WHAT I SMELL: Gentry Jockey Club goes on the skin with a warm and comforting bergamot with soft touches of iris and rose. It buzzes with vibrancy, yet at the same time retains a sense calm and a sense of security. A light leather soon enters, but like the florals, it too remains soft and inviting. To warm the perfume even more, an ambered hue of sandalwood is injected which begins to dry out the opening softness of the perfume. I’m not sure what is responsible for the next movement, but a light earthy element is brought in. It’s a combination that feels like earthy and mossy soil which has been dried in the sun. A birch note helps to give it a slightly burnt edge as if in the distance you can smell the remains of recent fire. This is where the perfume settles in for bulk of its wear, it radiates and pulses as continues to grow with some intensity resting in a dry burnt wood and hay consistency.
WHAT IT SMELLS LIKE TO ME: Gentry Jockey Club smells less like a race track and more like what I envision a medieval farm to small like…dirt, hay and scorched earth.
THREE WORDS THAT DESCRIBE GENTRY JOCKEY CLUB: rustic, earthy, dried
WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING ABOUT GENTRY JOCKEY CLUB: None found.
BOTTOM LINE: Gentry Jockey Club remains true to the roots of the Oriza L. Legrand brand. It has a nostalgic sensibility, but feels modern at the same time. If you like the smokiness of birch tar you’ll probably like this. To me however, after some time, the perfume just gets too smoky on me.
- Bone Rating: 3 out of possible 5 bones
- Scent: Woody
- Classification: Unisex
- Expense: 120 Euros for 100 ml Eau de Parfum
November 27, 2017 at 8:00 am
I don’t like the bottle & I have never tried anything from this brand but the beginning of your review seemed particularly nice. I wouldn’t mind a soft leathered iris if it didn’t turn too much into crop fertilizer because of hay or earthy notes you mention
LikeLike
November 27, 2017 at 8:17 am
LOL…the opening was lovely and really nice and soft, but unfortunately that didn’t last all that long. I find that most of the perfumes they offer have an underlying earthy quality that can be a bit challenging.
LikeLike
November 27, 2017 at 8:27 am
yikes, this doesn’t sound appealing anymore 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
December 3, 2017 at 1:45 pm
I chuckled when I read Lucas’s comment because my first thought was exactly the same: I don’t like those bottles. I don’t like the name either. But for me it goes beyond not liking packaging: I was willing to overlook the ugly bottles since everybody was talking about one of their perfumes – and now I think I’m scarred for life by their Chipre Mousse. It was probably the most revolting thing I’ve ever put on my skin!
So for me this brand is a “pass” by default, and your 3-bones review doesn’t tempt me to reconsider that. But I do not mind reading about your experience 🙂
LikeLike
December 4, 2017 at 3:37 pm
LOL. I have to agree on the Chypre Mousse. Everyone was loving it, but to me it smelled like fungus or an earthy mushroom. Not anything that I wanted to smell like.
LikeLiked by 1 person