60-60 diamonds with 33/41 angles

[glimmer]

I've read a lot about 60-60 diamonds but can't seem to find a consensus, some places say they're beautiful and offer more brilliance, others that they have less fire and should be avoided, and I was hoping to get some clarification. I know it can depend on the crown angle and pavilion angle but consider a diamond with a 60% table, 59.7% diameter and combination of 33 degree crown angle, 41 degree pavilion angle, that scores below 2 on the HCA with all excellents, would this diamond be safe to buy without an idealscope or ASET?

Pretty much the only available info is a photo and the GIA report. The diamond looks good to me and although it's a J color it actually looks "whiter" to me than other Js, could this be a result of the 60% table? Since I'm on the fence about the 60-60 diamond, I have also been looking at another diamond, pretty much same carat weight and price but with a 58% table, 60.1% depth, 34 CA, and 40.6 PA, also scores below 2 on the HCA and all excellents, but in the photo the diamond actually looks darker to me than the 60-60, less "white" and more like a J. Basically I'm looking for is the brightest/whitest diamond (J is what my budget allows, so looking for the brightest J) which has the best spread (looks its size or larger on the finger) while maintaining excellent "sparkle". I thought maybe the 60-60 would help the diamond look brighter and was hoping to get some clarification on this and what I'd be sacrificing.

I don't have any software like Gemadviser to Diamcalc and was wondering if anyone could offer some insight to what the pros and cons of either diamond would be and what you'd choose? Specifically, the pros and cons of a 60-60 diamond, and whether this diamond falls into those "ideal" 60-60s?


Thanks in advance!

 

[marymm]

I've read a lot about 60-60 diamonds but can't seem to find a consensus, some places say they're beautiful and offer more brilliance, others that they have less fire and should be avoided, and I was hoping to get some clarification[/b]. I know it can depend on the crown angle and pavilion angle but consider a diamond with a 60% table, 59.7% diameter and combination of 33 degree crown angle, 41 degree pavilion angle, that scores below 2 on the HCA with all excellents, would this diamond be safe to buy without an idealscope or ASET?

Pretty much the only available info is a photo and the GIA report. The diamond looks good to me and although it's a J color it actually looks "whiter" to me than other Js, could this be a result of the 60% table? Since I'm on the fence about the 60-60 diamond, I have also been looking at another diamond, pretty much same carat weight and price but with a 58% table, 60.1% depth, 34 CA, and 40.6 PA, also scores below 2 on the HCA and all excellents, but in the photo the diamond actually looks darker to me than the 60-60, less "white" and more like a J. Basically I'm looking for is the brightest/whitest diamond (J is what my budget allows, so looking for the brightest J) which has the best spread (looks its size or larger on the finger) while maintaining excellent "sparkle". I thought maybe the 60-60 would help the diamond look brighter and was hoping to get some clarification on this and what I'd be sacrificing.

I don't have any software like Gemadviser to Diamcalc and was wondering if anyone could offer some insight to what the pros and cons of either diamond would be and what you'd choose? Specifically, the pros and cons of a 60-60 diamond, and whether this diamond falls into those "ideal" 60-60s?


Thanks in advance!

Assuming both the 60/60 and the Tolk diamond are in the same cut class (meaning ideal-cut or comparable), it really comes down to personal preference - both diamonds will be beautiful and perform well, but if you are looking for a bit more white light return (brilliance), the 60/60 will deliver - and if you prefer a balance of brilliance and fire, then the Tolk diamond is for you (and if you favor fire over brilliance, you may want a FIC).

If your vendor has a solid return policy, go ahead and purchase the 60/60 stone and have it sent to you loose so you can examine it thoroughly. You could also consult an independent appraiser and receive a professional, objective opinion of the stone. https://www.pricescope.com/appraisers

Personally, I love well-cut 60/60 stones because I favor white light return and the larger table and the bigger spread of a 60/60.

Keep in mind the 60/60 stone may be a higher J-color and the Tolk J-color diamond may be a lower J - the cut difference may not have as much to do with what you are perceiving as color difference. Also, unless both are from the same vendor, the two photos may have been taken with different lighting/cameras/angles, etc. If they are both from the same vendor, see if they'll provide you with a pic of the two next to each other, face-up and face down. If different vendors, then personally I'd likely take a chance on the 60/60.

