Asscher confession

[Gypsy]

I have a confession to make that will sound blasphemous to many of you.

I had a choice of whatever cut I wanted in a diamond. I spent months researchings diamond and the four C's and beyond. I talked to dozens of jewelers... and I narrowed it down to a princess or an asscher. I liked the fire of the princess, but the shape of the asscher.

So I left the final choice between the two to my fiance, for him to surprise me.

And I got my lovely asscher. What I didn't know was that a BEZEL setting an asscher is a no-no... and I never noticed that all of the settings I loved were halos with BEZEL set center stones.

And what I didn't discover till after my fiance gave me the ring was the Radiant cut. I have no idea how I overlooked this cut. But I did... until a friend got one in her e-ring and you could have knocked me over with a feather when I saw it.

And I've been drooling over Radiants ever since. If I could go back... I'd definately pick a radiant over the asscher. If I didn't think it would break my fiance's heart, and show me up for an ungrateful *)&@* I'd call the diamond broker we got the ring from, tell him to put this stone on consignment, and get me a radiant.

*Hangs Head in Shame*

 

[diamondfan]

Why is it a nono to set them that way? Maybe if you set it without that, you would love it...frankly, I think an asscher is more elegant and unique than a radiant!

 

[Gypsy]

i was told, repeatedly (I keep asking ... the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results), that because it''s a step cut, the way it reflects and draws light would be compromised if it was pave set. It cuts down on the light return and makes the stone look significantly duller, like it''s a poorer cut than it is. Apparently, it''s not as huge a problem if you have a larger stone... but as mine is a little over a carat... it''s a problem.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 8/12/2005 1:47:07 AM
Author: Gypsy
i was told, repeatedly ..., that because it''s a step cut, the way it reflects and draws light would be compromised if it was pave set.

Get to see a couple - this sounds wrong to me. Btw, it can always be prong set above the pave frame, like THIS:

 

[strmrdr]

Sounds wrong to me too iv seen a bunch of asschers under a ct with pave halo''s and bezels and they rock.

Id take the asscher over a radiant anyday but to each there own :}

 

[Kaleigh]

That doesn''t sound right to me either.

 

[laney]

Who told you about pave and asschers? That''s just silly.

Have you personally looked at quality asschers in these types of settings and come to the same conclusion? If not - don''t let others opinion of what they like / don''t like sway you.

As far as changing the stone all together. That''s a more personal touchy subject. Can you read your fiances'' reaction when you talk about other stones? Is HE set and sentimental about your stone - or is it just you?

I thought I got what I got - and that would be it. He saw me on Pscope one day and said "ok... how long do I have until you want an upgrade... 1 year.. 5 years?" I thought he was kidding - but he wasn''t. Turns out - he wasn''t to sentimental about the stone - he just wanted me to be happy. Although I did get an upgrade (for a different reason) - we did discuss it.

Some guys are VERY sentimental about the stone that they searched for - and put down $$ for. Some guys are focused on makeing sure their girl is happy. That is NOT mutually exclusive - guys can be both - or either or


If not having an asscher in pave -- leads you to really prefer a different stone.. then I''d proceed with caution.. start gently .. "I have a friend who did this..." -- see what his reaction is. If he''d be crushed by the thought - leave it alone. Your ring was given to you out of love. If he seems amicable.. go slow.

 

[MaryAlaina]

Date: 8/12/2005 1:24:26 AM
Author: What I didn''t know was that pave setting an asscher is a no-no

I don''t understand this. A no no to who? If you as the consumer want a stone set in a certain type of setting, unless it physically is impossible, I don''t know why anyone would say that to you.

I have an asscher, set in a pave setting (though not with a halo). I get compliments on it all the time. I hardly think the pave takes away from the stone. This was the setting I wanted, and I can understand your frustration that you were not listened to. Is there any way you could reset your stone into the setting you really want (go to a different jeweler, ask online jewelers?)?

BTW, here''s mine, for reference sake:

 

[decodelighted]

It sounds like you need to switch the setting or switch the stone... though a talented craftsman might be able to work with what you have to raise the level of the Asscher so it will perform like you''d originally wanted.

On Radiants: ... to each his own ... I have a personal loathing for the radiant cut because to me it looks like a glass box with plastic wrap all crunched up in it. Especially in yellow diamonds, all easter basket wrapping paper crammed up in a wad.

