Cut it out

[sleeprequired]

hey no sweat Gypsy, i know you are indeed trying to help... i know if my missus was allowed to read this she'd be going 'GET ME THE BIGGER ONE YOU IDIOT' ... but i've suffered from this 'upgraditis' my whole life. Unfortunately diamonds are one category where EVERY person must compromise but for a very select few...

so maybe worrying about what's important to her is the way to go, doesn't stop me wondering how the differences play out in personal preference though...

 

[Gypsy]

ACA cut standards and parameters were created by Brian Gavin. Then he left WF and started BGD and his signature line. Both lines are very similar as a result. People looking for studs have bought one stone from each company before. That's how close they are.

 

[sleeprequired]

yeah he was saying when i was speaking with him... i still notice a different cut profile across most of his range... higher pavillion angle of 40.8 or 40.9 as opposed to 40.5-7. It's so consistent and i'm not sure from the conversation whether he said it or not, as to be deliberate and this is the basis of of my question of what would cause that preference and what the effect would be. Ever so slightly different from WF but very consistently different. We are hitting on the crux of my question now...

i'm just plain curious about it.

 

[geckodani]

A WF ACA and a Brian Gavin Signature cut will be 100% indistinguishable from one another with the naked eye when placed side by side. The infinitesimal difference in the cut is ONLY evident under high magnification.

You will NOT be able to find a better cut than the diamonds you have posted.

You are literally at flip a coin land here. Pick one; go with the vendor that has the setting you prefer, or the bigger one, or the slightly cheaper one, but rest assured that whichever you pick, you could NOT have found a better cut.

 

[Gypsy]

yeah he was saying when i was speaking with him... i still notice a different cut profile across most of his range... higher pavillion angle of 40.8 or 40.9 as opposed to 40.5-7. It's so consistent and i'm not sure from the conversation whether he said it or not, as to be deliberate and this is the basis of of my question of what would cause that preference and what the effect would be. Ever so slightly different from WF but very consistently different. We are hitting on the crux of my question now...

i'm just plain curious about it.

You know what? It didn't even occur to me to advise this. But honestly BRIAN is the best person to talk to about this. Yes, it is weird to ask him about a WF stone. BUT, he's a doll and if you just tell him you are trying to understand the "minute" performance differences you might see based on the numbers and ASK him if he would be offended if you showed him the WF stone-- he might go for it. For educational purposes.

There's no one better to ask. If it's really keeping you up at night, that's my recommendation.

 

[CharmyPoo]

We all tend to over analyze these magnified blown up pictures and we drive ourselves nutty. Once you start seeing more diamonds in person, you will see how small they are and most people won't even be able to tell a difference.

 

[Dreamer_D]

We all tend to over analyze these magnified blown up pictures and we drive ourselves nutty. Once you start seeing more diamonds in person, you will see how small they are and most people won't even be able to tell a difference.

Isn't that the sad truth!

 

[mrssalvo]

Do you know any sets of identical twins in real life? They might look the same, have the same #'s, height, weight etc. but different personalities. Maybe you are friends with one and not the sibling for some reason? That's the case with diamonds. They can be cut the same and still have an every so slight different personality and that is what is subjective. My vote in this case it to go with the bigger stone! Diamonds have a way of shrinking so it's never hurts to go with the bigger one to begin with.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I hate to say this, but I am almost wondering if your post is for real. Because we have said the same thing about 10 different times. The stones are equal in cut quality. One is not better than the other. One stone is bigger and costs less = no brainer. I like both vendors and buy based on price. I am happy to see lower pricing from BG because theirs had been higher for a few months.

And you are wrong about the pavilion angles being different at WF. I just went down a list of about 20 ACA diamonds, G-H VS2 over a carat, and ALL pa's were 40.7, 40.8, and 40.9. Then I clicked a random 10 BG stones and those pavilion angles were 40.7, 40.8, and 40.9. So your last quandry about why BG's pavilion angles are different from WF is just false. Of course, I already knew that because I have been looking at stones from booth vendors for the last 6 years, but I did double check just to be sure something hadn't changed.

Gypsy's car post was perfect.

 

[sleeprequired]

definitely for real and absolutely aware that i'm suffering from analysis paralysis. I was actually speaking with someone from whiteflash and they had 2 diamonds out and they recommended one over the other in terms of performance, but i think it would have been down to personal preference as well to a point. Small table as i recall.

Maybe i could just ask this question ... why do some people prefer a smaller to a larger table?

i recall reading a post about BGD having a slight preferece for light performance over the whiteflash ones... but then again i've been told some are cut in the same place ...

anyway.. i understand these diamonds are so similar that the price and carat would absolutely be the overriding factor now.

sitting there all the time... light return vs fire...

https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-table-size

 

[Gypsy]

A high crown and a small table usually mean more fire in terms of performance. As 'diamond gazers' we play with our diamonds in lots of light and a small table and a high crown usually results in some pretty dazzling shots of light.

I can't believe you haven't decided yet.

But, here's another piece of advice (not that you've been all that great about taking any so far).

Vendors can't respond to this post because there is a ban on vendors commenting on competitor stones.

BUT if you wanted a start a new thread, one that doesn't have anything to do with these two stones in particular but has to do with general diamond performance questions, that is something you can do. So my suggestion is start a thread that it titled "General Diamond Performance: Vendors please" and list your questions (but remember to avoid asking about specific diamonds or linking to them) about small tables, high crowns, and about specific angle combinations and what the corresponding performance looks like, you can do that. And you will likely get good answers.

My favorite vendor for questions like that is John Pollard (and his boss Paul S.) because he's VERY knowledgeable and also speaks in a very relate-able and clear way. So pay particular attention to him.

 

[Gypsy]

You edited. Here are some corrections to what you wrote.

The choice is NOT light performance OR fire. It's a matter of MINUTE TYPES (not quantity of light performance the AMOUNT is equal) of light performance with these stones. One has a small amount more fire over the other.

Also:

i understand these diamonds are so similar that the price and carat would absolutely be the overriding factor now.

NO. CARAT is irrelevant to us at this point. It's spread-- the measurements.

 

[sleeprequired]

You edited. Here are some corrections to what you wrote.

The choice is NOT light performance OR fire. It's a matter of MINUTE TYPES (not quantity of light performance the AMOUNT is equal) of light performance with these stones. One has a small amount more fire over the other.

Also:

i understand these diamonds are so similar that the price and carat would absolutely be the overriding factor now.

NO. CARAT is irrelevant to us at this point. It's spread-- the measurements.

sorry Gypsy when i said carat i was referring to what you (and others Said) previously, that these diamonds are so similar that the deciding factor would be the carat weight.

I will pull the trigger on the recommended stone and ask any 'theory' questions in a separate thread.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The thing is, I fear some people have unrealistic expectations and think there are going to be flames coming out of a diamond that supposedly has more fire. But I am sorry, I just don't see a whole lot of performance difference in a 55 table and a 58 table. And for one thing, it is totally dependent on the lighting! A person who works under fluorescent lighting just isn't going to see fire! I love regular incandescent lighting and the spot lighting at Walmart and other superstores for ALL diamonds.

And remember one more thing, carat weight shouldn't be the deciding factor. You have to also look at the diameter of the stones because two stones of the exact same weight can differ in diameter, and the visual size is what you can see, not the weight.

 

[sleeprequired]

yeah my understanding is the 1.06 BGD is .2mm bigger... i recall someone saying that, and the price should be the REAL deciding factors.