I''m back everybody and I need advice!

[Groovy Chick]

Hi everyone! I haven''t been here for about two and a half years but I''m back because we are upgrading my engagement ring and I really would appreciate opinions on the following Round Brilliant stone. Nice to see you still here, Mara

1.53ct brilliant, SI1, Fluorescence slight, Colour E, Measurements 7.28mm - 7.31mm x 4.62mm, Girdle medium 4.5% faceted, culet pointed, table width 57%, cr height 15%, pav depth 44%

These numbers don''t mean much to me so I''m hoping some of you can comment on them for me. We haven''t purchased yet so you can be honest! Basically I really want it to sparkle. That is the main reason for upgrading. I had a fancy cut which was pretty but I am missing the sparkle that you can get from a good RB.

It certainly looked fiery in the shop.

Thanks in advance for any opinions. Also, is there any particular setting that makes a stone look bigger?

 

[jaz464]

Can''t comment on the numbers, though if you loved it in the shop, that says a lot.

Date: 6/18/2006 10:51:43 PM
Author:Groovy Chick

Thanks in advance for any opinions. Also, is there any particular setting that makes a stone look bigger?

My opinion, a halo setting.

 

[Groovy Chick]

Thanks for replying! It''s so exciting to be back posting here after so long - and to be buying a new diamond! The thing is, I only had one other RB to compare it to in the shop (I''m from New Zealand and we don''t have an abundance of big diamonds like in the States) so I''m really hoping someone who knows what the ideal specs are for a RB can give me their opinion before we dig out all that money!

 

[mrssalvo]

Is the stone certified? and do you have the depth percentage?

 

[Groovy Chick]

I''m not sure. There is a certificate with it which has "antwerpen" written on it and I''ve typed all the specs that are on it in my first post. There doesn''t seem to be a depth percentage value on there. It does say "proportions: very good".

The jeweller was telling me that it is a really good stone and that the cut is "within 4% of ideal" or something like that? It just doesn''t mean too much to me!

I just don''t want to buy it and then later find out that the specs aren''t good at all.

 

[mrssalvo]

I''m not good with percentages but I do know that it''s hard to determine an accurate cut quality. you really need the crown and pavilion angles as well and the depth % to run it though the HCA and get an accurate result. For me personally I would not buy a stone that wasn''t AGS or GIA certified, preferably a AGS000 ideal cut stone. Hopefully, some of the round experts will chime in with their thoughts and opinions for you. Cut is the most important "C" and most of the folks here want ex/ex or ideal cuts to maximize the sparkle..

 

[Mara]

Hi Groovy Chick!! Welcome back....an upgrade, how exciting!! You know I love those upgrades!

According to my calcs, the depth on the stone is 63.2%.

Honestly, I would pass on this stone.

The reason being is that the diameter is 7.3mm and that means that it does not face up like a 1.5c would if it was excellently cut, which would be more like 7.4mm or 7.45mm. This looks more like a 1.40c most likely.

That means there is some loss of diameter in the deeper pavilion of the stone. To me this stone is not an ideal cut and certainly not within the top 4% (though I'm wondering well top 4% of what? maul cuts?) of the world's stones. I ran the numbers through the HCA and even though typically with %'s the HCA tends to give a better score than it would with angles, on this stone it gave an icky 4.5 which corresponds with my initial thoughts on seeing the specs, so to me it's a definite NO.

Can you keep looking with this jeweler? If so, tell him you want a stone that has depth between 60.5-62% and table between 54-57% with crown angle between 34.2-34.9 and pavilion angle between 40.5-40.9. GIA and AGS certs only if possible, with a Sarin run on the diamond if necessary.

Since you are upgrading for amazing sparkle, I would keep looking until you do get an excellently cut stone. You said this stone was pretty but honestly if you aren't married to just this one stone, I'd keep looking to find something a little better, esp since you are getting rid of a fancy stone to get the look of a RB, you don't just want any ole RB!! Keep us posted and please come back with more specs if he can find you other stones to compare to!!

 

[Groovy Chick]

Hi and thanks so very much for taking the time to reply. The jeweler did give me the specs on the other stone he has which is a "better" stone but was getting a little pricey. However, it may not be out of reach so could you let me know your thoughts on this one please anyone?

1.5ct brilliant, VS2, fluorescence nil, colour D, measurements 7.38 - 7.43mm X 4.49mm, proportions very good, girdle medium 3.5% faceted, culet 0.5% natural, table width 58%, cr height 14.5%, pav depth 43%

Do you think I''m likely to be able to find a much better cut diamond without increasing the price though? This one I''ve described here is really our upper limit.

Also, what is a Sarin run? I''ve never heard of this.

 

[Mara]

Date: 6/19/2006 12:26:45 AM
Author: Groovy Chick

Hi and thanks so very much for taking the time to reply. The jeweler did give me the specs on the other stone he has which is a 'better' stone but was getting a little pricey. However, it may not be out of reach so could you let me know your thoughts on this one please anyone?

1.5ct brilliant, VS2, fluorescence nil, colour D, measurements 7.38 - 7.43mm X 4.49mm, proportions very good, girdle medium 3.5% faceted, culet 0.5% natural, table width 58%, cr height 14.5%, pav depth 43%

Do you think I'm likely to be able to find a much better cut diamond without increasing the price though? This one I've described here is really our upper limit.

Also, what is a Sarin run? I've never heard of this.

Well that stone you just posted seems better but I don't really like the table at 58. The depth is 60.6. But the specs seem better than the first one. But honestly if these are the two best ones he has, I'd keep looking!!

However, part of the reason that these stones are most likely so pricey is because they are high color...D and E? also the first one is E SI1 so it should be cheaper than a D VS2, regardless of cut.

I'd ask for a better cut stone AND stick with something like E/F SI if you can. It's still colorless and if you can find an eye-clean SI...you will save $$. I'd *always* rather spend on CUT QUALITY than color and clarity, because a well-cut stone will also make the diamond look brighter...so if you get a better cut E than a D..it will most likely look like the D anyway and be more sparkly, just as an example.

A Sarin is a report run on a machine that confirms things like table/depth/crown/pavilion etc. But if you get an AGS or GIA cert, the angles should be on there. EGL only has %'s which are not as accurate, these stones this guy is pulling for you sound like EGL certs.

 

[Groovy Chick]

Thank you so much, Mara. I can''t believe my luck that you were around at the time I posted! I also can''t believe that these seemingly tiny differences in value can make such a difference to the appearance of the stone!

I think I will ask the jeweler to get more stones in based on what you said. I don''t even mind going to an F or G colour if it means I can get a better cut diamond for a more affordable price.

These two stones were pretty fiery though (of course it was under jeweler''s lights) and it''s hard to believe that a stone could be more sparkly but I guess I''ve just got to trust the measurements don''t I because it has all been mathematically worked out.

I hope he can find one with a closer to ideal cut though. Are there many around? I only have a couple of months to find it so we can get it duty free when we go on our trip to the States in September!