Are hearts and arrows worth it

[frodorick]

Ok, I know this question has been asked several times and discussed. But I seem to have additional questions.
First I see that vendors of H&A from BGD/WF/JA all use AGS certification for their H&A. To me, this is a confirmation that their bet is right, because AGS 0 is a stricter category than GIA excellent.
But let's say i go through some sites like BN or JA, and look at the proportions of the GIA excellent diamonds listed there. I will necesseraly find at some point a diamond with clearly ideal cut proportions. I have found that these diamonds do usually sell in the higher range of the diamonds listed, confirming my thoughts. I have never read anything about that.
My other point is the fact that I have read through many sites that AGS color grading is looser than GIA. This would thus make a H&A from BGD sell at least 1000-1500 more than an ideal cut proportions personnally selected from JA for example.
Is it really worth it


Your thoughts on that will be much appreciated

 

[oryan_dunn]

JA also has H&A that are GIA certified. You can do an advanced search and select both criteria, and currently they list 81 such diamonds.

 

[marymm]

Only you can decide if it is worth it to you. Look at stones with ideal-cut parameters and look at H&A stones that are AGS-ideal-000 or GIA-triple-excellent - if you can't see a difference between them, then H&A may not be worth it to you. Some people still want the H&A even if they can't see a difference, because they want "the best of the best." Other people are willing to give up the H&A in order to gain greater carat weight or higher color/clarity. It is really a matter of personal preference as well as budget.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Only you can decide if it is worth it to you. Look at stones with ideal-cut parameters and look at H&A stones that are AGS-ideal-000 or GIA-triple-excellent - if you can't see a difference between them, then H&A may not be worth it to you. Some people still want the H&A even if they can't see a difference, because they want "the best of the best." Other people are willing to give up the H&A in order to gain greater carat weight or higher color/clarity. It is really a matter of personal preference as well as budget.

Agree - its a mind clean thingy.
I have never met anyone prepared to bet they can pick the difference with eyes alone.

 

[John P]

Agree - its a mind clean thingy.
I have never met anyone prepared to bet they can pick the difference with eyes alone.

Garry, I have a question for you:

If I show you a dozen IF-VVS1-VVS2-VS1-VS2 diamonds - are you prepared to pick out those differences with eyes alone?
If I show you a dozen DEFs are you prepared to sort them to 100% accuracy with eyes alone?

If not I trust you will immediately ring up your stores and order them to stop selling colors above F and get rid of those IF-VVS1-VVS2-VS1 clarities... since those mind-clean color & clarity "thingys" cost consumers far more than securing a higher level of cut craftsmanship.

As a technical note, the combination of 3D cut-precision with optimum critical angles does influence optics. Now whether those optics make themselves visible depends on the specific diamonds compared, the all-important lighting environment and the perceptiveness of the viewers. But technical differences due to cut-precision exist, whether visible or not. So this is not like the "mind clean" of clarity where VVS1 is not likely to present any differently than VS1. It's more like the "mind clean" of D versus F, where a color sensitive person may indeed tease out differences depending on the conditions and specific diamonds being compared.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Agree - its a mind clean thingy.
I have never met anyone prepared to bet they can pick the difference with eyes alone.

Garry, I have a question for you:

If I show you a dozen IF-VVS1-VVS2-VS1-VS2 diamonds - are you prepared to pick out those differences with eyes alone?
If I show you a dozen DEFs are you prepared to sort them to 100% accuracy with eyes alone?

If not I trust you will immediately ring up your stores and order them to stop selling colors above F and get rid of those IF-VVS1-VVS2-VS1 clarities... since those mind-clean color & clarity "thingys" cost consumers far more than securing a higher level of cut craftsmanship.

