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.
pshar – :
3.4 cologne (newer formulation)
This isnt close to the lush vintage secret de venus. However, in 2017 this version needs to be redeemed a little bit. Its inexpensive, opens with lavender, citrus, amber vanilla and patchouli… Its a skin scent, fairly low sillage.
I think its time for another look with this one. Especially with the lavender mon guerlain hitting stores..herbal openings are hot at the moment. If you liked amber romance from victorias secret, I think you could get away with this one too quite nice. My have times changed….
fazedies – :
This review is for the vintage perfume oil.
Upon first sniff, straight from the bottle, my immediate reaction was to think of grape jelly or flavored pancake syrup.
Upon application, the sweetness changed a bit to a cherry coke aroma…and then transitions into a berry-patchouli.
I find this scent comforting and cozy. It oozes a warm, sappy, sweet, earthy aroma. Brings to mind a kitchen where women are kneading some dough to make bread sweetened with molasses. Patsy Cline is playing in the background. The fire pit is roaring in the backyard while the guys strum along to Patsy’s tunes with their guitars in the chilly, starry night. It reminds me of a chilly night in Austin in the company of good friends.
Interesting that a vintage scent would capture such a gourmand-like quality.
eka693intitytek – :
I’ve read the hype about this fragrance. The price certainly implies a hype. Vintage versions are often listed for hundreds of dollars.
I’ve had the Parfums Pour Le Corps for some time, which is more of a PdT in concentration and which does, in fact, smell quite heavenly. But I recently acquired a vintage Parfum. It’s dense,thick, almost syrupy and dark as molasses. Can this possibly be good still? And is it really Parfum or could it be the bath oil instead? The label it still bears is incomplete so I’m left wondering.
I have of course read that there is Patchouli but somehow, I didn’t pick up on it in the PPLC that I have used previously. However, the opening of the Parfum (oil???) is certainly a very earthy, vintage and real Patchouli. It’s got that tartness, a slightly sour feeling to it. Normally Patch doesn’t work for me, but I thinks it’s the modern version which must be less natural as certain older fragrances which are heavy with Patch don’t turn to dirt on my skin. Still, though I know this is vintage, the Patch scares me, it always does. After all, who wants to smell like garden dirt??
I must admit that the opening was a little scary. Other than the Patch, I got something that didn’t exactly warm my insides, perhaps it was the lavender, offering a medicinal, somewhat acrid quality. I’m not a giant fan of tart and sour and if it started that way, what was going to happen next?
As it turns out, that phase lasted about 15 minutes before the trademark smooth as butter feel of the PPLC emerged. The Patch is still there, grounding the whole but the overall feel was one of velvet, the kind that is thick and luxurious, with pile that you can see when you move your fingers over it. This stuff could well be described as a musk cream. I get no obvious floral, though several floral notes are listed. This one is vintage animalic at is wildest. Pure fur, warm and soothing and sexy and mysterious.
In the end, this wears on my skin like the very richest musk. I am reminded of the original Coty Wild musk oil, though I would not say this is a dupe. This is a wild animal that has been tamed and sits purring in your lap. You are amazed that this creature tolerates you, much less enjoys your company, but you are delighted that it does.
MaSTeRNV – :
I was fortunate to get an unopened vintage of this and Zibeline oil. Can I say THANK you GOD! Yes, SCREAM! I love it. It is nothing like the current makes. It is rich and warm. But you have to make sure you get a good one. I bought one after several years of waiting, researching, praying. Got one that was stored properly..Never opened. In the dark closet. By the way, I disagree entirely in regard to the vintage having Peach as a top note. As well as any hint of Gardenia. No lemon…
McChelovek – :
Gosh this is beautiful. I have been gifted a vintage Parfum de Toilette and it is simply stunning. This is creamy, rich and elegant. Sillage is soft, it’s a scent meant only for those who are close to you to notice. It opens quite sparkly with all those citrus combined with lavender. In fact, you really have no idea in the opening that it will go in the direction of soft and creamy, but that is exactly what it does. The top notes are gone in only a few minutes for me, but since it’s vintage, it could just be the age that is the reason for that. I get zero Patchouli, which is good for me as it doesn’t agree with me. I also can’t pick out the peach. Highly recommended.
dctt1984 – :
What has happened to this perfume !? It hasn’t been reformulated ,it’s been completely remade with awful results . If you have an opportunity to try the vintage version then definitely do so because it is a lovely perfume. The new version is screeching ,chemical laden mess .The only plus was that it was very short lived so I didn’t have to smell it for long.
eduard asdf – :
Would be really great to try the vintage one, I have got reformulated bottle, even from this “version” I can see that idea/concept was great and bewitching, but its only the “hints” and imagination that makes you create “that vintage real Secret” in your head…
My new-version bottle opens by clove ( that I cant see among notes but do smell) -cinnamon-freesia accord, smoothly goes to vanilla-peach and cassis and drydown is patchouli-sandal-lavender. I understand frustration of people familiar with the real Secret de Venus but nothing ugly in this cologne that I wear, there are lots of far worser and far more expensive scents out there…
So, its not at all flowery on me – really spice and vanilla one, not sharp but creamy, a tiny bit boozy, I like it
kadet5 – :
I happened upon a little vintage bottle of “Secret de Venus” and was thrilled to be able to experience it in its original form. It’s a stunner—deep as a well, rich as cream, complex and inviting. It opens with lavender and bergamot, along with some spicy notes, swiftly followed by beautiful sandalwood and patchouli. Flowers weave in and out; no specific blooms for me, just a rich golden floralcy. The sandalwood in my old bottle’s juice is so rich it reminds one of civet. In fact, I wonder at the absence of civet from the stated notes…Finally, a creamy vanilla and amber note appears. It’s a robustly sensual perfume—seductive is no overstatement. To me, it’s beautiful and timeless. And apparently, an endangered species, judging from the paucity of vintage sources (and the pricing of what there is), and from the uniformly bad reviews of the newer version by people who have experienced the original. Sigh…
rassol88 – :
This was one of the most beautiful fragrances that I ever wore. It was very sexy and not for the timid, yet it was exceptionally refined. This was a scent that drew compliments from both sexes yet I never met another person who wore it. I was just turning 19 back when I started wearing it and I suppose that most women who wore it traveled in more sophisticated circles.
