Reformulations that IMPROVED on the original...

For me, the reformulated Quorum is better than the original. I tested the original several times when it came out but never had any urge to buy it. More than 20 years later I found a bottle cheap and bought it just because I thought I should have it in my collection. When I tried this new version I found I actually quite liked it and have worn it out on occasion. Still not among my true favorites but much better than the original in my opinion.

It's going to be a very short thread...

Some talk recently that Tom Ford Neroli Portofino has been tweaked for the better.

I tried it when it was released and found it to be over synthetic but dropped in today at a new TF counter stocked up with new stuff (the line seems to be moving from boutiques to malls here) for a squirt and it seems not bad.

True. Examples of successful reformulations are few and far between.

However I do prefer reformulated Femme to the original. The cumin is beautifully done, it's earthy and carnal IMO, not foody or sweaty. Knocks it out of the ballpark for me.

I believe Ubar also falls into the category of well done reformulations.

None come to mind.

I don't think this one is better, but not bad for a reformulation even though there may some debate about is DHI.

I'd say Azzaro PH is better in its current formulation than vintage. The vintage formulation is milder and balanced and some say the current one is pretentious and drier. The vintage is indeed softer, lavender driven. The current is definitely drier with more anisic vibe.. to each his own!

None. When a fragrance is reformulated it is not the same as the original; therefore it cannot be an improvement. It is not the same. You may prefer the reformulation, that is your prerogative but it cannot be an improvement.

I prefer most of the reformulations of the 80's powerhouses. Sniffing is one thing and I can see why people love these, but when you actually have to wear them it can be challenging and the reformulations make them more versatile and wearable. As far as new reformulations I'm pretty happy with what Dior did to DH, DHI, and DHS. As far as Fahrenheit I'm highly disappointed with the original's reformulation, but in Aqua Fahrenheit the reformulation works really well with those notes. Also I'm sure there's tons of fragrances that are reformulated for the better, but the only ones that really get noticed are the popular mainstream fragrances that get talked about over and over again on here.

So....originals can NEVER be improved upon, because, therefore, they would no longer be original? So once it's on the market, that's it. It's as good as it's going to get.

I don't agree, in theory. It's a sad world when there's a whole class of things that can not ever be improved upon by default.

There are plenty of newer frags that I like. I haven't sought out any older ones, because I don't want to get into the very expensive and time consuming and difficult hunts for the last vintage frags on earth...I'd rather find something readily available that I like.

I like your way of thinking - it frees me from the delusion that I have to convince anybody about my preferences.

I tend to prefer the modern reformulations - it just seems that I love current fragrance trends. I was pleasantly surprised by Egoiste and Yatagan when I smelled the new formulations, after having smelled vintage first. And in an opposite way, I was not wowed by vintage Fahrenheit, when I finally got to sniff it. The newer stuff just continues to seem more interesting to me.

But I don't have to defend them as "improvements" - because, as you point out, they're not.

- - - Updated - - -


Perhaps the idea of improvement (as something other than personal preference) really only makes sense statistically. So if a company tweaks a formula and it sells better, they could call it an improvement. Customers are free to agree or disagree individually or in groups, but to the company, it's an improvement.

Fragrance is a mass produced product. Some people see it as art..some don't. Personally I think if something is made of chemicals it can be improved upon, but since it's mass produced it's all about the money not the art.

I second the newer version of Yatagan as an improvement. It's still somewhat "out there," but the earlier one I tried some six or so years ago was to my an industrial stringy Eau de Pinesol and would best be used for household applications, however, I could see myself wearing the reformulated version.

I could not wear the original version of Dior Homme. It made me sick, but I so wanted to love it. The reformulation is perfect for me. I have no idea what they changed, but I'm glad they did.

reformulations are rarely due to a genuine concern to provide better quality to the customer.

it's mostly corner-cutting, abiding by bureau regulations and sometimes making the fragrance more modern.

I guess I see SOME of them as art. It depends on who makes them, and why. Comparing Duchafour's creations to Axe is like comparing a Rembrandt painting to a Twilight poster.

Francois Demachy really did a very good job with the Dior Homme / DHI / DHS reformulations. Many will argue DH/DHI aren't as good as their originals, but as far as reformulations go, he came pretty damn close, and I could imagine this was NOT EASY to accomplish. When it comes to DHS, many have argued he has actually improved upon the original. I've yet to sniff the new one, so I can't comment.

Agree with silentrich for the most part too on the powerhouse frags being more wearable, and on Aqua Fahrenheit. Though it's not a reformulation per se, it's a thoughful re-interpretation flanker IMO. Credit again to Demachy on this.

I can't think of any...

Didn't Luca Turin claim that contemporary Poison was an improvement on the original?

I disagree with him but each of our views is valid

I've done some very careful sniffing job between the latest formulation of Van Cleef & Arpels Pour Homme and the vintage formulation. I've found the latest formulation to be a bit nicer and more balanced.

Yosh Sombre Negra is much better in the newer version.

Only smelled the new version, but from what I hear, this is correct. Good juice, btw.

I LOLed pretty hard at this.

"But.... but.... but..... the Twilight poster has that cute actor girl whose face never changes!"



LOL.

OK. But what about a can of Axe signed by Ann Gottlieb?

http://www.axenewsroom.com/experts/anngottlieb

(PS - I seriously have cans of my favorite Axe scents. And I still have a Farah Fawcett poster from the '70's! )

Some people prefer the current version of Habit Rouge EdT to the previous one, including Monsieur Guerlain and Luca Turin I believe. I still like the older one, but I think the current is very good too.

