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.
dmit1 – :
Can anyone tell me which is more civety or ha smore prominant civet, the EDT or the EDP?
Gizatullina – :
I wore this today for the first time in ages. My partner commented it smelt lovely and he’s usually oblivious to anything but vanillas. 2 colleagues commented how nice it smelt when I got to work.
I am still rubbish at identifying notes and somehow struggle particularly with the floral aldehydes although they are nearly my first perfume love. Aldehydes obviously and maybe some flowers- carnation at a push. Oh and I think I get the honey. I’ll keep working on it.
It smells, well, perfumy with a bit of warm dog to me. I mean that in a good way, how they smell in their basket first thing in the morning though I imagine that’s not very appealing if warm dogs aren’t your bag. I used to get the warm dog thing with Gucci No 1 (why Gucci, why did it have to end?).
It’s just lovely and womanly and I’m still enjoying it now at bed time. It’s been a sunny autumn day here and the low sun and autumn colours fit somehow.
BymnAtteneBom – :
First VC&A
One spray to inner elbow
summer test, cool and a bit windy
First impressions:
A juicy (not in the modern wet fresh sense) white flower i thought lily but possibly incorrectly, mature perfumyness.
Smelling up close to skin is a bit nicer, i get a mature aroma (yesteryear’s mothers and grandmothers floral sort). And not surprisingly I have smelled this on older ladies, which is a generational thing more than anything.
Aldehydes – dont really like these, alot ive smelled are of their time and to me not sensual and lovely as others report them to be. I am being open minded and trying.
This is absolutely a complex scent, its performing very well, very decent sillage, well priced (No5 can do one).My best advice would be have a look at similar scents and check how you fare with those.
EDIT: just reading down, yes i could agree with those likening it to No5 and rive gauche. aldehydes and the powderyness. There is that floral mix of perfumes made back in the 80’s or 90’s I cant explain what that mix is as i havent had experience with those indiviual notes- i dont think. Got to respect the lasting power above some of today’s offerings by big brands
outfictit – :
This fragrance is all the proof anyone needs that quality is not a function of price. Smells better than many fragrances I have that cost three or four times as much. Great dry clean chypre (Or green floral?), very classic, utterly unlike popular scents today.
Helps give me a break from my patchouli addiction. The narcissus and hyacinth do not make this flowery because the oakmoss offsets them. Just lovely, a fragrance for all times and occasions. If a niche house gave this a ridiculous name and charged $275 a bottle, people would rave about it.
den040481 – :
I can see why for some this is an “old lady” perfume… I get the powdery note on first spray is intense ( I PERSONALLY LOVE IT)…. This stays pretty linear on my for most of the day until I start sweating( surprisingly I wear this mostly in the summer); that’s when I get the I just soaked in a rose petal bath with lily of the valley and ylang ylang oil… Fresh, soapy and classy.
polymar76 – :
I’ve just got a mini bottle of this fragrance from Ebay and unfortunately I am not very impressed. I love vintage fragrances but all I can smell here is old incense.
Halk 545 – :
Disclaimer!! Do not be put off by comparisons to Diva….This smells NOTHING like Diva!
First is timeless, Diva is an obnoxious drek.
zingr – :
I’ve never worn this myself, but it’s been the signature of my grandmother for as long as I can remember.
That’s not to say that this is an old lady fragrance per se, but I will say that it definitely has that element of class and sophistication to it, but without overdoing the “powdery-ness” like a lot of classic scents, that gives them a certain “theatre makeup” smell.
The reason I remember this so well is, that when I went to visit my grandparents for the holidays I was usually dropped off at my granny’s workplace, a bank. Oftentimes this was about one hour before she had finished work and so I sat beside her and played some games.
Now, her fragrance ALWAYS was the strongest, most distinctive scent I could detect in that entire office. It was warm, loving, welcoming and soft and very, VERY unique.
Silage and longevity are formidable, I don’t remember my granny reapplying it throughout the day even once.
It is a thoroughly beautiful fragrance for classy women. A Chanel for people who don’t like the real Chanels (most Chanels don’t agree with me and are too “stuffy” for my taste).
