shape
carat
color
clarity

Opinions on this Asscher / Square Emerald

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

ghgh71

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Messages
6
My girlfirend fell in love with the Asscher / Square Emerald cut diamond .... so my mission is to find a great one for her E-Ring.

I have been to several local B/M jewelry stores in Atlanta and visited many online storefronts and I think i found a great diamond at a good price ..... I have seen it in person ..... and now i'm hoping to get a few opinions.

My desired specs: Carats: 1.4-1.75 Clarity: VS1/VS2 Color: F/G

Also, I have decided that I definaltely like the look of a larger Table on a Square Asscher vs smaller table commonly seen on the Royal Asscher.

Here are the specs of the diamond im seriously considering purchasing: (actual GIA cert is attached)
Shape: Asscher / Sq. Emerald
Carats: 1.53
Clarity: VS2
Color: G
Measmnts: 6.7 x 6.7 x 4.16 mm
Depth: 62.1%
Table: 67.0%
Girdle: Thin -Medium
Culet: N
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Fluor: Strong Blue
Certified: GIA
=====================
Price: $7,200 (diamond only).
30 day return policy

Questions:
1. What do you think of the specs?

2. I am a bit uneasy about the "Strong Blue Fluorescence". The jeweler placed this diamond next to 2 other similar stones w/o flourescence and I couldnt tell any difference in terms of appearance.

3. Does Strong Flou account for a lower price? I've done the price search on pricescope ..... and this stone seems to be at the "inexpensive" end of the spectrum. Could this be because of the Flou? What else should i be concerned about?

4. My girlfriend likes a "simple, thin, platimum setting". The jeweler suggested a "Tiffany Style" platinum setting. Does this sound like a good direction to take for an Asscher? Does anyone have examples i can see?

Thoughts? Comments? Insults??? Thanks in advance for your valued input!

Diamond_1.53GVS2.gif
 
I myself am also going for a squareish stone with cut corners, the Radiant stone, similar to the Ascheer cut. The jeweler also mentioned the tiffany setting, which is most likely the Lucida. I amattaching a copy of the princess set in the setting (found at whiteflash,com), and the design is by the designer Vatache. They are rumored to be the designer of the tiffany settings...This is a low set x-prong with 4 prongs at each corner. Without the asscher in it, you can try to imagine what it would look like... Good luck on your stone hunt, and this stone is probably lower priced because of florescence. The specs are good, and normally the stronger the florescence, the less the stone. Slight florescence on colored stones (below H, I believe) are supposed to make the stone "looL' whiter, but at your color range, may just lower the price. It still seems lovely, so it's your call..good luck!!

Vatache x prong.jpg
 
Here is the Tiffany's Lucida setting, so similar to the Vatache. You make up your own mind if they are similar or not. I can tell you there IS a price difference...
2.gif


engagement_lucida.jpg
 
I was going through the same exercise yesterday for a post on another thread. My conclusion was that the picture on the D Vatche site is not very good at comparing the two models (the setting in vertical position is tilted, so the Xs beneath the stone look tighter packed together than those in the Tiffany setting). Another picture (on the Niceice site) works better at exposing the striking similarity between the two settings (esp. the Knife edge D Vatche version). The tips of the prongs - showing a bit more on top of the stone - and the tappering elements not quite as close to the stone as in the Lucida "poster kid" make most of the difference to me, but both details can be adjusted while the stone is set, I believe. I would be quite grateful to know your opinion on this...
 
Lovely setting.
1.gif

As for the stone, if you like larger tabled Asschers(opposed to RA with 53-59% tables), then this one might be a good candidate. Can you get a Sarin to make sure that the crown height is >10%?. It would be really helpful.
If you're fine with the larger table (which is still within very well accepted ranges, BTW) and the strong blue fluorescence, it looks like a very nice stone: square and clean. I like the location of inclusions in this VS 2... There are a few but they seem to be very scattered from the plot.
10.gif

Let us know what you end up getting!
 
From the limited info, it looks pretty decent for a square emerald. However, it would be really nice to get crown and pavillion info.
 
Thanks for the thoughts on the setting and diamond!

Question: Can you tell me more info about Crown Height and Pavilion? Also, is a Sarin something that both BM and Online jewelers always should have avail?

Shopping for a diamond is a bit overwhelming! Everytime I think I've got my bases covered ..... I find addl things to learn about.
 
