Arpège

This is great. If you like Channel 5, search no more. Very statement parfum, kind of grows in your the longer you use it. Whenever you will wear it, you will not be unnoticed. This parfum does not ask for respect, it imposes it! Recommend!

One of Marilyn Monroe scents. She had a type! Aldehydic shine to waxy white florals - jasmine, lilies, neroli. Currently available for a steal. Very similar to Chanel N°5. Smells expensive and not that dated, just grown up and classy. I am wearing it today againts the type - summer day and the complexity pleases me. I myself think it is a wintery evening blend, but maybe it is more universal after all. Today it shines a different side. Clean, floral, slightly bitter and powdery. With time it starts to be similar to Bvlgari Jasmin Noir. After many hours it turns green on me with vetiver, patchouli and coriander mix. I must say, I command the evolution of this beauty on skin during a day. And the bottle is stunning! Also, I feel it still on myself in the morning - lasts very well. If you like Chanel N°5 you will love this.

شروع عطر با انبوه‌ای از گُل ها در بستر آلدهیدی هست که بسیار تند و تیز و به نظر من زننده بود با گذشت زمان و فروکش کردن آلدهید ها،روایح گلی خودشون رو به صحنه می‌رسونن،هرچند سایه‌ی پررنگ آلدهید روی سرشون هست شیرینی میوه ای از لابه‌لای گل ها بیرون میاد و سعی در کنترل و ایجاد تعادل در عطر داره تا فضای گلی عطر که بسیار متراکم و شلوغه رو رام کنه بین گل ها،یاس بیشتر قابل تشخیصه اما از تاثیر هرکدوم از نت ها بر تکمیل این آکورد گلی نمیشه چشم پوشی کرد و این فضای سنگین گلی_آلدهیدی که قطعا بی شباهت به خیلی از صابون ها نیست؛از کنار هم قرار گرفتن چندین نت صورت می‌گیره نه یک نت واحد عطر تغییر می‌کنه و به نت های پایه نزدیک میشه تاثیر مُشک و صندل رو در پودری شدن عطر میشه حس کرد و شیرینی عطر رو تا حدی به وانیل یا صمغ و آمبر هم میشه نسبت داد در کل شروع عطر باب سلیقه‌ی من نیست و در ادامه بهتر میشه اما با همه‌ی این تفاسیر عطر سن بالا ای هست و تست اش کافیه *************** scent:6.5/10 longevity:7.5/10 sillage:7.5/10 purchase value:4/10 ******** overall:6.4/10

The opening smells almost exactly like Chanel no 5, but it shines in the drydown. Very unisex in the drydown. Nice.

I bought the Eau de Parfum as it was on sale and very cheap and I was intrigued by its vintage history. Opens with a blast of lilly of the valley that smells of old ladies and cheap toiletries from the 80s, but after about half an hour, it became, on me, something much subtler and complex, it's hard to describe, it doesn't smell fresh floral, but it vividly brought to mind memories of my mother doing the flowers in church when I was a kid - powdery floral with an edge that implies authority, order, something slightly municipal, as the base notes come out. Not sure when or where I'd wear this, but it's value for a complex scent with a lot of history.

My first encounter with Arpege was in a perfume dispenser vending machine the ladies room at the Top of the Mark, when I went to San Francisco with my dad on a business trip. After my brother and I, both underage, drank a martini in the bar, I realized I should cover up the gin on my breath. I looked at what was on offer in the strange dispenser and decided not to choose Chanel No. 5, which my father might recognize, and chose Arpege instead, blasting it directly into my face. Loved it ever since. A colleague recently told me that I smelled like soap. It doesn't really work in Egypt after March, but I love the powder and the bottle is how I imagine the Platonic idea of perfume.

Bought it for Marilyn and stayed for Marilyn! It’s so clean, very Old Hollywood! Sophisticated scent not for a novice.

I am interested to buy a bottle or a sample, please PM me.

These vintage perfumes smell amazing. The blend of so many notes gives them a rich, unique, and beautiful scent.

