Code of Conduct
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 47
  1. #1

    Default Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    I've been reading the threads on reformulations and future bans on some ingredients. I am also sad and concerned about the state of many classics and the prospect of their further demise so to speak. So, I've been wondering if it is worth stocking up on already reformulated classics before 1st Jan 2010 or not. Have the versions available in shops now already been reformualted for the x time and will be the same next year?
    What are your thoughts and advice?
    Last edited by Frenchie Day; 19th April 2009 at 05:06 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    There are a few of us who look for the older versions and concentrate on those...I don;t see why you will not be able to find and earlier release years after 2010. It takes a lot of looking, but I wouldn't necessarily stock up on classics now, rather I would look for sources that sell earlier releases, and look to them if and when things start to change.
    Keep Smelling Good
    ANDREW

  3. #3
    N_Tesla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Center of the Universe; California.
    Posts
    4,599
    Blog Entries
    2

    Smile Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Answer: Yes. I think it would be worth stocking up a reasonalble quantity of those classic pre-reformulated fragrances that you most enjoy as part of your wardrobe. The reason I say this is that some of the ingredients are already being replaced by synthetics that just can't replace the real thing. I have personally already taken measures to aquire certain special fragrances that I want to continue to use. One fragrance, unusual to be sure, has prompted me to purchase over a liter of the juice. I store my fragrances in a dedicated refrigerator which, should maintain their quality for some 50 years or so. Granted, this is not for everyone but, I felt it appropriate and prudent for me. The decision is yours. Choose wisely. The quality of your tommorrows rest with decisions you make today.
    Last edited by N_Tesla; 20th April 2009 at 07:06 AM.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    The anxiety caused by these misinformed and over-dramatic articles is amazing.

    Do you think Chanel and the like waited till the last minute to reformulate their classics, with the world eager to smell the difference?

    The deadline was known for a very long time, at this point your favorite fragrance is reformulated not for months, but for years. Things started to change at Guerlain in 1996, that's 13 years ago!

  5. #5
    N_Tesla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Center of the Universe; California.
    Posts
    4,599
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Le critique de parfum View Post
    The anxiety caused by these misinformed and over-dramatic articles is amazing.

    Do you think Chanel and the like waited till the last minute to reformulate their classics, with the world eager to smell the difference?

    The deadline was known for a very long time, at this point your favorite fragrance is reformulated not for months, but for years. Things started to change at Guerlain in 1996, that's 13 years ago!
    What does that have to do with buying pre-reformulated fragrances now while they are still available though not in great supply. We know, in most cases, when reformulation took place and which packaging and labeling indicate the older formulation (vintage) supply. I happen to think some vintage Guerlains with pre-banned ingredients, are better than the current reformulated ones. We also know where new regulations are going to affect current scents in future forced reformualtions. Perhaps you should read the article at http://1000fragrances.blogspot.com/2...ragrances.html. How misinformed is that? The exchange of information and opinion are hallmarks of Base Notes and are much better received when the writers consider their tone and intent.
    Last edited by N_Tesla; 20th April 2009 at 07:54 AM.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Grasse, France
    Posts
    498

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Le critique de parfum View Post
    The anxiety caused by these misinformed and over-dramatic articles is amazing.

    Do you think Chanel and the like waited till the last minute to reformulate their classics, with the world eager to smell the difference?

    The deadline was known for a very long time, at this point your favorite fragrance is reformulated not for months, but for years. Things started to change at Guerlain in 1996, that's 13 years ago!
    This is such a money post and so true.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Ok, even if you are correct about Chanel and Guerlain, what about the smaller producers who may have ignored the guidelines but will not be able to ignore the regulations as law?
    "Don’t try to be original. Be simple. Be good technically, and if there is something in you, it will come out. ” - Henri Matisse.

