Advice needed!

[shinebrightlikea]

Hey everyone,

Just recently started delving into this confusing world of diamonds, in search of a nice round for an engagement ring (solitaire setting). Been reading a bit on here and learning a lot, but posting for the first time. The general criteria I've narrowed down to for the diamond is E-F, VS2-SI1, 1.85-2 carat, and either a GIA XXX or AGS 000, with a budget close to $25k. I would also like to have closest to ideal proportions as possible, with HCA under 2 preferably. I've come up with the 3 following online diamonds, and will also attach the cert for one I've seen in person (the HCA works out to be 4.4 on that so I'm a bit concerned with the proportions but I don't have a trained enough eye to really distinguish). I'm hoping to buy one of the online ones and get it appraised before making any more decisions. Given that, I have a few questions:

1 - what is your overall advice on these 4 stones - are any significantly better or worse than the others, and if so, why?
2 - any suggestion on maybe finding alternatives to these 4? (though I've searched on JA, WF and BG pretty extensively for these "ideal/signature" cuts and couldn't find many more options)
3 - I've found some other cheaper similar diamonds, at sites like Zoara and Yadav but those seems to have mixed reviews - any thoughts on that?

I know those are a bit broad for questions, but I'm hoping the PS community can help me out - I want to get this thing bought and set soon! Thanks in advance!

 

[shinebrightlikea]

Ha it would help to include the 3 online ones huh....

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/2.000-f-vs2-round-diamond-gia-54860727
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3801975.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3794733.htm

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The first stone doesn't even come close to the numbers we'd recommend, and that shows why the HCA score works most of the time!

The BG listing is for a virtual stone (it's not one of theirs) and doesn't even list the angles, so it really has to be eliminated.

The two Whiteflash stones are outstanding! Truthfully, it is hard to find stones right under the 2 ct mark (and right at 8mm), so you are lucky to have two great ones to choose from! My personal pick is this one (I like the numbers on it and I like that it appears cleaner):

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3794733.htm

 

[MissGotRocks]

I agree with DS on the 1.89 - I like that stone too!

 

[AprilBaby]

The WF 1.89 is a beauty!!!!

 

[shinebrightlikea]

Thanks for the replies! Of course you picked the most expensive one... haha I'm just kidding. I do understand you get what you pay for, and I like the 1.89 as well

 

[WillyDiamond]

Here ya go, and you can save $4k for the honeymoon
http://black.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond-details/bkags-104093051009

 

[Dancing Fire]

Here ya go, and you can save $4k for the honeymoon
http://black.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond-details/bkags-104093051009

Nice stone if the OP don't mind losing about .30mm in diameter + one color grade lower.

 

[WillyDiamond]

My eye could not tell .30mm difference in diameter. Same with color.
Most people find the "G" pleasing to the eye.

 

[gm89uk]

My eye could not tell .30mm difference in diameter. Same with color.
Most people find the "G" pleasing to the eye.

I think it's fair to say most people will be able to tell 0.33mm in diameter. Black by BG may be beautiful but not really an appropriate recommendation for the OP as a money saving diamond to save towards the honeymoon as there are much cheaper brands that are questionably just as well cut when viewed with a naked eye.

By that logic just go with this https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3646319.htm, also superideal and a grade up in clarity, and another $1k value saving on the black by BG with a better upgrade policy.

 

[shinebrightlikea]

Both the BG and the WF ~1.7 carat stones are great suggestions and I really appreciate them! I do want to stick with just under 2 carat however.
I had an online chat session with Debi from WF last night that went very well, and she answered many of my questions and put the 1.89 on hold for me until tomorrow. I am fairly close to finalizing my order for that but will continue to look around for another day or so.
More feedback is always welcomed!

 

[shinebrightlikea]

My local jeweler found 2 more similar diamonds with same specs and better proportions, and better HCA numbers. What are your thoughts on these two, especially in comparison to the WF 1.89? The first 1.93 F VS2 costs about the same as the WF stone, but the second 1.9 F VS1 is about $2200 more (makes sense for the upgrade in clarity). Here are the two certs, and the link for the WF stone. Thanks for the feedback!

