"Mush" in cushions and ASET

[Cachette]

Hi,

I'm now looking at cushions (mostly AVCs - they are my dream stone) for my upgrade and was wondering if it is possible to tell if the stone will show "mush" just by looking at the ASETS (again, looking at AVC's). I'm having a difficult time identifying these "mushy" areas in the stones in GOG's pictures. Not even sure if they are cut to really avoid this problem or if some of the AVCs have it. I've read up on it but the pictures aren't that telling (to me anyways) and I just want to make sure I pick a really clear stone if I decide to go with these cushions. I don't really have the options of viewing them IRL to compare so the stone I potentially select needs to be awesome. (of course!)

Could someone look at the AVC's and find me a couple of examples of really clear stones and stones that may have "mush" under the table or elsewhere in the stone.

And also - just by looking at the current inventory, in the 1-1.3 carat or so range, regardless of color or clarity, which stones, in your opinion, would you consider purchasing.

Thanks so much for your help!!!

Cachette

 

[lisamarie]

What exactly do you mean by "mush?" Is it inclusions that you're worried about? Or that crushed ice look that some cushions have? If it's the later, I don't think you need to worry about that with any AVC.

Can you show us a photo of a diamond that you consider "mushy?"

 

[natascha]

By mushy do you mean an area of the diamond where you can't see the separate facets and which does not really reflect light? The mushy part kinda reminds me me of oatmeal porridge. It looks bland, greyish and you can't see the separate oats .

Well if you mean that kinda mushy then it is due to the diamond not being well cut, so that won't be a problem with AVC. Also that effect is usually visible in photos and I would assume in an ASET photo.

 

[HopeDream]

Is your description of mush the same as is illustrated in this thread? https://www.pricescope.com/communit...test-your-cushion-knowledge-with-pics.167177/

Here are the official pics from my AVC and random pics from home. You will get a minor amount of mush between the maltese cross sections which will be multiplied by the Koizibe effect around the outer sections of the stone of the stone. In real life I don't find it that noticible because of how promanant and flashy the chunky facet reflections are.

On the ASET any single facet that shows a mix of colors the potential for mush.

 

[Haven]

LisaMarie and Natascha--The thread to which HopeDream linked has a good explanation of mush. I think Yssie coined the term, and it's a really good description because it describes the areas in the face-down view where the faceting is not clear, and thus looks mushy.

I hope Yssie can come in and talk some more about mush and her thoughts on it.

I found a more technical description of mush in Yssie's studs thread:

" by "mush" I mean I think what Karl calls "ineffective virtual facets" - clumps of poorly configured VFs that create this area of stone that doesn't do anything at all in most - if not all - types of lights. They're too small, closely packed, and poorly shaped and angled to individually or as a unit reflect light cohesively and attractively, obstruct, or uniformly allow light escape through the pav to add "leakage contrast".." Yssie, pg. 2 https://www.pricescope.com/forum/show-me-the-ring/my-studs-are-growing-up-t165839-30.html

 

[Cachette]

Is your description of mush the same as is illustrated in this thread? https://www.pricescope.com/communit...test-your-cushion-knowledge-with-pics.167177/

Here are the official pics from my AVC and random pics from home. You will get a minor amount of mush between the maltese cross sections which will be multiplied by the Koizibe effect around the outer sections of the stone of the stone. In real life I don't find it that noticible because of how promanant and flashy the chunky facet reflections are.

On the ASET any single facet that shows a mix of colors the potential for mush.

Exactly the thread I was reading before I opened this thread!

Thanks for your pictures and comments HopeDream! Your AVC is gorgeous! I'm having a hard time finding nice ASET pictures like the one your stone has and this is one of the reasons I was thinking about the "mush" factor..... Not sure why there aren't any. Are they being cut differently now?

Cachette

 

[UberClaire]

What is your budget? Do you prefer the square or the slightly rectangular shape in AVCs?
Do you know if you like warmer colors (K, L, M, N) or if you want something more colorless? The color seems to be the biggest factor into AVC price comparing stones of similar carat weight. Budget notwithstanding:

If I chose for myself in that carat range, I would choose this one:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8505/
I like the more rectangular AVCs. If I had $8200, this puppy would be mine.

