Experts Sought: I need help choosing one of these diamonds!!

[kelbel]

First, a huge thanks to Valeria, BearMan, Moremoremore, and Wallace for replying to my previous query.




Second, and here''s where I need your assistance. UnionDiamond and NiceIce have each offered me a diamond that they have in-stock and falls within my parameters. The one at NiceIce, however, being a bit more than I wanted to spend. Additionally, Good Old Gold, has two that interest me. Please, and I beg you, lend me your opinions on these diamonds.

**Union Diamond offered the following:

The diamond in question is a 2.58ct Princess Cut Diamond, H in color and VS1 in clarity, GIA Certified, 71% Depth, 70% Table, Thin to Slightly Thick Girdle, Polish and Symmetry – Very Good, No Culet or Fluorescence, the diamond measures 7.69 x 7.51 x 5.33mm.

The cost of this diamond is $16,800.00

**NiceIce offered the following:

. The closest we are aware of to your request is a GIA Graded, 2.53 carat Asscher cut diamond that is VVS-2 in clarity and H in color with no fluorescence that measures 7.61 x 7.63 x 5.19 mm with a total depth of 68.2% and a 61% table diameter with a medium to slightly thick girdle and excellent polish and symmetry with the primary inclusions being pinpoint size diamond crystals. The diamond is selling for $19,150.00 which will be discounted to $18,500.00 for payment via wire transfer plus shipping. It should be gorgeous, but it exceeds your desired price range.

**Good Old Gold offered the following:

choice one: This is a 3.08, G, SI2, med bl. flor regent from Good Old Gold.
Crown angle: 33.5
Crown ht: 12%
Pavil angle: 40.9
Pavil dep: 42.9
Tbl:61.1,
Dep:67.9

choice two:

[*]Carat Weight: 2.21

[*]Clarity: VS2

[*]Color: G

[*]Shape: Square brilliant (princess)

[*]Cut External

• Polish: GIA ~ Good
  
• Symmetry: GIA ~ Good

[*]Cut Internal

• Light Return ~ Excellent

[*]Price ~ $ 16,590.

[*]Bank wire discount ~ $ 16,225 .

[*]Table: 65.7

[*]Total depth: 70.4

[*]Pavilion depth: 57.1

[*]crown height: 12.6%

THANKS/idealbb/images/smilies/wink2.gif

 

[valeria101]

What about the inclusion in the SI2 Regent? Is that OK with you ?

Between the two princess cuts, I would go with the G-VS2: I like them with smaller tables and would rather have some test of brilliance done since no hard rules for guessing it by numbers applies to this shape.

I am puzzled that there is not more choice of Asschers than the respective one. I know Niceice carries a very nice selection, so I would not worry that the stone is less than excellent. Also, the price looks attractive for what the stone is. Besides, it will come with all sorts of tests and pictures attached. There does not seem to be a great selection of this cut available... too bad.

Among all these shapes, I am not sure what selection criteria would work. They are a diverse crowd indeed.

 

[valeria101]

Bar the Asccher, it seems that the G-VS2 princess would be the winner - just my opinion, of course.

However, I am very partial to step cuts and sorry that there isn't suitable one around. Unless one of these works: 2.18cts F-SI1 , 2.4cts G-VS1.

I wish I knew more about the G VS - those number are not the nicest combination but not so bad that the stone stands no chance to look good. The other seems nice by numbers but at 7.44mmx7.4mm would be a bit (5% actually) smaller than the one at Niceice. Oh well...

 

[kelbel]

Just wondering why you would bar the asscher? Are the numbers bad?




Thanks,


Kelly

 

[kelbel]

Just realized your use of the word 'bar' prob'ly means "aside from"....right?




So you would go with the asscher?

 

[wallace]

Hi Kelbel - I would make sure that you understand fluorescence and make a decision about how you feel about it before considering a med. blue fluor. Some people do like it but overall it is not as desirable as none to faint fluourescence. This should be reflected in the price. Strong flourescence can make a very clean stone look oily in the sunlight. You might want to see this before purchasing such a stone.

That said, I leave the cut details to the pros becuase I do not feel experienced enough to make serious comment on cut comparison.

I looked at Asscher (actually, royal asscher) too. I found it a very different beast than the other square mod. brilliants that interested me. I found it easier to decide which style I really wanted and then really pursue that particular cut. Personally, I felt chasing down acchers and sq. brils. a bit overwhelming becuase they are evaluated do differently and the price points are not really analogous to brills (and then there's shrinkage).

I think is what Valeria was trying to indicate by saying "bar" the asscher - the brills and asschers can't really be directly compared - like an apple to an orange!

