Help! Should I get one of these Asschers?

[docta13]

Hey everyone,

I''ve spent pretty much the last 48 hours doing nothing but doing diamond research and price shopping online for an engagement ring to surprise her! My target was a colorless Asscher somewhere close to 1.5 ct. Lots of different factors to consider, I know. But I''ve put together a breakdown of each of the 4 diamonds:

Diamond #1

Price: $10,550
Carat: 1.51
Cut: Ideal
Color: E
Clarity: VS1
Dimensions: 6.39 x 6.31 x 4.26
Depth %: 67.5%
Table %: 63%
Symmetry: Good
Polish: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Ratio: 1.01
Girdle: Slightly Thick



Diamond #2

Price: $11,376
Carat: 1.29
Cut: Signature Ideal Collection (supposedly unique Asscher cut)
Color: E
Clarity: VS1
Dimensions: 6.47 x 6.25 x 3.86
Depth %: 61.8%
Table %: 59%
Symmetry: Very Good
Polish: Very Good
Culet: Slightly Large
Fluorescence: None
Ratio: 1.04
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick



Diamond #3

Price: $11,349
Carat: 1.45
Cut: Premium
Color: E
Clarity: VVS2
Dimensions: 6.60 x 6.49 x 4.12
Depth %: 63.5%
Table %: 61%
Symmetry: Very Good
Polish: Very Good
Culet: Very Small
Fluorescence: None
Ratio: 1.02
Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick



Diamond #4

Price: $9,084
Carat: 1.35
Cut: Very Good
Color: E
Clarity: IF
Dimensions: 6.73 x 6.29 x 3.85
Depth %: 61.2%
Table %: 61%
Symmetry: Very Good
Polish: Good
Culet: Small
Fluorescence: None
Ratio: 1.07
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick

Would you all mind looking at the specs for my 4 diamonds and giving me your opinions on which you think would be best? I know there''s a lot of room for opinions with Asscher cuts, but I would REALLY appreciate your input!

Thank you so much!

 

[chrono]

I don''t think anyone here can say with any certainty that one is better than the other without the following information:
1. Crown height of all the stones
2. Magnified pictures to show the step pattern
3. Aset pictures to show light performance

 

[docta13]

Date: 10/17/2007 3:47:04 PM
Author: Chrono
I don''t think anyone here can say with any certainty that one is better than the other without the following information:

1. Crown height of all the stones

2. Magnified pictures to show the step pattern

3. Aset pictures to show light performance

Ok, I''m not asking for certainty, but can you please give your opinions from what data I have given you? I''m working hard to get the pictures, but I''d appreciate your input in the mean time.

Thanks

 

[chrono]

They all show some promise but don't really know for sure if they'll look pretty or not.

Stone 1: Hot keen on the Good symmetry. Prefer VG. Very square stone.
Stone 2: Slightly large culet? I am curious to see this stone. Sounds like an antique cut.
Stone 3: VVS is overkill. Not hot on the girdle but I can live with it if the stone is lovely.
Stone 4: Don't like IF; why pay for what I can't see anyway? A VS2 would be fine.

I do like the spread though.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Here are my (non-expert) opinions:

1. The only stone with typical asscher depth (>65%). Do you know if she prefers a stone with more depth vs. a stone with more spread? Each woman is different--some like the shallower asschers because they face up larger, whereas others (like me) will give up spread for depth. 67% isn't considered deep for an asscher by any means, but it's the deepest of the 4 you have listed. The table should be fine, some might consider 63% to be large for an asscher (mine is 63% as well), but if it doesn't look glassy at all, then great. E and VS1 will be great--white and clean. The only drawback is the "good" symmetry rating and a slightly thick girdle is really common for asschers.

2. Is #2 a GIA graded diamond? I'd love to see a pic of the "signature ideal selection". The spread is similar to #1, though it's the smallest and most expensive of the 4...

3. VVS2 might be overkill. It has the largest overall spread, though.

4. The measurements make it seem more like an emerald cut than an asscher, not that there's anything wrong with that. But the 1.07 ratio coupled with the shallow depth make it look more like a squarish emerald. And IF? I mean, that's fantastic but to most is overkill, though the price is the lowest of them all. Again, I'd make sure it's what SHE wants (not quite square--more shallow cut).

Are all of these GIA graded? Again, I'm no expert, but the prices seem a bit steep.

 

[decodelighted]

Sounds like Blue Nile.

Asschers are best selected in person ... or, 2nd best -- using a combo of stats & pictures/videos. I don''t think I''d order any of the above diamonds (or any Asscher) without seeing pictures.

Also, for me "E" is too high $ for value. I''d go at least to "F", what Leon Mege calls "the sweet spot" for engagement ring stones.

 

[strmrdr]

I would be extremely cautious of #2 there is cutter out there cutting total crap in that number range with larger culets.
An antique would be deeper 99.999% of the time.
Honestly unless you want high clarity for the sake of high clarity id skip 3&4 and 1 isnt that hot either by the stats but might be ok.
Otherwise find a vendor who does pictures and have them call them in or some others.
I recommend GOG they will call 2 in for free you can also ask him when the next time he is going to the asscher cutter''s office in person.