Here is a square AVC with a nice ASET, but it's not an AGS0 if that's important to you (polish is excellent, not ideal):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9282/

I think this one is a nice choice if you know you like warmer colors:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9055/

This is a nice square in a really high color, but I'm not as crazy about the ASET:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8614/

And if you wanted to go *really* colored, I like this one a lot too:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8917/

 

[HopeDream]

Uberclaire what do you want in an AVC? do you prefer rectangular or square?

I like symmetry and square AVCs so that's where my choices are coming from. When I look at an ASET I try to make sure that the area around the central maltese cross doesn't have too big of a ring of leakage (clear) around it and the overall aset looks symetrical. Aside from that, leaning more toward red than green is always better.

Fore these choices I'm color, clarity and price blind, and they are displayed in no particular order:

Nice symetrical ASETS with lots of blue for contrast (If you want a dynamic stone that changes a lot with different lighting):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8622/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8614/(I agree with Uber claire on this one)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8619/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8618/

Less contrasty but likely to be nice and bright overall (If you want a consistantly bright white stone):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9495/ ( nice kozibe effect)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9282/ (Another great Uber claire pick)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8918/ (also nice kozibe)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8949/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9203/

ASET is a good starting place, but keep in mind that your stone will be moving aroud quite a bit in real life as you wear it, so a video of several of your favorites having a showdown is probably the best next step. Diamonds are not static - they have to dance!

When my AVC is clean, it is crisp, luminous and firey. When my AVC gets dirty it seem to become slightly less contrasty and firey and exhibits an overall white glow. If you choose an AVC you will be getting a beautiful stone no matter what.

If there is a stone you like the look of except for the ASET, ask if they can re-take the ASET - sometime the scope isn't lined-up properly.

 

[Dougsgirl]

Uberclaire what do you want in an AVC? do you prefer rectangular or square?

I like symmetry and square AVCs so that's where my choices are coming from. When I look at an ASET I try to make sure that the area around the central maltese cross doesn't have too big of a ring of leakage (clear) around it and the overall aset looks symetrical. Aside from that, leaning more toward red than green is always better.

Fore these choices I'm color, clarity and price blind, and they are displayed in no particular order:

Nice symetrical ASETS with lots of blue for contrast (If you want a dynamic stone that changes a lot with different lighting):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8622/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8614/(I agree with Uber claire on this one)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8619/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8618/

Less contrasty but likely to be nice and bright overall (If you want a consistantly bright white stone):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9495/ ( nice kozibe effect)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9282/ (Another great Uber claire pick)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8918/ (also nice kozibe)
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8949/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9203/

ASET is a good starting place, but keep in mind that your stone will be moving aroud quite a bit in real life as you wear it, so a video of several of your favorites having a showdown is probably the best next step. Diamonds are not static - they have to dance!

When my AVC is clean, it is crisp, luminous and firey. When my AVC gets dirty it seem to become slightly less contrasty and firey and exhibits an overall white glow. If you choose an AVC you will be getting a beautiful stone no matter what.

If there is a stone you like the look of except for the ASET, ask if they can re-take the ASET - sometime the scope isn't lined-up properly.

OK... I have a quick question for HopeDream (Sorry, don't mean to hijack the thread, just curious about AVC ASETs).
I don't really understand how to read an ASET very well yet. Can you please tell me your thoughts on the ASET of this AVC...
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9198/
Thanks so much!!!

 

[Cachette]

LisaMarie and Natascha--The thread to which HopeDream linked has a good explanation of mush. I think Yssie coined the term, and it's a really good description because it describes the areas in the face-down view where the faceting is not clear, and thus looks mushy.

I hope Yssie can come in and talk some more about mush and her thoughts on it.

