please help us pick an asscher

[minxesq]

Hello Pricescopers:

My fiance and I would really appreciate your thoughts on the following two Asschers that our jeweler has offered to call in for us. Although we recognize that you really have to see a fancy cut in person to evaluate its qualities, any "pre-game" thoughts would be much appreciated by us before we make a 10-hour round trip to see these stones!

(1) Square Emerald Cut (GIA)

7.92 x 7.88 x 5.23 mm (length to width ratio: 1.00 x 1.01)
2.76 carat
Depth: 66.4%
Table: 61%
Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick
Culet: None
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Good
Clarity: VS1
Color: I
Fluorescence: None

(2) Square Emerald Cut (GIA)

7.87 x 7.71 x 5.33 mm (length to width ratio: 1.00 x 1.02)
2.77 carat
Depth: 69.8%
Table: 57%
Girdle: Thick
Culet: None
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Clarity: VS1
Color: H
Fluorescence: None

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

Based on what we have read from other Pricescopers' postings, the preferred specs would include:

Depth: Up to 64% (some seem to say up to 69%)
Table: 58% to 62%
Length to Width Ratio: 1.00 x 1.01 (some say up to 1.00 x 1.05)
Polish/Symmetry: Very Good/Very Good (or better)
Clarity: VS2 (or better)
Color: I (or better)

If we have this right, then it looks like the specs for Asscher #1 meet more of the preferred criteria, though its symmetry is only Good, not Very Good. Even though it is slightly smaller in carat weight, it has more spread.

Thanks so much in advance for all of your help!

 

[icemyster]

Cue Strmrdr!

 

[minxesq]

Thanks -- bring on the critique!!

Small but crucial update: The 2.76 Asscher (#1) is $21,000, and the 2.77 Asscher (#2) is $24,123.

Also, not sure if this adds anything to the analysis, but the GIA report for Asscher #1 is dated Sep. 2005 and the GIA report for Asscher #2 is dated Apr. 2006.

 

[strmrdr]

1st one: I color,,, in an asscher that big it may bug some people ,, symmetry only good .. may or may not be an issue.
Its worth looking at

2nd one: worth looking at.

The economics of asschers makes 64% deptha little low to be economically cut most of the time so they are very rare.
A lot of the ones that are available aren''t cut well with every weight saving trick in the book thrown in but there are exceptions.
kicken asschers go up to 75% depth and beyond but over 70% Id expect a discount over spreadier asschers or id pass.
Right now most of the best ones are found in the 65%-69% range because that is where the cutters doing the best work are cutting them right now.
The reason being that the rough will often sell for more and sell faster if cut into a princess cut so shallow asschers just aren''t economical.
64% is where I draw a fairly hard line on the table percentage on the high end and they can be kicken all the way down to a mid 40% table but 58-62 is a good range and right in the sweet spot for most of the better asschers being cut today.

 

[strmrdr]

there are several asschers threads here worth reading for more information.
Some of the numbers have been outdated as more info has come in.
One being the 15% top end for crown height.. that has since gone away as more data has came in.

https://www.pricescope.com/idealbb/forum.asp?forumID=32

 

[minxesq]

Thanks so much for this, Strmrdr!

It was particularly interesting to hear the supply/demand rationale for why certain roughs are more likely to end up as Princess cuts than as shallow Asschers (and thus how it is harder to find an Asscher with a depth below 64%). The economic drivers behind why a particular rough ends up with a particular cut and other specs is pretty fascinating.

Yes, after looking around at some other photos of folks with large I-colored stones, I think the I color in Asscher #1 could end up being an issue. Without seeing it, however, it''s hard to know whether we should ask our guy to look for different Asscher to call in for comparison against Asscher #2 (too bad that he can only get two at a time).

If you or anyone else happens to know of any other good candidates available on-line, please do let us know. Aside from the general guidelines above, we''re looking for something in the slightly under 3-carat range (to avoid the price jump/bad weight-saving cuts that are likely to come with diamonds just exceeding 3 carats. I guess the weight really doesn''t matter as long as the diamond actually looks nice and comes close to 8 mm (we''re trying to fit an existing setting). As always, thanks for your invaluable time and help!

 

[minxesq]

Just to make this more complicated, I''m particularly hopeful that we''re going to find one with a strong windmill pattern. I like them wider, but I''m not sure if that means we should be going for an Asccher that is more octagonal and/or with deeply clipped corners.

Strmrdr, you seem to have indicated elsewhere that you prefer a clipped corner square, so maybe that doesn''t affect the size of the windmill. Maybe it has to do with having wider steps -- I hope you don''t mind me "borrowing" one of your photos from this thread, for sake of illustration:

 

[minxesq]

I also think a nice drop is more interesting and Asscher-ish. Below is another of Strmrdr''s incredibly helpful illustrations from the same thread.

We had the opportunity to see a Royal Asscher in the approximate size range that we''re looking for, and it didn''t seem as Asscher-ish as the generic cuts/old Asschers. It was absolutely gorgeous, but the tons and tons of facets made it seem more like a Round Brilliant or a Princess from a distance. In a way, it was nice, because it made it more blingy. But it lost (for me, at least) the quality that makes you want to look down into an Asscher (the "pool" effect?).

I also thought that the some of the more interesting characteristics of an Asscher (particularly, the windmill and, in some cases, that drop effect) were lost or downplayed in the look of the Royal Asscher. I don''t know if I''m judging it correctly, but it looked much more like the "Narrow Step" illustration below, versus the "Wide Step" below, which is more the look that we''re going for.

 

[strmrdr]

The RA has a multi/narrow step look.
The ratio of white to black is a little different on most of them than my example but its the same look.
The drop style is the most common out there amoung the generic asschers.
The wide step is the least common out there.

The wide step is my favorite but I honestly like all 3 looks and would be happy with any of them.
My preference also varies by size in a 3ct one of the the narrow/multi/RA step patterns are my favorites because the drop is a little too much darkness at that size for me.
On the other hand the bolder pattern of the drop is my favorite in smaller asschers under 1ct or so.
Between 1 and 3 ct I like all 3 but lean towards the wide step if I found one. :}