Design Paul Sebastian

4.02 из 5
(43 отзывов)

Design Paul Sebastian

Rated 4.02 out of 5 based on 43 customer ratings
(43 customer reviews)

Design Paul Sebastian for women of Paul Sebastian

SKU:  6b8523401d71 Perfume Category:  . Fragrance Brand: Notes:  , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
Share:

Description

Design by Paul Sebastian is a Oriental Floral fragrance for women. Design was launched in 1985. Top notes are tuberose, orange blossom, peach and jasmine; middle notes are honeysuckle, carnation, gardenia, lilac, ylang-ylang and rose; base notes are sandalwood, black currant, musk and civet.

43 reviews for Design Paul Sebastian

  1. :

    5 out of 5

    My mother bought me my first bottle of Design and it’s magical on my skin. I can’t find many fragrances that smell nice on me. This is the fragrance that stands out from all the sugar milled overpriced and cheap syrup duds. This is very distinct. I was very surprised to see another Dior Poison similarity. I do get a combo of Poison and Pure Poison. It’s not soapy but the tuberose is a chameleon that smells like magnolia and the peach is just enough to settle it. I don’t detect a manly musk scent. Underrated. Must try.

  2. :

    5 out of 5

    I reviewed this a while ago but decided to try this again after not wearing for a few years. I’m not surprised this is an 80s scent because to me this is like Giorgio Beverly Hill’s younger, more modest and quiet sister. It’s a very clear, soft white floral and I had forgotten just how pretty it was. Will be wearing this a lot more in the future.

  3. :

    3 out of 5

    I tested this fragrance despite my better judgment after reading the reviews. I sprayed some directly on my hand a regretted it after just 20 mins. To me, this smelled great when first sprayed, but after about 20 to 30 minutes, I smelled like a cross between ben gay and sweet white flowers. My skin usually reacts quite well to white flowers so this was surprising to me. This smells very medicinal after a while and I’m not a fan. Perhaps this will smell good on the right person, but it’s a no from me.

  4. :

    5 out of 5

    Nope I cant. Too big, too 1980s, too white floral+ civet. It practically strangled me. Lol.

  5. :

    3 out of 5

    Teenage years, the perfume I bought when I ran out of my pricey one and couldn’t afford to replace it. On me, the scent was mostly sweet honeysuckle. Just a dab or two is all you need. I liked it but was never in love with it. Cheery but not whimsical enough. A bargain for those who are in love with it!

  6. :

    5 out of 5

    I have Truth or Dare and Design and I have to say, I like this one better! It lasts quite a bit longer and it is fuller and more lush and complex.
    I get the tuberose first of all, then carnation then lilac followed by jasmine. White florals are woven in and about though I don’t really notice the peach, though I do catch some shy sandalwood.
    I ignored Design on my table for more than a year and then said to myself, enough buying, more wearing what you already have. Wear Design. So glad I gave it a chance. For the ten dollars I spent on this, it is a like so much bordering on love, I’ll give it another day or two and I can see this easily turning to love.

  7. :

    4 out of 5

    This is a floral but it’s very sweet. It’s OK but very synthetically perfumy like Elizabeth Taylor’s White Diamonds. I’ll finish the bottle, I bought a small size for $10 at Marshall’s so it’s no big deal but I would NOT buy this again.

  8. :

    5 out of 5

    I liked this but not loved. Nothing stood out – smelt pleasantly generic and feminine. Warm and easy going for something like a long plane journey where you don’t want to knock people with sillage or unusual fragrances. Very safe blind buy for slightly musky florals.

  9. :

    4 out of 5

    Had the opportunity to smell this today at WalMart. It was less than $20, and I was so hopeful it would come home with me, but no, not a match made in heaven. I sprayed a little on my wrist and walked around the store, and you know what it smells like? Vivienne Westwood’s “Boudoir”. Exactly like it! It’s a nice fragrance BUT: know when you buy it that it is very dated.

  10. :

    3 out of 5

    I had a coworker who wore this and I loved it on her, so I had to have it. On me it just smells generic “perfumey.” It does last a very long time and has great sillage.

  11. :

    5 out of 5

    I love to spray this on my clothes during spring and summer. It does not work well with my skin (almost like two completely different perfumes) but it is a cheery tuberose-driven perfume on my clothes. Light and sunny and very pretty.

