Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

CBI vs ACA threads

S

skypie

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
503
Another poster mentioned she had never seen a CBI vs ACA thread where ACA came out on top.

Based on my experience I would agree...it seems like CBI always wins.

Anyone disagree?
 
I think this subject has been beaten to death on this forum and is to the point of being counter productive. Everyone should buy what they want, deal with the vendor they choose and be happy. Continually making these comparison threads hurts all vendors to a degree and I doubt that any of them would welcome this type of pitting.

Trying to quantify the difference between super ideal cut diamonds is just a foolish exercise at this point and you would never get a consensus on the issue. What is the point of continually bringing this up?
 
I get this topic is controversial. I bought an ACA myself, but it really does seem that in any head to head comparison CBI wins out. Not looking for vendors to comment, but rather for examples of consumers who did the comparison and chose ACA.
 
You are also will be paying more for a similar spec for CBI too and you also earn a life time buy back vs ACA which is a little cheaper and life time upgrade only. From what I’ve seen on here, there’s a little difference for the extra price you pay. But both company sells amazing diamond. Just boil down to how much you’re willing to spend.
 
skypie said:
I get this topic is controversial. I bought an ACA myself, but it really does seem that in any head to head comparison CBI wins out. Not looking for vendors to comment, but rather for examples of consumers who did the comparison and chose ACA.
Click to expand...

There have been threads regarding this issue complete with pictures and videos although I'm not sure that many people have directly compared a CBI to an ACA stone. The CBI owners are very happy and proud of their stones as they rightfully should be but so are the ACA, GOG, and BDG owners. You seem to feel that maybe you are missing out on something but the only way I know you can put your mind to rest is to compare them in person for yourself. I am sorry that this is causing you so much angst - a diamond should bring you joy!
 
I own them both and I have no regrets. None of my diamonds wish they sparkled more like the other. :lol:
 
I'd suggest counting how many people on here have CBI stones and how many have Whiteflash ACAs if you are really concerned about this. That should give you an idea that many people, including myself believe WF stones are as good or even better than CBI. Every diamond is different, so a comparison of two stones means you are comparing different measurements...table size, crown height, crown or pav angles, depth.

Off the top of my head, Happy New Life, grateful4life, MissGotRocks, m-2-b, mrs b, and ceg have from 2.5 to 5.5 ct ACAs. I imagine all of them could afford to buy the best, don't you?
 
Both vendors, have light performance images, and detailed specs. There are some ACAs I would rather own vs other ACAs, some CBI stones vs other CBI, some ACA>CBI and some CBI>ACA. Assess each stone by its own merit.
 
Last edited:
gm89uk said:
Both vendors, have light performance images, and detailed specs. There are some ACAs I would rather own vs other ACAs, some CBI stones vs other CBI, some ACA>CBI and some CBI>ACA. Assess each stone by it's own merit.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I am so sick of this coming up over and over again. It's ridiculous.

And I just finally had to post a clear example of a WF ACA that is better cut than a comparable spec CBI.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-needed-deciding-between-wf-and-cbi.239329/page-5
 
skypie said:
I get this topic is controversial. I bought an ACA myself, but it really does seem that in any head to head comparison CBI wins out. Not looking for vendors to comment, but rather for examples of consumers who did the comparison and chose ACA.
Click to expand...

But why does it matter?? What will it mean if someone does a comparison and to that person the ACA comes out on top? It doesn't mean the ACA is better than the CBI. It just means that particular person preferred that particular diamond over the other. And so then what?

Also comparing one ACA to one CBI isn't really representative of one brand being better than the other.
 
So over it. Both are stunning. Buy the one you like. If any one person is unsure view both in person and then decide. It’s a bit insulting to the owners of either brand to force a generalization.
 
I don't believe that if each and every measurement and dimension was exactly the same for a stone cut by each vendor, that someone would be able to tell the difference between who cut what.

So then if stones don't have exactly the same measurements, even within vendors own inventory, the stones will perform differently - even if they are all ACA's or CBI's... so it is never comparing apples with apples. And it comes down to what the eye likes or if experienced, what your preferred angles are.

Am I wrong here?
 
I said this many times on PS...

