2 plus carat diamond - help!

[JD_MD]

Hi all,

I''m looking for the best possible cut 2.25 - 2.75 ct diamond in a G color SI1 clarity (eye clean of course

). I considered H color but I''m afraid that it may appear a bit yellow for my taste.

I''ve enjoyed reading everyone''s post over the past few weeks here on PS and have learned so much about diamonds. The only bad news is....I''ve learned so much that I''m now a bit "over-informed" and now the generic description "ideal cut" is almost meaningless - I want better than that!

Any opinions on the most well cut, bling-bling, sparkly diamond out there for the money? I''m trying to keep my budget around $25K or under for the diamond itself, but I''d spend more for the perfect stone.

Also, just wondering - would the "average" person be able to tell the difference between a plain old "AGS 0" and one that scores less than 1 on the HCA? Am I being overly picky when in reality I wouldn''t be able to tell the difference anyways? Has anyone ever seen an AGS 0 next to a "super-premium" cut diamond?

Thanks in advance to everyone!

JD

 

[researcher]

You''re looking for a round, right? I don''t know much about them, but I do have some advice on color. There will most definitely be H colored stones that will look extremely white, while others will have a yellowish tint. I NEVER would have guessed I''d end up with an I colored stone because I am really color sensitive (I can tell the base colors in paint and see differences in evry shade of white), but the stone I ended up with faces up as white as most G colored stones I''ve seen. And, mine is a fancy shape that is over 3 carats (two factors which tend to make stones with lower color ratings look worse). So, don''t discount a stone on its color rating alone. Some stones just tend to show a lot of color in the pavilion when face down, but face up extremely white due to the cut. For that reason, I would get the best cut possible and sacrifice the color rating--as long as the stone is white white to the eye!

 

[Regular Guy]

This one''s under $25K based on their Pricescope''s discounted price of $24,492; this search by cut infobase has been created to help you navigate based on HCA score, and other things, and there''s several others there you may want to look at.

See the link below my signature to link this up with other options.

Best,

 

[LadyluvsLuxury]

Date: 5/23/2005 3:41:07 PM
Author:JD_MD
Hi all,

I''m looking for the best possible cut 2.25 - 2.75 ct diamond in a G color SI1 clarity (eye clean of course

). I considered H color but I''m afraid that it may appear a bit yellow for my taste.

I''ve enjoyed reading everyone''s post over the past few weeks here on PS and have learned so much about diamonds. The only bad news is....I''ve learned so much that I''m now a bit ''over-informed'' and now the generic description ''ideal cut'' is almost meaningless - I want better than that!

Any opinions on the most well cut, bling-bling, sparkly diamond out there for the money? I''m trying to keep my budget around $25K or under for the diamond itself, but I''d spend more for the perfect stone.

Also, just wondering - would the ''average'' person be able to tell the difference between a plain old ''AGS 0'' and one that scores less than 1 on the HCA? Am I being overly picky when in reality I wouldn''t be able to tell the difference anyways? Has anyone ever seen an AGS 0 next to a ''super-premium'' cut diamond?

Thanks in advance to everyone!

JD

Hey JD, let us know what you decide!

 

[JD_MD]

Thanks for the feedback so far!

Here''s a 2.16 RB I found for $21,900. The 8.44 mm size makes it look more like a 2.3 - 2.4 carat stone. It has a 1.5 HCA score and gets 3 "very high" scores on the Brilliance Scope.

I''d like to find something a bit larger but the numbers look great on this one. I''d be interested in other opinions - rip this stone apart and be honest!

AGS cert below

http://www.diamondbrokersoffl.com/stoneimages/G2909.jpg

Brilliance Scope

http://www.diamondbrokersoffl.com/stoneimages/B2909.gif

Thanks,

JD

 

[Maxine]

Having problems reading the #''s on the cert......

 

[JD_MD]

The cert is hard to read...here are the numbers:


RB 2.16 F SI1 8.43-8.47-5.07 IDEAL 60.00 57 N IDEAL IDEAL

Crown Angle 34.1

Pavillion Angle 41.0

 

[Maxine]

You might be looking at pavillion depth %, not the angles......

