Help to choose between two AVCs

The K in a heartbeat. I think the DiamXray in the M shows a lot of leakage, and in an M color (or any lower color), the leakage will show the diamond's yellowness (not warmth, but actually yellow) much more. It's not an attractive feature IMO.

K for me too!

The second one! Whoa! Perfect shape, beautiful culet. My vote, anyway.

That M is one of the few AVCs I've looked at the pic of and kind of not liked for whatever reason. And yeah, the ASET and such show a lot of white, especially for an AVC. I'd get the K instead, it looks lovely.

Thank you for all of your replies. Do you think the difference in size will be very noticeable between those two. My ring size is 2.75, so i guess any of this will look substantial on my finger. Also, since i've never owned an AVC before, what setting do you think would complement it the most? I like delicate settings, no halos.
Thank you!

You have the smallest finger EVER! EVER!!!

It's going to look like a boulder. 6.88mm / 13.78mm = 50% finger coverage. It's going to look like the Rock of Gibraltar, seriously.

How is it that you have such tiny fingers!

For settings, I really like cathedrals with cushions, where the cathedral airline is the same angle as the crown angle...looking for a good Leon to show you ...

Antelope1,
Thank you for your reply.
I know I'm pretty lucky for a diamond obsessed person, to have such a small finger size. But at the same time i love big stones. The bigger the better.
I think the common PS opinion is that the AVCs look their best at size above 1.25, but since it seems that GOG inventory is low in the range of 1.25-1.5 i had to move into the lower color (which doesn't bother me) and higher carat size zone.
Having said that, i have doubts about the K stone. I compared it's ASET to others and it looks like it looks kind of inferior comparing to other AVCs.
What do dear PS people think about this L color stone. I personally prefer more rectangular shape, but i really like the ASET image of this one.

So K or L ?

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/7547/

The ASET on the L seems to indicate slightly better light return (more red) and the culet is a bit smaller, but if you like a more rectangular shape...

I think both stones are lovely!

L over the K. Better light performance.

Keep in mind that the more rectangular a cushion, the harder it is to cut it well (and avoid leakage).

Also, in terms of face-up dimensions, you're not really going to notice anything less than 0.5mm change. So the impression that you would get from looking at the L vs the K is that the L is more square, but you wouldn't necessarily be able to tell which was "bigger" because they are different shapes.

Thank you all for your replies. I think i'll have to ask GOG to shoot a video with both stone.
What do you think about this one. It's smaller, but it has a beautiful shape and it's and E!

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/7442/

The L is better cut than the E, but that is a big difference in color. BIG difference. If you haven't seen any warm stones IRL, I'd check them out before committing to the L.

I have an .82 L AVC now (with medium flour). The color doens't bother me at all, but again it's only .82. So I expect the color to be more obvious in the larger stone.
I would be delighted to get an E though. I put all three of them on hold and will wait for tomorrow when GOG opens so they can compare all three of them and maybe suggest on the best performer.

I agree with antelope1that is a major difference in color. The E color is going to be much whiter than the L. You have to make very sure that you can stand the warmer color of and L on a long term basis. You are the one that is going to be wearing and looking at it on your finger each and everyday. You don't want to end up 2 weeks or a month after wearing a warmer stone that you now wish you had chosen a higher color. Just something to think about.

If it were me having to choose I would go with the K AVC of the 3 you have on hold, here's why:- sym & pol are ex, small table (which I love) great size (especially over the E), you already have an L, so a K would be in the same colour range. Love the shape.

I had a 1.22 L AVC and upgraded to a 1.82 J AVC purely for the larger size, both colours were fine with me.

A video of all three lined up will (hopefully) help you choose. Good luck !

Thank to all of you for advices and help you provided. At the end i decided to go with smaller stone (to save money and to have a space for future upgrades). I went with this 1.25 L SI1. It's about $ 1700 more than my .82 L. And I'm hoping to see the difference in size. I like the shape of it and the ASET looks lovely. Let me know what do think about my final decision.
Thnk you!


http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/7552/

I think it's gorgeous and very similar to the one we have on hold right now, pending a few questions Can't wait to see your pics once you have that baby set!

Wait, is this the same L as before? Or different?

I am noticing something in the ASET that bothers me (but may not bother you). At the corners of the table (in the ASET and in the DiamXray), do you see the leakage? I don't know if it matters that much...where is CCL when you need him?