- - - Updated - - -


Dude! Totally! Kristin Stewart is way hotter than any chick in a Rememberant paintings?

Kenzo Air Intense to my nose is identical to the original Kenzo Air. However the juice has a slight blue tint.

Yang by Jacques Fath was better as an original.

Hmmm... I am wondering if this assertion can be looked at another way: When a fragrance is reformulated it is not the same as the original; therefore it cannot be worse. It is not the same. You may hate the reformulation, that is your prerogative but it cannot be worse.

- - - Updated - - -


Dior's repatriations (i.e. taking back control of formulas by recreating them) would seem to be a departure from the common motivation for reformulations then.

I would think modernising fragrances does not necessary result in worse formulations; they are simply different, which may raise the ire of purists/loyal fans.

Dior Homme Sport 2012 reformulation is apparently better than the original

True, but that wasn't a reformulation. If I'm not mistaken, she discontinued Sombre Negra, then created an entirely new scent and re-used the name for it. Sombre Negra is excellent (!!!) but I think it was foolish of Yosh to re-use the name of a different scent since it can be hard to know which reviews are for which scent. They're entirely different. I don't get it.

...I must say, her use of the paper mustaches to market the new Sombre Negra was brilliant. And the scent really is a big bold wow.

- - - Updated - - -


Interesting!!! I would love to smell vintage Fahrenheit, as I really enjoy the current version, though it's the only version I know. Where did you find vintage?

- - - Updated - - -



I agree with Kaelee, 100%. Anything can be improved, especially when done by the original perfumer. I doubt most perfumers consider their releases perfect. Musicians often work on their music up until the very point they're forced to release it due to demands from their labels. I wouldn't be surprised at all if there are many cases where a perfumer completed a scent for a deadline but later realized it could use just a bit of this or a little less of that, leading to a future reformulation.

ON THE OTHER HAND... reformulations due to ingredient price increases or restrictions... those are what we typically think of since they happen so often, and those are a bad sign.

Yes and no. I believe the problem here is the lack of truth: the branding & label stays the same. That is one of the biggest problems with the industry imho: why sell a different juice in the same bottle, brand and under the same name??? For minor changes one can use the software name giving: Fahrenheit 1.1
For a totally different formula: change the name.

In the end it's the consumer that gets fooled.

I think perfumers can and should reformulate their fragrances if truly necessary. The analogy with music is somewhat apt. For example, in classical music, composers have been known to revise their scores, sometimes with strikingly different results. So, when musicians perform such works, they have to indicate which version they are performing.

So, indeed it would be best if brands/houses also indicate which formulation the perfume they are selling is in. Unfortunately, that seems unlikely since these brands would always prefer to pretend no reformulations had been enacted, perhaps in fear of losing customers. Well, discerning perfumistas will know anyway.

I find it interesting that the distinct formulations of Dior's Dior Homme series are listed as separate entries in Fragrantica. So, the original formulation (2005) by Olivier Polge is one entry, while the repatriated version (2011) by Francois Demachy is another entry, and so on for the flankers. This is one instance where Dior acknowledges the reformulations, even if this is not clear on the actual bottles and boxes, excepting the changes in bottle design.

For perfumistas, even if the houses do not publicly acknowledge the reformulations, we know anyway, and the Internet is a powerful tool for research. Of course, not everyone interested in buying perfumes do their research...

Yes! Yes! And more yes! I've often said it would be helpful if perfume were treated more like wine, with a year mark printed on the bottle and the box. It isn't going to happen, but it would be helpful.

This... may be a dangerous way to go. Batch madness lies that way!

Seriously, the Creed Millésime is a concept supposedly like wine vintages, where products may differ from year to year because of the quality of the ingredients used (and possibly also because of QC issues, and reformulations).

I was commenting on another thread and realized that Ubar falls into this category. I'm not sure how many of you have tried the original but the current formulation just stomps it.

Many of the older Guerlain's and Chanel's have to have been reformulated. I have never smelled Sous Le Vent in it's original formulation, but what they re-released was still magic.

Also, for a look on a constantly changing line (some could say somewhat annoyingly) look no further than Slumberhouse. I don't think there is a fragrance he has made that hasn't gone through some changes. Again, not having smelled any of the originals, but one of the recent reformulations of Jeke is one of the greatest things I have smelled. This isn't cost cutting though, it's just the way he views his creations as something that can constantly evolve as he pleases.

I had been working my way thru my last bottle of vintage ANTAEUS when it dawned on me that once it was gone I'd be bereft. So I took the bottle out of wearing rotation and blind bought a new bottle. I saw that the frag still got pretty great reviews so I wasn't really thinking it had really changed much due to reformulation.
At the first spritz I was heartbroken. It opened "fresh". WTF? ANTAEUS doesn't open fresh, it is a warm cashmere sweater from the get go! But you know what? As it dried down I could smell my old favorite coming thru. And after a few wearings, I wasn't struck by the dramatic difference anymore and I've really grown to love this reformulation. In fact, I never got a complement on my vintage version, but this one gathers many.
Maybe I can say it improved the original in that it seems to have somehow updated the classic to make it more "acceptable" to today's sensitive noses yet has retained enough of the original to satisfy longtime fans.
And the updated formula of the shower gel ain't bad either!