Blue Nile lost my diamond! Your opinions on this one?

[blackprophet]

Does Blue Nile have exclusivity? If they do, its not all of their diamonds because the diamond I bought was listed on their site after I bought it. And I didn't buy it from them.

At any rate, I found these. I think they might be better than the one they are suggesting if they are eye clean.

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03443439 (Very strong blue!)

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03436855|track=rec (Strong Blue, nice dimensions, but prob not eye clean)

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03446994 (with discount this might work)

ETA: we posted at almost the same time. I'll see if I can find anything else. Check these out though.

Many thanks for the suggestions!


Btw... BN offered this to me for about the same money:

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-h-colour-si2-clarity_LD02467632

Only a faint fluorescence. But I have requested for them to inspect if it is eye clean. FYI.

This one doesn't meet all of your criteria (<7.4mm) but I like it much better than the White Floro one.

If that price is a candidate, I will see if there are any other good ones in that range. I looke $8000-8700. I know they will give you their own discount but at least yo'll know you looked at all of their candidates.

 

[blackprophet]

Two more:

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-h-colour-si2-clarity_LD03300719

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-h-colour-si2-clarity_LD02816407

 

[lovebug1031]

Does Blue Nile have exclusivity? If they do, its not all of their diamonds because the diamond I bought was listed on their site after I bought it. And I didn't buy it from them.

At any rate, I found these. I think they might be better than the one they are suggesting if they are eye clean.

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03443439 (Very strong blue!)

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03436855|track=rec (Strong Blue, nice dimensions, but prob not eye clean)

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03446994 (with discount this might work)

ETA: we posted at almost the same time. I'll see if I can find anything else. Check these out though.

Many thanks for the suggestions!


Btw... BN offered this to me for about the same money:

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-h-colour-si2-clarity_LD02467632

Only a faint fluorescence. But I have requested for them to inspect if it is eye clean. FYI.

This one doesn't meet all of your criteria (<7.4mm) but I like it much better than the White Floro one.

If that price is a candidate, I will see if there are any other good ones in that range. I looke $8000-8700. I know they will give you their own discount but at least yo'll know you looked at all of their candidates.

Well someone bought it...bc it's gone now! Was it you Maximus?

 

[MaximusCruiser]

its not gone. they have just placed the diamonds on hold for me while they ask me to consider.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

Does Blue Nile have exclusivity? If they do, its not all of their diamonds because the diamond I bought was listed on their site after I bought it. And I didn't buy it from them.

At any rate, I found these. I think they might be better than the one they are suggesting if they are eye clean.

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03443439 (Very strong blue!)

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03436855|track=rec (Strong Blue, nice dimensions, but prob not eye clean)

http://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03446994 (with discount this might work)

ETA: we posted at almost the same time. I'll see if I can find anything else. Check these out though.

Many thanks for the suggestions!


Btw... BN offered this to me for about the same money:

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-h-colour-si2-clarity_LD02467632

Only a faint fluorescence. But I have requested for them to inspect if it is eye clean. FYI.

This one doesn't meet all of your criteria (<7.4mm) but I like it much better than the White Floro one.

If that price is a candidate, I will see if there are any other good ones in that range. I looke $8000-8700. I know they will give you their own discount but at least yo'll know you looked at all of their candidates.

Sigh... the problem is... I can't help but to compare it with my previous diamond.

While both are H SI2s..... this diamond has its disadvantages. As you pointed out... smaller dimensions... despite being 2-point heavier,largely due to the thicker girdle... Not sure if it is eye clean considering the crystal inclusion right in the middle (still waiting for BN to get back), and lastly, it has only faint fluorescence. While some may consider it as a benefit... I don't. I want the fluorescence effect! To me... that's part of the fun. I don't care for resale value since I am not going to sell this diamond.

So as you can see... I can't help but to feel that this diamond will be considered a compromise from my original that they've lost. So it is difficult for me to bite the bullet...unless there are really no options.


