Pick between 2 diamond, both ~1.1ct I VS2

[Yomister]

First time poster and buyer of diamond. I'm looking for a diamond for an e-ring and the following has caught my eye. They are very similar in price and spec, the only difference between The 2 is carat weight.

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3157605.htm

http://www.goodoldgold.com/ecommerce/1-10ct-i-vs2-superior-round-hearts-and-arrows-diamond.html

Are there any reasons I wouldn't just opt for the larger diamond?

Thanks in advance for all your comments!

 

[Dancing Fire]

The only difference is the med blue fluorescence on the GOG stone. Some people love blue fluor and some don't. I don't mind either way if the stone is well cut.

 

[Yomister]

If you don't mind me asking, how were you able to tell the gog stone has a med blue fluorescence? The website says "none" under fluorescence but I guess you have another way of telling.

 

[Dancing Fire]

If you don't mind me asking, how were you able to tell the gog stone has a med blue fluorescence? The website says "none" under fluorescence but I guess you have another way of telling.

The AGS lab report under "comments"... nothing wrong with owning a med blue fluor stone.

 

[Yomister]

Great thanks! I'll do some research on fluorescence.

I still have a question regarding value. Since both diamond are the same price with the same spec, would it be a better value to select WF for the bigger carat weight?

 

[palmersj]

I couldn't imagine that ctw would be a decision maker for this choice. imho. 1.1 vs 1.135
Are these the only two stones you're wanting to choose from? ie. Have you looked anywhere else to determine the diamonds that have made your "final cut" ?
Both of them are awesome from the information that you have. The pricing is pretty good to.
You could always open up some additional avenues of searching (but that will come at a cost of time and potential decisions made off of information that's not as detailed or documented). It really depends what's important to you and their relativity to each other.
If you're serious about just these, then I'd see about how you could view them side by side if possible. There's only a couple hundred dollar diff between them which is just as insignificant as their ctw's.

 

[Yomister]

I have not looked at other choices, but I would be open suggestion. Do you have any recommendations

However I do know what I want. About 1.1 ct I VS2 or SI1 (eye clean). I chose the 2 listed in this post for the reputation of WF and GOG and the ample information that they post on their website. My worst fear is getting a diamond that is not what I want.

 

[palmersj]

The two you suggested are premium cut stones. You could use bluenile and attempt to find a stone of very high cut quality. It's about a 2k price difference. If you're not set on a hearts/arrows stone you could get one that's excellent/ideal cut and increase the ctw or color preferences for the same money. The trade off is it's difficult to ensure a cut quality/light performance that you could by going with wf or gog. I find most folks on here are very much into obtaining the highest of cut standards. I think it's like anybody else that there's diminishing returns at some point. Wine coinsures can tell the slightest difference in flavors while the masses will say it tastes great.
The other option is to use bn sig ideal cuts. They've got a light performance from gcal. If you're not dead set, it might be worth a look.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would personally choose between these two stones, because you can't really find better cut stones (and those are the two places my diamond studs and diamond ring came from)! Both are great diamonds and it would be hard to choose! A lot has to do whether you desire fluorescence or not. Some of us love it and others want none. Please always go by diameter and not weight in your decisions. In this particular case, the 1.13 is just a slight amount larger in diameter, but that is not always the case when comparing two stones close in weight.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

The two you suggested are premium cut stones. You could use bluenile and attempt to find a stone of very high cut quality. It's about a 2k price difference. If you're not set on a hearts/arrows stone you could get one that's excellent/ideal cut and increase the ctw or color preferences for the same money. The trade off is it's difficult to ensure a cut quality/light performance that you could by going with wf or gog. I find most folks on here are very much into obtaining the highest of cut standards. I think it's like anybody else that there's diminishing returns at some point. Wine coinsures can tell the slightest difference in flavors while the masses will say it tastes great.
The other option is to use bn sig ideal cuts. They've got a light performance from gcal. If you're not dead set, it might be worth a look.

I would like to express my disagreement with the bolded part of your post.

Over the years, I have seen many analogies made to diamonds, today fine wine, pepsi-tests, and so on. While valuable at first sight, I think such analogies do not make any sense. Pepsi, fine wine, and many other products, are items of immediate customer-satisfaction. You could argue that one can enjoy the after-taste of a fine glass of wine, but surely, the joy and satisfaction of consuming that wine does not last for months or years.

Diamonds to the contrary tend to be purchased for an extremely long period of customer-satisfaction. That makes an enormous difference.

Especially when bringing up the so-called law of diminishing returns, I can kind of agree for products of instant consumer-satisfaction. I however disagree vehemently when it comes down to products where the consumer-satisfaction because of the nature of the product is spread over months, years, decades and in exceptional cases, even centuries. In that case, I state that the law of diminishing returns does not exist up to the level that exactly the opposite is true. Take for instance art, movies, music, furniture design, ... The fact that certain art or design stand the test of time is testament to just a tiny bit of genius, craftsmanship or extra quality making an enormous difference over time.

Whenever I meet consumers months, sometimes years after their purchase, I always ask them first about their experiences over time with the diamond. And I always get back stories filled with joy, things they did not truly expect at the time-of-purchase.

For that reason, I strongly oppose the 'law' of diminishing returns, when it comes down to diamonds.

