Sapphire rings for a newbie

[rikesh]

I spent a few months looking at custom sapphire engagement rings with my fiancee. Our target price was $3000 - for right around there we were quoted a custom 18K yellow gold setting with a 2 carat heat-treated cushion sapphire - the ring having a micro-channel setting with tiny sapphires (rather than the usual diamonds) inlaid. The sapphire was darker than the average sapphire we looked at but went perfectly with the setting. It was (in my mind, since I don't know that much and there are no gradings) very deep in color and at least moderately brilliant/sparkling, and had no inclusions that I could see with a loupe. I got a similar quote from another jeweler (and one for a non-heat-treated sapphire ring for $6800 - which I ignored).

Unfortunately, it looks like I'm unexpectedly going to have to bear all of the costs of the (large) wedding, and that requires me to radically rethink my budget. Now I'd be comfortable spending $1500 but hardly more. And I don't want to drag this out - I want to get a ring soon, as this is a bit of a disappointment to her.

My questions:

- Based on my description, how expensive did $3000 sound for the heat-treated sapphire on an 18K gold ring? Is it worth trying to negotiate to approach my new target price of $1500? What sort of negotiation leeway could I expect? Is there any area (stone, setting) in which I am likely overpaying?

- I would be willing to look at a smaller stone... 1.5 carat sapphires look good. Are there other modifications you would suggest to get the price into this range? Do I need to stop looking at custom rings?

thanks for your help.

 

[dragonfly411]

rikesh - Although I understand that it sucks that you'll have to pay for the wedding, I am wondering why you have to give up the ring/budget? Why not go ahead with the budget and then remain engaged while you save up the amount for the wedding? Will 1500 really make that much of a difference/ be something you can't save up for the wedding?

 

[T L]

In all honesty, I would go with an unheated stone. With heated stones, you have to worry about the very difficult to detect diffusion treatment. That treatment renders a sapphire very little in value. If you go with an unheated stone, although it costs a bit more, you'll have greater peace of mind and potentially saved yourself from getting ripped off. This is just my opinion, which I know others do not share, but I thought I'd put it out there. If getting any sapphire of significant value, it should come with a reputable lab report indicating all treatement, or the lack of treatment. I think $3K is an adequate budget to get a nice 1 to 1.5 carat unheated sapphire in a simple 18K gold setting, or one embellished with a small amount of melee.

 

[Michael_E]

- Based on my description, how expensive did $3000 sound for the heat-treated sapphire on an 18K gold ring? Is it worth trying to negotiate to approach my new target price of $1500? What sort of negotiation leeway could I expect? Is there any area (stone, setting) in which I am likely overpaying?

18K gold and a nice 2 carat sapphire puts your pricing in line with most everyone else and allows little room for negotiation, certainly not a 50% reduction in price and probably no reduction on your original piece if it has already been negotiated.

I would be willing to look at a smaller stone... 1.5 carat sapphires look good. Are there other modifications you would suggest to get the price into this range? Do I need to stop looking at custom rings?

thanks for your help.

Yes, if price is a major concern and your want the best center stone you can get for your money, skip the custom setting and probably skip the 18K alloy. If you want the best for the least, (it never happens, but it sounds good, so bear with me), you need to do the following:

1. Pick a center stone in an appropriate color, size, shape and price range. The least expensive shapes are ovals in sapphire, since that shape is often closer to how the stone was found and so there is usually less weight loss during cutting. In your price range, stay under 2 carats. At any price level better color and clarity can usually be had by going with a smaller stone. A super 1 carat stone can often be had for the price of a very moderate 2 carat stone, so decide if size or quality matters the most to you.
2. Pick a commercial setting in a commercial alloy and forget the custom stuff and 18K alloys. Making custom jewelry is very time consuming and so costs about 50% more than a similar commercially based setting. If you want some special touches, then ask what can be done to make a commercial setting a bit fancier, (modifications, engravings, etc.). 18K alloys are nice, but cost 30% to 50% more and you can't tell what an alloy is without looking at the karat stamp, so why mess with it if you are pinching pennies?
3. Do not "negotiate" anything. Choose a jeweler who is honest and upfront about their position, what your costs will be and sincerely wants to provide you with the best piece possible at your chosen price. Tell them what your budget is, what your size/quality preference is and then let them do their job by coming up with a set of alternatives from which you can choose. I hate the idea of "negotiating", since it always leads to clients hiding information about their budget and makes choosing appropriate stones, alloys and construction methods much more time consuming and difficult. If you feel the need to negotiate and don't trust your jeweler to provide the best piece possible at a given price, then you need to find a different jeweler.

