Help w/ rock and setting please!

[kpfury]

I'm planning on getting my girl a 2.0 - 2.2ct RB and want a setting like this 4-prong pave I found one here at James Allen. But now I'm worried that the size of the rock would look disproportionately too big relative to the band width... Any comments or suggestions?

On a related note, this 2.09ct H&A is one of the rocks I'm considering. This 2.24ct also looks good, except I don't like the cloud being right there smack in the middle. But the color and size are fantastic!

Finally, how's James Allen True Hearts stack up to Brian Gavin or WhiteFlash' H&A cuts? JA seems to have a great return policy, and I'm not too enamored with the settings they have at BG or WF... I want something close to the Tiffany Novo settings, except RB instead of Cushion cut. Sorry for the million questions, thanks!

 

[slg47]

if you want something close to the Tiffany Novo I would recommend this setting but the one you linked looks nice too.

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/home/ring-details/?product_id=5708

request an IS image for the H stone, G looks nice. If you are concerned about the cloud I would ask JA.

 

[kpfury]

What about the Tiffany Novo itself? I see that a 2ct cost about $32.6k, not much more than a 2.1ct H&A plus the setting for a round brilliant. Is the cushion cut just a phase? Would the Tiffany Nova sparkle and shine just as much as an H&A? Would a 2ct Square Cushion H&A look smaller than a 2ct RB H&A? Sorry for the questions, but I'm starting to get really torn, thought I was set on the RB...

 

[nfowife]

Cushion cut is not "just a phase" for sure. But it has a different look and I think slightly less light return than an ideal RB. Also many face-up smaller than an RB of the same weight.
I can't see the prices of the 2 you have since they are on hold. But I think you will without a doubt get more for your money by not going the Tiffany route, unless that is very important to your FW.
The 2 stones look nice, have the JA gemologist look at them both and give you their honest assessment of the 2 of them. Also request idealscope of both stones and then you can make an informed decision. The bigger one looks nice, and you can't see the clouds in a vs2 even if they are there. It shouldn't be an issue in the performance with a vs2 rating.
It is a thin setting but I think it would be fine with a stone, definitely a delicate look but the stone will surely "pop".

 

[kpfury]

Attached is the idealscope they sent me for the 2.09ct diamond and the hearts photo from their website (actual pic). They're both TrueHearts, or in other words, the JA version of the Hearts & Arrows cut. According to the sales rep, TrueHearts account for the top 1% of the ideal cut diamonds. I'm trying to get the image for the larger diamond.

So when comparing a 2.1ct H&A cut diamond vs a 2ct Tiffany Novo Square Cushion:

1) which would appear larger face up? The RB will have a larger diameter than the Novo I presume (based on a 2.06ct Sq Cush H&A on GOG) - does that mean it will look larger?

2) Which would have better brilliance?

 

[tyty333]

Round should look bigger face up. Cushions are usually cut deeper (so end up facing up smaller).

Round cut usually gives you the most brilliance. People usually buy cushions because they love the shape
and the faceting pattern. Just depends what your GF likes.

Here are a few videos that have both round and cushions in them (however, there are many different cushion cuts)
Not sure how much these will help but could be worth a look.

http://www.vimeo.com/4048424
http://www.vimeo.com/4203970

 

[kpfury]

that was very helpful, especially the 2nd video, thank you. The RB does seem to outperform the cushion and square cushion...

Here are the images for the 2.24ct one at JA. The fact that the red is not as dark as in the 2.09ct rock, does it mean the light performance isn't as good? There seems to be good coverage, just the tint isn't as dark, and a lot more inclusions in the larger diamond...

 

[yssie]

that was very helpful, especially the 2nd video, thank you. The RB does seem to outperform the cushion and square cushion...

This is the idealscope for the 2.24ct one at JA. The fact that the red is not as dark as in the 2.09ct rock, does it mean the light performance isn't as good? There seems to be good coverage, just the tint isn't as dark...

It's fine, just the way they took the photo and posted it to web - it's the difference in colours, from pink to white, w/in the pic that is important, not difference between pink/purple/red in different pics. Both ISs look nice.

 

[kpfury]

So they told me that the feather in the 2.09ct is small, but close to the girdle, and HCA score is 2.1... should I be worried?

 

[yssie]

So they told me that the feather in the 2.09ct is small, but close to the girdle, and HCA score is 2.1... should I be worried?

Nope - IS is nice, don't need HCA when you have IS that shows actual instead of estimated brightness. AGS/GIA reputably graded VS2 inclusions are of no concern wrt light return/durability, can ask if it can be put under/beside a prong to be sure if you feel more comfortable w/ that

 

[kpfury]

Thank you for all the awesome advice I think I'm going to pull the trigger on the 2.09ct... JA has a fantastic return policy, figure it's worth a shot. Thanks!!