Works well as a daytime scent, but also as a “big night” perfume, if you normally wear light scents to the office.
Edit: I was at the perfume store yesterday and tested it again just for fun. The tiny – minuscule really – amount that came onto my finger when spraying lasted for the REST OF THE ENTIRE DAY – and that was only the EdT. I had quite forgotten just how strong it was. So a word of advice and warning: use sparingly.
Xeroxmkrki – :
Revisiting this after retiring it from my private collection of fragrances for about five years. This is a luxury fragrance. It goes on strong and can wear fairly mature… so spray this about an hour before you plan on being in the car or elevator with someone.
I still LOVE this fragrance.
It is so rich and alluring… elegant – and warm.
Definitely one that you want to try, if you haven’t already.
This is a fragrance that requires more panache’ to carry off. If you are drawn to the naive, girly, sugary sweet fragrances that line the walls of the Body Shop and Victoria’s Secret– you may find that this is NOT your thing.
You may have had to survive the 1980’s – or have a depth as if you did — to truly appreciate this particular perfume.
It is lovely.
But requires more substance – it has a depth that can make it seem as if you are attempting to wear your mother’s or grandmother’s fragrance – unless you can step into the initial power of this one.
I still love and adore it –
Taking a break from this one only makes me respect is all the more.
Although this goes on rather strong like a full bodied 1980’s perfume – I really enjoy this dry down – it is truly spectacular – a complete symphony and work of art!
Love this!
pisarew – :
Oh my, narcissus, civet, hyacinth, jasmine, oakmoss, what a combination. I have placed this on my must have right away..
I cannot believe I missed this one, I love white flowers and musks, this one is sure to not dissapoint.
Phalescelve – :
A vintage scent, i bought it after reading a glowing review in here. It’s a wonderful floral fragrance, very retro and classic. It began with a warm big hug of flower bouquet and mellowed into a delicately soft bed of amberish jasmine on my skin. It’s a love for me .
pawlik – :
Definitly a vintage perfume .
I like it only in the dry down – it gets better .. i cant believe its transformation from the first initial spray !! Which was ghastly !
It does smell v classy
& is Very very soapy to me .
Morphs into something nice – not amazing .. just passibly nice as it still smells bitter and pinchy .
7/10
assassincred – :
I am new to aldehyde parfum but have been wearing some aldehyde perfumes that are so beautiful that I have to talk about it I like Chanel No 5 Maroussia and First Van Cleef & Arpels. This is my favorite aldehyde floral parfum. Expensive smell and very womanly O my God so beautiful. The bottle is so pretty! Smell at first of aldehydes fresh and with many sweet fruit notes mandarin orange peach currant and raspberry then I smell honey is floral with white flowers of narcissus tuberose jasmine also has carnation and rose flowers that are soft powdery and soapy clean floral the perfume is not spicy or too dry is always fresh and clean smell like expensive soap when dry is a musky scent with sandalwood and amber very gorgeous last so long and has a glamorous very rich smell I love this parfum and wear it with formal dress for formal event
Sergunok – :
I really like what Black Swan has written here. I absolutely agree. There is a good reson why some fragrances have been made for such a long time, because time is the best test of quality. People don´t have time to wait for anything and that is a sad thing. I am really disappointed from most of the modern scents which are fresh, and sweet and usually very similar and sometimes even annoying. It is so exciting to smell something so different and classical with its own development. I like when the fragrance changes during its stage. It is one of the pleasures of using quality perfumes.
I must also admit that it is very similar to Chanel No.5 for me which I like too. The real difference is just the price, which is absolutely matchless.
jeffoluke – :
Another gorgeous and elegant classic – like pearls – but like pearls – always in style but not seen very often anymore. I actually like that because these days you can make a unique statement wearing pearls and perfumes like this. It’s sad that people view these things as “old lady”. Maybe the old ladies have better taste. I’m 46 and don’t consider myself old in the least but I prefer the classic perfumes to the sweet, sugary trendy ones, and my simple pearl or diamond stud earrings to the cheap blingy jewelry trends any day. Something to keep in mind with these classic perfumes – they were made to be efficient and to last, unlike the current ones that are over sprayed and gone in an hour. You only need one spray. Spray it on a wrist and rub your other wrist and neck and you’re good to go all day. Also, give it 10 minutes or so. I hate the initial notes, but once the dry down starts, it is gorgeous, subtle, and long lasting.