 

[Michael_E]

In all honesty, I would go with an unheated stone. With heated stones, you have to worry about the very difficult to detect diffusion treatment. That treatment renders a sapphire very little in value. If you go with an unheated stone, although it costs a bit more, you'll have greater peace of mind and potentially saved yourself from getting ripped off. This is just my opinion, which I know others do not share, but I thought I'd put it out there. If getting any sapphire of significant value, it should come with a reputable lab report indicating all treatement, or the lack of treatment.

On the other hand, choosing a beautiful, diffused sapphire can reduce your costs dramatically and give you a stone which is as beautiful and durable as any untreated stone. The point of avoiding treated stones really does need to be based on price, meaning don't pay an exorbitant price for a treated stone, but if you find an attractive one at an appropriate price, by all means use it.

The idea of treatment rendering a stone of little value is absolutely the opposite of reality. Treatments are done to increase beauty and value. Just because some are misrepresented at inflated prices does not mean that they are of little value. Treated stones have a much wider range of color than can be had with synthetics and at values many time that of synthetics. Many times buying treated stones is the ONLY way that many people will ever own a beautiful sapphire. In my travels and discussions with many jewelers, treatments are considered a welcome addition to their inventories due to their lower costs and wider range of color. Only the most high end jewelers reject these stones and for most of them it's a necessary arrogance promoted as part of their image.

 

[rikesh]

rikesh - Although I understand that it sucks that you'll have to pay for the wedding, I am wondering why you have to give up the ring/budget? Why not go ahead with the budget and then remain engaged while you save up the amount for the wedding? Will 1500 really make that much of a difference/ be something you can't save up for the wedding?

I understand... but keeping a wedding moving ahead on a budget is more important to us than waiting and saving more to have a less budget-encumbered wedding. we're both in our mid-30s - hence some time pressure - and have savings but student loans as well.

 

[maebelle]

My advice then is to skip the engagment ring for now, do the wedding and THEN save up for your ring. That way you can keep the wedding timeframe (which seems important to you) and still get the quality ring you want when you have saved up enough again for it.

Hard to say on a jewelry forum, but with your priorities (good ones!) That's the answer.

Good luck with your search and congratulations!

 

[T L]

In all honesty, I would go with an unheated stone. With heated stones, you have to worry about the very difficult to detect diffusion treatment. That treatment renders a sapphire very little in value. If you go with an unheated stone, although it costs a bit more, you'll have greater peace of mind and potentially saved yourself from getting ripped off. This is just my opinion, which I know others do not share, but I thought I'd put it out there. If getting any sapphire of significant value, it should come with a reputable lab report indicating all treatement, or the lack of treatment.

On the other hand, choosing a beautiful, diffused sapphire can reduce your costs dramatically and give you a stone which is as beautiful and durable as any untreated stone. The point of avoiding treated stones really does need to be based on price, meaning don't pay an exorbitant price for a treated stone, but if you find an attractive one at an appropriate price, by all means use it.

The idea of treatment rendering a stone of little value is absolutely the opposite of reality. Treatments are done to increase beauty and value. Just because some are misrepresented at inflated prices does not mean that they are of little value. Treated stones have a much wider range of color than can be had with synthetics and at values many time that of synthetics. Many times buying treated stones is the ONLY way that many people will ever own a beautiful sapphire. In my travels and discussions with many jewelers, treatments are considered a welcome addition to their inventories due to their lower costs and wider range of color. Only the most high end jewelers reject these stones and for most of them it's a necessary arrogance promoted as part of their image.

