All things being equal, which would you choose?

[La Jolla]

All other things being equal, which would you choose?
Two RBs: The first is G-color, 1.92ct, ave. diameter 7.95mm.
The second is I-color, 2.02ct, ave. diameter 2.08mm.
Both are great cuts, both eye clean, both similar proportions, both roughly the same price, same lab. (Without tipping my hand, let me add that the I-color stone is maybe more like a high J. I.e., it''s still very, very nice, but in some lighting settings it has a light golden hue.)
The final choice will be going into a platinum solitaire engagement setting.
Her preferences? Size does matter with her, but I think either is big enough that she could tell her friends “It’s two carats.”
It''s a choice between two great stones; I thought I would solicit some other perspectives to help me decide, A or B.

 

[tonyc2387]

I really, really hope you mean 8.08mm diameter

If 1.92 is close enough to "two carats", then a good G is close enough to colorless, too, right?

Seriously, though, I pick #1, all else equal. Size difference is negligible, color difference is not.

 

[kenny]

Date: 11/23/2009 10:28:43 PM
Author:La Jolla


The second is I-color, 2.02ct, ave. diameter 2.08mm.

Wow, now THAT's what I call a steep-deep.

Yeah, I think there's a typo in the diameter.

I'd get the G 1.92.

 

[La Jolla]

Errr, yes!! 8.08mm average diameter. Typo.

 

[stone-cold11]

G

 

[FB.]

When you say "great cut" - just how great and who says so?

When you say "eye clean", what is the clarity grade? There are some eye clean stones around that have a dull/hazy appearance in certain lighting because they''re full of white clouds, wisps, feathers or pinpoints.

Based only on what you''ve said; I''d choose the G.
But if the G is VS1 clarity, you might be able to drop to SI1 and have both 2ct and eye clean.

 

[La Jolla]

FB,
They are both SI1 clarity. Both are graded as Excellent cuts. And visually, both I and a jeweler I''m working with can attest that they are excellent cuts. One rates 1.1 on the HCA; the other rates 1.3.
The 1.92 G/SI1 is $8,800 cash. The 2.02 I/SI1 is $9,180 cash. Those are hard-to-beat prices.
I should say that are close to 100% eye-clean, not 100% eye-clean. The G has the tiniest ever feather on the table that takes forever to spot, and you have to hold the stone at just the right angle in the right light to see it. 99.9% of the time it''s invisible. The I has a small crystal off to the side, near the girdle, that can be hidden either under a prong, or darn close to the prong. But I didn''t want to include all that detail.
Personally, I was leaning toward the G because of the better color -- or to be more precise, lack thereof.

 

[ukdiamondvirgin]

if everything u claim is right those prices are cheap cheap cheap
cheapest similar on JamesAllen for example
Round 1.93 G SI1 Ideal 1265492|Ideal|62.20%|58%|Very Good|Very Good|Medium to slightly t|7.88*7.93*4.92 GIA Photo $15,150

 

[FB.]

Date: 11/24/2009 4:54:42 AM
Author: La Jolla
FB,
They are both SI1 clarity. Both are graded as Excellent cuts. And visually, both I and a jeweler I'm working with can attest that they are excellent cuts. One rates 1.1 on the HCA; the other rates 1.3.
The 1.92 G/SI1 is $8,800 cash. The 2.02 I/SI1 is $9,180 cash. Those are hard-to-beat prices.
I should say that are close to 100% eye-clean, not 100% eye-clean. The G has the tiniest ever feather on the table that takes forever to spot, and you have to hold the stone at just the right angle in the right light to see it. 99.9% of the time it's invisible. The I has a small crystal off to the side, near the girdle, that can be hidden either under a prong, or darn close to the prong. But I didn't want to include all that detail.
Personally, I was leaning toward the G because of the better color -- or to be more precise, lack thereof.

Eye clean SI1 sounds like a good option. Finding an eye clean SI2 near 2ct could be difficult.

But beware of the cut grade. GIA's highest cut grade (Excellent) covers quite a wide range of proportions that don't suit everybody's taste. Some GIA EX stones have proportions that make them look fantastic under a lamp when held in tweezers, but can lose quite a lot of performance once their pavilion is covered by a mounting or everyday dirt and dust.