Arpège is a complex journey. It opens with a classic burst of aldehydes, lily of the valley, and bergamot, but soon transitions into a rich floral heart of jasmine and iris. As it settles, it reveals a fascinatingly 'dirty' yet animalic powdery side. There's a smoky woodiness mixed with a hint of spicy vin chaud (mulled wine)—cinnamon and all. To me, this smells like someone incredibly wealthy and aloof, looking down on everyone with a smirk. It feels cold and 'haughty,' yet there's a strange, heartbreaking void in it. It reminds me of a sunny, snowy morning right before the Lunar New Year. The dry down is a peaceful, soapy, yet melancholic incense. It captures the essence of a fleeting, unreachable adult—calm, hollow, and hauntingly beautiful. Definitely a scent for the cold seasons.

Sad that this is compared so strongly to No.5, which in my opinion far exceeds Arpege in terms of status as an iconic, timeless scent. Arpege is definitely worth trying if your're a fan of aldehydes and powdery florals - with a classic, vintage edge. However, even as an older perfume lover, I don't think I could use this outside the bedroom, where it works wonderfully on bedlinen, with a waft of flowers in the air. Sometimes vintage is just 'too vintage' to be wearable now - and Arpege is a classic example of this.

Arpège by Lanvin smells like elegance wrapped in satin. It opens with a luminous aldehydic glow -sparkling, refined, almost champagne-like - and then slowly melts into a velvet heart of rose, geranium, jasmine, and powdery florals. There is something irresistibly sensual about the way it moves: never loud, never obvious, but soft, polished, and deeply alluring. On the skin, Arpège feels creamy, silky, and intimate, like the trace of a beautiful woman who has just left the room. The rose and geranium give it that glamorous floral signature — chic, feminine, and timeless — while the powdery warmth underneath makes it feel almost like skin kissed with expensive face cream, fine powder, and a whisper of golden light. ✨ What makes it truly luxurious is its depth. Beneath the airy floral sheen, there is a darker softness — amber, sandalwood, musk, vanilla, patchouli — creating a smooth, shadowed sensuality that feels mature, magnetic, and utterly refined. It is softly sweet, but never girlish. Elegant, but never cold. Seductive, but in the most sophisticated way. This is not a perfume that begs for attention. It draws people in quietly. It has that old-Hollywood kind of beauty — poised, graceful, mysterious — the sort of fragrance that feels as though it belongs with silk gowns, pearls, candlelight, and slow, deliberate gestures. 🌙 It is timeless femininity with depth, softness, and a hidden fire. To me, Arpège is sexy in the most elegant possible way: not provocative, but mesmerizing. Not trendy, but eternal. It smells like glamour, intimacy, and quiet confidence — the kind of perfume that leaves a deep trail and an even deeper memory. 🥰 Femininity: 10/10 Luxury feel: 10/ 10 Sensuality: 9.5/10 Longevity: 9/10 Deep sillage: 9/10 Timeless sophistication: 10/10

one of the most elegant floral perfumes ever created. The composition is beautifully blended, with florals melting into a soft, powdery harmony that feels timeless and refined. While Arpège and Chanel No.5 belong to the same classic aldehydic floral family, I personally do not find them particularly similar neither to the extrait nor the Eau de Parfum. If anything, Arpège reminds me more of the atmosphere of Amouage Gold. Smooth, graceful and deeply sophisticated, it represents the quiet luxury of classic perfumery.

