Chanel No 5 Eau de Toilette

I understand the commenter right below me... I think, if I was comparing the excellent previous edition and this one, the previous one would feel like a more "real" N5 - the N5 we are used to, with its cool, sparkly, special-occasion vibe. However, looking at the vintage N5 eau de toilette, or rather its notes and the very rare reviews and descriptions, I can see that the new one is probably a more faithful iteration of the original formula. The fact that it is similar to Liu, which is a vintage fragrance issued as a "dupe" to N5 back in the day, confirms this. Purchase-worthy. In fact, I already have the big bottle, which is stunning by the way. To review the scent on its own, I feel the ylang-ylang is only there to enhance the beauty and richness of the hyperrealistic, intoxicating jasmine; I disagree with the votes showing that it's more prominent in the scent or the opinions that it's a sweeter scent than the previous editions. The aldehydes are inseparable from the rich sandalwood, creating, together, the illusion of genuine sandalwood powder or an expensive, artisanal sandalwood scented soap. The scent is warm, stopping short of being oriental-leaning. Sandalwood and jasmine are both very strong here. The animalic side is there but only barely, as in "a pampered body a few hours after the pampering". It's a love and a must-have if you are after the elusive original No5. Not a flanker, but the mothership, perhaps. I find it easy to wear and timeless, fitting present-day living with ease. Far from being modern but doesn't feel outdated, either. No special occasion is required. Just put it on, do whatever and go wherever - it'll be fine.

There is this tendency in the fragrance community to be purists, to be judging a fragrance based on perceived, often imaginary, culturally formed ideas on a legendary scent. For instance, N5 has changed throughout its history, and in the current century, the EDPs and EDTs we have had almost certainly do not reflect the original concept or formula. Even those of us who have the leftover vintage editions, can't form a solid judgement of the perfume as the scent is not fresh out from the production line and has, no doubt, by itself changed its chemical composition over the decades. We got used to the idea that N5 is something for dressing up, going out, being inapproachable, something that wears YOU unless you are more fabulous than the juice itself. One has to conform. Hence the tendency to look down on those that "don't get it" or aren't "elegant enough" to wear it. Yet, being dressed up and fabulous was not the original concept of N5. The original concept was to create a "woman's perfume with the scent of a woman". I think we lost the real N5 a long time ago and no one on this planet has a fresh bottle of N5 from 1921 with completely intact contents. And then comes a new edition - and it gets attacked for being... more true to itself? It contains the essence of pure, unadorned femininity. The recently known editions could not do any of that. They were something else. Something to wear, an add-on to elevate to a certain level, suggesting that, to start with, you are not enough. This edition is when you have nothing on and you can be yourself. THIS is the Essential No 5.

Why does fragrantica seem to think that just because a scent gets new packaging it’s been reformulated? They just did this with the new new Cristalle packaging and have people acting like the scent was altered even though it wasn’t. Then they change the note lists, leaving out some, and people start claiming that notes have “disappeared”

This new version of N5 edt is so good, more yellow flowers here and sweetness with a bit of creaminess, but doesn't loose the sparkle, longevity and projection for this edt is very good. This Olivier Polge is insane, what he touches is gold, the talent is after his brilliant father.

After having this for over a week, the main difference I noticed is the opening is softer brighter. The new version last longer( for me) it’s been over six hours and it’s still going strong.

I love this stuff! Elegant aldehydic perfume and perfect for any occasion!

The best chanel 5 . It lasts a lot.

I prefer it to EDP, but I’m still not entirely sold on it. It has a powdery scent, reminiscent of old-fashioned bar soap. It performs very well. 6/10

As a long time No 5 EDT owner, I am quite familiar with it. With that being said, despite the rep at the counter promising this 2026 release hasn’t been reformulated, I am detecting differences. The 2026 release is sweeter, warmer, and more balsamic. It honestly reads more like the EDP. The sparkle and liveliness is just not there. Still decidedly No 5, only the OG users will be able to tell a difference. IMHO, if I had to use one word to describe the difference, it would be “flat.”