If the price is surprisingly cheap, they may well be "steep/deep" stones (stones with "on paper" excellent proportions that are packed-out with extra weight and can have their beauty compromised), which are flooding the market wherever I look - at lower prices than truly Ideal cut stones.

The crown and pavilion angle information would be very useful to assess whether the stones may have issues once mounted.
34.0-35.0 crown angle and 40.6-41.0 pavilion angle is likely to give the best performance (with a 56-57% table) - but will usually cost more.

Having said that, my OH prefers stones with 33.0/41.0 angles with a 58-60% table.

 

[La Jolla]

You are right.

The secret? They are both EGL stones. The 1.92ct G-SI1 that I''m leaning toward has a medium faceted girdle, depth 61.7%, table 57%, crown angle 35° (15%), and pavilion angle 40.7° (43%). HCA score 1.3.

I spent months scouring through GIA stones on Blue Nile, Union Diamond and James Allen and ignoring the EGL stones, particularly EGL Antwerp/Israel. (EGL USA has a higher reputation, as you know.) On a lark, I decided to go take a look at a real EGL stone at a brick-and-mortar store. I was surprised: The color and cut were exactly as the cert said, suggesting that the lab doesn''t always over-grade, as many people say. So I decided to start researching EGL stones. Based on what I''ve discovered, if I were to buy another diamond in the future, I would again start with EGL and use the HCA as a weeding-out tool, followed by visual inspection. The prices speak for themselves. I''m not making them up.

By the way, in 2004 David Atlas and Garry Holloway conducted an interesting study on grading standards and pricing for EGL, GIA and AGS to try to demystify the whole buying process. Their sample size of diamonds wasn''t very large, but they did make some interesting findings. Among them:

"GIA is the strictest laboratory in the world" – Myth. According to this survey 8 out of 16 diamonds were graded more strictly by AGS. EGL tended to grade clarity more strictly.

"EGL certificates are not worth the paper they are printed on" – Myth. Although in 12 cases out of 17 EGL graded color softer, EGL clarity grading was as strict or stricter as GIA.

"It is safer to buy a GIA graded diamond" - Myth. Any diamond grading report is an opinion, not a guarantee.

"GIA-GTL charges more than other labs" – Fact. This adds to the cost.

"You can get ripped off buying an EGL USA graded diamond" - Myth. Even if you buy a one higher color EGL graded diamond than you require, GIA-GTL may grade it a color grade lower and the same clarity, but you will probably pay less.

There are some myths out there. In fact, the jeweler who sent me the G stone that I am currently considering buying emailed me this several weeks before:

“The Grading on EGL stones is known to be at least a grade or two lower on both color and clarity. A lot of times, stones this size get EGL certified because GIA won’t even certify them, especially if they are getting a EGL SI2 rating.”

He himself didn''t want to sell EGL, but I persisted on exploring them.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

I am very sorry to give such negative comment, but even the most average of average cut-qualities would cost a lot more for these sizes, colours and clarities.

Buyer beware.

 

[La Jolla]

I do need to add one other piece of clarification in all candor: The certificate for the 1.92 SI1 says H. Not G. But I''ve never seen an H this color. I took the stone to a reputable brick-and-mortar store here in DC yesterday and the jeweler (the person who has the 2.02ct stone that I am considering as an alternative) took one look at it and said, "They made a mistake. That''s a G-color stone."

So, no, you''re not likely to find a 1.92 G-SI1 for that price. But I did come across many H-SI1s in that price range with very good HCA scores on the site I shopped on.

I hope that''s of help.

 

[La Jolla]

To keep things simple (I tend to provide a lot of detail when I write), I described it as a G because it wouldn’t have been an accurate representation of it if I had said “I''m trying to choose between an 1.92ct H and a 2.02ct I” because you haven''t seen them. But once I brought the prices in, then I should have made it clear that the cert says H, because otherwise I agree, it throws everyone off.
But even an eye-clean, excellent cut 1.92ct H-SI1 for $8800 is a good price. At this point, I''ve seen a lot of excellent cuts, and this one may not be a Brian Gavin, but it’s up there.
By the way, the other stone is still available.

 

[FB.]

