To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Izmalkov.D – :
i was recommended this at sephora when i told the shop assistant i like unusual scents. she first recommended j’ose which i used to wear and then came up with this. i liked it at first sniff. it is soft and mellow but at the same time, daring, and unusual. i would not normally choose to try this but am glad i did. i am not sure why people dislike this, as i would think at least they would be neutral, but anyway. for me it is a pleasant, soft and womanly scent that has some unusual characteristics.
neodenis.a – :
It’s not the best and not the worst of Eisenberg’s perfumes. Somewhere in the middle.
It’s spicy, floral and a little bit sweet and soapy.
Sweet notes? I haven’t seen it described like this before, really weird. There’s sweetness, alright, a modest amount of sweetness.
The top notes were not very good smelling in my opinion, but the drydown is better, quite nice even.
So, it’s an average scent, not bad, but I expect a scent to be amazing right after smelling or I can’t stand it.
Flazping – :
I tested the complete line today and couldn’t find anything pleasant in the scents. They seemed very artificial and plastic. Not recommendable.
segun976 – :
Aww, this time Eisenberg didn’t do well…
Back To Paris doesn’t still the show.
This is a very weak fragrance, in many meanings – has almost no sillage, doesn’t live long, and seems like done in a hurry and with no money on even mediocre-quality ingredients.
Starts as a very delicate spicy rose, quite pleasant – but that lasts for about 5 minutes.
Then it becomes so oddly soapy and cheap smelling … A blend of plastic rose, rubbery jasmine, and lavender made of I don’t know what … PCV, probably. All sprinkled with mandarin grown on artificial fertilizers.
For a long time I haven’t smelled anything as cheap and artificial as this.
Just plain awful. Such a surprise from Eisenberg.