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.
ntkm – :
I bought this version by mistake, because the web page I bought it from presented the old bottle but sent me this one. First I was angry, that they cheated me, but when I tried it I decided that I love it. I must say I haven´t tried the original version, but if it is so much better than this it must be wonderful, because this is beautiful too. I am sorry for those who can´t see its beauty because of the comparison with the original. I must say this is really my cup of tea. I don´t regret this mistake. It is classy maybe in a different way than the original, but very elegant. You need to give it a chance.
Now I have to add that I bought the original version and compared them and still love it, they are very similar so I don´t understand these comments about big difference and disappointment from the new version.
dimapen – :
I can imagine that the original ‘Y’ from 1964 was quite different from the reformulated version of 2011. Nonetheless is this a stunning beauty if you are willing to give it an unbiased try. Though they are not listed here, I get at first the impression of snowy white aldehydes sparkling in the winter sun. Underneath there are earthy notes of oak moss and tart patchouli while in the backround a hint of iris gives this fragrance its rich and intellecutal touch for what it is famous for. This one is a modernized version for our nowadays noses, surely less dirty and animalic as its 60’s predecessor. Fresh pink pepper makes it just more wearable.’Y’ (2011) is not a subsitute of the original but a modern green chypre beauty of its own. Love it!
omichka1903 – :
On me it smells… galbanum. Too strict to like it.
людмила= – :
Wonderfull! Realy smells like the old Y imo but much stronger.I realy LOVE it!
misha_smallz – :
And I would like to add that the notes given by YSL are:
Top Notes:Aldehydes, Honeysuckle, Gardenia
Heart Notes: Tuberose, Jasmine, Bulgarian Rose
Base Notes: Sandalwood, Amber, Patchouli
We all know there’s a lot more to notes than meets the eye, and that marketing depts will put a different spin on notes depending upon what’s popular at the time (i.e. let’s mention the tuberose and not the narcissus). My point though, is that this illustrates that the overall shape of the fragrance is not so different from the original 60s version. The fragrantica notes need to be updated.
kommentarii-k-gpk – :
Oh come now people, this is in no way an altogether different fragrance to the original Y. I wonder which versions people are testing against, since the fragrance went downhill in recent decades. This is a faithful expression of the original done with modern materials. Would you rather not have it at all? I for one am thrilled that YSL chose to re-release, and indeed re-formulate, the La Collection fragrances. This is still a bright citrussy chypre with a solid backbone, refined and elegant. It may have a few flourishes that are different, the base wears as a bit more solid (more patchouli standing in for oakmoss?), but it’s certainly similar-enough to me that I am happy to have it and hope YSL will continue to make it. Hopefully more people will embrace it for what it is so it doesn’t disappear entirely.
LineKino-TV – :
30. october 2012
Finally i had a chance to test a rest of the “La collection” fragrances and while i loved the “In love again” (the best versions of them all IMHO), liked the “Nu” and “Yvresse” (not as good as the originals, but a good substitute anyway), i completly disliked this one! I rarely say that BUT this one is quite terrible!!!!
Let me say that i had troubles with the original “Y” in it´s last edition in the beginning of our relationship. I also dislike it, but mostly because of the powdery drydown i was getting from it, while wearing during a winter time. Then i have changed my mind and began to love it, since the powder was gone in a drydown during the springtime and it was a very nice and classy chypre for a springtime. I do own it in EDT and pure parfum.
Now bak to this one. Unbearably sharp! Ugly synthetic oakmoss that will not compliment probably any wearer of it. Just plain dry and sharp. I had such a grimace on my face when i sniffed it! Then it just becomes softer and fades away into unmemorable dry scent with a slightly peppery-sweet (patchouli here??!!!) drydown which is no close to the original “Y” at all!. I believe it didn´t sell well since it was once discontinued, but i doubt it will sell better now, since it is not an “Y” we all remeber and love (some of us who hate it might like this partucular version thoiugh).
One thing is good that it has a nice sillage (which for me is actually not a plus, since the fragrance is non-wearable to me) and lasting power is very nice as well.
Please do not remove this comment, since others might find it useful. Not every review should be positive, so people like me wanted to make a blind buy might find it very informative. Thanks.
inheclice – :
I am so sad that the powers that be at YSL would insult the vision of the person that created their legacy. “Y” is simply one of the most beautiful fragrances created, perfectly composed. Why tamper with which cannot be improved??? Oh why does a simple fad in perfumery to make everything mediocre make them think EVERYTHING, even iconic masterpieces, need retooling?? People yet to experience this will not get the entire story of why YSL was great. Why must they dumb down to an uneducated audience?? There is just not that many great vintages left that they haven’t sought to discontinue or cheapen for the latest fad. I checked these reviews out to see if this is the same Y. Sadly, the beautiful rose note has been excluded…that says it all for me. I totally am 100% with you, Marying, and fkollmeier; your description of original “Y” tugs on my heart. Judging from the addition of pink pepper(whhhaatt???) and deleted rose I won’t be trying this one.
vvv1956 – :
Why oh why did they change the original formula. This smells very second rate.
Evesustictats – :
i havent sampled this one but i have had a chance to get my nose on the original ysl y. what a gorgeous fragrance!!!! it is VERY classy and understated. telling from the notes of this comeback i don’t get why the pink pepper was added. y is not a fragrance that should be worn by everybody. it is simply too unique and i don’t see why ysl would go with the trend. definitely an evening perfume that smells rich and very exclusive!!! stays on forever and becomes much more subtle in the dry down. i get notes of aldehydes at first that make way to mossy, green and flowery to balmy notes. i also get patchouly and some lilly of the valley?! i can see a strange connection to the ysl rive gauche. projection is extremely strong.
yyo489JeomiWogkig – :
I never try the Original Y. This is a unisex green chypre, made me think of my Molinard de Molinard. Y is more to bitter oakmoss while Molimard is sweet grass.