Somehow, I doubt that a wholesaler or jeweller would allow an EGL-cert H that's really a G to sit in their inventory without sending it to GIA to get both a higher colour grade and a more respected certification.
The price increase between GIA-cert G and EGL-cert H would be enormous - and in these hard times almost anyone would be tempted.

Maybe you were comparing against poorly-cut G-H colour stones, which will appear more tinted.

Maybe your stone has some fluorescence that's masking the colour.

Maybe you got lucky.

Does EGL penalise or make note of brillianteering/painting/digging on their stones? I don't know. But maybe your stone has been cut with non-standard faceting that would be laughed out the door of GIA.

But I don't think it's that easy to "beat the system". It's not often in life that you get something for nothing.
Any diamond being offered for a surprisingly low price usually has some kind of issue - often unknown to the buyer - which could be an issue with the cut, colour, clarity or durability.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Ditto to what FB said.

 

[stone-cold11]

Thritto.

 

[La Jolla]

Beats me how or why I got lucky, other than that I prayed hard!

Some of you may know that I was recently considering a GIA-certified RB. I even had it appraised by David Atlas and all that. I had it here with me for close to the full 30 days, so I became quite familiar with its color. I looked at it every day, and took it around and compared it. It was a 1.65ct G-color, triple EX stone. HCA score: 0.9. I even posted the ASET and Ideal-Scope images here on Price-Scope.

So I''m quite familiar with what a true G or an H or an I looks like. (Indeed, I find it amusing when some people say, "How on earth could anyone tell the difference between F and G?" It takes me about 10 seconds, but not everyone is the same; and it doesn''t make others'' eyes inferior.) The 1.92ct stone I presently have is the equal of the GIA G-color stone I had for 30 days a couple of months ago.

I''m also quite familiar with GIA excellent cuts because of the sheer amount of time I''ve spent at I. Gorman, Boone & Sons, Washington Diamond, Continental Diamonds, and a number of other stores here in the city. I''ve spent a LOT of time discussing crown and pavilion angles and table and depth percentages.

The most puzzling thing to me by far about this 1.92ct H-SI1 is that it was certed way back in September 2008, and my guess is that the website listed it soon thereafter. Why it sat there for 14 months undiscovered, as if covered by the hand of God and rendered invisible, is a mystery to me. But a welcome one.

Thanks for all your advice.

 

[La Jolla]

By the way, the jeweler who said yesterday that the stone is a G, not an H, was a GIA grader for many years. But I already knew it was a G and even suggested it to him before he said it. He merely confirmed it.

 

[HVVS]

Is that G/H stone clarity enhanced, and that''s why it''s about half the prices you see elsewhere?

 

[FB.]

Date: 11/24/2009 7:28:38 AM
Author: La Jolla
By the way, the jeweler who said yesterday that the stone is a G, not an H, was a GIA grader for many years. But I already knew it was a G and even suggested it to him before he said it. He merely confirmed it.

Would that be the same jeweller who stands to profit by selling you the stone?

Have you inspected the inclusion plot? Maybe it has an open feather or twinning wisp that risks cleaving the stone in half from a knock at some later time.

You pay your money and you take your chances. We're just pointing out that it sounds too good to be true - and that most of the time, if something sounds too good to be true, then you've missed something sinister.

 

[Collee]

Everyone has offered very knowledgeable and candid advice. I agree with the PPs in that the price is very inexpensive and too good to be true.

Since your mind and heart is set on the 1.92 G/H, send the loose stone to one of the recommended appraisers (perhaps Dave Atlas since you have an established business relationship with him) for inspection and spec confirmation.

 

[La Jolla]

No, it''s not clarity-enhanced, most definitely not.

Yes, I''ve looked at the inclusion plot. It''s a remarkably clean stone, other than a tiny feather on the table and a few other minor inclusions.

When the vendor got the diamond in (they''re based in the New York diamond district), he called me and said, "I know you''re very picky because you returned the GIA G-color Triple X stone that we sent to you. Believe me, you''re going to like this one."

Is the price too good to be true? Maybe, I don''t think so. I have seen three or four examples of a stone listed on their site that is also listed on Blue Nile or another website for $600 to $1000, same exact stone.