I agree with Heirloom's critique below. I tried this perfume twice. Firstly, most of the fragrance's brilliance lies in the top notes during the first hour. It is not fresh, or like champagne, but more of a sickly sweet and warmer version. It reminds me of a sweet plastic "Barbie" Chanel version. It has been stripped down heavily and become a more generic close-to-the-skin scent without much projection at all. It has lost its wonderful, lush, rose-lasting aldehyde luxury edge. This version is lacklustre after an hour on me. This safe, trend-following formula does not impress me. The only thing I like is the clip-on cap on this bottle. The font and layout of the bottle look cheaper to me. I liked the older bottles better. The middle and base notes blend into a faded, blended mess. Due to Chanel's weakening of its best fragrances, I will never purchase a new bottle of Chanel again. I now search for vintage versions of these perfumes. This perfume only lasted 4 hours on my skin, while the vintage EDT lasted 7+ hours. It fades very quickly on me and tends to smell like a citrus, vanilla & floral fabric softener. On clothes it lasted 6 hrs. In comparison, my beautiful Chanel No 5 vintage EDT perfume (over 20 years old) lasts 12+ hours. This new version reminded me of the weakened, reformulated Chanel Premiere smell in the base. To me, it has a stale quality to it. This new perfume version, for me, is very overpriced. Perhaps they have to pay for the excessive marketing of Margot Robbie. I was told that this is the latest No 5 Chanel EDT version at the Chanel counter at Myer and David Jones. If you want a stronger version, I was told that I would have to buy the 35ml for $140, the 50ml for $210 or the 100ml EDP for $295. I was quoted ridiculous prices for the new EDT 75ml $277 or the 150 mls version, $382.00. You do not get an option to buy a 35 ml or 50 mls EDT bottle. You really need to try this perfume before you buy it. If you smelled the perfume in its previous editions, you may be disappointed. I cannot believe that they have destroyed this beautiful fragrance. Yes, for me, it is only a mere shadow of its former glory. I guess the 100ml EDP would be a better value for money. I hope they have not weakened that one as well.

Adding to my previous review, I tested the old and the new EDT side by side on skin to better understand the differences between the two formulations. Opening Old No.5 EDT - The opening is bright, effervescent, and sparkling. It feels cool and crisp, with aldehydes that come across as fizzy and vibrant. The neroli adds a distinct burst of freshness that gives the fragrance an uplifting, champagne like quality. New No.5 EDT - The opening is noticeably warmer and sweeter in comparison. The aldehydes feel subdued and have largely lost their effervescent sparkle, and the crisp freshness from the neroli is absent. Heart Old No.5 EDT - As it develops, the fragrance begins to warm up while remaining beautifully layered. There’s an interplay between floral, woody, animalic, and powdery nuances that creates depth and complexity. New No.5 EDT - In the heart, the fragrance begins to resemble more of a scented body product, something closer to a cream or body oil rather than a perfume. The new No.5 EDT starts resembling the EDP rather than the previous EDT version. Dry Down Old No.5 EDT - The dry down becomes soft, sultry, powdery, musky, Everything feels cohesive, rounded, and balanced. New No.5 EDT - The dry down is where the two are somewhat similar but the new version feels choppier and sweeter. There’s a noticeable woody note mixed with a lemony accord that disrupts the smoothness. Final Thoughts The new No. 5 EDT no longer smells as refined as the previous version, nor is it as balanced or well rounded. In stripping it down, the fragrance seems to have lost much of the flamboyant elegance that once defined it. Experiencing the change is like watching a starlet once radiant with life and extravagance quietly fade from center stage into the background. For someone who hasn’t spent much time wearing the previous EDT, the differences may not be obvious. However, when the two versions are worn side by side, the differences become much clearer. Anyone claiming there is no difference should try both at the same time and evaluate them again.

