Is this stone a transitional or a badly cut modern?

[nala]

 

[Karl_K]

Modern

 

[LightBright]

Its not a Transitional, it’s a early modern.

 

[nala]

Its not a Transitional, it’s a early modern.

What can you tell me about early moderns? How do they perform? The seller said the ring has not been cleaned and I don’t know to what extent that is impacting the performance

 

[Karl_K]

Whats the sellers story on the ring?
I doubt its super old.
Side pics?

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

My mother's ring from the early 1940s looks rather like that, only yours isn't chipped in 6 places. Like Mya's ring, it's probably going to need you to clean it several times, then give up and have it professionally cleaned.

 

[nala]

Whats the sellers story on the ring?
I doubt its super old.
Side pics?

It is stamped C. Mayer iridium platinum

 

[Karl_K]

It is stamped C. Mayer iridium platinum

100% cast repro setting and stones are not old style

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI all!
I can't see the side diamonds.
The center looks like a really badly cut modern diamond.
Now, when I say "Modern" ..that's in relation to Old Euro, Old Mine Brilliant, etc.
"Modern" round brilliant is a cut which came into prominence in the 1950s
So, it's totally possible a "modern" Round Brilliant diamond can be 70 years old.
Back in the day, there were cheap, badly cut diamonds on the market. Computer-guided/planned cutting changed that.
I don't see RBC stones cut like that anymore.
I used to see them more frequently many years back

 

[LightBright]

My mother's ring from the early 1940s looks rather like that, only yours isn't chipped in 6 places. Like Mya's ring, it's probably going to need you to clean it several times, then give up and have it professionally cleaned.

I also have a ring from the 40s with a diamond cut like this. My diamond has got a very large table and is shallow. The crown is almost non existent. It has similar faceting. My ring is iridium platinum, center is set with Fishtail prongs like this, and side stones are set with a set down and delicate prongs. Sorry for the low resolution photos!

I believe your ring could be late 40s, LATER than mine, although it could also be a repro. I think those big prongs on the side stones aren’t typical for early 40s.

In my case, my stone has a lot of fire, it’s lively, but the faceting is very splintery, not what I prefer. I prefer older cuts with thicker facets, that have higher crowns and smaller tables because I prefer more three dimensional look to diamonds versus the flat look here.

Nala, you asked me what I know, your ring and diamond are somewhat typical of that time period.

 

[LightBright]

What can you tell me about early moderns? How do they perform? The seller said the ring has not been cleaned and I don’t know to what extent that is impacting the performance

I think cleaning it will make it look much better. My diamond has a similar cut and it’s surprisingly firey and lively. Each diamond is different, your’s needs to be considered, cleaned. But like I said above, I prefer fatter and more defined faceting.

 

[Karl_K]

If I had to guess I would say 1960s to 80s but there was a resurge in the early 2000s.
It shows the signs of a period ring being used to create the mold.
From the top everything is soft like a used bar of soap.
An original would even at its age be much sharper, then seeing the sides that look like they were drawn with a crayon 100% confirms it.
Its a repro

 

[LightBright]

If I had to guess I would say 1960s to 80s but there was a resurge in the early 2000s.
It shows the signs of a period ring being used to create the mold.
From the top everything is soft like a used bar of soap.
An original would even at its age be much sharper, then seeing the sides that look like they were drawn with a crayon 100% confirms it.
Its a repro

I agree that the setting in question is soft, like a used bar of soap. And even the diamond looks a bit “stylized”. There is something cartoonish about the softness (yeah, crayons is a good way to put it). You can see from the period piece I posted, that the early setting has a crispness and refinement to it that the later piece doesn’t. Puzzling.