Which Asscher...Need Help!!

[barkingpumpkin]

Which loose Asscher Diamond should I buy:
(1) 2.29 1.05 ratio, Depth 70.3, Table 59, Girdle THIN-SLTHICK, Polish GOOD, Symmentry GOOD, Clarity VS1, Fluor NON, Cutlet NON.

(2) 2.01 1.03 ratio, Depth 68.6, Table 61, Girdle THICK, Polish EX, Symmentry EX, Clarity VS1, Fluor NON, Cutlet NON.

They are the same price. I am an amateur to diamonds, but have done a lot of research. I like the bigger one, but concerned about the polish/symmentry being not as good for a bigger Asscher. Will I notice the difference all other things being equal?

Help...I would like to purchase today or tomorrow.

Thanks!

 

[9301silver]

I definitely suggest checking out this place below for buying and answering questions.


http://www.diamondbrokersoffl.com/aboutus.htm

You should also check out the royal asscher diamond rather than a regular

http://royalasscher.com/

I just bought one and it just jumps out to me much more than a regular asscher because
the royal has many more facets to reflect the light.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 10/14/2004 4:09:48 PM barkingpumpkin wrote:

Which loose Asscher Diamond should I buy:


I like the bigger one, but concerned about the polish/symmentry being not as good for a bigger Asscher. Will I notice the difference all other things being equal?

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

The numbers look very nice

The havier one is also deeper cut, and the other one has a thicker girdle... so: is there a serious difference of size (milimeters, not carats) after all ?

I bet there is no way to detect the polish grade (and the first slightest scratch will do away with the "ex" by all means). The 'good' symmetry grade is most likely not of any concern, although some very slight fault could become visible with magnification if unlucky.

However, table and depth do not do the best job to describe how these diamonds look. is it possible at all to get at least a picture of the two ? Not that the Ideal Scope would hurt

 

[barkingpumpkin]

Thank you Valeria. Both of these are online so I cannot look at them. I wasn't sure how important the polish/symmetry was with the Asscher as I have read conflicting reports. The 2.29 is bigger so I thought that the "good" rating might not show as well as the "Excellent" rating on a smaller Asscher. So, your comments are helpful...I never thought about the ole' one scratch and the EX becomes a Good... :>.

Would you say that the clarity is more important with the Asscher then? I have found two new ones, 2.08, 2.06, that both have VVS2. Here are their stats. I really like the 2.06 as its almost perfect square...but should I worry about the verythin-slightlythick Girdle? At the end of the day, will I ever notice the difference in any of these given that I will only see one of them (the one I buy!). ???

2.06, 7.11x7.10x4.78, Depth 67.3, Table 63, Girdle VTN-STK, Culet NON, Polish EX, Symmetry EX, Clarity VVS2, Color G, Fluor NON

2.08, 7.18x7.13x4.92, Depth 69, Table 65, Girdle M-STK, Culet NON, Polish VG, Symmetry VG, Clarity VVS2, Color G, Fluor NON

Thanks!

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 10/15/2004 11:52:05 AM barkingpumpkin wrote:




...both have VVS2.

Here are their stats. I really like the 2.06 as its almost perfect square...but should I worry about the verythin-slightlythick Girdle?

[...] given that I will only see one of them (the one I buy!). ???

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

There seem to be three Qs in your post (slashed from original above). I am not much of an 'expert'. Here's my take on each:

Clarity: well, given that I really only like step cuts I would be in serious trouble if only VVS will do. You will read in lots of places that step cuts show inclusions more - this is true. It is also true that inclusions can be oriented during cuttin so that the finished facets show the best aparent clarity - so even SI1 is not a definitive curse. VS? Sure bet. VVS ? if you really want that.

It would be a pitty to avoind a nice diamond just because the calrity grade does not read right inspite of the stone's look. Otherwise, VVS is really just a "rarity" factor - nothing more.



Shape: you say 'almost perfect square' - both these stones are perfect squares. GIA calls 'square' everything wil L/W < 1.05 I think this is conservative. You ca try the "fancy shape selector" application at gemappraisers.com to model such tiny variations and get an idea of what they mean.


Girdle outline: there will always be some variatioon of girdle thickness on a square stone due to the corners (thickness changes turning corners without affecting symmetry). Saying "less variation is better" here is just another rule of thumb - partially useful only because the cert does not tell you well what diamonds look like in person. 'Very thin' is not great news - if near corners, this may make them brittle. There is just one way to know - get stone under loupe

You say: " I will only see one of them (the one I buy!)."

This is really not great. Can they really sell an expensive gem like this completely sight unseen ? I hope not. There must be some return policy, not to mention a digital camera somewhere around. There are SARIN machines these days too, you know. If worse comes to worse and only the return policy works, could you have the stone shipped to an appraiser? 2 carats G/VVS seems well worth the trouble

Just my 0.2, of course.

 

[JC]

Well, you do have a difference of carat weight, but I like option #2 the best....Good Luck.

 

[barkingpumpkin]

Thanks for your advice. Very useful.

Yes, the company has a 30-day return...so I have time to get it analyzed and return if needed.