Reformulations.

[SteveInCNY]

Hello All,
I have been reading more and more and watching reviews etc. and it seems some people will say that the juice "used to be fantastic in 1998, but the new formulation sucks." and I'm using 1998 as an example. So my question is, is there any validity to this? I understand opinions are subjective, but I'm thinking like a new guy like me, what am I supposed to do? just not buy any cologne that was reformulated? Or just look for all "pre-reformulation" bottles? I tried Joop! Homme, many people on different sites said that it was reformulated and now doesn't have the projection or lasting power it used to. Well my brand new bottle arrived and I happen to like the scent, one spray lasts me FOREVER and projection is marvelous. So either I got a pre-reformulation bottle, or I got a "magic" bottle that happened to be okay, or the people saying this don't know what they are talking about. Also true, is I never smelled an old bottle of the stuff, so maybe compared to the old stuff this stuff is weak. I just can't believe someone saying what I have is weak compared to anything. Just looking for ideas and opinions here. Thanks!
-Steve E.

 

[hednic]

I understand opinions are subjective, but I'm thinking like a new guy like me, what am I supposed to do?

You sample whenever possible and judge for yourself whether you like it or not.

 

[sjg3839]

Agreed

You sample whenever possible and judge for yourself whether you like it or not.

 

[freewheelingvagabond]

Try it. If you like it enough, buy it.

 

[Deleted member 13385235]

Yup. If you don't know the vintage then you aren't missing anything so rock the current version.



But buy a backup if you like it, just in case they reformulate

 

[Hawky454]

Don't buy into the reformulation hyperbole.

 

[Twilight99]

People are going on and on about reformulations all the time. In my experience it's just not a big deal. People just come here and read about it, and start to worry and writing about it. Your sense of smell can vary from day to day, and this is often the reason many worry. There are of course legitimate worries about some fragrance, but the whole thing is blown out of proportion in my opinion.

What people seem to ignore, is that some fragrances are reformulated to the better. Check the new reformulation of Chanel Egoiste for example. This year the formulation got a big improvement.

Conclusion; stop worrying what other people think and use your own nose. It's the only way to find what is right for you.

 

[Bigsly]

The short/easy answer is that if scents are more or less an olfactory blur to you, then it probably doesn't matter. If, however, you smell a scent and say things like, "wow, that's a nice yet subtle sandalwood note," many if not most of the reformulations (of let's say pre-1995 vintage) will likely disappoint you.

 

[dealt7faux]

The "magic bottle" is the one you like the best.
The other stuff will come in time should you choose to expand your fragrance knowledge

 

[petukchele]

You sample whenever possible and judge for yourself whether you like it or not.

this

 

[Tmoran]

Hello All,
I have been reading more and more and watching reviews etc. and it seems some people will say that the juice "used to be fantastic in 1998, but the new formulation sucks." and I'm using 1998 as an example. So my question is, is there any validity to this? I understand opinions are subjective, but I'm thinking like a new guy like me, what am I supposed to do? just not buy any cologne that was reformulated? Or just look for all "pre-reformulation" bottles? I tried Joop! Homme, many people on different sites said that it was reformulated and now doesn't have the projection or lasting power it used to. Well my brand new bottle arrived and I happen to like the scent, one spray lasts me FOREVER and projection is marvelous. So either I got a pre-reformulation bottle, or I got a "magic" bottle that happened to be okay, or the people saying this don't know what they are talking about. Also true, is I never smelled an old bottle of the stuff, so maybe compared to the old stuff this stuff is weak. I just can't believe someone saying what I have is weak compared to anything. Just looking for ideas and opinions here. Thanks!
-Steve E.

I would not worry about reformulations unless money is not object. Do reformulations happen? Yes. Are they as bad as some make it? It depends on the scent. But you cant miss what you havent had. And if you try and like a different formulation it may mean you would like the older version less as you cut your teeth on the current one and that is the smell your mind will forever associate with that fragrance.

Another thing to consider is that what i remember a scent smelling like and what it actually smelt like may not be accurate. Our perceptions of scent at least for me constantly evolve. Scents i used to like i no longer care for. And fragrances i once despised are now my favorites. So if our perception of scents can change then maybe it is to some degree that we outgrow something and the scent is actually very close but our new impression of it is altered as we grew and evolved.

Now some may say "but i have a pre reformulation bottle and it smells nothing like the nee one. Fair enough but one thing that can and does happen many times is a scent will degrade over time. Slowly. Slow enough that changes may not register as they are so gradual. The bottle you buy today will not smell identical in ten years. There are so many factors at play. Especially if its a scent that has been around a decade or longer. And above all the hypotheticals reformulations are hear to stay no matter how many of us stomp our feet. I just dont see anyone taking the head of this beast so we either pay niche prices for vintage juice and stress out over even finding the stuff or you play the hand given to you and make the best of it. The only people i really feel for are the guys who wear a scent for years and it is them through and through and it gets discontinued.

 

[cacio]

I agree with what others said. It depends on the case.