I found a more technical description of mush in Yssie's studs thread:

" by "mush" I mean I think what Karl calls "ineffective virtual facets" - clumps of poorly configured VFs that create this area of stone that doesn't do anything at all in most - if not all - types of lights. They're too small, closely packed, and poorly shaped and angled to individually or as a unit reflect light cohesively and attractively, obstruct, or uniformly allow light escape through the pav to add "leakage contrast".." Yssie, pg. 2 https://www.pricescope.com/forum/show-me-the-ring/my-studs-are-growing-up-t165839-30.html

Thank you Haven! That's what mush is! I'm trying to find a stone that don't have these "ineffective virtual facets".

Cachette

 

[Cachette]

What is your budget? Do you prefer the square or the slightly rectangular shape in AVCs?
Do you know if you like warmer colors (K, L, M, N) or if you want something more colorless? The color seems to be the biggest factor into AVC price comparing stones of similar carat weight. Budget notwithstanding:

If I chose for myself in that carat range, I would choose this one:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8505/
I like the more rectangular AVCs. If I had $8200, this puppy would be mine.

Here is a square AVC with a nice ASET, but it's not an AGS0 if that's important to you (polish is excellent, not ideal):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9282/

I think this one is a nice choice if you know you like warmer colors:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9055/

This is a nice square in a really high color, but I'm not as crazy about the ASET:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8614/

And if you wanted to go *really* colored, I like this one a lot too:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8917/

Thanks UberClaire! Those stones are all very nice! I love the cut of the N AVC but worry that N is too low. I'm still not sure what color range I like or want because I've never seen the lower colors IRL but I LOVE all the ones I've seen in videos and on here (PS). I wear a 2.5 carat eternity band as a wedding band and wear it solo and the stones are G/H but I could always wear it on my right hand but would prefer to keep it as a wedding band so I should probably stick with H to J I guess. I wonder if K would be too warm to wear with the eternity band.

My eye is drawn to the more rectangular shape but at a ratio of about 1.03 to 1.07; not too square and not too rectangular.

My budget is about $6000-$8000 for the stone and $1000 for the setting. If I don't find a stone that makes my heart sing I will wait and save some more and go from there.

Thanks again!

Cachette

 

[HopeDream]

Hi Cachette,

I'll have a look at rectangular cushions and see if there are some nice ones.

Dougsgirl: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/avc-aset-for-dougsgirl.177676/#post-3233887#p3233887 I made you a thread

 

[Rhino]

Karl hit the nail on the head with this quote "clumps of poorly configured VFs that create this area of stone that doesn't do anything at all in most - if not all - types of lights. They're too small, closely packed, and poorly shaped and angled to individually or as a unit reflect light cohesively and attractively, obstruct, or uniformly allow light escape through the pav to add "leakage contrast".

**edited by moderator. please abide by our policies about self promotion**
Regards,
Rhino

 

[Cachette]

Hi Cachette,

I'll have a look at rectangular cushions and see if there are some nice ones.

Dougsgirl: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/avc-aset-for-dougsgirl.177676/#post-3233887#p3233887 I made you a thread

Thanks again HopeDream! I took a look at the ones you suggested and the first 4 are out of my price range but are very beautiful. F color is too high - I'm looking for the biggest spread possible at my price point so I'd like to stick with H and lower. The other ones I will look at closely tonight - I looked quickly and there may be some possibilities there... Just for reference, I'm a size 6.5 but would have the ring made at 7 because my hands tend to swell a lot depending on the weather. Also, do you think a K color AVC would look ok next to a G/H eternity band??

Thanks soooo much HopeDream!

Cachette

 

[yssie]

Karl hit the nail on the head with this quote "clumps of poorly configured VFs that create this area of stone that doesn't do anything at all in most - if not all - types of lights. They're too small, closely packed, and poorly shaped and angled to individually or as a unit reflect light cohesively and attractively, obstruct, or uniformly allow light escape through the pav to add "leakage contrast".

