No. 10

5 reseñas

Mostrando las más recientes primero.

• Cata-Rica

  October 12, 2020

  

  This time it’s the review of Sukimuki 10. Just by the ingredients, one inevitably thinks of one thing: Aventus… and nothing closer to reality. The opening features bergamot and grapefruit, slightly chemical, and reminiscent of CDNIM. As time passes, the ‘pineapple’ note emerges, which shows some quality, much better than in other clones. Is it an Aventus clone? The truth is no; rather, it has a resemblance to Nishane’s Hacivat. It’s accompanied by unlisted jasmine and cedar, obviously synthetic, and at the base, patchouli, giving it an ‘earthy’ effect. It’s a perfectly unisex perfume. It has no smoky notes. The projection starts moderate-to-intense but quickly fades, staying less than an hour close to the skin, and the longevity hovers around 3-4 hours, so on my skin, I rate it as poor. As a fan of this style, I think it’s a poor perfume for what it offers; I recommend trying it, but not buying it. Its resemblance is more to Hacivat, but it’s not even remotely similar and is far inferior in performance and quality to the Turkish fragrance.

• byrgertidesson

  October 16, 2020

  

  After a break due to a cold, I’m back with Sukimuki, this time the No. 10. Honestly, I think Aventus is ‘plain and simple’—a very good perfume without more. I understand that ten years ago it was a milestone, but today, with those ten years, the 100,000 clones, and the reformulations, it has lost novelty and prestige. Why does Sukimuki 10 exist? Easy: it’s the 100,001st attempt to resemble Aventus. Resembling Hacivat? No, it leans more towards CDNI but without the unpleasant opening note, making it more linear (and usable if you come from ‘freshie’ scents). As an inspiration, it’s very good, but honestly, due to the price, I’d go for CDNI because it has more presence and phases. If you want something more sophisticated in this line, buy Hacivat; if you have extra money and want to smell like the muse behind all these derivatives, buy the original Aventus. (9/10 for the price and for a certain audience not used to it, 6.5/10 for those who have already smelled something from this DNA).

• Diazepam911

  June 8, 2021

  

  I just tried this perfume from a Discovery Set. In the general market, there are at least three options for this scent: Club de Nuit Intense as an Aventus clone, Perfumes Europeos, Mont Blanc Explorer, and Zara Vibrant Leather, from lowest to highest quality. What is the goal of this new option? Honestly, I don’t know. On YouTube, a certain reviewer (who clearly got paid, as they offered discount codes) claimed it resembles Nishane’s Hacivat—please! While Hacivat is just another Aventus clone with better performance, it’s essentially a cheaper alternative that is still pricey. Speaking of Sukimuki 10, I don’t recommend it or would buy it, especially given the price, which ranges from 900 to 1200 Mexican pesos, almost the same as Club de Nuit Intense, 300 pesos more than Vibrant Leather, and nearly 700 pesos more than its Perfumes Europeos counterpart. A good attempt, but for me, it’s a ‘meh’.

• Davik81

  July 2, 2021

  

  I don’t detect that sharp, smoky note that sometimes goes too far when trying to emulate the Aventus DNA and gives me nausea. Aside from that, it does resemble Hacivat more due to its floral side. Although I’m tired of giving this Mexican house the benefit of the doubt this time, the #10 should be more balanced. If you already own other perfumes with this DNA, buying this fragrance would be totally redundant. 6/10.

• JoseVG

  February 11, 2023

  

  I was curious enough to buy fragrances from this brand, but I felt scammed. They claim a 30% concentration, yet the longevity is non-existent—it barely lasts two hours, not even on clothes. It’s a shame because right after application, the projection is good and the ingredients seem high quality. No. 10 isn’t Aventus or Hacivat, but it has a slight resemblance due to the pineapple note. Even though the price is lower compared to previous ones, I don’t recommend it; it’s a pity that you can tell they paid many reviewers to promote these.