Please help with asscher!!!!

[Beansy]

Hi all,

We just got the royal (branded) asscher in the mail, and the boyfriend and I are going back and forth with what to do. He want's to make sure this is truely what it's worth. Please help. Thanks.

6.16 x 6.14 x 3.98
1.24 cts
D 64.8%
T 57%
Girdle Med
Culet small
polish VG
symmetry G
Si2
G
Fluor faint
Price $7490

It does have visible inclusions when viewing from the pavillion, most are white, but it includes 3 teany tiny dark ones, and a large feather.

Please help me out.

 

[Hest88]

You can't really quibble with a branded diamond's price, especially something as unique as a RA. However, you can quibble over whether or not it's a stone you can live with. Personally, eye-visible inclusions would drive me nuts, though, and I'd hold out for a stone that really made me happy.

 

[Beansy]

I would love to hear from Niceice, whiteflash, and Rich here, too.

I am posting a quote from niceice that concerns me about the royal we have here...

"The total depth for an Asscher needs to be in the 67 - 70% range in order for the concentric squares to look right. The table diameter is not as critical. Excellent polish and symmetry is readily available so you shouldn't feel like you need to settle for anything less..."

Should I be worried, or can I get a better performing square than this royal????

 

[Mara]

Tough call Beansy...do you love the stone? The way it looks? That may be more important the numbers, esp since you have the stone in your possession.




That said, I am not an eye visible inclusion person either--we passed on a very well cut SI1 because it had a dark carbon spot visible from the bottom....who looks at a diamond from the bottom? Still it bothered me.




Good luck, hope some of the experts chime in to assist you.

 

[Beansy]

Thanks for responding Hest and Mara.

I have in my mind the image of what the 2 ct looked like in the B and M store that first made me fall in love with the royals, but this isn't really fair when looking at a 1.24 at home in our generic lighting conditions, is it? It definately sparkles, but not in that same way.

We fell in love with a square cut emerald at Tiffany's too, but again, the lighting conditions are prime and tweaked to make even fiberglass look good.

I'm dying to take it to the mall and walk into Victoria's secret with their tiny halogens just to see if it compares? The boy seems to be bothered by the inclusions, though, and I fear going any higher in price, it seems selfish on my part.

 

[Giangi]

Hello Beansy!

I thnk you got a pretty stone! RA's look so different from generic ones... Much prettier!

On this stone, I like the small table, the very even girdle, while the depth seems to be a bit shallow. But I am sure that if it passed the royal asscher's quality control, it is still very good. Also, you'll see that many good looking unbranded asschers with 66-70% depths have thick girdles, while this one has a medium girdle, so this may be why it is a bit shallow.

As for the inclusions... SI 2 in step cut has almost always eye-visible inclusions... But are these visible in the face up position or only up side down?
If the inclusion thing bothers you, I'd look for a 1.10-1.15ct stone, G-H-I color and VS 2 or SI 1. They should look a bit better. I have a little I color Royal Asscher and it's very white.

Believe me, I am picky, I see body color in face up position even in G-graded stones.

 

[Beansy]

Thanks all for your help. We are going to pass on this one, though. Everyone was right, the SI2 (at least in this example) is way too included for us to be truely happy.

My boyfriend is now starting his diamond education, and he said finding information out about the Royal asscher is like finding a BMW with a unicorn horn on it. HA HA, so true.

Thanks all.

 

[Mara]

Good luck B...can't wait to see what you guys find next

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 11/28/2003 3:24:24 PM Beansy wrote:

'The total depth for an Asscher needs to be in the 67 - 70% range in. The table diameter is not as critical. Excellent polish and symmetry is readily available so you shouldn't feel like you need to settle for anything less...'---------------​

The comment on depth regards the classic (old) Asscher profile, the new branded one is a whole different storry. I doubt that the RA brand limits depth exactly in this way, if at all. The comment on polish and symmetry applies to modern emerald cuts (including square emeralds, of course). old cuts do not attain such technical level. Very Good symmetry is desirable in step cut stones, which tend to emphasize the quality of the cut readily, but Good/Good grades are, I guess, the acceptable norm.


Black inclusions though? I would probbaly not sacrifice that much clarity for the brand name. It may be an RA, but black spots are black spots and a well cut suare emerald, crystal clear and well priced seems (to me, at least) as a worthy contender for the whatever brand. Of course, the choice is yours... The RA does have some extra facets out there which makes it look slightly different than ordinary square emerald cuts, but I can't possibly know how important is this difference for you. The new, RA brand has a very different look than the old Asscher, and I doubt it had at any point the goal to reproduce the old look.


By the way: while there never where certain benchmarks for the old Asscher look, versions with small tables seem to be preffered now. Of course, since there is no standard in force, one can argue aout this forever. For the square emerald cuts being sold as "asschers" now, table dimensions are subject to the criteria for emerald cuts...


Did you get to do your lighting experiment? I am very curious to know what the result was... However, why not seek a stone which looks good under normal lighting?

 

[elmo]

I saw a branded Royal asscher last weekend, and thought it was just about the finest looking step-cut diamond I've ever seen. Sortof like what Giangi said, it was a J color stone that faced up very well. I did a little research afterwards, and it looks as though you may get just a bit more spread on the branded stone than on the ex/ex old-style Asschers up on the niceice site. But the branded runs a bit more. Really nice diamonds though.

Has anyone seen the Royal asscher in 80-90 point sizes?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 11/30/2003 12:00:32 AM elmo wrote:

I saw a branded Royal asscher last weekend, and thought it was just about the finest looking step-cut diamond I've ever seen. Sortof like what Giangi said, it was a J color stone that faced up very well. I did a little research afterwards, and it looks as though you may get just a bit more spread on the branded stone than on the ex/ex old-style Asschers up on the niceice site. But the branded runs a bit more. Really nice diamonds though.

Has anyone seen the Royal asscher in 80-90 point sizes?----------------

I did get my hands on a lot of smaller RAs (0.9 to 1.1 cts, 7 stones). I actually liked the distinct look of these, while other special cuts appear (to me) to loose their personality in smaller sizes. I guess they are an improved version of the square emerald cut, and would not go for eye visible inclusions in either...

The square stones on the NiceIce site are but an approximation of the older Asscher cuts. The old stones were much less precisely cut. I have only seen two examples of historic asschers in person and maybe a dozen otherwise. Based on this sample, I would say that the respective cut clearly conserved the shape of the octo rough, and had relatively imprecisely cut facets. The huge (over 30%) crowns looked like nothing modern cuts would tolerate. Some of the stones (maybe 4 of those mentioned) had extra large 'corner' sides making them look more like octagons than squares. No comment on light return... for better or worse the old Asscher was cut for weight retention-fullstop. However, those old cuts are out of the picture now: they are really nowhere to be found aside old jewelry.