    "Wear R de Capucci" - Hirch Duckfinder

    reviews

  8. #8

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Thanks for all the comments so far. Unfortunately, my interest in perfume started only a couple of years ago, after many reformulations of classics had already happened. I have never smelled older versions of what is available today. So basically I'm now wondering if I should bother stocking up on current versions (like Mitsouko for example) since they have already gone through a lot and will continue to change I suspect.
    Also, if anyone could give me a tip about finding vintage stuff I'd be most grateful.
    Last edited by Frenchie Day; 20th April 2009 at 01:19 PM.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    I was under the impression that the IFRA continues to amend their regulations, and that the changes that occured in Guerlain's past (apart from financial reasons) were to comply with *previous* amendments. The current amendment adds additional ingredients to the list.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    N_Tesla, I would call this sensationalism

    Scentophile, merci!

    Hirch_duckfinder, there's really no such thing a small producers right now. Even the little maisons are ordering their juices from Givaudan, IFF or Robertet, who happen to know exactly what to do.

    Frenchie Day, just relax, really my friend. Reformulations are not always the devil, let's trust the wizards of perfumery. These restrictions may actually improve their creativity and ingeniosity. New versions of our beloved classic may actually improve over the next decades from what they are rignt now...

  11. #11

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Reformulations are not always the devil, let's trust the wizards of perfumery. These restrictions may actually improve their creativity and ingeniosity. New versions of our beloved classic may actually [I
    improve[/I] over the next decades from what they are rignt now...
    That's what I'm hoping for actually :-)

  12. #12

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Yes, don't worry

  13. #13

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Le critique de parfum View Post
    The anxiety caused by these misinformed and over-dramatic articles is amazing.

    Do you think Chanel and the like waited till the last minute to reformulate their classics, with the world eager to smell the difference?

    The deadline was known for a very long time, at this point your favorite fragrance is reformulated not for months, but for years. Things started to change at Guerlain in 1996, that's 13 years ago!
    Yes and practically everbody (except you) seems to agree that it got worse. The older ones smell better.
    We all agree that really dangerous substances should be banned. But restrictions on a skin irritant (moss) and citrus oils is just bureaucratic over regulation.

    So what is your point? That fragrance companies will continue to develop new aromachemicals? I'm sure you are correct on that, but I want to smell the old ingredients, steeped in history, not new.
    "Don’t try to be original. Be simple. Be good technically, and if there is something in you, it will come out. ” - Henri Matisse.

    "Wear R de Capucci" - Hirch Duckfinder

    reviews

  14. #14
    ECaruthers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    946
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Let me ask about a specific classic - Joy. I sprayed a sample on a card at a NM in Honolulu in March. The scent lasted two days. If changes have been made since 1930, the current version is still pretty wonderful. Several posts about the awful changes to come claim that the Jasmine absolute in Joy and some other classic French perfumes will no longer be legal. So, what do people think will happen to Joy?

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Grasse, France
    Posts
    498

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Le critique de parfum View Post

    Hirch_duckfinder, there's really no such thing a small producers right now. Even the little maisons are ordering their juices from Givaudan, IFF or Robertet, who happen to know exactly what to do.
    .
    Pardon (in my best French accent), this is not true. There are plenty of small producers in the outskirts of Paris, Grasse, New Jersey, etc, and I assure you that these groups are working its "magic" to work with IFRA 43.
    Last edited by scentophile; 20th April 2009 at 06:52 PM.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by hirch_duckfinder View Post
    Yes and practically everbody (except you) seems to agree that it got worse.
    I never said that.

    You're rignt, the oldies do smell better of course. I said that all the classics were already reformulated at this point, and that things could improve in the future. Also, I for one don't care about ingredients, as long as the magic happens.

