Rubegon...where are you?
Thread: PdN New York
Does anyone have both an old and new formulation of New York? I know this fragrance's reformulation has been previously noted, but I haven't found a thread that really pits one version against the other.
Please share your thoughts on this perfume's changes!
*PS, I have a sample of the newer stuff and, to me, it smells great.
Rubegon...where are you?
Discover my Guest Reviewer Of The Day here
Here I am, alfarom! Yes, I do have both. I'm a little ashamed to say I haven't worn my vintage one yet ...
I've been hoarding it. I've been sort of waiting to see if I can get another bottle before starting to use the one I have, if that makes any sense. I will try to test them to tonight and report back.
Anyway, for now, here's the family photo ...
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Have a bottle of the newer stuff. Just wonderful
Wow, rubegon--the children have their mother's eyes
I have about 10ml left in my old 30ml bottle. It's strong and rich, and was in my top 3 fragrances. Sweet ambery orange and spice, with wood. Just all around classy but versatile and comfortable in any situation. I could always wear it when I couldn't decide what to wear. Now I'll be hoarding it, like someone upthread said.
The newer 100ml that I just bought last month is a major disappointment. Much weaker and only lasts about 3 hours, 4 tops. I may be able to wear it if I over-apply, haven't tried that yet. But it's just not the same. The old one lasted all day and I'm really sad.
I think they're nearly the same as far as notes. I did try them side by side. It's the strength and longevity that really suffered with the reformulation. And of course, this is just one person's opinion. But I seriously was thinking about returning the new bottle.
Did anyone around here win the big partial bottle that was on ebay recently? I was outbid and was really curious if it was the good old formula. Just to torture myself. : )
Last edited by My_pep_pep; 17th December 2012 at 10:02 PM. Reason: adding link
I've just recieved my 1 oz. bottle today of the reformulation and it smells wonderful. I've been on basenotes long enough to know that there will be a group that claim the vintage is so much better that the reformulation smells like pig offal. Since it's a claim made for every scent that has ever been reformulated I no longer give it much credit. It's simply a fantastic scent and really look forward to giving it a proper wearing.
First of all, the one I've worn regularly is the 1oz bottle on the left. I bought it at the Scent Bar early this year, and it's on it's last few sprays now (the photo is a couple of months old). I know it pretty well, as I've gone through an ounce in about 10 months or so. I love it. I don't know if it has been reformulated since my bottle or not. I usually wear 4 or 5 sprays and I can still detect it by the end of the day, 10 hours later or so. Radiance is very limited after about 4 or 5 hours, but it hangs in there.
The tall 100ml bottle is a backup I got in a swap a few months ago. I don't know how old it is, but certainly older than September. I got the vintage bottle in October, having never seen this bottle/box design before. The presentation is much higher quality, obviously. Does anyone else have this presentation? Has anyone ever seen it before?
My_pep_pep: is your old 1oz bottle like mine? Has it been reformulated with the same packaging, in other words? I did see that 250ml flacon on eBay. II watched it until it went over what it's worth, IMO. The buyer paid a premium for what looks like non-vintage juice in an opened splash bottle.
OK - on to the comparo. I'm no alfarom, but I'll do my best.
I sprayed each on an outer forearm - 2 or 3 sprays - about 2.5 hours ago.
Immediately there was a pretty clear difference. The vintage was tart, earthy and spicy. It felt a bit like a powerhouse 80s masculine, recalling the big badass old school chypres like Aramis and Tiffany Cologne. Recognizably NY, but rougher and more in-your-face. It didn't smell off, but I think the citrus was a bit less pronounced than it's supposed to be. Perhaps it's lost some brightness with age.
The recent juice is the one I know and love, of course - it felt a bit weak and thin in comparison. The citrus stands out more, that distinctive orange/bergamot, and it is sweeter, more powdery.
For the hour or so, the vintage is more powerful. I may have gotten more of it on because the sprayers are different, but I'm pretty sure it projects more.
Two or three hours on they have evened out a bit more. If anything, the modern juice is a bit stronger now. They are a lot more similar, though. The vintage is still solid but closer to the skin. It's drier and darker, a bit more intricate. The modern is brighter, sweeter and smoother.