 

[dani13]

Hi Gypsy,

I am sorry you feel this way. I happen to love asschers and love pave, but I can kind of appreciate what you are talking about. I was in Tiffany''s on 5th ave in NYC a few months ago looking at emerald cuts and asschers, and I said to the sales woman, "what about a pave setting/halo/etc.?" And, she looked at me and told me that emeralds and asschers are step cuts, and have clean, simple lines- that is the beauty of them, and when you put them with pave it takes these lovely characteristics that many people appreciate away. And, honestly, I could kind of see what see was saying.

To each is own- I love the simplicity of a well cut emerald- but IMO, I dont really like it with pave. An asscher may be a little different, because I do like the new rings- lovey''s, dazedland''s etc., that have asschers with pave. But, in the end I can see your point- does that make sense?

I love radiants too- they have a beautiful cracked ice mesemerizing effect- can you sit down with your fiance and talk about it? You should not hold on to something that cost so much $$$ if you really dont like it. You are doing yourself and your man an injustice. Hopefully the place you bought it from has a return policy( if you bought it recently) or a trade-up policy...Good luck, and let us know what you decide!

 

[windowshopper]

its absurd to say you cant but i have to agree that pave directly around the asscher is not optimal...................band and prongs fine but i do think it kills the stone.

 

[MissAva]

How will he feel about changing the stone?
If you want pave get pave. I think it sound more like you need to switch jewlers then stones. THe bottom line IMO is that you are the one wearing it. If you want it in pave the go for it, if you are looking for a reason to switch stones tell your SO. Other wise you might end up with a pave setting and still be unhappy.

 

[blueroses]

Oh-ho-ho....pave set with an asscher a NONO???!!! wha-wha-WHAT!!?? Tell that to my buddies Daniel K, Leon Mege, and Mr. Ritani!!

Seriously, I practically need to be institutionalized b/c of my obsession with pave-set asschers. There's something about the cool reflective step-cut combined w/ the sparkle of the pave that I LOVE....way more than baguette-set asschers. Here are a couple of collages I've made as required by my sponsor in my AA (asschers anonymous) 12 step-(CUT) program.

(Photos in the collage include Daniel K, icestore, DCD and others, but also the lovely rings of PSers Mommy2nk and of course, LOVEY!)

 

[blueroses]

And one more:

This one has a lot of Ritani, some antique asschers from a site which escapes me, and PSers Hest88''s sister''s ring (the platinum halo w/o pave, but I love it!!), Jessesgrl, and lovemybigassch!!

 

[blueroses]

Oops. One more try:

 

[Gypsy]

Thank you all for your advice. I have a feeling that my fiance is the sentimental type about this stone. I have mentioned that I may-- eventually and if the money gods are kind, MAYBE want a three stone... with my curent stone as a side stone and an asscher cut larger stone (not necessarily a diamond) as the center... and he was okay with that... after I told him it would be a past (this stone), present (the center) and future thing.... but not before I explained that. He does want me to be happy, but he''s rather tied to this stone... be doesn''t care what I do with it in terms of setting... but he fell in love with this stone when he saw it, broke his budget because he wanted me to have it, and... well.. you get the picture.

I think I''m probably going to go the prong set over the halo route, but I don''t like it because my stone isn''t really ''stop sign'' octagonal... it''s a square with the corners just clipped, a little... so I''m not sure they could do a prong setting that would emphasis the octagonal... the way it''s set now, the prongs just make it look perfectly square... which annoys the crap out of me.

This is the setting I''m leaning toward, Although I saw this Tacori and was really impressed by it.


Okay I have no idea if I managed to post these pictures correctly... hold on. LOL>

 

[Gypsy]

Just the baguette halo... not the band or the baguettes on the side... and with the stone prong set... AND with the whole face/ head made in such a way that my wedding band would slide under it... and sit flush with it...

This is the tacori... also a pave... I tried it on today. It was quite nicer in person than in these pics... which have been cropped to death... the band is a plain platinum one.

 

[Gypsy]

Blah.. blah.. blah ...

MaryAlaina, your ring is lovely... but how is that pave set? Half-pave? I mean the sides of the stone are open (like mine... although much nicer).... I''m obviously missing something... so excuse the ignorance.