Reformulations are a problem, for a couple of reason. The main one is that recently the aromachemical lobbying association, for reasons we've been discussing here forever, have severely restricted the use of many ingredients (a key one being oakmoss). In addition, some materials have become unavailable or too expensive (eg sandalwood). Finally, it is sometimes the case that perfume companies cheapen the formulation of a perfume.

The effects of these factors vary. Sometimes they are irrelevant. Other times they are relevant, but the perfumer has substituted these materials with others, obtaining something that's different but still good and enjoyable. Sometimes the results are very negative however. Note incidentally that the effects, if any, are most notable in the drydown - so sometimes the top seems fine, then one hour in it's completely different. Also, I think that on average femine perfumes, which in the past were always stronger and richer, have been affected more than masculine ones.

cacio

 

[Mitchapalooza]

You can check your fragrances manufacture date on checkcosmetic.net

 

[Darjeeling]

No, no. Everything has been reformulated and is now crap. In fact, might as well stop wearing fragrance altogether.

 

[SteveInCNY]

Haha thanks all for the replies.. This is kind of where I was headed in my own brain. I was thinking, I'm just gonna still buy stuff and if I like the way it smells, so be it, if I don't I'll prolly still hang on to it for my collection or sell/trade it online lol. Darjeeling, haha its so funny you posted that because thats exactly what runs through my mind when I read some things online. Stuff like, well, in 2003 this stuff was great, but now since the reformulation it sucks so don't waste your time. LOL!

 

[hitman]

You sample whenever possible and judge for yourself whether you like it or not.

^ exactly to the point.

 

[uhbhatti88]

From my experience:

My dad wore fahrenheit (i was born in 1988) all my childhood. After 1995 (when i was 7), i next smelled a bottle of fahrenheit in 2009. It was not the same. I kept thinking my memory was at fault, until in 2014 i got a vintage bottle (from 1999) and it smelled exactly as it should have.

I smelled a sample of M7 when it launched around Christmas 2002. For years i had one tiny sample. I smelled the first reformulation bottle (brown sticker) in 2009. It was not the same. In 2012 I happened to find an old all-brown bottle in the back of a store, i smelled it and it was the same.

There is only one reformulation that i know of that actually did a job so good i felt at home when i used it - Yohji Homme.

So all in all, the more distinctive a fragrance, and the better you have gotten to know it (through repeated wearings and by paying attention to it), the uneasier you will be when you smell a change in the air.

If my first time smelling a perfume is the reformulated one, and it smells good in itself, I'm satisfied and dont hunt for vintages at all, even if the changes are reportedly "drastic". Some examples: Dior Homme & Intense. Guerlain Vetiver, Habit Rouge, & Derby. Most Lutens, Frederic Malle. Knize Ten. Givenchy III. This could be a pretty long list.

So while it is true that there are so many factors at play, if you find something today that you truly love and wear, buy two bottles. Don't sweat stuff that was before your time (great classics are an exception, for academic reasons and not, for me at least, emotional connections)




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bigsly]

I would not worry about reformulations unless money is not object. Do reformulations happen? Yes. Are they as bad as some make it? It depends on the scent. But you cant miss what you havent had. And if you try and like a different formulation it may mean you would like the older version less as you cut your teeth on the current one and that is the smell your mind will forever associate with that fragrance.

Another thing to consider is that what i remember a scent smelling like and what it actually smelt like may not be accurate. Our perceptions of scent at least for me constantly evolve. Scents i used to like i no longer care for. And fragrances i once despised are now my favorites. So if our perception of scents can change then maybe it is to some degree that we outgrow something and the scent is actually very close but our new impression of it is altered as we grew and evolved.

Now some may say "but i have a pre reformulation bottle and it smells nothing like the nee one. Fair enough but one thing that can and does happen many times is a scent will degrade over time. Slowly. Slow enough that changes may not register as they are so gradual. The bottle you buy today will not smell identical in ten years. There are so many factors at play. Especially if its a scent that has been around a decade or longer. And above all the hypotheticals reformulations are hear to stay no matter how many of us stomp our feet. I just dont see anyone taking the head of this beast so we either pay niche prices for vintage juice and stress out over even finding the stuff or you play the hand given to you and make the best of it. The only people i really feel for are the guys who wear a scent for years and it is them through and through and it gets discontinued.

It's important not to bring in another issue which serves to obfuscate the discussion in favor of the "pro reformulation" side of things. That is, I'd be the first to mention that I used to wear vintage more often, and that some vintage I don't like as much as I used to, whereas others I like more. This, however, has nothing to do with my perception of the "quality" of the scent. Now sometimes I don't feel the need to wear a quality scent, and I often reach for a "super cheapo," but if I'm in the mood for vintage Zino, for example, that's what I want. I have no interest in wearing what I believe to be reformulated Zino, ever. Others can't detect any difference, or claim it is negligible. That's fine, but it has absolutely nothing to do with what I want to buy or wear. And that's why my first response referenced how you perceive and appreciate these concoctions - that is what matters, and nobody can read your mind, so the best you can do is read the relevant information online and try to make the right decision (but it will only be the right decision for you, not necessarily for anyone else).

