I’ve bought a number of >25 year old frags. The key is to buy sealed bottles and they are usually good. Open bottles are usually bad. Like all rules of thumb, there are exceptions both ways. Generally for a given frag, the vintage is stronger and often a lot more animalic. Thinking of Hamman Bouquet that in its current form is pretty feeble but used to have a very distinctive character. Givenchy Gentleman also used to be loaded with civet but is currently rather dull.
What is your view of buying vintage cologne?
- Thread starter StAnger667
- Start date
Sealed bottles could well be spectacularly expensive.
I doubt if my experience will be all that helpful. As I think about it, my direct experience is pretty limited. This is my personal experience and not what I have done with/through friends out side of B&B, who are way more experienced and have way better connections that I have. That experience has been highly satisfactory. But someone along the way may well have gotten burned.
I bought a partial 30 ml non-spray bottle of Pen's BB that had gone pretty dramatically bad. Turned very dark in color and lost most of its character. But it was cheap, the bottle itself was interesting, and I think I knew the condition might be bad going in. I got an about 2/3s of a 100 ml bottle, as I recall, of a very vintage Guerlain Vetiver. I think it was even called an EDC rather than an EDT. I think I paid north of $75 for it. Wonderful stuff. Very different from the current version and seems fully intact.
I have bought partial bottles of non-vintage stuff through various sources, including B&B, some pretty random, and I do not think I have been burned. Although I recently got a nearly fully bottle of Heeley Sel Marin on ebay, and to tell the truth I do not love it as much as I loved the in store sample sniffs I have had.
The sale of empty scent bottles on eBay does give me the creeps, unless someone can explain to me a legit reason why someone would pay substantial money for an empty fragrance bottle.
I know that some folks who have a lot of knowledge and experience, are highly skeptical of folks selling decants on eBay, but i have no direct experience.
I guess, as I write this, it seems like a jungle out there!
I doubt if my experience will be all that helpful. As I think about it, my direct experience is pretty limited. This is my personal experience and not what I have done with/through friends out side of B&B, who are way more experienced and have way better connections that I have. That experience has been highly satisfactory. But someone along the way may well have gotten burned.
I bought a partial 30 ml non-spray bottle of Pen's BB that had gone pretty dramatically bad. Turned very dark in color and lost most of its character. But it was cheap, the bottle itself was interesting, and I think I knew the condition might be bad going in. I got an about 2/3s of a 100 ml bottle, as I recall, of a very vintage Guerlain Vetiver. I think it was even called an EDC rather than an EDT. I think I paid north of $75 for it. Wonderful stuff. Very different from the current version and seems fully intact.
I have bought partial bottles of non-vintage stuff through various sources, including B&B, some pretty random, and I do not think I have been burned. Although I recently got a nearly fully bottle of Heeley Sel Marin on ebay, and to tell the truth I do not love it as much as I loved the in store sample sniffs I have had.
The sale of empty scent bottles on eBay does give me the creeps, unless someone can explain to me a legit reason why someone would pay substantial money for an empty fragrance bottle.
I know that some folks who have a lot of knowledge and experience, are highly skeptical of folks selling decants on eBay, but i have no direct experience.
I guess, as I write this, it seems like a jungle out there!
I bought some Creed Selection Verte vintage and it wasn't that good. My opinion is that unless they're stored properly there is a chance that they could lose something.
I couldn’t agree with you more! The word “vintage” has become quite irritating to me.
Sorry, Steve. I think I was saying the opposite.
I think "vintage" is a good word, and there is not another word that conveys the same meaning in this context.
When I re-read your post, I began to wonder which end you were on. Actually, I am “vintage” and most of the products referred to as vintage were new to me long ago so I’ve made the trip right along with them and don’t find modern products of lesser quality and in many cases much improved. For example, I’ve used Old Spice for over 50 years and haven’t noticed the differences as the formulation has evolved over those many years. In fact, I much prefer the current Classic OS as it isn’t as “loud” as it once was. To me, it has the same scent but is much more pleasant. Williams soap is another example. I have no problems getting a great lather and it still performs very well. I certainly wouldn’t pay a premium for a puck of Williams made in the 70’s or 80’s. Even though the formulation has changed many times over the years, the changes have been subtle and it remains much the same. The only vintage items I have are straight razors as they are readily available and much less expensive than newly made razors of similar quality.Sorry, Steve. I think I was saying the opposite.