I'll give the vintage a full wearing tomorrow and see how it does in the real world.
I like both a lot. I'm happy to have both vintages, but I'd be perfectly happy if I could only get the one I have in the 1oz bottle. If it's been reformulated from that, I hope its not too bad.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thanks, rubegon, for taking the time to do this comparison! And an alfarom-quality review, I might add.
The recent juice is the one I know and love, of course - it felt a bit weak and thin in comparison. The citrus stands out more, that distinctive orange/bergamot, and it is sweeter, more powdery.For the hour or so, the vintage is more powerful. I may have gotten more of it on because the sprayers are different, but I'm pretty sure it projects more.All telltale signs of the likely culprit here . . .The vintage is still solid but closer to the skin. It's drier and darker, a bit more intricate. The modern is brighter, sweeter and smoother.
They are similar, but the old one had more "power" in every stage.
My 30ml bottle is about 3 years old and has a different label, like this:
Anyway I suspect it is the pre-reform based on Rubegon's descriptions.
Thanks rubegon, first time I have seen a Black Label NY. Mine are similar to Marais pic above. The truly Vintage bottle looks terrific - what a find!
After reading comments here and in the other nearby Thread it sounds like the new PC version is worth a shot, at least, but I will be a little more restrained in making good use of my current stash of the good stuff.
I am going to through a bomb into the bottle design thing. I have an old version bought early 00s, 50mls and its in the old style women's bottle. The round blue plastic bulb top, and you can unscrew the spray.
Oh and since you guys just love your Lot Numbers its. No Lot CL
The removal of furocoumarins, the natural stabilizers for bergamot. They give it richness, without them the bergamot becomes diluted. Also creates other problems that confuse the composition.
A change or complete removal of many of the aromachemicals used to produce and modulate cinnamonic and clove like notes. Creates all kinds of problems.
The substitution of inferior aromachemicals in the basenotes for the more nuanced natural basenote ingredients of the original formulation (all kinds of stuff, who knows). Natural animalics (in this case castoreum and costus) changed to synthetic versions, which were a big part of the original New York and many others classics. Leads to a loss of complexity in many areas. Basically, makes reformulations of many of the older fragrances smell harsh and confused.
And much more...........
Last edited by pluran; 18th December 2012 at 10:24 AM.
Honestly I'm glad this came up. I was so disappointed but after reading this, I gave the new NY another chance today, and I'm kind of happier with it now. I put it on about 5 hours ago and I can still smell it. It's still not the old NY that I love, but I think I can live with it. Sorry I came into the discussion with such high emotions, but I was just mad at myself. For months I put off buying a bigger bottle and I should have done it right away!
The whole thing has made me rethink how I go about buying samples and bottles. If I love something, I'm going to make sure to get more pretty quickly! (which I already knew but this really drove it home)
I wouldn't even know what to do with a PdN lot number.
It's not clear to me whether the dark label bottle I have is the new "bad" reformulation Turin has written about, or whether it has been changed since I got my little bottle. I say that because i think my little one is great, but that may just be my lack of ability to detect its deficiencies. I wouldn't assume that a reformulation coincided with the change in label color.
- - - Updated - - -
Thanks for the kind words, though.
Update: I'm full-wearing the vintage today (3 sprays in the shirt and 1 on each forearm - my skin tends to mute most fragrances. It's similar overall to my small bottle. It's definitely less strong a few hours in. Maybe it's the weather - it's cooler now since I last wore the newer juice. Based on this, though, I think I prefer the newer juice, to be honest. This is nicer up close perhaps, but more subtle. I like a bit more projection than I'm getting here. I may try again tomorrow with a heavier application. We'll see how it does by the end of the day.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
The moss was surely not removed, merely reduced to the IFRA maximum.That's what I assumed. I have to say though, that if the new one is mossless, Ms. Nicolai did an excellent job of retaining the character of the original. The one I have with the dark label (it's navy, I think) is very good I think.
I'm just glad this thread was fruitful (but not a fruity floral ).
