Burberry wasn't the first to this theme, and the underrated house of Moschino arguably did it better with Uomo? Moschimo (1997), which didn't utilize a violet note as the dominant accord like Burberry has on display here, but the Burberry name attached to this juice ultimately made their take on the style more popular. Part of this trend continued into the mid-2000's, which is where we get several overbearingly sweet gourmands for men, and the exceptionally good iris-heavy classic Dior Homme (2005), but for Burberry's part of the trend, we get what is basically a light men's ambery musk. It was time for a change, and although not everyone was on the same page for what that change should be come the year 2000, Burberry thought it should be more in line with the new vibe straight men were borrowing from portions of the gay community with their "metrosexual" style: an urbane and bookish vibe with a touch of feminine flair that made it safe to play with things like perfume notes perceived as "for girls".
I really think if Burberry repackaged it and put some marketing behind it Touch would find a whole new - and mass - audience.īurberry Touch for Men (2000) must have seemed downright mellifluous to the nose after the rather plain-spoken pure 90's freshness that was Burberry Weekend for Men (1997), which along with Ted Baker Skinwear (1998) and Penhaligon's Quercus (1996), more or less encapsulated the popular lemon-powered "sons of Blenheim" neo-barbershop style British masculines were going through in the latter half of the decade. It probably will always be in the moment. But Touch smells nothing like most colognes from that time period (with the exception of The Dreamer).
And relegates it to the discounters and rack stores (not a bad thing for the person looking fir cheapie gold). That clean, minimalist and modern look so ubiquitous in the 90’s and early 2000’s kind of (unfairly) traps Touch in that timeframe. The look and vibe of the bottle is cool too but dated. It’s a smooth, refined 4 season scent, with good sillage and decent duration. I have really come to love and respect Touch. Akin to The Dreamer in this way, as well as in the sweetness (tobacco leaf?). These are all riffs on Touch IMO.Įdit 8/4/22: A big difference to the above is that Touch is very powdery, while the aforementioned are not. Anyone that is looking for a light spicy and woodsy scent will appreciate the nuances of Burberry Touch.I’m thinking about the clean, sweet, spicy, woody, fragrances so prevalent today. While the individual notes are detectable, they also don’t separate or overpower each other. The cologne is unique and blended beautifully. The violet leaf, combined with Mandarin orange, gives it a light and tropical fragrance. It has a feminine side that is appealing to women and guys. Personal Impressionsīurberry for men Touch cologne is not overly masculine. You can use a broad mist or a more targeted spray. If you enjoy displaying your colognes, the Burberry Touch will add a touch of class and elegance.Ī small atomizer allows you to disperse the perfect amount of fragrance.
The clear bottle is devoid of decoration, except for the Burberry logo. The crystal cologne bottle echoes the brand’s classic style. The white letter is discrete and distinctive. The box features a grey plaid design with red accents. Just like their tasteful clothing, the cologne mirrors the brand’s classic designs. You expect classic packaging from the London company. Smooth Vetiver is combined with white musk and tonka bean. When the cologne settles, the subtle base notes appear. Cedar and nutmeg are combined with the spice of white pepper. The cologne’s body or mid notes are what give it a slightly spicy, masculine scent.
0 kommentar(er)
