Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Thoughts on these asschers (strmrdr/Karl K)?

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
S

sv77vs

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
68
The first asscher:

Carat weight: 1.12
Cut: Ideal
Color: F
Clarity: SI1

Depth: 65.1%
Table: 61.0%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Slightly thick to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.84*5.85*3.81
Ratio: 1.00

Inclusions are "very difficult to see" with the naked eye. Main inclusion is a whitish knot that is above one of the p3 facets. I attached an image, ASET coming up. Don''t have a crown height, yet.

SIasscher1.JPG
 
ASET of the 1.12 F SI1

SIasscherASET.jpg
 
Second stone:

Carat weight: 1.10
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VVS1

Depth: 69.4%
Table: 58.0%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.76*5.76*4.00
Ratio: 1.00

I like the proportions of this one, it has nice windmills, but the table seems a little dark. Not very much red on the ASET, but great patterns and I like the table and depth %.

VVS1Hasscher1.JPG
 
ASET of the 1.12 H VVS1

VVS1Haset.jpg
 
Date: 1/18/2010 8:50:52 PM
Author:sv77vs
The first asscher:

Carat weight: 1.12
Cut: Ideal
Color: F
Clarity: SI1

Depth: 65.1%
Table: 61.0%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Slightly thick to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.84*5.85*3.81
Ratio: 1.00

Inclusions are ''very difficult to see'' with the naked eye. Main inclusion is a whitish knot that is above one of the p3 facets. I attached an image, ASET coming up. Don''t have a crown height, yet.
Click to expand...
The first stone is much better cut quality.
Be careful the SI1 and eyevisibility - I find about less than half of strictly graded SI1''s are really eyeclean.
 
No expert here on asschers, but the pics and images of number one do look much better to me.
 
Is an SI1 knot a durability issue? I will get it looked at by an appraiser, but what are people''s thoughts on this?

Thanks.
 
Date: 1/18/2010 9:51:44 PM
Author: sv77vs
Is an SI1 knot a durability issue? I will get it looked at by an appraiser, but what are people''s thoughts on this?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
I don''t think so.
 
I am no expert but I think number one looks very pretty.
 
#1 hands down.
30.gif
 
Yes, #1 is pretty awesome.

A little worried about the SI1 clarity, but it does knock the price down quite a bit than if it were VS something. I suppose that is what the 30 day return policy is for, but I don''t want to go through that again...

That being said, the inclusion looks white and is in a good spot to hide.
 
Date: 1/18/2010 11:33:35 PM
Author: sv77vs
Yes, #1 is pretty awesome.

A little worried about the SI1 clarity, but it does knock the price down quite a bit than if it were VS something. I suppose that is what the 30 day return policy is for, but I don''t want to go through that again...

That being said, the inclusion looks white and is in a good spot to hide.
Click to expand...
Please post pics once you get it!!! Good luck!!!
1.gif
 
#1 cut wise but an si1 inclusion in the p3 area is really hard to hide.
That area reflects a lot in the diamond.
Is an inclusion you may be able to see sometimes ok?
I would be really careful to view it in a lot of lighting conditions both clean and dirty during the return period if you have it sent to you.

What is the CH? do you have it yet?
 
Don''t have the ch for the 1.12 F SI1, still waiting. Hopefully this afternoon I will get that.

I keep being assured that it is eyeclean, that the knot in the middle can only be seen with a loupe and the rest of the inclusions are difficult to see with a loupe.

Here is an old thread that talked about the 1.10 H VVS1:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/asscher-help.97366/

People seemed to like it more back then, including you, Karl_K. What changed?
 
Date: 1/20/2010 2:13:09 PM
Author: sv77vs
Don''t have the ch for the 1.12 F SI1, still waiting. Hopefully this afternoon I will get that.


I keep being assured that it is eyeclean, that the knot in the middle can only be seen with a loupe and the rest of the inclusions are difficult to see with a loupe.


Here is an old thread that talked about the 1.10 H VVS1:


https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/asscher-help.97366/


People seemed to like it more back then, including you, Karl_K. What changed?
Click to expand...
ASET image.
The regular picture looks decent.
 
After seeing these and others in person, I decided that the 1.12 F SI1 (from JA) is the one.

I couldn''t find the inclusion without magnification in their Manhattan office. After I located it with a loupe, I could position the stone in a certain direction to make it out at a close distance (5 inches or so) from my face. This is eye clean enough for me, and I have 20/20 vision and am good at spotting inclusions. Maybe one downside of this incredible stone, but not too much of a worry for me.

Its performance was awesome though, it was really and truly the best I think out of about 15 I looked at yesterday.

I got it set in a 2.0 mm plain solitaire platinum setting. I will post pics when I get it. The pricescope discount was significant, and with all things considered, I just couldn''t pass this up.

Having them in Manhattan is nice, perhaps if I ever have to send it back for service/whatever I won''t have to go through another shipping nightmare.
 
Date: 1/30/2010 11:29:44 AM
Author: sv77vs
After seeing these and others in person, I decided that the 1.12 F SI1 (from JA) is the one.


I couldn''t find the inclusion without magnification in their Manhattan office. After I located it with a loupe, I could position the stone in a certain direction to make it out at a close distance (5 inches or so) from my face. This is eye clean enough for me, and I have 20/20 vision and am good at spotting inclusions. Maybe one downside of this incredible stone, but not too much of a worry for me.


Its performance was awesome though, it was really and truly the best I think out of about 15 I looked at yesterday.


I got it set in a 2.0 mm plain solitaire platinum setting. I will post pics when I get it. The pricescope discount was significant, and with all things considered, I just couldn''t pass this up.


