Compare

[vault16]

After a little work I purchased a diamond that I will try and beat in the next 30 days. I don''t think I will. I like the ideal and hope it perfroms. I reduced it to an H to get the VS2 clarity

1.21-Carat Round Diamond, Ideal-cut, H-color, and VS2-clarity

http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?pid=LD00213434
Crown angle: 35 degrees
Crown height: 15.9%
Pavilion angle: 41 degrees
Pavilion depth: 43.3%

I love the diamond/I am planning on placing it into a Scott Kay ring set.(using rounds)

http://www.topperjewelers.com/skay/rc6.html

1) Do you pro''s have any good feedback on diamond options and the “Scott Kay” brand? thks..kb

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 6/26/2004 3:13:20 AM vault16 wrote:

After a little work I purchased a diamond that I will try and beat in the next 30 days. I don't think I will.

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

Hm... a G-VS2 ideal just sold for the same price and a H-VS1 AGS0 H&A is lurking around for the sake of competition. So it is not very hard to find a little better a little cheaper

Where do the angles for the BN stone come from? I don't see them on the site. The sample picture does not add any information to the GIA cert, I am affraid

 

[vault16]

To get the angles for the cut advisor, I called Blue Nile and they emailed them to me. They were very helpful and a pleasure to work with.

I looked at a "1.24-H-VS1-Signature Ideal-AGSL/GCAL-ID/ID" on BlueNile and it is going for 8.4. Since my original buget was 6.5, it was a little to much. Is this the one you are talking about?

I might be crazy, but decided to spend a little extra on a
"named brand - scott kay" ring.

Thanks, kb

 

[Dancing Fire]

----------------
On 6/26/2004 3:13:20 AM vault16 wrote:

After a little work I purchased a diamond that I will try and beat in the next 30 days. I don't think I will. I like the ideal and hope it perfroms. I reduced it to an H to get the VS2 clarity

1.21-Carat Round Diamond, Ideal-cut, H-color, and VS2-clarity

http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?pid=LD00213434
Crown angle: 35 degrees
Crown height: 15.9%
Pavilion angle: 41 degrees
Pavilion depth: 43.3%

I love the diamond/I am planning on placing it into a Scott Kay ring set.(using rounds)

http://www.topperjewelers.com/skay/rc6.html

1) Do you pro's have any good feedback on diamond options and the “Scott Kay” brand? thks..kb
----------------

Vault
H vs2 is an ex combo,but i would look for a stone with a crown angle 34.2-34.6 with a pavil angle 40.6-40.8 to be safe that its still an ideal cut next year.

 

[chialea]

----------------
On 6/26/2004 6:56:05 PM vtigger86 wrote:

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

H vs2 is an ex combo,but i would look for a stone with a crown angle 34.2-34.6 with a pavil angle 40.6-40.8 to be safe that its still an ideal cut next year.----------------

OK, vtigger, you keep saying this. The real question is why would someone buying a diamond for an engagement ring care -- if it looks great, what does it matter if someone calls it "ideal" or "good" or "timbucktoo" next year? (I think I'll call my diamond "parakeet" next year -- maybe it'll turn blue!) You don't know what the specs are, exactly, from what I've gathered, you're guessing with just about as much information as everyone else, on a label which is attempting to capture that elusive quality of beauty, for better or worse.

My point is that this is not something to worry about, unless you're planning on reselling the diamond or bragging in a way that is just not going to come up in everyday conversation.

 

[hoorray]

"Ideal" and all the specs that go with it are supposed to help buyers identify beautiful diamonds. No matter what AGS and GIA do with their cut statistics will change how my diamonds look. They will not look worse than they did when they were "Ideal" if they no longer fit the "Ideal" criteria. They wil not look better if they are graded higher.

Reselling diamonds as a consumer is usually a losing proposition, no matter how ideal the paper says it is. I think the lesson learned out of all of this change is to use all the specs and stats and grading to help us find potentially beautiful stones, but then enjoy them for their actual beauty, not their pedigree.

 

[Dancing Fire]

----------------
On 6/26/2004 8:03:57 PM chialea wrote:

----------------
On 6/26/2004 6:56:05 PM vtigger86 wrote:

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

H vs2 is an ex combo,but i would look for a stone with a crown angle 34.2-34.6 with a pavil angle 40.6-40.8 to be safe that its still an ideal cut next year.----------------

OK, vtigger, you keep saying this. The real question is why would someone buying a diamond for an engagement ring care -- if it looks great, what does it matter if someone calls it 'ideal' or 'good' or 'timbucktoo' next year? (I think I'll call my diamond 'parakeet' next year -- maybe it'll turn blue!) You don't know what the specs are, exactly, from what I've gathered, you're guessing with just about as much information as everyone else, on a label which is attempting to capture that elusive quality of beauty, for better or worse.