 

[glimmer]

Thanks so much for the reply! I'm buying online and neither diamond is an in house diamond but I have photos of both diamonds (I've attached them below in case you'd like to see) they seem to be same lighting and background, but I know it's not the same as seeing them side by side, what a great suggestion. When talking about brilliance and white light, does that contribute to a diamond looking like a lower color grade? And would this only be in certain lighting conditions? Would you say that if both diamonds are the same carat weight and only .10mm difference in size (with the 60-60 being the larger one), the 60% table makes the diamond appear larger on the finger? Seems like I'm going towards the 60-60, only thing I like about the Tolk better is the arrow pattern.

The 60-60:


The Tolk:

 

[marymm]

The brilliance and white light return can make a diamond look brighter/whiter and thus higher in color. (In diamonds, D is the highest color, and Z is the lowest color.)

A larger table can make a 60/60 diamond seem to have a bigger spread as compared to a similar-diameter Tolk or FIC diamonds, but it is a trick of the eye - in reality, a 6mm diamond is still a 6mm diamond regardless of table size.

Of the two pics you posted, I too have a slight preference for the Tolk's arrow pattern but remember these are static images and IRL they probably look more similar than different.

If these diamonds are on "hold" for you, and you'd like more feedback from PSers, you may wish to post the GIA certificate numbers so all the specs are available. Are both GIA stones rated Excellent in Symmetry and in Polish?

 

[Karl_K]

Thanks so much for the reply! I'm buying online and neither diamond is an in house diamond but I have photos of both diamonds (I've attached them below in case you'd like to see) they seem to be same lighting and background, but I know it's not the same as seeing them side by side, what a great suggestion.

That is some of the worst lighting I have ever seen used for someone trying to sell diamonds.
I am not seeing anything that screams don't buy me in either photo but that isn't saying much.

 

[luvdajules]

Given your priorities said, I think getting the 60/60 stone for actual viewing and appraising is a good option. The one you are calling the Tolk isn't really,it's more of a hybrid (something between Tolk and 60/60). I thought the good spread from 60/60 stones were caused by the depth, the shallower the stone the more weight it left for diameter. I would guess the more brilliant and white light return of the 60/60 stone, along with the excellent cut would make for a super sparkly, whitest J (and if there's fluoro even better). Just make sure if there's clouds or twinning wisps on the inclusion plot or comments, that they don't affect brilliance or transparency (from appraiser or vendor). Try to view the stone on a setting, so you can estimate any color changes once it is set.

Just my opinion, but a GIA or AGS J are still very white (maybe not icy white), mine is a mid J with medium fluoro. I always make sure it's clean when I go out, so I can enjoy it at it's performing best. I also set it in a simple solitaire setting so I can clean it well.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I've read a lot about 60-60 diamonds but can't seem to find a consensus, some places say they're beautiful and offer more brilliance, others that they have less fire and should be avoided, and I was hoping to get some clarification. I know it can depend on the crown angle and pavilion angle but consider a diamond with a 60% table, 59.7% diameter and combination of 33 degree crown angle, 41 degree pavilion angle, that scores below 2 on the HCA with all excellents, would this diamond be safe to buy without an idealscope or ASET?

Pretty much the only available info is a photo and the GIA report. The diamond looks good to me and although it's a J color it actually looks "whiter" to me than other Js, could this be a result of the 60% table? Since I'm on the fence about the 60-60 diamond, I have also been looking at another diamond, pretty much same carat weight and price but with a 58% table, 60.1% depth, 34 CA, and 40.6 PA, also scores below 2 on the HCA and all excellents, but in the photo the diamond actually looks darker to me than the 60-60, less "white" and more like a J. Basically I'm looking for is the brightest/whitest diamond (J is what my budget allows, so looking for the brightest J) which has the best spread (looks its size or larger on the finger) while maintaining excellent "sparkle". I thought maybe the 60-60 would help the diamond look brighter and was hoping to get some clarification on this and what I'd be sacrificing.

