I'm not sure I'd use the word 'matured'. I think my taste has both 'broadened' and 'narrowed'.
A few years of immersing myself in what's out there has enabled me to get some perspective on most genres, altho I'm still woefully uninformed on the better known 'femmes' - just haven't had the time or inclination to really explore that world. I honestly couldn't tell you a Coco from a Charlie. That said, I have zeroed in on chypres and some of the eaux marketed to women over the last few decades (or more) and I'll take a Mitsouko or Vol de Nuit, or an Eau de Patou or Chamade EDC over most of what's currently out there for men anyday. I think I'm comfortably at a point where I can take something on board and assess it reasonably well within it's style, and that would include femme marketed florals. It's not that difficult to get a handle on the works that constitute 'top of the class' in their respective genres and use that as a basis for comparison with others . . . The Guide, a handful of blogs and some writers here make that simple enough to do then it's just a question of trying them.
On the other hand, while being open enough to smell something and appreciate it for what it was designed for, even if that might be tweens from the burbs or whatever, my tolerance for what I actually want anywhere near me - on myself or anyone else - has become pretty low. With every new release I am becoming more and more attuned to the LCD running thru so much stuff, the 'woody notes' with a cheap varnish job, the blowsy 'woody ambers', the chemical musks and vanillas with a half life of decades etc.
I read an article about 'professional industrial tasters' who can nibble a biscuit or a cookie and tell you what grade and batch the basic 'crumbs' come from before the flavouring was added. What a depressing job. And that's, sadly, what perfumers and more finely tuned amateurs can do - pick the chemical, which recent rose from IFF, iris from Givaudan, patchouli from Symrise or whatever. Sort of kills the romance a bit. I'll never get close to that and certainly don't aspire to, but what seems to have happened is that I am just more intuitively aware of what 'quality' of ingredients are in something now and that has increasingly narrowed down what I personally enjoy.
None of this is revelatory stuff - in any hobby or profession the more you experience the easier it is to zero in on what is actually any good, or at least what you like, I guess. It's weird, on the one hand I can sniff something and see how it will probably be a massive hit with a certain segment of the population and appreciate how the perfumer arrived at the end result and managed to make the focus group / marketing people swoon etc. (while personally loathing it), and then go off and breath easy in the knowledge that my vintage Guerlain still has a decent slug of oakmoss holding it up, there is Mysore sandalwood there in my Patou Pour Homme and that a (very) few people are still shooting for the stars with the work they do, in the face of an increasingly cynical industry churning out front loaded impressions of a happy clappy sanitised chemical wasteland in a bottle. I think I've hit grumpy old man status at last - nirvana