getting another asscher shipped in...how do it sound?

[aschman]

hi there,
well, since the last two stones i posted on here received numerous objections including my own, i am having a new asscher shipped in tomorrow. the one thing that is interesting about this stone is that there are 4 steps on the pavillion instead of 3 that we generally see on todays generic asscher. i will be sure to post pics and idealscope once i get them. how do these numbers sound to you.
thanks

1.17 square emerald cut GIA
6.04x5.83x3.89
Clarity- SI1 eyeclean
Color- J
D= 66.7
T= 55.3
Crown - 14.4
Pav 48.4
Girdle - thick
culet - none
Pol - ex
Sym - ex
Flour- medium blue

 

[windowshopper]

i wish that it was perfectly square

 

[valeria101]

sounds great to me... this one should have the classic shape that everyone seems to want - you know high crown, small table, lots of steps inside what not. There is always room for a surprise between numbers and the stone, but this one seems to leave little room for error. It simply can't be dull and flat with those stats - at least as far as I can imagine.

The length and width are not the same number... granted, but this would still be called "square" (all are between 1:1 and 1.05:1 L/W) and GIA is pretty conservative with those proportions, I think. Diamonds and drawings of them are not the same, but you can play with these proportions and see how far square-ness goes. The "fancy shapes selector" on gemapprisers.com helps with just that.

 

[aschman]

ok guys,
just received the pics and idealscope of the new asscher. the IS is not the best, but remember that i am working on a 4k budget and "size does matter" for her. this stone has 4 step compared to the normal 3. it is the one on the left being compared to the 1.19 that i posted last week.once again here are the specs of the 1.19


#2
sq.emerald
1.19 GIA
I
SI1 (completely eyeclean)
5.91x5.89x3.98
depth- 67.6
table-63.4
pav. depth-47.2
crown-15.7
pol-ex
sym-gd
flo-none
girdle-thick
$4000
Pic of the 1.19

 

[aschman]

IdealScope of the 1.19

 

[aschman]

sarin of the 1.16

 

[aschman]

here is the pic of the 1.16

 

[aschman]

idealscope of the 1.16

 

[strmrdr]

The 1.16 looks good to go.
Nice pattern.
Its a little off square but not enough to break the look.

The top side (towards the top of this page) is a hair miscut which is the reason for the dark in the idealscope.
You can see it in the picture also.
Not that bad.
It is a nice one.

 

[aschman]

and finally, them side by side

 

[aschman]

here is a better photo of the last pic

 

[strmrdr]

1.16 gets my vote

 

[Hest88]

The 1.16 looks considerably more like a classic asscher. The other is too square.

 

[Kaleigh]

1.16 gets my vote. It''s very pretty and has that asscher look!

 

[lindsal]

I vote for the 1.16 as well. Much more of a mesmerizing, get lost in the steps stone then the other choice, and for me, that''s what asschers are all about.

 

[maddogmadden]

Go with the smaller stone, it is a nice asscher cut. This is a great example of how the extra step cut can make all the difference.

 

[aschman]

thanks so much for your help...i to think that the 1.16 is the much better stone. i believe it may finally be time to make a purchase.

 

[aschman]

well, i might be faced with a dillema. just received pics from a different broker with pics of a different asscher that seems to look nice. it a 1.31 pretty close to the price of the other. the lighting is completely different and is probably set to make the stone look its best. maybe you guys can help me out by determining if this 1.31 is any better than the 1.16...also i have no idealscope image....they don''t believe in it. the pics and sarin can be found below.
thanks so much and for being patient with me.

 

[aschman]

a smaller image

 

[aschman]

and the sarin.

 

[Kaleigh]

This is going to be tough! Any chance we can see them side by side?? It looks very nice.

 

[aschman]

i highly doubt that it will be possible to see them side by side especially with this diamond being listed with another broker that is not on the pricescope diamond search engine.

 

[Hest88]

The new one isn''t going to face up much larger than the 1.16, if I''m reading the dimensions correctly, but it looks nice. Personally, I''d just go with the cheaper one in this case.

 

[Kaleigh]

IMO, I would go with the 1.16, epecially if the other one is''nt going to face up any bigger!

 

[strmrdr]

the 1.31:
crown facets are a little better cut than the 1.16
inner pattern is slightly worse.
It has one facet thats slightly off. (the black step were the other 3 are white in the pic)

The 1.31 would have slightly more fire.
The 1.16 would probable look a little deaper.

I think cost will be the deciding issue.

Forced to pick id go with the deaper looking stone.

 

[aschman]

thanks for the in depth info. i myself am still leaning towards the 1.16. it just seems like everything is there what i am looking for. plus the med.blue flourescense will hopefully improve the color a grade or two. by the way, the 1.31 is about $30.00 more.
thanks a bunch

 

[strmrdr]

$30 hmmm when your talking as much $ as they are the they basicaly are the same price.
Tough choice.
Honestly I think you would be happy with either one.
Which vendor is the 1.31 from?
They have good taste in asschers if that one is representative of what they carry.

 

[aschman]

the 1.31 diamond is by d.b.o.f.
i am almost positive i am going to go with the 1.16 since i have been already quoted a reasonable price for the custom setting i want by them and i think it would be easier to keep everything in house.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 1/19/2005 2:40:44 PM
Author: jenks
the 1.31 diamond is by d.b.o.f.
i am almost positive i am going to go with the 1.16 since i have been already quoted a reasonable price for the custom setting i want by them and i think it would be easier to keep everything in house.

By the looks of the pictures I figured it was one of theres.
They do pick out some nice diamonds I will give them credit for that.
The attitude I can do without however.

 

[aschman]

being just a newbie, but having been a lurker for the past year and a half i get that impression after reading numerous posts here regarding this issue. i don''t want to say that i would not buy a stone from them because of that, but it could be a cause for concern. i think that having a good/great repor with the vendor would definately be much more of a seamless and less stressfull proccess when purchasing.