Any issues with this emerald (Muzo no-oil)

[Sydneyphoenix]

Hi while I’ve been on the lookout for that perfect Burmese ruby, grown weary with frustrations and have been venturing to look at another item on the bucket list: no-oil Colombian emerald.

First, came across this 1.17ct cushion cut emerald with fresh certificate, designated as Muzo no-oil per (?local) independent certificate. Quite pleasing to the eye. This one is a bit more expensive.

https://imgur.com/a/esNm7DN

Then found another no-oil Colombian emerald, 1.16ct emerald cut, that’s not designated specific as Muzo on the certificate. Also mentions presence of substances of cutting process in the certificate, I assume that’s the norm. Price is better, cheaper by around $1300 USD.

https://imgur.com/a/cqMxOiO

Aside from Muzo designation, does the 1.17ct cushion have anything going for it over 1.16ct emerald cut to justify higher price? Aesthetics wise colour look similar and I don’t see any major flaws in either stone. If you see anything interesting on the videos please let me know. Probably will have to decide within next 24 hours…

 

[mellowyellowgirl]

I like the first one much more. It looks like a brighter, richer green. The second is wishy washy and although it’s clean for an emerald, the cut and overall blankness of the stone makes me notice the few inclusions it does have.

Are you sure either of these are saturated enough for you though? I would take a peek at @Crimson ’s emeralds for amazing examples of Muzo. Otherwise you might as well drop the muzo and just get a richer green? But if you like it at this tone then the first one is very pretty.

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

I like the first one much more. It looks like a brighter, richer green. The second is wishy washy and although it’s clean for an emerald, the cut and overall blankness of the stone makes me notice the few inclusions it does have.

Are you sure either of these are saturated enough for you though? I would take a peek at @Crimson ’s emeralds for amazing examples of Muzo. Otherwise you might as well drop the muzo and just get a richer green? But if you like it at this tone then the first one is very pretty.

Thank you. Have the design thought already…with small modification to make it a Phoenix rather than eagle, my family motif. The original according to LOTR is in white metal (platinum?) but yellow gold might accentuate the emerald’s colour better?

ELESSAR™ The Elfstone - Silver

Elessar, AKA the Stone of Eärendil, is a silver eagle brooch set with a green stone from The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Available as a brooch or necklace pendant. Handcrafted by our jewelers from solid sterling silver and set with a green stone, cubic zirconia optional. Officially licensed to...

badalijewelry.com

 

[Crimson]

I like the first one much more. It looks like a brighter, richer green. The second is wishy washy and although it’s clean for an emerald, the cut and overall blankness of the stone makes me notice the few inclusions it does have.

Are you sure either of these are saturated enough for you though? I would take a peek at @Crimson ’s emeralds for amazing examples of Muzo. Otherwise you might as well drop the muzo and just get a richer green? But if you like it at this tone then the first one is very pretty.

Thanks for sharing, @Sydneyphoenix. I agree with @mellowyellowgirl the second stone is better.
However, neither stone looks Old Mine Muzo green to me.
Which lab did the dealer use?
1. For me, only GRS holds water when it comes to the Old Mine Muzo Green designation.’ Gubelin is good with emeralds too - they give indicate grade, assign points and give an evaluation, but they don’t give a Muzo designation.
I notice Guild, Bellophoron and other labs have been giving out their own Muzo certs to stones which are a far cry from the Old Mine Muzo Greens. I have seen stones with those certs and I am not at all impressed. So please be careful.
2. I have also seen dealers use Muzo very loosely to indicate Colombian origin, although there are other sources in Colombia e.g., Chivor.
3. The company Muzo Emeralds is selling emeralds from Muzo of different hues, tones and quality. They use the term Muzo strictly to indicate origin and not hue, saturation or quality.
4. Price is a (rough) indicator. I haven’t seen any worthy Old Mine Muzo Green emeralds for less than 10K a carat, and the price per carat jumps with size.
@mellowyellowgirl has given good advice — buy whatever makes you happy.
If we really want stones with certain colour designations, we must be prepared to pay (rather breathtaking prices} for them. Even within those color designations, there are better and worse ones.
Just for fun - here are Lorraine Schwartz emeralds that they showed me at Harrods. Can you guess which item costs the most?