    ECaruthers, Joy isn't going anywhere, transition was probably done seamless

    Scentophile, they are plenty parfumeurs of course, I had in mind the little niche houses discussed here on Basenotes

  17. #17

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    ok, there is always that thought, that all the big perfumers and houses just recently got to know the fact, that oakmoss will be restricted (not 01.01.10, this is also a misinformation, as far as i'm concerned, it's in march or april, but you can find it in the orginal ifra paper).

    what about 31 rue cambon? it was released 2007, when was it planned? it's that big marketing thing, that it's the one chypre, that doesn't have oakmoss. who would care about it, unless oakmoss would be restricted some day soon. there was up until the recent years never the need or the urge or the will to create a chypre without oakmoss, but 1 (or 2 or 3) years ago chanel decided, without the ifra in mind: now it's about time, to create a chypre without oakmoss. yeah, alright, what an outstanding timing!

    i can tell you first hand, that marketing and positioning stratetegy is the first step in creating any product, at least, if you are one of the biggest ones in business. i'd guess, that no nose is allowed to create anything for chanel, until the target group for the product and than the strategy and the positioning is steady. you don't create the first chypre without oakmoss (or choose to market it as such), without the planners have decided to do so. the process of positioning and marketing needs months alone.

    and now tell me, that it was such a big surprise for everybody in the business, that oakmoss will be restricted.

    one more argument: there were a lot of chypres, that were discontinued the last years, but mostly early in this century, although they were much loved and are now the most looked after gems in ebay. the ones that sold/sell well were being reformulated. "they" probably knew that the "old" ingredients wouldn't make it the next years, so they on the one hand discontinued, what wasn't profitable enough to reformulate and on the other hand only reformulated, what would be sold even if it would smell tremendously different. most of it took place, when ifra 43 wasn't even thought about.

    why do i say that? because i'm still convinced, that most reformulations were already made with knowledge of the "new" restrictions. to buy it now means with big possibilty to buy the product, that will be there the next and the following years.

    in the end, it will be your decision: if you are fearless, don't buy, but if you are really concerned, buy, it doesn't harm anybody. and you can be sure about one thing: even if there would be proof, let's say in july 2010, that there weren't any reformulations at all, there will be heaps of people swearing, that their favourite scent has been changed.


    the by far most informative and unemotional source is the perfumeshrine, i think. i highly recommend to read the posts about this issue.
    Last edited by Bandit; 20th April 2009 at 09:23 PM. Reason: english is a hard and annoying language ;)

  18. #18
    N_Tesla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Center of the Universe; California.
    Posts
    4,599
    Blog Entries
    2

    Lightbulb Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    To: le critique de parfum From: hirch_duckfinder

    Quote Originally Posted by hirch_duckfinder View Post
    Yes and practically everbody (except you) seems to agree that it got worse. The older ones smell better.
    We all agree that really dangerous substances should be banned. But restrictions on a skin irritant (moss) and citrus oils is just bureaucratic over regulation.

    So what is your point? That fragrance companies will continue to develop new aromachemicals? I'm sure you are correct on that, but I want to smell the old ingredients, steeped in history, not new.
    hirch_duckfinder From: N_Tesla:

    I agree completely. The point of aquiring preformulated fragrances is to continue to appreciate them as they were and will not again be. The restrictions continue to change and some current, yet not reformulated, will become reformulated based on new restrictions so, based on advaced information current favorites could be aquired while still easily available and cheaper. Oakmoss is still, in some measure, included in many fragrances but, under continue tightening of restrictions will soon eliminate the use at all. I have yet to see here on base notes a single post indicating that a reformulated fragrance is better for the reformulation as Le critique de parfum has asserted. Furthermore why should we dumb down to the industry elite and, as also asserted, trust in the maisons. I think the maisons need to listen up to the buying public who underwrite the lifestyles of the perfumists. Purchase power is the answer to lame industry decisions like Proctor and Gambles discontinuance of Patou 1000. Sounds like the aristocracy is making a comeback in France. I am waiting for them to announce " ..then let them eat cake."
    Last edited by N_Tesla; 20th April 2009 at 10:39 PM.