**edited by moderator. please abide by our policies about self promotion**

Regards,
Rhino

Sorry Rhino, that's my quote though the credit goes to Karl since it's really an "Engish please?" translation of Karl's many statements on ineffective VFs and my take on what they actually mean w/ some of my own stones.

And just to be extra clear - when I say "mush" I never mean "crushed ice" (by any of the variety of definitions used on this board)!

 

[Rhino]

Thanks for clarifying Yssie. Honestly I haven't read the whole thread but "mush" doesn't sound like anything I'd necessarily associate with the AVC line. Correct me if I'm wrong according to the definition you've assigned to it.

 

[Cachette]

Karl hit the nail on the head with this quote "clumps of poorly configured VFs that create this area of stone that doesn't do anything at all in most - if not all - types of lights. They're too small, closely packed, and poorly shaped and angled to individually or as a unit reflect light cohesively and attractively, obstruct, or uniformly allow light escape through the pav to add "leakage contrast".

**edited by moderator. please abide by our policies about self promotion**
Regards,
Rhino

Thank you Jon!

If you don't mind, can you explain the difference in performance of these 2 stones - one showing lots of contrast areas and another showing little blue and all around very different ASET than the first one? I'm sure they are both beautiful stones but does one (the obvious symmetrical ASET) out perform the other and if so, in what way? I'm really trying to visualize these stones through the pictures and ASETs because I'll never get a chance to walk in your stone and say "Show me what you've got!" and pick through many stones to find the perfect one for me. Sure wish I could. I over analyse choosing paint colors for my walls, picking out an AVC may put me over the edge.

Thanks again!

Cachette

 

[HopeDream]

Well... for AVC stones 1.0-1.3ct that are $6-8k with a 1.03-1.07 aspect ratio, there are 2:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8973/ a larger I1 F - I know you said F was to high but I didn't want to list only one stone.
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9494/ a smaller H Si2

I'd probably go with the H because I1 clarity would be a mind-clean issue for me, but it would be interesting to see them side by side.

You will notice a different between a k diamond and g/h melee, but you may not mind it https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-out-k-color-diamonds.167037/ - see Haven's set about half way down the thread.

Do you want to broaden your preference or wait?

I love shopping AVCs - thanks for the fun hunt!

 

[Cachette]

Well... for AVC stones 1.0-1.3ct that are $6-8k with a 1.03-1.07 aspect ratio, there are 2:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8973/ a larger I1 F - I know you said F was to high but I didn't want to list only one stone.
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9494/ a smaller H Si2

I'd probably go with the H because I1 clarity would be a mind-clean issue for me, but it would be interesting to see them side by side.

You will notice a different between a k diamond and g/h melee, but you may not mind it https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-out-k-color-diamonds.167037/ - see Haven's set about half way down the thread.

Do you want to broaden your preference or wait?

I love shopping AVCs - thanks for the fun hunt!

You're too kind Hope Dream! How wonderful of you to help! The first one, like you said, would be a mind clean issue for me also. The inclusion is pretty big and would take one heck of a big prong to hide it.

The other is actually one I'm curious about... It's the second ASET that I copied above to ask Rhino about its performance based on its ASET. I'm looking forward to hearing what he says.

I'm still not 100% certain if I will wait but perhaps I may get one now and upgrade later for bigger. I have a big time itch that needs to be scratched and only a pretty diamond can cure me.

Cachette

 

[HopeDream]

Well.....Was a video made? I still want to know how the two stones would compare visually given the variation in their ASETS.

 

[UberClaire]

Yes -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICYW8pedP1s&feature=plcp

 

[HopeDream]

Thanks UberClaire!

Wow! There really isn't a visual difference . Very interesting
Great Video John!

Cachette did you pick one?

 

[Rhino]

Thanks UberClaire!

Wow! There really isn't a visual difference . Very interesting
Great Video John!

Cachette did you pick one?

Thanks Hope. I thought you would appreciate that.

 

[Dreamer_D]

xActually, I think all cushions show this effect to a degree. Its the same way that all RBs, no matter how well cut, show *some* obstruction sometimes.