Eventually it became hard to find. I seem to remember replacing it with Hermes Caleche when it was no longer available or maybe that was Worth’s Je Riviens. I agree with some of the other reviewers here, there are other scents that have been similar, but none quite as seductive and mysterious as this heady potion.
LipMooxyViodo – :
I received an bottle some ten years old from an aunt. I opened it, I could not smell much at first but then I put a little spritz on my wrist… Wow! Holy Moses and Mother of Christ! A blast of sumptous, opulent, really ‘rich’, sensual, lush, luxurious, deep, spicy flowers… that transported me in no time in perfume heaven! They don’t make ’em like that anymore. People who love ‘Fantasy’ and all modern sugar waters, ‘eaus’ and weak fruity florals will call this ‘old lady’. Well, if this is ‘old lady’, bring the ‘old lady’ ones on! This is a whole other level than most ‘modern’ fragrances. This can be compared in quality to Chanel 5, the pre-reformulated Opium, the original Must, Baiser du Dragon, Obsession… It has personality, sillage, longevity… A little goes a long way. It was launched in 1933 but it is as alive as Britney on speed and Celine Dion on caffeine. I mean this oozes effortlessly timeless quality and class. How to describe the actual fragrance? I like Serge Lutens and I never thought I would say this, but this Weil has a Lutenesque quality and ‘feel’. It is very complex, dense, unique. You can’t really discern seperate notes but all the notes combine into an ever changing impressive symphony on the skin. You have freshness of the bergamot and citrus combined with the lavender first. But after a few minutes all heaven of flowers breaks loose! A divine cauldron of breathtaking spices and flowers. Gardenia, honeysuckle, iris, jasmine, freesia… I detect peach, cassis, cinnamon, cedar, vanilla, sandalwood, candied fruit, a nutty note… I can compare the ‘feel’ of it it best with Tom Fords ‘Black Orchid’, combined with Chanel 5, Hermes 24 Faubourg and Paloma Picasso. Not for the faint of heart and nose. But for the lovers of old school, unabashedly opulent, classy, rich, dense juices. When fragrances were still ‘perfumes’. You can find this unknown gem at very reasonable prices online. Of course you won’t get a pic of a highly paid celeb on the box and bottle. You can’t have it all. But his perfume is sold as ‘Eau de Cologne’ but the strength of an edp. It will knock your socks off and you’ll go to heaven.
arhip_94 – :
Can any of you please say whether the notes listed above are supposed to reflect those in the current reformulated version or those of the original? I’m mainly surprised to see notes of freesia and grapefruit in a vintage formulation- those seem to be much more prevalent in contemporary formulas, but I realize it’s possible they are in the original. If you are familiar with the vintage formula, do you find either of those notes to be noticeable or prominent? I ask because i’m considering investing in a vintage bottle but often those notes do not agree with my sinuses so I’d much appreciate any observations by knowledgeable Fragranticans!
m057131 – :
When I used this perfume, some 10 years ago, I bought a bottle of this which totally different picture is shown. I found the image I used, and sent to the forum, I hope you also put it on the site. And the scent was very good, really deep, sensual and mysterious. I was sad to know that the smell has changed … =/
filemon – :
The House of Weil is my shrine in the world of fine fragrances and since the 70’s its been my designer of choice. This Parisian house although not as celebrated as the other greats, introduced some of the most sumptuous scents of all time. The original Secret De Venus is a warm, oily, fur enhanced animalic potion that is dangerously compelling. It’s an explosion of sexiness like no other and although there is a strange dichotomy to it’s sister partners Zibiline and Antilope, Secret de Venus ranks in a world of it’s own. Yes, there are others of this kind, with the same notes and similar combinations but none that compare to this “Secret” result.
The re-release of Secret De Venus was and is disappointing to say the least. When I first sprayed it on, my initial thought was “What happened here”? ” Is this some kind of bad joke”? This mishmash of mystery notes bares zero resemblance to the original. It’s displeasing on all accounts. People, please, avoid this one like the plague if you know whats good for you. The Weil Brothers must be turning over in their graves to have their name associated with this altered version. Apparently the original was a well kept “Secret” as this inferior attempt to redo what once was, failed miserably, a chemical train wreck! This is definitely a case of “never tamper with perfection”!
.
ZLoy_BaNaN – :
First of all, I’m a huge fan of Weil house; I’ve been lucky to get samples of almost all vintage perfumes, and the only thing I can say about this one is – stay away from it!!! It isn’t even a reformulated version of the original, it’s a completely different fragrance – pale, common floral which lacks any character. I think it’s a crime to release it under the Weil name:(