Final AVR comparison...2.12 and 2.29 I VS1

[stargurl78]

I actually like the 2.12 better, not because it's less $, but becuase I *like* it better. For some reason it seem brighter to me.

Ditto. I would save the $5k unless you reaaaalllyyy prefer the slightly larger size.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I am pleasantly surprised that all the responses are not "go for the larger one"! It makes me feel better in the event I choose the smaller one. In real life, they appear very close to the same size. And a couple of people even like the 2.12 better! Just remember, both are larger than the 1.6ish stones I have had for the last few years!

I needed to order the 2.29 just to be sure my 2.12 looked as well cut as the 2.29. I didn't want to settle for a stone that was not the best cut. But I do believe that the stones have an equal appearance as far as cut and light performance go. So it really is more of a matter of the size and cost.

 

[missy]

As I said, I don't think you can go wrong with either choice. They are both beautiful stones.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

As I said, I don't think you can go wrong with either choice. They are both beautiful stones.

Thank you, Missy! The thought crossed my mind after I see yours and others in Vegas that I might really want to upgrade!!! I love those big antique stones!

I just have to be careful. as someone said, since these stones are not exactly plentiful, and I don't want to take the chance on missing out on one that might not be there later.

 

[kathley]

My preference is the 2.12. For some reason my eye is just drawn to that one. They both are absolutely gorgeous and they look beautiful on your hand!

 

[marymm]

They both are so beautiful - as others have said, you really can't go wrong - but I will say I have a preference for the larger one as its facet pattern seems much more "out there" - if this is truly a one-time purchase for me I'd probably go with the 2.29ct and wait to get the french cut band.

I also have to admit, for a forever stone, knowing which cutter cut my stone would provide added value to me, to the extent I would be willing to pay some extra $$$ - but not $5K more unless like here you are also getting more carat weight and (to me) a more overt facet pattern.

I look forward to seeing what you decide!

 

[two_little_birds]

Do you have the links to both stones at GOG? I'd love to see the other images and stats too.

I'm taking a guess here, but I assume the prices are $22K to $27K (again just a guess based on AVR prices). Does Jon negotiate at all?

I still fancy the larger stone, I find the pattern more appealing. I'm not saying that because of size either - I'm just naturally drawn to it.

 

[summerlove6]

I love the 2.12. Something about it is prettier and more graceful, although both stones are gorgeous!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Do you have the links to both stones at GOG? I'd love to see the other images and stats too.

I'm taking a guess here, but I assume the prices are $22K to $27K (again just a guess based on AVR prices). Does Jon negotiate at all?

I still fancy the larger stone, I find the pattern more appealing. I'm not saying that because of size either - I'm just naturally drawn to it.

I wish that was the case, but a 2.26 J SI1 AVR is listed at $28k, and these are a color grade higher and two clarity grades higher. So they are both more than that one, just to give you an idea. One he was able to discount a little and the other he already had reduced on the site as much as he could because he had more invested in that one (rough and cutting costs). The 2.12 is a lower price per carat because he was able to buy the rough and have it cut for less than the other. It doesn't hurt to ask, but most of the stones I have bought there were the prices he had listed except the 2.12. Every stone will be different depending on it's cost to them.

Oh, and I understand about the size! I know people aren't preferring it just because of size, it is because the facet pattern is bigger!

 

[gemtastic]

Based on the pics provided, I like the larger one better, and I can notice a size difference.....but $5,000 is a lot of money for such a small increase in size. There will always be bigger stones out there......if you get the 2.12, will you always be wondering about a larger one? Both are gorgeous. From your earlier post when you received the 2.12 it seems you would have been happy with it had this slightly larger sister not been waiting in the wings. Good luck in your decision--either way you win big time as they are both GEORGEOUS

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks everybody!!! Yes, I did and do love my 2.12 stone!!! I just have this thing about choosing between two stones and have done that several times! I just had uncertainty having this stone and setting it without comparing it to a stone that was very close in specs to it. It is a big decision, but the good thing is, I am certain that I will be happy with either one.

It is great to get everyone's perspective and I think you are all right! That's why the decision is hard!

 

[Mayk]

DS will you have the "one" back by Vegas... What a treat to be able to see it at the GTG!!

 

[lizzyann]

smaller one (which is still HUGE sister! over 2 carats!) and then get a gorgeous new band too!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

DS will you have the "one" back by Vegas... What a treat to be able to see it at the GTG!!

Yes! I think I am going to set it in my current setting because it might take years to figure out a new setting! The cost is relatively small for Vatche to make a new head, so that is the best way for me to get the new stone on my finger quickly!

And thanks! You know I can't wait to see your new beauty as well!

