Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Asscher Help: Calling Strmrdr and others

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
A

antiqueasscher

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
66
I have been reading the forum for a while now, trying to inform myself before making the big engagement ring purchase. I'm in the market for a 1.25-1.48ct Asscher (not Royal). I've heard good things about GOG and Whiteflash and have contacted both of them in my search for a good diamond. I know that pictures are a must, but first diamonds must be weeded out based on their numbers.

Here are the diamonds/numbers that Bob at Whiteflash sent to me. I plan on posting information on any other diamonds that I get from others as well.

Please help me in my search as I've seen the good work this board and strmrdr can do. I want a "kickin" diamond.


#1. Asscher 1.21 G VS1 GIA TK N EX EX N 68.2 60 5.95x5.88x4.01 $7237/$7020ps wire
Ratio 1.01:1
- My Comment: Is a straight 'thick' ok? This on the small side for what I was looking for.

#2. Asscher 1.27 F VS1 GIA TK N EX VG N 68.8 64 5.97x5.96x4.10 $8151/$7810
Ratio 1:1
- My Comment: Good dimensions. I'd be ok with a G or H and may be paying more for the F. 'Thick'? 64 Table seems too high as well.

#3. Asscher 1.22 F VS1 GIA STK-TK N EX VG N 68.2 60 5.92x5.91x4.03 $7830/$7596
Ratio 1:1
- My Comment:

#4. Asscher 1.24 F VVS2 GIA TH-VTK N EX EX N 68.6 61 6.07x5.93x4.07 $8935/$8665
Ratio 1.02:1
- My Comment: Don't like the dimensions as much here. Thick to Very Thick doesn't work does it?

#5. Asscher 1.38 G VVS2 GIA VTH N EX EX F 68.5 60 6.16x6.15x4.21 $9966/$9668
Ratio 1:1
- My Comment: slightly out of my price range.

I can't wait for the responses and any help that people are willing to offer. Thanks in advance.
2.gif
 
1 and 3
 
Thank you for your response storm. I have a few questions still:

- Is a 'thick' girdle acceptable?
- Is it worth waiting to look at stones with a G or H color in order to get more diamond for my money? From my understanding G and H will still be colorless to the naked eye.
- How much of a difference do you (naked eye) truly notice size wise between a 1.25ct and a 1.35 or a 1.4? I ask because I wonder if it's truly worth trying to avoid E,F and VVS1 and VVS2 solely to increase size or if the increase in size is so nominal I should just find a good diamond in that ct range? (I hope this all made sense?
19.gif
)

Thank you for your help.
 
thick is the most common girdle for asschers.

only you can decide the color issue, H-vs2 is the bang for the buck area but well cut ones are very hard to find, one of the top cutters reserves them for their brand cutting supply.

generally a 15%-20% increase in mm area is visible but a smaller well cut stone is much better looking than a larger woofer.

I bought my diamond from GOG and personality id set them hunting and take it from there.
 
How long does it usually take GOG to reply? I emailed them yesterday morning and haven''t heard anything yet. Most places respond with a ''thanks we''ll help you, etc.'' Should I try contacting them again or is this normal?
33.gif
 
almost always within 24 hours, Try sending again.
email isn''t always 100% reliable.
 
Alright here are some some specs on diamonds that were emailed to me. Feel free to voice your opinion on what diamonds are worth seeking pictures of based on the numbers.

#1
1.24ct
F
VVS2
6.07 x 5.93 x 4.07
Depth: 68.6%
Table: 61%
Pol: Ex
Sym: Ex
Fl: None
My Comments: Looks good, but there are many Gs in the bunch that may be a better value?

#2
1.22ct
F
VS1
5.92 x 5.91 x 4.03
Depth: 68.2%
Table: 60%
Pol: Ex
Sym: VG
Fl: None
My Comments: Numbers look good, once again an F though

#3
1.38ct
G
VVS2
6.16 x 6.15 x 4.21
Depth: 68.5%
Table: 60%
Pol: Ex
Sym: Ex
Fl: Faint
My Comment: looks to be good, price may be on my high side, we'll have to see


#4
1.42ct
G
VS1
6.43 x 6.3 x 4.04
Depth: 64.1%
Table: 60%
Pol: Good
Sym: Good
Fl: None
My Comment: G and VS1 = good value, 1.42 may put out of my price range though. 64% Depth may be too low.

#5
1.26ct
G
VS1
6.02 x 5.98 x 4.09
Depth: 68.4%
Table: 60%
Pol: Ex
Sym: Ex
Fl: None
My Comment: G and VS1 = good value, good numbers, I'm liking this stone.


#6
1.26ct
G
VS1
6.09 x 6.04 x 4.07
Depth: 67.4%
Table: 59%
Pol: Ex
Sym: VG
Fl: None
My Comment: same as above, except symmetry is only VG.