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

Thanks for sharing, @Sydneyphoenix. I agree with @mellowyellowgirl the second stone is better.
However, neither stone looks Old Mine Muzo green to me.
Which lab did the dealer use?
1. For me, only GRS holds water when it comes to the Old Mine Muzo Green designation.’ Gubelin is good with emeralds too - they give indicate grade, assign points and give an evaluation, but they don’t give a Muzo designation.
I notice Guild, Bellophoron and other labs have been giving out their own Muzo certs to stones which are a far cry from the Old Mine Muzo Greens. I have seen stones with those certs and I am not at all impressed. So please be careful.
2. I have also seen dealers use Muzo very loosely to indicate Colombian origin, although there are other sources in Colombia e.g., Chivor.
3. The company Muzo Emeralds is selling emeralds from Muzo of different hues, tones and quality. They use the term Muzo strictly to indicate origin and not hue, saturation or quality.
4. Price is a (rough) indicator. I haven’t seen any worthy Old Mine Muzo Green emeralds for less than 10K a carat, and the price per carat jumps with size.
@mellowyellowgirl has given good advice — buy whatever makes you happy.
If we really want stones with certain colour designations, we must be prepared to pay (rather breathtaking prices} for them. Even within those color designations, there are better and worse ones.
Just for fun - here are Lorraine Schwartz emeralds that they showed me at Harrods. Can you guess which item costs the most?

Thank you for considerate and detailed advice.

I guess you mean you like the first stone out of the two, that’s what @mellowyellowgirl preferred?

The company for the first stone is Muzo emerald by George Smith and they used a local lab in Colombia, Rodrigo Ginaldo (may have misread the last name). It is a different colour from GRS Muzo green designated emeralds, but I quite like this colour as much, blue-green and refreshing. I am not after absolute top colour in emerald; somewhat vivid shadow of green is fine. What is more important is no-oil designation as I am (relatively) careless with knocking the stones about. I will have to be careful with care of one of these stones regardless. The price is also a consideration, if old mine Muzo green emeralds are >$10K/carat, no-oil representation will be even higher.

All in all this is a thought I had that clarity, no treatment and geographic origin are priorities for emerald and these happen to be the colour I quite like as much as old-mine Muzo colour. Just trying to see if it’s worthwhile spending some extra on the first stone over the second.

As for your quiz, gosh I don’t know, the large ring with deep green large emerald in the middle? Are they no-oil?

 

[Autumn in New England]

Gems are not an area where you want to rush a purchase... having only 24 hours to make a decision is super scary to this crazy Gemini. That being said, and even though you really didn't ask this, keep in mind that the reason these emeralds are "no oil" and so clean is because their saturation is rather low. Chromium, which gives a Colombian emerald its vivid greens, also helps create its "jardin." So fine color and lower clarity are often (though not always) a direct correlation. Just expect the color to be sort of lackluster in natural light in person. But some folks like these lighter, sort of sea green shades. So if that's you, ignore the preceding.

That being said, the first stone has a window (I know, you're probably tired of hearing that at this point), but it's super clean. I actually think the color of the second one is slightly better, but step cuts don't do us any favors masking inclusions.

 

[Autumn in New England]

I just read where you mentioned wanting no clarity enhancement because you're hard on your jewels. I can understand the preference in that case... so it's more about having a stone with few inclusions. In deciding between these two stones then, I would definitely go with the first. The larger fracture in the corner of the second stone would worry me if I were putting it in a ring and prone to bumping.

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

Gems are not an area where you want to rush a purchase... having only 24 hours to make a decision is super scary to this crazy Gemini. That being said, and even though you really didn't ask this, keep in mind that the reason these emeralds are "no oil" and so clean is because their saturation is rather low. Chromium, which gives a Colombian emerald its vivid greens, also helps create its "jardin." So fine color and lower clarity are often (though not always) a direct correlation. Just expect the color to be sort of lackluster in natural light in person. But some folks like these lighter, sort of sea green shades. So if that's you, ignore the preceding.