As a technical note, the combination of 3D cut-precision with optimum critical angles does influence optics. Now whether those optics make themselves visible depends on the specific diamonds compared, the all-important lighting environment and the perceptiveness of the viewers. But technical differences due to cut-precision exist, whether visible or not. So this is not like the "mind clean" of clarity where VVS1 is not likely to present any differently than VS1. It's more like the "mind clean" of D versus F, where a color sensitive person may indeed tease out differences depending on the conditions and specific diamonds being compared.

Hi John,
Not even 1% of my diamond stock is VVS, because I agree with you. Lot's of my diamonds are H&A's, and probably half are +F because there is not a huge price jump in VS and SI clarity range. As you say some people can tell the difference in colour, and we have good daylight in both stores, never trade at night, and we have great light quality down under. Rarely can anyone pick D from G in carat stones. In 10ct stones we can all pick D from G.

I think that Flawless is the only 'mind clean' diamond in the minds of those who care. Personally it is meaningless since if you raise the magnification from 10 to 100x there may not be a thing such as a flawless diamond.

BTW I have no objection to H&A's commanding a premium price. That was not my point. They should as a reward for craftsmanship alone. Just as with any premium product.

 

[TC1987]

Cutters tend to know which lab will give a diamond the most favorable-sounding report. Thus, some get sent to AGS, some to GIA, and some to EGL. I have owned a GIA excellent (my first H&A), and I now have an AGS 000 H&A, and I think it actually is cut better than the GIA stone was. Both stones were top-rated, but in person, the AGS one has more scintillation and personality. The GIA one looked a little more bland and "watery," like flashes of brilliance from moving water (hard to explain, but it lacked big bold and crisp flashes, somehow, and had more pin fire).

Color: If you only look at in-house stones, probably that dealer has a colorimeter of some sort to test color against whatever the lab report claims. If not, then at least they'd have a master CZ set that could be used to spot something that's a grade off, I'd wager. If you are looking at virtual stones, it would have to be called in to be tested.

I like diamonds that have a structured pattern and the faceting has to be orderly. I don't like messy or random. Doesn't have to be perfect H&A, necessarily. I like the OEC and transitional cuts, and antique marquise faceting, as well. It's nice that today's market offers variety.

 

[TC1987]

I also have a 1ct RB that looks a lot like this James Allen stone, a tad deep, not a H&A but has some facets that look like arrows. I've seen it show the black lines that look like these, under certain conditions. But it's a very nice-looking diamond, and I'd still pick it for the right price today. This JA gets a 2.3 VG-VG-VG-VG. I think my stone would score a little better on light return and fire. I'm just using this one as an example of non H&A but still GIA excellent cut.
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/E-SI1-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond-1395439.asp

 

[WinkHPD]

It has been my experience that when showing three to five stones to a client on a slotted tray without telling them anything at all about the stones that the top cuts are chosen well over 80% of the time.

Often times medium and even low colors are chosen over the top colors and it is almost always the man who will tilt the tray to look at the sides of the stones to see which one he "should" choose while the ladies almost always observe from the "sparkle" side of the view without worrying about looking from the side.

When a well cut stone is placed in with the top cuts it is exceedingly rarely chosen, even if the color and clarity are superior. In one test between two larger diamonds eighteen of twenty ladies chose the J color over the D color, but of course the D color was only a 2ct versus the 3ct J color. (This was just a test to see what the ladies liked, none of them were being presented the stones for sale as both stones had been custom cut for clients and were awaiting pickup.) Since the larger the diamond, the larger the flashes of light and the more attractive to the eye, this was not a fair test, but it clearly drove home to me that color is not as important as size to most viewers.

With the sizes similar I have always had the blind taste testers choosing the best cut diamonds on a very consistent basis and thus I will always believe that the best cuts are worth the slight premium that they deserve and command.

Wink

 

[GreenBling]

It has been my experience that when showing three to five stones to a client on a slotted tray without telling them anything at all about the stones that the top cuts are chosen well over 80% of the time.

Often times medium and even low colors are chosen over the top colors and it is almost always the man who will tilt the tray to look at the sides of the stones to see which one he "should" choose while the ladies almost always observe from the "sparkle" side of the view without worrying about looking from the side.