Live long,

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I could not agree more with you, Paul. I don't spend a lot on things like wine or clothes exactly for that reason. I spend the money on fine things that will be heirlooms for my granddaughters. Maybe it is because I am older that I can see that. When I was young we knew nothing about diamonds and my original one is probably "good" at best, and while I keep it for sentimental reasons, I have no real desire to reset it. Thankfully we found PS before buying another diamond and were introduced to the fine diamonds like CBI, WF, and GOG. I realize not everyone can buy those, but those who do are very fortunate.

 

[pfunk]

Here are some nice stones that give you extra size:

http://www.solomonbrothers.com/Diam...-4530-A456-0409DFEFB8DE&utm_source=PriceScope

This one I would def try to get idealscope because you never know about the 41 degree pavilion causing problems.

Here is an even bigger option.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R134-4GSP8R?cid=pricescope

 

[toade]

Or maybe this one for him pfunk?
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R130-BM9ENR

Great numbers, better girdle, and pretty great hearts symmetry.

 

[pfunk]

Or maybe this one for him pfunk?
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R130-BM9ENR

Great numbers, better girdle, and pretty great hearts symmetry.

Oh yeah! That one looks really great too. And the better girdle keeps the diamter up over 7mm even with the lower weight. Great looking diamond. **edited by moderator to comply with policies**

 

[BrownyJones]

Super ideal cut diamonds are more like atomic clocks.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Super ideal cut diamonds are more like atomic clocks.

I love this quote!

I only wish it were true because that would mean they would become an international standard and the defaut way the world thinks diamonds should be cut. Since atomic clocks have also been critical to the development of a whole host of technological and social innovations, including GPS and deep space exploration, then super ideal diamonds would soon change the world as we know it. Then I could ask for a raise

 

[cflutist]

I could not agree more with you, Paul. I don't spend a lot on things like wine or clothes exactly for that reason. I spend the money on fine things that will be heirlooms for my granddaughters. Maybe it is because I am older that I can see that. When I was young we knew nothing about diamonds and my original one is probably "good" at best, and while I keep it for sentimental reasons, I have no real desire to reset it. Thankfully we found PS before buying another diamond and were introduced to the fine diamonds like CBI, WF, and GOG. I realize not everyone can buy those, but those who do are very fortunate.

I agree with Paul as well.

However, everyone "could" buy those if they chose to, it basically boils down to quantity versus quality.

Oh and I love the "Super ideal cut diamonds are more like atomic clocks." quote from BrownyJones ... bravo

 

[palmersj]

The two you suggested are premium cut stones. You could use bluenile and attempt to find a stone of very high cut quality. It's about a 2k price difference. If you're not set on a hearts/arrows stone you could get one that's excellent/ideal cut and increase the ctw or color preferences for the same money. The trade off is it's difficult to ensure a cut quality/light performance that you could by going with wf or gog. I find most folks on here are very much into obtaining the highest of cut standards. I think it's like anybody else that there's diminishing returns at some point. Wine coinsures can tell the slightest difference in flavors while the masses will say it tastes great.
The other option is to use bn sig ideal cuts. They've got a light performance from gcal. If you're not dead set, it might be worth a look.

I would like to express my disagreement with the bolded part of your post.

Over the years, I have seen many analogies made to diamonds, today fine wine, pepsi-tests, and so on. While valuable at first sight, I think such analogies do not make any sense. Pepsi, fine wine, and many other products, are items of immediate customer-satisfaction. You could argue that one can enjoy the after-taste of a fine glass of wine, but surely, the joy and satisfaction of consuming that wine does not last for months or years.

Diamonds to the contrary tend to be purchased for an extremely long period of customer-satisfaction. That makes an enormous difference.

Especially when bringing up the so-called law of diminishing returns, I can kind of agree for products of instant consumer-satisfaction. I however disagree vehemently when it comes down to products where the consumer-satisfaction because of the nature of the product is spread over months, years, decades and in exceptional cases, even centuries. In that case, I state that the law of diminishing returns does not exist up to the level that exactly the opposite is true. Take for instance art, movies, music, furniture design, ... The fact that certain art or design stand the test of time is testament to just a tiny bit of genius, craftsmanship or extra quality making an enormous difference over time.

Whenever I meet consumers months, sometimes years after their purchase, I always ask them first about their experiences over time with the diamond. And I always get back stories filled with joy, things they did not truly expect at the time-of-purchase.

For that reason, I strongly oppose the 'law' of diminishing returns, when it comes down to diamonds.

Live long,

I can appreciate your opinion on diminishing points of return with regards to cut quality. I believe most people on ps know that the cut is the most important aspect in selecting a stone. The OP asked for an opinion on two very nicely cut stones and I wanted to add in another thought. Specifically has the OP considered shifting some balance towards the other C's or is it that important to keep the cut portion at that upper echelon level. I think it's worth working through it so you feel ultimately comfortable with the final decision.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Palmersj,

I am in this thread purely on a theoretical basis, and essentially somewhat off-topic, as I cannot and do not wish to give any comment on the specific stones brought forward by the OP.

When it comes down to trading-off cut-quality against any of the other C's, that is to some extent mathematical, to another emotional.

On a mathematical basis, all other C's (ranging from Carat weight over Color to Clarity) cause price-differences which are huge for aspects (close to) undistinguishable. In comparison, price-differences because of cut-quality are minor, and the differences far more important.

Emotionally however (possibly based upon a century-long bad education by the industry), most people have set preferences for Carat weight, Color and Clarity and often a clear limit they emotionally simply cannot go under. And financially, there always is a budget-limitation.

In the end, every purchase-decision is weighing the logical with the emotional, and each person needs to be happy with the result of that exercise.

Live long,