I don't have any software like Gemadviser to Diamcalc and was wondering if anyone could offer some insight to what the pros and cons of either diamond would be and what you'd choose? Specifically, the pros and cons of a 60-60 diamond, and whether this diamond falls into those "ideal" 60-60s?

Thanks in advance!

Hi Deisy,
You seem to be putting alot of emphasis on the perceived color between the two stones. You say neither are in-house so I assume you have not seen them in person. What are you basing your opinion on? The photos you attached? If so, I think you are trying to do too much with the available information. There is a possibility that the two stones could be at different ends of the J range. But if so, you don't have enough info to know which stone is at which end. And it is possible that the 60/60 could look a little whiter face up (if the body color is the same) although this effect would be extremely subtle between these two stones. You might be sacrificing some fire for that potential small benefit. The main thing is that you make your decision based upon your personal preferences and based upon the knowns.

 

[HappyNewLife]

I've recently gotten two 1.7 carat 60/60 stones with similar parameters and I love them both. They look very different though. One is icy white and a sparkler, while the other one has a glassy depth to it and sparkles more than the first. Both are G/eye-clean SI1. I don't mind that there isn't a lot of fire, it's not like I have other diamonds that do have fire to compare them to and it's pretty unlikely that a friend would look at my diamond and think "bleh, no fire", lol.

That said, I wouldn't recommend any purchase without an idealscope image. You just don't know for sure if there is leakeage without an image.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I've recently gotten two 1.7 carat 60/60 stones with similar parameters and I love them both. They look very different though. One is icy white and a sparkler, while the other one has a glassy depth to it and sparkles more than the first. Both are G/eye-clean SI1. I don't mind that there isn't a lot of fire, it's not like I have other diamonds that do have fire to compare them to and it's pretty unlikely that a friend would look at my diamond and think "bleh, no fire", lol.

That said, I wouldn't recommend any purchase without an idealscope image. You just don't know for sure if there is leakeage without an image.

True, people will not normally recognize deficiency in fire. If the diamond is bright with lots of sparkles of white light it will be appreciated. Particularly considering that most lighting environments are not very conducive to seeing fire in the first place. But boy is it magical when you see it.

A rainstorm moving across an open plain can be lovely to watch. But when that rainbow comes out at the end, that's rare beauty.

 

[glimmer]

Thanks for all the replies, they've been very helpful. Here are the GIA reports for both diamonds:

The "tolk"
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?pagename=GST%2FDispatcher&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&c=Page&cid=1355954554547&reportno=6167099828

The 60-60
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?pagename=GST%2FDispatcher&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&c=Page&cid=1355954554547&reportno=2165113509

Saw the "Tolk" in store today - it was absolutely breathtaking. Pictures to come soon.

 

[luvdajules]

Hi OP, are you paying a premium for the IF 60/60 or the VVS "Tolk"? As long as they aren't priced too much above a regular eye clean VS2/Si1. I noticed that both have fluoro, which is great. I'm guessing both these are less than $9k.

 

[glimmer]

No premium for the IF, they're both around $8500. I don't know if it's worth picking the 60-60 over the tolk just because it's IF either, I didn't really think so but I might be wrong.

 

[SirGuy]

No premium for the IF, they're both around $8500. I don't know if it's worth picking the 60-60 over the tolk just because it's IF either, I didn't really think so but I might be wrong.

I wouldn't pick one over the other just because it's IF instead of VVS2; at that point it's a question of which is more "mind clean" than the other, rather than which is more "eye clean."
Reports and images are good to have. Your eyes are the final judge. Looking forward to hearing more about the one you saw in person, and how you saw it. (Only in jewelry store lighting or did you get a chance to try it out in different environments?)