And I have found that vintage holds up incredibly well over the decades. If your experience is different and that has led you to avoid vintage, I applaud your strong decision-making qualities, but again, that has nothing to do with my decisions in this context. If you don't like it when others talk about how much they like their vintage scents, then just ignore them - why post something that suggests you think they are deluded, lying, or wasting their time? It's a hobby, and the internet provides places like BN to share opinions and information, so of course there are going to be threads on the subject! I remember when I investigated the world of fine art works on paper, some people thought pop art was "garbage" and laughed at the prices, yet that would have been a much better investment than something like op art or minimalism, that's for sure (generally-speaking). And with scents, most are not trying to "cash in," but just seeking out what they consider to be the best scents ever made. Some people might eat any pizza that put in front of them, whereas others only want "quality" pizza, and even if the restaurant is out of anchovies, and they'd really prefer it that way, they are not going to eat the "garbage" pizza because that restaurant didn't run out of anchovies. LOL. So, it may be true that top notes are sometimes "messed up" (which is irrelevant to me) or that base notes have shifted slightly, because they are still head and shoulders above everything else! Again, if you think that's not the case, then go ahead and be happy with your decision, but that has nothing to do with me.

And as to money being no object if you want to buy vintage, exactly where are you looking for them? I've got so many great vintage deals, just on ebay alone, that I wouldn't want to think about putting a list of those together! Even if you pay "high" prices," how do they compare to the prices being asked at the local dept. store for the usual generic/synthetic dreck? There are only a small number that sell for "big bucks" in vintage: PPH, Derby, Egoiste Cologne Concentree. Others with prices that high are usually an ebay seller's wishful thinking, as I have waited for great deals on many of those and was rewarded. It's more an issue of patience with probably at least 90% vintage, if you want to pay at current dept. store prices or lower, in my experience.

 

[Darjeeling]

Personally I can't be bothered spending the time and money searching out vintage and seeing whether I prefer it. Others are, of course, free to do whatever they want with their time and money. If I like what's currently available I'll buy it. I t me to still be exploring more modern scents anyway.
On the other hand, I can see how, if one has used a certain scent in a certain formulation and love it as is, one would be sorely disappointed with any change so I understand how people completely write off reformulations. It strikes me as an expression of their emotions rather than an attempt to be objective about the reformulation. Any change is an affront.
Then again, I think it can get a bit hysterical and almost paranoid when suspicions of reformulations are discussed. I suspect in some cases there are issues with scent memory being obscured by time as well as the fact that bottles are used over a number of years meaning that perhaps no two bottles age in exactly the same way.

 

[Bigsly]

Personally I can't be bothered spending the time and money searching out vintage and seeing whether I prefer it. Others are, of course, free to do whatever they want with their time and money. If I like what's currently available I'll buy it. I t me to still be exploring more modern scents anyway.
On the other hand, I can see how, if one has used a certain scent in a certain formulation and love it as is, one would be sorely disappointed with any change so I understand how people completely write off reformulations. It strikes me as an expression of their emotions rather than an attempt to be objective about the reformulation. Any change is an affront.
Then again, I think it can get a bit hysterical and almost paranoid when suspicions of reformulations are discussed. I suspect in some cases there are issues with scent memory being obscured by time as well as the fact that bottles are used over a number of years meaning that perhaps no two bottles age in exactly the same way.

That could be true for others but I came upon this the other way around. I bought the reformulations first, heard the reformulation "hysteria" (which never seems hysterical to me), and dismissed it. But then I began to understand "quality" and came upon some vintage formulations, and eventually couldn't stand most of the reformulations (as a newbie I basically didn't have a perception of "synthetic"). I had just about no memory of "vintage greats" before 2008, nor any real understanding of what made them special. And there's no need for a lot of time to be spent - just go to the BN sales forum or the Crystal Flacon site. There are plenty of people who will put a bunch of decants or samples together at a reasonable price, no more than you'll spend on the latest designer scent at the mall (at least that's where my pricing is at for most vintage I can decant).

 

[cornishlee]

I would not worry about reformulations unless money is not object. Do reformulations happen? Yes. Are they as bad as some make it? It depends on the scent. But you cant miss what you havent had. And if you try and like a different formulation it may mean you would like the older version less as you cut your teeth on the current one and that is the smell your mind will forever associate with that fragrance.

Another thing to consider is that what i remember a scent smelling like and what it actually smelt like may not be accurate. Our perceptions of scent at least for me constantly evolve. Scents i used to like i no longer care for. And fragrances i once despised are now my favorites. So if our perception of scents can change then maybe it is to some degree that we outgrow something and the scent is actually very close but our new impression of it is altered as we grew and evolved.

Now some may say "but i have a pre reformulation bottle and it smells nothing like the nee one. Fair enough but one thing that can and does happen many times is a scent will degrade over time. Slowly. Slow enough that changes may not register as they are so gradual. The bottle you buy today will not smell identical in ten years. There are so many factors at play. Especially if its a scent that has been around a decade or longer. And above all the hypotheticals reformulations are hear to stay no matter how many of us stomp our feet. I just dont see anyone taking the head of this beast so we either pay niche prices for vintage juice and stress out over even finding the stuff or you play the hand given to you and make the best of it. The only people i really feel for are the guys who wear a scent for years and it is them through and through and it gets discontinued.