ulc207JeomiWogkig – :
I just received mini Parfum and mini EdT of this. I allready had big bottle of EdP-version, and there is something like strong musk or civet, or some sort of powdery note (I like civet), that is too much. But how I love Parfum and EdT; they are really beautiful. I don’t know if my mini’s are old or new version, but I think EdP is current version. I did like a little that EdP, but I love Parfum and EdT.
I wonder when that EdP-version has come. I think that all vintages are edT-versions. Is the edP some newer release?
I am so happy I got these two different versions. They are now in the top of my best perfumes.
buksirprovorny – :
My First EDP finally arrived. I have been craving it lately and I got it for a song on Ebay. It’s a 2 oz. tester bottle. It has all the fragrance notes written on the back of it…interesting. Anyway, I don’t think it’s the original formula. I had the black canister back in the late 80’s. My current bottle doesn’t smell quite the same, so I’m sure it’s a reformulation. That’s ok though, because I still like this soapy, sparkling aldehydic gem. It actually smells better on me at night time, after it fully dries down. It reminds me of a perfume my mother wore in the 70’s, that I was never able to find again. It was some kind of musk oil by Dana. She loved it, and it smelled great on her. For some reason, I imagine Doris Day wearing First. First has this sunny disposition like Doris Day. I kind of wish that I had gotten the parfum dab version instead though, because when you spray this, it’s very hard to control, and you end up with a lot of fragrance on you. I’ll try to use it sparingly for that reason. At any rate, I’m so glad to have this little sweetie back in my perfume collection!!
feis – :
Paulidoodle – do you have the vintage or the current reformulation? EDT or EDP?
Looking to purchase but have only my (wonderful) memories of the vintage to go on. Haven’t had the opportunity to sample the current version and thinking of buying it blind….
TIA
bumi1971 – :
Have Wanted This Perfume For Such A Long Long Time & Now I Have It!! It’s Just Absolutely Gorgeous,& Already It’s Now A Firm Favourite!! In My option it deffo doesn’t smell anything like Chanel No.5!! A lighter version of YSL Rive Gauche which I happen to also adore!! & Both these perfumes are wore by Joanna Lumley who has really gorgeous taste in her Perfumes!! Today is my First day trying out this Van Cleef & Arpels Gem,& Already I’M soooooooooo in love with it!! I have every single Perfume listed if you this you’ll deffo like/love this one also!! & by heck it isn’t half true!! This Perfume is Green Floral Heaven to me,& I will deffo put this edp I have to the test in the next comming few days!! But already it’s looking good indeed!!
hivignisa – :
Hi, can someone tell me if the Edt as good as the edp?
Is it like Rive Gauche or is it like Arpege?
I love Rive Gauche but not Arpege.
I am looking for similar to No.5 which some of the reviews said this is similar.
Thanks!
kuw645JeomiWogkig – :
A classic animalic-aldehydic-floral, on the style of the elegant vintage perfumes that have become legends.
It’s beautiful and very very elegant and smells of class and wealth and good taste.
—
I own a sample. To later compare with the other classic perfumes in the same vein.
sam77789 – :
I adore First. I use to like Chanel no. 5 in the past. And for me this smells more as the vintage no. 5, particulary in the drydown, than the no. 5 they sell today. Very beautiful with heavy silage and a outstanding longevity. I don’t like aldehydes much, but the aldehydes here are also beautiful and fresh. If you love vintage Chanel no. 5, try this one, it is almost the same. And far better than the currant one. And this is only the eau de toilette! What a perfomance! I wonder how heavy the eau the parfum will be.
puncheg – :
I used to wear this when I had a serious job and worked in New York. Now that I live in Oregon and have a more casual lifestyle it doenst sit as well. I might get chased out of the Whole Foods if I wore it in there. It reminds me of a perfectly polished well groomed woman of the 1950’s 60’s. Pearls, red lipstick, cashmere, and in control. Betty Draper all the way and it lasts forever.
