Lotus, Jasmine, Muguet, Peony, Gardenia.
Rose, Tuberose, Orange Blossom.
Ambrette Seed, Musk, Oakmoss, Sandalwood, Vetiver.
In 2005, Ralph Lauren released Blue for women. I've only had opportunity to smell this very recently. In wearing Blue, I initially thought it was rather banal and innocuous. After a few wearings however, it occurs to me that Blue isn't exactly shallow. It may be a tad generic, but there's more here than meets the nose.
Blue leans floral / aquatic to me, but in the end, does anyone really care about category.....or more importantly, the person who categorizes it? I'm a hobbyist like all of you and since I'm no expert of perfumery, I simply do my best to describe what it is I'm smelling. My "goal" is to give an accurate opinion that will hopefully steer you to ( or away ) from a particular scent.
Blue opens fresh as an aquatic floral, then becomes more substantial while lowering volume and presence as it glides toward the heart accord. It doesn't become "heavier", it simply morphs into a more floral mode and that seems to give the illusion of gravitas. What I suppose I like most is the fact that it never evolves the sweetness I expected from the notes implemented. It's tuned for a light-hearted wear and it succeeds. This is a subtle, chypre variation that's feminine, versatile and possesses nothing controversial during any stage of development.
Even the base and drydown of Blue is soft and supple. Those expecting Blue to make a "statement" will undoubtedly be disappointed, yet this is more suited to those looking for a pleasant and contemporary fragrance. Uncomplicated, Blue is relaxing and care-free.
Think summertime. Think running out to the mall and needing a last minute choice to spray and go. Think about an evening in jeans or sweats in front of the tube with that special someone. Think a bit elegant. Think modest-versatility and then wear Blue. It's all good. Thumbs up from Aromi and a recommendation to sample first.
Rose, Tuberose, Orange Blossom.
Ambrette Seed, Musk, Oakmoss, Sandalwood, Vetiver.
In 2005, Ralph Lauren released Blue for women. I've only had opportunity to smell this very recently. In wearing Blue, I initially thought it was rather banal and innocuous. After a few wearings however, it occurs to me that Blue isn't exactly shallow. It may be a tad generic, but there's more here than meets the nose.
Blue leans floral / aquatic to me, but in the end, does anyone really care about category.....or more importantly, the person who categorizes it? I'm a hobbyist like all of you and since I'm no expert of perfumery, I simply do my best to describe what it is I'm smelling. My "goal" is to give an accurate opinion that will hopefully steer you to ( or away ) from a particular scent.
Blue opens fresh as an aquatic floral, then becomes more substantial while lowering volume and presence as it glides toward the heart accord. It doesn't become "heavier", it simply morphs into a more floral mode and that seems to give the illusion of gravitas. What I suppose I like most is the fact that it never evolves the sweetness I expected from the notes implemented. It's tuned for a light-hearted wear and it succeeds. This is a subtle, chypre variation that's feminine, versatile and possesses nothing controversial during any stage of development.
Even the base and drydown of Blue is soft and supple. Those expecting Blue to make a "statement" will undoubtedly be disappointed, yet this is more suited to those looking for a pleasant and contemporary fragrance. Uncomplicated, Blue is relaxing and care-free.
Think summertime. Think running out to the mall and needing a last minute choice to spray and go. Think about an evening in jeans or sweats in front of the tube with that special someone. Think a bit elegant. Think modest-versatility and then wear Blue. It's all good. Thumbs up from Aromi and a recommendation to sample first.
Comments
Post a Comment