Perfect.

 

[Roky]

You sample whenever possible and judge for yourself whether you like it or not.

I'm totally with Hednic, the grandseigneur of simplicism. I think that's the way to go. Just have fun with what you`re smelling.
Also Cacio and Bigsly pinned it. It's a matter of approach and of how long you`re into this. I know the Sandalwood note mentioned by Bigsly from the earlier days - so I sometimes miss it. I can't remember Joop Homme back then and I enjoy the recent version. Personally, most Vintages I'm buying are completely discontinued ones ... just for the fun of it.

 

[Darjeeling]

That could be true for others but I came upon this the other way around. I bought the reformulations first, heard the reformulation "hysteria" (which never seems hysterical to me), and dismissed it. But then I began to understand "quality" and came upon some vintage formulations, and eventually couldn't stand most of the reformulations (as a newbie I basically didn't have a perception of "synthetic"). I had just about no memory of "vintage greats" before 2008, nor any real understanding of what made them special. And there's no need to a lot of time to be spent - just go to the BN sales forum or the Crystal Flacon site. There are plenty of people who will put a bunch of decants or samples together at a reasonable price, no more than you'll spend on the latest designer scent at the mall (at least that's where my pricing is at for most vintage I can decant).

But I have no interest in the latest designer scents at the mall either. I think I'm afraid that I'll like vintage too much.
But also, antipathy. I honestly CBF. Call me shallow. I don't want to be buying scents just because they are vintage. There's the odd scent I'd be interested in but they seem to be pricey (C&E Sandalwood, Egoiste)
Not all of the pro vintage talk is hysterical, but there is often a hysterical element to some of it.

 

[Johnny_Ludlow]

Reformulations are very real, but sometimes people draw wrong conclusions from this. An example, I'm a huge fan of Eau d'Hermes. I love the 70's crystal bottles and also the copper cap version. Current Eau d'Hermes is striclty inferior fragrance, no doubt about it. From this some people conclude that in the good ol' times fragrances were great and now they are crap. Wrong. It's just that with current materials it's not possible to duplicate older masterpieces. When you have to replace the sandalwood, civet and oakmoss with something else and still want to keep the fragrance intact, it sometimes ends up smelling kind of similar, but just not satisfying. Similar in exactly the same way as black and white newspaper photo of Botticelli's Nascita di Venere looks like the one in the Uffizi. Easy to recognize, but you just don't enjoy it anymore.

There are many new superb synthetic ingredients perfumers in the 50's couldn't even dream about - and much more natural ingredients readily available. Roudnitska used the materials he had and created Eau d'Hermes, a masterpiece. Some 60 years later Ellena uses the best and most fitting ingredients he has and creates another leather masterpiece for the same house, Cuir d'Ange. But when Ellena has to try to use ingredients we now have to duplicate a fragrance that was made with a different set of ingredients, result is disappointing - this is the reason why current version of Eau d'Hermes is not good enough. So, the basic problem of reformulations is that they have to try to be faithful to the original and this inevitably leads to compromises. Say, EU bans butter and cheese with more than 10% fat. You replace butter and your favourite cheese with light cheese and vegetable oil margarine. One day you realize that you just do not enjoy eating bread anymore. Instead of replacing cheese and butter with kind of similar dairies, maybe you should come up with something completely different. Eating bread isn't ruined forever, you just have to move on.

I like what Hermes is doing at the moment with their classics. Bel Ami Vetiver and Equipage Geranium are better fragrances than the current formulations of Bel Ami and Equipage. I believe this is because the point I made above. Now Ellena doesn't have to try to copy Bel Ami and Equipage, he can draw influences and take the fragrances to new interesting directions, based on his own ideas and also the ingredients available - no more need to make sad compromises.

 

[badarun]

it's just not a big deal.

Not a big deal indeed, if u haven't smelled the vintage version of a perfume in production right now...

 

[badarun]

It's just that with current materials it's not possible to duplicate older masterpieces. When you have to replace the sandalwood, civet and oakmoss with something else and still want to keep the fragrance intact, it sometimes ends up smelling kind of similar, but just not satisfying.

+1 Good points...

 

[Vinnie]

Third reformulation discussion in a week? That's something! I will say basically the same thing I said on others threads.

I came to conclude vintages aren't better, they're different. And what I see the most is the oakmoss in their compositions. Honestly, I prefer the reformulations. But wouldn't mind owning a vintage myself, if it wasn't for the prices they're asking for. You should pick the fragrance that's right now available and make a test. If you find certain 80's reformulated scent to be too agressive, offensive, loud and strong, trust me: the vintage version is all these adjectives, but in double. If your Joop lasts and projects big time, there is nothing strange about that. What happens is that vintages used to last over 30 hours, but that doesn't make a 12 - 16 hours fragrance to be weak at all, of course. Just don't trust everything you read. Some people happens to be driven with passion, especially those who lived the 80's, and I don't blame them for that. They want THAT smell, the smell they experienced when younger. If you're in your 20's (like me) or even early to mid 30's, you're not missing anything buying only reforms. They are more wearable and it's, in my opinion, 98% the same. If you like oakmoss (and I dare you to like it, if you're new), there you have the vintages. Same smell, different vibes. Enjoy the hell out of your reformulated Joop and forget what the others say about it.