I'll never understand the pretentiousness in some of the reviews on this site, but that's a rant for another time. Anyway, on to Arpège. This is a review of a 70-year-old bottle of the extrait. I don't have any experience with other formulations. People constantly compare this to Chanel No. 5. I get why, but saying they smell the same isn't accurate at all. No. 5 is a cold, sparkling fragrance, whereas Arpège is warm and velvety. The opening aldehydes are certainly there, but they lack the sharp soapiness of Chanel. They are softer, darker, and quickly transform into a creamy heart of peach, honeysuckle, ylang-ylang, and jasmine. You simply can't fake 70-year-old Mysore sandalwood and natural musk. It dries down into a rich, oily, resinous warmth that modern perfumery is legally forbidden from replicating. To a modern nose raised on fruit-chouli and sugary nonsense, it would probably be called "old lady" or "dated." But really it's just dark and sophisticated in its purity. I'm sure it's due to the age, but my bottle doesn't have any projection, even for an extrait. It sits very close to the skin and transforms several times over the span of a couple of hours. In the bottle, it smells like straight bourbon. It's likely the aged top notes, but the moment it touches skin, it turns very floral. The transformation is impressive to me, and I'm not easily impressed. When it finally heats up completely, my husband (whose reaction to most perfumes is just "ok, whatever") said, "Oh, that's really nice! It's like a bouquet." I never said he was a poet, but he's cute, so I keep him around. I don't wear this often, since I usually prefer something that slaps bystanders across the face. I save this for special occasions, and I enjoy it every time I wear it.

The opening is nice for around 20 minutes similar to no 5 but no where near as nice it drys down minty on my skin and nothing special..aldehydes definitely work different on everyone’s chemistry..people usually hate no 5 but love it when I wear it as it comes off clean and musky on my skin..this doesn’t work for me unfortunately if you don’t want to spend on no 5 but want something similar and classic go for l'aimant it’s cheaper than Arpege and much more interesting 💗

I love it, even though it is a difficult perfume for me. Quite old school and strong so I can’t wear it anyday/anytime. I never liked Chanel No5 on me (I find it beautiful on others, though), but Arpège yes. I imagine a confident woman wearing it 100 years ago and it really moves me :-)

(Comparison of vintage Arpege extrait of the Lanvin Perfumes era, and Arpege Eau de Lanvin, both prior to 1990) This was going to be one of the hardest things I’ve ever done in all of my years of perfume collecting and writing. I can sum it up in one sentence if this is an undertaking you wish to do yourself: good luck picking out most of the notes in either one of these. Arpege is a true floral amalgam, the kind that No. 5 only wishes it could be (yes, I know those are fighting words). So, I’m not going to bother with my usual way of going about this, and we’ll look at the forest not the trees. The first thing to note is that the extrait plays around with the fruit and florals a lot more than the eau. The eau pushes the honeysuckle and muguet very far forward, which in tandem with a big clove note gives a honeyed animalic type feeling - also likely thanks to some base materials already playing upwards. Strangely, and rather opposite to what happens with these concentrations, the extrait is brighter than the eau. Richer, sure, obviously, but the eau has dimmer light thanks to more spices and more emphasis on the darker and durable materials in the base. The extrait is compelled to hold on to the brighter fruit and brighter florals for as long as possible, and it does so for a long time before the fruit departs first. The heart of the extrait still keeps the lights on, seeming to focus more on rose, ylang-ylang, and mimosa rather than spices, and keeps the base materials firmly underneath and well covered. It’s no surprise that the eau reaches the base before the extrait, the former going a more convincing chypre direction while the extrait commands a more amberic lean. The eau is classically mossy, and given sparing doses of sandalwood and spices to help it along. The extrait is very sandalwood, vetiver, and spices forward with a touch of leather. Thanks to the slightly green vetiver, the extrait still feels brighter with the eau feeling like a forest walk at dusk. There is a lot more to Arpege than what I have described, but the primary thing to note is the extrait is more amber, the eau is more chypre, the extrait has a sunnier disposition while the eau prefers to play with shadows. Arpege is quite grand and statement making; many will not find it easy to wear, but that’s not because it is loud, ostentatious, or challenging, far from either of those things, it’s because it has one of those profiles or personalities that is so intricate, beautiful, and unique that it will capture the full attention of whatever room it walks into. Whatever the concentration, know that you will get a perfectly seamless composition of exquisite materials that will defy any attempts to break it apart or pigeon-hole it. There you go, folks. That’s the best that I can do, which doesn’t do Arpege justice. It is a perfume to be experienced in its entirety and reveled-in from moment to moment, not a perfume for study or reductive commentary as above - though it certainly tempts study in every perfume nerd that comes across its path. In any and all forms Arpege is a legend, a maverick of modern perfumery, and one of the best ever made.