I don't mind owning any true H&A stones from WF,CBI,GOG or BGD. If I was looking to buy a MRB there are certain proportions I'd look for no matter from which vendor I decide to buy from, and yes I want to see 8 matching hearts. I don't mind a little heart clefts but all 8 hearts must match.
 
diamondseeker2006 said:
I'd suggest counting how many people on here have CBI stones and how many have Whiteflash ACAs if you are really concerned about this. That should give you an idea that many people, including myself believe WF stones are as good or even better than CBI....
Click to expand...
Well, I guess you can't whine any more when others think CBI is better than X vendor without being a hypocrite, since you just did what you criticize others of doing.

diamondseeker2006 said:
Exactly. I am so sick of this coming up over and over again. It's ridiculous.

And I just finally had to post a clear example of a WF ACA that is better cut than a comparable spec CBI.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-needed-deciding-between-wf-and-cbi.239329/page-5
Click to expand...
I REALLY don't know what you think you "proved" with your one solitary little example. If you think it is some earth-shattering revelation to anyone, you might be sadly mistaken. And if you are "so sick" and "weary" of reading certain topics, perhaps you should pass them up and not cause yourself any more agony.

Last time I checked, you don't own this board even with your 53k posts, and I don't think you should be trying to dictate what other people want to hash out, ad nauseum. Whether you disapprove of a subject or not is totally irrelevant, nor are your preferences the subject of any discussion. "I just finally had to post a clear example of" how your egotistical postings are coming across.
 
@SandyinAnaheim I have every right to call out posts that I think are false and misleading on this board. The truth is that several vendors here sell equally as good hearts and arrows stones, in general. Individual stones may be better than another within one vendor's stock or between two stones of two vendors. I haven't seen clefts in any of WF ACA stock, so until proven otherwise, I'll say that I think they may be stricter than CBI on the cut they allow into ACA. I did say that I had not checked every stone of each vendor, if you recall (but I did see a few other less than perfect hearts in CBI). It's just false and misleading for people to keep claiming CBI is superior overall. I have been kind all along in saying I like and respect them and would be happy to have diamonds from them. But their stones aren't a higher level of perfection. Not sure why you're so angry about the truth. And I will continue to advocate for the truth on this board as long as I am here.
 
DS, your assessment of the CBI H&A images is wrong. I posted a lengthy explanation about why you are wrong in one of the other threads. You should know by now that we can’t always rely on photos alone to assess diamond cut due to stones being tilted, poor lighting, variation in photo equipment, obstruction, and on and on. And we certainly can’t rely on photos to assess scintillation and 3-D performance. I know you know this, having advised many newbies who are buying from vendors like JA whose photos are tricky to interpret due to variations in lighting and stone position. I know you know better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lula said:
DS, your assessment of the CBI H&A images is wrong. I posted a lengthy explanation about why you are wrong in one of the other threads. You should know by now that we can’t always rely on photos alone to assess diamond cut due to stones being tilted, poor lighting, variation in photo equipment, obstruction, and on and on. And we certainly can’t rely on photos to assess scintillation and 3-D performance. I know you know this, having advised many newbies who are buying from vendors like JA whose photos are tricky to interpret due to variations in lighting and stone position. I know you know better.
Click to expand...

Hi Lula, you are wrong that these clefts are an artefact of photography. There is no clear axis which demonstrates tilt. Additionally the clefts are consistent in all the hearts demonstrating excellent cut consistency.

Additionally it's not difficult to find the diamond in question where even the electronic report shows the clefts here https://dealer.craftedbyinfinity.com/public/diamondFiles/9231/cert201709041140189231ags.pdf
Most likely this is a byproduct of having a 79LGF and I'm sure have no negative impact on the appearance of the stone, as DF said, as long as they all look at the same. Even a hypothetical most perfect tolk proportion diamond with 80LGF will have clefts, it doesn't mean it's not beautiful, as long as the consistency is there. Why there is an outcry on symmetrical hearts if there are some clefts because it breaks the law of H&A I don't know (even though you could argue the clefts are not big enough to not be called H&A). This is a point I've raised before fighting the corner of well cut longer LGF before here (https://www.pricescope.com/communit...-ideal-super-ideal.234434/page-3#post-4223585) a discussion that involved @John Pollard.