Compared to the I-color diamond I mentioned in the first post... it looks less obvious as a compromise. It has a better clarity grade (SI1) and comes with White Fluorescence... which, if there is no clear negative effect, the rarity of it all makes it unique. It does however, have a lower color grade. So it is more of a trade off than a compromise.

BN came back a couple of hours ago to say they will match the same price for both diamonds. If this is the trend, then I can probably look at diamonds around the 9k range. Still looking... very tired of doing so though.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

Two more:

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-h-colour-si2-clarity_LD03300719

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-h-colour-si2-clarity_LD02816407

Thanks... but these two were ruled out very early on... with a HCA scores of 3.9 and 2.6, respectively. And I really doubt the 2nd diamond can be eye clean.

 

[luvmysparklies]

So are you still sticking with strictly blue nile? Just wondering.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

So are you still sticking with strictly blue nile? Just wondering.

Yes... as explained in earlier posts... it makes the most financial sense for me right now. Thanks.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

Just did another search.... what do you guys think of these two:

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-i-colour-si2-clarity_LD03230549

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-i-colour-si2-clarity_LD02084665

Lower color but larger.
Faint fluorescence though.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

Just did another search.... what do you guys think of these two:

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-i-colour-si2-clarity_LD03230549

http://www.bluenile.com/sg/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-i-colour-si2-clarity_LD02084665

Lower color but larger.
Faint fluorescence though.

hmm... the first diamond looks VERY eye clean to me. Should I take issue with the fact that it has no laser inscription?

as a lay person. ... I definitely appreciate such a security feature. any views?

 

[Smith1942]

Both of these diamonds look very good, and if BN is price matching, then they seem like an excellent deal, I'd say. Especially the 1.67. Now, that is a NICE size!

The HCA scores for both look really promising. The 1.60 falls into AGS triple 000 parameters. (Their standards for the top cut grade are stricter than GIA's, in case you didn't know.)

About the fluorescence, you wouldn't see it the vast majority of the time. It would only be evident if you shone a black light on it or went to a disco. Given BN's cock-up, it seems a good chance to get a very nice size of stone at an excellent price...if you feel you could live without the fluoro.

You could always get one of these and remember that if you didn't like it, or felt you couldn't live without the fluoro, it could be changed.

If you are short of time to get a ring before the cruise, another option would be to propose with a loose diamond (one of these) and tell her that the options are open to get a different one. Then see what the inventory looks like upon your return. If something closer to your original comes up, you can then swap it easier than if it were set. And if both you and she love this loose diamond, you will be sending it back to be set anyway.

I think the 1.67 I would be gorgeous.

ETA: I really don't know why one appears to have a laser inscription and not the other. I think a BN rep would be able to answer that for you. Re. the inclusion plot, I think twinning wisps are sometimes not a good thing - I'd imagine that the 1.67 is in fact cleaner in real life. It's really hard to tell from the plot because you can't see if the crystals, for example, are black or white. Has BN confirmed that these are eyeclean? If so, then I think they'll both be fine. As you know, I'm very happy with my eyeclean Si2 studs, assessed by BN.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

Both of these diamonds look very good, and if BN is price matching, then they seem like an excellent deal, I'd say. Especially the 1.67. Now, that is a NICE size!

The HCA scores for both look really promising. The 1.60 falls into AGS triple 000 parameters. (Their standards for the top cut grade are stricter than GIA's, in case you didn't know.)

About the fluorescence, you wouldn't see it the vast majority of the time. It would only be evident if you shone a black light on it or went to a disco. Given BN's cock-up, it seems a good chance to get a very nice size of stone at an excellent price...if you feel you could live without the fluoro.

You could always get one of these and remember that if you didn't like it, or felt you couldn't live without the fluoro, it could be changed.

If you are short of time to get a ring before the cruise, another option would be to propose with a loose diamond (one of these) and tell her that the options are open to get a different one. Then see what the inventory looks like upon your return. If something closer to your original comes up, you can then swap it easier than if it were set. And if both you and she love this loose diamond, you will be sending it back to be set anyway.

I think the 1.67 I would be gorgeous.