OMG! I do see the white color on the corners of the the table.
It's a different L. I stopped my horses before making a jump from .82 to 1.7 and decided to settle in the middle with 1.25c.
I looked through all of the AVCs in the range from 1ct - 2ct so many times and compared all the ASETs so many times that i missed it. I even looked through all of them in the Show me the ring thread and traced them back to their ASET images on GOG site. I did see some pergect ASETs. But I could not find a perfect one in the current inventory. I noticed that square ones have better ASETs with more red, and more rectangular ones have leakage here and there.
So do you think i should pass on this one and keep looking?

I would pass on this one. The leakage at the corners of the table is extra pronounced, IMO.

You're absolutely right, the more rectangular ones tend to leak more. It's a much bigger challenge to cut a rectangular cushion as well as a square one.

I liked the first L best (of the ones you posted). If you're going to go bigger, go bigger.

Written by antelope1:I would pass on this one. The leakage at the corners of the table is extra pronounced, IMO.

You're absolutely right, the more rectangular ones tend to leak more. It's a much bigger challenge to cut a rectangular cushion as well as a square one.

I liked the first L best (of the ones you posted). If you're going to go bigger, go bigger.

The cut quality of some AVCs these days does vary a little bit more than it used to.
However I think that you are nitpicking from amongst the best performing vintage style cushions available.
Leakage in the faceup position may not stay leaky upon a small tilt under the table.

If given the choice I would choose the more square ones but I doubt that little bit of leakage in the corners under the table is going to be that noticeable in terms of LR. However you might see more tinted color in those areas in some lighting scenarios. If the tint doesn't bother the wearer I wouldn't worry about it too much.

I sent a question to Sarah to see if she can help me to compare 1.25 L to others of the same size and color range and find the best performer.
I decided to spend around $2000 more to get to 1.25 size range. Jumping to $8,000 price tag would be a hard thing for me to do. And my finger size still 2.75:)

Decide on a short list (size, shape, light performance, price, etc.). Then ask Jon to shoot a video of the chosen ones. You may also want to ask Jon's opinion on the best light peformer in the bunch and see if you can detect this on the video, go from there and hopefully narrow down your choice.

I like the video idea of the finalists! +1

How do I get through to Jon? Every time I contacted GOG I was communicating with Sarah. They have 3 L cushions that range from 1.22 - 1.25.
I'll ask to shoot a video of three of them.

I know you're are not wanting to spend more for a larger stone but you may want one added in the video to get an idea of the difference in size.....just a thought. DSS sets in quickly

Sarah is Jon's daughter. If Jon is shooting the video ask Sarah to ask her Dad to indicate which is the best performer for you.

If you tell Sarah you have a question for Jon, she will give you his email address....

You sound like me - I also have a 2.75 finger and own a 1.71 E AVC. I also tried to reach Jon but kept getting Sarah but eventually Jon emailed me and it was happy sailing for me. Anyways, my advice is to wait until you find the diamond that you are perfectly happy with. I personally don't have the energy to keep upgrading and changing my ering - doing one upgrade took more time than I wanted already. Wait for the right diamond .. get the perfect setting .. then you can wear it in peace.

Written by ChunkyCushionLover » December 7th, 2010, 2:49 pm:
The cut quality of some AVCs these days does vary a little bit more than it used to.

I think the variation is a good thing. It gives people choices. They're all going to be among the best, as you said, and (to my mind) these aren't supposed to be like WF ACA's, standardized. A lot of the choice of an antique style cushion is (subjective) aesthetics.

So here is the update. I did call GOG yesterday and got to talk to Jon. He was very sweet and I enjoyed the little background and the overview of the AVCs. He assured me that this is the very nice stone an it's ready to be shipped.
I receive it today and will try now to discribe my impression with it:
It's a nice stone, but it looks much more yellow than .82 L AVC that I have. The yellow is more pronounced not just in the face up position, but the body color itself looks more yellow. The .82 L doesn’t look really warm, but rather has steely look in some lighting conditions. The 1.25 L looks yellow in almost all lighting conditions. I don’t know if the reason is the cut, the larger size or it maybe it’s a “much lower L” than 0.82 L.
I was looking forward for keeping it and returning the .82 L, but I’m going to return the 1.25 L. Maybe it's a good lesson for me not to go lower than K in a larger size diamond. I am going to keep looking for an ideal one.