The price of my 1.92ct H-SI1 (G-looking H) is consistent with the other prices on their website, so unless all of the thousands of diamonds on their site are too good to be true ...

For example, the GIA 1.65ct RB that I previously purchased and returned to them was $8700. 100% eye-clean SI2. Is that an unreasonable price?

I think they''re just working with tighter margins. But even for them, I think I lucked out on this one.

As I said, the 2.02 I-SI1 is still available for $9192 to be exact, but that''s from a brick-and-mortar store here in DC. They reduced the price in light of the alternatives I presented to them.

 

[AprilBaby]

I vote for the G.

 

[La Jolla]

"Would that be the same jeweller who stands to profit by selling you the stone?"

FB, no. The assessment that it was a G came from a competitor jeweler who wants me to buy HIS stone and not this one. It was more of an admission.

 

[stone-cold11]

If you want to try your luck, sure go for it. It is your money and you might be lucky, who knows?

 

[FB.]

I have deep suspicions, but your answers have defeated them all. But that's not to say that I'd rush into buying it.

Maybe you really have found a "diamond in the rough".

 

[Laila619]

I would prefer the ''G looking H'' over the I.

 

[vespergirl]

I would go with the slightly smaller G. You probably won''t be able to see the tiny difference in size, but I am color sensitive, and can see a slight tint in I color stones, so I would go with the G.

 

[La Jolla]

Quite a strong consensus seems to have emerged, with not a single vote going for the 2.02ct I-SI1. A lovely stone in its own right, but my biggest fear with it was that the light golden tint may have bothered me for years, and that I would have kept looking at it in restaurants and other light settings to see if the yellow hue is really that noticeable.

Personally, I would have gone for an F 1.75 carat RB, but a friend of hers got a 2 carat this past summer, and that was that.... Not that she’s competitive or anything!

Tonyc2387, Kenny, Stone-cold11, FB, AprilBaby, Laila619 and vespergirl, you all voted for the 1.92ct “G-looking H.” Thanks for all of your input, as well as the cautionary suggestions from expert hands.

I have no reason to brag about the price. I’ve never understood why some feel a need to brag to people they’ve never seen! That’s just the oddest thing. I mentioned the price only because FB suggested that I might perhaps be able to drop down a clarity grade, and I wanted to assure him that actually I''ve cut it to the bone and can’t do better than what I have.

“If you want to try your luck, sure go for it. It is your money and you might be lucky, who knows?”
Stone-cold11, it’s not like it’s sight unseen. It’s right here with me. And a former GIA grader has looked at it and been impressed with its color and cut quality. I never thought a piece of stone could get me to unbox it every few hours and gaze into it for ten minutes at a time, like it’s some kind of visual catnip! Quite embarrassing! But hey, chalk it up to the power of prayer that I found it.

Regarding getting an appraisal. Suddenly I''m of mixed minds on that: I already paid $180 two months ago to get the GIA stone that I returned appraised, so I kind of feel like the appraisal kitty box is empty right now. I know it doesn’t make sense. The other thing is, once I went through the haloed process of getting it appraised and received the ASET and I-S images and all that, the whole process kind of demystified itself. Suddenly I felt, “Geez, why not trust your own eyes? Why do you need an expert to tell you you have a nice stone in order to believe you have a nice stone?”

Suddenly I no longer felt I needed to have my stone “mind-certified.” Like they say in audiophile circles (Stereophile, The Absolute Sound), Trust Your Ears!

That said, I probably need to have it appraised for insurance purposes. But I think I can get that done locally and perhaps not need the services of one of the nation’s most authoritative appraisers, excellent as he is.

Thanks, all.

 

[FancyDiamond]

Without having read the responses (don''t want to be influenced by others), I would go for the higher color. The size difference is ever so slight that I do not think I can tell a difference (counting on the diamond being top cut). The color difference is at least 2 grades, and we are talking about the lower end of "near colorless". Thus, I think the color difference will be noticeable. I am guessing about the color difference now, as I do not have anything lower than H for the moment.

The reason why there is not much price difference for a 2-grade color difference is that you may be getting a bargain price for a diamond that is just shy of the critical mark of 2 ct. To me, a 1.9x ct diamond is as good as a 2ct in terms of size. I consider finding something shy of the critical mark a rare find.