Royal Asscher and generic Asschers

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

I went to a local jewelery store today to pick up a tourmaline ring they had set for me, and they had a bunch of STUNNING Asschers in-store...which turned out to be Royal Asschers. This was the first time I had seen asschers in person and they were mesmerizing (I came back home and told BF that I think I wanted an asscher now instead of an RB, lol). I didn''t have my camera with me, but I''m hoping they''ll let me take pictures when I go back next week to pick up my earrings...but in the meantime, can people tell me (please) more about the difference between Royal and generic asschers?

I know from past threads that Royals are patented and they were the first asschers to be cut, and also that as a result of the name and patent, they''re more expensive (I saw a 1.1 ct D VVS1 in a plain setting (I think platinum) for about $18,500, but are there other differences? Do Royals perform better than generics?

If anyone has pictures comparing the two, I''d appreciate it. I did see the comparison on this thread but I''d definitely love to see more.

Thanks!

 

[bgray]

The non-technical response is that while some "generic" asschers --really just square emerald cuts--can be quite lovely, the true royal asscher is a different animal altogether. It has a unique combination of facets, often coupled with a high crown, in a truly octagonal stone that displays concentric steps into the stone creating that windmill effect, all viewed through an optical "tunnel." They are really quite extraordinary............

 

[strmrdr]

This could take a book...

The RA are not the original asschers they more or less are a more modern reinvention of the asscher by the company founded by the original designer.
Even from the beginning asschers where cut in many different ways and saying one is more right is problematic.
But what I would consider the real asscher isn''t being cut on any kind of scale and to be truthful were not very common even back in the day.(I have seen 3 out of a bunch of vintage asschers)
That said some very very beautiful diamonds are being cut to the asscher concept today and in the past also.
The RA has extra pavilion facets that gives them a slightly different look than many other common modern asschers on the market.
The RA look can be duplicated with and without the extra facets.
Some cutters are cutting to a similar structure as RA as the patent is unenforceable for all practical purposes.

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

Thanks BGray and Storm! Storm, I was reading some of your past posts just now on asschers - very helpful!

There was something about the asschers I saw in the store earlier today that I think is hard to capture in photos...I had no idea, even from looking at the pictures of incredible asschers owned by PSers, that it could scintillate so much.

My concern, from reading past posts, is how small PSers say they face up compared to a RB. The 1.1 ct I saw definitely seemed a little on the smaller side, but there wasn''t a huge difference. When I go back, I think I''d be interested to see a couple side-by-side comparisons with the asschers they have and the RBs.

 

[Miss Fortune]

Overall, I prefer the look of "generic" asschers to royal asschers. I currently have a 1.2 ct and I''m trying to find a 2.1 to upgrade to. They definitely face up a lot smaller than other stones of similar size. Just my 2 cents. BUT, they are the most lovely diamonds ever!! IMHO

 

[bgray]

Date: 12/10/2008 11:58:51 PM
Author: Brown.Eyed.Girl
Thanks BGray and Storm! Storm, I was reading some of your past posts just now on asschers - very helpful!

There was something about the asschers I saw in the store earlier today that I think is hard to capture in photos...I had no idea, even from looking at the pictures of incredible asschers owned by PSers, that it could scintillate so much.

My concern, from reading past posts, is how small PSers say they face up compared to a RB. The 1.1 ct I saw definitely seemed a little on the smaller side, but there wasn't a huge difference. When I go back, I think I'd be interested to see a couple side-by-side comparisons with the asschers they have and the RBs.

personally--i would rather an asscher or something a little more unusual even if it faced up smaller than say a comparable round. When I first started searching for my stone a long long time ago........................

I wanted an Asscher --a real Asscher. I even bought a rare book on the Asscher family and the whole cutting thing. Long story short I couldnt find a stone I liked. The vintage stones i found were lower color grades than i wanted and the new RA's were too expensive relative to how much I liked them. Not enough in the end.........My stone person at the time said for the size stone you want you will need to go up at least a carat plus in an asscher to achieve even close to the same look. I ended up with an Emerald cut which i am thrilled with but the asscher thing is compelling--

 

[Miss Fortune]

Date: 12/11/2008 12:23:20 AM
Author: bgray

Date: 12/10/2008 11:58:51 PM

Author: Brown.Eyed.Girl

Thanks BGray and Storm! Storm, I was reading some of your past posts just now on asschers - very helpful!