When a well cut stone is placed in with the top cuts it is exceedingly rarely chosen, even if the color and clarity are superior. In one test between two larger diamonds eighteen of twenty ladies chose the J color over the D color, but of course the D color was only a 2ct versus the 3ct J color. (This was just a test to see what the ladies liked, none of them were being presented the stones for sale as both stones had been custom cut for clients and were awaiting pickup.) Since the larger the diamond, the larger the flashes of light and the more attractive to the eye, this was not a fair test, but it clearly drove home to me that color is not as important as size to most viewers.

With the sizes similar I have always had the blind taste testers choosing the best cut diamonds on a very consistent basis and thus I will always believe that the best cuts are worth the slight premium that they deserve and command.

Wink

Very interesting observation! And it does make sense. The first thing that catches my eyes is often the sparkles, follows by size then color. In fact, when looking at other people's rings, its usually at a distance and moving, so the color never even cross my mind, unless its so icy white or yellow that it makes an impression. I think color is something that appeals to the wearer more than anyone else.

 

[TC1987]

Found a Good Old Gold video while looking for something else. It compares H&A pattern with "chaotic", both GIA excellent and AGS ideal.
http://youtu.be/MC4-hIhRoo4

 

[milton333]

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. I think H&A rightfully commands a premium due to the technical perfection of the cut. However, if your question is whether you need H&A to get an appropriate engagement ring stone, it's a different answer. Everyone has a budget. There are a number of variables you can adjust to get a stone within your budget. I agree with Wink that size is important. So, if you're on a tight budget, aiming for at least 1 ct, and you're already into, say, H SI1, is a GIA excellent that scores well on HCA and has a great Idealscope acceptable, if you'd have to go smaller to get an H&A with the same color/clarity specs? Probably, but how much smaller? Are you dealing with a "mind clean" issue of hitting a particular carat size? It's going to be hard to see the diameter size difference between .9 and 1 ct, for example, but it may be psychologically important to have 1 ct.

The differences between ideal H&A and "just" ideal or excellent are very subtle. IME, virtually every diamond I see on a daily basis is filthy. Even the rare clean ones are not even excellent, let alone H&A. I have an H&A AGS000, but that's more of a nerdy thing for me, I don't think anyone around me could tell the difference between my stone and "just excellent." If you're a diamond connoisseur, you may insist on H&A for yourself and those you love, but I can absolutely agree that it may not make budgetary sense given whatever else you're trying to achieve on your budget. With ample funds, I'd prioritize super-ideal cut, but most of the people who seek advice on this board have limited, even very challenging, budgets, and you do what you can. If budget will not allow you to achieve the size, color, clarity you're seeking with H&A, but you can get "just excellent" with appropriate HCA and Idealscope, then it's extremely doubtful that the stone will appear to be lacking, to you or anyone else who sees it.

 

[dianabarbara]

Found a Good Old Gold video while looking for something else. It compares H&A pattern with "chaotic", both GIA excellent and AGS ideal.
http://youtu.be/MC4-hIhRoo4

I second this recommendation. On good old gold website you can find plenty of videos that show different cuts side to side.
I also recall a video comparing their H&A with GIA Excellent, Very Good, and Good cuts.

I doubt that without a first hand experience it can get any clearer than that.

All the best

 

[Dancing Fire]

Only you can decide if it is worth it to you. Look at stones with ideal-cut parameters and look at H&A stones that are AGS-ideal-000 or GIA-triple-excellent - if you can't see a difference between them, then H&A may not be worth it to you. Some people still want the H&A even if they can't see a difference, because they want "the best of the best." Other people are willing to give up the H&A in order to gain greater carat weight or higher color/clarity. It is really a matter of personal preference as well as budget.

Agree - its a mind clean thingy.
I have never met anyone prepared to bet they can pick the difference with eyes alone.

agree with Garry..i know i can't see the difference if they are well cut stones.