Help between 2 diamonds - solitaire ring!

[rockysalamander]

here's a True Hearts at James Allen (will perform basically the same as a SuperIdeal) .

JA TH is neither a true H&A line or precision-cut -- they don't claim to be {branded name aside}. JA True Hearts are really focused on a cutting pattern they pull from the virtual inventory, that has the result of improved performance, but that is not really their goal and they are not really H&A by most definitions. You will see that it is a very very rare TH that has a IS that is as strong as a super-ideal (and that would be more obvious comparing ASET). Let's say we find a JA TH with perfect angles and perfect light return, does that make it perform the same as a super-ideal? Not if they can't prove it. Super ideals are precision cut (not just well-cut) to achieve optically symmetrical, true H&A, within the center of AGS0, highly precise polish, highest physical symmetry, minimal painting and digging, minor facets perfected...and they prove it. The proof is key.

But, I think your point is that maybe one person can't see the difference in performance (if you agree that such a difference exists). So, can a particular person appreciate that difference? Your mileage may vary especially as our optical acuity and pupil sizes vary. Peoples ability to resolve spectrums of lights vary. Some see little difference, some see huge ones. Though...I've found that its a rare person that sees no difference between super-ideals and well-cut ideals. But, is that difference valuable to a viewer? YMMV.

I value and respect you @TreeScientist, so I hope you'll read this as (nerdy, pedantic) scientific discourse.

Read posts 14-20 here where @Texas Leaguer and @Karl_K provide good descriptions on this topic if you are interested,
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...actually-better-than-vs2.232674/#post-4203120

 

[TreeScientist]

JA TH is neither a true H&A line or precision-cut -- they don't claim to be {branded name aside}. JA True Hearts are really focused on a cutting pattern they pull from the virtual inventory, that has the result of improved performance, but that is not really their goal and they are not really H&A by most definitions. You will see that it is a very very rare TH that has a IS that is as strong as a super-ideal (and that would be more obvious comparing ASET). Let's say we find a JA TH with perfect angles and perfect light return, does that make it perform the same as a super-ideal? Not if they can't prove it. Super ideals are precision cut (not just well-cut) to achieve optically symmetrical, true H&A, within the center of AGS0, highly precise polish, highest physical symmetry, minimal painting and digging, minor facets perfected...and they prove it. The proof is key.

But, I think your point is that maybe one person can't see the difference in performance (if you agree that such a difference exists). So, can a particular person appreciate that difference? Your mileage may vary especially as our optical acuity and pupil sizes vary. Peoples ability to resolve spectrums of lights vary. Some see little difference, some see huge ones. Though...I've found that its a rare person that sees no difference between super-ideals and well-cut ideals. But, is that difference valuable to a viewer? YMMV.

I value and respect you @TreeScientist, so I hope you'll read this as (nerdy, pedantic) scientific discourse.

Read posts 14-20 here where @Texas Leaguer and @Karl_K provide good descriptions on this topic if you are interested,
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...actually-better-than-vs2.232674/#post-4203120

I totally agree with you that there is a difference (and of course I enjoy science-based discourses ). The question is how much of a difference. I will definitely say that almost all of the JA "True Hearts" are not true H&A diamonds. But many are very close. The one thing about the JA line is that there is definitely a pretty wide range in how "close" their True Hearts diamonds are to SuperIdeal range. Some are pretty darn close, but some seem (to me) pretty far afield of the mark, especially in the larger sizes. I'm wondering if JA widens the boundaries on what they accept as True Hearts as the diamonds get larger so they can make a premium on large True Hearts stones...

For example, the one I recommended above to the OP seems pretty darn close to H&A, but this one, however, seems like a veerrryyy loose interpretation of H&A judging by the H&A and IS images:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...color-vs1-clarity-true-hearts-cut-sku-3295280

The nice thing about ordering from a SuperIdeal vendor is you know that ANY stone you order from their signature line will be a top-of-the-line performer. There's no cutting (pun intended ) corners there. It's great peace of mind to pretty much be able to blindly select a diamond from their signature lines and know it will be great. But there is a premium associated with peace of mind...

 

[rockysalamander]

I totally agree with you that there is a difference (and of course I enjoy science-based discourses ). The question is how much of a difference. I will definitely say that almost all of the JA "True Hearts" are not true H&A diamonds. But many are very close. The one thing about the JA line is that there is definitely a pretty wide range in how "close" their True Hearts diamonds are to SuperIdeal range. Some are pretty darn close, but some seem (to me) pretty far afield of the mark, especially in the larger sizes. I'm wondering if JA widens the boundaries on what they accept as True Hearts as the diamonds get larger so they can make a premium on large True Hearts stones...

For example, the one I recommended above to the OP seems pretty darn close to H&A, but this one, however, seems like a veerrryyy loose interpretation of H&A judging by the H&A and IS images:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...color-vs1-clarity-true-hearts-cut-sku-3295280

The nice thing about ordering from a SuperIdeal vendor is you know that ANY stone you order from their signature line will be a top-of-the-line performer. There's no cutting (pun intended ) corners there. It's great peace of mind to pretty much be able to blindly select a diamond from their signature lines and know it will be great. But there is a premium associated with peace of mind...

Its true that JA is a mixed in TH. About 6 months ago, their stones were consistently better. A major supplier seems to have started cutting for weight over performance. So, the searching/weeding is harder. I will say that in certain sizes, WF is equal to or less than the JA TH -- so, that has really altered the buying equation where buying super-ideal always has a premium. I just posted 3 WF stones on another thread that were all less than their equivalent from JA (let along TH).

 

[TreeScientist]

Its true that JA is a mixed in TH. About 6 months ago, their stones were consistently better. A major supplier seems to have started cutting for weight over performance. So, the searching/weeding is harder. I will say that in certain sizes, WF is equal to or less than the JA TH -- so, that has really altered the buying equation where buying super-ideal always has a premium. I just posted 3 WF stones on another thread that were all less than their equivalent from JA (let along TH).

Ah, maybe the weight-over-performance issue is why we're seeing such slack standards in the TH diamonds around 1 carat.

And I definitely agree that if you can get a SuperIdeal (with all of the images to prove performance) for the same or a little more than the equivalent spec'ed TH, then hands down one should go with the SuperIdeal. Like you said, it is "proven" to be great, so that's a no-brainer. To me, the decision starts to become a little more difficult once we're getting to the 10-20% difference in price point.