We will have to agree to disagree here. Besides what is an "appropriate price" if you have no idea of the extent of the treatment on the stone? While I do agree that treated stones can be a good option for people on a budget, you know as well as I, that many marketed "heated" sapphires are questionable as to the extent of their treatment. Are they just heated, or are they diffused as well? If we could more easily know for sure, without a questionable and expensive lab test, then I would be happier to agree with you.

The fact of the matter is that with all other things being equal, an unheated stone is worth more than a simply heated stone, and a simply heated stone is worth way way more than a heated/diffused stone. I don't want to pay a heated price for a heated/diffused stone, and to tell the difference can be expensive, time consuming and ultimately lead to disappointment. The testing is also questionable. Given the choice, I think an unheated sapphire is a much better value in the long run.

 

[rikesh]

In all honesty, I would go with an unheated stone. With heated stones, you have to worry about the very difficult to detect diffusion treatment. That treatment renders a sapphire very little in value...

On the other hand, choosing a beautiful, diffused sapphire can reduce your costs dramatically and give you a stone which is as beautiful and durable as any untreated stone. The point of avoiding treated stones really does need to be based on price, meaning don't pay an exorbitant price for a treated stone, but if you find an attractive one at an appropriate price, by all means use it...

We will have to agree to disagree here. Besides what is an "appropriate price" if you have no idea of the extent of the treatment on the stone? While I do agree that treated stones can be a good option for people on a budget, you know as well as I, that many marketed "heated" sapphires are questionable as to the extent of their treatment. Are they just heated, or are they diffused as well? If we could more easily know for sure, without a questionable and expensive lab test, then I would be happier to agree with you.

The fact of the matter is that with all other things being equal, an unheated stone is worth more than a simply heated stone, and a simply heated stone is worth way way more than a heated/diffused stone. I don't want to pay a heated price for a heated/diffused stone, and to tell the difference can be expensive, time consuming and ultimately lead to disappointment. The testing is also questionable. Given the choice, I think an unheated sapphire is a much better value in the long run.

Saw your comment on the lab report. This sapphire does not have one. I think this jeweler provides them on their unheated stones. When I asked if the stone had a diffusion treatment, I was told it did not... but I get the impression the jeweler really doesn't know. They order in loose sapphires from somewhere else anyway.

What % of heat-treated stones on the market would you say are diffused? Does anybody even know?

If that reduces the value... well, such are the pitfalls of buying colored stones, I would imagine. with no GIA diamond-like grading it's pretty hard to have any idea of value other than a gut feeling. one of the jewelers we visited told me that people get completely ripped off when it comes to colored stones, because they have no idea how to judge quality. We tried to look at as many loose sapphires as we could... if one thing might make me suspect (as a total amateur) that this is not diffused it's that it is a darker, deeper color stone than the typical "ideal" blue sapphire.

I asked for a quote in 14K gold just to get an idea of the difference, we'll see.

Forgoing the ring for now may be an option. Don't know how that would fly.

 

[Michael_E]

We will have to agree to disagree here. Besides what is an "appropriate price" if you have no idea of the extent of the treatment on the stone?

If you have no idea of treatment, then your only guide is price. If the price makes you uncomfortable without knowing, then it's not appropriate for you. If the stone is beautiful and the price is not something that concerns you then it is appropriate. It's a personal thing and definitely not a black and white issue.

While I do agree that treated stones can be a good option for people on a budget, you know as well as I, that many marketed "heated" sapphires are questionable as to the extent of their treatment. Are they just heated, or are they diffused as well? If we could more easily know for sure, without a questionable and expensive lab test, then I would be happier to agree with you.

At a certain price position, who cares? It's the price level which matters most in the bulk of purchases involving treated stones. Advising someone to only buy untreated stones, when they may never be able to afford them, (or even just want something right now), is definitely not helping them to find a piece of jewelry which is beautiful and affordable to them and meets their needs. My job as a jeweler is in satisfying needs and desires at any price position, and removing second tier qualities, treated stones or even synthetics would remove my ability to do that for a large segment of the people I talk with. I'd love to deal only with the highest end of things and look down on everything else as if it were junk, but it's not and it all serves some need...as long as the buyer knows exactly what they are receiving.

