Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

ASETs for Three Asschers

M

MarionC

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
6,244
Due to the weather things got behind at the vendor and I am just now getting the ASETs for the three Asschers I picked out a couple of weeks ago.
:confused: Any comments would be welcome.




1.30:
35968.jpg
0.90:
184620.jpg
1.21:
223941.jpg
 
What did JA say about the stones? The 1.2 looks best from ASET.
 
Hi Gypsy.
Here's what he said:
"The 1.30 carat-H-VVS2 is the liveliest performer. It has the beautiful alternating pattern of light and dark that you want in a well performing asscher. It also has smaller corners, giving it a more square look that the gemologist found to be very attractive. The 0.90 carat-G-VVS2 is a close second. It too has a nice alternating pattern of light and dark, it just wasn’t as eye catching as the 1.30 carat. The 1.21 carat-G-VS1 is a very beautiful option, however the light performance is a little symmetrical, making it the weakest of three. All three diamonds are not only completely "eye clean", and they are also facing up a nice, white color".

I found that this assessment was not as helpful as I would have hoped, and the comment about the small corners surprised me. My bet was on the 1.21 as it looked "lively" in the videos and has a lovely shape. The 1.30 looked very nice, above average, but would never have been my first choice.

If anything, having these ASETs and comments from the gemologist made things more confusing. :errrr:


edit: he didn't mention light return - and that was my reason for the ASET request. He was not available to discuss the stones, so maybe tomorrow.
 
Do you have a link to the video? No.1 has a much more noticeable contrasting pattern which you can see in the ASET so that is probably what the gemologist is seeing when he is describing the better contrast between the dark and light zones or on/off facet pattern in the stone.

No.3 has better edge to edge brightness in the ASET and it is more uniform looking in bright light return as well, it is interesting that the gemologists definition of a better performing Asscher is one that has more contrast rather than one that has less darkness overall.

I'd love to see a video of all 3 and see which one was more appealing to my eye.
 
arkieb1|1394493168|3631331 said:
Do you have a link to the video? No.1 has a much more noticeable contrasting pattern which you can see in the ASET so that is probably what the gemologist is seeing when he is describing the better contrast between the dark and light zones or on/off facet pattern in the stone.

No.3 has better edge to edge brightness in the ASET and it is more uniform looking in bright light return as well, it is interesting that the gemologists definition of a better performing Asscher is one that has more contrast rather than one that has less darkness overall.

I'd love to see a video of all 3 and see which one was more appealing to my eye.
Click to expand...
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/asscher-cut/1.30-carat-h-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-184620
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/asscher-cut/0.90-carat-g-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-223941
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/asscher-cut/1.21-carat-g-color-vs1-clarity-sku-35968
 
Can you ask them to make a video like the GOG ones with the 3 stones next to each other. In all honesty I don't like the shape or the cut of the 1.30 at all.
 
edited for clarity.
 
arkieb1|1394493877|3631335 said:
Can you ask them to make a video like the GOG ones with the 3 stones next to each other. In all honesty I don't like the shape or the cut of the 1.30 at all.
Click to expand...

I think that would be a stretch for JA.
The reason I got these ASETs is because the 0.90 was once my diamond and I was planning to buy it back. I thought I might as well take advantage of the ASET service first & get more education, and JA suggested I pick 2 other Asschers to have some comparisons with the 0.90. Then I thought maybe I'd get lucky and find a stone a bit bigger than the 0.90 that I liked as much.

Asschers are so tricky - everyone has different taste, so it's hard to judge what you are getting. I feel that videos [one eye] help, but still don't give an accurate picture of what the stones will look like in person [two eyes].
Some people say square, some stop-sign, some say they traditionally look "glassy", but the 0.90 I had was more like a round brilliant in fire & scintillation.
Hm-m-m, now I'm starting to ramble, so I'll shut up. =)
 
I'm going to guess that ASET #1 is the .90 and ASET #3 is correctly labeled.
 
I feel like an idiot - but I shouldn't - they were presented that way and I just assumed they were right. I'm fixing it so they are labelled correctly. Thanks for point it out - good,
 
I feel like an idiot - but I shouldn't - they were presented that way and I just assumed they were right. I'm fixing it so they are labelled correctly. Thanks for pointing it out - good for you! The first person to catch it - [including JA and Me : ) ].
 
Yeah, you should ask JA to clarify which ASET is which, and if the evals are mixed up. Honestly, not even the first or second time I've seen incorrectly labeled IS/ASETs
 
I don't know. The gemologist and the ASETs... huh.

I would go for 90 pointer probably at least the ASET looks nice. The 1.3 looks like it has p3 angle issues.
 
OK. I gotta say. I don't normally say this. But I've decided the gemologist had the diamonds confused or was drinking happy juice that affected his judgement. Or he has no idea how to evaluate asschers. Which is possible. It sounds like he LIKES strong dark facets for patterning.

I looked at that 1.3. NO WAY would I recommend that stone. It definitely has P3 issues.

Also what the heck does the diamond "light performance is a little symmetrical" mean? Does he mean it's too bright for him? Seriously, on the happy juice, or he needs training on step cuts.

Something is up. I gotta say from the ASETs the .9 is the one I would by. And from the video AND the ASET I would not buy the 1.3.
 
I agree with Gypsy I think he either has no clue or was into the happy juice too when I saw the video I thought the .90 was the one that did it for me visually (I liked the best) irrespective of the ASETs. The 1.30 in the video looks like a dog shape wise and just O.K performance wise. But you are correct Asschers are subjective. I'll make and educated guess and say he actually really wasn't on the happy juice and that the bigger stone costs more so he is making the recommendation to earn more out of the sale..... either that or he read it was a double ex cut on the certificate and decided that must make it better than the other stones... Have you tried Good Old Gold instead they have some killer Asschers in stock from time to time, if you are looking for one a bit bigger.
 