#7
1.28ct
G
VS2
6.49 x 6.24 x 3.84
Depth: 61.5%
Table: 66%
Pol: VG
Sym: VG
Fl: None
My Comments: Bad depth x table %s


I posted my initial thoughts, based on what I've seen to look for. I'd love to hear what others have to say and from there I plan on requesting some pics and posting those for further input and enjoyment of those who care. Thanks again all.



9.gif
 
2, 3, 5, 6
 
I think id start with 5 and 6.

numbers look good and as noted may be a better value for the money.

#2 out of the F's looks interesting.

#3 larger and vvs2 == more $$$ otherwise looks worthy by what little the numbers tell.
 
Here is another diamond, let me know what you think.
1.25ct
VS1
G
Depth: 68.8
Table: 61
STK
Polish: G
Symmetry: G
Flour: N
6.11x5.84x4.02

My Comments: besides for only Good polish and symmetry, everything looks ok to me.

Feel free to voice your opinions. Thanks
 
Date: 3/27/2007 12:05:12 AM
Author: antiqueasscher
Here is another diamond, let me know what you think.

1.25ct

VS1

G

Depth: 68.8

Table: 61

STK

Polish: G

Symmetry: G

Flour: N

6.11x5.84x4.02


My Comments: besides for only Good polish and symmetry, everything looks ok to me.


Feel free to voice your opinions. Thanks
Click to expand...

right, besides the polish and symmetry. But because of the symmetry, I''d pass. You have listed better prospects.
 
Date: 3/27/2007 12:59:19 AM
Author: bosoxbw


right, besides the polish and symmetry. But because of the symmetry, I''d pass. You have listed better prospects.
Click to expand...
Ditto. You''ve got much nicer listed above. Pass.
 
BAD News:
29.gif

I found out today that the 2 1.26ct Asschers I was contemplating are off the market as they have been set as matching earings and are ''unbreakable'' according to the jeweler in possession of them (not the jeweler I was dealing with). Does this happen often? This diamonds can still be found when doing a search on pricescope, but when the jeweler went to call in the stones they found out the above. Can a jeweler set stones that are on the open market and then refuse to send them to another jeweler or does the jeweler who set them own the diamonds now and the system just hasn''t been updated?

SO:
My search continues, with what appeared to be 2 good prospects down the drain. I have a couple of jewelers still searching for me, but any help from the forum would be appreciated.

I have another question: I was told by a jeweler that tables over 60% (on asschers) are usually what he sells and that my information is incorrect if I think that a good asschers has to have a table under 60%. Is this true? I thought that ideal specs were table at or under 60% and depth from 65-70% (of course still needing to see pictures).

Here''s a new diamond that was found:
Asscher 1.21 G VS1 GIA TK-VTK N VG VG N 68.4 56 5.87x5.72x3.91 $6857/$6488
Lot # 11121336
Ratio 1.03:1
- My Comments: vtk? I don''t like the dimensions, .15 difference seems a bit high to me.

OK: lots of questions and I hope I can get some answers out of people, especially you storm, the resident asscher expert.
 
low 60s is fine for the table. id try and stay 64 and under.

not thrilled on the one listed but might be ok would need pictures to tell, if its in stock get pics but I don''t think id call it in.

yes a dealer can have stones on memo and while they are technically on the market they are reserved to that dealer.
 
Ok here is another in house diamond with pictures, please let me know your thoughts:

#1
1.24ct
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Good
Fluorescence: Negligible
Girdle: 4.34%
Width: 5.99mm
Length: 6.01mm
Depth: 4.04mm
Table: 64.55%
Depth: 67.49%
Crown Depth: 12.30%
Pavilion Depth: 50.26%
- My Comment: symmetry is only good. Table might be a bit high. This one is in house and has pictures though, but I''m not really impressed with them.

Diamond12351.jpg
 
More diamonds to voice your opinions on:

#1
1.37
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 70.2%
Table: 63%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.3*5.93*4.18
Ratio: Table may be a bit too high?

#2
1.34
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 69.5%
Table: 53%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Girdle: Thin to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Faint
Measurements: 6.27*6.17*4.29
Ratio: 1.02
- My Comment: Only VG and Good. Measurements may be a bit off (.1)

#3
1.29
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 66.8%
Table: 61%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.11*6.05*4.04
Ratio: 1.01
- My Comment: Appears to be very promising as long as it''s a good H

#4
1.26
Cut: Good
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 66.6%
Table: 53%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Girdle: Slightly thick to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.13*5.90*3.93
Ratio: 1.04
- My Comment: Symmetry is only good. Measurements appear to be too far off.

#5
1.25
Color: G
Clarity: VVS2
Depth: 68.8%
Table: 62%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Slightly thick to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.03*6.02*4.14
Ratio: 1.00
- My Comment: Looks very promising to me

#6
1.25
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 68.5%
Table: 63%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.97*5.94*4.07
Ratio: 1.01
- My Comment: all appears ok. Table may be a bit high?