The fact of the matter is that with all other things being equal, an unheated stone is worth more than a simply heated stone, and a simply heated stone is worth way way more than a heated/diffused stone.

But all other things are never equal. An fine quality unheated stone is always MUCH more expensive than an equally nice looking treated stone and probably worth more than a treated stone which looks a lot better. So what? If the buyer has a limited budget for whatever reason, what is the advantage of spending 10 or 20 times as much for the untreated stone? Because it holds it's value? Who cares if you don;t have much into it in the first place. Because it comes with a better story? O.K. with me, I love good stories. From my perspective treatment doesn't matter if the price is low and only becomes a concern when the price is based on a lack of treatment and the buyer cares about it for some reason.

I don't want to pay a unheated price for a heated/diffused stone, and to tell the difference can be expensive, time consuming and ultimately lead to disappointment. The testing is also questionable. Given the choice, I think an unheated sapphire is a much better value in the long run.

The price you pay is related to the treatment of any stone and so if you are paying a large price based on no treatment, part of that price needs to be for the testing and certification costs for that stone, (unless you are willing to believe a seller based on their word OR you have the skills to tell whether a stone is truly unheated). If you are paying a much lower cost and there has been no testing, then you may as well assume that the stone has been treated. This has nothing to do with the qualities of treated stones however and everything to do with what you are paying and expecting in return. If you know, or must assume, that a stone is treated and you are O.K. with the quality and price, then it can still be an excellent deal for you based on your needs, tastes and budget.

 

[minousbijoux]

I'll disclose upfront that, as you know, I tend to feel the same as TL about corundum so with that disclosure out of the way:

I think TL is speaking to the grey area in the middle. If someone is fine getting a diffused or otherwise treated sapphire, then good for them - in fact, they will have a lot more options at much lower cost (heck, they're all over ebay). But if one draws the line at heat treated only, that's where it gets dicey, because you can't take a jeweler's word for it (well, I guess you could, but no one would recommend it) and so it requires testing, which at the end of the day will add time and $100 - $200 to the cost. So for those and other reasons, many of us here default to untreated with certs.

I don't get the sense that TL is looking down on these stones, and is pretty articulate about stating her preference and the reasons. Michael, you make a lot of sense in terms of filling the need of various price points, and it is awesome that this OP or anyone else can find a beautiful sapphire within their budget because of certain treatments. Agree to disagree.

OP - until I came to PS, it never dawned on me that people upgrade their engagement rings over time or, for that matter, have multiple rings (one PSer at last count has 10 or 11, all spinels!) - what about saving money, buying either: 1) a beautiful custom setting and a treated but beautiful sapphire (which you can eventually upgrade); or 2) a cheaper setting - stuller or ebay's LOGR comes to mind - and a smaller but high quality heat only or unheated sapphire with the idea you would eventually upgrade the setting?

Finally, color is a personal preference - if you and she like darker sapphires, then great! You'll get a better price than you would for one of an "ideal" color.

 

[T L]

I'll disclose upfront that, as you know, I tend to feel the same as TL about corundum so with that disclosure out of the way:

I think TL is speaking to the grey area in the middle. If someone is fine getting a diffused or otherwise treated sapphire, then good for them - in fact, they will have a lot more options at much lower cost (heck, they're all over ebay). But if one draws the line at heat treated only, that's where it gets dicey, because you can't take a jeweler's word for it (well, I guess you could, but no one would recommend it) and so it requires testing, which at the end of the day will add time and $100 - $200 to the cost. So for those and other reasons, many of us here default to untreated with certs.

I don't get the sense that TL is looking down on these stones, and is pretty articulate about stating her preference and the reasons. Michael, you make a lot of sense in terms of filling the need of various price points, and it is awesome that this OP or anyone else can find a beautiful sapphire within their budget because of certain treatments. Agree to disagree.

OP - until I came to PS, it never dawned on me that people upgrade their engagement rings over time or, for that matter, have multiple rings (one PSer at last count has 10 or 11, all spinels!) - what about saving money, buying either: 1) a beautiful custom setting and a treated but beautiful sapphire (which you can eventually upgrade); or 2) a cheaper setting - stuller or ebay's LOGR comes to mind - and a smaller but high quality heat only or unheated sapphire with the idea you would eventually upgrade the setting?

