Code of Conduct
Results 1 to 52 of 52
  1. #1

    Default Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Having used Armani Eau Pour Homme for the last 20 odd years, I was sad to note that my most recent purchase of this delightful fragrance appeared to be significantly less potent and rich. Even the box and bottle were cheaper versions of the original, and were it not for the impeccable source from which I purchased it, I might have had my doubts about its authenticity. It was purchased from Harrods, and I spoke to the SA there about the drop in quality, and it is clear from the comparisons she made with two other bottles, that it is indeed a standard version. I made a further comparison at another store, and it was the same outcome.

    It is still a fantastic fragrance, and a staple of mine in warmer weather, but I am slightly depressed at the drop in standards from such an esteemed marque. I still have bottles from the 80s and 90s for comparison, and there is undoubtedly a decline in the whole package. It was never a strong fragrance, but now it really is more like a weak EDC than an EDT. I wonder how many more of the classics will be pale imitations in the near future.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    That sucks. I have put off a full bottle purchase of this for years. (Did the same with Gucci Envy). Lesson learned - if you really like a fragrance, buy it early on. Don't procrastinate just because you have samples or miniatures. If you adore a fragrance- buy a larger bottle or two smaller ones.

    Can you tell us or take a picture of what the new bottle and packaging look like?

  3. #3

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Well, the differences are slight, but the lettering and the quality of the box are cheap looking, the nozzle on the bottle is of inferior quality. Granted these are small things, and on their own no great problem, but the quality of the fragrance is not as rich as before, its lost its edge. It had a delightful smokey quality that seems very muted in the newer bottle. Still eminantly wearable, but even a slight decline is a step in the wrong direction. I have yet to find a newer version of anything that was actually an improvement.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Could be so kind as to take a picture - that way I can see about locating a bottle of the 'old' juice based on the photo. If possible?

  5. #5

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    ...........
    Last edited by Drax Blower; 15th July 2009 at 12:19 AM.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Can anyone confirm if the bottle or packaging has in fact changed? I don't know how else to determine if it is new juice or old juice without opening it? And we all know you can't return it once that is done!

  7. #7

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by Inselaffe View Post
    Having used Armani Eau Pour Homme for the last 20 odd years, I was sad to note that my most recent purchase of this delightful fragrance appeared to be significantly less potent and rich. Even the box and bottle were cheaper versions of the original, and were it not for the impeccable source from which I purchased it, I might have had my doubts about its authenticity. It was purchased from Harrods, and I spoke to the SA there about the drop in quality, and it is clear from the comparisons she made with two other bottles, that it is indeed a standard version. I made a further comparison at another store, and it was the same outcome.

    It is still a fantastic fragrance, and a staple of mine in warmer weather, but I am slightly depressed at the drop in standards from such an esteemed marque. I still have bottles from the 80s and 90s for comparison, and there is undoubtedly a decline in the whole package. It was never a strong fragrance, but now it really is more like a weak EDC than an EDT. I wonder how many more of the classics will be pale imitations in the near future.

    Unfortunately Inselaffe,
    I concur with the letter and spirit of this post. Most reformulations are sad events, this one more so for me since Armani Eau Pour Homme was a staple for me in the 1990s.

    There is no doubt that most fragrance companies believe the market will stand inferior products. Personally, I don't think there are many clever people with integrity working in the fragrance industry, probably not one its
    management or marketing segments. The bottom line seems to be their god and they are sacrificing everything to it. My advice, buy vintage whenever you can--everything is being watered down--and forget the rest, even to a large extent the false deities of the niche pantheon.

    scentemental

    Last edited by scentemental; 18th June 2009 at 04:06 PM.

  8. #8
    Sur la Plage

    petruccijc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Clearwater Beach, Florida
    Posts
    17,010

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    That's very sad to hear. I always liked Armani Eau Pour Homme, and had even thought of adding it back to my wardrobe. But if I do, I guess I will need to look for a vintage bottle.
    Please feel free to check out my Swap Thread - Patou pour Homme, L'Instant de Guerlain PH Extreme, Dior Homme Intense, Pure Malt, Pure Coffee and many more! Click Here For My Swap Thread

  9. #9

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Drat!

    I've been thinking about this one a lot recently. It seems like every time I wear it I'm impressed by how good it smells, and it is one of the few frags I wear that regularly draw compliments, especially from women. It remains one of my all time favorites after all these years.