 

[Regular Guy]

F&I,

Despite your beliefs in the powers of the eyeball, do I recall your saying you employed a diamond shopper to get a diamond for yourself?

JD,

Curious...how did you find the option you found from Diamond Brokers of FL? I do see it at their web site, but having recently become aware of the db they've implemented at Diamond Talk, with SuperbCert, I don't see it there.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 5/24/2005 9:27:50 AM
Author: Regular Guy
F&I,

Despite your beliefs in the powers of the eyeball, do I recall your saying you employed a diamond shopper to get a diamond for yourself?

JD,

Curious...how did you find the option you found from Diamond Brokers of FL? I do see it at their web site, but having recently become aware of the db they''ve implemented at Diamond Talk, with SuperbCert, I don''t see it there.

No. Not me. I had a friend who is a GG, appraiser & estate jeweler locate stones for me. In the end, with his recommendation of the stone, *my* eyes decided. Ira, buying by my eye is my livelihood. Sarins can be off, HCA can be quite arbitrary & machines are quite fallible. Even if I must buy from a picture, I make sure it''s not a done deal until I see it. Even the best pictures can be deceiving (not purposeful - just not exactly the story).

My point - There are other vendors who own their inventory that can be your eyes. Though obviously the vendor wants to make a sale, they also don''t want the hassle of a return.

 

[JD_MD]

I like the 2.16 RB stone at DBOF for a few reasons:

G color
SI1 is extremely clean
Scores 2 very highs and 1 high/very high on the brilliance scope
HCA score is 1.5
9.4 Isee2 rating
Priced right

What I don''t like:

Doesn''t have a true H&A pattern
A little small

My questions is....would a true H&A have the same or higher scores or is H&A more of a "characteristic" that doesn''t neccessarily lead to high scores. Since most vendors can''t provide Isee2 and Brilliance Scope scores would that mean that if I found a slightly larger stone with an H&A pattern it would automatically score similar to the one I found?

What I REALLY want is a 2.25 - 2.4 F/G SI1 with a H&A pattern that is amazingly brilliant. This seems to be a tall order!!

Thanks!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 5/24/2005 11:17:09 AM
Author: JD_MD

My questions is....

is H&A more of a ''characteristic'' that doesn''t neccessarily lead to high scores.

Yeah, this is true.

The "super ideas" listed around pricescope usually have it all: AGS0 pedigree top HCA, perfect IdealSCope and H&A pattern by the book. Either quality can and does exist separate from the others

If you do want all those stats aligned to perfection is a personal choice...

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Let me throw my monkey wrench into this fray.

Personally, I prefer stones of 60 depth, 60 table- that''s MY ideal cut.
In a 2+ carat stone, the larger table lights up the entire center of the stone- where a smaller ( ideal) table, seems to throttle, or contain the sparkle.
Then we have the depth.
Many AGS0''s are 61-62 % depth.
It does not take a rocket scientist to see that a well cut diamond that is 60% depth will have a greater spread than a diamond of the same weight with a depth of 62%.
I''ve had wonderful 1.00 60/60 round diamonds that spread 6.5, or even 6.6mm.
Look at the typical spread of an "ideal" cut 1.00

Then we have hearts and arrows- personally, I like hearts in love, hearts on the poker table, and arrows at an archery range- but I don''t love this pattern in a diamond.
I prefer my diamonds to have an unorganized sparkle.
Now, I''m not saying that I am right in preferences- at the same time, why should anyone have the right to tell me I''m wrong to love what I love?

Given the fact that 60/60''s may trade at lower prices than "ideal" or H&A stones, it certainly bears checking out, no??

 

[valeria101]

Date: 5/24/2005 1:06:57 PM
Author: JD_MD

I like the ''full disclosure'' on GOG''s site!

Who doesn''t !

It must help that those diamonds are quite a feat themselves ...

It is quite amazing for me how the rounds at GOG actually top every scale of every cut branding machine and then some. It must be hard to find the rare pickings since those standards (Iscope, Bscope, Isee2, GemAdviser) do not totally agree with each other.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 5/24/2005 1:19:01 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Personally, I prefer stones of 60 depth, 60 table- that''s MY ideal cut.