  12. :

    4 out of 5

    Design. 1.7 oz Parfum Spray.
    Design is the underrated white floral fragrance. If you like the white floral genre, check out design. Its a great drugstore option. Design has a fresh honeysuckle and lilac slant so think giorgio meets white shoulders. Any animalic is synthetic. Its well done, kind of dense in nature,and I like to layer it with coty vanilla musk to give more woods and warm vanilla to support the florals. It really updates design. Sometimes you want a pretty white floral that doesnt break the bank. Design is it.

  13. :

    5 out of 5

    I don’t know if I bought a watered-down fake from Ebay, or what – but for me, Design by Sebastian was less than mediocre; so, I gave it away (which is what I do with all my perfume buys that are less than an olfactory delight). I no longer buy perfume via Ebay – too many bad experiences. Now, I stick to buying directly from the manufacturer of the scent, or, from a respected retail or online store.
    Note: After I posted this review, I saw that this product uses animals in the ingredients. I don’t do products that use animal ingredients in the perfume.

  14. :

    3 out of 5

    Nobody mention that this smells a tad like Madonna’s Truth or Dare, Fracas and Elizabeth Taylors Gardenia? !
    Well then– I will.
    I did a TRIPLE header blind buy at Marshalls tonight and guess what?
    This one was the “winner”. The other two blind buys were awful.
    This is going on my “favorite cheapie” list!
    Love it!

  15. :

    4 out of 5

    I’d never before smelled this or, rather, didn’t remember this one from the 80’s until just now, when I opened and sprayed the 3.4 ounce parfum onto the backs of my hands. I’d picked this up at a local garage sale for only $5 (which, naturally meant that it must be mine). A certain website tells me that batch #A6JB (which is on the base and box of the one I had) was bottled/boxed in July 2016.
    With just two sprays, I smelled the beautiful, complex, slightly-animalic floral fragrance that made this perfume legendary. This is a delicate, lovely fragrance. I can see now why PS Design is considered iconic.
    Yes, there is a sweetness to the composition but it’s a floral sweetness, not a candy or fruit sweetness.
    Scent: 7/10 (Tuberose lovers are remiss to skip this one).
    Longevity: moderate to long-lasting (several hours)
    Sillage: moderate (to enormous, if over-applied)
    I gave this to one of my best friends and she loves it.
    (It’s a very good perfume, I just have more than enough in the way of tuberose-heavy juices for now).

  16. :

    4 out of 5

    I love Design it always puts a big smile on my face when I wear this. Design isn’t a fancy scent it also is very cheap and can be abit loud if over sprayed I wear about 5 or 6 sprays and it lingers on my clothes forever. I get 12+ hours and heavy sillage. I get compliments every time I wear it. 7/10

  17. :

    4 out of 5

    I spray-tested it once at TJ Maxx and I really liked it but never got around to buy it until this week. I needed a perfume post work as it was a really hot and humid day. It was a cheap deal $10 for 50ml EDT, 7CA2 stamped on it.
    The opening notes are warm florals mostly honeysuckle. Then it settles down and you can smell tuberose and perhaps gardenia. It is a long lasting smell and it settles down with musk at the end. I wore it to the gym and was glad I could smell it instead of sweating bodies. I would consider this one for casual days, as a back up in the purse when you may be running around and need a long lasting scent on you.

  18. :

    3 out of 5

    I just recently got a bottle because it was my favourite scent in 1989 when I was a young teen. Every-time I wear it the compliments never end. It is a very sophisticated, slightly musky floral scent and in my opinion it is NOT sweet at all. It has carnation in it but it does not smell like a funeral home like one would think. Its a very nice smell because of the tuber-rose not being too strong you can smell the other flowers like the jasmine, YLANG-YLANG, honeysuckle and lilac quite well. This is different from any fragrance I have worn. It lasts all day long. It is well worth the money and the bottle is very nice with a elegant burgundy cap. I get more compliments when I wear this than any other perfume. It is very opulent. I will continue to stock up on this just in case they discontinue it because that is how much I love it. Its best worn in the spring and summer due to the intense floral notes. Not a winter scent at all in my opinion because its not at all spicy and a little goes a long way. Paul got this perfume right! Its so lovely I cant say enough good things about it. And do not listen to SCBohemian its not tacky AT ALL.