Finally, color is a personal preference - if you and she like darker sapphires, then great! You'll get a better price than you would for one of an "ideal" color.

Minous,
You have echoed my feeling. I will say that if you know for a fact you're buying a diffused stone, go for it, as long as you pay a fair price. I will say if you know you're buying an unheated/untreated stone, go for it, as long as you have reputable lab work to accompany it. There are some gem species that we cannot definitively say, "untreated" or "only heated" or "treatment X" as those are more cloudy areas and it may take a lot of time and money to figure that out. In the example of corundum, which does have that "dicey" area as you put it, I rather go with a lab verified untreated stone, especially for an e-ring, and if I'm paying a significant amount of money.

If I'm talking Columbian emerald for example, then the treatment is far easier to detect, and I say, go with what treatment level you want, as a treated stone will save you some money, and the type of treatment used on emeralds is easy to determine. The fact of the matter is that we can't just say, "oh go with a treated stone, it will be cheaper" as there are so many kinds of treatments and depending on the gem species and the treatment, some are very difficult and/or costly to detect, if not impossible to detect. Corundum falls in that group. I do not look down at all upon treated stones, except that many vendors do not disclose the full amount treatment, if they disclose treatment at all. That's my issue, and therein is where the consumer gets ripped off.

 

[rikesh]

So out of curiosity, what kind of lab test could I have this sapphire subjected to? Is there such a thing as a lab verified treated stone?

Does GIA have something? How does it work if it doesn't already have a certificate - does the jeweler typically send it to them? Who pays for the test if something isn't as expected - for instance, if the jeweler claims it's not diffusion treated and it turns out it is?

 

[T L]

So out of curiosity, what kind of lab test could I have this sapphire subjected to? Is there such a thing as a lab verified treated stone?

Does GIA have something? How does it work if it doesn't already have a certificate - does the jeweler typically send it to them? Who pays for the test if something isn't as expected - for instance, if the jeweler claims it's not diffusion treated and it turns out it is?

I would send it to the American Gemological Lab (AGL for short). They are the premier lab for colored stones, and they have the very expensive equipment to test the stone. However, the testing, from what I hear is not 100% definitive, and it's very costly. Again, that's why I think it's best to get an untreated stone, which I think is well within your budget for a 1 to 1.5 carat stone. The lab report to verify it is more definitive based on natural inclusions, and not as costly to verify.

I think a reputable jeweler should eat the cost if the report comes back as something it is not, if he states its untreated for example, and it comes back as treated. If he doesn't know, then the cost falls on you.

 

[T L]

But all other things are never equal. An fine quality unheated stone is always MUCH more expensive than an equally nice looking treated stone and probably worth more than a treated stone which looks a lot better. So what? If the buyer has a limited budget for whatever reason, what is the advantage of spending 10 or 20 times as much for the untreated stone? Because it holds it's value? Who cares if you don;t have much into it in the first place. Because it comes with a better story? O.K. with me, I love good stories. From my perspective treatment doesn't matter if the price is low and only becomes a concern when the price is based on a lack of treatment and the buyer cares about it for some reason.

I rather spend more on an unheated/untreated stone that I know is untreated, then spend 10 to 20 times more for a diffused stone than what it's worth simply because no one knows the treatment, or they're not disclosing it. Now if the diffused stone already came back with a lab report that stated it was diffused, it's likely that the cost of the report is worth more than the gem, and I don't want to eat the cost of the report. If the price is really really low, then it probably is diffused or synthetic, but this gentleman is looking for an e-ring stone, so he and/or his fiancee may care about this. There is still something to be said about the beauty that mother nature can create on her own, and as a result I think if one can afford it, it's important to buy the best you can afford for such a special sentiment as an e-ring. If you don't care, then go buy a synthetic sapphire, at least you'll know for sure what you're getting, and it will be cheap.