That being said, the first stone has a window (I know, you're probably tired of hearing that at this point), but it's super clean. I actually think the color of the second one is slightly better, but step cuts don't do us any favors masking inclusions.

No not at all tired of hearing this, that’s why I put these posts up!

While I have slight preference for deep old-mine Muzo green, I like the bright green of the two stones almost as much. The first one has a window but I hope with setting it won’t be as noticeable, thank goodness it’s not a large window, I think. The second one has a bit of yellow tinge to green?

I just read where you mentioned wanting no clarity enhancement because you're hard on your jewels. I can understand the preference in that case... so it's more about having a stone with few inclusions. In deciding between these two stones then, I would definitely go with the first. The larger fracture in the corner of the second stone would worry me if I were putting it in a ring and prone to bumping.

I am thinking of putting it into a pendant, like the link I shared above, given how fragile emerald is. To accentuate the colour the vendor recommend making the basket of the setting yellow gold even if the rest of the setting is white gold (or platinum, but I don’t think many jewellers will offer combo of gold/platinum?). That might make the colour of the stone a bit deeper anyway…

 

[Autumn in New England]

So I would say both of these emeralds lean blue... the 1.17ct. more so. To my eyes, from the media provided, it looks a bit lighter than the 1.16ct. But it also appears to be much cleaner, as we discussed.

Now that you say it would be going in a pendant, I think either of these stones would be a safe choice. I also don't think the windowing of the 1.17ct. is horrible. It might even disappear in the right mounting. I also like the choice of setting the stone in yellow gold and casting the rest out of white gold or platinum. LOTR should have no problem accommodating this. I plan on going two-tone myself.

 

[Autumn in New England]

P.S. If I were going to choose one of these stones, based solely on the videos and info provided, I would purchase the emerald-cut... with one caveat. That larger inclusion would have to pass inspection. If I felt it posed no structural issue, I'd be fine with it. I just think the color and cutting is better, and I'm partial to emerald-cut emeralds. There's a reason the cut was named after the stone.

 

[Autumn in New England]

This sometimes helps me... again, we're at the mercy of the videos. There could be lighting differences or camera calibrations influencing the color of each. Not sure if they're the same vendor. If so, ask if you can see them side-by-side on the hand.

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

This sometimes helps me... again, we're at the mercy of the videos. There could be lighting differences or camera calibrations influencing the color of each. Not sure if they're the same vendor. If so, ask if you can see them side-by-side on the hand.

The vendors are different unfortunately. But I take your points about the large inclusion on 1.16ct (can’t visually test it directly, and rather not go through the return process) and the colour of 1.17ct being slightly lighter. It’s a tough choice…and I might have to play it safe given the import charges into Australia and if I have to return the item to the home country are significant. Thank you so much for your feedback thus far.

 

[Autumn in New England]

The vendors are different unfortunately. But I take your points about the large inclusion on 1.16ct and the colour of 1.17ct being slightly lighter. It’s a tough choice…Thank you so much for your feedback thus far.

Good luck!!

 

[toomuchB]

This sometimes helps me... again, we're at the mercy of the videos. There could be lighting differences or camera calibrations influencing the color of each. Not sure if they're the same vendor. If so, ask if you can see them side-by-side on the hand.

Another factor this image brings to mind is face up size differences. Impossible to tell from the vids if one faces up larger significantly (intuitively the EC appears to face up bigger). Its another parameter to consider, if its important to you. You'd have to ask for measurements on each. You can then accurately visualize the size difference on a site like https://www.gemsize.org/

FWIW I voted for the cushion based on clarity, but I am personally not a fan of lighter emeralds in general (I do like the more saturated Chivor material and not just the deeper Muzo color) so my opinion doesn't matter much. The higher prominence of inclusions in the EC would be enough for me to rule it out.