I would like to offer my 2 cents on this topic, as I unknowingly sold what was a vintage
bottle earlier this year...
The one I had had the "New York, Eau de Toilette" in blue on the front of the bottle.
A bottle I swapped for this past summer simply had "New York" in blue, and was clearly the current formulation.
The "vintage" bottle I had was much richer, longer lasting, and projected better.
Getting rid of that vintage bottle I had is truly one of the biggest regrets I've had in the fragrance hobby.
I don't know exactly what is to blame for the inferiority of the current formulation.
I suspect it is more than just a reduction in oakmoss content.
At the time, I considered having New York, Heritage and Tiffany for Men in my wardrobe to be unnecessary overlap.
In time, I've realized how wrong I was. Those 3 scents are similar to be sure, they "live on the same street" in the fragrance
neighborhood, if you will. But the New York I had was a deep, gorgeous scent that I regret losing.
If others are pleased with the current formulation, I'm glad for them, truly. The current version is a fine scent by any measure.
But for me, it will never stack up to the older version.
I have the older bottle with blue "New York Eau de Toilette" sticker. Spraying only 1/2 (half) spray on each side of my neck, it projects very well, without over-powering, and lasts almost 24 hours on my skin, which makes me suspect that it's really an eau de parfum.
Thanks for the nicely done side-by-side, rubegon. I'm glad to hear that you love the new version. I've never tired it and ought to before I'm forced to make the switch abruptly. De Nicolai has approached reformulations sensibly, I think--saving compositions that can be saved, substantially changing things that simply couldn't, like Odalisque and Le Temps d'Une Fete. Certainly you could object to retaining the names where the frags have been so markedly changed but I don't mind coming down on that side of continuity-in-change. It's the way of all things, no?
The thing that Luca Turin says of the reformulated Habit Rouge seems to pertain to a lot of good reformulations: "the new version appears sparer, less laden with dandified frippery." Of course one might object that the complexities and endurance, that slow sunset to gentle darkness of traditional base materials, don't constitute frippery but are in some way the soul of the fragrance. I certainly lament the loss of many beautiful materials, but it's still possible to love these newer more focused versions of familiar fragrances. It seems to be a time of surfaces, of demonstrated effectiveness, rather than of depths, of subtle after-effects. Plus apparently people get rashes. Whatchagonnadoo?
'...And you'll carry me down on your dancing
To the pools that you lift on your wrist...'
It is important to merge this thread with Tiffany for Men&Pour Monsieur&New York, because pluran and mr. reasonable go deeper in the reformulation issue. NY is lovely but is no more what it used to be. And I walked so many blocks to find out the Rue de Richelieu PdN boutique with a sort of travel agency on the back.... The only think I regret is not to have started this hobby before, when they used to sell the real stuff...
Thank you rubegon for your comparative review!
So are we saying thay the current version is no good or just not as good as vintage.
Do you still recommend
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
Thanks for that brilliant info Pluran - and all you guys.
Just blind bought a vintage 30 ml bottle off the sale forum here based on this thread. Glad i did!! Just moved into my #1 spot ahead of Habit Rouge EDP. Its much different than i thought based on reviews. To my (uneducated) nose it smells like an even combination of florals/oakmoss/citrus. Much more (pleasantly so) floral and oakmoss than i was expecting. Lasts all day on my dry skin. Now i'm scared i might go through it quickly. I'm already on the hunt for the vintage and i've never smelled the new one. I can imagine that if the oakmoss is toned down it would drastically change the scent (not for the better).
Some fragrance formulas can’t be successfully altered to accommodate IFRA regulations. New York is one of them. The fragrance is dead, virtually unrecognizable. A harsh, confused orange cologne. Patricia de Nicolai was talking about discontinuing it. She should.
I changed my review (of the newer formula) from neutral to thumbs up. I gave it a chance and it is not bad.
In my opinion here's the difference between the older and newer formulas. Imagine you are listening to a favorite song or piece of music. The older version is like hearing the music in the same room where it's being performed. The newer formula is like hearing the same music from a different room or from outside the venue. It's fainter and doesn't have the same impact but you can recognize what's great about it.