You have to assume, a cutting house like CBI will be extremely aware choosing a 79LGF puts the stone at higher chance of having 'clefts'. What's important is I have complete faith that this LGF was picked for a reason, this is not their first time to cut a stone. Whether it be to hide an inclusion or improve light performance somehow, which for me are far more important attributes than picture perfect H&A images, which are most certainly not exhaustive in terms of diamond beauty.

I almost feel superideal vendors are restricted in their creativity by these expectations from consumers about how a diamond should look on magnified images.

This is by no means a post getting involved with ACA vs CBI, a topic I care little about, just food for thought, and faith in our trusted vendors, ACA or CBI, that the choices they make in their cutting for the stones are for prettier diamonds first and foremost.
 
gm89uk said:
a cutting house like CBI will be extremely aware choosing a 79LGF puts the stone at higher chance of having 'clefts'.
Click to expand...

Btw, stones with right proportions combined with 79-80 LGF are stunning! I just wish I see more of these from super-ideal vendors, because hunting for a good one is like finding a needle in a haystack.

gm89uk said:
I almost feel superideal vendors are restricted in their creativity by these expectations from consumers about how a diamond should look on magnified images.
Click to expand...

Amen.
 
gm89uk said:
Most likely this is a byproduct of having a 79LGF and I'm sure have no negative impact on the appearance of the stone, as DF said, as long as they all look at the same. Even a hypothetical most perfect tolk proportion diamond with 80LGF will have clefts, it doesn't mean it's not beautiful, as long as the consistency is there.
Click to expand...
gm.
You are correct about clefts;)). My wife's unbranded 3.34 ct from GOG. and the LGF is 80. there are little clefts on all 8 hearts.

Consistency?... Here is the sarin scan. Notice the deviation difference b/t the min. and the max?. It is a very tightly cut stone. it doesn't get any better than this. :praise: :love:

upload_2018-5-22_7-13-14.png
 
skypie said:
Another poster mentioned she had never seen a CBI vs ACA thread where ACA came out on top.

Based on my experience I would agree...it seems like CBI always wins.

Anyone disagree?
Click to expand...

As the first line, I don't know who "another poster" is, and I don't know which threads she has read and/or remembered she read, or the accuracy of her recall, so while I don't disagree, I cannot agree either.

As the second line, "my experience" is not defined ... are you referring to your experience in reading threads? your recall of threads? your experience with CBIs and ACAs?

And, "it seems like CBI always win" well, "seems" is a waffle-y word. I guess I can agree that to you it seems like CBI always wins.

FWIW, generally speaking, when it comes to super-ideal MRBs, personally I prefer ACA diamonds as I prefer the WF company. But if I was shopping for a diamond with particular specs, I might be persuaded to purchase from CBI or BGD or VC if WF didn't have what I wanted. While I like CBI's policies, I find their diamonds often priced higher than similar diamonds elsewhere.
 
Dancing Fire said:
gm.
You are correct about clefts;)). My wife's unbranded 3.34 ct from GOG. and the LGF is 80. there are little clefts on all 8 hearts.

Consistency?... Here is the sarin scan. Notice the deviation difference b/t the min. and the max?. It is a very tightly cut stone. it doesn't get any better than this. :praise: :love:

upload_2018-5-22_7-13-14.png
Click to expand...
@Dancing Fire How do you like that stone's performance compared to other H&As you've had on your hands?
 
Well, if it's not the angles, and it's not the H&A patterning that make CBI's so consistent in appearance across stones in the brand, then it must be the "secret sauce" :roll and we've come full circle :lol:
 
marymm said:
While I like CBI's policies, I find their diamonds often priced higher than similar diamonds elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Right - for me this is the big deterrence. While I certainly have more than enough funds to afford branded high quality goods, saving money and finding high quality good for less is like a game to me, and I personally rather see money inflated in my banks/stocks.
 
Lula said:
Well, if it's not the angles, and it's not the H&A patterning that make CBI's so consistent in appearance across stones in the brand, then it must be the "secret sauce" :roll and we've come full circle :lol:
Click to expand...

Not true - I believe the posters were rather illuminating on points for most unbiased readers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top