 

[snoopkat]

Hi rikesh, I can't give you the expert advice some of the other PS-ers here have so kindly provided. But for a price comparison, my boyfriend and I paid about 4.5k (USD) for a wedding set and my e ring has similar specs to yours. 2.02c unheated sapphire set in platinum with 0.3c diamonds in a pave setting. Assuming the wedding band itself would cost 1k (I'm going off prices from where I live coz jewellery is expensive here), I'm going to assume that my e ring by itself would cost 3.5k, more or less your initial budget.

IMHO, i think you're paying way over the top for a heated stone in 18k gold. When we were doing our research, I've found most heated stones in the carat weight you're after are priced significantly lower than unheated stones, 18k gold also cost less than platinum. The initial stone we wanted to purchase came back from testing as heat treated and the vendor brought the price down by over 50% when they re advertised the stone.

Have you got pics of the stone/setting? You might be able to get advice from some of the trade PS-ers here about whether you're paying a fair price (you didn't mention if there was any intricate design involved or if it's a simple setting).

 

[Pandora II]

I'm on the other side of the fence in that I have no issues with heated stones at all - I'm just careful about where and from whom I buy. Not all stones are diffused - although diffusion (and I don't mean surface) of blue sapphires is becoming more common, it is used to lighten a stone rather than change the colour in the way it is used in fancy colours of corundum.

It's also done under long term/high temperature heating which IIRC completely removes the rutile and can leave some peculiar spring-like inclusions. It's relatively easy to see when a sapphire has been heated enough to alter the rutile from it's unheated state (obviously this could be entirely natural and happened during it's genesis) and should be enough of an indication that the stone has only been subjected to relatively low heat. Since rutile doesn't melt until 1400 degrees C, stones that looked unheated may well have been heated.

It's also not in the interest of many dealers in Thailand etc to kill their own markets. As Michael says there is a demand for the Be diffused material and people are there to supply it, but there is also a market for quality heated goods and quality unheated goods and reputable dealers are not going to want to screw their reputation and businesses by supplying long standing clients with falsely identified goods.

So, I don't feel every sapphire needs a lab report or that all stones except unheated should be thrown out with the bathwater as second-rate goods. You will pay a substantial premium for unheated, but saying that a stone will hold it's value is somewhat misleading. As with all commodities you need a market to sell the stone in and if you've paid retail then you'll make a loss selling it to a wholesaler and finding an end consumer willing to pay the price you paid isn't that simple.

 

[T L]

It's also done under long term/high temperature heating which IIRC completely removes the rutile and can leave some peculiar spring-like inclusions. It's relatively easy to see when a sapphire has been heated enough to alter the rutile from it's unheated state (obviously this could be entirely natural and happened during it's genesis) and should be enough of an indication that the stone has only been subjected to relatively low heat. Since rutile doesn't melt until 1400 degrees C, stones that looked unheated may well have been heated.

What if the stone has no rutile to begin with (in it's unheated state)? How do you tell it's been heated or not?

 

[PrecisionGem]

TL, I don't think these diffused stones in decent sizes are as worthless as you think. A stone is really only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Most people don't buy a stone with idea of resale, and if they did in most cases they will never sell the stone for the price they paid for it. I really don't have a problem with heated or even Be treated sapphires. It allows for very pretty stones as a more reasonable cost. I think 95% of the people would rather have a pretty heated stone, than a not so pretty unheated stone. Most people I talk to outside of regular Pricescopers, could care less about heating sapphires, aquamarine, zircon or most anything. What they want is a pretty color and nice size period. Most people will shy away from lab created stones, but have no problem with a heated natural stone.

 

[T L]

TL, I don't think these diffused stones in decent sizes are as worthless as you think. A stone is really only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Most people don't buy a stone with idea of resale, and if they did in most cases they will never sell the stone for the price they paid for it. I really don't have a problem with heated or even Be treated sapphires. It allows for very pretty stones as a more reasonable cost. I think 95% of the people would rather have a pretty heated stone, than a not so pretty unheated stone. Most people I talk to outside of regular Pricescopers, could care less about heating sapphires, aquamarine, zircon or most anything. What they want is a pretty color and nice size period. Most people will shy away from lab created stones, but have no problem with a heated natural stone.

