H&A that scores 2.0 on HCA, need opinion!!

[Mattcv]

I was looking at a 1.66 H VS1 from JA. It is labeled as a H&A, but I haven''t seen the IS image yet so I cant confirm. However, after punching the info into HCA it only scored a 2.0, should I be worried? I know it says anything below a 2.0 is ok, but this is the first H&A type stone that hasnt been 1.8 or lower.

Below are the specifics on the diamond.

 

[Mattcv]

Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.65
Cut: Hearts & Arrows Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: AGS

Depth: 61.4%
Table: 57.9%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Negligible
Measurements: 7.59*7.62*4.66

Crown Angle: 34.9°
Crown %: 14.70
pavilion Angle: 40.9°
pavilion %: 43.20

 

[strmrdr]

Is it AGS0 cut grade?
JA will provide a heart image and an IS image.
Request both and post them and we can advise you further.

 

[Mattcv]

It''s AGS 0, and I am waiting for the IS. Should be here tomorrow. I will post it once it comes in.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/28/2009 11:12:00 PM
Author: Mattcv
It''s AGS 0, and I am waiting for the IS. Should be here tomorrow. I will post it once it comes in.

kewl

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/28/2009 11:36:08 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/28/2009 11:12:00 PM
Author: Mattcv
It''s AGS 0, and I am waiting for the IS. Should be here tomorrow. I will post it once it comes in.

kewl

Ditto

 

[stone-cold11]

should be good. let''s see how the IS goes.

 

[Mattcv]

Hearts

 

[Mattcv]

Arrows

 

[Mrs W]

Date: 7/29/2009 6:23:26 PM
Author: Mattcv
Hearts

Wow, first hearts image Ive ever seen from JA...those look great

 

[Mrs W]

That looks really good too!

 

[elle_chris]

It looks good to me. I''d get it.

Is it official now, does JA carry true H&A''s??

 

[LAdiamondHUNTER]

Excuse me because I am new, but is JA not a good place to get an H&A? who would you recommend?

 

[elle_chris]

Date: 7/29/2009 6:33:27 PM
Author: LAdiamondHUNTER
Excuse me because I am new, but is JA not a good place to get an H&A? who would you recommend?

James Allen is a very good place to get a stone.

If you''re looking for one, and have questions, you''d be better off starting a new thread

 

[Mrs W]

Date: 7/29/2009 6:33:27 PM
Author: LAdiamondHUNTER
Excuse me because I am new, but is JA not a good place to get an H&A? who would you recommend?

Sorry, its a good place. I just made the remark bc they have not been providing hearts images until just recently

 

[Mattcv]

Here is the HCA and the grades. It is hard for me to discount this diamond due to a score of 2.0 since all of the other data looks good.

The other diamond that I am looking at scores a 0.8 on HCA and it is an AGS0, but a non H&A. Would the H&A give me a better sparkle even though the HCA says it wont?

 

[Mrs W]

Any HCA score of 1-2 is good, one is not better than another. The HCA is just an eliminator after that you get IS images to confirm if light return is good or not and your IS image is really good. The hearts image is good aswell. Hearts and Arrow diamonds means better symmetry but it does not mean you get a good performer, the IS image tells you that.

 

[Mattcv]

Date: 7/29/2009 6:29:56 PM
Author: elle_chris
It looks good to me. I''d get it.


Is it official now, does JA carry true H&A''s??

JA just changed their website and started to call their H&A "True Hearts". Their diamonds didnt change, but I think they are going to try and market them a little more.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

very nice

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/30/2009 3:42:15 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
very nice

Ditto and kudos to James Allen for the hearts image!!

 

[stone-cold11]

ya, nice.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/29/2009 11:32:38 PM
Author: Mattcv

Date: 7/29/2009 6:29:56 PM
Author: elle_chris
It looks good to me. I''d get it.


Is it official now, does JA carry true H&A''s??

JA just changed their website and started to call their H&A ''True Hearts''. Their diamonds didnt change, but I think they are going to try and market them a little more.

James Allen have done a great job in listening to consumers request hearts images for their h&a diamonds - thank you Jim and the team!!

 

[dpm9h]

Date: 7/29/2009 11:22:08 PM
Author: Mrs W
Any HCA score of 1-2 is good, one is not better than another. The HCA is just an eliminator after that you get IS images to confirm if light return is good or not and your IS image is really good. The hearts image is good aswell. Hearts and Arrow diamonds means better symmetry but it does not mean you get a good performer, the IS image tells you that.

Is there anything special about a rating of 2.1 that makes it worthy of elimination while a 1.9 or 2.0 HCA score is all fine and dandy and apparently equivalent to an 0.4 HCA score as far as the measurements are concerned? Aren''t the differences in measurement between a 2.1 and 1.9 incredibly minute, yet one is undesirable and the other one raises no concerns whatsoever?

For example, just to make up some numbers:

60 depth, 59 table, 41 pavilion, 34.2 crown is a 1.9 HCA. Great, it passes this stage with flying colors.
60 depth, 59 table, 41 pavilion, 34.4 crown is a 2.1 HCA. Move along, nothing to see here.