123123 – :
First is one of the best old school perfumes that still remains a true classic. Growing up I regularly smelt this perfume on my mum. This perfume still smells the same to me several years later, and despite having so many notes blends well impeccably. This fragrance is the pure essence of elegance, sensuality, and a polished lady. Constantly reminds me of the likes of Chanel No5, but at half the price and has even stronger silage and longevity! I love Chanel No5, but unless you’re lucky enough to have an old bottle, the newer formulations are really not as potent and do not last as long as before. Nonetheless, it remains a classic and I would still repurchase it. If you cannot afford Chanel No5, but would love to have a similar smell Definitely try FIRST. You will not regret it! This is a perfume lasts forever and will remain wearable for years to come. Perfect for the polished lady who loves to leave a trail of elegance. x
Antonixx-26 – :
The companion fragrance to Giorgio Beverly Hills for Men.
Both have similar honey-sweetened aspects.
Both are perfect.
gufich45 – :
The companion fragrance to Giorgio Beverly Hills for Men.
Both are sweet and patchouli-happy.
Both are perfect.
DeniSSSR – :
For the vintage EDT.
For me it´s a joy to wear floral aldehydes during spring time. And First is the one I enjoy the most. It´s also great for going to the theatre and listen to some Beethoven or Rachmaninoff after smoking a spliff.
Shabby – :
I now have the EDT to compare to the EDP (my review is on that page). And I do think this is slightly fresher, lighter, and more green (as others have said).
But I still find it very similar to the current Chanel No. 5 EDP.
I don’t know if I could tell them apart actually (No. 5 is sharper tho).
So if Chanel is too expensive, try First. I got the EDT on ebay for $14, and the EDP for $25 (2oz bottles)
Smells like vintage aldehydes, flowers, and the greenery (stems/leaves) that come with flowers. A very nice scent. Very perfumey in a nice way, but also lacks character/uniqueness. Overall, still a solid blind buy for $14!
Маргоша23 – :
It goes on a lovely floral aldehyde but then a bitter almost metallic bloodlike note takes over and fights with the oakmoss which makes this less pleasant as it dries down. I think it may be the oakmoss and hyacinth. I love hyacinth but this jumble of notes is throwing everything off into a discordant, unharmonious montage.
mecher93 – :
This smelled a lot like Quelques Fleurs at the start…I thought I had found a less-pricey substitute but as it dries down there is something lurking around that I don’t like. With so many notes, who’s to say what it is? I’d bet, though, that years ago it didn’t end like this….
LasloDemsi – :
عطر فان كليف فيرست
هذا التقرير عن نسخة او دو تواليت الاصدار الجديد وليس الفينتاج
بعد رش العطر بفترة قصيرة .. انت صابونة فخمة تمشي
عن نفسي اعشق هذا العطر ، بعض الاحيان اخلطة مع عطور ثانية
اجمل من شانيل نمبر فايف بوجهة نظري
الثبات و الفوحان في غاية الرضا
ملاحظة : انصح بنسخة التواليت اكثر من البيرفيوم
shadow502 – :
Good old school. Try if you like Diva by Ungaro. Creation by Ted Lapidus, vintage Miss Dior etc. Does not smells cheap but can be bought on ebay for cheap. I have vintage EDT mini. Now want a full size bottle. it is a gem. I expected non-wearable retro. I was wrong. Very nice fragrance. I am 30 y.o. by the way.
coollx – :
When First calms down and past the hours it seems Amouage Gold Homme …
peerceinifaft – :
This wasn’t a complete blind buy, but it was based on a many-years-old memory of how FIRST smelled on a former colleague when I sat next to her during staff meetings. At the time, I’d liked the fragrance enough to ask what it was and I’d meant to check it out for myself, but somehow never did. I’d forgotten about it, but then I recently happened to come across a bottle of the edp at a good price and decided to take a chance on it as there was no tester. This is the modern formulation: batch code 01G20F237 – manufactured in August 2015. I don’t want to jinx it, but I’ve been lucky with blind buys lately and this was another success.
