Skip to main content

Nicole Miller for Men

Image
By
This particular fougiental was released in 1994. The most notable remarks I can recall from previous owners is how much better the original version was compared to the current one.

Having never smelled the original, I have nothing to add to that assumption. After wearing the current version of Nicole Miller for Men, I cannot say I'm impressed with it or the idea that the original is better. What I am smelling now falls into the category of "Meh"........yes, "Meh"......and I highly doubt I'd be impressed with a superior version of "Meh", but I have no way of knowing for sure. I'm not inclined to seek out the original for a side by side.

Is Nicole Miller for Men horrible? No, it's not horrible at all. It's uninspiring to be honest and doesn't permit me to either love it or hate it. I've worn it a few times and ambivalent is a good term for me to use. I remain unmoved.

The opening is a strange rendition of apple that's sweetened by an unknown component. The musk from the base accord already attaches itself to the opening volley. What's revealed in the first few minutes is a musky, sweet apple note that needs to transition to something else.......but doesn't.

Ever so slowly, a woody amber inserts itself. It's a quiet accord and almost goes unnoticed. There's also some subtle moss and vanilla and it's this rendition I don't care for that much. The base accord is what I believe hurts this fragrance and why many don't care for it. It may be that the original had a superior drydown because this version lacks clarity and quality.

Enough said I imagine. A big, fat neutral rating is in order for Nicole Miller for Men. This is one of those frags that would get passed over as I peruse my wardrobe for something to wear. I have too many superior choices to wear than this.
Labels:

Comments

  1. AnonymousOctober 15, 2011 at 4:41 PM

    I have both versions, and generally agree with those who say the new one is reasonable but should not be compared to the original, which features a well-integrated sandalwood note. I don't know if the original is entirely successful, but there was an attempt to create a really special fragrance, and so even if one considers it 80% successful, that would still be better than at least 99% of the designer fragrances marketed since then, IMO.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Oriental Lounge by The Different Company

By
Bergamot, Curry Leaf, Pepper, Red Rose, Tonka Bean, Labdanum, Satinwood. I suppose the first thing I noticed about Oriental Lounge is that as a man, this is a bit of a stretch to pull off. Since the core of Oriental Lounge is a powdery tonka and amber duo, it really does lean a bit too far feminine for me to wear. However, it would smell just as lovely on a woman and more appropriate as well. I bring this up simply because it's marketed as shared. I was wondering about the curry leaf. Actually, this "note" brought nothing to the table with the exception of possibly enhancing the pepper note just a bit. Even so, the pepper note itself was low key ( at least on me ) and both blended nicely with the citrus opening. From the onset of Oriental Lounge, it's unmistakable that this fragrance is.......well.....an oriental. From other opinions, I read some gripes about longevity, but it lasts on me quite awhile. This fragrance is uncomplicated and without much movemen...
4 comments
Read more

Black Suede by Avon

By
Nutmeg, Clove, Amber, Musk, Moss, Wood Notes. Yes.........I am reviewing one of the Rodney Dangerfield's of fragrance. Black Suede has been gracing medicine cabinets, for better or worse, since 1980 my friends. If you're expecting me to inform you ( like others may have already ) that Black Suede is a nasty scrubber, you will be disappointed. On the other hand, if you're expecting a glowing review claiming it's a diamond in the rough, you won't hear that from me either. I will say though that Black Suede doesn't deserve the hate it's received and most of that is due to snobbery aimed at Avon products in general. I kid you not when I state that a close relative to this fragrance is Cacharel Pour L'Homme. The array of spice in both ensure comparison, but the "smoother" of the two is Black Suede due to its implementation of Amber. While wearing Black Suede, one can detect a hint of "drugstore". That quality doesn't manife...
1 comment
Read more

Paco Rabanne Pour Homme

By
I am reviewing the original Paco Rabanne Pour Homme ( circa 1973 ) thanks to a generous basenoter who sent it to me recently in a swap. He also sent me the current formulation in order for me to do a side by side comparison. The side by side resulted in what I had already imagined would be the case. Not that the newer formula is terrible by any means. The original version simply is better by being deeper and a bit more masculine. No......you shouldn't go to ebay searching for the vintage formula and paying stupid prices. It's simply a notch or two better than the current and noticeable by comparing the two in real time. Rabanne Pour Homme opens with a slight shimmer in conjunction with lavender, spices and a subtle woodiness. It's an old school introduction, however a good one. The lavender takes about 5 minutes to raise its volume and evolve into a soapy rendition. I dislike when a boatload of soapy lavender takes over a composition, but here it doesn't go over t...
2 comments
Read more