 

[woofmama]

The 2.12 speaks to me more so than the larger diamond. Perhaps it is the smaller flower facet in the center or smaller table. Not sure why, I'm sure both are amazing IRL. I would save the $5k toward your dream band. Of course choose what makes you happy!

 

[ecf8503]

Do you have the links to both stones at GOG? I'd love to see the other images and stats too... I still fancy the larger stone, I find the pattern more appealing. I'm not saying that because of size either - I'm just naturally drawn to it.

2nd - I'd like to see the other images and stats too.

When you compared the larger and smaller table versions in the past didn't you say you preferred the larger table option?

When *I* look at videos and pics of AVR's my eye is naturally drawn to the larger table because the flower pattern shows up so well. I have not had an opportunity to see any in person, so take that for what it's worth, but in these pics I prefer the larger stone with larger facets and more pronounced flower.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Ooops, forgot to give the links:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9648/

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9582/

ecf...as far as table size goes, if you had asked me just from seeing the earlier AVR's, I might have said I preferred around a 48-50 table. I did want one smaller than the 1.8 ct stone had that I strongly considered. But I like both of these diamonds which have smaller tables. I thought I might like the 2.29 more because it has a slightly larger table at around 45, but they are so close it doesn't make a lot of difference in real life viewing.

 

[ForteKitty]

I prefer the 2.12ct. In the earlier pictures, I wasn't sure because the stones weren't angled the exact same way. The 2.12's pattern is more pleasing to my eyes because I don't like the rounded petals as much. Knowing there is a $5000 difference, my choice would definitely be the 2.12!

 

[04diamond<3]

I know my opinion doesn't matter that much but after seeing the links, I still prefer the 2.29 because I like the dimensions better than the 2.12.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I prefer the 2.12ct. In the earlier pictures, I wasn't sure because the stones weren't angled the exact same way. The 2.12's pattern is more pleasing to my eyes because I don't like the rounded petals as much. Knowing there is a $5000 difference, my choice would definitely be the 2.12!

I thought maybe that was what you were thinking! I really can't see that in reality, though, as they appear the same to the eye. I think the 2.29 is very different than the 1.8 stone that definitely had a larger table and round petals. But I am still glad some people still like the 2.12 since it is hard for me to justify the price increase on the other one.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I know my opinion doesn't matter that much but after seeing the links, I still prefer the 2.29 because I like the dimensions better than the 2.12.

I think your opinion certainly counts! And I will say, the 2.29 does have the more perfect images and is a truly gorgeous stone! Just from my short time seeing them both, I would lean towards it other than I think the other stone is a better value.

 

[04diamond<3]

I know my opinion doesn't matter that much but after seeing the links, I still prefer the 2.29 because I like the dimensions better than the 2.12.

I think your opinion certainly counts! And I will say, the 2.29 does have the more perfect images and is a truly gorgeous stone! Just from my short time seeing them both, I would lean towards it other than I think the other stone is a better value.

I would agree with what Missy said earlier to get the bigger stone because as you know a lot of people here that buy the smaller stone regret it soon. And you can get your band later. To me, 5k for a stone that I'm going to wear for the rest of my life doesn't seem like that much of a difference. I've also heard that you can negotiate with Jon, so maybe give that a try?

 

[CaratLover2]

I really don't think there's enough visual difference to warrant spending the extra money - they're both beautiful - but I'd be tempted to go as large as possible too!

The pics are great by the way - they make me want a big AVR so bad

 

[CharmyPoo]

I think both of these diamonds are far prettier than the earlier AVRs that have really ROUND petals. With that said, I am with ForteKitty on picking the smaller one. In the really straight up photo that show facet pattern of the larger one, the rounded petal effect can be seen more evidently and I find that it looks artifical to me. I suspect that as you wear it more you will start to notice that pattern more. I don't see this effect with the smaller AVR.

I know some like a big evident flower petal pattern. I am a bit strange in that I like smaller flower patterns and I noticed this is not driven by the table size. I don't know technically what causes this but I described this to a few old stones experts and they know what I am talking about. I actually seek out the tiny flower petal patterns which two of my OECs have.

 

[chicam]

I'd pick the bigger stone if its gonna be a forever stone (or at least a very long time stone) cos if I didn't I'd regret it later. They are both so pretty. Don't notice much difference in facet structure, but definitely notice the size difference. The $$$ difference is significant too. But if it were to be a forever stone, I'd go larger and be done with it. Goodluck. Either way, you'd have a truly beautiful stone.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think both of these diamonds are far prettier than the earlier AVRs that have really ROUND petals. With that said, I am with ForteKitty on picking the smaller one. In the really straight up photo that show facet pattern of the larger one, the rounded petal effect can be seen more evidently and I find that it looks artifical to me. I suspect that as you wear it more you will start to notice that pattern more. I don't see this effect with the smaller AVR.