 

[Bigsly]

But I have no interest in the latest designer scents at the mall either. I think I'm afraid that I'll like vintage too much.
But also, antipathy. I honestly CBF. Call me shallow. I don't want to be buying scents just because they are vintage. There's the odd scent I'd be interested in but they seem to be pricey (C&E Sandalwood, Egoiste)
Not all of the pro vintage talk is hysterical, but there is often a hysterical element to some of it.

I can't say I understand all of the above, but I'll mention, again, that I came to vintage after being a skeptic and never having paid much attention to them "back in the day." I smelled mostly the reformulations first, and then in a few cases accidentally tried the vintage versions, such as from a sample, and noticed what seemed (and still seems) like a huge difference in many cases. As a newbie I doubt I would have been able to detect much if any difference, but after several months of intense study it became clear.

As to those who make up excuses, it does get irritating after a while to hear them, over and over again, so I'll try this one more time:

1. Vintage can be cheaper than dept store prices for generic designer stuff.
2. Sure, avoid sampling Patou Pour Homme if you don't want to feel you must have it, but the drydown to vintage Bijan Men isn't too far off and I've seen that selling cheaply on ebay, again, if you have patience.
3. If you don't have patience there are BNers and Crystal Flacon sellers who can help you out. I have a small group of people who buy from me on a regular basis, mostly vintage (samples, decants, and bottles), for example.

There is no reason to avoid vintage, IMO, unless you are going to claim that you only want something like PPH in its "pristine" 1980 form. In that case, yes, you are too particular for vintage, but for others that high-priced stuff is probably well under 1% of the vintage scents out there, probably well over 95% selling at or below current designer prices, if you want to buy on ebay (and possibly cheaper from BN and CF sellers).

 

[Darjeeling]

I can't say I understand all of the above, but I'll mention, again, that I came to vintage after being a skeptic and never having paid much attention to them "back in the day." I smelled mostly the reformulations first, and then in a few cases accidentally tried the vintage versions, such as from a sample, and noticed what seemed (and still seems) like a huge difference in many cases. As a newbie I doubt I would have been able to detect much if any difference, but after several months of intense study it became clear.

As to those who make up excuses, it does get irritating after a while to hear them, over and over again, so I'll try this one more time:

1. Vintage can be cheaper than dept store prices for generic designer stuff.
2. Sure, avoid sampling Patou Pour Homme if you don't want to feel you must have it, but the drydown to vintage Bijan Men isn't too far off and I've seen that selling cheaply on ebay, again, if you have patience.
3. If you don't have patience there are BNers and Crystal Flacon sellers who can help you out. I have a small group of people who buy from me on a regular basis, mostly vintage (samples, decants, and bottles), for example.

There is no reason to avoid vintage, IMO, unless you are going to claim that you only want something like PPH in its "pristine" 1980 form. In that case, yes, you are too particular for vintage, but for others that high-priced stuff is probably well under 1% of the vintage scents out there, probably well over 95% selling at or below current designer prices, if you want to buy on ebay (and possibly cheaper from BN and CF sellers).

But the thing is, I don't use a current formulation of those scents. Why would I seek out the vintage when it is not the type of scent that interests me in the first place? It would be vintage just for the sake of buying vintage. There is the odd sandalwood scent that vaguely but that's about it. Perhaps DHI, but even scents like DHI and Egoiste aren't full bottle worthy to me. A smallish decant is sufficient so seeking out pre reformulated versions seems like a waste of time. I'm sure I'll like them, but the few ml I have at the moment is plenty.

Just my personal tastes and rather narrow brief when choosing scents. I'm sure the vintages are wonderful and smell better, if you like that kind of scent to begin with.
It's like the reasons I mainly wear niche. It's not that I think it's superior, it's just that those are the scents that most appeal to my relatively narrow tastes. Why would I seek out generic designer vintage when generic designers don't fit my brief in the first place? Am I going to be wowed and won over all of a sudden despite not being interested in the composition? Should I forget the composition and just feel the quality of the ingredients? While I'm sure it would be valuable for educational purposes I have other priorities at this stage so that's where my limited resources go. It's this attitude that comes across as if vintage is the be all and end all that bugs me. Nothing wrong with loving vintage and making that the focus of one's hobby, but it's statements that can sometimes come across as dismissing others who don't do the same that make me raise an eyebrow.
But I fear I've gone off point as this thread should be about reformulations rather than my own personal tastes and paths while exploring fragrances.

 

[Bigsly]

But the thing is, I don't use a current formulation of those scents. Why would I seek out the vintage when it is not the type of scent that interests me in the first place? It would be vintage just for the sake of buying vintage. There is the odd sandalwood scent that vaguely but that's about it. Perhaps DHI, but even scents like DHI and Egoiste aren't full bottle worthy to me. A smallish decant is sufficient so seeking out pre reformulated versions seems like a waste of time. I'm sure I'll like them, but the few ml I have at the moment is plenty.

