Considering an Asscher...Your opinion on it please.

[fisher]

I''ve run across an Asscher (square emerald cut) that I think looks pretty good - based on the numbers. I know the numbers aren''t everything, but before I go to the trouble and cost of having it shipped to Houston for an in-person inspection, I thought I would solicit your expert opinions. It looks like the only inclusion is a small cloud (shown on the GIA cert below). Any opinions on how bad this might be? Is this the worst possible flaw to have? Other red flags? Your help is appreciated.


Here''s a link to the GIA report:

http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?pid=LD00136616&item=1_7&filter_id=0&sec=&query=&page=1&sortby=ranking

 

[chrono]

Are you looking for an unbranded asscher or an emerald cut that is perfectly square (1:1 ish ratio)?

 

[fisher]

Just a 1:1 proportion square emeral cut. I cannot afford a Royal Asscher, though the girlfriend would certainly love one. I''m looking for a S.E. cut that has the same basic proportions as the true Asschers - smaller table, larger depth, near 1:1 ratio, etc.....Does that sound logical or just dumb?

 

[valeria101]

''Sounds'' good, but diamonds need to be seen & preferably compared with some worthy refference. After all, most diamonds are nice on their own and few (IMO) get anywhere close to the best possible. Saying "best" - I have brilliance in mind, mostly.

I would not worry about whatever inclusion there might be in a VVS2 piece

... for once, those inclusions are barely visible under 10X by definition - this means they are comparable in size with an invisible grain of dust. You would probably need a microscope not just 10X jeweler''s loupe to see those inclusions. The shape of the respective grain of dust is identified under 30X magnification or more.

Anyway... if you are not concerned with the esotheric symbolism of VVS but visible clarity, VS (either VS1 or VS2) should be totally safe. This, not to say SI1: an eye clean step cut of this grade would be quite a bargain, of course, although a somewhat hard to find item. The location and type of inclusions would indeed be critical for SI1. It really doedn''t matter for VVS

Just my 0.2, of course.

 

[fisher]

Thanks Ana. I''m not obsessed with the VVS2 clarity and I too think a regular VS2 would be fine. Do you think I might be paying too much of a premium for this higher-grade clarity (considering it is an I color)? This may be silly, but I thought the dimmensions, ex/ex grade, clarity and color were seemingly as good as many of the diamonds in the $18,000 range - and this one is in the $16,000 range. I tend to be a sucker for any kind of perceived bargain, so please tell me if this isn''t one. I would appreciate your hones feedback. I will indeed analyze any diamond by comparing to others - that''s great advice.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/29/2005 103:42 AM
Author: fisher
Just a 1:1 proportion square emeral cut. I cannot afford a Royal Asscher, though the girlfriend would certainly love one. I''m looking for a S.E. cut that has the same basic proportions as the true Asschers - smaller table, larger depth, near 1:1 ratio, etc.....Does that sound logical or just dumb?

GIA calls "square" anything from 1:1 to 1.05:1 l/w... I think they are conservative and err on the safe side in this regard.

And, well, I definitely see the point about smaller tables. I would too say 60% and below if there is where to choose from. Otherwise, well, it''s hard to pass a nice looking stone based on some not critical number; If the pictures are nice, so is 65% table

But I am less sure about depth. What good does it do ? If the stone looks nice and it is appropriately brilliant, all the extra depth is not desirtable and doesn''t help with anything, really. It is true that the old Asscher cuts were deep, but that''s not because someone decided they''d better be deep to look good. Technology limitations were responsible for that cut

(rough diamonds could not be sawn, only polished, so it made sense to keep as much of the original octahedral shape as possible - same as for old mine cuts). As far as I know, of course.

The "depth" and concentric mirrors of the Asscher cut depends on more than just total depth - it matters how that extra deep is cut. Also, the old asschers would have allot of that extra depth above the girdle (as crown height) - something that doesn''t necesarily improve brilliance and it is not done today at all.

For all that matters, a crown as high as the oldie''s below is not likely at all.

By comparison, (and IMO,as usual) the modern square step cuts are a new breed altogether. So... depth is just good as long as it keeps pavilion angles at the desirable angles needed to create brilliance. That 70% depth is still ok, I would think. More ? Not quite so - although prices of those extra deep stones sometimes reflect their reduced size.

Just a thought... about a very tempting subject!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/29/2005 10:15:18 AM
Author: fisher

Do you think I might be paying too much of a premium for this higher-grade clarity (considering it is an I color)?

... I thought the ex/ex grade ... were seemingly as good as many of the diamonds in the $18,000 range

No, I would not consider VVS a "bargain" for the life of me.

( how about I/VS2 - so... it's bit deeper, but 4k cheaper too!)

Honestly, G-H/VS2 (or SI1) sounds allot better, if you do find the one stone in the right size & price range...


That is just my opinion & taste. This (about ex/ex) is not.

These "polish and symmetry" (or finish) grades don't mean much. Even the lab (GIA) admists (in their recent cut study) that they have no visual impact and... is planning to go softer. For once "symmetry" does not mean "nice shape" - that's an abstract technicality reffereing to how sharp the edges of the facets are (and some other similarly obscure details). Neither polish or symmetry are technical challenges now - anything but "fair" in either grade is way more precise than you could detect even under a loupe. I found it difficult to learn how to tell these grades under 10X

Speaking of "technicla challenge" - I guess brilliance still is one. I am not sure how many modern asschers are cut to optimize brilliance. Sellers have several tools at hand to demonstrate that one diamond is more brilliant than another (or compare it relative to standards), but not many do this. Blue Nile does not. Their stones may be good or downright great (in terms of brilliance) - there just isn't any way to tell from the description provided

(PS: I didn't mean to totally swamp this thread! - sorry if this is just toooo much chatter from my part)

 

[strmrdr]

There isnt enough information to tell if its a good one.
An I asscher in that size will likely show some color.
Im much more comfortable buying an asscher from someone that will pull it in and look at it and provide pattern pictures and all the other info needed.
The numbers are about 20% of the info you need.
Iv been thrilled with some of the asschers Jon at www.goodoldgold.com has been bringing in.
He sold out on them quickly and has more on the way.
Id contact him and have him bring some in for a look.
Whiteflash.com also has found some nice ones for clients but the ones they are stocking im less than thrilled about most of them.

Do not buy an asscher the vendor hasnt seen and cant provide pictures of.

more info here:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/all-about-asschers.24689/


www.goodoldgold.com
www.whiteflash.com