I often see crown angle in increments of 0.5 degrees, which means you can expect a few 10ths of degrees of rounding which I''ve demonstrated can be enough to swing an HCA score from the perfect range to the range of "only buy it if it''s cheap and you''re willing to compromise." At least that is the impression I''ve been getting from this forum.

It just seems a little bit weird/subjective to me to draw such a hard line at a certain score. I''d appreciate any explanations or rationalizations.

 

[stone-cold11]

It is just an arbitrary cut off. If you want to move the score higher, feel free. After all that, an IS is still required and you eyes will still make the final call.

Also, it is not that the crown angles change by 0.5 degrees but rather GIA round them to increments of 0.5 for the crown angles and 0.2 for the pavilion angles, so that is quite some uncertainity that is being introduced there. We prefer to play it safe by staying lower on the score especially when no image is available.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/30/2009 11:35:46 AM
Author: dpm9h

Date: 7/29/2009 11:22:08 PM
Author: Mrs W
Any HCA score of 1-2 is good, one is not better than another. The HCA is just an eliminator after that you get IS images to confirm if light return is good or not and your IS image is really good. The hearts image is good aswell. Hearts and Arrow diamonds means better symmetry but it does not mean you get a good performer, the IS image tells you that.

Is there anything special about a rating of 2.1 that makes it worthy of elimination while a 1.9 or 2.0 HCA score is all fine and dandy and apparently equivalent to an 0.4 HCA score as far as the measurements are concerned? Aren't the differences in measurement between a 2.1 and 1.9 incredibly minute, yet one is undesirable and the other one raises no concerns whatsoever?

For example, just to make up some numbers:

60 depth, 59 table, 41 pavilion, 34.2 crown is a 1.9 HCA. Great, it passes this stage with flying colors.
60 depth, 59 table, 41 pavilion, 34.4 crown is a 2.1 HCA. Move along, nothing to see here.

I often see crown angle in increments of 0.5 degrees, which means you can expect a few 10ths of degrees of rounding which I've demonstrated can be enough to swing an HCA score from the perfect range to the range of 'only buy it if it's cheap and you're willing to compromise.' At least that is the impression I've been getting from this forum.

It just seems a little bit weird/subjective to me to draw such a hard line at a certain score. I'd appreciate any explanations or rationalizations.

A lower score is not necessaily better than a higher one, the HCA is used for rejection, not selection. The aim is to score below 2 when you have no other info and then GET that info such as IS/ ASET to evaluate further. Some diamonds which score above 2 can be super choices if you have the images available or can see the diamond with your own eyes. So really the line can be drawn in various places, it isn't as straightforward as 1.9 = superb, 2.3= rubbish. Also remember GIA round the numbers so any you enter into the HCA can be subject to more variance still so images are even more crucial with the steep deeps and shallow/ shallows as called in Pricescope speak to make sure you aren't eliminating a diamond which could in actual fact be a great looker.

 

[dpm9h]

Date: 7/30/2009 11:43:22 AM
Author: Stone-cold11
It is just an arbitrary cut off. If you want to move the score higher, feel free. After all that, an IS is still required and you eyes will still make the final call.

For an arbitrary cut off, it seems to carry a LOT of weight.

Are these statements true?

1) A diamond with an HCA score of 1.9 is, on average, expected to have roughly equal spread and light performance compared to a diamond with an HCA score of 0.4.

2) A diamond with an HCA score of 2.1 is, on average, expected to have noticeably inferior spread and light performance compared to a diamond with an HCA score of 0.4.

3) A diamond with an HCA score of 2.1 is, on average, expected to have noticeably inferior spread and light performance compared to a diamond with an HCA score of 1.9.

 

[dpm9h]

I''ll add another one.

4) A diamond with an HCA score of 3.1 is, on average, expected to have noticeably inferior spread and light performance compared to a diamond with an HCA score of 2.1.

 

[stone-cold11]

Not necessary. As I said, depende on other factors too, and all requires more information than what is input for the HCA as HCA is 2D and make a number of assumptions. HCA is used as a rejection tool, to speedily weed out bad performer. Might throw out some good performers too in the process.

 

[Mattcv]

Well, I am down to two diamonds from JA. The first is the 1.66 shown above and the second is a 1.75 non H&A ideal cut. Here''s the info on the second stone:

Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.75
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: SI1
Certificate: AGS

Depth: 61.4%
Table: 56.0%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle:
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 7.73*7.75*4.75
Pavilion: 40.6
Crown: 34.9
HCA Score: 0.8

 

[Mattcv]

There is no IS image so I have asked JA to look at the stone through an ideal scope and let me know if there is somewhat of a H&A pattern. I have asked for the gemologist to give me their recommendation between the two, but I would like to know your opinion!!!


The gemologist did look at the stones and made the following comments:


"I had these diamonds inspected and compared thoroughly by my gemologist. The two H&A diamonds are impeccable and are optically superior. Although the 1.75ct offers an option to save money, it does contain many scattered inclusions. This will not effect the diamond when viewed with the naked eye as it will appear visually clean. The 1.67ct (this is the one I have ruled out) contains a tiny crystal away from the table that is completely invisible to the naked eye and will not effect its brilliance.

Honestly, if you were to place these diamonds together on a table and walk away. You would find it extremely difficult to tell them apart once you returned without the aid of magnification. You really cant make a bad decision with any of these."