    Now it looks like I should've bought another bottle years ago. Despite the rash of reformulations I had made the false assumption that this one would be safe and that I could get another bottle of the real stuff any time.

    Is the reportedly subtle difference in box quality the only way to ID the vintage juice? Armani could've at least done us a favor by changing the packaging when they did the dirty deed. How sneaky!

    This has certainly put a crimp in my day.

    I'm going to go douse myself with Eau pour Homme and stew about it.

    noggs

  10. #10
    Basenotes Institution
    mikeperez23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    27,201

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by petruccijc View Post
    That's very sad to hear. I always liked Armani Eau Pour Homme, and had even thought of adding it back to my wardrobe. But if I do, I guess I will need to look for a vintage bottle.
    Oh me too.

    I wore this a lot growing up (I have a distinct memory of growing up and sneaking into my brother's room to spray this from his bottle) and I'm saddened to hear this news.
    "You are here to enable the Divine purpose of the Universe to unfold. That is how important you are."

    -- Eckhart Tolle

  11. #11

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline


    Armani fragrances are currently--and have always been--owned by L'Oréal's luxury products division Prestige & Collections. It's part of the multinational corporatization of the designer fragrances that has been going on especially over the period of the last two decades, and the writing is on the wall. Look what happened to Rochas fragrances, for example, when they were sold to P&G [Proctor and Gamble] Prestige Beaute. What's really surprising is that L'Oréal took as long as it did to change the formulation. One cannot assume that any fragrance is sacrosanct anymore. In fact, I daresay there is not a fragrance older than 10 years that has not been reformulated to some extent already. Apparently, even Acqua di Giò pour Homme has been reformulated, dumbed down, if you can believe it.

    I have been buying, storing,and using my favorite vintage fragrances for a few years now. I have one of those 6.8 oz splash bottles of Armani Eau Pour Homme. My only regret is that I didn't buy a few of those bottles when I had the chance. Compared to to what you pay for the same stuff today or even for niche drek, they were going for a song.

    Just to show how far we've regressed, Armani Eau Pour Homme was, I believe, originally created for Giorgio Armani as his personal bespoke fragrance by the great perfumer Roger Pellegrino. It was the original Armani Privé fragrance and worthy of the name, hardly the same quality and beauty that goes under that Armani Privé label at the moment, you know, the $180.00 retail bottles that turned up in embarrassingly large numbers and at embarrassingly bargain basement prices at discounters like Marshalls and TJMaxx. Everybody was surprised. I wasn't. Why, because I know that a bottle of vintage Armani Eau Pour Homme costs considerably more to produce than any of the current Armani Privé line, and let's not even get into the whole discussion to do with aesthetics. I find the current Armani Privé line uninspired and a cynical and insulting exercise in tricked up quality and exclusivity. I didn't trip over anyone to buy a bottle, not even at $30.00, as if that were a good reason for purchasing something that was originally $180.00.

    With the disappearance of such a fine formulation as the vintage Armani Eau Pour Homme, more and more people will have less and less of a basis for comparison of true quality and beauty, and they will be taken in and more by the blandishments of packaging, branding, and price. In some ways, the multinational corporations have already won the hearts and minds of the consumer. Why, indeed, keep a quality product like the vintage formulation of Armani Eau Pour Homme on the market. Give the public the watered down, chlorotic version. Really, who would know the difference--except for a handful of Basenoters--and, really, who gives a sh*t, and what could those who give a sh*t really do anyway? Fragrance is a thing of ephemeral beauty and we are losing even that as it is being replaced by an enduring mediocrity right under our noses.

    scentemental

    Last edited by scentemental; 14th August 2009 at 04:57 AM.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Hear, hear, scentemental. You put it so very well.

    I can't tell you how many times I've been elated to discover that a favorite scent was still being produced, only to find a weakling imposter in the newest bottle. Rochas, as you mention, is one of the saddest cases. I threw away (!!) the last bottle of Eau de Rochas I purchased - it was garbage and that's where it belonged.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Soooooooooo, does anyone know what the new packaging looks like? I'd like to snag an old bottle while I can - but I need to know the packaging and or bottle changes to be able to differentiate.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by Jardanel View Post
    Hear, hear, scentemental. You put it so very well.

