Color Advice (G or H)?

[Randy]

Thank you everyone for your helpful advice. Obviously, to purchase any stone, we need to have a budget. If I''ve reached my maxium dollar budget for a:

2.01 carat, H, VS1, 60.6% depth, 60% table, Symm: VG, Polish: Excellent, Fluor: None, Girdle: Med, Culet: None

All else being equal, does it make a better difference in the quality of the stone to upgrade to a G, VS2 for $2000 more or should I go for a G, SI1 for the same price as the H color?

 

[Nicrez]

If you can tell the difference between the stones face up and it bothers you and $2000 is not that much, I say go for it. To me, in a shaped stone, you can tell color like anything. In a round stone, which I assume this is, you CAN'T!

I saw an H, next to an F and with my superior eye for color in shaped stones I COULD NOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE!!! Save your $2K, and let her enjoy the size, and you take that money and invest it somewhere else.

You can even put it towards the band, which trust me, will be pricey! My plain platinum band with NO DIAMONDS anywhere was $1400. Trust me, save your money, the ONE color grade is NOT worth it!

 

[pqcollectibles]

Have you seen this diamond in person?? 60:60's can be very tricky. Only a small range of crown and pavillion angles combinations work to produce great performers. Check out the link to the Price Scope Tutorial page on 60:60 cut diamonds.

http://diamonds.pricescope.com/60.asp

Regarding color,..... Typically people cannot see a difference in adjacent color grades. G/H should have virtually the same visual appearance.

 

[Randy]

Thanks for your answers (esp. on color). Yes, I have seen the stone & it looks beautiful. After reading so much about AGS0, Sarin reports, & HCA, you start to get confused.

I'm super happy with the stone. It's easy to second guess your choice of color & not getting an ideal cut. Is 60.6/60 riskier than a 63/60 or is that just a catchy way of making a point? Not expecting to get a super ideal cut, what are your thoughts about the stone?

 

[phoenixgirl]

If the cut were the same, I'd go for the G SI1 assuming it was eye-clean. An eye-clean stone is an eye-clean stone, so why pay more for something you can't see? Of course, if the inclusions are visible, that's a different story, but VS2 might be a good compromise.

I would prioritize cut more than one or two grades different in color and clarity. Do you know anything else about the stones' proportions and performance?

I don't know if this is the stone you were considering, but this 2.06 carat G SI1 (scores a 1.0 on the HCA and has a good looking ideal scope image) looks good to me as long as the inclusions are not bothersome/visible.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Ewww, PG! That's a good stone!!

Very good Ideal Scope and the Cert Plot looks relatively clean!!

 

[valeria101]

Sorry for the acid... but this diamond is more mythology lesson than gem!

First, the 60%-60% cut standard has been debunked a while ago, so this is not an inexpensive great cut - just a relatively well priced so-so cut.

Second, the 2.01 cts weight indicates some strain to keep this stone just above the 2cts money-making price jump. Of course, the difference in size given by that last 0.1 cts is immaterial, but expensive.

Both the 60-60 rule and the 2cts mark are words with little to show: diamond-selling myths, I am afraid.

Conclusion? A 1.8 cts G-SI with great optics (H&A or near) would surely look better than this due to cut quality alone. At least in my view...

 

[roshita]

As you may have noticed, cut is the priority here and the general concensus is to own an ideal cut as the one PG found as an example. If cost is too much then as Valeria suggested, go smaller. Brilliance and sparkle in an ideal cut stone will never diminish. Good luck in your decision.

 

[Mara]

60/60 will probably have the same chances of being well cut as a 63/60 but neither are choices I would really consider...however based on a thin budget and wanting to maximize the stone carat weight and not sacrifice too much elsewhere...go with G SI as long as the stone looks good to your eye. I don't really see a difference in G and H color but VS/SI you DONT see a difference as long as its eye clean, so you do get a color bump by sacrificing nothing on clarity. I would always sacrifice clarity for color..hands down. As long as the stone is eye-clean, no one knows it ain't a VS except your wallet!

Definitely not worth $2k for G VS!

 

[DavidEmslie]

Considering you need magification too see the difference, and face up they would be almost the same...id say the answer is obviouse. A true SI1 to a VS is hard to tell the difference, and once on the hand, no one will be able to tell the difference. eitehr way she will love you, probably more if that extra 2 grand goes to someting else, IRA, paying down debt, maybe a trip, maybe a nice high quality custom mounting so you can say "I had this made for you"
Just a few sugestions.

 

[Rhino]

In 2ct sized rocks it would be a little easier to see the color difference than if you were comparing stones of a smaller size (1ct or under) which is why there is a rather sizable price hike when you go from H to G in this size range. IF (and this is a big if) the cut qualities are the same you may not see that much of a difference in color. Superior cut qualities will always face up better so that would be my next question regarding the 2ct stones you're looking at. If the H is cut better than the G then the optics of the H alone would make it the stone of choice. Hard to say without seeing the details though. If you can provide at the very least crown/pavilion angles we'd be able to give better input.




Kind regards,

 

[Mara]

----------------
On 2/9/2004 3:30:54 PM Nicrez wrote:





My plain platinum band with NO DIAMONDS anywhere was $1400.

----------------

Yikes that sounds way overpriced! My eternity wedding band will have about .60ctw of prong set melee ACA stones in a custom platinum 2.5mm setting and it's around $1600. Diamonds? Plain platinum. Diamonds? Plain platinum. Hmm.

 

[pqcollectibles]

I was actually glad to see the $1400 figure for plain platinum. It made me feel better about my plain platinum set price!

 

[diamondsman]

2.00cts.diamonds have to be around the 8.2mm. in diameter.
From my experience, 60/60 stone with the right diameter could be a very fiery and would have alot of brilliance,If you can provide us with the diameter it would help.

 

[Randy]

Thank you everyone for your responses. It sounds like all else being equal, the consensus here is that G SI1 is preferred to H VS1 for this 2.01 carat stone.

To better answer Diamondsman question about the diameter of this stone (regarding the 60/60 question), here it is:
8.16 - 8.21 x 4.96mm.

Help is much appreciated.

 

[diamondsman]

I think the stone is a performer!
If the price is right ,go for it.

good luck