EDITED TO ADD: I did mean to mention that fluorescence is apersonal chioce. I do not imply that it makes for a bad stone. In fact, as F&I points out, it can be an attribute to a stone - it can balance out yellow overtones. While not the most important factor in stone eval. I just thought I would point it out since only one stone had it and not the others you listed. It might help one make a final decision.

 

[valeria101]

Kelbel... the 'numbers' on the Niceice stone are all great except the price (which goes over the initial budget, as the original posts says, but it is not unreasonable for the stone I would think) - this is why I took it aside.

Regents are very nice, but this one is not a particularly 'clean' SI2. Medium blue fl. does have some impact on market value, but I strongly doubt anyone will ever see it.

Surely soem would differ, but i had serious trouble finding an "oily" fluorescent diamond after after asking for it in quite a few places. It's fl. not only was labeled "very strong" but also glowed stronger under UW than other stones with "very strong" fluorescence. Given that H is not particularly tinted, the color variation theoretically induced by this med. blue fl. will likely be... just theoretical. I wouldn't like it in a fancy yellow stone, but H is very far from that.

 

[kelbel]

Yes, your mentioning of the med. blue flor is very important. It's so difficult being a newbie..with no intention of becoming a professional! I've read by some that they wouldn't buy a diamond without flor. Who to believe?? Perhaps I am most skeptical of the regent because of the SI2 rating...just a bit nervous about something that is "visible to the naked eye".




The more I look at the asscher, however, the more I like it. It seems timeless, yet has a modern quality, too. Trouble is, they're so hard to find, and I'm not the least bit equipped at validating price and specs. I'm considering NiceIce b/c of their reputation of carrying quality stones.




Did you end up buying an asscher or not?

 

[valeria101]

Just wandering wether you have asked for an Asscher only at Niceice. It is not unusual to place an order for a stone and give sellers some agreed amount of time to find it.

Would this work?

You may want to check Whiteflash for Asschers too. The ACA collection is their trademark, but there are square emeralds on in their stock too.

With no good means to convey the 'look' of fluorescence (if any) oinline, I wold leave this topic aside. However, you may want to consider GIA's conclusion on the visual impact of fluorescene (search 'fluorescence' on www.gia.org) if your preffered diamond turns out to have some.

PS: I wish there were more pictures of Asscher cuts around... I just wanted to point to a certain type of this cut that makes me preffer these stones to modified brilliants: I like them with tiny tables, way below 60%, like THIS one. The stone in cause is way astray from your specs (K-VS2, med fl. and 1ct bigger), but the shape is all I wanted to sample.

 

[kelbel]

Unfortunately, my timing is a major issue here. My husband and I are having a vow renewal ceremony in Ireland in June, and we would like my ring to join us. Whatever stone I choose will be set by Nathan Levy in New York, and he has said that he needs of minimum of 6 weeks, more like 7 or 8 to complete it. With that said, I need this stone in a hurry. Because I'm making such a large purchase online, I'm a bit apprehensive about Whiteflash simply because they haven't been discussed as much as some of the others. Plus, being in Germany, a ten-day return period is a bit short for us. I suppose that I've been looking for this stone since February, and I'm truly ready to find it, even if it means paying a bit more (as the NiceIce asscher would require). What do you know about Whiteflash, and do they carry their supply in-stock or do they have to get it from a supplier first?

 

[valeria101]

I think Whiteflash and Niceice have just as good reputation around here. There are allot of posts about the "A Cut Above" (ACA) ideal rounds by Whiteflash. Brian from Whiteflash is often mentioned as the best person to ask for a 'last word' of advice on their stones.

There is no way I could know wether one stone or another (aside those in the Expert Selection and the ACA) are in stock or not at Whiteflash... but they could probably tell you asap. I wish I had the stone, since I should be in Berlin next week

 

[valeria101]

These are the two stones that made me mention Whiteflash in the first place...

 

[kelbel]

Thanks, Valeria, for posting those. I'll check into them today and let you know what I come up with.

 

[wallace]

Hi KelBel -

I did not buy the asscher, after all. I had a bit of a time issue but mostly, after I learned more about it, I decided I would rather wait til I could get precisely what I wanted. I really do love the asscher cut! The stones I liked were just a bit out of my range becuase of the shinkage issue. My FI and I decided to get one as an anniversary gift in a few years. then, I can start early to find the right one.

I think 2.5ct. is a good size and I would be very happy with any of the ones listed. The ones Valeria listed sound very good, too, esp. pricing. Lots of options. It is alot to spend - but it's an asscher! I wish you the best of luck in your search and I hope you find THE stone soon. jbr

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 4/14/2004 6:52:21 AM kelbel wrote:


I've read by some that they wouldn't buy a diamond without flor. Who to believe?? ?
----------------

I can only chime in on the Fluor as I do not know square stones. It is I who would not buy a stone without fluor. Flour is one of the most misunderstood of characteristics. Years ago, it was the best & prized. Some fraud was involved w/ representation of the stones. The industry ran from them. Old habits die hard. But, GIA did a positive study on Blue Fluor in 1998.