    I can't tell you how many times I've been elated to discover that a favorite scent was still being produced, only to find a weakling imposter in the newest bottle. Rochas, as you mention, is one of the saddest cases. I threw away (!!) the last bottle of Eau de Rochas I purchased - it was garbage and that's where it belonged.

    Weakling impostor is a great way of putting it Jardanel. As I said in a previous post, they took more than just the Pour out of Eau de Rochas Pour Homme when the reformulated it and repackaged it as Eau de Rochas Homme. Another one of my favorite citrus fragrances reformulated to insignificance.

    scentemental

  15. #15

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Irrespective of all this, and I should feel concerned and even hurt, since it is one of my favorites (and it is not easy to be disappointed by the very one and only absolutely fave scent), it still manages to occupy the top spot for me.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by scentemental View Post

    Armani fragrances are currently--and have always been--owned by L'Oréal's luxury products division Prestige & Collections. It's part of the multinational corporatization of the designer fragrances that has been going on especially over the period of the last two decades, and the writing is on the wall. Look what happened to Rochas fragrances, for example, when they were sold to P&G [Proctor and Gamble] Prestige Beaute. What's really surprising is that L'Oréal took as long as it did to change the formulation. One cannot assume that any fragrance is sacrosanct anymore. In fact, I daresay there is not a fragrance older than 10 years that has not been reformulated to some extent already. Apparently, even Acqua di Giò pour Homme has been reformulated, dumbed down, if you can believe it.

    I have been buying, storing,and using my favorite vintage fragrances for a few years now. I have one of those 6.8 oz splash bottles of Armani Eau Pour Homme. My only regret is that I didn't buy a few of those bottles when I had the chance. Compared to to what you pay for the same stuff today or even for niche drek, they were going for a song.

    Just to show how far we've regressed, Armani Eau Pour Homme was, I believe, originally created for Giorgio Armani as his personal bespoke fragrance by the great perfumer Roger Pellegrino. It was the original Armani Privé fragrance and worthy of the name, hardly the same quality and beauty that goes under that Armani Privé label at the moment, you know, the $180.00 retail bottles that turned up in embarrassingly large numbers and at embarrassingly bargain basement prices at discounters like Marshalls and TJMaxx. Everybody was surprised. I wasn't. Why, because I know that a bottle of vintage Armani Eau Pour Homme costs considerably more to produce than any of the current Armani Privé line, and let's not even get into the whole discussion to do with aesthetics. I find the current Armani Privé line uninspired and a cynical and insulting exercise in tricked up quality and exclusivity. I didn't trip over anyone to buy a bottle, not even at $30.00, as if that were a good reason for purchasing something that was originally $180.00.

    With the disappearance of such a fine formulation as the vintage Armani Eau Pour Homme, more and more people will have less and less of a basis for comparison of true quality and beauty, and they will be taken in and more by the blandishments of packaging, branding, and price. In some ways, the multinational corporations have already won the hearts and minds of the consumer. Why, indeed, keep a quality product like the vintage formulation of Armani Eau Pour Homme on the market. Give the public the, watered down, chlorotic version. Really, who would know the difference--except for a handful of Basenoters--and, really, who gives a sh*t, and what could they do even if they did give a sh*t? Fragrance is a thing of ephemeral beauty and we are losing even that as it is being replaced by an induring mediocrity right under our noses.

    scentemental

    An excellent post scentemental, and confirmation indeed that absolutely nothing is sancrosanct anymore. One can only imagine what further changes will occur to this fragrance over the next few years with the advent of new perfumery regulations. Anyone owning a vintage bottle at this moment in time should treasure it, and marvel at the delightful untarnished liquid within. Some will argue, and indeed cogently, that it is only a small drop in quality, from maybe a 9/10 fragrance to an 8, but to me, that one point made all the difference. What was sublime, is now only very good. This is the thin end of the wedge, further decline is inevitable. I am resolved to replenish my supply with older stock where and when I can find it.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Is there a time frame when the reformulation might have occurred? I have an old bottle of this that I've been using lately and it has really grown on me.

  18. #18
    Pollux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    http://goo.gl/1zgdDl
    Posts
    3,584

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Blame cost reduction policies and its negative impact on quality on Porter's cost - efficiency advantage and mediocre managerial decision making. At this point, I have the feeling that it would be an excellent idea to develop our own fragrance company.

