Gucci's latest fragrance for women, Gucci by Gucci, will launch this coming October. It will be the first major feminine launch under Gucci Creative Director Frida Giannini, who reportedly "unleashed her affinity for masculine notes" with the modern chypre fragrance.
The notes include guava, raspberry, pear, Tahitian Tiare flower, orange blossom, spider lily, patchouli, honey and musk.
Gucci by Gucci will be in 50 and 75 ml Eau de Parfum and in matching body products. (via Women's Wear Daily)
Update: see a review of Gucci by Gucci.
Just doesn't *sound* masculine at all, does it?
Also doesn't sound like a chypre. I don't care how much patchouli you chuck into it: if it doesn't have oakmoss, it isn't chypre. Yeah, I'm old-school.
Sounds masculine only if you're a male drag queen….LOL
There actually is something a bit drag queen like about the model in that ad.
I think they are saying the base notes (patch, honey, musk) are the masculine part. Perhaps it will “smell” masculine, we'll see — obviously those notes are used in plenty of women's fragrances.
I'm old-school too! At least they're using the term “modern chypre”, which I can live with.
To me, that ad shows an anorexic, unhappy woman wielding a home-made detonator. And 'chypre'? From those notes?
She doesn't look very happy about holding it, does she?
I think we all have to give up on the old meaning of chypre. The first usage that really surprised me, if I remember correctly, was Miss Dior Cherie. At the time, I thought they were calling it a chypre just to link to the original Miss Dior, but by now it is clearly widespread.
Not going to go there 😉
What do you reckon is intended now when they say 'chypre'? Miss Dior Cherie was straight strawberry jam on me. Do you think they mean 'fruit, with an edge of bitterness'?
“Modern chypre” my &%$! Nothing but a transparent ploy from soulless marketing execs to seduce the over-30 crowd (whom they've completely lost due to the avalanche of fruity-florals) into buying a fruity-floral. Why does Orwell's “1984” come to my mind? :-\
Calling an oakmoss-less fragrance a chypre just because it contains patchouli is like calling straight-up vodka a “martini” though it does't contain vermouth. Wrong wrong wrong. Yes, I'm old-school too. And all that fruit! Doesn't sound even vaguely masculine to me either. I am itching to try it nonetheless. 🙂
No, I don't think they mean the fruit. I take “modern chypre” to mean that although it isn't heavily mossy, it still has a relatively dry, earthy-woody base, and *most* of the modern chypres fit that. Miss Dior Cherie I still think is stretching the point.
Part of the term's usage may in fact be to avoid calling fruity florals by their true name — at least, that seems to fit some of them. We'll have to see if this one smells like a fruity floral in the end — you can certainly throw plenty of fruit into the top notes without necessarily creating a fruity floral.
Not arguing with your point at all though! I do think a lot of it is soulless marketing.
The thing is that many of these “modern chypres” may in fact have some moss (synthetic, presumably), but they don't *smell* mossy. I like a fragrance that goes by the name chypre to smell mossy, personally, but I think the change isn't due to the fact that you can't use appreciable amounts of real moss so much as that people don't like moss anymore — they find it musty & old-fashioned 🙁
Hmm, i haven't really love any fragrance by Gucci.. Nothing really special about them, they don't even nearly smell half good for my taste.
At least i guess the Gucci men fragrances smell better,not very good though.
I think they have to stop making perfumes. And those who buy gucci fragrances i think mostly they buy it for the name.
But i really hope this one will smell nice, not because the sake of gucci..hehehehe, but because i want to smell a nice fragrance and get to have it. Just as usual.
All due respect, but totally disagreeing with you there. I could care less about designer labels and never buy anything I think is just a name. Gucci had some total duds there for a while, and I obviously can't speak for the new one, but both Rush and Envy (the femmes) are excellent, original fragrances. I like Gucci Pour Homme, as well. Certainly, I can understand if they don't work with your chemistry – but there are plenty of us that buy them simply because, as you say, we want to smell and own a nice fragrance.
I'm glad somebody mentioned this, because I think that, like so many terms in the fragrance industry, it simply doesn't mean *anything* anymore. In the same way that terms like “glowing white amber crystals” or “drenched jabuticaba fruit” leave you thinking “huh?”, “chypre” has become just another word that seems like good advertising copy. It sounds exotic and elegant, and advertisers like it. Whether the scent has any of the ingredients that actually make it a chypre seems irrelevant these days…as with so many other terms, all that seems to matter is that it conjures up some sort of desirable image.
Yes i forgot about Rush, i agree that is a good one , i like to smell it on others but not me. Too bad.
I have many of those kinds of perfumes – good on others, doesn't work for me. What lines do you like, G-S?
What is really interesting to me is that it is considered desirable at all. I mean, who are they reaching for? Classic chypres are no longer appealing to most female consumers, and I would venture to guess that the majority of female consumers these days, at least those under 30 (e.g., all consumers they care about) don't even know what a chypre is. So why not just make up some new term?
GS, I like the Gucci men's better than the women's too, although will agree with Tigs that the Gucci women's selections aren't a total wasteland.
Some percentage of scents no doubt are bought for the cachet of the name, but given how much competition there is for fragrance consumers these days, I don't think the name itself is enough.
I don't have a specific line, But there is a fragrance that i think is really wonerful, it's called Un air de paris By Dorin.
You can check here:
http://www.double-click-perfumes.com/pages/air.htm
And i'm really a kind of person who like the perfume for one day a week a month, and in a sudden i just hate it.
Vary vary few fragrances i keep loving, one of them is coco by chanel.