Having them in Manhattan is nice, perhaps if I ever have to send it back for service/whatever I won''t have to go through another shipping nightmare.
Click to expand...
kewl
congrates!!!!
 
Congrats! Can''t wait to see pics!
 
Thanks for the help, everyone. This forum is such a fantastic resource. I know so much more about diamonds now!

I think I have made an unconventional decision in getting an SI1 Asscher, but it is eye clean according to the most commonly accepted definition.

Hopefully it will stand up to my looking-at-it-for-1h-a-day test after I get it. JA gemologists highly recommended it, and I trust them.

One other stone that I liked was at GOG (who I love, they are great), it was a 1.0 something asscher that had a 10% smaller spread. It was VS2, drop style (which I don''t care for as much as a wide or narrow step) which would end up costing almost $1000 more.

I wouldn''t have gotten the SI1 if I hadn''t actually seen it in person. I guess that is a luxury that I have... online prices but able to actually see stones because of where I live... So everyone who is buying online, focus on VS2 or above!
 
Date: 2/2/2010 6:39:01 PM
Author: sv77vs
Thanks for the help, everyone. This forum is such a fantastic resource. I know so much more about diamonds now!

I think I have made an unconventional decision in getting an SI1 Asscher, but it is eye clean according to the most commonly accepted definition.

Hopefully it will stand up to my looking-at-it-for-1h-a-day test after I get it. JA gemologists highly recommended it, and I trust them.

One other stone that I liked was at GOG (who I love, they are great), it was a 1.0 something asscher that had a 10% smaller spread. It was VS2, drop style (which I don''t care for as much as a wide or narrow step) which would end up costing almost $1000 more.

I wouldn''t have gotten the SI1 if I hadn''t actually seen it in person. I guess that is a luxury that I have... online prices but able to actually see stones because of where I live... So everyone who is buying online, focus on VS2 or above!
Click to expand...
Many congrats!!!!!!!!!!
 
OK... so I got the ring, the F SI asscher set in a plain platinum band with a basic 4-prong design.

At first, I was very happy and it looked eyeclean. Then I took out the loupe, and also looked at it under a high-powered stereo microscope, and there are a few things that bother me and I am trying to decide if they are a big deal. I have very sharp eyes.

1. The stone is not set flush with the band. I noticed this without looking at under the loupe/scope. It looks as if someone grabbed the stone and twisted it clockwise perhaps 5 degrees.

2. The knot in the center of the table is not visible from the top, but it is very obviously there from a pavilion view. The setting leaves the pavillion almost completely bare.

3. The inclusion that bothers me is a crystal at 3 o''clock that reflects all over the place. I can see it very easily. It is really shiny. It is not listed first on the GIA report, so at first, when I saw the stone unset, I thought it was not going to be a big deal.

Not sure what to do. I don''t think there are any other stones on the market that I would buy right now, there are some at JA and GOG that are iffy that I am not too enthused about.

Thoughts? Am I being too critical?

As you can see, the stone is cut very well-- probably one of the best I have seen. Crown height conservative estimate is 15%, probably more.

FSI1asscher.jpg
 
Whoaaaaaa... sorry about that. Why can''t you edit posts on this forum?

Here is a smaller one.

FSI1asscher2.jpg
 
There is *ALWAYS* a compromise when you want more than you can afford (or want to spend), which is the situation almost all of us are in. You got a larger less expensive diamond that you love but the compromise was clarity. A different setting could hide the pavilion view, if it bothers you. As to the crystal at 3 o''click, are you sure that''s what it is? Not a trick of lighting or facets? I ask because if it is not on the plot it seems odd. Only you can decide if it bothers you to see an inclusion though the pavilion when you look for it.

If you think the diamond is torqued in the setting, get them to fix it.

And then don''t look at your SI diamonds under loupe or microscope ever again. Such stones are not made for that and it breeds unhappiness.
 
Yes, I did have to compromise something... and it was clarity. The stone is cut sooooo well. Whoever did it did an excellent job. I am sure he/she was very proud of their work.

The crystal at 3o''clock is on the plot, it is just not listed first.

I think I am going to have to at least fix the setting. The diamond is definitely torqued. That really needs to be changed. I might get a different one that hides the pavilion better.

I need to get rid of my loupe. And not look at it again under the scope... wow I think I would be shocked at how included a VVS1 is with that thing... haha.
 
Date: 2/6/2010 1:42:51 PM
Author: sv77vs
Whoaaaaaa... sorry about that. Why can't you edit posts on this forum?

Here is a smaller one.
Click to expand...
You can edit text for a few minutes after posting but not images, you would need to contact admin and ask them to do it for you.
 
Eh, I guess it points out the crystal I am talking about pretty well...
 
your problem is that you looked at it under a loupe, then a microscope. What were you thinking??

sigh. you just can't un-see what you've already seen.

yes, inclusions which are invisible in some lighting become visible in other lighting. IMO, do not worry about pavilion view inclusions. If I, as a girl, were getting a ring, I would be rocking it face-up, sighing at the pretty sparkles, not looking at it from the bottom.
 
I know, stupid. I am a scientist though. I had to satisfy the urge. Ugh.

So do you think I should have gone for the extra 10% on the size? It is noticeably bigger than a 1 ct, and it is a little shallower, I get 5.85 x 5.85 rather than 5.5 x 5.5 (ish).

What do girls think about this? She told me to go as low on clarity as possible without it looking bad. I don''t think it looks bad, but you can see that one inclusion if you look hard enough. It''s not like it is screaming at you HEY IM HERE AND IM UGLY.
 
Based on what your gf said, I think it is ok... the asscher is looks amazing.
 
based on what your GF said I would get the setting fixed so it isn''t off kilter and propose. I bet she''ll love it, I know I would
3.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top