    At least there is one exception: I have the three versions of Van Cleef & Arpels pour Homme and the people of Interparfum made a good job with VC&A pour Homme.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Last edited by neal; 19th June 2009 at 03:02 AM.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    The Scentedmonkey image is definitely the new packaging and very likely the reformulated version.

    The Scentiments image is the older style bottle, but it is there is no absolute guarantee that is has not been reformulated. There is a possibility that it was reformulated before the bottle and packaging changed. Although, most reformulations tend to come with changes in bottles and packaging.

    Also, remember that most online retailer keep the old image up on their websites and sell the new bottle even after customers have pointed out to them that it's misleading to do so. Find out which bottle you are getting before you order, and do let us know how you faired.

    scentemental

  21. #21

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    The packaging hasn´t changed. The Scentmonkey pic. is just the 30ml version and the Scentiments the bigger size version.
    Here´s the most recent version from a Douglas website.
    http://nl.douglas-shop.com/douglas/G...001403304.html

  22. #22

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline


    I don't recall if the new 3.4 oz bottle I recently tried at Ulta has the black plastic missing at the bottom; that might, indeed, be a feature of the smaller sized bottles, but I definitely remember there were changes to the bottle,
    especially around the sprayer, that made it look and feel cheaper. The fragrance definitely smelled cheaper.

    scentemental
    Last edited by scentemental; 19th June 2009 at 06:15 AM.

  23. #23

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Vintage Packaging





    Current Packaging (reformulated fragrance)

    Last edited by scentemental; 13th August 2009 at 11:19 PM.

  24. #24

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    I whole heartedly agree with this post. I also used to live in England during the 80's and 90's and had many great years as a young man using the original Armani. It was in fact, the second quality designer fragrance I ever discovered. The first was Paco Rabanne. The days of my youth are gone now and so too it would seem are the quality fragrances I remember from that time. The same can be said of Santos De Cartier. I remember trying it back in 1989/1990 and being completely seduced by it. Twenty years later and not only has the fragrance been altered, the bottle is changed too. You used to be able to buy that in a large refillable version. Long gone, too.

    The problem of fragrances being compromised over time is not going to go away. However, as Scentemental rightly says, the conusmer at large is not even aware of the changes, let alone feeling the need to revert to former glories. Of course, many basenoters care but fragrance houses will not listen to the minority.

    regards

  25. #25

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    New:
    http://www.theperfumeshop.com/pws/im...large/7335.jpg

    ...Note the stubbier cap. The black top half being shorter.


    Old:
    http://www.amaranti.pl/images/armani_pour_homme.jpg
    Last edited by neal; 2nd July 2009 at 10:17 PM.

  26. #26

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    While I can certainly appreciate the disappointment of those who are familiar with the new vs. the old versions, I personally never knew the "original" original version of Armani. And have just tried it for the first time yesterday, I have to say that it is nevertheless an uncommonly excellent fragrance in its latest incarnation -- I even purchased a bottle at full price and do not regret it in the least.


  27. #27
    Basenotes Institution
    mikeperez23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    27,201

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by vonMises View Post
    While I can certainly appreciate the disappointment of those who are familiar with the new vs. the old versions, I personally never knew the "original" original version of Armani. And have just tried it for the first time yesterday, I have to say that it is nevertheless an uncommonly excellent fragrance in its latest incarnation -- I even purchased a bottle at full price and do not regret it in the least.

    Good news.

    Sometimes some of us get swept up in reformulation mania, and sometimes for those who haven't smelled the old, the problem can be nonexistent.

  28. #28

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline


    When all is said and done, I am happy for all those who are content with the new formulations.

    However, for those of us have who grew up on the more-true-to-the-art-of-classic-perfumery
    original vintage formulations and lived with such original vintage formulations for years and are now confronted with having to accommodate ourselves to the new, glib technology of reformulations, the dilemma can best be summed up with an analogy: if one grew up drinking freshly squeezed orange juice for most of one's life, no bottled orange juice is ever going to be an adequate or satisfying substitute for the real thing, so, please, let's not pretend there isn't a difference. The difference, experientially speaking, is substantial, undeniable, and irrevocable because it is clearly perceived and sincerely lamented. For those who haven't lived with these original vintage formulations, you may well consider yourself fortunate, but then again, from another perspective, it is possible to consider yourself as unfortunate.