ETA: I really don't know why one appears to have a laser inscription and not the other. I think a BN rep would be able to answer that for you. Re. the inclusion plot, I think twinning wisps are sometimes not a good thing - I'd imagine that the 1.67 is in fact cleaner in real life. It's really hard to tell from the plot because you can't see if the crystals, for example, are black or white. Has BN confirmed that these are eyeclean? If so, then I think they'll both be fine. As you know, I'm very happy with my eyeclean Si2 studs, assessed by BN.

Yes... the 1.6 is a great cut! That's why it is more expensive than the 1.67... but the lack of inscription is really a sore point. I thought twinning wisps is usually a good inclusion to have since it is usually white? Most of the time when I see them in JA website, I can't even identify it, even with the GIA chart.

The 1.67 is only a Very Good symmetry but most people will say that is good enough. What it has going for it is the Dimensions! At 7.72mm... it will look larger than most diamonds of 1.7+! It does not fall into the AGS triple 0 cut range but the HCA is still excellent. Essentially, its size and dimensions seem to overwhelm all other relative shortcomings! Haha.

Blue Nile came back earlier to say:

1) The 1.53 H SI2 diamond they wanted me to consider is eye clean
2) The 1.54 I SI1 diamond (with strong white fluorescence) is eye clean with no negative effect from fluorescence and internal graining. The gemologist added that it is a beautiful stone.
3) The 1.6 I SI2 diamond is eye clean (BN says they usually go with the chart rather than the laser inscription, so cutter must have tried to save cost)
4) The l.67 I SI2 diamond ... still waiting for update from gemologist inspection

For the first two... BN already said they can match the price. I am pretty sure they can also match the price for the 1.67. Not sure about the 1.6 though... but I have already asked them earlier via email so will probably know by the next 7-8 hours.


Yes... I am tempted by the 1.67 for the size, the 1.6 for the good proportions (AGS 000) and the 1.54 for the unique strong white fluorescence. The first diamond is probably out for me even though it is a H-color and the most expensive ($9,276)...it is too much of a compromise.

I gather that your choice is the 1.67? Hope it returns as eye clean though.

 

[blackprophet]

The 1.67 has such great spread because the crown angle is only 32.5. That is the shallowest crown I have even seen (not that I've been around here that long). I think that might have an adverse affect on the diamond. Hopefully someone can come in here and comment on that specifically. I'm guessing that might be why it got VG symmetry

Most around here wouldn't except VG Symmetry, but most around here are not your average consumer

I liked the 1.6 the best, but no laser inscription does kinda suck. Not sure which way to go.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

The 1.67 has such great spread because the crown angle is only 32.5. That is the shallowest crown I have even seen (not that I've been around here that long). I think that might have an adverse affect on the diamond. Hopefully someone can come in here and comment on that specifically. I'm guessing that might be why it got VG symmetry

But isn't that what the HCA score is for? It measures how the crown and pavilion angles interact with each other to produce light return, fire and scintillation. Despite its 32.5 angle, it still returns a score under the excellent range.

 

[blackprophet]

The 1.67 has such great spread because the crown angle is only 32.5. That is the shallowest crown I have even seen (not that I've been around here that long). I think that might have an adverse affect on the diamond. Hopefully someone can come in here and comment on that specifically. I'm guessing that might be why it got VG symmetry

But isn't that what the HCA score is for? It measures how the crown and pavilion angles interact with each other to produce light return, fire and scintillation. Despite its 32.5 angle, it still returns a score under the excellent range.

No that is not what its for. The HCA is an elimination tool. You use it to eliminate diamonds. Anything <2 is worth further consideration. 1.6HCA diamond is no worse than a 0.9 diamond. The measurements on a GIA cert are averages, and thus the HCA cannot accurately measure all of their nuances. As well Fire and scintillation and light return are all affected by the minor facets, which arent considered in the HCA at all.

