Help me with my Asscher search!

[Jamieson22]

Hello!
So I have been leeching info from this site for the past few weeks as I have been casually looking for asscher cuts. I think it has finally come to the point where I could use some help.
My general search has been for F-G color, VVS2 - VS2 clarity, EX/VG cut and polish. This has generally meant stones in the 1.3-1.7 carat range for my budget of <$11k (~$10k would be ideal as it would leave room in case I want to go a bit nuts on the setting; total ring price of under $12k would be nice) for the stone. There is wiggle room in my criteria, so long as it nets me a stone that knocks her socks off (which isn''t exclusively based on carats).
So, as I said I have started getting more serious in my search and attached are the first two stones I have received info on. Any thoughts? Anything else out there that I should take a look at?
Thanks in advance for any help!
Jamie

 

[Jamieson22]

Report: GIA
Shape: Asscher
Carat : 1.33
Clarity : VS1
Color : G
Measurements : 6.11 x 6.05 x 4.18
Depth : 69.1
Table : 60%
Polish : Excellent
Symmetry : Excellent
Fluorescence : None

 

[Jamieson22]

Report: GIA
Shape: Asscher
Carat: 1.56
Color: H
Clarity: VVS1
Depth: 69.3
Table: 59
Girdle: STK-
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.48-6.45X4.47
Length/Width: 1.00

 

[JulieN]

wow, we haven''t seen too many SC diamonds on here for some time.

 

[Kaleigh]

Storm is the expert around here, but I like the 1.33 better. To me it''s crisp and beautiful. But will wait to see what he has to say.

 

[strmrdr]

I like em both yummy.

hmmmmmm the 1.33 slightly speaks to me just slightly more but the 1.56 is bigger.
tough choice.

 

[Gypsy]

The 1.33 is definately crisper... but I have 1.09 asscher at 5.87 x 5.86 (solid specs) and this one isn't that much bigger than mine. I have to say for the budget... I'd rather have the 1.56. I also generally feel that with asschers size is a huge consideration in terms of impact of the cut and the shape. Just my opinion though.

 

[decodelighted]

I think I agree with Gypsy ... the size difference in MM is pretty compelling. If the size was the same I might prefer the first ... but, honestly, good Asschers are hard to find overall & you LUCKED out with two pretty ones right off the bat!

 

[Gypsy]

Here a couple others I found just looking quickly:


http://www.dimendscaasi.com/diamonds/diamondDetail.asp?stockNum=194294&displayShape=Asscher

http://www.icestore.com/search/diamond_inventory_detail.asp?ID=9305


http://www.whiteflash.com/asscher/Asscher-cut-diamond-2362641.htm

http://www.whiteflash.com/asscher/Asscher-cut-diamond-2363076.htm

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/1034/ (negligible flourescence on this one, rest are none)


All of these offer settings, NICE settings, and I don't know, but maybe there is a little wiggle room on the prices posted if you get the setting with it.

 

[Jamieson22]

I saw 2 in person today, the one below and a 1.71 (I believe) that was a VS1/H. They didn''t face up too differently size wise. Anything to say about the one below (sorry have no pics)?

Report: GIA
Shape: Asscher
Carat: 1.40
Color: D
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 66.7
Table: 65
Girdle: STK-TK
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.51-6.40X4.27
Length/Width: 1.02

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 5/6/2006 12:25:51 AM
Author: Jamieson22
I saw 2 in person today, the one below and a 1.71 (I believe) that was a VS1/H. They didn''t face up too differently size wise. Anything to say about the one below (sorry have no pics)?

Report: GIA
Shape: Asscher
Carat: 1.40
Color: D
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 66.7
Table: 65
Girdle: STK-TK
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.51-6.40X4.27
Length/Width: 1.02

I am by no means the expert but will chime in until Strm does.

Best color to date. Depth is good. But the table is bigger than I prefer. Without pictures it''s hard to tell anything more really. But what matters most is what you thought when you saw it. Did you like it? How did it compare in yor opinion?

 

[Jamieson22]

Gypsy-
Thanks for the links. I believe the 1.33 you posted from WhiteFlash is the same one I posted pics of. Now compare that to the 1.56 from WhiteFlash you posted (which I believe may be a repeated stone in yoru links). Is the .23 carat increase worth the $3300 price jump? I don''t mean as far as price/value, but more so would a difference of that be noticeable on the hand (both are G/VS1/Ex/Ex)?
I did like the 1.4 stone, but the price I was quoted vs the price I saw on PriceScope when I got home was $1350, which is a BIG difference, especially since if I purchased it from the local jeweler I also have to pay 9% sales tax.
Thanks-
Jamie

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 5/6/2006 12:42:53 AM
Author: Jamieson22
Gypsy-
Thanks for the links. I believe the 1.33 you posted from WhiteFlash is the same one I posted pics of. Now compare that to the 1.56 from WhiteFlash you posted (which I believe may be a repeated stone in yoru links). Is the .23 carat increase worth the $3300 price jump? I don''t mean as far as price/value, but more so would a difference of that be noticeable on the hand (both are G/VS1/Ex/Ex)?
I did like the 1.4 stone, but the price I was quoted vs the price I saw on PriceScope when I got home was $1350, which is a BIG difference, especially since if I purchased it from the local jeweler I also have to pay 9% sales tax.
Thanks-
Jamie

Hmm. Yeah, that''s a huge price difference.