  19. :

    4 out of 5

    Paul Sebastian DESIGN is very likely the longest-in-coming blind buy of my life. I have been seeing the familiar white or cream box with burgundy nameplate on discount store shelves for a solid 25 years, minimum.
    Every time, I have passed by it. The dirt cheap price, unheard of (to me) designer and constant stock that never seemed to dwindle (no one buying??) killed any interest in me for about 15 years.
    Then I became a literate and online-educated fragranista (instead of a natural/nascent one who hadn’t yet learned there was a name and community for people like us). And suddenly DESIGN was on the menu…but the accords, notes and reviews on Fragrantica gave me massive pause.
    4-5 times, I reached to blind buy this, re-read this page, and put it back on the shelf. I am seriously leery of white flowers, especially tuberose, and the way they were done in many fragrances of the mid 80s to mid 90s. White flowers from those decades are always too sweet for me, too either grape-like or bubblegummy (for one example intolerable to me, see Elizabeth Taylor’s DIAMONDS & EMERALDS). POISON was good in doses but invariably wore out its welcome for me, and that’s down to the strong 80s tuberose.
    But friends, you know how it goes.
    You know the moment when you are itching for a blind buy and there’s precious little else on the shelf so you take the plunge with something you’re sure you’ll dislike.
    Wonder of wonders…
    I don’t dislike DESIGN. In fact, I am enjoying it more every day and night.
    First of all, if you are old enough to have been at least in grade school in the US during the 1990s, you have smelled DESIGN before. I guarantee it. It is such a familiar scent, and no wonder, given its widespread distribution in discount stores and its affordability.
    Tuberose/white flowers? YES.
    Perfume-y and clearly of a time before the 2000s? YES (this is actually a plus to me, not a minus).
    Too sweet for me? NOPE. HALLELUJAH.
    Overly grape-y? Nope. HALLELUJAH.
    Bubblegummy? Not at all.
    And here’s the great thing: I’m getting a dash of something peach-like that gives freshness and loft to the fragrance, separating it from the dense white flower creations of the 80s and 90s, YET , the fragrance could never be described as fruity, either.
    Someone below compared it to Alfred Sung SUNG. It’s true he/she did say the two aren’t dupes for each other, but Sung would never have occurred to my nose in the first place (It’s subjective, smell). That fragrance, which is a serious love for me, is much greener and less sweet than Design, as well as much higher-pitched and more aggressively “spring floral” (lily of the valley and hyacinth, neither of which at all comes through to my nose in DESIGN).
    DESIGN, as an 80s tuberose-centric frag, has more in common with things like Bob Mackie MACKIE and Dior POISON but is much lighter and less statement-making. If you hate POISON, please don’t avoid Design for that reason.
    I have been spraying this liberally at bedtime for a week , displacing my usual alternating of MAGIE NOIRE (sour chypre) and, sometimes SHALIMAR (vanillic Oriental). What a surprisingly refreshing difference in DESIGN.
    And, today I wore it during the day and have been enjoying getting wafts of it from under my shirt for the past 6 hours (indoors, climate control, not sweating. It fades more quickly in warm humid temperatures).
    This is simply a good, solid perfume for anyone who wants something totally non-gourmand that is neither a literal bouquet of flowers nor a sour/mossy chypre. I see now why it has survived when so many others have been discontinued.
    Tip: it is also great when layered with the very nonsweet, heliotrope-y (unsweetened almond milk-y) pure floral of PAUL SEBASTIAN CASUAL, another perennial cheapie at discount stores. The moderate sweetness of DESIGN adds depth to the more sterile florals of CASUAL , while CASUAL tempers any warmth or sweetness in DESIGN that might get out of hand for some people (like me usually).
    I think that if you go in to this blind buy expecting something that doesn’t smell contemporary or in-fashion, you will probably be pleased with this.
    Caveat: With any widely-available fragrance over 10 years old, there is always the possibility that someone you disliked wore this, or that you’ve smelled it oversprayed/abused by people around you. I suspect there is great danger of this with DESIGN, so don’t be surprised if you have a negative predisposition towards it for reasons you can’t understand.