    Everyone has the right to drink bottled orange juice, and that's fine, but I prefer mine freshly squeezed. It's not a mania; it's a preference based on what I value, the quiddity of my personal taste, and, in the final analysis, an aesthetic judgment about what is truly beautiful. Fine distinctions to be sure, but in an age that is increasingly erasing all distinctions and making of everything one huge undifferentiated, agglomerated mass, fine distinctions become increasingly more and more important and necessary, especially if one feels the need to resist the strong drift toward homogenization.

    scentemental

    P.S. I agree, the reformulated Armani Eau Pour Homme is still better than most of what is released today (designer or niche).


    Last edited by scentemental; 14th August 2009 at 05:16 PM.

  29. #29
    AromiErotici
    Guest

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by scentemental View Post

    When all is said and done, I am happy for all those who are content with the new formulations.

    However, for those of us have who grew up on the older, more-true-to-the-art-of-classic-perfumery formulations of these older fragrances and lived with these original formulations for years as opposed to accommodating ourselves to the now new, glib technology of reformulations, the dilemma can best be summed up with an analogy: if one grew up drinking freshly squeezed orange juice for most of one's life, no bottled orange juice is ever going to be an adequate or satisfying substitute for the real thing, so, please, let's not pretend there isn't a difference. The difference, experientially speaking, is substantial, undeniable, and irrevocable because it is clearly perceived and clearly lamented. For those who haven't lived with the vintage formulations, you might well consider yourself fortunate, but then again, from another perspective, you might not.

    Everyone has the right to drink bottled orange juice, and that's fine, but I prefer mine freshly squeezed. It's not a mania; it's a preference based on what I value, the quiddity of my personal taste, and, in the final analysis, an aesthetic judgment about what is truly beautiful. Fine distinctions to be sure, but in an age that is increasingly erasing all distinctions and making of everything one huge undifferentiated, agglomerated mass, fine distinctions become increasingly more and more important and necessary, especially if one feels the need to resist strong drift toward homogenization.

    scentemental

    P.S. I agree, the reformulated Armani Eau Pour Homme is still better than most of what is released today (designer and niche).


    No doubt about your excellent command of the written word my friend. There aren't too many others here that can explain clearly and eloquently, but you are surely among them.

    I am unfamiliar with this scent you speak of, but do lament reformulations, with the exception of only a few. You have already said it better than I could ever muster.

  30. #30
    smeller
    Guest

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    I must say that I just bought a 50 ml (1.7 oz) at a large department store here in Brazil.

    The bottle/box/juice color is absolutely identical to the older "vintage" version that's in the pics on this thread (and the one I purchased back in january 2007).

    They are ONLY selling these "vintage" bottles, they have many and the SA didn't even believe me about the existence of this different bottle.

    I'm still to do a side-by-side comparison, but I wanted to get an extra bottle of this. Of course, there is also the risk of a reformulated juice in a vintage bottle, but I decided to take this chance, considering that even the reformulation is potentially great stuff.

    The downside: it's really expensive to purchase fragrances in physical stores here, that's why I always try to do my shops in international websites. Obviously, this was a deserved exception.

    So, anyone have seen the current formulation being sold in the vintage bottle?

  31. #31

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    I was fortunate to get some Versace l'Homme at a good price recently. Very potent stuff! Discovering and enjoying some of the "classics" is a major thing I look forward to with this hobby.

  32. #32

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    For all those looking for what Armani Pour Homme used to be, may I suggest Lorenzo Villoresi Uomo.
    It is just that. Perhaps better.

  33. #33

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    This saddens me, I have always worn and enjoyed this frag. But I must say the new version, although not as good, good enough to get the job done. But to many of our Classics are being reformulated

  34. #34

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Such is the fate of most fragrances it seems

  35. #35

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Well, you would want a cheapened version of this to wear with your Chinese-assembled Armani watch (production cost $5) and low-end stitched-together-in-Romania Armani suit. Ahh, sweatshop "luxury."
    My Wardrobe
    II est de forts parfums pour qui toute matière/Est poreuse. On dirait qu'ils pénètrent le verre.