Just my personal tastes and rather narrow brief when choosing scents. I'm sure the vintages are wonderful and smell better, if you like that kind of scent to begin with.
It's like the reasons I mainly wear niche. It's not that I think it's superior, it's just that those are the scents that most appeal to my relatively narrow tastes. Why would I seek out generic designer vintage when generic designers don't fit my brief in the first place? Am I going to be wowed and won over all of a sudden despite not being interested in the composition? Should I forget the composition and just feel the quality of the ingredients? While I'm sure it would be valuable for educational purposes I have other priorities at this stage so that's where my limited resources go. It's this attitude that comes across as if vintage is the be all and end all that bugs me. Nothing wrong with loving vintage and making that the focus of one's hobby, but it's statements that can sometimes come across as dismissing others who don't do the same that make me raise an eyebrow.
But I fear I've gone off point as this thread should be about reformulations rather than my own personal tastes and paths while exploring fragrances.

If you don't care about vintage at all then these threads are irrelevant to you, so I'm not sure why you waste your time on them! I'm certainly not one to tell people that if they don't like vintage they are somehow a lesser person.

 

[Darjeeling]

If you don't care about vintage at all then these threads are irrelevant to you, so I'm not sure why you waste your time on them! I'm certainly not one to tell people that if they don't like vintage they are somehow a lesser person.

I don't think that's true. I can be affected by reformulations or have opinions on alleged reformulations even if I don't have an interest in exploring vintage for the sake of vintage. There are scents I own that are alleged to have been reformulated and scents that I love that are facing reformulation. I think it's regrettable that regulations are removing many ingredients from the palate that perfumers can create from. I also think there are many new options for perfumers to create interesting new scents, although they are no replacement for the ingredients that have been lost.

I also think that, sometimes, people overstate the impact of reformulation. But this is subjective as what is a barely noticeable change for one person can be a fundamental alteration that makes a night and day difference to another. I also think that there is an interesting psychological impact driven by scarcity (or perhaps fear of missing out) once the consumer knows that there's a limited quantity available due to reformulation or discontinuation, the the esteem in which it is held sometimes seems to grow and it suddenly becomes more valuable.

These aspects interest me, which is why I like to discuss them at times. I'm against absolute views of any kind, such as claiming only niche/designer/vintage is worthwhile, because it reeks of snobbery.

In the case of the OP, perhaps vintage Joop is readily available. But having bought a new bottle, it would seem a waste to then seek out a vintage bottle too if he's satisfied with what he has and the main analysis of the difference is potency or longevity. Even more so if there is some doubt about when and if reformulations have occurred. But that's just me. I don't buy backups.
Of course everyone should make up their own minds, so if he gets curious there's no reason not to pursue vintage Joop.

 

[SteveInCNY]

Haha. Didn't mean to start anything! but this is good information. I guess my problem is I totally like imagining how stuff would have smelled like back in the 70's, or 80's. I sincerely get it that if I like how it smells now then who cares how it used to smell, but a small part of me is also like, damn this smells good now but I wonder how it smelled back in the day! I've got some 1976 Gucci Pour Homme on the way, interested to see what that animal smells like haha. In any event I appreciate the responses and I'm just gonna keep having fun and doing my thing, reformulation or not!
-Steve E

 

[Tec972]

Not a big deal indeed, if u haven't smelled the vintage version of a perfume in production right now...

LOL!! This sums it up perfectly. Everyone else gave very good advice, so I will give mine. I grew up in the 80's. So I love the fragrances from then, and as a teen I was very much into fragrance. Well after going for a long time not paying very much attention to what went on in the fragrance world, (Thanks military life) I got back into it recently. I purchased some stuff in the 90's and the early 2000's. But not like when I was a teen and not like now since I have gotten back into it.

After getting back into it and trying to rediscover everything I loved as a kid was appalling to say the least. The first thing I did a few years ago, was start to re-acquire everything I loved as a teen. Let me tell you, I remember what my fragrances smelled like. As I started ordering online, and trying stuff in the store, something was not right. With almost everything I got or tested I was extremely disappointed. Nothing smelled like it used to. Then I learned about reformulations, and it all made sense. There is nothing I used to wear that is still available now that I like more in its current formulation!!!! The vintage stuff was always better. It was how it was intended to be. When I finally did get the vintage stuff I immediately knew, and said to myself, "Yep THIS is how I remembered it." My memory was not off.

The older stuff cannot even be made again, the laws of physics and universe wouldn't allow it. The space time continuum would be disrupted. Even if they wanted too, they couldn't. Mostly thanks to IFRA, but partly because it must be illegal somewhere to manufacture, sell, or distribute anything that's awesome, powerful, or that outwardly projects manliness ever again in an era where manliness is frowned upon. We live in an era where the effemination of men is en vogue. (If there's been a release like that lately, I must have overlooked it.) I don't live in a very trendy place anymore, so I don't get to come across a lot of good stuff like many others on BN.

Profit margin maximization, lack of natural resources, art of the craft, IFRA restrictions, and trends in perfumery all play a key role. Don't get me wrong, there are some newer fragrances I like. But if you were to throw me back into the 1980's or 90's in a department store and let me buy whatever I wanted I'd be set for life. Everything was better made (designer frags), more potent and much more interesting and unique, not to mention, if I wanted a classic from the 60's or 70's, it was still intact and exactly the same as it was when it was first released, with all but very few exceptions, and even those were still awesome.