If most people saw what a be-diffused stone looked like before treatment, and the after, they wouldn't pay 10 cents for one. While some could be nice before treatment, they can turn road gravel into something pretty. I personally think it's a crime to charge a good amount for them, as you are simply paying for treated road gravel. I've seen prettier fish tank gravel. The problem is that you don't know how worthless it was before treatment, so you are simply paying for the treatment process and some cutting.

Yes, maybe 95% of people would want one, but that's why 95% of people are probably ripped off every day when buying gems & jewelry. Thank goodness for consumer forums like PS. 95% of people have no idea stones are even being treated, nor do they even understand the myriad of treatments out there. Unfortunately, most people are not like Pricescopers, because if they were, there would be far less people getting ripped off out there in the retail gem & jewelry world.

Honestly, if the OP started this thread as, "I have a budget of $300, and I want a sapphire right hand ring," I would tell him/her to get a heated sapphire, and give a little warning on treatment, and that would be that. The OP wants a $3K ring, and that's a significant budget IMO, and it's for an e-ring Therefore, for me to simply suggest a heated stone, and to tell him to not worry about diffusion, would be irresponsible on my part. Remember that this is an important piece for someone he plans on sharing the rest of his life with, and he's spending thousands of dollars on it.

To also set the record straight, I have no problem with simple heating, but to determine what is heated vs diffused, is not an easy task, nor an inexpensive one. Pandora is lucky she is a gemologist as that gives her an upper hand than Mr. Regular Consumer, but for the rest of us, it's not as conclusive, and lab reports can be expensive and still be inconclusive.

 

[ooo~Shiney!]

I guess you want a nice dark blue sapphire for your fiance, which is nice
But this is one that I keep longing for.
Not heated.
It is a perfect size, to me.
No, it is not blue blue, but I think that makes it better.
I think it fits perfectly in your new budget, with enough left over for a pretty setting...

 

[ooo~Shiney!]

If you like it, better act quickly, in my experience things vanish fast once they are put up here

In fact, if I hadn't made such a major purchase today myself, I would be talking myself into it !!!!

http://www.gemfix.com/sapphire_blue.html

 

[PrecisionGem]

All the heating in the world won't turn road gravel into a pretty sapphire. A clean, bright clear treated sapphire, didn't start out as road gravel. It started out as a clean sapphire, that most likely didn't have the most desirable color. A lot of the Songea sapphires from Tanzania are Beryllium treated, but you first need to start out with a descent clean stone. Even off color rough Songea sapphires at 2 grams that would cut a 3 ct stone, can fetch $200 or $300 for the rough. They most likely would cut a rather ugly grayish brown with a hint of blue blue stone. Treated it can be much more appealing. A very included, poor crystal stone, treated will still be very included and cloudy after wards.

TL, what if you bought a Sapphire, and were told it wasn't treated at all, you then sent it out to a lab, and it came back as natural. You loved the color and make of the stone. Then 10 years later, some new analysis is invented, you send you stone out, and now it comes back as treated. You instantly hate the stone and toss it in the fish tank?

 

[T L]

All the heating in the world won't turn road gravel into a pretty sapphire. A clean, bright clear treated sapphire, didn't start out as road gravel. It started out as a clean sapphire, that most likely didn't have the most desirable color. A lot of the Songea sapphires from Tanzania are Beryllium treated, but you first need to start out with a descent clean stone. Even off color rough Songea sapphires at 2 grams that would cut a 3 ct stone, can fetch $200 or $300 for the rough. They most likely would cut a rather ugly grayish brown with a hint of blue blue stone. Treated it can be much more appealing. A very included, poor crystal stone, treated will still be very included and cloudy after wards.

TL, what if you bought a Sapphire, and were told it wasn't treated at all, you then sent it out to a lab, and it came back as natural. You loved the color and make of the stone. Then 10 years later, some new analysis is invented, you send you stone out, and now it comes back as treated. You instantly hate the stone and toss it in the fish tank?

I have seen photos of pre-treated material, and it does look like road gravel. It does not mean that all pre-treated gems look that way, but some do. I don't mind simple heating to ward off some grey or brown, but I draw the line at diffusion. It can alter the color dramatically.