  36. #36
    Dependent pluran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    6,991

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    One of the best accords ever, and it used to be a great fragrance. It's still there in the new stuff, but the overall fragrance has become a little cheap and annoying.

    The older fragrance formulas (mostly designer) are generally more intricate, and have a hard time accommodating the current IFRA regulations. This one is a classic example. Still prefer it to the majority of niche fragrances, though.
    Last edited by pluran; 25th January 2013 at 08:24 AM.

  37. #37
    Basenotes Plus
    Diamondflame's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,716

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    A real shame for this was my 'signature' scent in early 1990s. I've outgrown it since but it does bring back the bitter sweet memories...

  38. #38

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by smeller View Post
    I must say that I just bought a 50 ml (1.7 oz) at a large department store here in Brazil.

    The bottle/box/juice color is absolutely identical to the older "vintage" version that's in the pics on this thread (and the one I purchased back in january 2007).

    They are ONLY selling these "vintage" bottles, they have many and the SA didn't even believe me about the existence of this different bottle.

    I'm still to do a side-by-side comparison, but I wanted to get an extra bottle of this. Of course, there is also the risk of a reformulated juice in a vintage bottle, but I decided to take this chance, considering that even the reformulation is potentially great stuff.

    The downside: it's really expensive to purchase fragrances in physical stores here, that's why I always try to do my shops in international websites. Obviously, this was a deserved exception.

    So, anyone have seen the current formulation being sold in the vintage bottle?
    Hi from Italy here,

    as Armani pour Homme is among my favourite scents (and the most Italian smelling juice ever IMHO), after reading this post I run to a perfume shop in my town and asked about this story of reformulation. The sa stared at me surprised and told me there is only 1 Armani Pour Homme (as in the picture of the vintage version posted by Scentemental :brolly. I bought a bottle on the spot and made the comparison with my nearly empty 20 years old bottle. Result: same bottle, same box, same smell.
    So, I agree, second and confirm the words of the Brazilian basenoter.

    Should I guess that in Italy or in Brazil there are still stocks of older bottles?

    Cheers

  39. #39
    Basenotes Plus
    ericrico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,128

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Hi scentemental -

    I wanted to verify this as some contradictions have come up. I thought that "89% Vol." was listed on the older juice...? I have a bottle sold to me as "Vintage" with the code on the bottle not verifiable by Checkcosmetic.net - usually a good sign for Vintage scents. Plus, it smells wonderful and rich.

    I bought the exact 50ml boxed bottle pictured in your post from a dealer not too long ago (no "89% Vol." printed on it) - it dates back to mid-2006. On the back, both Oakmoss and Treemoss are in the list of ingredients. It has "80% Vol" volume listed. So, I would have to think that older juice is actually listed with "89% Vol" as the 2006 juice is very nice, but has limited oakmoss in it (since it is post-IFRA's ban on the wonderful note & fixative that is that precious lichen). But, this is contradictory to what you say.

    I have to say that between the two bottles, they smell rather close...but the bottle sold as Vintage with a gold-plated bottom smells wonderful. Neither has excellent longevity - but I find a bit more in the "89% Vol." juice...with some more depth.

    This is confusing a bit. Another reviewer wrote this:

    "I actually have 2 bottles of this...One marked 80% and another marked 89%. Let me say that the 80% volume has greater depth and longevity. I use the 89% for casual wear and keep the 80% for more formal times. This will always be a favorite of mine."

    I am curious to know more for sure...is the "89% Vol." for sure the reformulation? As someone put forth, the latest reformulation only says "ARMANI" in the middle and "eau pour homme" at the bottom of the glass. Oakmoss would be even less than the 2006 juice I have - and the bottle has once again, changed slightly. By the way, 2006 juice is NOT Vintage for all those wondering. IFRA's ban on oakmoss started phasing in around 2000/2001, to my knowledge.

    Check out the latest bottle shown in ads from Armani - http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...9QEwAw&dur=549

    Curious if people know more or have some evidence - for example, who has a bottle from the 90's? What does it look like? I consider this a 'reference scent' in citrus. It is one I've known for years and it seems to balance the classicism of Monsieur de Givenchy and Eau Sauvage with a nice, contemporary feel. Actually, not a dated fragrance to me at all. Formal and wonderful.

    Nothing short of wonderful...!