I'm looking at the 1.2. I think that ASET was crooked. And I think that one, given the spread, might be worth a chance. Can you order both the .9 or the 1.2. Because the video of the stone looks really nice.
 
I liked the 1.2 from the aset at first but think The 0.9 looks the nicest on video. I don't like the 1.3 at all
 
Gypsy|1394514974|3631555 said:
I'm looking at the 1.2. I think that ASET was crooked. And I think that one, given the spread, might be worth a chance. Can you order both the .9 or the 1.2. Because the video of the stone looks really nice.
Click to expand...

Gypsy, pretty sure I understand, but want to clarify....Do you mean that the video of the 1.21 looks really nice?

My goal was to buy 2 diamonds this year - an outstanding RB and an Asscher.I have the RB almost figured out =) =), but the Asscher is proving to be more problematic!
I'm glad you think the 1.21 might be worth looking at in person. I would be very happy if it performed better than the gemologist thinks. By the way, the info I got was third-hand. The gemologist sent the report to the head of a dept. who passed the info along to someone else who emailed me with his synopsis. No wonder there is/was confusion.
 
Either the 0.9 or 1.2 asscher, with a stronger preference for the 0.9. I do not like the look of the 1.3 at all.
 
Gypsy|1394510613|3631509 said:
what the heck does the diamond "light performance is a little symmetrical" mean? .
Click to expand...

I spoke with someone at JA and it was a typo - supposed to be "asymmetrical". The notes from the gemologist read that the 1.21 was "very slightly asymmetrical".
In any event, out of curiosity [and ever hopeful!], I'm having them send me the stone.
So....Thanks for your input!
I'll post opinions & photos when I get it.
 
The 1.3 small corners with too much contrast (darkness) - Yuck! What was the gemologist thinking???
 
I do not like the windmills much on the 1.3, but it has the best light return in the center and I think that is why he is choosing it. The other two do not have good enough ASETs to consider them, in my opinion. None of these are great asschers. They need to do the ASETs on white backgrounds, too.
 
Here is a good ASET (with vendor name blotted out). You can see good reds and blues throughout the stone. I just don't see any of those having as good light return as this one. I wouldn't buy one where the predominant color is green (or green and black). I also wouldn't go below a carat in an asscher. Mine is 1 ct and really, I wish my setting would have taken a larger one because I think the cut can be appreciated more in a larger stone.

_15707.jpg
 
Chrono|1394550784|3631720 said:
I have seen cases where the stone with the less nicer looking ASET outperform another step cut with a great looking ASET in person. I would not rely on the ASET as my sole evaluation tool.
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/james-allen-admits-lousy-aset-machinery.195065/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/james-allen-admits-lousy-aset-machinery.195065/[/URL]
Click to expand...

Wow...after reading this [and of course those great explanatory missives from Karl that appear from time-to-time] do I qualify for a diamond nerd badge? :lol:

Just when I think I've started to get a handle on things, a whole new universe of information appears. After reading this ASET forum the first thought that came to mind was, "so they can put a man on the moon, but a consistent ASET is impossible".

Thanks for posting.
 
I can see why you're thrown by the gemologist's comments! I thought the 1.21 looked the best from the images, followed closely by the .9, and I would never think to choose the asscher with more contrast. I guess I could see that if it maybe shows off the step facets better? But it still looks like the 1.21 would do the same thing in a more even way.. Are you talking with a particular person at JA that you trust, or would you want to ask someone else there for their opinion?
 
gemologists are trained to pick up a diamond in tweezers and hold it up in the air and look at it.
This hides a lot of cut defects even more so in step cuts.
The will gather light from the pavilion sides and return it to the eye because of where the p1 and p2 facets point. This light is blocked in a setting on the finger.
It does not show a diamond the way it will look on the finger.

lightfrompavilionside.jpg

lightfrompavilionside1.jpg
 
Karl_K|1394555883|3631760 said:
gemologists are trained to pick up a diamond in tweezers and hold it up in the air and look at it.
This hides a lot of cut defects even more so in step cuts.
The will gather light from the pavilion sides and return it to the eye because of where the p1 and p2 facets point. This light is blocked in a setting on the finger.
It does not show a diamond the way it will look on the finger.
Click to expand...
Karl, Could this explain why I was smitten by an Asscher I had out on approval, loose, and then when I had it set in a fairly enclosed setting it just didn't grab me anymore? [Loose it was gorgeous, but set it was only "lively" around the outside, but under the table was quiet].
 
Jimmianne|1394576295|3631999 said:
Karl_K|1394555883|3631760 said:
gemologists are trained to pick up a diamond in tweezers and hold it up in the air and look at it.
This hides a lot of cut defects even more so in step cuts.
The will gather light from the pavilion sides and return it to the eye because of where the p1 and p2 facets point. This light is blocked in a setting on the finger.
It does not show a diamond the way it will look on the finger.
Click to expand...
Karl, Could this explain why I was smitten by an Asscher I had out on approval, loose, and then when I had it set in a fairly enclosed setting it just didn't grab me anymore? [Loose it was gorgeous, but set it was only "lively" around the outside, but under the table was quiet].
Click to expand...
bad p3 angles is the most likely cause if it was dead under the table set.
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/performance-and-p3-facets-discussion-about-step-cut-diamonds

That is why you need to view it in a ring stone holder on your finger or at least in the v of your fingers.
A quick test is to hold the stone face up over a bright red or blue piece of Mylar and see if you can see the color in large areas of the stone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top