  20. :

    5 out of 5

    Design is one of those rare blessings to perfume enthusiasts… Great price, great scent, great performance, non-offensive despite it’s heavy silage, total crowd pleaser. It is so fantastic when we can get all that positive action packed into one scent without breaking the bank!
    Something about Design reminds me of Alfred Sung’s SUNG. I wouldn’t call them dupes for one another, but the similarities are there. With Sung I get mostly LOTV and greens while design has a bit more than that going on. Design also manages to be comforting in some way. It could be worn in any season easily. It’s incredibly versatile in that way. Impressive, really. This is one of those perfumes I truly believe should be in every collectors wardrobe. (IF you like 80’s florals anyway) It’s totally perfect for laid back days that don’t require anything fancy or use of your expensive designer stuff, but yet you want to smell good without having to reapply 20 times in a day. This has the longevity and silage that will go the distance and keep you smelling and feeling great all day. I believe it to be blind buy safe. TJ MAXX often has big bottles for under 10$ too, so if you’re unfamiliar with it and considering a blind buy I’d encourage you to go there for it.

  21. :

    3 out of 5

    Testing a mini vintage original in good condition. This one is a VERY nice 80´s white floral. What sets this one apart from the many others of this same type is that,while it is strong, it is not cloying, nor overly sweet. The opening is a little bit acidic or sourish, but that settles very soon into a classic white floral scent softened by other notes. I sense more of a civet than musk undertone, but it is nice as not an obvious musk. The spicy carnation note is there, especially in the opening. I would say a solid fragrance for 80´s style white florals. Very decent and very versatile.

  22. :

    3 out of 5

    DESIGN has been on the market since 1985, but I just discovered it last spring when I blind-bought a bottle for under $15. This is the modern formulation (batch code 2HA12, manufactured in June, 2012) and I’m not familiar with the original, so can’t compare the two.
    I’m happy to report this was a successful blind buy. On me, DESIGN starts out a little too heavy on the tuberose, but it mellows out within a few minutes. The tuberose does remain dominant, but it becomes much softer and the other notes come through nicely. Once dry-down has happened, DESIGN becomes a very smooth fragrance that is warm without being sweet and it’s retro in a good way. As the hours pass, I can detect the spiciness, sandalwood and musk. There’s no vanilla here and I don’t pick up much of the fruit notes. Sillage is on the high-moderate side and longevity is excellent. I enjoy this most in cooler weather and I find it to be very versatile.

  23. :

    4 out of 5

    I have tried many perfumes, from very low end to extremely high end. And yet I cannot shake Design. Maybe it’s because my mom always wore it (she passed away just 1 year ago at 56–miss you, mom) but it smells like home to me. It never fails; Design is the only perfume that when I wear it, I am literally stopped in the street and complimented. On my mom it smelled like a beautiful gourmand with notes of peach and honey and grape, and we must have similar chemistry because I get the same scent when it’s on my skin. It wears even better in summer.
    Note that only one or two sprays are sufficient.

  24. :

    4 out of 5

    I have love/hate relationship with this fragrance. I don’t wear it often, but when I do I tend to enjoy the lovely honeysuckle note combined with tuberose, and gardenia. I don’t smell any rose, or lilac which are listed on this page. But I definitely notice the civet note. bought this on fragrance.net, and was afraid the perfume would be too strong because of the tuberose, which some say can be an overpowering scent if done wrong. I ended up ordering it anyway, and I can say I don’t regret buying it. The perfume is very sweet, light, very oriental

  25. :

    3 out of 5

    I know a lot of people who love this perfume, but I suspect it all depends on body chemistry. On me it’s screechy, annoying and . . . add any other unpleasant adjective you can think of. The notes don’t seem to be the problem, unless lily-of-the-valley is hiding in there somewhere. Lily o V and me don’t agree. I’m talking about the original ‘Design’, have no idea of how the reformulation might differ. Paul Sebastian’s ‘Casual’ doesn’t agree with me, either. My skin, my brain and my nose all agree to disagree. But variety is the spice of life! Go for it!

  26. :

    3 out of 5

    I love it! I’ve been eyeing this for months.so, there she was at Marshalls! $9.99. Review by Gigi made me even more sure id buy it. Its so lovely,sweet,and powdery to my nose.I get powdery rose and carnation and woods,,,all very light and not a screetch to be found.just lovely! I encourage a blind buy for this,its gorgeous!
    Ps..it is not ,loud,strong,overbearing, or anything to be afraid of overspraying! It must have been reformulated because alot of older reviews say it is the above.Nope! One floral I can get behind!