    Cheers,

    ericrico

    Quote Originally Posted by scentemental View Post
    Vintage Packaging





    Current Packaging (reformulated fragrance)

    Last edited by ericrico; 25th January 2013 at 03:19 AM.
    “Some perfumes are as fragrant as an infant’s flesh, sweet as an oboe’s cry, and greener than the spring; While others are triumphant, decadent or rich; Having the expansion of infinite things, like ambergris and musk, benzoin and frankincense, which sing the transports of the mind and every sense.”

    ― Charles Baudelaire, The Flowers of Evil & Paris Spleen

  40. #40
    hednic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    McLean, NYC, & Búzios
    Posts
    83,790

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    I got this when it first came out in stores but my feeling is that any release of this classic is worth having.

  41. #41

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    I've concluded that very few will ever be as it was back then, especially in the designer realm.
    Is the juice worth the squeeze?

  42. #42

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Hi all, the two bottles depicted on Ericrico's post (by Scentemental) are NOT vintage ones.
    Vintage ones are like this (sse picture), with the percentage of alcohol (in this case 89%), and NO bar-codes on the box.



    About lists of ingredients: here is Rear of the box in 2008 (left) and 2004 (right)

  43. #43
    Basenotes Plus
    ericrico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,128

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Hello Andre -

    Thank you. I am a little confused here as the bottles (which I think are actually Vintage - listed with 'eau pour homme' and '89% Vol' look identical. Boxes aside, as I found a bottle identical to what you show (which is the same as Scentemental's bottle)...it came without a box.

    Here is the key. Please take a picture of the bottom of your bottle and post it. I would like to see the base plate. It is much appreciated and I think will shed light on this.

    Thank you, my friend.

    ericrico


    Quote Originally Posted by Andrè Moreau View Post
    Hi all, the two bottles depicted on Ericrico's post (by Scentemental) are NOT vintage ones.
    Vintage ones are like this (sse picture), with the percentage of alcohol (in this case 89%), and NO bar-codes on the box.



    About lists of ingredients: here is Rear of the box in 2008 (left) and 2004 (right)
    - - - Updated - - -

    Hello Andre -

    Thank you. I am a little confused here as the bottles (which I think are actually Vintage - listed with 'eau pour homme' and '89% Vol' look identical. Boxes aside, as I found a bottle identical to what you show (which is the same as Scentemental's bottle)...it came without a box.

    Here is the key. Please take a picture of the bottom of your bottle and post it. I would like to see the base plate. It is much appreciated and I think will shed light on this.

    Thank you, my friend.

    ericrico


    Quote Originally Posted by Andrè Moreau View Post
    Hi all, the two bottles depicted on Ericrico's post (by Scentemental) are NOT vintage ones.
    Vintage ones are like this (sse picture), with the percentage of alcohol (in this case 89%), and NO bar-codes on the box.



    About lists of ingredients: here is Rear of the box in 2008 (left) and 2004 (right)
    “Some perfumes are as fragrant as an infant’s flesh, sweet as an oboe’s cry, and greener than the spring; While others are triumphant, decadent or rich; Having the expansion of infinite things, like ambergris and musk, benzoin and frankincense, which sing the transports of the mind and every sense.”

    ― Charles Baudelaire, The Flowers of Evil & Paris Spleen

  44. #44

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    I have a Reformulated bottle and today I compared it (smell) side by side in a store (I know the owner) with an old tester she had that is marked 89% and there was ZERO difference. NADA!! Hence, more confusion. It appears that there is no sure way of knowing which is which at this point by outside appearances other than no bar code IMO.
    Last edited by Boge; 26th January 2013 at 05:01 AM.

  45. #45

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Here'a bottle of old "Armani" splash version.
    The Paco Rabanne perfume is a tribute for Ericrico

    Presentation


    Front box: note the "compact" greenish color (not woody or fabric drawings)


    The batch code is almost invisible, you have to twist the bottle to see it.


    Bottle under light


    Side of the box with list of "ingredients"


    IMPORTANT: the carved/embossed loo on the upper side of the box


    and finally, the bottom of the bottle


    hope this helps!
    bye,
    Andre

  46. #46
    Basenotes Plus
    ericrico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,128

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Thank you, Andre!