----------------
On 1/26/2004 8:14:15 AM ghgh71 wrote:



Question: Can you tell me more info about Crown Height and Pavilion? Also, is a Sarin something that both BM and Online jewelers always should have avail?
----------------


Not sure how iportant these mesuremnts are for a non-round cut, but most standards / benchmarks refer to these parameters. The most straightforward set of reference measurements I know of is the AGA chart (found with usage instructions and all under the "fancy shapes" link on the first page here). This standard does not focus on light return (as they explain): if this is what you are after, there is no rule currently devised to deliver predictions based on numbers. All you can rely on is a direct analysis of the stone (BrilianceScope and IdealScope come to mind) or have the model of the stone evaluated via a computer simulation (DiamCalc example). For the latter, you would need the complete measurements of the diamond (given by a Sarin or OGI report, which, BTW, is something any seller can get with more or less headache and cost involved). Not sure wether step cut stones are even expected to have great light return, although they surely can.

There is no rule of thumb for what makes an EC (square or not) sparkle, unfortunately. Of all types of myths and legends I came accross in this domain, three seem somewhat more popular: that a large table (say over 70% or more than depth, cf. AGA) guarantees a dull-er stone, that steep pavilion facets create a window effect (see-through zone with no light return) and that a combination of multiple crown and pavilion angles (these are multiple, not one as in a RBC) might be a sufficient determinant of light return (not helping, since no one went as far as to determine it yet). the one sure thing: deep stones look small, so (my obsession here) I would not get one more than 70% deep, no matter how Asschers were cut 100 years ago.

Conclusion: you may want to find a stone with higer crown and smaller table, and the combination of measures for the shallower total depth in the AGA charts are probably the best guidance available. If you want sparkle, you would need to choose among the very few stones for which the characteristic has been tested by the seller, or else prepare to search for the proverbial needle.

This is about all I know about my favorite cut
2.gif
Hope it helps...
 
The numbers on the stone seem to be good, it is a perfect square,& The table and depth are withing the proportions of a good cut stone.
The only thing that I am concerned with ,is that the stone has strong flour.Most of the times it has no affect on the stone,with a few exceptions where the stone might be a little hazy (and that you want to stay away from),If it's on the border of being Very Strong Blue.
Also if you ever want to upgrade or sell the stone, the buyer would use that against paying you a higher price,As these stones do trade for less money than the ones that don't have flour.
As far as the ring is concerned, there is the 3 stone ring that's beautiful and elegant,it has 2 smaller sq.ec. side stones,enhancing the center stone .in a crossover prong Platinum ring.

Just another suggestion.

Good luck
 
Thanks again for the help! This forum is a tremendous resource!!!

I received the Sarin info on the Asscher / Sq Emerald diamond today:
Weight: 1.53 ct
Width/Length 6.68 - 6.74 L/W 1.01
Total Depth 62.3% 4.16mm
Crown Angle 40.1 (40.4 - 39.8)
Crown Height 9.4% (9.1 - 9.6)
Pavil Angle 56.5 (56.4 - 56.6)
Pavil Depth 51.1% (51.9 - 50.4)
Table size 69.7% 4.66mm
Girdle thick 1.8% (1.3 - 2.2)

Do the Crown / Pav measurements look good? What effect would a lower crown (ie: 9-10%) have verson a larger crown (12-16%)?

As reminder, here is info from the GIA report
Shape: Asscher / Sq. Emerald
Carats: 1.53
Clarity: VS2
Color: G
Measmnts: 6.7 x 6.7 x 4.16 mm
Depth: 62.1%
Table: 67.0%
Girdle: Thin -Medium
Culet: N
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Fluor: Strong Blue
Certified: GIA
=====================
Price: $7,200 (diamond only).
30 day return policy
100% upgrade policy

I noticed that there was a 2.7% difference in Table size between the FIA Cert and Sarin report. Are differences betweeen the two reports common? The other numbers on both reports seem to match very closely

As far as the strong blue flourescence goes, I have decided that if there is no noticable effect on the diamond (ie: hazy or oily), then I'm comfortable buying w/ flour. The jeweler is going to show me the diamond in direct outdoor sunlight tomorrow so i'll know more then. Plus, the jewelery store has a 100% upgrade policy so i dont need to worry about resale value should we decide to upgrade in the future.

Thanks again for the comments! They are most welcome.
 
Bump. Addl opinions on this Asscher diamond now that I have the Sarin report info?
 
From the numbers, I would be a little hesitant. Such a low crown might make it look a bit flat. As I suggested, I'd consider stones w/12-16% crown height for that famous 'hypnotic' look.
1.gif
 
As far as the sarin report is concerned,these stones are a little flat.Lacking the brilliance that a real sq.ec should have.

I would try to stay withing the 14%+-cr. height,or stones with a higher depth, in order to get the most brilliancy out of the stone.
 
Agree on the crown. I'd prefer a higher one as well.

You know, I thought I remembered the table and depth numbers being reversed, but I remembered wrong. I would also like the table to be smaller than the depth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top