Given the fact that 60/60''s may trade at lower prices than ''ideal'' or H&A stones, it certainly bears checking out, no??

Is this one up to par ?

Someone made a 60/60 H&A for once. Too bad there aren''t more on show.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 5/24/2005 1:23:52 PM
Author: valeria101

Date: 5/24/2005 1:19:01 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Personally, I prefer stones of 60 depth, 60 table- that''s MY ideal cut.

Given the fact that 60/60''s may trade at lower prices than ''ideal'' or H&A stones, it certainly bears checking out, no??

Is this one up to par ?

Someone made a 60/60 H&A for once. Too bad there aren''t more on show.

Ana - your link didn''t work for me.

 

[JD_MD]

Date: 5/24/2005 1:23:52 PM
Author: valeria101

Date: 5/24/2005 1:19:01 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Personally, I prefer stones of 60 depth, 60 table- that''s MY ideal cut.

Given the fact that 60/60''s may trade at lower prices than ''ideal'' or H&A stones, it certainly bears checking out, no??

Is this one up to par ?

Someone made a 60/60 H&A for once. Too bad there aren''t more on show.

Yup...you got my attention but a dead link! Please try again.

 

[valeria101]

Here it is: LINK

Depth: 59.5
Table: 60
Crown Angle: 33.9
Pavilion Angle: 40.7
HCA = 0.7 (TIC)
Girdle: Medium Faceted
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Culet: None

 

[Mara]

Nice find Val!!

I would not throw a 60/60 out of bed with that striking arrow pattern that I prefer, but IMO it''s too hard to find good 60/60''s with disorganized sparkle online and get all that crucial data...hence why people don''t usually go looking for them.

 

[JD_MD]

Any more opinions on this one??

http://www.goodoldgold.com/2_370ct_h_si1_h%26a.htm

 

[fire&ice]

I think a lot has to do with what size you want. I really like that E SI1 - but it''s smaller than the H si.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 5/24/2005 3:07:56 PM
Author: Mara
Nice find Val!!

I would not throw a 60/60 out of bed with that striking arrow pattern that I prefer, but IMO it''s too hard to find good 60/60''s with disorganized sparkle online and get all that crucial data...hence why people don''t usually go looking for them.

On the contrary- if one does find diamonds of 60 table/60 depth, it is likely that they WILL be attractive. I''ve seen a lot of unatteractive "ideal" cut diamonds- yet in my memory, almost all the 60/60''s I''ve seen looked good.


In a public forum where a lot of people like these Hearts and Arrows, it might seem like everyone feels the same way- or even that there is some sort of proof that "ideal cut" is better- but this is NOT the case.

 

[JD_MD]

Date: 5/24/2005 3:29:19 PM
Author: fire&ice
I think a lot has to do with what size you want. I really like that E SI1 - but it''s smaller than the H si.

I loved the pattern and symetry of the E SI1, but it (appears) that there is a nasty inclusion across the table that is more visible under the ideal scope pic.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 5/24/2005 3:30:31 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Date: 5/24/2005 3:07:56 PM
Author: Mara

... IMO it's too hard to find good 60/60's with disorganized sparkle online and get all that crucial data...hence why people don't usually go looking for them.

... it might seem like [...] that there is some sort of proof that 'ideal cut' is better- but this is NOT the case.

Oh well, it sounds like it is the "proof" that makes AGS0 & H&A attractive and not the other way around. Could this be just a war of words ?

There's room for an entire dictionary between the current 100 kinds of "ideal by anybody's guess" and the bright new GIA and AGS cut grading mantras and top cut grades. Perhaps these respectable institutions are just following your word by broadening the cut standard back into its senses.

 

[icekid]

Date: 5/24/2005 3:39:17 PM
Author: JD_MD

Date: 5/24/2005 3:29:19 PM
Author: fire&ice
I think a lot has to do with what size you want. I really like that E SI1 - but it''s smaller than the H si.

