X-Centric
Dunhill (2001)

I never was crazy for Dunhill X-Centric, but I did admire it from afar for being a sufficient, basic scent.

Start with the eccentric volley of top notes, most of which were spices normally found in the heart of typical fragrances. It gives a fresh, slightly aromatic spice citrus intro, meshing with the nice rose, delicate wet sweet touch of lotus, and iris-cousin freesia adding its unique peppery freshness. And we head to the combo of dry wood, sweet amber, tar-like touch from guiac, floral-spicy sweet patchouli, and generic subtle musk.

All in all, it has an aromatic, woody spicy floral wetness and freshness. Not at all cloying, but overall safe and unadventurous.

It's an okay scent, but at least within the Dunhill universe, I have plenty of other options to satisfy.

This is the best of the least--by which I mean that at Dunhill's lowest ebb, they were producing some really mediocre scents. X-Centric, which is from that period, is not bad. For Dunhill, which was and wants to be again a serious fashion brand, the gimmicky name (XS all over again.....) and the gimmicky bottle (albeit from a house known for its lighters) seem out of line with their image. The scent itself? Woody, floral and spicy--quite nice, actually, if a little artificial smelling. Some of my favorite notes, clary sage (which Dunhill has always used to great effect) and Guaiacwood, along with the cedar and cypress, create a woody base for the very floral heart and spice notes. With the amber and patchouli this could almost be a masculine floriental, but one that has been put on a diet. The ad campaign seemed totally at odds with this scent, which is neither dangerous nor eccentric

OK - this one was my go-to in the early 2000's....and if I could find it cheap in quantity, I would be wearing it again. On my skin, it had a tobacco type smell (which I love) and it was pretty even and fresh. I had to layer it pretty good for an evening out...and I guess that helped with the longevity. I found it to be masculine and sexy - and the wife dug it too.

I normally like Dunhill fragrances - a lot.

But this is rubbish.
It's VERY light.
All I smell is a weak rubbery note and maybe a bit of ozone.
Stays incredibly close to the skin.
Stupid bottle top as well.
Very disappointing.

This is the only Dunhill fragrance that I've worn and not enjoyed. I bought it blind, and since it was Dunhill I thought it would be appealing to me. It has a weird and synthetically cloying smell, not unlike Burberry Touch and Kenzo colognes. A major disappointment.

I really wanted to like this perfume a lot. Judging just by its notes it sounded so apealling, but I could not find the "Eccentricity" of this perfume at all. It is so common, actually it reminds me of several other scents. The word for it is "mediocre", and that is being generous. On the other hand, it is not repulsive, it is actually pleasant and I could wear it anytime, specially if I want to go unnoticed because it will no call the attention of anybody. (Good "camouflage" scent???) LOL