Touch for Men
Burberry (2000)

Man I really wanted to like this. It stays on you like a friggin powdery ghost. I could not wash it off. Everything I heard about it I should have just heard “powder note” and sprayed it on a tester strip, not on my skin. I think Burberry makes some great women’s scents. I’ve yet to smell a men’s one I love. If you want to smell like a baby, this is a good choice.

On Fragrantica there's an AI generated comment that calls this a 'unique' scent, and quite a few voters agree.
I guess it might have influenced modern perfumery...
With its davana, vetiver and ginger, Touch for Men may anticipate the flora-spiciness of Idole d'Armani EdT.
And the peppery ozone and sweet woody musk seem to foreshadow Sauvage and the Spiky Woods.
So Touch for Men gets credit for being ahead of the curve, but it’s still the sort of thing I would change trains to avoid.

Touch (for Men) is my favourite Burberry fragrance by far, and has been for a good few years now. It's a violet leaf covered in a gigantic cloud of talcum powder; a very likeable and comforting aroma. Good performance, too, for a seemingly soft fragrance it projects strongly. (I just wish that the cap on the bottle clicked into place securely! Be careful when picking it up, readers...)

Touch was ahead of it’s time.

I’m thinking about the clean, sweet, spicy, woody, fragrances so prevalent today. Things like Dior Homme 2020. K, Sauvage Parfum, Burberry Hero. These are all riffs on Touch IMO.

——-
Edit 8/4/22: A big difference to the above is that Touch is very powdery, while the aforementioned are not. Akin to The Dreamer in this way, as well as in the sweetness (tobacco leaf?).
——-

I have really come to love and respect Touch. Bottom line it’s a great fragrance. And the best description is timeless. Indeed

It’s a smooth, refined 4 season scent, with good sillage and decent duration. And zero bubblegum. 😀

The look and vibe of the bottle is cool too but dated. It looks and feels passé. That clean, minimalist and modern look so ubiquitous in the 90’s and early 2000’s kind of (unfairly) traps Touch in that timeframe. And relegates it to the discounters and rack stores (not a bad thing for the person looking fir cheapie gold). But Touch smells nothing like most colognes from that time period (with the exception of The Dreamer). Touch smells like now. It probably will always be in the moment.

I really think if Burberry repackaged it and put some marketing behind it Touch would find a whole new - and mass - audience.

It’s that good.

Bitter

Its a mishmash. Opens airy, bitter and herbal. I was trying to place it blind, and kept thinking citric, but bland bitter citric. I was thinking cheap fake yuzu, but it says mandarin. Rough. Fairly powdery and floral. Cheap tonka, vetiver, and laundry musks in the base. The base feels less composed, more just dumped after a decision, which if built from the ground up is fine, but it seams to not coellese into a singular voice.

That artesima in the opening is the not pleasant to me. It feels poorly blended in. The citris is of poor quality. The base is ok for a cheap fresh aromatic. But the base seems amatuerish. Feels like it should be a car company fragrance or something.

Lalique White comes to mind in the same vein. White is higher quality, better blended, but thinner in the base. Thumbs down.

Touch is a light yet ever present trail of a scent that transitions from a brushing sweet feel into a sensual embrace of freshness. It opens with a watery violet, a sharply bitter artemisia and a pulpy orange rind of a trio that is sweetly pure, purely light, and beautifully ozonic; before dashes of pepper and dry cedar bring forth a warmth to the blooming powder puff, only to be further cozy-upped by a doe-eyed and pretty white musk leaning over for a tonka bean whisper. What comes to mind is an aura of genteel cleanliness of barbershop talc, clothesline laundry; fresh and perfectly set for spoiling. This woody-musky aromatic of soft, sweet powdery caresses is all love and cuddles past and present.