    Merci. I see the points you make - thank you for the details. But, my eyes keep drifting to the Vintage Paco Rabanne box, so it's hard to see what the Armani bottle even looks like for me!

    Cheers,

    ericrico

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrè Moreau View Post
    Here'a bottle of old "Armani" splash version.
    The Paco Rabanne perfume is a tribute for Ericrico

    Presentation


    Front box: note the "compact" greenish color (not woody or fabric drawings)


    The batch code is almost invisible, you have to twist the bottle to see it.


    Bottle under light


    Side of the box with list of "ingredients"


    IMPORTANT: the carved/embossed loo on the upper side of the box


    and finally, the bottom of the bottle


    hope this helps!
    bye,
    Andre
    “Some perfumes are as fragrant as an infant’s flesh, sweet as an oboe’s cry, and greener than the spring; While others are triumphant, decadent or rich; Having the expansion of infinite things, like ambergris and musk, benzoin and frankincense, which sing the transports of the mind and every sense.”

    ― Charles Baudelaire, The Flowers of Evil & Paris Spleen

  47. #47

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Andre,

    How is the quality on that older bottle? In general, do bottles of vintage Eau Pour Homme last well? (Assuming they have been cared for!)

  48. #48

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_newton View Post
    Andre,

    How is the quality on that older bottle? In general, do bottles of vintage Eau Pour Homme last well? (Assuming they have been cared for!)
    Last very well: the major differences from modern version are the strong base notes, especially oakmoss & musk in the drydown, both intense and persistent.

  49. #49

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    I have found the reformulated version is not only not as robust, but smells like a wet-dog upon dry-down. The reforumulated smells "similar" to the vintage for a few fleeing moments until you are left with a frangrance with no depth, character, or lasting power. This frangrance was never one for longevity, but now it's a shadow of what it used to be. I own both and can say without hesitation that I wouldn't bother with the reformulated version.

    As a side note, the newest version sports a silver stripe on the bottom of the box. Unfortunately, the "older packaging" is not necessarily indicative of older juice with oakmoss. The only way one can confirm what they're receiving is by asking the seller exactly what the packaging looks like. If you have a short list of ingredients on the side of a greenish colored box, you're good. If you have ingredients listed on the back of the box, oakmoss and tree moss have to be included, otherwise, you're left with an overpriced, hollow rendition...

    I have decanted some of the newer juice and added oakmoss absolute that I'd bought from Camden-Grey to it... It definitely takes on a different vibe, and is much more reminiscent of the older juice with more body and substantiation. I'm still playing with the ratios, but I can tell you that I'm on to something! Oakmoss absolute is highly concentrated and has to be diluted with a another agent. I've chosen jojoba oil, seeing as it's unscented, it seems like a good mixing vessel. I've done this with newer releases of Safari by RL, and the results have been fantastic after I figured out how much to add. Just some food for thought

  50. #50

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Andre,

    Are you absolutely sure about the batch codes and their chronology?

    According to your site, UMxx shifted to 5 digits in 1994.

    However, I just found a bottle with UM123 stamped into the cardboard.

    Everything else indicates common early 90s production - Cosmair, 129 rue du FG St.Honorè etc.

    So, is it likely the production actually shifted in 1993, (If you are still using the the two letter abbreviation)?











    Kind Regards
    Last edited by jason_newton; 28th November 2013 at 12:13 PM. Reason: Added details

  51. #51

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    precisely, I was wearing it the whole day (the current one) and It lasted a very long time, I could not but smell it all day , but one thing is certain: with a very moderate projection, but I was quite surprised about its longevity.
    my current top five (always in transition)

    Dior Eau Noire
    HdP 1725 Casanova
    eau de gloire parfum d'empire
    Dia man Amouage
    comme des garçons man 2

  52. #52

    Default Re: Armani Eau Pour Homme. A decline

    Andre,

    There is also a change you may not have seen or considered. Your bottle with the UL code (1992) has a slightly different list of ingredients to my bottle with a UM code. Do you think they went from 4 digits to 5 during 1993 rather than 1994. It would seem that way to me.

    Regards

Similar Threads

  1. Which designer fragrances are comparable to niche?
    By Kevin Guyer in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 15th August 2012, 08:26 PM
  2. Armani Eau pour Homme.
    By frank06 in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12th June 2007, 04:06 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