There is a reason the vintage stuff is sought after and goes for more money. Even though some on eBay try to really take advantage and ask ridiculous prices for certain things as others have pointed out. I always prefer vintage, but there is a catch 22 with that. When you have a bottle that is 30 years old it may still smell really good compared to whats out there now, but it is still not as good as it was in 1985. Fragrances get a little too steep or heavy and lose some of their beautiful topnotes often. So you really get most and not all of the experience of wearing it then. Sometimes you really luck out and get one thats in really good shape. Everyone on here who buys vintage stuff can relate to that. Bottles from the same batch from 30 years ago can smell different too because of how they aged and what conditions they were stored.

If you are not familiar with the vintage stuff, then don't worry about it too much, you'll just get obsessive and drive yourself crazy like many of us do trying to date stuff by packaging and batch codes. If you ever have a chance to try the vintage stuff go for it, so you know where we are coming from. My first love of fragrances was in the fragrances of the 70's and 80's. The industry changed so much and I don't like it. I don't like feeling that way, but there is nothing I can do about it except go after my first love. So I'm always chasing the older stuff, and it's just that I prefer those type of fragrances SO much more than whats offered today.

 

[Bigsly]

LOL!! This sums it up perfectly. Everyone else gave very good advice, so I will give mine. I grew up in the 80's. So I love the fragrances from then, and as a teen I was very much into fragrance. Well after going for a long time not paying very much attention to what went on in the fragrance world, (Thanks military life) I got back into it recently. I purchased some stuff in the 90's and the early 2000's. But not like when I was a teen and not like now since I have gotten back into it.

After getting back into it and trying to rediscover everything I loved as a kid was appalling to say the least. The first thing I did a few years ago, was start to re-acquire everything I loved as a teen. Let me tell you, I remember what my fragrances smelled like. As I started ordering online, and trying stuff in the store, something was not right. With almost everything I got or tested I was extremely disappointed. Nothing smelled like it used to. Then I learned about reformulations, and it all made sense. There is nothing I used to wear that is still available now that I like more in its current formulation!!!! The vintage stuff was always better. It was how it was intended to be. When I finally did get the vintage stuff I immediately knew, and said to myself, "Yep THIS is how I remembered it." My memory was not off.

The older stuff cannot even be made again, the laws of physics and universe wouldn't allow it. The space time continuum would be disrupted. Even if they wanted too, they couldn't. Mostly thanks to IFRA, but partly because it must be illegal somewhere to manufacture, sell, or distribute anything that's awesome, powerful, or that outwardly projects manliness ever again in an era where manliness is frowned upon. We live in an era where the effemination of men is en vogue. (If there's been a release like that lately, I must have overlooked it.) I don't live in a very trendy place anymore, so I don't get to come across a lot of good stuff like many others on BN.

Profit margin maximization, lack of natural resources, art of the craft, IFRA restrictions, and trends in perfumery all play a key role. Don't get me wrong, there are some newer fragrances I like. But if you were to throw me back into the 1980's or 90's in a department store and let me buy whatever I wanted I'd be set for life. Everything was better made (designer frags), more potent and much more interesting and unique, not to mention, if I wanted a classic from the 60's or 70's, it was still intact and exactly the same as it was when it was first released, with all but very few exceptions, and even those were still awesome.

There is a reason the vintage stuff is sought after and goes for more money. Even though some on eBay try to really take advantage and ask ridiculous prices for certain things as others have pointed out. I always prefer vintage, but there is a catch 22 with that. When you have a bottle that is 30 years old it may still smell really good compared to whats out there now, but it is still not as good as it was in 1985. Fragrances get a little too steep or heavy and lose some of their beautiful topnotes often. So you really get most and not all of the experience of wearing it then. Sometimes you really luck out and get one thats in really good shape. Everyone on here who buys vintage stuff can relate to that. Bottles from the same batch from 30 years ago can smell different too because of how they aged and what conditions they were stored.

If you are not familiar with the vintage stuff, then don't worry about it too much, you'll just get obsessive and drive yourself crazy like many of us do trying to date stuff by packaging and batch codes. If you ever have a chance to try the vintage stuff go for it, so you know where we are coming from. My first love of fragrances was in the fragrances of the 70's and 80's. The industry changed so much and I don't like it. I don't like feeling that way, but there is nothing I can do about it except go after my first love. So I'm always chasing the older stuff, and it's just that I prefer those type of fragrances SO much more than whats offered today.

Perhaps there are some people who have poor control of their emotions, but I fail to see how one can assume that there are a bunch of people who are "hysterical" or "going crazy" because they do research on scents. Does anyone say this about wine connoisseurs, people who must have a comic book with a certain number on it, those who wouldn't buy a coin unless it is in BU whatever condition, baseball card collectors who insist on a certain rating from the major rating companies, etc? No, this is the rule, not the exception in these kinds of endeavors. You can call it a waste of time, but I don't see many people devoting most of their free time to charity, if any. Is it worse than playing a video game or watching a mindless TV show? Let's get real here, please! LOL.