i keep deleting my reviews on this one, because i don't feel like i can truly put into words what this perfume does to my brain. this IS exceptionally timeless and YES, it is very dark. dark in the sense that this is chanel no. 5's goth sister. a very tall dark church, with the windows very up high and where the light enters scarcely. very occult and mysterious.... i also can imagine the followers of a satanic temple reeking of this lol...... unfortunately..... or not?

I'm talking about a very old version , from the column-like bottle. It's a classy chypre with its amazing structure when you start from sharpy , greenish notes, not a lemon spray we see now in modern chypres, but more dark, then you slide through the peach skin to its fruity flesh and you feel this juicy soft peach almost on the tips of your fingers, then you swim in the woodsy mossy flowers for ages. I love it immensely. For me its not very close to Chanel's No.5. Their aldehydes seem to me different. Here they are more transparent and sharp, in the Chanel's creation they are more soft, nutty and almost greasy. but it's just my impression. We are different.

I feel sad that in his "review" of this masterpiece, Marcke Menke thinks it is clever to display an ugly arrogance that says more about his character than it does about Arpège. I understand that not everyone will love it, even that it might be polarising, but far more knowledgeable perfume experts than he (Roger Dove, Luca Turin, Michael Edwards, Victoria Frolova to name but a few) agree that it belongs in the pantheon of the all-time greats. Well, now I've got that off my chest, it will surprise no-one to learn that I love this very grown-up floral aldehyde: a delightful bouquet of blowsy white flowers captured in that fleeting, exuberant, moment just before they die. There are clear similarities to that other iconic floral aldehyde, Chanel No 5, but for me Arpège is brighter, perhaps more accessible. I love too the creamy, lactonic heart, and the faintly spicy note in the drydown (coriander?). I agree it is NOT at all like the many modern sweet gourmand perfumes that are in fashion right now (how many of them will last for 99 years?); rather it has an intemporal quality which evokes the decade that gave us so many of the "greats": Shalimar, No.5, Joy..... This is one for a confident, assured woman to wear with a little black dress and pearls rather than jeans and a sweatshirt. It's 1920s glamour in a wonderful art deco bottle: often to be found at a very affordable price, too.

The strong and lingering aldehydic opening of Arpège literally reeks of history from perfumery's golden age. ...And so therefore do I continue to receive a strangely esoteric enjoyment in occasionally smelling it again, even now in the present day. However, despite, or because, of what I just wrote, Arpège is NOT in anyway exceptionally 'timeless'. On the contrary, it is very much from a dark corner of its own time: born 1927, on into the 1930s and 40s, and persisting strongly well into the 50s and 60s, ...before its long decline in stature became evident to all. Today, it is almost obscure; kept alive by small cults of both excessively curious history-buffs and lunatic-fringe devotees of the bizarre and archaic. Indeed, there is an aspect of Arpège that both literally and figuratively reminds me of naphthalene mothballs. I recall two, very strange, old buildings from childhood that smelled like Arpège. One, the gloomy hallways of a darkly lit, moorish revival apartment building, with ornate stucco, gilded mirrors, flame-bulb wall sconces, and that antique carpeting that resembled cushioned red velvet. A peculiar, spinster friend of my mother lived there. The other building was an actual nunnery or convent, that I only gained brief access to due to being an inquisitive child. Arcane religious paraphernalia, windows of distorted yellow glass, and more of that oddly opulent carpeting. I doubt such places would look, or smell, quite like that today. Even back then they were anachronisms; faded remnants of prior eons, half-forgot. Daring to venture further into these outre edges of subjectivity, I shall hazard there is also something, ...evil about Arpège. Its squat, jar-like bottle resembles a canopic relic from an ancient tomb, done up in Anubian tones of nyx and gilt. Those two strange figures on the Lanvin logo, draped in strange, ceremonial robes never looked very wholesome to my eye either. Yes, I know they are meant to be Jeanne and her daughter, done up in fancy dress, ...but all the same, what eerie garb, even for a costume party. Rosemary may have donned blessedly chaste Detchema, but I always imagine the Dakota's satanists stinking of Arpège, ...and tanis root.