FIRST is a polished, cool and somewhat dry floral with a green vibe and dominant aldehyde notes. It’s a very sophisticated and classy scent that is versatile and easy to wear. There’s a bit of sharpness in the initial phase, but this disappears with dry-down. The floral notes become more evident after a couple of hours, but the aldehydes remain throughout. To me, FIRST is a “perfume-y” fragrance and it’s difficult to pick out individual notes. Sillage is on the high end of moderate and longevity is excellent.
bnk219intitytek – :
After testing two recent versions of this perfume (the current EDT in the white box and the 2012 EDP Intense, more on these later), I decided to get my hands on a good example of the original issue. If you are not interested in vintage perfume talk, you may want to stop reading now. There are a lot of vintage bottles of First to choose from since it has been in circulation for almost 40 years. I ended up with a still-sealed Sanofi-era, pre-barcode EDT which I can date to before 1990, thanks to the invaluable Raiders of the Lost Scent blog.
Composed in 1976, the year he left the Givaudan school, First is aptly named. It was the first perfume launched by the jewelry house, and it is Ellena’s first feminine perfume, an operatic floral aldehyde worthy of comparison to vintage No. 5, Joy, and Madame Rochas. (Ellena’s first composition was the 1974 unisex Eau du Campagne, a groundbreaking celebration of vegetal perfume notes that is still unbeatable today.)
First vintage EDT opens with some crisp, soapy aldehydes but it changes very quickly into an abstractly beautiful woody floral. Almost from the start, you sense flesh and warmth within First, rather than starchiness or primness. Ylang ylang emerges as the most prominent floral to my nose, with jasmine, a touch of rose, and narcissus. Despite the 420 votes and counting, I really do not get a strong civet note in the vintage EDT or perceive anything that I would call animalic. There is a bit of sweetness and a soft velvety muskiness, with a base of lovely sandalwood. First is richly fragrant but still fresh, like a warm day in May just before the heat of summer settles in.
How does my pre-1990 compare to the current EDT? I did enjoy my sample of the current EDT. The necessary reformulations appear to have been carried out with care, but as I often feel when I am trying current versions of older perfumes, there is a definite thinness and sharpness to the newer composition. The vintage EDT is much superior. Meanwhile, First Intense EDP (2012) is MUCH greener, sharper, and soapier and felt rather harsh when compared to the vintage EDT.
Hojakec – :
i was gifted a sample of this in a giveaway from a very generous member, and i am soooo grateful! i knew i wanted to test this wonderful, precious beauty, but i didn’t know how deeply i would love it.
at first i was a little turned off because of the alcohol-but then, i use alot of perfume oils, and am not used to the alcohol scent.once that wore off-i was bowled over! this is so sexy, so classy, so perfect.
i must get a FB-soon.
…honey,amber and sunshine-how can you not love it?
СергейХР – :
I was compelled to try this because it was the first great creation of Jean Claude Ellena’s. Otherwise, there is little reason for me to venture into aldehydic florals with such big shoulder pads. The first thing to note is that you can smell as well as taste this fragrance. Scent and taste may be intimately connected, but I don’t encounter many fragrances that I can taste while bringing my wrist to my face. This scent is that grand, that potent.
The fragrance itself is a kaleidoscope on my skin, changing from moment to moment. It opens with a sparkling rush of aldehydes accented with blackcurrant, peach, and orange, which give way to the spicy carnation note and clean, soapy jasmine at its center. Sometimes the jasmine is more prominent, sometimes it is crisp and fresh, and sometimes it mysteriously becomes thick and powdery.
It is all in a shift of perspective, and the perspective of this woman is from very high up. As the reviewer sherapop wrote, “FIRST is a golden crown embedded with precious stones, and perhaps one needs to have a bit of a nobility complex to be able to wear this royal diadem comfortably…. Know thyself!”
Oxythitty – :
Oh, this is climbing up the stairs of my Classic Aldehydes Tower as the years go by.
Honestly, I am no longer a big fan of No5, I like L’Air du Temps but I find it too soft-hearted sometimes, Le Dix is hmmm a bit acidic, blah blah…while First is a pure grower. And I am growing older along with it I guess..