This is the major reason that most people here suggest using other vendors than BN (such as GOG, WF, BG, etc.) because they can give you pictures and scans that more accurately measure fire, light return, etc. That is also the reason they are more expensive than BN. BN is giving you bare bones service and their prices reflect that. The Cert and the HCA alone are not enough to acurately mesure those metrics.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

The 1.67 has such great spread because the crown angle is only 32.5. That is the shallowest crown I have even seen (not that I've been around here that long). I think that might have an adverse affect on the diamond. Hopefully someone can come in here and comment on that specifically. I'm guessing that might be why it got VG symmetry

But isn't that what the HCA score is for? It measures how the crown and pavilion angles interact with each other to produce light return, fire and scintillation. Despite its 32.5 angle, it still returns a score under the excellent range.

No that is not what its for. The HCA is an elimination tool. You use it to eliminate diamonds. Anything <2 is worth further consideration. 1.6HCA diamond is no worse than a 0.9 diamond. The measurements on a GIA cert are averages, and thus the HCA cannot accurately measure all of their nuances. As well Fire and scintillation and light return are all affected by the minor facets, which arent considered in the HCA at all.

This is the major reason that most people here suggest using other vendors than BN (such as GOG, WF, BG, etc.) because they can give you pictures and scans that more accurately measure fire, light return, etc. That is also the reason they are more expensive than BN. BN is giving you bare bones service and their prices reflect that. The Cert and the HCA alone are not enough to acurately mesure those metrics.

Haha... while I can certainly appreciate that... I guess BN will appeal to price sensitive risk taking individuals like myself.

I always choose on a simple principle... will I still wonder about the other option once I have decided? If the answer is no, then go with the decision. So if other suppliers are more expensive and I buy from them instead... I will always wonder about the cheaper option... what if they are really the same and I am just paying more?

To this end, online reviews help a lot. Not many I know are complaining about the diamonds they got from BN... guess other vendors like JA with actual diamond images sell a "peace of mind" for a premium. Something that BN's return policy can help to partially address.

Price sensitive plus risk taker.... is a potent combination for BN. Too bad my decision back fired in the most unexpected way!

 

[blackprophet]

The 1.67 has such great spread because the crown angle is only 32.5. That is the shallowest crown I have even seen (not that I've been around here that long). I think that might have an adverse affect on the diamond. Hopefully someone can come in here and comment on that specifically. I'm guessing that might be why it got VG symmetry

But isn't that what the HCA score is for? It measures how the crown and pavilion angles interact with each other to produce light return, fire and scintillation. Despite its 32.5 angle, it still returns a score under the excellent range.

No that is not what its for. The HCA is an elimination tool. You use it to eliminate diamonds. Anything <2 is worth further consideration. 1.6HCA diamond is no worse than a 0.9 diamond. The measurements on a GIA cert are averages, and thus the HCA cannot accurately measure all of their nuances. As well Fire and scintillation and light return are all affected by the minor facets, which arent considered in the HCA at all.

This is the major reason that most people here suggest using other vendors than BN (such as GOG, WF, BG, etc.) because they can give you pictures and scans that more accurately measure fire, light return, etc. That is also the reason they are more expensive than BN. BN is giving you bare bones service and their prices reflect that. The Cert and the HCA alone are not enough to acurately mesure those metrics.

Haha... while I can certainly appreciate that... I guess BN will appeal to price sensitive risk taking individuals like myself.

I always choose on a simple principle... will I still wonder about the other option once I have decided? If the answer is no, then go with the decision. So if other suppliers are more expensive and I buy from them instead... I will always wonder about the cheaper option... what if they are really the same and I am just paying more?

To this end, online reviews help a lot. Not many I know are complaining about the diamonds they got from BN... guess other vendors like JA with actual diamond images sell a "peace of mind" for a premium. Something that BN's return policy can help to partially address.

Price sensitive plus risk taker.... is a potent combination for BN. Too bad my decision back fired in the most unexpected way!

I wouldn't say backfired. What happened to you couldve happened with any online dealer selling virtual stones. Vendors such as BN who deal in ONLY virtual stones (drop shipper), the risk of this happening increases. You just got unlucky.

If you search these forums alone you will see many stories of people buying stones from any number of online vendors, finding out if they are eye clean, paying, only to find out that they are unavailable after the fact (lost, sold to someone else, never shouldve been listed in the first place, etc. etc.)

