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.
sashur – :
Stunning.
And not a surprise as the perfumer is Michel Almairac who creates beautiful fragrances.
Classic. I love this. Wow!
otard – :
A very well blended, graceful and feminine floral which has a very creamy and earthy base.
It’s the kind of fragrance that does not overpower you with sharp distinct notes but rather wraps you in a warm cloud of very well orchestrated list of notes.
I particularly like its woodsy transition to the base.
It’s the kind of fragrance that turns some heads to you as you walk by and the wind carries your smell in the room with a flick of your hair, a very very strongly 90s scent.
Instant confidence booster and one of the ultimate feel-good fragrances for women.
Странник010 – :
I just added the original to our database – Eau de Gucci Concentree (Classic). I have both the original and the 1993 version and they are quite similar, close enough to think that the 1993 was a re-orchestration/re-launch. Looking forward to your comments on the original : )
Sfaiter – :
Pretty powder. Thanks to my grandmother, it’s in my collection. Almost a full bottle too!
NooK47 – :
I have the 1982 version (this site needs a separate listing!) and I’m in love with it! It’s got that vixen bite I love in vintage perfumes matched with a slightly powdery VERY floral undertone (girls my age don’t wear scents like this anymore I feel). I can smell the hyacinth, lilac (my favorite flower, next to violets), and oakmoss most prominantly, but I’m no expert.
I layer this occasionally with bath & body works white citrus toilette, it’s white floral with a dash of sweetness. Takes away the “bite” of the gucci, I LOVE them together!
Ryslan7739 – :
I think this smells very earthy, Chanel 5 type of perfume. I get the smell of sauna, maybe when you smell this, you’ll understand what I mean. I get the same vibe from Estee Lauder’s Beautiful and don’t care that very much (Beautiful is more floral to my nose, and not so ‘sauna’, maybe that was a poor comparison, but there’s some tiny similarity). Maybe it’s my skin, I don’t know. I have exactly same bottle than in picture above. Don’t know if it’s old or new version, I have bought it from eBay and it was used, almost full.
Notes that are listed sound very pretty, I like them all except vanilla, but it’s in the end of the list anyway. I think it could be the oakmoss I don’t seem to like if it’s prominent. I have come to that conclusion, that sense of smell works differently in every person. Others smell clearly something that others don’t smell at all etc. If we could smell the same divine of beauty than somebody else, we’d love it in the same way. Instead we smell something else and don’t understand the taste of the others.
After all it’s not so bad, maybe it will grow on me, but it IS earthy.
tigey22 – :
I had the opaque navy blue bottle with the gold,red and green stripes wrapped around part of the bottle. The blue bottle actually looked like plastic and shaped similarly to today’s iphones but in a slightly smaller size. I have a feeling it was this 93′ version.
The reason being is that recently i tested a bottle of Sung by Alfred Sung. The first thing that came to my mind was eau de Gucci which i wore in my teen years. The notes are similar yet there are subtle differences. Due to that reminiscence i purchased the bottle of Sung as i have thought of eau de Gucci quite often in the recent years.
Notes they share that stand out to my nose are ylang, hyacinth, galbanum, lily of the valley, iris, lemon, lime, jasmine and oakmoss. Even the slightest rose.
Eau de Gucci did make me think of the scent of money, makeup and a faint banana smell from the ylang ylang, which i adore. Such a gorgeous hyacinth note this had. I get what some would mean by bubble gum & pencil shavings. The sweetness from the hyacinth & ylang creating that bubblegum while the vetiver & cedar smell like freshley sanded wood. I wish i had saved the bottle for keep sake.
smile93 – :
I have the 1980’s vintage concentree with the red/gold/green band, blue lid or opaque blue bottle depending on ml, and its a green, woody, powdery lilac scent. I wore it for quite a few years. It should be listed separately! I think the original version is more timeless, in the vein of Chanel 19 / Christalle etc. The version listed above is one I never had, I do however have a dupe of it and it smells like expensive hyacynth soap with a wood base, and feels a bit dated.
vokson0001 – :
This is for the 1993 version. I never tried the 1982 version im afraid.
I like the creamy drydown, middlenotes are sharpspicy on me. Love it, though it is not my typical style of perfume.Very longlasting.
I think I am going to try out the 1982 version.
effonsErott – :
This is actually a review for the vintage 1980s version of Eau de Gucci concentree. Upon first spray, I experienced great disappointment believing that it would be my first vintage fragrance where the notes have gone “off”.