#7
1.23
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 68.7%
Table: 57%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Girdle: Slightly thick to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.08*5.98*4.09
Ratio: 1.02
- My Comment: symmetry is only good. Measurements may be a bit too far off.

#8
1.23
Color: H
Clarity: VVS2
Depth: 67.3%
Table: 56%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Medium
Measurements: 6.04*6.00*4.04
Ratio: 1.01
- My Comment: Medium Fluorescence? H, depends on pictures.

#9
1.23
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 68%
Table: 61%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.97*5.95*4.06
Ratio: 1.00
- Appears to be a good one.

#10
1.22
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 68.2%
Table: 60%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Slightly thick to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.92*5.91*4.03
Ratio: 1.00
- My Comment: All appears to be good as above, but why would above cost more as a G?

#11
1.21
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 68.4%
Table: 56%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Thick to very thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.87*5.72*3.91
Ratio: 1.03
- My Comment: Very Thick? Is that too much? Measurements are probably too far off (.15)

#12
1.21
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 68.6%
Table: 61%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thick to very thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.92*5.90*4.05
Ratio: 1.00
- My Comment: good numbers, but lower end of my ct. scale

#13
1.20
Color: F
Clarity: VVS2
Depth: 71.9%
Table: 61%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.77*5.59*4.02
Ratio: 1.03
- My Comment: 1.2 = lower end of my scale. Measurements probably too far off (.18)

OK, I know it''s an exhaustive list again, but my search has in essence started over because I was not the only one you liked the 2 diamonds I had narrowed my search down to. Another jeweler liked them so much he decided to pick them up and turn them into a pair of earrings
29.gif
. Oh well, there is still a perfect diamond out there for me and I''m counting on all of you to help me find it for my gf. Thanks
9.gif
 
9
3
10
5
8
..........
Id actualy call in 3 first cuz Im fine with H asschers otherwise 9 first then in that order.
 
With regards to fluorescence in #8, is Med. ok? Most of the stones have none. What exactly will fluorescence do to a diamonds and is it only visible in the dark??? Thanks

I have requested #3 be called in so I can see pictures, hopefully it''s not taken already.
 
Ok, this is #8 I have idealscope and sarin images coming. It was in house so it was free to get the pics so I decided to check it out. You have to go to the website to view the diamond though: Diamond Image Click on "Magnified Image" on the right side, below the Windows MP screen.
- Personally I''m not liking the pic, though it''s only one. We''ll see what the images show.
 
Ok, this here is the Idealscope image of #8 and then I''ll attach the Sarin. The standard image as I noted before can be seen on the link: Image (Click on Magnified Image)

Please voice your opinions. I love having Storms opinion (being the asscher picking expert he is), but would like to hear what others have to say as well so please chime in. If this isn''t exactly what I''m looking for, I''m going to have #3 called in. Thanks for everyone''s help.

2808ideal.JPG
 
Here''s the Sarin

2808sarin2.JPG
 
little dark in the center can you get an aset image?
the very center is fine but a little more fill around it would be nice but its tricky to judge if its too much.
 
relooking over the images Id buy it.
kicken if you like the bright drop style

What put it over the edge is that its on the verge of a wide step and farther away would look nice and bright and up close miles deep and maybe just a bit dark but not too bad.
 
- What do you think about the Fluorescence on the stone?

- Did you check out the magnified image? How does that look in your opinion.

- I think the stone looks good, but didn''t wow me. Storm, please explain to me exactly what you are seeing so that I may be better able to understand why this is a kickin diamond?

Thank you for your help.
 
Date: 3/30/2007 11:15:42 PM
Author: antiqueasscher
- What do you think about the Fluorescence on the stone?

- Did you check out the magnified image? How does that look in your opinion.

- I think the stone looks good, but didn''t wow me. Storm, please explain to me exactly what you are seeing so that I may be better able to understand why this is a kickin diamond?

Thank you for your help.
Click to expand...
I always like fluor.

yes, looks good

Then look for a different style either a multi-step or a wide step.
Im seeing nice even patterns, high crown, and a pleasing shape.
If you like the style its a good one if you dont keep looking.
 
The light colored area the arrows point too being red would be better.
but overall I like it but it may be too much for some.

s2808ideal.jpg
 
here is what changed my mind the black arrow is over leakage and the blue to partial leakage, a lot of the time that area will be returning some light.

web_15292551PIC.jpg
 
Thanks Storm. I do like the stone and it''s a consideration and very likely pick, but I do think I am going to have #3 called in still. For such a large purchase I don''t mind a few extra dollars to make sure there isn''t another stone I may like a bit better. So, hopefully I''ll have some more pics to post Tue or Wed next week and who knows maybe a diamond purchased by the end of the week.
6.gif
Man that thought is exciting but gives me butterflies just thinking about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top