I would counter your online reviews argument though. I would say that not many bad online reviews for blue nile would be the same as saying not many bad reviews for a B&M store (such as kays). Many who are buying don't know any better. Those who do, don't shop there. JA isn't selling you peace of mind, they are showing you cold hard facts. They are letting you make an more informed decision. Information you don't have with BN.

I'm not saying JA is better than BN. I'm just saying JA gives more info. As you said for someone who wants to gamble like you BN is the better choice. Just like BN was the better choice for Smith1942 above for her studs.

I too shop under the same pricciple as you. But that leads me to a different conclusion about BN. I could never buy from BN knowing what I know now. Because once I got the diamond I would wonder "what is its IS like? Does it have H&A? What is its light return?" But I am a data/analysis loving geek .

Amazing how similar persectives can lead to wildly different outcomes.

 

[Smith1942]

The 1.67 is an HCA 0.8. My D pendant is a 0.8 and it's super-sparkly.

Maximus, you said that the 1.60 was a much better cut, and it's true that it falls within the AGS box on the HCA whereas the other doesn't. However, I asked the experts here some hard questions when I was getting my BN stud upgrade, because I wanted to get Signature-level sparkle without paying for the Signature premium. They basically all said that if there was a difference in sparkle between cuts like these, you wouldn't see it with the naked eye.

I've done super-well out of Blue Nile's bare bones service and lack of a million photos. I've saved thousands, basically, and received beautiful, beautiful diamonds.

Everyone here says that the HCA is just an elimination tool and that further investigations are needed once a diamond is under 2. But I've bought diamonds using just the HCA with no further photos and they've turned out so well.

BN isn't a risk - their return policy is smooth and no-questions-asked.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

I wouldn't say backfired. What happened to you couldve happened with any online dealer selling virtual stones. Vendors such as BN who deal in ONLY virtual stones (drop shipper), the risk of this happening increases. You just got unlucky.

If you search these forums alone you will see many stories of people buying stones from any number of online vendors, finding out if they are eye clean, paying, only to find out that they are unavailable after the fact (lost, sold to someone else, never shouldve been listed in the first place, etc. etc.)

I would counter your online reviews argument though. I would say that not many bad online reviews for blue nile would be the same as saying not many bad reviews for a B&M store (such as kays). Many who are buying don't know any better. Those who do, don't shop there. JA isn't selling you peace of mind, they are showing you cold hard facts. They are letting you make an more informed decision. Information you don't have with BN.

I'm not saying JA is better than BN. I'm just saying JA gives more info. As you said for someone who wants to gamble like you BN is the better choice. Just like BN was the better choice for S1942 above for her studs.

I too shop under the same pricciple as you. But that leads me to a different conclusion about BN. I could never buy from BN knowing what I know now. Because once I got the diamond I would wonder "what is its IS like? Does it have H&A? What is its light return?" But I am a data/analysis loving geek .

Amazing how similar persectives can lead to wildly different outcomes.

Haha... I hear you! While the principle is the same... what we can and cannot walk away from, will be different because of our values (and obsessions) are different. That is understandable.

But in my situation, I don't have much of a choice. I have to stick with BN for now... to get the best deal I can... making the best out of a bad situation

Even if it is a risk... I would think that for you... the 1.6ct I SI2 will be a much safer option, right? After all, the twining wisps is not at the center table and it has a AGS 0 cut grade for its proportions. That would be a worthwhile gamble compared to the rest, no?

I am actually inquiring with BN how on much they will charge for additional laser inscription.

 

[Smith1942]

I just wanted to post some quotes to back up what I said about the experts telling me that variances at this level of cut aren't really visible.

The thread is called "Need Expert Cut Help" but to save you looking - as I know this diamond chase has you nearly exhausted by now, Maximus - I'll just post two relevant quotes.

Christina said: "HA is about optical symmetry and not light performance. My opinion is that it's nearly impossible for the human eye to see the differences between a true HA stone and an ideal cut stone with tight variances."