  27. :

    5 out of 5

    Fragrance Review For Design
    Paul Sebastian
    Top Notes
    Tuberose Orange Blossom Peach Jasmine
    Middle Notes
    Honeysuckle Carnation Gardenia Lilac Ylang Ylang Rose
    Base Notes
    Sandalwood Black Currant Musk Civet
    Wow Wow Wow!!!!
    I’m usually very subtle in my reactions to fragrances but this is such a fantastic fragrance that I was swooning when I smelled it. As a floral Oriental fan, this type of fragrance hits the spot. It’s a lush gorgeous white floral as well. The bottle is attractive, the scent is luxurious and full bodied, it’s like a beautiful, ageless woman whose beauty can transcend any time, any era. Something about the name “Design” also attracted me to it. Smells like a fashion designer in haute couture she created herself.
    The first note that reached my nose was tuberose: a rich delicious vanilla scented tuberose. It smelled delicious and the peach is giving it a fruity sweetness but it never becomes cloying or sugary. There’s also a distinct orange blossom. It smells fruity and citrusy but very floral right from the start. Because that tuberose is at the top, it does not take over and comes and goes like a little fashion model on the runway. The other scents that make appearances on this same runway are gardenia, carnation and jasmine. They are all white flowers of a heady fragrance to die for. There’s also ylang. All the flowers really match up with the peach. Beautiful.
    About half way into the performance of this fragrance, a honeysuckle and black currant provide even more fruit flavors, but it’s not super fruity either. It’s subtle, sweet, and soft. It’s quite easy to wear in the spring and summer and the perfume sits on your skin like a little logo, like a little fashion label on your skin. It has a little civet bite and musk toward the dry down but it’s not as heavy as I’ve experienced civet in other frags. The sandalwood is more pronounced and there could be vanilla and benzoin. It’s a good base/dry down, with a creaminess and sweetness set apart from most heavy darker Orientals.
    At times this smells like it could be for men too as it has a slight aftershave scent or shaving cream scent but it’s only a little trace of it. For me the florals are the key players: that gardenia and jasmine, as well as carnation and ylang, and the peach currant and sandalwood. It’s not terribly complex, it’s light and powdery as well. The perfume begs to be worn in the noon time when you’re having drinks and lunch, when you’re with friends. It’s innocent and not seductive in the least. At the same time it’s also mature.
    This is a beautiful perfume and I wish there was more love for it. I hadn’t heard of it until a friend of mine told me she wears it and I smelled it on her and wanted that same smell on me.

  28. :

    4 out of 5

    I smelled Design for the first time a few days ago for the first time. It was on osale and I wanted to smell something new to me. I had not noticed it before because of its very sedate box and name.
    I just had to go back and buy it tonight after thinking about its floral loveliness all week long. I am so glad I did!!! It’s a flower bomb, full of tuberose, but very wearable. I have not reached the dry down yet, but had to write and express my gratitude for this very well designed, sweet “Design”. Hooray for the 80’s!

  29. :

    4 out of 5

    Sweet white floral reminiscent of the old Tatiana, but more Honeysuckle than Gardenia, so very sweet. You either love that or not! A simple fragrance with not the least bit of sophistication, just a happy mood for me. I had a patient who wore and loved the linger in the waiting room!
    That said, it may be cloyingly sweet and too strong for some. As the staying power is long, spray gently. As for comparisons to Sung, I do not get that at all. There is a distinct woodsy note to Sung that is not to be found here.

  30. :

    5 out of 5

    I love the opening; while I find most perfumes initially smell strongly of alcohol, this goes on lovely at first spray. It is undeniably retro. It does indeed smell like a (heavily fragranced) bar of soap–it’s sweet and clean but still a little spicy and warm.
    If sprayed in moderation, this is not overpowering but has a definite presence. I find this to be a very comfortable fragrance.