  19. #19
    N_Tesla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Center of the Universe; California.
    Posts
    4,599
    Blog Entries
    2

    Smile Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit View Post
    ok, there is always that thought, that all the big perfumers and houses just recently got to know the fact, that oakmoss will be restricted (not 01.01.10, this is also a misinformation, as far as i'm concerned, it's in march or april, but you can find it in the orginal ifra paper).

    what about 31 rue cambon? it was released 2007, when was it planned? it's that big marketing thing, that it's the one chypre, that doesn't have oakmoss. who would care about it, unless oakmoss would be restricted some day soon. there was up until the recent years never the need or the urge or the will to create a chypre without oakmoss, but 1 (or 2 or 3) years ago chanel decided, without the ifra in mind: now it's about time, to create a chypre without oakmoss. yeah, alright, what an outstanding timing!

    i can tell you first hand, that marketing and positioning stratetegy is the first step in creating any product, at least, if you are one of the biggest ones in business. i'd guess, that no nose is allowed to create anything for chanel, until the target group for the product and than the strategy and the positioning is steady. you don't create the first chypre without oakmoss (or choose to market it as such), without the planners have decided to do so. the process of positioning and marketing needs months alone.

    and now tell me, that it was such a big surprise for everybody in the business, that oakmoss will be restricted.

    one more argument: there were a lot of chypres, that were discontinued the last years, but mostly early in this century, although they were much loved and are now the most looked after gems in ebay. the ones that sold/sell well were being reformulated. "they" probably knew that the "old" ingredients wouldn't make it the next years, so they on the one hand discontinued, what wasn't profitable enough to reformulate and on the other hand only reformulated, what would be sold even if it would smell tremendously different. most of it took place, when ifra 43 wasn't even thought about.

    why do i say that? because i'm still convinced, that most reformulations were already made with knowledge of the "new" restrictions. to buy it now means with big possibilty to buy the product, that will be there the next and the following years.

    in the end, it will be your decision: if you are fearless, don't buy, but if you are really concerned, buy, it doesn't harm anybody. and you can be sure about one thing: even if there would be proof, let's say in july 2010, that there weren't any reformulations at all, there will be heaps of people swearing, that their favourite scent has been changed.


    the by far most informative and unemotional source is the perfumeshrine, i think. i highly recommend to read the posts about this issue.
    Bandit:

    Here, here! Your points are well made.

  20. #20
    kumquat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    9,913
    Blog Entries
    100

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    I still think the oakmoss thing has as much to do with $$ as anything. It has probably been phased out over the last 30 years and people began noticing it in the 80's when their favorites were reformulated and suddenly no longer as good. That is likely true for other ingredients that are expensive like jasmine absolute & real sandalwood, etc. We perfume fans just have to follow the niche producers who are making quality frags, even though they are usually quite expensive.
    Currently wearing: Azurée by Estée Lauder

  21. #21
    Lian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    1,875

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    I'm thinking of stocking up on a la nuit. I just don't know how many bottles I'll need :/
    But once you get locked into a serious perfume collection, the tendency is to push it as far as you can.
    Currently wearing: L by Lolita Lempicka

  22. #22

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    I really don't think that Le critique de parfum said that reformulated perfumes are better than originals, but that new reformulations in the future might be better than the versions of classics we have today. No? Makes sense to me.

    I definitely agree that restrictions have been known for a while to everyone in the business, I'd be surprised if it were otherwise.

  23. #23

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Lian, I'm stocking up on Dzing!. You never know which ingredient is next, right? :-)

  24. #24

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Thank you Frenchie Day

    Not to mention that the problem is much more complex than some people might think. It's not like the versions we know were formulas from the 30s! It's an open secret that most classics were "tweaked" in the 50s, the 60s and later, with not always the best ingredients, and with tools and technology from that time period...

