Help needed on deciding between the two RB

[sparkle-sparkle]

I found two RB from WhiteFlash''s Expert Selection.

#1
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=AGS-5950002


#2
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=GIA-13681226

I am leaning towards #1, but not sure about the depth, which looks a little shallow on the paper. Could you all please share your opinion on these two stones? I have #1 on hold for me over the weekend. Thank you.

 

[Mara]

Hmm tough call!! Both look very nice, the 2nd doesn''t have an IDealScope so hard to compare, but that first one is an eye popper and I actually like the slightly more shallow depth here because you get a bit more spread that way but it doesn''t look like you are sacrificing either that fabulous arrow symmetry OR light return to get it, pretty cool.

I''d probably go with #1, also I don''t like paying more for VS2 if you can find an eye-clean SI1, even if it is just a few hundred...and I like the bigger spread on #1 and the more shallow pav angle...should be an eye popper!

 

[sparkle-sparkle]

Thanks, Mara. You are always so helpful and generours with your insights.

I was told the #1 was eye clean. The 2nd one has very thin girdle and I am afraid it''s on the fragile side. Mara, do you think the shallow depth would make the stone appear lliveless? Overall, #1 has a good score on HCA. I think we are OK. WF is going to ship the stone on Monday as soon as I wire the $$. I like their upgrade policy. If I don''t fall in love with this one, I can get something else later.

After I see the stone and decide to keep it, I will send it back to WF for setting. I like the Tiffany replica. Do you think I should go with the knife edge or the half-round? I plan to get a chanel set eternity band to go with the ring. Don''t know if it will it sit flush with the ring or not. Any advise? Thank you.

I like your setting a lot. I have been looking at your thread for a while. I have a 2 year old so I think I''d better get something really really smooth and safe. This is my upgrade for our 8th anniversary, btw.

 

[Mara]

I wouldn''t worry about a thin girdle on stone #2...I have had two stones with thin girdles and have had nothing happen to them (knock on wood) and I am pretty clumsy. But some people don''t feel comfortable and want more around medium.

Re: the depth of the stone, having had a more shallow stone with non-stellar numbers and an okay look...this stone should perform quite well. If it scores well on the HCA esp with respect to FIRE, I think the numbers seem lined up pretty well to have this be a very lovely stone in terms of a good balance with brilliance and fire.

Maybe Garry can chime in with his thoughts on Stone #1 re: the balance of brilliance to fire and if you would be sacrificing too much of one for the other. I personally would love to see stone #1 in person...so good luck with your decision!!

One comment re both stones, if you can, have Brian at WF take a few minutes of time to go over the two stones and what HIS thoughts are. I find Brian to be very savvy in breaking down differences for me when I am considering two stones, and I often take his advice or his opinion re: beauty and overall look pretty close to heart, I trust his eyes and think he would not steer you wrong in terms of assessing the differences of one stone vs the other . If you ask him re: fire and the depth of the more shallow stone, it may help set your mind at ease OR give you more food for thought.

Good luck! Oh and whatever you decide, I would love to see pictures of either of those beauties so please post!

 

[Jennifer5973]

What a choice! Two WF beauties

As Mara said, girdle thickness (and peace of mind around it) can be a matter of choice but I would personally avoid a thin to very thin girdle. My original ering stone had a very thin girdle and it still has tiny chips allover it after about 7 years of wea (I ntoiced the chips when i had the stone reset and the jewler showed me). And I am very careful with my rings (they come off once in the house, always did).

I am sure Brian can give you expert direction but with a girdle going from thin to very thin, I think you take more risks.

 

[sparkle-sparkle]

Thank you ladies. I will ask for Brian''s opinion before we finalize the purchase.

I also noticed some discrepancy on the AGSL report and the Sarin report for stone #1. How could this be?

 

[Mara]

I didn''t look at the reports but it is not uncommon for the two to be inconsistent...not huge jumps normally but a tiny bit off. It depends on the machines, calibration, etc. Obviously the AGS was done in the AGS lab and the Sarin was done at WF. So if the AGS says 40.5 pav angle and the Sarin says 40.6...that''s not a huge deal IMO. It would be if the AGS said 40.5 and the Sarin said 41 that would red flag it for me. Same with table and depth...it may be off just slightly. As long as both sets of numbers are acceptable to you...it would not bother me to have small inconsistencies between the two reports.