Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Fragrance Industry and General Fragrance Discussion › Reformulations and Flankers: When has the sequel been better than the original?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Reformulations and Flankers: When has the sequel been better than the original?

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
With so much talk on here all the time about reformulations and flankers, does anyone here consider any of them to be better than the originals in which they came from?

To me Pure Malt seems better than Angel Man.
post #2 of 9
A lot of people think M7 (second version, with synthetic oud) is better than the raw original, because sweeter, less rude, less in-your-face frag.
post #3 of 9
Every flanker of an existing fragrance for me has its own special appeal.
post #4 of 9
I always remember Chandler Burr saying YSL M7 is a very bad fragrance, thankfully there is the new M7 Fresh...(serious)
post #5 of 9
IMO DHI smells better than DH and DH sport.
post #6 of 9
To me DHI and all the Pure Line of A Men are really better stuff than their original parents!
post #7 of 9
i find that the allure flankers are better than the original allure
post #8 of 9
Drakkar Noir has more chutzpah than the original, Drakkar.
post #9 of 9
Eau Sauvage Parfum (Never tried the vintage original, sorry)
Midnight Poison
Power Cologne
Terre D'Hermes Parfum
Voyage Parfum
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Basenotes › Basenotes Forums › Fragrance Discussion › Fragrance Industry and General Fragrance Discussion › Reformulations and Flankers: When has the sequel been better than the original?