The civet and especially the honey note are very prominent on my skin. So it is elegant and sparkly but also veeery warm and cosy. Winter love.
AND I had no idea this is a 40-year-old J.C. Ellena composition, wow that explains a lot. <3
elena21 – :
First was my Christmas present to my mom, which I gave to her because she liked the eau d’été she’d bought a few months earlier–it’s a 60 ml. bottle manufactured in 2002.
After spraying, you start feeling a floral blow of aldehydes and civet that shows you this is a mid-seventies fragrance; after an hour or so, the civet subsides, and you’re left with a creamy flower and fruit cocktail that is wonderful. Longevity is around 6-7 hours, with moderate projection–I think they can be enhanced through a few more spritzes. It’s a really special perfume as it brings a lot of memories back, perhaps due to some similarities to Givenchy III and Opium, which are also 70s fragrances that remind me of what my mom and aunts smelled like back when I was a child. It’s a scent for real ladies, and it suits my mother’s style very, very well.
First is not a perfume for everyone, but for women who want to make a big statement.
Pahan669 – :
This is a classic vintage scent. It’s sophisticated and it’s a lady. It’s screams class, as it should. It’s a parfum to respect for standing the test of time. Every note plays perfect. From opening to end, it’s fantastic. Lovers of vintage, scents adore or will appreciate this bottle of pure pleasure. Sexy, yet classy, yet mysterious. Wear anytime, anywhere. On another note, I love this house! Exquisite!
ViagraPharmacie – :
This review is for the bottle at Neiman Marcus San Francisco, December 2016.
When I smelled First, I burst out laughing and said “this smells like the 80s!!”
It does. It has a generic “perfume in an elevator and women are wearing shoulder pads” scent which is even beyond the aldehydes. This “generic 80s smell” is like the top of the top notes.
The aldehydes take center stage for a solid 10 minutes, maybe 15. Then the rose heart, which was hinted at, is unveiled, and on me, that’s all I get for a very, very solid 9 hours. First never goes anywhere else on me. The drydown is just a soft, aldehydic rose.
I was initially excited to smell the aldehydes and then I was intrigued by the rose – the rose reminds me very much of YSL’s Paris (circa 2005). I would like to wear this with dark blue jeans and a top, because I like wearing heavy hitters casually.
However, while this scent initially intrigued me, it hasn’t held me. My dreams of blue jeans and a classy perfume probably won’t be realized. I’ll stick to Ma Griffe & Chanel No. 5 for that!
I will note that the talk of civet has me quite intrigued, and I’ll try hunting down some vintage to see the differences.
rastabrat2 – :
First is a must have for classic lovers,especially classic floral lovers
It opens with an aldehydic blast,which is interpreted to soap for me,soon I can smell some juicy citrus notes besides aldehydes,fruit notes are light and very well blended,so it’s difficult to pick them up separately,for me top notes is a combination of aldehydes and a very natural juicy orangy citrus,I find this blend very clean,fresh and likable
As aldehydes start to calm down and citruses fade,florals kick in,florals are soft and soapy,it doesn’t smell as a specific floral note,there is lots of different flowers here so you can’t say this is a Jasmine perfume,or rose perfume,whatsoever,it’s a floral bouquet perfume and florals produce a very clean,fresh and a tad soapy scent.this is definitely pretty,although there are lots of flowers here but they’re getting along with each other very well.there’s nothing sharp,harsh and too much here..they’re soft powder and even they’re soapyness is nice..but it’s obvious that you’re dealing with a classic,so if you don’t like classic old-fashioned fragrances,florals or soapy scents,first is not for you
Yes,I said old-fashioned,but I believe it’s easily wearable in modern world in case you don’t overspray
In drydown,florals get warmer and less dominant,I’m waiting nervously for civet to showup and ruin this beauty for me,but thanks goodness it’s shy and not as dominant as notes order suggests,or maybe my bottle is post-reformulation,I can just get a bit warmness of shy civet,some oakmoss and a hint of musk..it’s not bad but I preferred middle notes to drydown
For me,first is a clean floral with a fresh citrus/tea-like green undertone,it’s a spring scent,classic but easily wearable and not too mature for a 26 year old girl like me
Unfortunately I don’t like florals as I used to love them,maybe because it’s getting cold here,but I’m going to save it for spring
I believe first is one of prettiest classics I’ve ever tried,it’s balanced,wearable and likable..it’s soft,kind,fresh and clean also powerful and longlasting and oh I love classic bottles and their golden juices(it’s not a golden scent for me,if scents had color this could be white or pale lemony yellow IMO)
❤❤❤❤
vital-322 – :
First
The fragrance draws you in with aldehydes, and to quote my 2nd husband when I used to wear this and when he was alive, “smells like a beautiful woman out of the shower”. The aldehydes have an incandescent brilliance, not like glittery cheap sequins, but the natural light emitting from diamond jewelry or precious jewels.