It smelled like elementary school paste.
I buy fragrances for both my pleasure and as a way of learning about the way that perfumes are formulated so even if I can’t stand a perfume, I will not scrub it off. Instead I’ll give it time to bloom or continue on a path of horror. Well Eau de Gucci thankfully did the former and oh boy did it! Very rich, warm and spicy animalic floral that is more on the side of Oriental than chypre that is more unisex than gender specific. There’s a bit of tuberose that reaches the forefront but it’s never strident in the way that other 80s tuberose scents are and is kept in check by a bit of leathery castoreum, herbaceous florals, and vetiver. The tangerine that someone else mentioned has perhaps been lost to the ravages of time.
This is not a scent that would be popular today because it does not have that instantaneous love factor so necessary to push frags at the modern cosmetic counter. This is a frag that requires time to bloom on the skin, at least 15-20 minutes during which one must suspend opinions and classifications. It seems a bit hard to find and of course has been discontinued, but well worth it. Is it a favorite for me? No. However I’ve enjoyed it and am happy to have it as a part of my collection.
dime – :
Anyone of you ever tried Eau de Gucci concentrée or concentrated? That fragrance is GREAT. The notes included tangerine, lilac, jasmine, violet, sandalwood, vetiver, and vanilla. I used to get compliments for it in the ninties, everyday, everywhere, from everybody. Unfortunatley it’s discontinued BUT still available in several vintage versions on good old eBay. I got it recently from there.
I also know how this original Eau de Gucci (not concentrated) smells. Georgious. Elegant. Uplifting. Like walking through a field full delicate flowers.
So sad it has been discontinued.
zafiruss – :
I tried the body lotion that turned me into newer version of this eau (all discontinued products). Very beautiful perfume with hyacinths dominance,lasting and classy, it is a heavy duty for a younger girls. But if you like classy sophisticated perfumes try this one. My latest find in a vintage concentre, very lasting, much heavier than newer eau, but very pretty, definitely an old style floral chypre, hyacinth is very strong that I like. No question Gucci reformulated the modern eau which is more dilute and floral notes are more spread as compared to concentre. I like both, I found a vintage, great smell that is discontinues unfortunately.
rusik90 – :
Update: I just followed the link in the description for Michel Almairac, who also created Chloe edp and L’Eau de Chloe. Those two are lovely, and could be nice replacements (not dupes, but similar in mood). Almairac is also behind the legendary Venezia. I’d love to get a whiff of that one.
СТРЕЛОК – :
Katherinemo…You are correct. This listing must be for the reformulation of the original that several of us have or remember having. It was launced in 1982 and included note of tangerine, Lilac, Jasmine, Violet, Sandalwood, Vetiver, Vanilla.
Sounds like Gucci simply launched a new fragrance and used the older name.
This actually reminds me a bit of Vivienne Westwood Boudoir.
Adelie12 – :
There are many notes in this but they are masterfully blended into a bouquet of rich, yet demure and elegant florals. I can’t even really deconstruct this fragrance because I think everything in it contributes to it’s outstanding quality and overall loveliness.
It is totally feminine, in the strong, elegant sense. It captures the essence of several groups into one – green, woody, floral, sweet, slight powderiness, and satisfies yearnings for all of those elements when I can’t decide what to wear.
An absolute delight to wear. I’m not sure about newer version(s), but the older concentrée is wonderful.
Boojin – :
I still have this perfume and bought it in a duty free shop. Wish I bought more than 1 if I knew it will be discontinued 🙁 now I can’t find it anywhere and nowhere any of the ‘new’ Gucci scent really matches it..
Why discontinue when a lot of women loves it and brings more profit to the company… *sigh*
jwgz – :
I bought a bottle of this circa 1980. It was at discount stores, I guess department stores were making way for the 80’s powerhouse fragrances, like Obsession, Opium, Paris. It is everything a perfume should be, imho — feminine floral, intriguing, inviting, fresh, soft. I like how Pinja put it when she said “it breathes.” That’s exactly right. It has presence, distinctiveness, and wonderful lightness. I agree with all of you who can’t understand why companies discontinue jewels like this one. However, I do get a slight trace of this in the topnote of Gucci Flora. only a trace and only for a millisecond.
tmafija – :
This was such an elegant, femenine,, subtle perfume. i miss it. It was floral but clean in how delicate it was. It was such a lovely, intimate day scent. It wast most enjoyed in short distances, like in a kiss. To me this smelled like a beautiful woman with a gray pencil skirt and a crisp white shirt who under her office clothing wore very beautiful pinkish silk and lace matching underwear. I miss this. Hope Gucci brings this timeless fragrance back.