Here''s my question back... what is her jewelry style? In terms of types of settings?

If you are talking about someone who likes things very simple and clean... so a nice platinum solitare or tension setting would suit her best-- then I''d say the price difference might be worth it in terms of the MM size of the stone. BUT... if she''s into pave, halos, three stones, eternity styles, etc... then, no.... the money you save could make for a stunning setting with would definitely compensate for the lost MM.


It''s hard for me to advise when I don''t know what as a complete package would make the greatest impact on her.

 

[Gypsy]

I'm off to bed. But here are a couple of settings that I've thrown about:

http://www.thefacetscollection.com/item.cfm?item_id=2366

http://www.dimendscaasi.com/images/products/large/1EA1/1EA1_large_1.jpg

http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=99&sessionid=6e940683e4f6397bca7fcf8a21614aa3

http://www.lockesdiamonds.com/assets/ring1.jpg

http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/prodshots/06TT18.jpg

If none of these general styles suit her... and something simpler this does instead... then go for the larger diamond *shrugs*... it's not the difference is carat weight... the the MM that make me say that... the 1.56 diamond is going to make a ton more impact in a simple, clean, elegant platinum setting than the smaller diamond is. I know... I have a simple solitare now. If my diamond were bigger... I'd be thrilled with it. But in my x prong it gets lost especially since mine doesn't have large corners and the stone just looks square with the prongs obscuring them... unless you look closely.

 

[Jamieson22]

My only hesitation on the 1.56 is the fact that it is VVS1 and H. Seems like on my "trying to find a good balance" I am above what I feel I like/need in clarity and below on color. I DID notice the H color on the one I saw today but to my eyes I didn''t see anything wrong with the VS1 I looked at. Just want to make sure the money is put in the right places, if you know what I mean.
As for settings, it will definately be a platinum solitare, and she likes plain "tiffany style" just as much as pave/side diamonds (and by that I mean small ones in the band not 3 stone or anything). So as far as that goes things are pretty flexible.
What I do plan to do is look into some more stones and see what turns up. What I have seen so far is beautiful, but each one misses the mark just a bit on what I am after (size on one, color on the other).
Jamie

 

[JulieN]

sometimes it takes awhile to find THE stone. how long do you have?

 

[Jamieson22]

I have the time to make sure I find THE stone, but I sure am getting antsy!
Jamie

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 5/6/2006 9:17:58 AM
Author: Jamieson22
I have the time to make sure I find THE stone, but I sure am getting antsy!
Jamie

Oh... If you''re not under the gun, then definitely take your time. I''m color sensative myself and anything below G''s bother me (some G''s bother me too). If I were you I''d call a couple of places and tell them what you want. Personally my diamond is a VS1 F. We got my diamond at www.Minstersjewelers.com Will is a diamond broker in DE (no sales tax... even over the net sometimes there is sales tax, but not in DE). He''s really patient and good at finding just the right stone. But unfortunately I don''t think he has the ability to show you the diamonds over the net-- my fiance went in to actually pick the diamond from the 6 he had goten in for us after we conducted the search over the phone. Honestly, selection wise, WF and Dimend Scaasi have impressed me. Just call them up and see if they can locate 3 diamonds for you. Give them exact specs. And keep the color G and above and tell that for your budget you think something in the VS range would be best. Both have lovely setting options and both do custom settings. Keep us updated! And good luck.

 

[Gypsy]

Just went to Diamond Brokers of Florida... They have Royal Asschers!!! Oh YUM! Just as a future piece of advice BTW... makes sure you look at the MM measurements, not just the carats.

.

Lab Shape Carat Color Clarity Measurements Depth Table Culet Polish Symmetry Cash Price

GIA AS 1.13 F VS2 5.82-5.81 Royal Asscher 68.00 55 S EXCELLENT VERYGOOD 8967 9150
GIA s AS 1.27 E VS2 6.01-5.93-4.09 69.00 61 N EXCELLENT EXCELLENT 8967 9150


Site doesn't give you enough info though. No mention of flourescence.