I know some like a big evident flower petal pattern. I am a bit strange in that I like smaller flower patterns and I noticed this is not driven by the table size. I don't know technically what causes this but I described this to a few old stones experts and they know what I am talking about. I actually seek out the tiny flower petal patterns which two of my OECs have.

Charmy, I do know what you mean, and I can absolutely clearly see it in the 1.8 stone I looked at last fall versus these. But I really don't see a visible difference in these two other than the tables are a tiny bit different. I have seen the ball-flowers but the larger stone does not look like that at all to me. I really need to stick with my 2.12 because of the price difference, but when I look at these two stones I can't really see a difference in the style of the pattern under the table. So I don't think that could really affect my decision since that 2.29 is cut to the level of a H&A but OEC style, although it does give me some comfort in keeping the 2.12 (which is certainly well cut) that some people prefer it! I will have to say, on my original thread for the 2.12, every single OEC person and everyone else liked that stone, and that doesn't happen often!

I am anxious to see the stones better today since it is supposed to be sunny! Yesterday was overcast and stormy and I was able to see the pastel colors reflect a little before the rain started. But I am hoping as I see them more in better lighting, I will better see their personalities and feel more comfortable with one or the other. I have to say, though, the price difference (which is more than $5k) is the thing I am having trouble getting over. I can do it IF the larger stone is somehow visually superior to the other, but so far, they look equal to me..both very beautiful!

 

[CharmyPoo]

With the resounding preference for the 2.12 and the fact that they look similar to you ... I say it is obvious to save the money and keep the 2.12. $5000 is a heck of a lot of money - it's enough for a 1.5 ct true OEC or plenty of goodies on ebay or just saving in your bank account. Don't look anymore and save the money!!

 

[missy]

With the resounding preference for the 2.12 and the fact that they look similar to you ... I say it is obvious to save the money and keep the 2.12. $5000 is a heck of a lot of money - it's enough for a 1.5 ct true OEC or plenty of goodies on ebay or just saving in your bank account. Don't look anymore and save the money!!

Did you check out the ASET's Charmy? I thought that was interesting.

It totally comes down to real life assessment though and it sounds as if they are equally beautiful in your eyes DS and in that case it is a no brainer. Plus, doesn't Jon have a good upgrade policy? So if in the future you decide you must have a larger AVR that option is still open to you. And then you can get a 3plus AVR if you want!


DS,I know you have been searching for the perfect ring for a while and I am so happy you are finally going to be getting the ring of your dreams!

 

[Monnyjay]

Well, if the money wasn't a factor for you I would choose the 2.29. Both facet patterns are gorgeous and similar but the 2.29 is, to my eye, significantly larger. I see the size difference easily and for me it would be a no brainer. I would rather forgo the french cut band for now DS and get the larger diamond because you are never going to upgrade again (probably) and down the road you can get your french cut band. The AVR is the main attraction and I say go big or go home. Though you really cannot go wrong with either choice but just sharing my honest thoughts with you. I would rather sacrifice getting other jewelry for now in order to get the biggest most beautiful diamond. Good luck with your decision!!!

+1.

cheers--Sharon

DS I totally agree with Missy and Sharon - in the end go with your heart! If you have to make a few sacrifices in the short term, (passing up on a few extra goodies ) I personally think it would be well worth it. If you are anything like me, and I have made choices based on budget in the past, you will always regret not getting what you really wanted at the time. Good luck with your decision

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks, again ladies! I do lean a little towards the 2.12 because I can't justify the price difference. There are times that I have to hold the two stones next to each other to be sure which one I am looking at, they are that close in size (but yes, if the 2.29 was only $3k more, then I would lean towards it!!!). The paper perfection of the 2.29 attracts me as does the cutter, but I am not sure I can say that those differences equal the $5k++ price difference. That is why it was necessary for me to see both, because if the 2.29 was visually superior, then I would have the justification. And I am still evaluating that, but so far, I can't see a difference. I have to pack up the stones on Sunday night, so I have today and tomorrow to decide.

The thing is, 2 cts is considered large in my part of the world, so it is not like I am settling for a 1.7-1.8 which I was considering earlier . The 2.12 was a nice upgrade from a 1.6. It only looks small when next to something larger! But there will always be something larger out there somewhere, even if one has a 3 ct stone!

(And thanks, Missy! Either of these will be the ring of my dreams which is why I want to hurry and get it set so I can wear it!!! Oh, and while the ASET is technically more perfect on the 2.29, the extra blue on the other is just contrast. Stones don't stay still, so the center facets are flashing all the time on the 2.12 as the stone moves. I can't really see the difference. It is green that is more neutral on the ASET. Jon said he is planning a video to explain interpreting ASETs which I look forward to seeing.)