pls pls help me decide btw emerald cut and sq em cut

[London]

Hello all,
These are two stones I am debating between. I realize the emeralds table is sort of big and depth shallow but I have read a number of times to not go off of the numbers or AGA class tool alone. So I just dont know which is better. I have a picture and cert to go off of but nothing else. I love the emeralds 1.22 length width but I also love the sq one. Which one is more likely to be a better performer and have a nice bright and lively center? Pls help!

sq em cut:
3.66 crt
8.91x8.91x5.74
G VS1 faint
64% depth 58%table
13.5% crown height
slightly thick to thick girdle
culet none
ex ex
AGA class tool: 1B

em cut:
4.22
10.40x8.50x5.18
I VS1 none
61% depth 72% table
9.5% crown height 49.3% pavillion
medium girdle
culet none
ex ex
AGA class tool: 2B

 

[Niel]

Just looking at the pics the square emerald (caugh cough asscher) looks like the winner to me.

 

[AprilBaby]

The asscher will be more lively but I prefer the emerald, classic!

 

[msop04]

The square one looks like it would give better performance, but I like the chubby rectangular EC pictured best because it'll give a good bit more finger coverage.

 

[London]

The emerald gives 14% more face up finger coverage.
Also asscher pavilion depth% is 48% (forgot to type that part in above)

 

[Diamondbug]

Tough choice. I think the asscher is beautiful but I really can't deny the need for finger coverage. Sorry I am no help.... but it's a good problem to have!!

Weeeellll took another look at it.... I guess that is a gorgeous asscher so I will have to pick it as long as it performs the same in real life.

 

[dk168]

Based on the two photos alone, the square EC looks like a better stone.

However, I am not a fan of square EC myself, and prefer rectangular (and longer) ECs myself.

DK

 

[msop04]

OP, have you tried both shapes on to see how they look on your hand? If so, which shape looked best on you and/or made you happier?

 

[Gypsy]

Very tough.

Are they both long distant? Can we see the ASET of either. Or if they are in person, can you walk with them both in the crease between your fingers for a while and see which one looks best to you?

 

[msop04]

I ask because although I feel round shapes look best on me, I couldn't get past the finger coverage the cushion halo provided (vs. round halo).

 

[London]

I have tried asschers and emeralds on my hand and the round looks better on me but I dont care bc I love the step cut.

I think what setting I put the step cut in will also play a role in which one will look better so my bigger concern is which one will perform better.

No ASET available

 

[LLJsmom]

From the pics I can't tell which would perform better either. But from shape alone I would chose the emerald. Someone called it a chubby rectangle. I totally agree and it looks gorgeous!!

 

[lambskin]

I think that the photo of the square cut is far better than the emerald cut and you need a better photo of the latter. That being said, if the Emerald cut has a good performance i would go for that as it will look huge on the finger as it is nice and long and a bit chubby. It is far more classic and will look good in a simple setting -especially with two baguettes- a classic 3 stone ring.

 

[arkieb1]

The square EC in theory will have better light return and "perform better" as you put it. I am a sucker for a fat emerald so I actually like the shape and size of no.2 better and would possibly choose it over the other stone provided it's not dead looking... but it depends if you want size or just fire. It's tough to decide without either a video with them side by side or ASET images.

 

[London]

I get to see the emerald in person tomorrow

It will have to be in the evening so I wont have daylight to judge from but will I just know if it is the one?!? How will I know which one is better since I only get to see the emerald in person and not the asscher?

I don't think the place I'm going to have a look at it has any diamond performance devices. Any tests I can do with the emerald to see if it is a good performer when I see it in person?

 

[dk168]

Don't know if such tests exist, however, I went by look and shape when I was choosing mine, in that some ECs can look dull whereas others look more sparkly and bright, and some shapes are more pleasing to me than others (I prefer longer ECs to chubby ones).

DK

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Can you enlarge the picture of the emerald cut? I really can't compare it to the asscher. The asscher looks excellent, but I usually like those a little smaller and set in a halo or bezel or something. Not sure about one that size. I would in theory maybe prefer an emerald cut at that size, but I would be unlikely to choose the one you posted. I'd want more defined corners and definitely a smaller table. The asscher has a great table size.

 

[London]

this is the only other pic I was sent...

 

[Gypsy]

Why are you buying such an expensive stone from a vendor that doesn't offer ASETs?

Here's what I would do.

Have both stones sent to Neil Beaty. http://www.americangemregistry.com/ Or since you are in LA, to Patrick Davis: http://www.jewelryappraiser.net/

Most vendor will be fine with sending the stone to an appraiser for evaluation before purchase. It's smart, and not uncommon. Particularly given how much money you are spending!


They will be able to give you an ASET and recommend which stone to buy. And if you go to Patrick then you can go and see the stones before you buy.

Honestly, after all the research you've been doing I'm shocked you are working with a vendor without an ASET.

 

[heididdl]

I join the ranks. Although I think the ascher might be the better performer ...as an owner of a 3.66 EC I love my finger coverage and I love my sparkle and mine only has very good polish and good symmetry so yours will be amazing.

 

[London]

Why are you buying such an expensive stone from a vendor that doesn't offer ASETs?

Here's what I would do.

Have both stones sent to Neil Beaty. http://www.americangemregistry.com/ Or since you are in LA, to Patrick Davis: http://www.jewelryappraiser.net/

Most vendor will be fine with sending the stone to an appraiser for evaluation before purchase. It's smart, and not uncommon. Particularly given how much money you are spending!


They will be able to give you an ASET and recommend which stone to buy. And if you go to Patrick then you can go and see the stones before you buy.

Honestly, after all the research you've been doing I'm shocked you are working with a vendor without an ASET.

Very good point! I will look into this. Thank you.