Are high performance stones worth it?

[yalegirl]

Hey Everyone,

My boyfriend and i are finally in the process of looking for a diamond. I already know that I'd like something in the G-H color range and VS-2 eye clean clarity range, but I'm having trouble deciding how stringent I want to be with cut. we could go for triple excellent with HCA<2, which would give us a pretty high performing stone and allow me to get pretty close to my 2 carat weight goal (our budget is about 20K), OR, we could go for a VERY high performance stone (like a signature diamond from brian gavin), which does command a premium price and would require that I sacrifice size a little (probably go down to 1.5-1.6ct).

What do you all think? My instinct is to go for the best cut possible, but then again, with constant wear, I know that diamond will get dirty, and some of that fire and light return will be impeded anyway. Maybe I should just go for size because that's what I'll be seeing everyday? and triple Ex with HCA<2 will still perform pretty well, right? thoughts?

thanks in advance!

 

[SB621]

I honestly think it depends on you and your priorities. Do you want the best cut or do you want size? Many on PS go with cut however I personally would go for size as long as cut is still excellent. I personally wouldn't pay the extra expense for high preformance, but that is just me and my priorities with diamonds.

 

[rocku]

I would take a 2ct XXX with a nice HCA score over a 1.5ct H&A, but that's just me.
You have to decide for yourself.

 

[Niel]

Personally I'd go for size. A well cut stone like you are looking at will be beautiful. And for me personally, I'd notice the size difference before I'd notice the cut difference.

There is a 2ct BG blue I for sale at jewels by Erica grace. Might be just what you're looking for.

 

[rocku]

I don't know if I can even tell the difference between a H&A and a good GIA XXX.
Well...there is a HoF store openning up soon at a my mall. I need to pay them a visit.

 

[yalegirl]

Thanks so much for your help everyone! I think I'm leaning towards 2ct, XXX, and a good HCA score. Are there any other parameters I should be thinking about? Is there an HCA score sweet spot that I should be aiming for?

 

[CharmyPoo]

Another vote for the above"

 

[SB621]

Thanks so much for your help everyone! I think I'm leaning towards 2ct, XXX, and a good HCA score. Are there any other parameters I should be thinking about? Is there an HCA score sweet spot that I should be aiming for?

I believe the saying is that the HCA isn't the end all be all- it just helps you decide what not to buy. There is no difference if the score is a .8, 1.2, or 2.0.

 

[Niel]

Down toward the end of the page was the one I was talking about. I'd probably offer 20k see if they take it.... with the fluor this seems like a really great option.

http://jewelsbyericagrace.com/modern_and_estate_rings_page_2

 

[TC1987]

There's a discussion on here someplace of 60/60 diamonds, and they they discuss what makes a good 60/60. They also veered off a little into "steep/deep" diamonds like 35.5 degree and steeper crown angles. In that discussion, someone (I think it was Karl) says HCA 2.0-2.5 might be okay, too, because variations that cutters can make in the minor facets can make some of those diamonds be really good performers. He said let your eyes decide regarding those stones but he would not advise trying to buy then sight-unseen.

 

[bunnycat]

Looks like I may rock the boat a little. I have had both an unbranded AGS000 stone and a branded non H/A cut (BG Blue) and I could tell the difference between them, and the AGS000 was nothing to sneeze at in terms of performance. I thought it would be hard to beat and my Blue beat it no problem (to mine and hubby's vision).

I think it is just going to depend on you personal preferences. For some people, that possible little extra "oomph" of a branded stone may be noticeable (like it was for me) and for other people not so much.

What I would personally do if you wanted to go for a branded stone and the associated performance that come with them from the really tight cut parameters is see if you can move down a little more in color to gain some size back, and go for a branded but non H/A stone like a BG Blue (same cut parameters, just not the same focus on H/A symmetry) or WF Expert Selection.

 

[kathley]

Looks like I may rock the boat a little. I have had both an unbranded AGS000 stone and a branded non H/A cut (BG Blue) and I could tell the difference between them, and the AGS000 was nothing to sneeze at in terms of performance. I thought it would be hard to beat and my Blue beat it no problem (to mine and hubby's vision).

I think it is just going to depend on you personal preferences. For some people, that possible little extra "oomph" of a branded stone may be noticeable (like it was for me) and for other people not so much.

What I would personally do if you wanted to go for a branded stone and the associated performance that come with them from the really tight cut parameters is see if you can move down a little more in color to gain some size back, and go for a branded but non H/A stone like a BG Blue (same cut parameters, just not the same focus on H/A symmetry) or WF Expert Selection.

+1.

 

[bcavitt]

+1 to the subjective part, but if you look at the 400 lb. gorilla in the storefront jewelry business, Sterling (Kay and Jared), there has to be a reason they carry 5 levels of stones - Super Value, Better, Best, Leo (branded with extra facets), and Tolkowsky (I don't think this is an actual brand) ideal cuts. If they didn't think it was worth it, they wouldn't do it.

Bryan Cavitt
Images Jewelers

 

[oldminer]

The most commonly sold diamonds are fair to good cut, not ideal or excellent. Wal-Mart sells a lot more volume than Lord & Taylor or Tiffany. There is a difference, but not everyone cares to pay for it. The majority compromise on most things and diamonds, being a luxury item, are generally a compromise for the middle classes. The added cost of a finely cut diamond is worth the added cost, but it has to be a situation that fits you and your needs. There are plenty good to very good cut diamonds available which can be a bit less costly, but you must become much more careful when selecting them as there is a wide range of visual appearance in those compromised cuts than with the rather narrow category of Excellent or Ideal cut.

Often jewelers ask as much or even more for compromised cut diamonds. It is a little like fishing, to see if you will bite.

 

[kenny]

Don't decide till you see a well-cut diamond in action ... away from jewelry store lights.

Knowing about them is not the same as experiencing them.

After seeing them if you decide the light show is not worth the extra money to you, so be it.

 

[TC1987]

And the super-ideal cuts are less affected by a bit of dirt or soap residue than some of the "good " cut and older diamonds are. Less affected by lighting conditions, too. My everyday ring is .8ct and it's an older cut with a big table, low crown, and a bit too much weight in the pavilion. If you didn't see it beside a super-idea H&A, it would be acceptable, and I get a lot of compliments on that ring. But the H&A diamonds blow it away. And I find myself having to keep that .8ct very fastidiously clean, because its light performance drops significantly if it gets any haze on it. Generally, if you put a super-ideal next to a lesser cut diamond, you can immediately tell the difference. But VG or even good can look pretty good all by itself.

If you want a solitaire without side stones, and a larger diamond, then I don't see where anything but at least a VG cut will do. But if you are going to mount it in a very busy or glitzy pave or halo mounting, then I would argue that the cut of the center diamond may not need to be the best. It might not need to be better than good or VG, actually. Some of the settings are very "busy" and tend to make the center just blend with the rest of the ring.