It is no wonder that Van Cleef & Arpels, one of the world’s most artistic jewelry design labels, at the same level as Tiffany’s Cartier or Winston, created this perfume. It used to sell at their boutique in the late 70’s where you could also look into purchasing fabulous watches. The glamorous and “upper class” high society aura of that boutique is contained within this fragrance.
The aldehydes are sparkling diamonds. The citrus notes of mandarin orange and bergamot orange are fresh and match up with the aldehydes, providing this scent with a sort of golden-yellow light. This fragrance is always shining! Not at all like Lady Million by Rabane which attempts to evoke gold. This is truly liquid gold. The scent has fruit notes early into it’s performance with a peach scent (not a heavy peach) a currant or cassis, a raspberry but most of all citrus. Sweet and fresh upon that first spritz.
Once the citruses settle down, the sweet floral notes emerge. Because of those ever present aldehydes that dominate the fragrance, they are more of the soapy floral kind. But it’s nevertheless a heavenly aroma. The flowers that my trained nose never fails to notice: orchid, a little exotic orchid, pink or white in color, an orchid that has become sweeter with a matching raspberry. The carnation and lily of the valley mix and mingle in good company but they are not as green-floral as other fragrances with lily of the valley and carnation. This is a bigger rose perfume with a Turkish rose that smells lush and velvety, like rose colored velour. There’s plenty of flowers that each contribute to this beautiful aroma including ylang and jasmine. Classic floral perfume.
The dry down gets interesting.
By the time both the fruit and flower notes are gone, there is a party going on among base notes of amber, musk, vanilla, and vetiver/moss. The original fragrance had moss and civet, a civet that would not have been synthetic. But this was never really that musky so they were never using too much musk or animalic accords. This is not a civet. It’s an amber. The amber and the vanilla provide this scent with a spiciness and resinous quality that smells unbelievable and divine.
Be warned that even in the new formula the aldehydes florals and amber can pack quite a punch so don’t spray liberally unless you’re by yourself. The perfume is traditional, classic, glamorous, romantic, and womanly. I don’t see any 18-19 year old wearing this. This is a perfume of maturity, elegance, and it even evokes iconic women that we associate with beautiful but accomplished, successful women: Grace Kelly Audrey Hepburn Elizabeth Taylor Jackie Kennedy. This perfume is classy. It is highly affordable nowadays but not when it was first released. It was truly a luxury perfume. So if you wear this now you’ll wear a perfume that was always a luxury item.
The new formula is not bad and I do wear it because it is as soapy, sweet and floral as I like my floral aldehyde ambers. The bottle is so attractive and I proudly display it in my collection on top of the dresser table. The spray bottle is more dramatic and I love to douse myself in this scent and it leaves behind a lovely aroma as one passes by others. I wear this to staff meetings and to London Fashion Week, and although I don’t teach music anymore, nor sing, I am involved in charity groups and performance art patron leagues. I wear this to their most formal fundraisers.
This perfume matches up with elegant and expensive haute couture and evening gowns. There is no way a woman can wear this perfume with a pair of jeans and a T shirt with a Vegas Baby logo. No. This perfume was meant to be worn with expensive high fashions, for women of discriminating taste, good taste. The best part for me about the new formula is the civet has shut up and its bite is gone. In it’s place amber and vanilla, with a rich c