I like it. It be hard pressed for any diamond dealer to say that the med bl. fluor would negatively impact the appearance of a stone in the H color. In fact, it has every posibility to face up whiter than an H. The only viable criticism has been from someone who does not like the bluish/purpleish hue in sunlight. I love it. To me, it makes the stones more "plugged in".

 

[purduephotog]

I bought a UV LED so that I could look at diamonds and get an estimate as to what 'blue fluorescence' looked like.

I borrowed a few coworkers rings- one had none I could pick out in cubelight (also known as fluorescent overhead fixtures); the other glowed a radiant blue when the LED was held some distance away.

It was rather fascinating, I must say- but even then looking at the stone it looked just fine... and not clouded.

I'll grab her wrist next time we're outside and see if I can see the 'oily' look you've described. I'm guessing it's a strong blue response; she's going to look thru her papers for it.

I think I'd still like to see a red fluorescent stone, however... even if it hurts the colour.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 4/15/2004 4:55:41 PM purduephotog wrote:



I think I'd still like to see a red fluorescent stone, however... even if it hurts the colour.
----------------

If you do... gee.. you might want to tell the owner what a rarity he has. Of all diamonds on PS there was just one listed with white fluo, none with yellow. Non-blue fluorescence is quite unusual (maybe 1% of all diamonds with some fluorescence would have it other than blue), red is not even always mentioned among the possible colors.

Actually, I am not sure that the mention of "red fluorescence" is accurate. Some diamonds (reputedly some of the dark blue ones) have red phosphorescence, not fluo.... And in this case "red" often means "intense orange". When something occurs rarely among the already illusive blue diamonds... it would be quite a surprise to get hold of an example, I suppose.

You may find lime green fluorescence in... lime yellow diamonds

And in synthetic yellows.

However, if you do find some good reading on other-than-blue diamond fluorescence, I would appreciate a link

 

[purduephotog]

----------------
On 4/16/2004 7:34:45 AM valeria101 wrote:

----------------
On 4/15/2004 4:55:41 PM purduephotog wrote:



I think I'd still like to see a red fluorescent stone, however... even if it hurts the colour.
----------------

However, if you do find some good reading on other-than-blue diamond fluorescence, I would appreciate a link

----------------

Actually, I found a red fluorescent diamond. Its probably a 5 pointer, pave setting, with a couple of dozen other ones around it. Funny enough it's seated next to a blue fluorescent diamond. I was fascinated at comparing the two items.

Check out this link for some of the colour information.

http://webexhibits.org/causesofcolor/11.html

I've got a few more but it's mostly from my own research and has come from pdf's published about microwave plasma diamond creation.

 

[WinkHPD]

Having sold a few Asschers over the years I can honestly say that I prefer it to most square shaped stones for its elegance. However, you must be aware that you are looking at a step cut stone versus a brilliant cut stone for the traditional princess or Regent cut stone. If you prefer brilliance, then go with a princess or the beautiful Regent. (The regents will be consistently more sparkly than most princess cuts as they are only cut by one firm who consistently cuts them for beauty. Princess cut stones can be incredibly beautiful, or incredibly boring, depending on whether they were cut for beauty or weight.)

I am not a big fan of numbers for square shaped stones, since it is so hard to judge them without seeing the stones. We simply do not have the numerical guidelines for fancy shapes that we have for rounds, and even for a round it is always good to see the stone to confirm that it lives up to the numbers. I was showing two very attractive H&A cuts yesterday, both with strong H&A patterns in the viewer, one a .92 and the other a little over a carat. As pretty as the carat stone is, the .92 was noticeably more beautiful and 2k less money. All the numbers were there for both stones, and the carat was an incredible stone, but the eye readily revealed that the .92 had some extra magic.

As for fluorescence, it can be a great plus to a stone, or a HUGE negative. Although rare, an overblue will completely ruin a stone out of doors. You can take a beautiful overblue from indoors into the sun light and it will look as if someone spilled oil on it. Yuch!

However I sold a 2ct+ stone several years ago that had Strong Blue listed on the cert. Out of doors it became a light pink color, but in the lab it showed a strong blue under the fluorescent lights. I hope it never gets lost or stolen, because even though insured I doubt that it could ever be replaced. I defy any one to tell me that it's true value was hurt by the fluorescence, although if you only trade paper it is worth less by the paper. Please use the numbers as a guide, but let your eyes be the final arbiter. Good luck on your selection, and good luck on your trip!

Wink