I also echo the sentiments above about the rushed feeling/decision period. There are plenty of emeralds out there. You are not restricted to these 2, you can take your time and keep inquiring/looking around. I personally find the chase satisfying, but we are all different.

 

[Crimson]

Thank you for considerate and detailed advice.

As for your quiz, gosh I don’t know, the large ring with deep green large emerald in the middle? Are they no-oil?

i have circled it. It cost a million pounds Old Mine Muzo Green, Minor oil.
It is easier to find a small no-oil emerald than a larger one that has not been oiled.
As @Autumn in New England has pointed out, there is an association of chromium with oiling.
Also note that GRS has reported seeing an increasing number of emeralds that have been subjected to oil-removal, testing and then re-oiling or resin after getting a no-oil report. This amounts to deception by some sellers and that is why they have added a comment to their more recent reports if the stone seems to have been one of the above.
I agree with @toomuchB - take your time! Enjoy the hunt!

 

[Autumn in New England]

Also note that GRS has reported seeing an increasing number of emeralds that have been subjected to oil-removal, testing and then re-oiling or resin after getting a no-oil report. This amounts to deception by some sellers and that is why they have added a comment to their more recent reports if the stone seems to have been one of the above.

Utterly diabolical.

 

[Autumn in New England]

i have circled it. It cost a million pounds Old Mine Muzo Green, Minor oil.
It is easier to find a small no-oil emerald than a larger one that has not been oiled.
As @Autumn in New England has pointed out, there is an association of chromium with oiling.
Also note that GRS has reported seeing an increasing number of emeralds that have been subjected to oil-removal, testing and then re-oiling or resin after getting a no-oil report. This amounts to deception by some sellers and that is why they have added a comment to their more recent reports if the stone seems to have been one of the above.
I agree with @toomuchB - take your time! Enjoy the hunt!

I was sure it was going to be the ring on the left! But emeralds tend to photograph darker than they are, so that makes sense. The larger cushion is probably a tad lighter than ideal in person. Still, I wouldn't throw any of them "out of bed!"

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

Another factor this image brings to mind is face up size differences. Impossible to tell from the vids if one faces up larger significantly (intuitively the EC appears to face up bigger). Its another parameter to consider, if its important to you. You'd have to ask for measurements on each. You can then accurately visualize the size difference on a site like https://www.gemsize.org/

FWIW I voted for the cushion based on clarity, but I am personally not a fan of lighter emeralds in general (I do like the more saturated Chivor material and not just the deeper Muzo color) so my opinion doesn't matter much. The higher prominence of inclusions in the EC would be enough for me to rule it out.

I also echo the sentiments above about the rushed feeling/decision period. There are plenty of emeralds out there. You are not restricted to these 2, you can take your time and keep inquiring/looking around. I personally find the chase satisfying, but we are all different.

Thank you. I have the measurements for the stones and second one comes out bigger, with more of weight for the first one under the girdle. The colour is not industry ideal but probably as good as I will get (especially no-oil) for similar price and happen to like this colour a lot too. I bought a bit more time so will look around but given no-oil is a priority, not as many options around.

i have circled it. It cost a million pounds Old Mine Muzo Green, Minor oil.
It is easier to find a small no-oil emerald than a larger one that has not been oiled.
As @Autumn in New England has pointed out, there is an association of chromium with oiling.
Also note that GRS has reported seeing an increasing number of emeralds that have been subjected to oil-removal, testing and then re-oiling or resin after getting a no-oil report. This amounts to deception by some sellers and that is why they have added a comment to their more recent reports if the stone seems to have been one of the above.
I agree with @toomuchB - take your time! Enjoy the hunt!

Thank you for lovely specimens of emerald, could never buy one but still good to gawk. What you said about deception with oil is horrible, such deception. Glad GRS make comments on the suspicious one. I will think more but given how I like this shade of emerald might end up getting one of them, just not super-rushing it.

I was sure it was going to be the ring on the left! But emeralds tend to photograph darker than they are, so that makes sense. The larger cushion is probably a tad lighter than ideal in person. Still, I wouldn't throw any of them "out of bed!"