 

[glimmer]

I saw the stone set in a pave setting. Most of the time in jewelry store lighting but I also took it by the door to see it in sunlight (though not for very long like I had originally planned just because I was so excited ha) and I looked at it under magnification and under UV light to appreciate the fluorescence. Is there anything in the GIA report that's concerning about either? I was nervous about letting the Tolk go after I had seen it so we went ahead and bought it and it's getting resized now. There's still a bit of doubt in my mind that the 60-60 would have been more beautiful but I'm scared of the tolk getting snatched up if I didn't grab it now so I decided to buy it and I'm considering buying the 60-60 in the setting so I can compare them side by side (since this is what I've wanted to do from the start) and then return the one I don't want to keep. But there's a couple of problems with that, the biggest being I don't have enough funds to complete both purchases at this time and the second being I'm afraid of going past the 30 day return window. Maybe it's best if I just put it out of my mind and stop thinking about what could have been since I really loved how the "tolk" looked. It's just hard to do that because I've been looking at both these diamonds for so long and there's things I love about both of them

Planning on posting pics after ring is back from resizing.

 

[TC1987]

I would have picked the Tolk with 58% table over the other one. That low flat crown on the other one would not produce much fire. A diamond has to have some crown height for fire, and the one that you picked does have that. A 58% table looks quite large to me, and I like them smaller. But I have a H&A diamond that is in between the two that you posted, in terms of crown height / table size/ crown angle but has the Tolk proportions, It has less fire than my ideal HA& with the 55% table and taller + steeper crown. But it faces up very "white" considering that it's in the L or M color range.

 

[luvdajules]

Hi OP, I think you made a good decision because it's the constant comparing that will drive you nuts and I do think in the long run you would enjoy either stone, the anxiety over the thought of losing the one pushed you to make a difficult decision (not that you couldn't change your mind later on). At least this way, the jeweler knows you are a truly serious buyer just trying to make the best decision with limited info. Now you can go back and leisurely look at both stones with "new" eyes and really let your eyes decide which they prefer.

Sounds like you found a lovely stone. Do enjoy!! Can't wait to see the pics.

 

[Karl_K]

I do not feel the fire comparison presented 60/60 vs tolk is accurate.
Both if well cut can display jaw dropping fire under lighting highly conductive to fire.
The difference is across a wide variety of lighting in general the tolk will tend to show fire more often.
It is not that the 60/60 will never show nice fire.

 

[John P]

The difference is across a wide variety of lighting in general the tolk will tend to show fire more often. It is not that the 60/60 will never show nice fire.

RE this thread's title: 60, 41, 33 coupled with (typical) 80+% lower halves can be a terrific combination.

Expanding on Karl's comment I'd add that in well-made cases both have fire, it's just different character. An optimized Tolk at 56, 40.8, 34.5 with LHs around 77% will generally produce larger colored flashes in a given condition, while the 60, 41, 33, 80+ will show smaller flashes. It's a by-product of VF size and refraction through the crown, which relies on configuration.

Assuming both diamonds have top, consistent craftsmanship across all 57 facets, the 60-60's colored flashes can be more intense where there are very bright and direct light sources, such as a jewelry showroom. In places with less direct lighting the Tolk's configuration produces more visible fire events due to the larger dispersive fans created by wider mains and higher crown.

 

[glimmer]

Thanks for that explanation John. So are you saying that in everyday conditions: outside natural lighting, regular office lighting, i.e. everything that is not a jewelry showroom, the 1.50 which is closer to a Tolk will outperform the 1.55 that is a 60-60? Or am I not understanding that tight? Thanks in advance!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Thanks for that explanation John. So are you saying that in everyday conditions: outside natural lighting, regular office lighting, i.e. everything that is not a jewelry showroom, the 1.50 which is closer to a Tolk will outperform the 1.55 that is a 60-60? Or am I not understanding that tight? Thanks in advance!

Not to speak for John to your specific question but I will emphasize an important part of John's statement (I have bolded it below):

Assuming both diamonds have top, consistent craftsmanship across all 57 facets, the 60-60's colored flashes can be more intense where there are very bright and direct light sources, such as a jewelry showroom. In places with less direct lighting the Tolk's configuration produces more visible fire events due to the larger dispersive fans created by wider mains and higher crown.

Unfortunately the GIA report does not inform you about this level of precision. The craftsmanship differences between the stones could make visual difference. How facets align with their opposite counterparts in three dimensions will impact the performance at this level of analysis. ASET and Hearts and Arrows views are helpful in this regard.