  31. :

    4 out of 5

    Very old school and musky, but clean and flowery at the same time. Reminded me a bit of the unique old school spiciness of White Shoulders and when I look it up on here I see EIGHT of the same notes (Animal musk, peach, lilac, sandalwood, jasmine, gardenia orange blossom, tuberose)
    A little hokey, a little heavy, and a little obvious, but in spite of it’s flaws, I like it. It’s a drug store staple that still works. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

  32. :

    3 out of 5

    On me, Design is nothing special – but on my Mother, it is simply DIVINE. She gets non-stop compliments on it. Most perfumes depend, to some extent, on body chemistry and how it is applied. Design doesn’t work for many – but when it does, it is beautiful.

  33. :

    4 out of 5

    This is my moms signature, its actually the only perfume she owns. Thank god because I love this fragrance, and having a bottle around all the time comes in handy.
    Im a little shocked to see so many people dislike this gorgeous perfume.
    1-3 sprays max will do! Sweet, warm, and happy powerhouse floral.. Give it a test the next time you see it, you might love it!
    Also, sillage and longevity= the best of the best ive ever tried, even compared to alien, angel, all that jazz. This is a beautiful monster.

  34. :

    4 out of 5

    One of my first girlfriends wore this and I can say without reservation that it is one of the most nausea-inducing scents out there. I don’t know what it’s chemical makeup is, but I am certain syrup of ipecac is in there somewhere. Bleh.

  35. :

    3 out of 5

    I find it funny and surprising when there are so many polarized opinions of a perfume. I like this one, I actually wore this in the early 90’s when I was 14 or so. It’s very floral on me, and very strong. I like Red Door too, so there you go. I think sometimes people have problems with “classic” fragrances , but it’s the application, not the fragrance itself.. I find older fragrances NEED to dry-down as well, they’re usually off putting at first, younger generations aren’t used to smelling certain notes.

  36. :

    4 out of 5

    I have to say, I don’t get the hate for this one. I love trying perfumes that are widely disliked or at least divisive, and even if I love them (and I usually do) I can understand how there is a widespread strong distaste, but Design strikes me as pleasant. You have to like super sweet white florals to wear it, of course, and it’s certainly not a GREAT frag, but unless it were way overdone, I can’t really see it being offensive on someone else. It reminds me a LOT of a bit softer, closer version of Giorgio… ain’t no way to wear that one discreetly, which is one of the things I love about it, but Design could, if applied with a light hand, make that sunny, cheery, musky tuberose/gardenia thing workplace appropriate. If that happens to be your thing, it’s a worthwhile purchase if you come across it.

  37. :

    5 out of 5

    I don’t know how to say this in a nice way. But it smells very cheap. Slutty almost. My sister used to wear this all the time. My mother hated it so much she threw it out. She refused to believe that this monster of a scent came from behind a department store counter. Smells like cheap musk and artificial flowers.

  38. :

    3 out of 5

    I sympathize with the reviewers who are bored with this one. For a couple of years, it was everywhere. I feel like that was a while ago – I haven’t smelled it on anyone recently. I used to own it and swapped it away long ago. I got a nostalgia craving for it recently and ordered the parfum. It is yummy. It is everything I wanted. Pushing gourmand, but not too cloying. Mellow fruitiness and the right mid-balance of floral. Earthy, but still light. Very early 00s. For a while I thought of Paul Sebastian as too boring to take seriously, but now I adore how light, pretty and simple it is. Great for this warm weather. The citrus really rises to the occasion. I think if I didn’t know and smelled this from a niche house for the first time today, I’d say hell yes finally. Paul Sebastian is a nice little personal gem. The sillage of the parfum is very close to the body, which I prefer to the total knock out projection of the , which I had before.
    I’ve recently been revisiting the perfumes I wore 10+ years ago and I have to say, this one I appreciate more at 32 than I did when I was 18. I feel lovely in this today.

  39. :

    4 out of 5

    Do you know Alfred Sung’s Sung? Design smells like someone twisted Sung’s balls off, then made him Sing. It’s the nasal equivalent of the sound you would hear if you lit a metal hair bands’ hair on fire- while the amp was on 11.
    Civet and tuberose, what could *possibly* go wrong?
    I like it!
    Wear it at night, so you can’t be identified.