Sorry. I thought when you said you "hated the word" and "[t]he word 'vintage' has become quite irritating to me" that it was the word itself or the use of the word itself that you had come to dislike. Sounds like what you really intend to contest is over reverence for older "hardware" and "software" over current versions.
I think I agree with re straights. I do think vintage scents, particularly the expensive ones, can be a real dice shoot. But, for the most part, I prefer the original versions of scents over the reformulations--Havana would be a prime example, for me. And we are never going to see real sandalwoods again, or, apparently, things like Creed vintage Tabarome or Cuir de Russie. I think the removal of real oakmoss from scents has been a bad thing. i guess I would not beat the drum to bring back civet. Most of the scents I own and use are current.
I do not think I have a preference for vintage soaps, brushes, or DEs. I suppose one does pay a lot for a good modern DE. I guess I have a preference for tallow soaps, but there are real tallow soaps around now. I have had good and bad vintage strops.
For the most part, I personally do not have the energy or skill to chase down vintage anything. Too some extent I think a preference for vintage stuff is a hobbyist's preference for that which is more exclusive and harder to obtain, which I think is fine and may add to the fun. Folks are just not going to be as attracted to collecting what is sold universally these days.
I think I agree with re straights. I do think vintage scents, particularly the expensive ones, can be a real dice shoot. But, for the most part, I prefer the original versions of scents over the reformulations--Havana would be a prime example, for me. And we are never going to see real sandalwoods again, or, apparently, things like Creed vintage Tabarome or Cuir de Russie. I think the removal of real oakmoss from scents has been a bad thing. i guess I would not beat the drum to bring back civet. Most of the scents I own and use are current.
I do not think I have a preference for vintage soaps, brushes, or DEs. I suppose one does pay a lot for a good modern DE. I guess I have a preference for tallow soaps, but there are real tallow soaps around now. I have had good and bad vintage strops.
For the most part, I personally do not have the energy or skill to chase down vintage anything. Too some extent I think a preference for vintage stuff is a hobbyist's preference for that which is more exclusive and harder to obtain, which I think is fine and may add to the fun. Folks are just not going to be as attracted to collecting what is sold universally these days.
I have used Gentleman Givenche since 1972 and fortunately there has been no change in that. It is MY scent. I am retired and don’t wear cologne often now but when I do, I wear that. It is very special to me. I agree that people do enjoy the search
To me the word “vintage” has been much overused,in a way, like “awesome” and “like”. I suppose I’m just a bit quirky about language.
Fragrance is one of those things I prefer to buy in a regular store, where I can test it / sniff it.
Perhaps it’s because I’m vintage and less loved than a thirty year old puck of Williams.
.Perhaps it’s because I’m vintage and less loved than a thirty year old puck of Williams.
I sincerely doubt that!
And, I am pretty vintage myself.
I may overuse "awesome" myself. It does seem to me that the dictionary definition of
"causing or inducing awe; inspiring an overwhelming feeling of reverence, admiration, or fear: an awesome sight. exhibiting or marked by awe; showing reverence, admiration, or fear" would make it a rather intense, useful, and out of the ordinary word.
Whereas in general use, including my own use, "awesome" is pretty much used in place of "really good" or "impressive." So fair enough!
Awesome was a powerful word but through over use that aspect has been greatly diminished. Language always evolves though - no stopping that.
My buy of Creed Green Valley (back in 2011) was awful. Smelled like worn shoe leather. I've had a few other vintages that smelled off but wearable. Some vintages have smelled ok. Only thing vintage in my collection that every smelled great is vintage Old Spice.
Of all the vintage Avon (and other staple fragrances from the 60's and 70's) I've purchased only a very few were "bad". I try to buy scents I can smell before I put my money down - with most Avon scents i can tell if they're OK or not.
Similar threads