As to the second paragraph you have, I will just state that I have a beautiful blue 2.75 carat pear shaped sapphire that I cannot determine the extent of treatment. It has been determined as heated, but the lab didn't test for diffusion and would not tell me anything more than that (the lab being AIGS). It is sitting in a box, and I look at it very sadly. I really cannot enjoy it as I can't tolerate diffusion and other treatments like irradiation, coating, and lead glass filling. I draw the line there. I was going to send it to the AGL, but I am unsure if they can test 100% definitively for diffusion. The testing is also expensive, and since it could come back as diffused, it's a lottery if I pay for the testing. I just wish it was unheated, and I wouldn't have to worry about any of this.

Now, if we can get back to the OP's question again, I think/suspect he wants to get the best value for his money, and as far as I'm concerned, if you want the best value for your money, that includes peace of mind that you're not getting overcharged for some diffused material. Therefore, I highly recommend untreated/unheated sapphires for anyone spending a significant amount and using it for a very important piece of jewelry. In the end, the OP has to make the decision based on what is discussed here by a variety of people, vendors and consumers alike, so I am just putting this out there from a consumer standpoint, and from what I know about this treatment.

 

[PrecisionGem]

A widely respected and used wholesale price guide lists 3 ct yellow sapphire in fine quality as $500 per ct for Heat, surface-diffusion. I know you wouldn't want the stone TL, but I wouldn't call that worthless.

I don't know what pictures you saw, but I can assure you that road gravel quality will never produce a fine quality looking stone.

 

[T L]

A widely respected and used wholesale price guide lists 3 ct yellow sapphire in fine quality as $500 per ct for Heat, surface-diffusion. I know you wouldn't want the stone TL, but I wouldn't call that worthless.

I don't know what pictures you saw, but I can assure you that road gravel quality will never produce a fine quality looking stone.

This article from the GIA goes in depth on beryllium diffusion.

http://lgdl.gia.edu/pdfs/su03a1.pdf

Essentially, they can take a pale, too dark or colorless stone, and give it highly saturated color. To me, that is a very dramatic change, as the original material is worth very little. Why pay so much money for something that is enhanced by humans on a mass scale and pretty much "dyed" to look beautiful? That doesn't make much consumer sense to me no matter what that wholesale guide says. I personally think it's nuts to pay $500/ct for diffused yellow sapphire of 3 carats.

 

[ooo~Shiney!]

How about this sapphire? I think it is pretty, a bit darker, seems to change to a pretty violet and has a glow.
(I tend to like stones that look different in different lights, you may not)

anyway, another suggestion well within your budget and leaving room for a nice setting !

http://www.gemrite.com/cubecart/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=268

 

[ooo~Shiney!]

No Treatment, too

 

[T L]

How about this sapphire? I think it is pretty, a bit darker, seems to change to a pretty violet and has a glow.
(I tend to like stones that look different in different lights, you may not)

anyway, another suggestion well within your budget and leaving room for a nice setting !

http://www.gemrite.com/cubecart/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=268

Thanks Shiney. That whole stone is around $500, and untreated (although I would get a lab memo to verify). I don't understand why people can't get an affordable unheated sapphire, as they do exist, under the two carat mark. I think these are examples of why PS is doing a service to consumers. I don't think someone should have to "settle" for a diffused or heated stone with a $3K budget. Thanks again. I hope we didn't scare the OP away, and instead gave him some "food for thought."

 

[minousbijoux]

Wow, I have to start purchasing from Gemrite!

I agree TL, there are so many unheated sapphires that are under the radar - perhaps because they don't have a "name" location attached, or because they aren't "the" color. We went through this a few weeks back with someone looking for a blue/green sapphire. As I recall, she came with one that was pretty gray and when we showed her cheap and - in my view better - alternative sapphires, she was thrilled. Montana is a great resource (though on the small side), as are slightly included ones or ones that are slightly off the color track. If someone is willing to consider this range, then there should be no problem staying well within budget, except if they decide to create a custom setting which is terribly labor intensive.