That Dimend Scaasi one I posted last night is nice though. G, VSI with a feather off to the side and nice numbers. Personally would like to see the Sarin report for this one. I think it does a great job of giving you that balance you mentioned. I'd call Isaac or email him and see if... with a simple platinum setting you can get it for 12K. Wiggle room. There might be some.

http://www.dimendscaasi.com/diamonds/diamondDetail.asp?stockNum=194294&displayShape=Asscher

 

[Jamieson22]

So, I slept on it a bit and came to a realization that if my eye is constantly drawn back to that 1.33, shouldn''t that be enough? Just seems so "alive" inside, with such clear and distinct steps. I would just hate to give that up for something that is simply a few fractions of a mm larger... Just afraid I am geting too caught up in the numbers, rather than the most important things: how it looks to me/her and what it represents.
Is there anything in the 1.33 that I am missing that could be improved or is it right on target?
Jamie

 

[Kaleigh]

I love the 1.33 myself. Nothing wrong with it as far as I can see. Go for it!!! I know it''s a hard decision. I sweated over picking mine. But this one reminds me of mine and that''s why I like it so much. How are you going to have it set??

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/6/2006 1:39:00 PM
Author: Jamieson22
So, I slept on it a bit and came to a realization that if my eye is constantly drawn back to that 1.33, shouldn''t that be enough? Just seems so ''alive'' inside, with such clear and distinct steps. I would just hate to give that up for something that is simply a few fractions of a mm larger... Just afraid I am geting too caught up in the numbers, rather than the most important things: how it looks to me/her and what it represents.

Is there anything in the 1.33 that I am missing that could be improved or is it right on target?

Jamie

follow your heart and make it yours.
its as good as they get.

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 5/6/2006 1:39:00 PM
Author: Jamieson22
So, I slept on it a bit and came to a realization that if my eye is constantly drawn back to that 1.33, shouldn''t that be enough? Just seems so ''alive'' inside, with such clear and distinct steps. I would just hate to give that up for something that is simply a few fractions of a mm larger... Just afraid I am geting too caught up in the numbers, rather than the most important things: how it looks to me/her and what it represents.
Is there anything in the 1.33 that I am missing that could be improved or is it right on target?
Jamie

I think it''s a lovely diamond-- so crisp. Congrats!!! Now... which setting are you going to choose?

 

[Jamieson22]

So I did go with the 1.33, it met everything I was after and didn''t want to let it get away.
Now I am working with Barry/Judah at Exceldiamonds on a setting. I am pretty sure I will be going with something with side diamonds and a claw prong (simple lines) but not 100% sure of what I want so I need to do some searching. I want the diamonds just on the top part of the band, not going all the way around. Also don''t want the ring to be too wide, so I think in the 2.5-2.7mm range (is that fairly narrow?). Such a hard decision....
Jamie

 

[Kaleigh]

Congrats and your idea for the setting sounds fabulous!!!

 

[indecisive]

My asscher e-ring band is 2.7mm wide and I spent a whole lot of time thinking it would be thick but it isn''t at all! I think it will be great! Congrats on a gorgeous asscher!

 

[JulieN]

Date: 5/7/2006 1:04:12 PM
Author: Jamieson22
So I did go with the 1.33, it met everything I was after and didn''t want to let it get away.
Now I am working with Barry/Judah at Exceldiamonds on a setting. I am pretty sure I will be going with something with side diamonds and a claw prong (simple lines) but not 100% sure of what I want so I need to do some searching. I want the diamonds just on the top part of the band, not going all the way around. Also don''t want the ring to be too wide, so I think in the 2.5-2.7mm range (is that fairly narrow?). Such a hard decision....
Jamie

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 5/7/2006 4:37:57 PM
Author: JulieN

Date: 5/7/2006 1:04:12 PM
Author: Jamieson22
So I did go with the 1.33, it met everything I was after and didn''t want to let it get away.
Now I am working with Barry/Judah at Exceldiamonds on a setting. I am pretty sure I will be going with something with side diamonds and a claw prong (simple lines) but not 100% sure of what I want so I need to do some searching. I want the diamonds just on the top part of the band, not going all the way around. Also don''t want the ring to be too wide, so I think in the 2.5-2.7mm range (is that fairly narrow?). Such a hard decision....
Jamie

Stunning.

 

[Jamieson22]

JulieN, we must have similar taste as that is the setting picture I sent to Excel to get a quote. He said .03-.05 side diamonds and probably 5 on each side in platinum. It would be for a Size 5 ring and I want to make sure it stays narrow. Said a quote would be ready in a few days.
Anyone have even a decent guess a to what that setting should cost?
Jamie

 

[JulieN]

that particular ring in the picture is available for 1200, plat., 2.7 mm band

I fear the quote you get from SC is going to be much higher. While their Tiffany setting is beautiful and not many people do it better... 1200?? Robbery, IMO.