Chanel No 5 with a drop of Anaïs Anaïs. A soapy, sparkly, creamy white floral with hints of honeysuckle, peach skin, and sandalwood. A floral scented, lathered up white bar soap on a porcelain dish, set on a black marble countertop in a fancy art deco bathroom. Extremely sophisticated, feminine, and classic-smelling, and surprisingly deep and complex for such a soapy scent. It took a while, but Arpège grew on me and now I adore her!

This is a review for the new formula. Strong when first sprayed but after a couple of minutes it softens Clean soap smell . I don’t hate it nor do I love it. It’s a good after shower perfume . If your into soapy perfumes , you will like this.

I bought a 5ml bottle that was made in the 1950s. It's said that this is what Marilyn Munroe wore. Upon opening the bottle, it smells exactly like brandy. It's strong and extremely alcoholic. I only put one drop on my skin and it still had that brandy smell. I let it sink in for a good half an hour before i truly smelt it and it was like an orgasm for my nose. It reminds me of my great grandmother's home - like a heavy wooden trunk filled with clothing and with a few mothballs dropped in. It smells a little old person-y but in the best way, like an extremely rich grandmother. It does remind me of Chanel no5 but with more amber and less fruit. I just wish a bottle of this stuff that was made before the 70s wasn't so damn expensive

@chimidoro YES! I have the very same issue. After a while it stopped spraying. I have to take the top off, turn it upside down and press the nozzle directly against my skin in order to get anything out of it :/ A shame, since I love it so much

Wow... 🥰😍👌 I got two bottles of this, not vintage. One doesn't spray, no matter what I do. Anybody else had this issue? Doesn't smell anything like Chanel no05 to me. I own no05 parfum and edp, or smells like neither. This isn't something I would reach for or wear myself but it's something I'd love to smell on others, I never have!

The definition of beautiful but not for me. It smells of a elegant, woman of a certain age. Easily the best aldehydic I've likely smelled, with a delicate yet omnipresent mildly sweet floral character. Ultimately, this perfume feels like a costume I'm wearing to be someone else rather than me. I'm going to pass it on to one of my aunt who regularly enjoys a scent like this. Maybe you'll come to me another day my dear, but for now we're saying adieu.

This one cannot be over sprayed as it is a real powerhouse.

I should have liked this perfume based on the reviews and I didn't. The reasons are it was like a block aroma and not enough layers of smells. It was too soapy and slightly bitter but fortunately became sweeter as it dried down. The age of it really appealed to my love of all that is vintage but it was just TOO old lady. Another reason I bought it was because one review I read said specifically, it was similar to Chanel number 5 but better and I found neither to be true. I have tried a spray now and again since I bought it a couple of weeks ago in the hope I might like it eventually but I think I may have to sell it. It doesn't smell spicy or sweet or aqua or grassy just strong flowers. I don't know enough about the science of perfume so I don't know which kind of flowers but not subtle smelling flowers, not roses, not violets, not lavender. Looking at the middle notes I think is the ylang ylang I dislike as it's the only thing I smell from the first spray until it wears off.

An easy love since smelling like Chanel no. 5 is always going to reel me in. Purchased a partial bottle in Manhattan (perfume district south of Koreatown, north of Flatiron) for $20. Akin to a Mercari purchase without the waiting in my book. I can’t tell this apart from Paloma Picasso, but I have others from this era on their way to me so hopefully I can sit with them all and detect the differences. I like the fluffiness, the powder, the woods, the sparkling aldehydes.