This was likely reformulated to get capsniffers to try No. 5. Gone is the initial blast of aldehydes which I imagine were off-putting to people used to sweet or fruity. I now get floral up front with the aldehydes lurking in the background. On the skin this quickly takes a turn and shifts to aldehyde overload - more like the 1980's EDP - big aldehydes that overpower all the middle notes. The former EDT's middle was a long-lasting warm, soft, peachy, milky sandalwood that was gently sparkling and bubbly. This is just strong aldehydes, sharp woods and other aggressive notes. After about 2-3 hours the aldehydes fade and the dry down has a similar sweet rosy jasmine as the original EDT, but it is short lived and it fades quickly. The original EDT smelled soft and rosy jasmine 12 hours later - this was gone in about 4 hours. More expensive and not as elegant. A sad downgrade.

I managed to test this on my skin today, and although I’ll continue wearing the sample to give it a fair chance, my first impression is deep disappointment. This new version feels incomplete, lacklustre and hollow. It has been stripped of its soul. Chanel No. 5 Eau de Toilette no longer feels grand or transportive. To my nose, the house has diluted what once made it so iconic. The cold, bright, sparkling opening I loved is gone. In its place is something warmer, sweeter, and softer but without the same opulent presence. The dry down is less powdery and instead settles into a somewhat lemony, woody accord that feels unfamiliar and disjointed. I’m genuinely devastated No. 5 EDT was one of my all time favourite scents and was the one who started my love and interest for fragrance.

The new Chanel No. 5 loses the cold, sparkling elegance that made the original feel iconic and untouchable. Instead of the sharp aldehydic sophistication and airy structure, it leans overly sweet and woody to the point of smelling like expensive cough syrup. It feels smoother and more commercially wearable, but in the process loses the mysterious, abstract Chanel DNA that gave No. 5 its soul. Somehow, it smells like sadness, like watching an old Hollywood icon trying too hard to seem modern.

I'm disappointed with this new version of No.5. The florals are way too overpowering; if you really love florals you may like this...but there is something off-balanced about this to me. It's like the floral elements got ramped up way more than the other notes and it feels astringent to me. Feels more like they tried to turn No.5 into a body spray for younger people. It's a pass for me

I really REALLY hope this is just a repackaging and not a reformulation. I loved the previous tall slender bottle and this “new” flanker design is quite brilliant if you look at the previous ones. And, yes, it is expensive. But if you’re into that “old-school” vibe or just love N°5, you should love this. My only concern again is that they don’t reformulate it and make it smell more “modern”. It’s just not N°5 without that golden-era roaring twenties classic vibe to it. The discontinuation of N°5 Parfum has broken me enough, this is the closest to the original that most people can get their hands on unless you can afford the Grand Extraits from Chanel. I am expecting to to smell the same and if it does, it will be a grand addition to my wardrobe. 🙏

No 5 is now more than a century old, and it has been reformulated lord knows how many times. So it's fun to read reviews stating that the scent 'no longer resembles itself', because we actually have no idea what the original 1921 release smelled like! We can only hope that these 21st-century versions are close to the original formula, although some ingredients had to be changed. Anyway, each new reformulation has its pros and cons, and here the most obvious 'con' is the price hike. It seems to me that the greedy folks at Chanel headquarters cooked up this 'reformulation' (actually, rebottling) just to have an excuse to sell it at a higher price. Other than that, it still smells like the good old Chanel No 5 that we know and love.

@kkalyani This is a lot of mental acrobatics to justify this new No. 5 smelling like they've used less precious materials at an increased cost to the buyer, with the heart more dissonant than previous iterations. A downgrade in formula. The argument you’re making conflates several different “objects” that belong to different conceptual categories (formula, historical artefact, cultural meaning, and aesthetic evaluation), treating them as if they were the same thing.

If their intention was to "olderize" it, to age it they have fully succeeded. It smells cheaper and more outdated than before. Instead of modernizing it, they’ve made it feel worn-out. Granny-aged. That the raw materials seem to come directly from the supermarket perfumes. Remember l'Aimant de Coty, Chant d'Arome and especially Liù de Guerlain A real scourge. I'm in mourning.

I did a side by side comp today can't smell any difference. Maybe the opening of the new has more sparkle? But my current bottle is several years old so it might have lost some freshness by now. I stocked up with one of the old 50ml bottles before they disappeared but I needn't have bothered. I certainly saved money though, the price difference being what it is.