Attached is HopeDreams image where I circled the areas she was talking about -- the areas between the maltese crosses, that show some "mushy" ineffectual virtual facets. I noticed these same areas in the AVC I had for a while. I noticed it mostly in very strong sunlight. I think its likely a hallmark of a chunky cushion, and minimized like it is in an AVC is likely the best you will find.

The whole point of buying a cut like an AVC is so you don't need to worry about this stuff Cachette. Pick one that pleases your eyes in shape and fits your budget.

Now, if you want to look for an antique cushion or some other brand, this issue may be more important to consider. But not with an AVC.

 

[UberClaire]

Thanks UberClaire!

Wow! There really isn't a visual difference . Very interesting
Great Video John!

Cachette did you pick one?

No problem -- it's what comes of stalking Rhino's YouTube channel, lol.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Thanks UberClaire!

Wow! There really isn't a visual difference . Very interesting

And this is why I am not such a big ASET-lover. These two ASETs look different but the stones look identical. Another video Jon shot showed how ASETs of poorly cut stones can identify those stones -- but the poorly cut stones were obviously poorly cut by looking at them in the video or in photos. In other words, the ASET did not add anything beyond what the eyes can tell. Add to this the fact that most vendors do not use ASET properly (GOG being an exception), and you get a tool that is little help to most consumers.

 

[Cachette]

Thanks UberClaire!

Wow! There really isn't a visual difference . Very interesting
Great Video John!

Cachette did you pick one?

Hi HopeDream! I'm working with Jonathan right now and will update the thread once everything is finalized. He's been beyond helpful in my quest and you can't ask for better customer service than what I've been given.

The video is great and it's the next best thing to getting to see the stones in real life. Very informative also on the role of the ASET in selecting diamonds. They are both beautiful stones!

Cachette

 

[Cachette]

xActually, I think all cushions show this effect to a degree. Its the same way that all RBs, no matter how well cut, show *some* obstruction sometimes.

Attached is HopeDreams image where I circled the areas she was talking about -- the areas between the maltese crosses, that show some "mushy" ineffectual virtual facets. I noticed these same areas in the AVC I had for a while. I noticed it mostly in very strong sunlight. I think its likely a hallmark of a chunky cushion, and minimized like it is in an AVC is likely the best you will find.

The whole point of buying a cut like an AVC is so you don't need to worry about this stuff Cachette. Pick one that pleases your eyes in shape and fits your budget.

Now, if you want to look for an antique cushion or some other brand, this issue may be more important to consider. But not with an AVC.

Thanks Dreamer! That's what I'm doing! It's exciting but I'll be honest, my nerves are a little frazzled with all this - I want everything to be perfect and not being able to really "see" what I'm buying, I'll probably second guess until the end. But that's my nature. Any kind of decision making stresses me out! I'm sure everything will be fine though. Jonathan is really helpful and Marie is quite patient in helping me select a setting.

Cachette

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks UberClaire!

Wow! There really isn't a visual difference . Very interesting

And this is why I am not such a big ASET-lover. These two ASETs look different but the stones look identical. Another video Jon shot showed how ASETs of poorly cut stones can identify those stones -- but the poorly cut stones were obviously poorly cut by looking at them in the video or in photos. In other words, the ASET did not add anything beyond what the eyes can tell. Add to this the fact that most vendors do not use ASET properly (GOG being an exception), and you get a tool that is little help to most consumers.

I really, really agree with this. I have learned that diamonds can be excellent cut and have a small amount of leakage according to the ASET or Idealsccope and guess what? They still look perfect with the eyes...which is the tool that counts most! I never worry about diamonds from GOG because Jon screens them so well and also will tell you what you need to know.

I can't wait to see what you have chosen! No worries with an AVC!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Cachette I know this is an important purchase for you, you've been plotting this upgrade for a while! I wonder if you would consider seeing your diamond in person before you set it? It is a little more complex from Canada but not *that* big a deal. I just want you to be sure you are getting the right diamond *for you* since you have wanted this for so long!