or 4 hours on opposite wrists) that the new version has somehow been sweetened up a bit, has less anise, and is considerably shorter on sillage than the original. Though, the longevity is comparable.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Male Fragrance Discussion

Features on Basenotes

Petals Falling From The Sky - A Report From The Cote d'Azur's Bataille De Fleurs
Basenotes Reader Awards 2013 - Finalists Announced.
Greatest Hits: Annick Menardo
Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Male Fragrance Discussion › Azzaro PH (old formulation) vs Azzaro PH (new formulation)