I loved the pattern and symetry of the E SI1, but it (appears) that there is a nasty inclusion across the table that is more visible under the ideal scope pic.

yes, but remember how magnified those pictures are. it''s very possible that the stone is eye clean even though it looks like there is some "huge" inclusion. if you call WF, they can look at the stone for you and let you know if the inclusion is visible.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 5/24/2005 3:42:09 PM
Author: icekid

Date: 5/24/2005 3:39:17 PM
Author: JD_MD

Date: 5/24/2005 3:29:19 PM
Author: fire&ice
I think a lot has to do with what size you want. I really like that E SI1 - but it''s smaller than the H si.

I loved the pattern and symetry of the E SI1, but it (appears) that there is a nasty inclusion across the table that is more visible under the ideal scope pic.

yes, but remember how magnified those pictures are. it''s very possible that the stone is eye clean even though it looks like there is some ''huge'' inclusion. if you call WF, they can look at the stone for you and let you know if the inclusion is visible.

Hm.... there is a cloud there allright. The one at GOG has a couple of crystals that look smaller in those pictures.
IMO, both have good chances to be "eye clean" without a loupe over them, but "eye clean" is not a formal property - to each his own.

There was one VS2 in my first post.

 

[fire&ice]

Did I read correctly that the Diamondbrokers of fl stone has a cert date of 9/2000? Has it been in inventory for 5 years?

Another alternative you have is to work with a vendor you feel comfortable with and ask them to be on the look out for exactly what you want.

Are pickings really that slim in that size? I know I''ve been a bit out of the loop - but the prices are astounding me.

 

[Mara]

JD *again* PLEASE call WF and have them eyeball any stones regarding inclusions...

Multiple people have pointed out that the stone pictures are under huge mag...and may not be accurate for eye-sight visibility...I can''t stress how important it is to have someone eyeball the stoneand going to give you SO much insight than assumptions...

Do NOT rule out any stone you are seriously considering until you speak to WF or whoever the vendor is re: inclusions!

 

[JD_MD]

Date: 5/24/2005 3:58:03 PM
Author: Mara
JD *again* PLEASE call WF and have them eyeball any stones regarding inclusions...

Multiple people have pointed out that the stone pictures are under huge mag...and may not be accurate for eye-sight visibility...I can''t stress how important it is to have someone eyeball the stoneand going to give you SO much insight than assumptions...

Do NOT rule out any stone you are seriously considering until you speak to WF or whoever the vendor is re: inclusions!

I just got off the phone with WF and she''s going to send me a few others on the "super secret list" (she didn''t actually call it that of course). I''ll make a few selections and call back for a visual inspection one 1 or 2.

I agree that you can''t tell much from a 4 inch wide picture of an 8.5 mm diamond...WAY too much magnification to tell what''s visible and what is not.

I can''t believe the slim pickins out there...no idea so many people were lining up to buy $25K tiny clear rocks.

Also to address the above about the certificate date being old - Per Jan at DBOF the stone was never previously sold...it is new. I agree that it''s an old cert but my only concern was that it was "used" goods. Kinda odd but what can you say....?

 

[Mara]

Date: 5/24/2005 4:09:13 PM
Author: JD_MD

Date: 5/24/2005 3:58:03 PM
Author: Mara
JD *again* PLEASE call WF and have them eyeball any stones regarding inclusions...

Multiple people have pointed out that the stone pictures are under huge mag...and may not be accurate for eye-sight visibility...I can''t stress how important it is to have someone eyeball the stoneand going to give you SO much insight than assumptions...

Do NOT rule out any stone you are seriously considering until you speak to WF or whoever the vendor is re: inclusions!

I just got off the phone with WF and she''s going to send me a few others on the ''super secret list'' (she didn''t actually call it that of course). I''ll make a few selections and call back for a visual inspection one 1 or 2.

I agree that you can''t tell much from a 4 inch wide picture of an 8.5 mm diamond...WAY too much magnification to tell what''s visible and what is not.

Great! Let us know what they say. I do know they have a new batch that just came in which may be the ''secret stash'' ... their pages are not live yet.