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3794733.htm

 

[koolio2017]

My local jeweler found 2 more similar diamonds with same specs and better proportions, and better HCA numbers. What are your thoughts on these two, especially in comparison to the WF 1.89? The first 1.93 F VS2 costs about the same as the WF stone, but the second 1.9 F VS1 is about $2200 more (makes sense for the upgrade in clarity). Here are the two certs, and the link for the WF stone. Thanks for the feedback!

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3794733.htm

Only the first stone (1.93) has okay proportions. The WF has better proportions than both of these. The 1.90 VS1 has weird crown angle and depth that are a bit too high for my taste. I think the WF with it's smaller table will be superior to the other two.

 

[WillyDiamond]

As I said "my" eye could not tell diameter difference.

I think it's fair to say most people will be able to tell 0.33mm in diameter. Black by BG may be beautiful but not really an appropriate recommendation for the OP as a money saving diamond to save towards the honeymoon as there are much cheaper brands that are questionably just as well cut when viewed with a naked eye.

By that logic just go with this https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3646319.htm, also superideal and a grade up in clarity, and another $1k value saving on the black by BG with a better upgrade policy.

 

[shinebrightlikea]

Please help! I've narrowed my search down to these 3 stones, and would love some feedback from all you experts out there! I did go down a bit in size for an upgrade in clarity, with 2 of the 3 stones (the 1.89 VS2 and the 1.79 VS1) being almost identical in cost, and the slightly larger 1.82 VS1 being almost 2k more. Thoughts?? Thanks!

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=3798132,3794733,3797676

 

[koolio2017]

Please help! I've narrowed my search down to these 3 stones, and would love some feedback from all you experts out there! I did go down a bit in size for an upgrade in clarity, with 2 of the 3 stones (the 1.89 VS2 and the 1.79 VS1) being almost identical in cost, and the slightly larger 1.82 VS1 being almost 2k more. Thoughts?? Thanks!

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=3798132,3794733,3797676

Ehh I don't like to go VS2 because it will bug me. I think VS1 is the sweet spot for me personally. The 1.79 has the best IS image with darker reds and blacker arrows than the other 2....but I don't think you will go wrong with any of them.

 

[ac117]

I'd go with the 1.894 or the 1.788. I personally had a 1.81 VS2 with a couple of black specs under the table and I could only see them from the side if I tilted my ring forward at like 3 inches away from my face so the 1.894 would probably be my choice since it just misses the 8mm mark. I wouldn't go with the 1.818 F VS1 that's $2k more than the 1.788 F VS1 for .05-.06mm larger. Any of them will be beautiful, though!! You could also ask WF to pull all 3 and tell you what they see and which performs best.

 

[shinebrightlikea]

I agree that I'm probably down to the 1.894 or the 1.788. I agree with koolio that the IS image for the 1.788 is best, but it seems to me that the hearts image isn't as clean? I don't really know how to read these images too well - anyone with a trained eye have any input?

 

[ac117]

The IS of the 1.894 is no less than the 1.788...the difference is in the backlighting, which is stronger for the 1.894. You can tell bc the light is even coming through the black arrows.

 

[koolio2017]

The IS of the 1.894 is no less than the 1.788...the difference is in the backlighting, which is stronger for the 1.894. You can tell bc the light is even coming through the black arrows.

Correct me if I'm wrong...I don't think this is true because whiteflash has certs for ISO9000 so their pics are all standardized. There should be no difference between setups.

 

[gm89uk]

The diamonds are of different size and have slightly different proportions, the same set up may not give identical results. I agree there is no IS superior to the other. The back lighting is affecting the 1.894 stone more, as you can see this effect disappears when looking at the dark background ASET.

 

[ac117]

Correct me if I'm wrong...I don't think this is true because whiteflash has certs for ISO9000 so their pics are all standardized. There should be no difference between setups.

The ISO9000 assures you that the quality is there and it is. But unless these stones were photographed using the same settings (exposure, backlighting, contrast, what have you) then there could still be minor differences in the intensity of the colors.

 

[Dancing Fire]

IMO, I'd pass on the 1.81ct b/c the 1.78ct is $1900 less and I wouldn't able to see the size difference b/t the two stones.

 

[shinebrightlikea]

Thanks for all the input everyone. I put the 1.788 on hold and will sleep on it tonight before pulling the trigger tomorrow! Hope it's the right choice!