No, I will take any of them if gofted, lovely emerald jewellery. But gives you an idea of how hard it is to get big no-oil emerald, especially for old-mine Muzo green stuff. For someone like me putting priority on treatment status, choice can be limited, especially at low price range.

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

Maybe should consider going for minor-oil GRS Muzo green rather than one of these two with lighter green no-oil? No-oil GRS Muzo green seem to be virtually nonexistent holy grail.

 

[Avondale]

Maybe should consider going for minor-oil GRS Muzo green rather than one of these two with lighter green no-oil? No-oil GRS Muzo green seem to be virtually nonexistent holy grail.

Probably.

Just because a stone has not been oiled, doesn't mean it cannot be oiled. That's the reason behind GRS's approach of noting the presence of surface reaching fissures on their reports.

Furthermore, even if a stone has been oiled, and you want something with no oil, you can just get rid of the oil. It can be cleaned, and very easily at that. And there, you have your no oil emerald.

You can evaluate durability just by observing the stone and how included it is. Remember, no oil would mean at best no surface reaching fissures. It doesn't necessarily mean the stone doesn't have internal fissures and inclusions. So on the "no inclusions" front you're looking at a compromise more with the colour, rather than with the level of treatment.

 

[Crimson]

I was sure it was going to be the ring on the left! But emeralds tend to photograph darker than they are, so that makes sense. The larger cushion is probably a tad lighter than ideal in person. Still, I wouldn't throw any of them "out of bed!"

Yes, me neither, I tried the cushion, it is “only” half the price of the other

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

Are two-tone jewellery with platinum (rather than white gold) and yellow gold a common thing? I am thinking about that Elessar pendant design above and the vendor of the 1.17ct Cushion emerald advised that to accentuate green colour I should place emerald itself in yellow gold basket even if I want the rest of the piece in white metal. How difficult a manufacturing process would be for combining platinum and gold in design and how about the product’s structural durability compared to making it with white gold/yellow gold combination (which I imagine will be technically easier)? And would rose gold rather than yellow gold accentuate the green colour in different way?

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

Probably.

Just because a stone has not been oiled, doesn't mean it cannot be oiled. That's the reason behind GRS's approach of noting the presence of surface reaching fissures on their reports.

Furthermore, even if a stone has been oiled, and you want something with no oil, you can just get rid of the oil. It can be cleaned, and very easily at that. And there, you have your no oil emerald.

You can evaluate durability just by observing the stone and how included it is. Remember, no oil would mean at best no surface reaching fissures. It doesn't necessarily mean the stone doesn't have internal fissures and inclusions. So on the "no inclusions" front you're looking at a compromise more with the colour, rather than with the level of treatment.

That’s the main reason I am considering 1.17ct cushion, along with pleasant green colour (even if not old-mine Muzo green) it appears to be free from large inclusions or fissures. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t have small internal fissures…didn’t know GRS mentions surface-reaching fissures on their reports, I knew GIA does.

 

[Avondale]

didn’t know GRS mentions surface-reaching fissures on their reports

They won’t spell it out for you, but you read what the report above states. They tell you if the no oil stone can be oiled and to what degree. Which is essentially letting you know there are surface reaching inclusions, because without the inclusion reaching the surface, there’s no way, no physical path for the oil to get in.

 

[toomuchB]

Probably.

Just because a stone has not been oiled, doesn't mean it cannot be oiled.

I wrote a post about this in another thread which I will just quote here. AGL stated that it had no fissures and it is un-oilable/cannot be clarity enhanced at all.

Are you asking about eye clean, or better? Keep in mind oil can make inclusions harder to spot with a loupe, not just the naked eye.