And i do like seductive and candy like smell fragrances,Also powdery scents, but it depends with all of these.
She looks like an unhappy drag queen that is thinking “God, I wish I didn't have to carry this huge bottle! My feet are hurting in these 8 inch stillettoes. Plus I'm very hungry. I haven't ate in 4 weeks just for this photo shoot!” LOL!!!! I'm sorry, had to caption this one now.
Here! Here! Well put, Winterwheat.
No thanks. No modern “chypres” with exotic fruits for me. I tried Bandit just few days ago for the first time and I bow to it. I`m a slave to Cabochard, L`Arte di Gucci, Dioressence, Jolie Madame, O de Lancome. I want mossy. Gucci can scratch my name off their lists.
Oakmoss is musty? Gimme musty – I`m all for it!
Well said, WW.
You & me both — it is one of my favorite notes.
Oh, look! Another fruity floral. No wonder that model looks so somber. She's hefting the jumbo bottle and finding it only suitable as a dressing for all that fruit salad that must be in the bottle. And calling it a chypre is wrong, even if it does have patchouli and musk.
That is a great list of scents, can't argue with you.
Have you heard about a perfume company called (Ajmal ). They were in GUINNESS book for creating the largest incense burner (Mabkhara).
Personally i dont like their fragrances, it's all about oudh, and oudh gives me headache. There are only a few types that can be ok with me, but not that ok too.
But i have noticed that there are oudh fans in this blog.
http://www.ajmalperfume.com
I have heard of them but never tried them.
LOL — she does look somber. We'll have to be hopeful about the juice 🙂
I love your list, benvenuta. I've been in love with Cabochard since I was 16 years old (many eons ago).
With O de Lancome I experienced a real surprise this summer. I hadn't used it since the summer my first child was born, many, many years ago. Quite to my surprise my 16 year old daughter loves it, too. Not what I had expected at all.
To make it even more refreshing in our hot and humid NC summers I store it in the freezer, and then spray it all around me so that a gentle, cold rain of refreshing scent falls on me and my hair.
Forgot to add this to my earlier comment. As for the new Gucci, I'd like to second everybody else's disappointment about the notes and the picture. Let's hope it smells better than it sounds. I'm definitely not in any rush to try it, though.
As for the new Gucci, I'd like to second everybody else's disappointment about the notes and the picture. Let's hope it smells better than it sounds. I'm definitely not in any rush to try it, though.
Amen. What she said. And actually, it's not a martini unless it's made with GIN. (I'm even older-school.)
Extremely interesting article on what constitues a new “modern” chypre.
I am not thrilled that oakmoss is so restricted, but these do possess some charm I find.(OK, apart from Miss Dior cherie which I disliked)
Here it is:
http://ayalasmellyblog.blogspot.com/2006/11/dawn-of-pink-chypres.html
It's written by Ayala Moriel who is herself a perfumer, so it's a useful insight into them.
I agree that they should just invent a new classification for fragrances like this rather than just stick the word “modern” in front of chypre. After all, “marine/ozone” was a new classification added in the early 90s. Chypre should *stay* chypre! What's next? A men's “modern” fougere fragrance loaded with vanilla and fruit? Sigh.
And yes, another banal perfume ad…double sigh…
Can you tell I'm a bit cranky today?? 😉
It is sad that oakmoss is so rare in newer fragrances–and almost blasphemy to hear non-oakmoss touting fragrances called “chypres” ;). I've noticed that vetiver or sandlewood often stand in for oakmoss, but both are often sweeter and oakmoss brings that edgy cut that would really balance some of the new saccharine fragrances. I can think of at least 7 new fragrances that oakmoss would've saved.
I'd call the new classification “Candied Forest”, “Powdered Sugar Amazon” or “Hansel and Gretal do Neiman Marcus” ;D.
LOL those are great!!
Thanks!
Can't draw that line myself since almost all I like to drink are vodka gimlets. Still, they're pretty old school? Sort of?
CBG, modern fougeres are creeping in already, so prepare for more cranky 🙂
Well, the thing is that some of them may actually have oakmoss — lists of notes are rarely complete. Its just that if they don't smell like chypres, why call them chypres? So we agree 🙂
I'm an old school chypre fanatic, and I jsut ignore the term 'new chypre' – ignorance is bliss sometimes! That said, I think this could have potential, and I really like the look of the bottle. Slowly, I think some more interesting scents are starting to distinguish themselves from the recent fruity floral clones. My favourite recently is Badgley Mischka. It's got fruit, flowers, sweets and patch but is well blended and while giving a young enough vibe, doesn't drop to the teen level and still strikes me as rather elegant and having a satisfyingly richer base. I'm hoping this might be in the same manner.
Agree completely that Badgley Mischka is a grownup scent, although it doesn't suit me personally. Perhaps as you say this will be the same, and yes — it is best to ignore the chypre classification. Certainly got people riled up here though 🙂
Orange (flower), patchouli and honey? Does anybody else smell Liberte by Cacharel, or is it just me? Liberte is also advertised as chypre. C'mon, Gucci, this is lame 🙂
I would call Liberte an oriental gourmand — it smells nothing like a chypre to me at all.
I have a feeling this new Gucci fragrance would be so much better if Gucci hadn't let Tom Ford go. What a shame.
by the way, has anyone heard if Gucci Rush is being discontinued? is this true?
Tom Ford did some great scents for Gucci & YSL, so I totally agree. I've seen rumors that Gucci Rush is discontinued, but sorry, no idea if it is true. It is often hard to tell until the product disappears from the shelves.