  40. :

    5 out of 5

    This is the latest formulation I could find of this. It’s still very affordable and I believe it has greatly improved it’s general appeal for a larger number of people.
    Design opens strong with a very sweet punch. It’s not a gourmand, edible sweetness but a more floral sweet with a heavy peach and current touch. I was surprised. It’s not the civet bomb I remember and there is no soap, no sharpness and no powder from the white flowers. I like this smooth and almost creamy take on white flowers. I’ve never been as thrilled by heavy soap or sharpness. The florals in the opening are mainly honeysuckle and tuberose but the sweetness is intense, just walking the line between alarming and eccentric.
    After an hour or so the sweetness has faded and I’m left with a lovely smooth and silky honeysuckle dominated white bouquet over a sweet musky sandalwood base. The peach and current aren’t “notes” so much as impressions now, lending their sweetness to a clean musk. It’s warm and almost comforting. I don’t detect any civet or really any anamalic hints at all. I’m also not getting that peppery bite of carnation I remember. I am really enjoying wearing it. I also like that honeysuckle is the main star here. This is a floral that is very under-represented in my wardrobe and this is a good use of it.
    The dry down is very much like the heart. There is not very much evolution here. The sandalwood is a bit more prominent. It’s smooth and creamy over that sweet musky base. Lovely. The Gardenia becomes the dominant flower in the dry down. It actually begins to almost shout in a creamy, coconutty, kinda sweet way. I didn’t expect this. I really noticed it about 9 hours after application. I love gardenia, so this is a good thing.
    This didn’t become a skin scent until well after 9 hours and I was still catching snatches of it up to 14 hours later. Overall the scent wears very well and doesn’t fall apart at the end. It’s well blended and not at all what I was expecting from the bottle design. I didn’t realize I made judgments on a scent just by looking at the bottle until this scent surprised me. A great buy for the price, just use a light hand because it really has a big reach.

  41. :

    4 out of 5

    In the 1990’s, I worked in the fragrance department of a prominent department store. Design by Paul Sebastian was considered such an overpowering, migraine-inducing scent, that the testers were locked in a drawer (per the store manager’s request). The synthetic, chemical notes still remind me of the tacky clientele who requested it. Design is overwhelming and animalistic; there is nothing subtle and refined about this cringe-worthy concoction.

  42. :

    5 out of 5

    This must be a cult classic,since it’s one of the most famous 80’s scents that I’ve never seen in Canada, yet is still being sold today.
    I’ve never seen it or tried it, but it’s very popular and apparently smells different on everyone, which must account for the strong differencs in opinion.

  43. :

    4 out of 5

    After several years of perfume preoccupation, I’ve finally gotten ’round to reading from THE GUIDE, by Luca Turin and Tania Sanchez. This scintillating and well researched book is often referred to as some kind of Bible by perfume illiterates like myself, but for me personally it’s actually a wickedly Funny Ride! They have a deliciously irreverent attitude, coupled with a fine knowledge of their subject.
    Not that I don’t disagree with them from time to time. In particular, they seem to enjoy bashing inexpensive beauties for their lack of expensive ingredients, an outlook which I find circular in reasoning if not downright hilarious! Which leads me to this particular budget classic.
    Tania Sanchez gave Design exactly one star, meaning a deplorable scent, mere ‘floral shampoo’. I do understand her point of view, especially when reading her puzzled remarks. Given just a few minutes to spray a blotter and sniff, I have come to conclusions just as arbitrary. It took me a full year to acquaint myself with Design, trying her in all sorts of weather and moods. Like Tania, I initially wondered, what makes people BUY this stuff?!
    Granted, Design is no exotic masterpiece, but rather a powerful, lingering floral of the most tenacious variety. It shines best when misted lightly or applied sparingly indeed. The aura is ever so slightly fruity ( black currents, disguising themselves as that insidious shampoo note ) while always uncompromisingly floral. This particular weakness is actually it’s strength, delivering – sometimes loudly! – the essence of fresh greens, lilacs, and gardenias. In reality, the apparent simplicity is intelligent understatement. Civet, rose, honeysuckle, carnation, and Musk are all part of this deceptive siren song. It’s simply so well blended that at first you don’t notice…. Like a supposedly unsophisticated young woman in a gingham dress, who you then realize is the diva you’ve admired from afar, Design holds allure for those persistent enough to look twice. ( Or in my case, More than twice! )
    In answer to why this perfume is still selling, I reply that it is GOOD. Not

Design Paul Sebastian

Add a review

About Paul Sebastian