And Diamond seeker replied: "I agree with Christina that we can't really see the difference with our eyes between an ideal cut and super ideal cut in most cases."

This knowledge would seem to imply to me that the cut difference between the 1.60 and the 1.67 wouldn't be visible to the naked eye, although I wish others would chime in about the crown angle.

 

[blackprophet]

I wouldn't say backfired. What happened to you couldve happened with any online dealer selling virtual stones. Vendors such as BN who deal in ONLY virtual stones (drop shipper), the risk of this happening increases. You just got unlucky.

If you search these forums alone you will see many stories of people buying stones from any number of online vendors, finding out if they are eye clean, paying, only to find out that they are unavailable after the fact (lost, sold to someone else, never shouldve been listed in the first place, etc. etc.)

I would counter your online reviews argument though. I would say that not many bad online reviews for blue nile would be the same as saying not many bad reviews for a B&M store (such as kays). Many who are buying don't know any better. Those who do, don't shop there. JA isn't selling you peace of mind, they are showing you cold hard facts. They are letting you make an more informed decision. Information you don't have with BN.

I'm not saying JA is better than BN. I'm just saying JA gives more info. As you said for someone who wants to gamble like you BN is the better choice. Just like BN was the better choice for S1942 above for her studs.

I too shop under the same pricciple as you. But that leads me to a different conclusion about BN. I could never buy from BN knowing what I know now. Because once I got the diamond I would wonder "what is its IS like? Does it have H&A? What is its light return?" But I am a data/analysis loving geek .

Amazing how similar persectives can lead to wildly different outcomes.

Haha... I hear you! While the principle is the same... what we can and cannot walk away from, will be different because of our values (and obsessions) are different. That is understandable.

But in my situation, I don't have much of a choice. I have to stick with BN for now... to get the best deal I can... making the best out of a bad situation

Even if it is a risk... I would think that for you... the 1.6ct I SI2 will be a much safer option, right? After all, the twining wisps is not at the center table and it has a AGS 0 cut grade for its proportions. That would be a worthwhile gamble compared to the rest, no?

I am actually inquiring with BN how on much they will charge for additional laser inscription.

Oh I understand. Thats why I have been trying to help.

Yeah I would go for the 1.6 if it comes back eye clean. I would not personally buy a diamond with a 32.5 crown (1.67). Way too shallow, too far from the accepted parameters of ideal cuts. I think that will affect the sparkle.

If it doesn't comeback eye clean, you might want to ask if the inclusions can be covered by a prong., I forget what setting you are gettting, but that is another option.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

The 1.67 is an HCA 0.8. My D pendant is a 0.8 and it's super-sparkly.

Maximus, you said that the 1.60 was a much better cut, and it's true that it falls within the AGS box on the HCA whereas the other doesn't. However, I asked the experts here some hard questions when I was getting my BN stud upgrade, because I wanted to get Signature-level sparkle without paying for the Signature premium. They basically all said that if there was a difference in sparkle between cuts like these, you wouldn't see it with the naked eye.

I've done super-well out of Blue Nile's bare bones service and lack of a million photos. I've saved thousands, basically, and received beautiful, beautiful diamonds.

Everyone here says that the HCA is just an elimination tool and that further investigations are needed once a diamond is under 2. But I've bought diamonds using just the HCA with no further photos and they've turned out so well.

BN isn't a risk - their return policy is smooth and no-questions-asked.

Haha... thanks for the valuable inputs!! Gosh... this is a hard decision! But at least it is a good problem to have... rather than to have no real alternatives to my original diamond.

I must say... size was a big factor for me. I was originally looking for G color VS2 range... but realise that for the same money... this can only bring me a 1.2ct diamond. So I started to ...err... compromise. Especially on the clarity and hunt for eye clean SI range diamonds. So the 1.67 was a big draw for me... especially if BN can match the price.

As for Color... well....after seeing some videos online...I really don't want to go down to the J range (I can see the yellow tint myself)... and was very happy to have found my H-color diamond. Now... it may look as if I need to settle for I-color... but as you said (and I agree), it really isn't much of a difference from H.