My point is that this is not something to worry about, unless you're planning on reselling the diamond or bragging in a way that is just not going to come up in everyday conversation.----------------

chialea,
a few months back i'm the one who said maybe it's better for gia and ags don't come out with a cut grade, that way everybody can decide on what their own ideal cut would be.if i were to pay a premium for an ideal cut today, i want to make darn sure when the new grading system comes out, it's still an ideal cut. i'm not the one guessing about the specification on the new cut, if you look at earlier posts. one of the cutter here (paul of infinity diamond) says there will be a pretty high percentage that today's 0 cut won't make it next year,but if you don't care the cut is good,bad or ugly that's ok too, i just would assume everybody wants their e-ring to sparkel for many years to come.

 

[Dancing Fire]

----------------
On 6/26/2004 8:39:15 PM lop wrote:

'Ideal' and all the specs that go with it are supposed to help buyers identify beautiful diamonds. No matter what AGS and GIA do with their cut statistics will change how my diamonds look. They will not look worse than they did when they were 'Ideal' if they no longer fit the 'Ideal' criteria. They wil not look better if they are graded higher.

Reselling diamonds as a consumer is usually a losing proposition, no matter how ideal the paper says it is. I think the lesson learned out of all of this change is to use all the specs and stats and grading to help us find potentially beautiful stones, but then enjoy them for their actual beauty, not their pedigree. ----------------

lop,

i agree with you. the diamond won't change next year no matter what standard they use. a nice stone is a nice stone. but as a consumer, you know we would have to pay a premium for whatever they call ideal cut .we are paying for it today,it won't change next year either.

 

[chialea]

----------------
a few months back i'm the one who said maybe it's better for gia and ags don't come out with a cut grade, that way everybody can decide on what their own ideal cut would be.if i were to pay a premium for an ideal cut today, i want to make darn sure when the new grading system comes out, it's still an ideal cut. i'm not the one guessing about the specification on the new cut, if you look at earlier posts. one of the cutter here (paul of infinity diamond) says there will be a pretty high percentage that today's 0 cut won't make it next year,but if you don't care the cut is good,bad or ugly that's ok too, i just would assume everybody wants their e-ring to sparkel for many years to come. ----------------

I'm just going to answer this briefly, because I'm not in the mood for a nuclear war today.

1. everyone can still decide on what their own ideal cut is. there are many ideal cuts today, and there will be tomorrow, and you can agree or disagree with them as you will. I've seen what's been posted about how the specs are likely to change, but there's nothing really firm yet that I've seen.

2. the premium for an "ideal" cut today is most likely different than the new premium will be when the specs change. there have been discussions on this board of how the beauty of cut is taken into consideration in pricing diamonds, NOT just the label. the same takes place with better/worse SI stones.

3. I think that speculating about my cut preferances is rather out of place without a bit more information. what I have told you is that I don't think the label, and how that might change in the future, is of importance to most people. it's not EVER going to change how my ring sparkles if anyone changes their cut standards. thus, I can pick my stone for beauty today, and it will still be beautiful tomorrow (assuming I clean it regularly). it's amazing how that works.

 

[hoorray]

chilea, I agree with you 100%.

----------------
On 6/26/2004 8:57:10 PM vtigger86 wrote:

----------------
lop,

i agree with you. the diamond won't change next year no matter what standard they use. a nice stone is a nice stone. but as a consumer, you know we would have to pay a premium for whatever they call ideal cut .we are paying for it today,it won't change next year either.----------------

vtigger,

You are paying today's market price for your diamond. A number of years ago, people paid a premium for flouresence. Now they get a discount. It's a market that changes, but right now they have defined "ideal" to try to charge extra for the "most beautiful" stones. It doesn't mean there aren't lots of beautiful sotne outside of these ranges. It's just harder for consumers to find them on their own. The new standard will do the same next year -- it's just the industry's way of trying to quantify something that they know makes a difference, so that they can charge for. Our costs are "sunk" costs (unless you think this is an investment asset). My opinion is that once you plunk down your $$ on what you decide is a beautiful stone, you shouldn't look back.

If you are trying to second guess next year's new standards, I'd be looking for the beautiful stone that DOESN"T meet today's ideal standards but might meet the new ones. That's the stone that might go up in value just due to the rating change.

Enough of my soapbox..... now I'm going to go clean my stone and pour a glass of wine.....

edited to add: sorry for the thread hijack.....