Nuflareepseus – :
Reading the reviews I thought “Are we talking about the same fragrance here?” Old and new versions must be significantly different, not just slightly tweaked.
The bottle of Eau de Gucci concentrée I have is a gorgeous, blooming, über feminine, heavy white flower perfume from the 80’s (blue plastic cap with blue, red and gold paper ribbon around it). In addition to hyacinth it is heavy on white flowers, tuberose and indolic jasmine. It is also animalic to the point that I wonder if there is a drop of civet in it. One spriz is potent, and the lasting power is good, a whole day. There’s a real sillage too. This perfume makes a statement, a very feminine one.
I find Lauder Beyond Paradise smells surprisingly similar, almost identical, yet there’s a BIG difference: Eau de Gucci breathes, it is alive and natural, and therefore feels lovely. The artificial and soapy Beyond Paradise is hallow, empty, without a natural feeling to it, and feels lifeless. (Why Fragrantica would list “animalic” for Beyond Paradise is Beyond Comprehension).
I do not get anything near “light demure & pretty” or “eau de pencil shavings”, but no doubt the versions those reviewers had, did have those qualities.
Lovely!
Osss – :
Hi, can you please tell me where I can buy this, I absolutely love it it takes me back to when I was a teenager. Anyone help please?
vovakori – :
Just an update: This fragrance will last about 3-4 hours, then it softly lingers on clothes or wrist, put you will get up close to smell it. I would wear this it I was a little down, and needed something to pep me it. It is still very lovely.
voiten80 – :
Just an update: This fragrance will last about 3-4 hours, then it softly lingers on clothes or wrist, put you will get up close to smell it. I would wear this it I was a little down, and needed something to pep me it. It is still very lovely.
koka555 – :
This perfume is a real treasure, the splash of wonderful flowers, the depth of fragrance is rich. I would probably wear this on clothes. The reason being that it a fragrance which wiffs across when you are walking but not overpowering is a close fragrance to the wrist smell. The smell of rich money smell and the 70’s smell is great and unique. A great purchase if you have the chance. I have bought one bottle, it was well worth the blind purchase. It has a free gyspy feel about of fresh fields of flowers.
sergeymaster – :
I will never understand why such beautiful creations are taken off the market! 🙁
One of my aunts used this fragrance many years ago and I fell in love with it. I always sniffed the bottle when I was visiting and asked for the bottle when finished 🙂
This is pure, elegant, sophisticated, delicate, feminine floral fragrance. The pale pink color of the fluid suited the scent well. It’s not aggressive at all but still has a lot of character which most recent modern creations lack.
So all the women in the world, use this fragrance on you and make people around you delighted 🙂
cleo – :
Strange…I first bought this perfume in Paris in 1985 in a tiny perfume boutique near Notre Dame Cathedral. The paragraph above states that it came out in 1993.
sams1k – :
Reminds me of the Caribbean, I absolutely loved this one..:)
29веснушек – :
This is for the original cologne concentree version. Initially, I get almost pure hyacinth, with a smidge of Spanish cedarwood, with the cedarwood becoming more prominent as the drydown continues. I have a jar of hyacinth tincture I made from purple hyacinths picked from my yard, and this is almost spot-on. I haven’t tried the reformulation, but the original is very pretty and a must-try for hyacinth lovers.
leraverrf – :
Shaving cream and flowers. I like it. It is not so overwhelming, actually it is spring or summer fragrance whit a touch of the past. Elegant creamy and sweet, little bit clean feel because of the shaving cream scent in it.
Staying power is not so outstanding, pretty average for me: 5 to 6 hours.
VOP – :
very very long- lasting
supervanya – :
Top and middle notes are very good, it smells like a lovely bouquet, a little bit creamy. The drydown was awful on me, I guess its because of either the vetiver or the cedar. Very long lasting.
storozhuck.victor – :
I once heard this described as “eau de pencil shavings and bubble gum.” That’s a pretty accurate description, I think. And that’s not an unpleasant aroma, trust me! This one smells absolutely delicious. The soap and body products in this scent are even better. Pity that all are getting so difficult to find.
goroh1 – :
This is a light demure & pretty floral. I love the top and middle notes of this, but it does not last long at all on my skin. I really have to spray it on to get any scent to rise! You could wear this to a wedding or to a business meeting, it’s very versitile.