 

[Darjeeling]

Perhaps there are some people who have poor control of their emotions, but I fail to see how one can assume that there are a bunch of people who are "hysterical" or "going crazy" because they do research on scents. Does anyone say this about wine connoisseurs, people who must have a comic book with a certain number on it, those who wouldn't buy a coin unless it is in BU whatever condition, baseball card collectors who insist on a certain rating from the major rating companies, etc? No, this is the rule, not the exception in these kinds of endeavors. You can call it a waste of time, but I don't see many people devoting most of their free time to charity, if any. Is it worse than playing a video game or watching a mindless TV show? Let's get real here, please! LOL.

I'm trying to match up the content of your reply to the content of his post. It seems you have seriously misinterpreted what he said or maybe meant to reply to someone else. About the closest is a passing mention to driving himself crazy trying to verify the vintage which strikes me as an expression of how it can be frustrating trying to pin these details down.
Some people love the chase, but I can imagine that working with uncertainty in trying to find what one loves can be frustrating for some. I don't think he was saying that vintage enthusiasts are crazy or hysterical. In fact, he describes himself as a vintage enthusiast, so it strikes me as a self deprecating comment rather than an attack on anyone.
I hope you'll excuse my continued participation in this thread. Other threads, like the vintage discussion in the General discussion forum I would not try to post it because I could contribute nothing useful to it.

Wine connoisseurship has other issues and for some it looks like a socially acceptable way to be an alcoholic.

 

[Johnny_Ludlow]

I agree with you, Darjeeling. I also found that Bigsly's reply didn't do justice to that long, interesting and well written post. Good stuff Tec972.

There have been a lot of talk about oakmoss on this thread, as if vintages are all about oakmoss. I have to agree that after a while these oakmoss monsters starts to feel repetitive - and I also usually don't feel comfortable wearing these fragrances. Gucci Nobile is a great example of a aromatic fougere where the use of oakmoss is very skilful and moderate.

But the thing is, none of my absolute favourite vintages are about oakmoss. They are also always absolutely singular and unmistakeable. Vintage Eau d'Hermes has civet and probably also high quality sandalwood, Domenico Caraceni 1913 and No. 88 are all about Forester's unrivaled rose and geranium extracts and the very first version of No. 88 also allegedly had mysore sandalwood. Fahrenheit's reformulations are probably mainly due to the change in tastes of the masses (considering that they made it softer and sweeter with vanilla) and also possibly cheapening of some ingredients. Then there are vintages that are ultra complex symphonic harmonies of many - atleast seemingly - high quality ingredients. Vintage Equipage and Tiffany for Men would be my prime examples here. So in short, most vintages just as most modern fragrances are not even close to being worth owning. But some vintage fragrances have attributes that are practically impossible to find in current formulations. Then again, I'm also enjoying what the likes of Ropion and Ellena are doing nowadays with all the state of the art synthetics. I wouldn't want to be without either and sometimes people talk about the subject as if we had to make a choice between vintage fragrances and fragrances currently in production.

 

[Kaern]

Are these 'vintages' always inherently better?

Or is it just nostalgia and memories?

 

[Vinnie]

Or is it just nostalgia and memories?

Yes, that's what I would say...

 

[Tec972]

Perhaps there are some people who have poor control of their emotions, but I fail to see how one can assume that there are a bunch of people who are "hysterical" or "going crazy" because they do research on scents. Does anyone say this about wine connoisseurs, people who must have a comic book with a certain number on it, those who wouldn't buy a coin unless it is in BU whatever condition, baseball card collectors who insist on a certain rating from the major rating companies, etc? No, this is the rule, not the exception in these kinds of endeavors. You can call it a waste of time, but I don't see many people devoting most of their free time to charity, if any. Is it worse than playing a video game or watching a mindless TV show? Let's get real here, please! LOL.

You are taking my somewhat lighthearted post a bit too literally in your interpretation Bigs. You also have to admit that the collector mentality is somewhat of an obsessive or compulsive mentality in addition to that. Especially when it concerns spending a good deal of money looking for that certain comic book or baseball card or vintage of wine. We know what we want or what we are looking for, and only want to spend money if its the real deal!!

 

[Tec972]

I'm trying to match up the content of your reply to the content of his post. It seems you have seriously misinterpreted what he said or maybe meant to reply to someone else. About the closest is a passing mention to driving himself crazy trying to verify the vintage which strikes me as an expression of how it can be frustrating trying to pin these details down.
Some people love the chase, but I can imagine that working with uncertainty in trying to find what one loves can be frustrating for some. I don't think he was saying that vintage enthusiasts are crazy or hysterical. In fact, he describes himself as a vintage enthusiast, so it strikes me as a self deprecating comment rather than an attack on anyone.
I hope you'll excuse my continued participation in this thread. Other threads, like the vintage discussion in the General discussion forum I would not try to post it because I could contribute nothing useful to it.

Wine connoisseurship has other issues and for some it looks like a socially acceptable way to be an alcoholic.

Thank you Darjeeling, you are spot on in what I was trying to convey. I think Bigsly took it too literal or misinterpreted my intent.