 

[MelisendeDiamonds]

Assuming both diamonds have top, consistent craftsmanship across all 57 facets, the 60-60's colored flashes can be more intense where there are very bright and direct light sources

Smaller average VFs, shallow crown/pavillion combination, I can't understand why it would have more intense colored flashes?

Appear brighter in strong spot lighting perhaps, smaller, more numerous, and faster on/off colored flashes perhaps, but more intense colored flashes?

 

[John P]

Assuming both diamonds have top, consistent craftsmanship across all 57 facets, the 60-60's colored flashes can be more intense where there are very bright and direct light sources

Smaller average VFs, shallow crown/pavillion combination, I can't understand why it would have more intense colored flashes?

Appear brighter in strong spot lighting perhaps, smaller, more numerous, and faster on/off colored flashes perhaps, but more intense colored flashes?

That's a good question. The word is a characterization made by shoppers in taste-tests I ran. I'm sure that perception is a by-product of smaller/more-numerous/faster under bright lights. I agree with your technical descriptions, by the way, Mr. Ohannessian.

More detail, if anyone is interested: The post linked below was composed following a consulting job I did for an industry entity. Various shoppers went through paces with four different well-cut makes of diamond (and one I considered not-so-well-cut) to see what "popped" and where. The process is described in the post.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/60-60-round-brilliant.168324/#post-3063015#p3063015

The word "intense" was most used to characterize the sparkle of the extra-faceted cut and the 60-60 make in the study, but only under bright lights. Whether measurable or not, I suspect the word is a perceptual by-product of smaller/numerous/faster. For what it's worth (and hoping I'm not violating my NDA) the Tolk held up the best, according to that study group, over the broad cross-section of lighting we used. Thanks for asking me to explain, btw.

From that thread, and possibly interesting for readers here:



<<In technical terms longer lower halves mean thinner pavilion mains; what you see in diamond photos as ‘arrows.' The mains are the primary engines driving light return, so when all else is equal short lower halves (wider pavilion mains) tend to help performance in indirect/soft lighting conditions - and longer lower halves (thinner pavilion mains) tend to intensify performance in direct/spotlighted conditions. The middle range balances those qualities. As it relates to scintillation, large colored flashes generally become more visible as lower halves gets shorter. Meanwhile intense needle-like flashes generally become more visible as they get longer. Of course the specifics depend on the overall configuration but you can see why diamonds cut for a large balance of fire in performance (small-medium tables, higher crowns and large virtual facets) benefit from shorter lower halves which produce pavilion mains that are not too thin.>>

 

[John P]

Thanks for that explanation John. So are you saying that in everyday conditions: outside natural lighting, regular office lighting, i.e. everything that is not a jewelry showroom, the 1.50 which is closer to a Tolk will outperform the 1.55 that is a 60-60? Or am I not understanding that tight? Thanks in advance!

Not to speak for John to your specific question but I will emphasize an important part of John's statement (I have bolded it below):

Assuming both diamonds have top, consistent craftsmanship across all 57 facets, the 60-60's colored flashes can be more intense where there are very bright and direct light sources, such as a jewelry showroom. In places with less direct lighting the Tolk's configuration produces more visible fire events due to the larger dispersive fans created by wider mains and higher crown.

Unfortunately the GIA report does not inform you about this level of precision. The craftsmanship differences between the stones could make visual difference. How facets align with their opposite counterparts in three dimensions will impact the performance at this level of analysis. ASET and Hearts and Arrows views are helpful in this regard.

Bryan covered the most important part. Top craftsmanship is the key. Per my comments above, the optimized "ideal" MRB (modern Tolk) seems to hit a sweet spot for many people.

With that said, you can have a diamond with seemingly-great Tolk numbers that's cut with poor consistency, had some cheating along the way, etc. - - - it may not be as appealing as another make with optimum angles and consistency... I'd also say that "outperform" can be subjective. Factually, there are folks who just plain like the look of a spready diamond - just as some people like a step-cut more than a brilliant - or a square better than a round. It's one of the coolest things about being in the business; in exploring what appeals to different people I'm constantly learning something new.