Top Notes 
Heart Notes 
Base Notes 
06/20/2020
Melisse2
24 Reviews
Translated
Show original
Melisse2
Top Review
34
Parallel test: New against old
Nocturnes as EdP from an original sample from 2020 compared to the mini of an EdT, whose age I could not find out. The older scent came to me in a set that also contains "Courrèges in Blue" and "Vent Vert", photo in my album.
In the prelude both versions are the same in my opinion. I smell soapy aldehydes, more bitter than those in N. 5, with a rather dry impression, and slight fresh notes of flowers. This is the phase when I start googling how long the above mentioned other perfumes were made, because I'm thinking that the mini-set could also be from 2015 and I'm testing the same fragrance on both wrists in parallel.
However, after about half an hour, the floral impression becomes stronger in both versions and they start to grow apart.
In the older version
there is now a smell of oakmoss, which has been used discreetly, however, and shifts the character of the eau de toilette towards a pleasing, unsweet, further soapy chypres. In addition, there is a general floral impression, without me being able to determine exactly which flowers are involved, and citric notes, which I also cannot further assign.
An hour later, the older version is a fresh floral chypre, with a delicate hint of vetiver, which will be more and more noticeable later. The bouquet is reserved compared to the younger fragrance, which suggests that vintage doesn't have more tinsel after all.
The modern EdP
becomes even more floral than the older version, also slightly sweet, also remains soapy and develops into a clean floral scent. Increasingly the chewing gum note of tuberose is asserting itself, at first favourably held in check by the other white-flowering plants and an echo of neroli.
At this time and in the hours to come, the current fragrance, as already noted, has a stronger aura than the older version, although it is also present in higher concentrations and tuberose is usually not very reserved anyway. Not in this case either, the floral opulence of tuberose gains the upper hand. I actually like this soapy, clean tuberose scent quite well, especially since a slight herbaceous spice is added. However, I have the impression that I have smelled similar creations before. Vetiver can also be perceived in the modern version. But it will take hours before we reach the same level as tuberose. And during this time the fragrance reaches a point where it becomes too sweet for me and I smell nothing else but sweet tuberose.
After 13 hours the surprise: While the older EdT continues to smell like fresh chypre with vetiver, there is only a sweet, indefinable hint left of the modern EdP. So there is.
Conclusion: Both Nocturnes have the same name and the same top note. Otherwise they are different scents. For hours I like both. The fact that I'm more inclined to the older fresh flowery and soapy chypre with a vetiver base than to the modern tuberose scent is certainly a matter of taste.
In the prelude both versions are the same in my opinion. I smell soapy aldehydes, more bitter than those in N. 5, with a rather dry impression, and slight fresh notes of flowers. This is the phase when I start googling how long the above mentioned other perfumes were made, because I'm thinking that the mini-set could also be from 2015 and I'm testing the same fragrance on both wrists in parallel.
However, after about half an hour, the floral impression becomes stronger in both versions and they start to grow apart.
In the older version
there is now a smell of oakmoss, which has been used discreetly, however, and shifts the character of the eau de toilette towards a pleasing, unsweet, further soapy chypres. In addition, there is a general floral impression, without me being able to determine exactly which flowers are involved, and citric notes, which I also cannot further assign.
An hour later, the older version is a fresh floral chypre, with a delicate hint of vetiver, which will be more and more noticeable later. The bouquet is reserved compared to the younger fragrance, which suggests that vintage doesn't have more tinsel after all.
The modern EdP
becomes even more floral than the older version, also slightly sweet, also remains soapy and develops into a clean floral scent. Increasingly the chewing gum note of tuberose is asserting itself, at first favourably held in check by the other white-flowering plants and an echo of neroli.
At this time and in the hours to come, the current fragrance, as already noted, has a stronger aura than the older version, although it is also present in higher concentrations and tuberose is usually not very reserved anyway. Not in this case either, the floral opulence of tuberose gains the upper hand. I actually like this soapy, clean tuberose scent quite well, especially since a slight herbaceous spice is added. However, I have the impression that I have smelled similar creations before. Vetiver can also be perceived in the modern version. But it will take hours before we reach the same level as tuberose. And during this time the fragrance reaches a point where it becomes too sweet for me and I smell nothing else but sweet tuberose.
After 13 hours the surprise: While the older EdT continues to smell like fresh chypre with vetiver, there is only a sweet, indefinable hint left of the modern EdP. So there is.
Conclusion: Both Nocturnes have the same name and the same top note. Otherwise they are different scents. For hours I like both. The fact that I'm more inclined to the older fresh flowery and soapy chypre with a vetiver base than to the modern tuberose scent is certainly a matter of taste.
28 Comments
