Code of Conduct
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pennsyl-tuckey
    Posts
    1,749
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Question Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    No, this is not a thread comparing the two. However, that is my question - I'm wondering if there's any difference between the most recent formulation, in the "original" bottle, and the previous two formulations. I have the most recent version and it smells like a watered down Aramis Havana (although Tsar came first), and the longevity is kinda lame.
    SEEKING BOTTLES OF:

    Aramis New West (preferably old bottle)
    Patrick by Fragrances of Ireland
    Azzaro Aqua
    Gloria by Cacharel

    PM me if you have bottles that you're willing to sell or trade!

  2. #2
    kxe003's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    873
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Yes, the longevity is very average to me, but that is fine as Tsar is not one of my favorites anyway. Although a great fragrance nonetheless.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by kxe003 View Post
    the longevity is very average to me.
    To me also.

  4. #4
    vita odorifera
    perfaddict's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Lagos
    Posts
    7,035
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    The newest Tsar is okay. I have it and enjoy it, but it is not as long-lasting as the original version, which is closer to Montana's Parfum d'Homme than to Havana, i think. I wonder why the one in the ribbed bottle was even called Tsar! VC&A must have had a tongue-in-cheek moment then.

    As an aside, one way to tell the difference between original and newest verrsions is that the bottle of the new one is actually transparent, and not opaque like the original.
    ointments and perfume delight the heart....

  5. #5
    shamu1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    North Shore, Mass.
    Posts
    2,347
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation

    Quote Originally Posted by perfaddict View Post
    The newest Tsar is okay. I have it and enjoy it, but it is not as long-lasting as the original version, which is closer to Montana's Parfum d'Homme than to Havana, i think. I wonder why the one in the ribbed bottle was even called Tsar! VC&A must have had a tongue-in-cheek moment then.

    As an aside, one way to tell the difference between original and newest verrsions is that the bottle of the new one is actually transparent, and not opaque like the original.
    I agree. Smells great, but not a powerhouse like the original Tsar. I just spray on more, and reapply mid-day. No sweat.
    Check out my blog Pour Monsieur, a no-nonsense guide to men's fragrances:
    http://pourmonsieurblog.blogspot.com/

    Any fragrance that should not be worn in public, should be worn in public.

Similar Threads

  1. What formulation is this Gentleman??
    By Hasupk@gmail.com in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 2nd March 2009, 08:00 PM
  2. The new Pour Homme Van Cleef & Arpels and Tsar or is it?
    By scentimus in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 29th August 2008, 02:40 PM
  3. Old formulation Ungaro III
    By aljinnie in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24th February 2008, 08:49 AM

Posting Permissions

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