Venus in Blue Jeans: New York Oud

The new Bond No. 9 offering, New York Oud, is an extremely wearable take on oud, and would easily appeal to someone who would never wear the overtly sensual Al Oudh, or other dense, cumin-y, or medicinal ouds. It’s in a similar vein as the JHAG oud offering, Midnight Oud, yet is both brighter and smoother than that wanna-be courtesan.

It garnered instant approval from my discriminating hubby, and that’s because this is isn’t like the other ouds in our house: the L’Artisan from last year, the Le Labo, the Montales, or the Al-Rehab’s. This is a fruity-oud. The sweet, plummy note is delightful; it doesn’t make me think of New York, because I always think of that city as dark, cold, maybe even metallic, while NY Oud smells like fun. It’s transparent, impossible to over-apply, with a definite feminine cast. NY Oud is to a Montale Oud (pick any you like) as Eau Premiere is to No. 5. Lighter, fresher, with a uplifting and distinctly modern quality. If your man wears the femme Chanel’s, he’ll have no problem with this one; it will be a shared fragrance in our house.

Price-wise NY Oud is in the same range as the Amouage line. While I can see myself setting up a shrine around an Amouage bottle, not so with the Bond. This extravagantly priced, beautifully laser-etched bottle would comfortably find a home at the bottom of the over-sized medic bag I use as a purse. She’s a true Venus in blue jeans.

If you’ve been hunting for an everyday oud scent, you can’t go wrong with this one.

$310 for 100mL, available Valentine’s Day at Saks, and Bond No. 9 stores.
A sample of NY Oud was provided to me by the nice PR people at Bond No. 9.

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Venus in Blue Jeans: New York Oud

  1. Wow, this is expensive!
    For once – despite your lovely review – I am really not tempted, because I don’t like oud and I don’t like fruity. Ha, easily dodged this one 😉

    1. Oh yes ouch! What a price. And do the Bonds only come in big bottles?

      At my distance I often wonder about the type of customer that Bond is after. Has Bond identified a niche for itself among people with plenty of money to throw around, who might not otherwise buy perfume at all because they are not attracted to the old world, European aesthetic of high French perfumery? I mean, if you have that much money to burn and the Chanels and Guerlains remind you of your grandmother, if Uncle Serge seems to weird, and the small niche French houses too Gallic, what is there left? Maybe the Bonds attract people who want to re-invent themselves, who are suspicious of tradition? Oh well, just thinking aloud.

      1. Anne-Marie,

        Thinking out loud is fun!

        I think of Bond No. 9 in the same way I think about an Hermés handbag. Simple, beautiful but never edgy, made with the finest materials by top artisans. Someone who knows nothing about bags would probably still recognize the quality of an Hermés bag, and even be able to tell it apart from a knockoff.
        The Bond No. 9 aesthetic strikes me in much the same way. You can tell that it’s really good stuff, but, as with my handbags, I want more ZAZZ!

    2. You are so funny B., yes, it’s very pretty, but yes, it’s also quite pricey!

      The only Bond No. 9 scent that I’ve owned (swapped it away) was from a bottle split—which is pretty much the only way I can afford them. 🙂

    1. Well, Matt smells really good in feminine leaning scents, especially those with a synthetic edge, while you seem to smell good in dirtier, more natural smelling ones.

      I think that this is one of those rare fragrances that *anyone* would smell good in—a testament to the quality of the juice. However, I don’t think “universally appealing” is really your cuppa. Am I right?
      😉

      1. i certainly prefer complicated and unique over universally appealing. it really just depends on how my dirty, more naturally smelling skin transforms the smell.

Comments are closed.