St. John Eau de Parfum

many years of favorite for the entire family and friends..we looked for this like crazy when we couldn't find it..i used many bottles..then for a few years, I couldn't find any..then I found the same with a different packaging...the picture that shows the perfume here is the changed bottle..and I did find this one and bought two of them..the old look had a black box and the bottle was round but flat on both sides..exceptional perfume. update-I did find th original one I used many years ago..The black box and the logo is right in the center of the bottle. Very very few around now and are sold for crazy prices..Still worth it if you are a fan.

Its sweet yet OLD at the same time....I feel pretty but yet old church motherish when i wear it........But overall, a nice rich fragrance!

I'm on a marigold roll, so I decided to don St. John SIGNATURE today, which, like VAN CLEEF, has a marked marigold/tagetes note. It's such a wonderful flower in the few perfumes where it figures, my question is: why are there so few? ST JOHN SIGNATURE seems lighter and more modern than VAN CLEEF--a bit less intense. The overall feeling reminds me of something like Chanel CHANCE, although the notes are totally different. I wonder whether I'm being slightly influenced by the bottle design? Hmmm.... Anyway, this is a floriental which features marigold above all of the other flowers and also smells rather woody and spicy. It's not nearly as thick and perfumey as VAN CLEEF, but it has its own appeal. As ST JOHN heats up on the skin, the sillage expands considerably, and it smells beautiful. The opening is, once again, not entirely harmonious, and now I'm beginning to wonder whether this has something to do with marigold/tagetes, which might also explain why this note is so rarely featured in floral perfumes. Problematic openings, for obvious reasons, do not sell well at the counters! I recommend ST JOHN to perfumistas who like modern Chanel perfumes such as CHANCE, ALLURE, and COCO MADEMOISELLE. This creation seems perfectly suited to wearers of those fragrances, it seems to me, although it is true that the compositions are totally different. It's more the style, timbre, and attitude which strike me as the same.

Thanks to your reviews, I've made another successful unsniffed purchase! Very few floral fragrances seem to work well for me, but this one does. The marigold is a bitter note on me, which I enjoy very much. For a while, after the initial spray, the fragrance smells like a bitter-fruity concoction. I love that phase! Then it settles down into a creamy base that is so similar to Brit, as essija mentioned. I really like Brit, but I can't wear it because it stays so sharp on my chemistry. This fragrance has a dry-down like Brit, without the sharpness. It's delightful! Definitely a warm weather fragrance for me. The only downside to the fragrance is the bottle. While it's a nice design, it looks very cheap up close. The cap is a lightweight, clear plastic, and the charm and rhinestone band around the neck of the bottle are like a plastic-metal. The original price of a 1.7 oz. bottle was marked on the box as $70.00. For that price, I would have been horrified to discover the tacky bottle inside. Because of the actual fragrance, it turned out to be a very worthwhile purchase.

St. John is a very odd fragrance. Upon first sniff I thought that I liked it, came back to it and thought that it smelled a bit elderly and now I'm back to liking it. I envision wearing something like this when I'm a bit older. It begins with a citrusy type of floral notes, slowly dominated by the more floral heart notes. That apricot note gives it a little tartness that I loved. During the drydown the florals linger and the fragrance becomes softer and slightly musky. At once, it smells cloying but classic...fusty, yet feminine. I suppose that I love it more than I hate it, so I'm sticking to it. Excellent longevity and sillage. I rate it 7 out of 10.