  25. #25
    AromiErotici
    Guest

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    If you're like me and prefer the ingredients used in 1970's and 1980's frags, then it's prudent to store up some bottles since they will be reformulated over and over again. With very few exceptions, the reformulated scents do not have the substance or quality of their namesakes.

    I may come across as being prejudiced against modern releases, however, that is not true at all. I try many new frags with an open mind and no preconceptions, yet most of them smell unsubstantial and too similar to one another. To me, they are unremarkable and have a one-size-fits-all mentality. Not every one mind you, but the vast majority.

    There is NO QUESTION fragrances will continue to run this course and gems from the past will be even more sought after. After all, there's only so many vintage bottles of juice floating around and when they're gone......it's all over but the crying.

  26. #26

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Le critique de parfum View Post
    The anxiety caused by these misinformed and over-dramatic articles is amazing.

    Do you think Chanel and the like waited till the last minute to reformulate their classics, with the world eager to smell the difference?

    The deadline was known for a very long time, at this point your favorite fragrance is reformulated not for months, but for years. Things started to change at Guerlain in 1996, that's 13 years ago!
    At last a voice of reason.
    Last edited by surreality; 24th April 2009 at 03:37 AM.
    Seek not the favor of the multitude; it is seldom got by honest and lawful means. But seek the testimony of few; and number not voices, but weigh them. - Immanuel Kant

  27. #27

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by hirch_duckfinder View Post
    Ok, even if you are correct about Chanel and Guerlain, what about the smaller producers who may have ignored the guidelines but will not be able to ignore the regulations as law?
    Any company that lacks the foresightedness to ignore guidelines destined to become law has no-one to blame for any future happenings but itself.
    Seek not the favor of the multitude; it is seldom got by honest and lawful means. But seek the testimony of few; and number not voices, but weigh them. - Immanuel Kant

  28. #28

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Of course, in principle, skilled perfumers can continue to achieve similar effects with a changing palette. But the question as I see it is not abstract at all-- it is this: which particular perfumes depend upon byGod naturals to achieve the particular effects that transport us. Let me suggest that we take up the case of three particular perfumes that stand to be changed--or so I fear-- by this round of restrictions: a citrus, a chypre and a jasmine soliflore. And since I'm doing this, let's say that we choose three that I love:
    1. Aqua di Parma Colonia. I've read that many citrus frags already use synthetics but does Colonia depend upon naturals for its particular effect? Which I find I am powerless to describe, but you might wonder the same about your favorite citrus.I would assume that Un Jardin Sur La Nil is safe, but what about Eau Sauvage, AdP Colonia, etc.?
    2. Odalisque. This is a floral chypre with a salty skin note similar, I think, to the salty note in Sel de Vetiver and to a lesser extent in lots of chypres.
    3. A la Nuit. What will be the fate of indolic jasmine soliflores after 2010?

  29. #29
    Pollux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    http://goo.gl/1zgdDl
    Posts
    3,957

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Everybody in product development knows changes must not be made in a rush. Changes in formulas are done in homeopathic steps. The New Coke case proved what every single product development engineer was doing ages ago, you can not do it on a sudden.

    So the answer would be that there will be plenty of time for getting stocks, but only in the cases were the end product would radically change due to reformulation.

    Final line - change is part of life, just cope with it.

  30. #30

    Default Re: Are the classics worth stocking up at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by surreality View Post
    At last a voice of reason.
    Wow, thank you so much Surreality.

Similar Threads

  1. A Tribute to the Classics of Scent
    By milamber in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 156
    Last Post: 20th April 2011, 10:23 PM
  2. Which are the classics?
    By Eau_Boy in forum Just Starting Out
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 16th May 2006, 07:54 PM
  3. Classics Month!
    By ironmics in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 9th August 2005, 03:54 AM
  4. My collection lacks classics!
    By madgradrx in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 16th July 2005, 02:10 AM
  5. Discovered, many LANVIN CLASSICS !!!
    By david in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12th July 2005, 06:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Loving perfume on the Internet since 2000