The issue is... my gf works as a private banker... and in her line, many bankers wear branded and expensive stuff. So I am trying to preempt a situation where some of her colleagues might start placing their colorless diamonds next to hers to compare. I don't want her to feel inferior. But then again, she rarely ever notice such details anyway... so I went with the near colorless range and overwhelm with size instead. But decided to avoid J. I is the lowest I will go.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

Oh I understand. Thats why I have been trying to help.

Yeah I would go for the 1.6 if it comes back eye clean. I would not personally buy a diamond with a 32.5 crown (1.67). Way too shallow, too far from the accepted parameters of ideal cuts. I think that will affect the sparkle.

If it doesn't comeback eye clean, you might want to ask if the inclusions can be covered by a prong., I forget what setting you are gettting, but that is another option.

Yes... they have already came back to say that the 1.6 is eye clean. The only outstanding diamond for eye clean check is the 1.67.

The questions left for the 1.6 is the price (if they can match) and the cost of laser inscription.

 

[blackprophet]

I just wanted to post some quotes to back up what I said about the experts telling me that variances at this level of cut aren't really visible.

The thread is called "Need Expert Cut Help" but to save you looking - as I know this diamond chase has you nearly exhausted by now, Maximus - I'll just post two relevant quotes.

Christina said: "HA is about optical symmetry and not light performance. My opinion is that it's nearly impossible for the human eye to see the differences between a true HA stone and an ideal cut stone with tight variances."

And Diamond seeker replied: "I agree with Christina that we can't really see the difference with our eyes between an ideal cut and super ideal cut in most cases."

This knowledge would seem to imply to me that the cut difference between the 1.60 and the 1.67 wouldn't be visible to the naked eye, although I wish others would chime in about the crown angle.

You misinterpreted what they said.

It IS true that it is impossible to see the difference with our eyes between an ideal cut and super ideal cut in most cases. This has to do with symmetry and not light return (as Christina said). People say to get an ASET, IS, Etc to judge light return. As I said earlier, sparkle, light return, etc. have a lot to do with minor facets, specific angles, etc. You can have two diamond with the exact same angles on the GIA cert, and one sparkles more than the other. This is why you need the other info such as ASET, IS, etc. to evaluate that SPECIFIC DIAMONDs light return.

If you asked Christina and diamondseeker if 32.5 crown angle was ideal cut, i'm confident both would say no.

With regard to the crown angle it would be visible to the naked eye. If you looked at both from a side view one would have a higher crown than the other. Whether that would affect the sparkle, that could only be told from and Aset or IS.

And as well, if you asked Christina or diamondseeker if they would buy a diamond without a aset or IS i'm confident they would say no as well, unless it was from someone with a trusted eye, such as BG or GOG.

 

[blackprophet]

Oh I understand. Thats why I have been trying to help.

Yeah I would go for the 1.6 if it comes back eye clean. I would not personally buy a diamond with a 32.5 crown (1.67). Way too shallow, too far from the accepted parameters of ideal cuts. I think that will affect the sparkle.

If it doesn't comeback eye clean, you might want to ask if the inclusions can be covered by a prong., I forget what setting you are gettting, but that is another option.

Yes... they have already came back to say that the 1.6 is eye clean. The only outstanding diamond for eye clean check is the 1.67.

The questions left for the 1.6 is the price (if they can match) and the cost of laser inscription.

Then if they match and inscribe I'd go for that one.

 

[Smith1942]

Maximus, I think that maybe you need a greater variety of opinions about that crown angle in order to assist your decision, assuming the 1.67 is eyeclean.

I'm not disputing what Blackprophet said, but I'm unclear if this is a personal opinion/preference or if it's pretty much a fact that one should never buy a diamond with a 32.5 crown angle. I guess it depends on the other angles in the mix.

You could start a separate thread asking cut nuts' opinions solely about the 1.67's numbers and HCA score. If everyone thinks it's too shallow, maybe avoid it, but if not then you might have a firecracker on your hands. It would be great to get a range of opinions about that stone. It might not be the best choice...or on the other hand you might get a great spread and great sparkle.