 

[decodelighted]

Hey Gypsy,
I''m no jewelry expert, but I think what you''re referring to that you don''t like is called "Bezel-setting" with pave surrounding the stones. I''ve always heard "pave" just referred to as tiny stones. Bezel, if I''m right is when the stone is set by surrounding the girdle and sinking the stone so that only the crown shows? Sometimes surrounding it entirely with metal? Anyone else want to weigh in on this terminology primer? When a stone is surrounded with pave, but is set up above it with more than the girdle exposed, using prongs, (like Lovey''s) -- that''s prong set. Also - using claw prongs instead of ball style prongs would complement your stones octagonal shape, rather than squaring it off (I''m choosing to square my future Asscher off - even though I didn''t like the look in photos, in person, it made the stone look bigger!)
Hope I''m not talking out of my bum ...

 

[decodelighted]

p.s. -- if you like the baquette-face halo from Daniel K ... also check out this one from Leon Mage

 

[windowshopper]

Date: 8/15/2005 3:24:56 AM
Author: Gypsy
Thank you all for your advice. I have a feeling that my fiance is the sentimental type about this stone. I have mentioned that I may-- eventually and if the money gods are kind, MAYBE want a three stone... with my curent stone as a side stone and an asscher cut larger stone (not necessarily a diamond) as the center... and he was okay with that... after I told him it would be a past (this stone), present (the center) and future thing.... but not before I explained that. He does want me to be happy, but he''s rather tied to this stone... be doesn''t care what I do with it in terms of setting... but he fell in love with this stone when he saw it, broke his budget because he wanted me to have it, and... well.. you get the picture.

I think I''m probably going to go the prong set over the halo route, but I don''t like it because my stone isn''t really ''stop sign'' octagonal... it''s a square with the corners just clipped, a little... so I''m not sure they could do a prong setting that would emphasis the octagonal... the way it''s set now, the prongs just make it look perfectly square... which annoys the crap out of me.

This is the setting I''m leaning toward, Although I saw this Tacori and was really impressed by it.


Okay I have no idea if I managed to post these pictures correctly... hold on. LOL>

i would like to see your ring...................it would be helpful to visualize

 

[MissAva]

Date: 8/15/2005 3:49:52 AM
Author: Gypsy
Blah.. blah.. blah ...

MaryAlaina, your ring is lovely... but how is that pave set? Half-pave? I mean the sides of the stone are open (like mine... although much nicer).... I''m obviously missing something... so excuse the ignorance.

I think she posted that becuase her shank has pave, but the prongs do not and it is not a halo you are correct.

 

[Gypsy]

ARGH! You''re absolutely right. BEZEL set, is what I like (I''m such a goof), well, with a halo. Bezel set is what I was told I couldn''t do. That ought to treach me not to post late at night.

As for my ring, it''s a 1.09 carat asscher (very square one, not a very stop-signish one) in a Lucida type setting. No bells, no whistles.

Thanks all.

 

[MissAva]

I dont see why you could not do a bezel setting...I think that would look lovely.

 

[Mara]

Put that sucker into whatever makes you happy! Screw people who tell you that you can't do something or it's a no-no when it comes to your own jewelry!

I love love love the pave halo settings, they are sooo beautiful. Not for my hand as I recently found out but they look great on everyone else.

I like radiants, but oh my gosh to trade in a mile-deep drooly asscher for a radiant? Sacrilege!!

Have fun with your ring.

 

[mrssalvo]

well, most of the rings in the collage Blueroses posted are bezel set with pave halos, so who ever said you couldn''t hasn''t seen some of the popular rings in 2005

Sounds like you have a gorgeous stone. Find a setting you like and go for it

 

[Joane]

Date: 8/15/2005 9:34:08 AM
Author: windowshopper

i would like to see your ring...................it would be helpful to visualize

Yes, a picture would be helpful.

 

[MrsFrk]

You must stop listening to the mythic "they".
"They" say that the wedding band goes on the bottom, don''t mix cuts, no sets on the right hand, yadda-yadda-yadda.
Do whatever makes YOU happy, it''s your ring.

I have a lovely Asscher that I wouldn''t trade for the world. Radiants don''t do it for me.

 

[Gypsy]

Okay... I''m gonna do it. Bezel set my asscher. LOL. You''ve all been very convincing... THANK YOU.

As for taking a picture of my ring... I cannot for the life of me get one to come out clear. At ALL. A well. I''m just not very photographic, I guess.

 

[upgrading mama]

wow that''s a beautiful ring