There was something about the asschers I saw in the store earlier today that I think is hard to capture in photos...I had no idea, even from looking at the pictures of incredible asschers owned by PSers, that it could scintillate so much.


My concern, from reading past posts, is how small PSers say they face up compared to a RB. The 1.1 ct I saw definitely seemed a little on the smaller side, but there wasn''t a huge difference. When I go back, I think I''d be interested to see a couple side-by-side comparisons with the asschers they have and the RBs.

personally--i would rather an asscher or something a little more unusual even if it faced up smaller than say a comparable round. When I first started searching for my stone a long long time ago........................

I wanted an Asscher --a real Asscher. I even bought a rare book on the Asscher family and the whole cutting thing. Long story short I couldnt find a stone I liked. The vintage stones i found were lower color grades than i wanted and the new RA''s were too expensive relative to how much I liked them. Not enough in the end.........My stone person at the time said for the size stone you want you will need to go up at least a carat plus in an asscher to achieve even close to the same look. I ended up with an Emerald cut which i am thrilled with but the asscher thing is compelling--

true on the unusual thing... I''m the only person I know that has an Asscher. I love emeralds too! Especially when set East West!!!

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

MissFortune, BGray, I totally agree on the unusual factor - there''s definitely something about such a unique, lovely cut...that most people won''t have (especially since they''re so hard to find!). I think my jaw dropped when I saw them in the display case earlier - they definitely weren''t there last week (the owner said the Asscher company sent them in so they''d be there for the holiday season). But I guess what I''m worried about is that it won''t be as "classic" to me in the long-run as a RB would be - and I don''t believe in upgrades (nice RHRs a different story, of course!) so I want future ering to be as classic as possible. But of course, if BF presented me with an asscher, I wouldn''t say no

 

[bgray]

honestly--i thinki an Asscher even more classic than a round--more sense of history--kind of old-fashioned etc

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/11/2008 7:03:52 AM
Author: bgray
honestly--i thinki an Asscher even more classic than a round--more sense of history--kind of old-fashioned etc

ditto

 

[bgray]

Date: 12/11/2008 10:16:41 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/11/2008 7:03:52 AM
Author: bgray
honestly--i thinki an Asscher even more classic than a round--more sense of history--kind of old-fashioned etc

ditto

sorry tried to upload some photos--didnt workl

 

[Mediterranean]

Date: 12/11/2008 10:25:00 AM
Author: bgray

Date: 12/11/2008 10:16:41 AM

Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/11/2008 7:03:52 AM

Author: bgray

honestly--i thinki an Asscher even more classic than a round--more sense of history--kind of old-fashioned etc

ditto

Thritto!

In fact, the Krupp Diamond comes to mind. Definitely classic and elegant!

 

[bgray]

http://www.neimanmarcus.com/store/catalog/prod.jhtml?itemId=prod39440010&parentId=cat14840756&masterId=cat14460734&index=114&cmCat=cat000000cat2830732cat14460734cat14840756

 

[NewEnglandLady]

The difference is that a generic has 3 steps on the crown and 3 steps on the pavilion whereas the royal has 3 on the crown and 5 on the pavilion, right? I have to admit that I LOOOVE the fire of a royal asscher, but because of those extra facets the steps can be too thin on stones under 2 carats or so. For smaller stones, I think the bolder pattern of a generic is more flattering. While I prefer stones in the D-F range (especially in step cuts, I like how the icy whiteness emphasises the crisp lines), I would be happy to go down a little in color for the royal and a bit of a softer look. I just think they are all beautiful!

I never considered another cut for my e-ring because nothing else would do, haha, but for those who want something that faces up larger for their e-ring, I think an asscher would make a great RHR

So glad you got to see them! I think they are so beautiful in person...

 

[Mediterranean]

Ya know, if there''s anything that PS has taught me, it''s that I''m a fancy-shape kinda girl! The "squares/rectangles" especially: emeralds, asschers, princesses, radiants....

 

[bgray]

Date: 12/11/2008 11:47:42 AM
Author: Mediterranean
Ya know, if there''s anything that PS has taught me, it''s that I''m a fancy-shape kinda girl! The ''squares/rectangles'' especially: emeralds, asschers, princesses, radiants....

I am defintely a step cut person: asschers and emerad cuts. i actually dont like any brilliant cut stones. too much for me