An emerald with no surface reaching features - even no really really tiny fissures - are very, very rare. Those emeralds are literally un-oilable, as there is no where for the oil to go. Here is an example of such a stone - the screenshot is from the AGL's report comments.

https://rauantiques.com/products/russian-emerald-ring-7-16-carats-1#product-desc

Poster above beat me to it

Just providing context, not making judgement on any decisions people make/opinions people have on emeralds and treatment ofc.

this is a video of the stone since the link i supplied back then is defunct:

 

[Autumn in New England]

Are two-tone jewellery with platinum (rather than white gold) and yellow gold a common thing? I am thinking about that Elessar pendant design above and the vendor of the 1.17ct Cushion emerald advised that to accentuate green colour I should place emerald itself in yellow gold basket even if I want the rest of the piece in white metal. How difficult a manufacturing process would be for combining platinum and gold in design and how about the product’s structural durability compared to making it with white gold/yellow gold combination (which I imagine will be technically easier)? And would rose gold rather than yellow gold accentuate the green colour in different way?

Very common! I have several pieces with a gold basket and platinum head, shank, etc. For my emerald, I absolutely intend on setting it in a two-tone mounting.

 

[Autumn in New England]

I agree with Avondale... I would aim for a clean, F1 Muzo. Because, as you said, this is more about durability for you than the prestige of owning a "no oil" emerald. So why pay that crazy premium and limit yourself, all while having to compromise more on color. Plus, the stone is going in a pendant, not a ring, where it is FAR less likely to get damaged.

 

[Sydneyphoenix]

They won’t spell it out for you, but you read what the report above states. They tell you if the no oil stone can be oiled and to what degree. Which is essentially letting you know there are surface reaching inclusions, because without the inclusion reaching the surface, there’s no way, no physical path for the oil to get in.

Okay, got that.

I wrote a post about this in another thread which I will just quote here. AGL stated that it had no fissures and it is un-oilable/cannot be clarity enhanced at all.



Just providing context, not making judgement on any decisions people make/opinions people have on emeralds and treatment ofc.

this is a video of the stone since the link i supplied back then is defunct:

Thank you for sharing. I imagine those GIA no-fissure emeralds will be especially rare, especially gem-quality ones.

Very common! I have several pieces with a gold basket and platinum head, shank, etc. For my emerald, I absolutely intend on setting it in a two-tone mounting.

That’s great to hear. I was wondering how difficult it is.

I agree with Avondale... I would aim for a clean, F1 Muzo. Because, as you said, this is more about durability for you than the prestige of owning a "no oil" emerald. So why pay that crazy premium and limit yourself, all while having to compromise more on color. Plus, the stone is going in a pendant, not a ring, where it is FAR less likely to get damaged.

Other option is to get imperial-green jade cabochon for the Elessar pendant. Wonder which will be better and more expensive, F1 old-mine Muzo green emerald or imperial green jadeite. Will cost a small fortune for either.

 

[Autumn in New England]

Okay, got that.



Thank you for sharing. I imagine those GIA no-fissure emeralds will be especially rare, especially gem-quality ones.


That’s great to hear. I was wondering how difficult it is.



Other option is to get imperial-green jade cabochon for the Elessar pendant. Wonder which will be better and more expensive, F1 old-mine Muzo green emerald or imperial green jadeite. Will cost a small fortune for either.

@Crimson is well-versed in both fine Colombian emerald and jadeite, so perhaps she can speak to how the pricing compares. I am still woefully lacking in matters of jade quality/value, though Crimson has been doing her best to educate me!

 

[toomuchB]

Thank you for sharing. I imagine those GIA no-fissure emeralds will be especially rare, especially gem-quality ones.

For sure, they are very rare exceptions that I just felt like bringing up. I have a small red beryl that is no-oil but has some surface reaching features (stable and all) and the vendor said it could be oiled to improve appearance; I decided to buy it unoiled. I would post a photo of the main surface reaching feather but its very thin and hard to photograph even with a loupe.

Other option is to get imperial-green jade cabochon for the Elessar pendant. Wonder which will be better and more expensive, F1 old-mine Muzo green emerald or imperial green jadeite. Will cost a small fortune for either.

I'm certainly not one of the jade experts here, but true imperial green jadeite would be more expensive I believe. If you are willing to compromise on color or translucency level, maybe its a good alternative - jade's greens are beautiful even if not true 'imperial green'. But I'll let the experienced jade posters weigh in.