 

[blackprophet]

The 1.67 is an HCA 0.8. My D pendant is a 0.8 and it's super-sparkly.

Maximus, you said that the 1.60 was a much better cut, and it's true that it falls within the AGS box on the HCA whereas the other doesn't. However, I asked the experts here some hard questions when I was getting my BN stud upgrade, because I wanted to get Signature-level sparkle without paying for the Signature premium. They basically all said that if there was a difference in sparkle between cuts like these, you wouldn't see it with the naked eye.

I've done super-well out of Blue Nile's bare bones service and lack of a million photos. I've saved thousands, basically, and received beautiful, beautiful diamonds.

Everyone here says that the HCA is just an elimination tool and that further investigations are needed once a diamond is under 2. But I've bought diamonds using just the HCA with no further photos and they've turned out so well.

BN isn't a risk - their return policy is smooth and no-questions-asked.

Haha... thanks for the valuable inputs!! Gosh... this is a hard decision! But at least it is a good problem to have... rather than to have no real alternatives to my original diamond.

I must say... size was a big factor for me. I was originally looking for G color VS2 range... but realise that for the same money... this can only bring me a 1.2ct diamond. So I started to ...err... compromise. Especially on the clarity and hunt for eye clean SI range diamonds. So the 1.67 was a big draw for me... especially if BN can match the price.

As for Color... well....after seeing some videos online...I really don't want to go down to the J range (I can see the yellow tint myself)... and was very happy to have found my H-color diamond. Now... it may look as if I need to settle for I-color... but as you said (and I agree), it really isn't much of a difference from H.

The issue is... my gf works as a private banker... and in her line, many bankers wear branded and expensive stuff. So I am trying to preempt a situation where some of her colleagues might start placing their colorless diamonds next to hers to compare. I don't want her to feel inferior. But then again, she rarely ever notice such details anyway... so I went with the near colorless range and overwhelm with size instead. But decided to avoid J. I is the lowest I will go.

Yours will be bigger and sparkle more. That's way more important.

 

[Smith1942]

We were posting at the same time, Blackprophet!

I agree that the angle on its own looks shallow, but isn't it about how it plays with the other angles? I'm thinking that if it was a badly cut diamond with affected sparkle, it wouldn't have scored under 2?

 

[blackprophet]

Maximus, I think that maybe you need a greater variety of opinions about that crown angle in order to assist your decision, assuming the 1.67 is eyeclean.

I'm not disputing what Blackprophet said, but I'm unclear if this is a personal opinion/preference or if it's pretty much a fact that one should never buy a diamond with a 32.5 crown angle. I guess it depends on the other angles in the mix.

You could start a separate thread asking cut nuts' opinions solely about the 1.67's numbers and HCA score. If everyone thinks it's too shallow, maybe avoid it, but if not then you might have a firecracker on your hands. It would be great to get a range of opinions about that stone. It might not be the best choice...or on the other hand you might get a great spread and great sparkle.

I was thinking this very thing. Or maybe I or Smith could start it and you just lurk, so people don't think your overwhelming the board with threads.

Smith1942 it is just my opinion. Its based on the infor I've gained in my (admittedly short) time here. Maximus has gotta make the final call.

 

[MaximusCruiser]

Maximus, I think that maybe you need a greater variety of opinions about that crown angle in order to assist your decision, assuming the 1.67 is eyeclean.

I'm not disputing what Blackprophet said, but I'm unclear if this is a personal opinion/preference or if it's pretty much a fact that one should never buy a diamond with a 32.5 crown angle. I guess it depends on the other angles in the mix.

You could start a separate thread asking cut nuts' opinions solely about the 1.67's numbers and HCA score. If everyone thinks it's too shallow, maybe avoid it, but if not then you might have a firecracker on your hands. It would be great to get a range of opinions about that stone. It might not be the best choice...or on the other hand you might get a great spread and great sparkle.

Great idea! Will try to get those cut experts' attention with a new thread.