How come nobody talks about Solasferas

[kenny]

I've had a Solasfera round and an ACA round for almost 10 years.
Their weights are 0.82 and 0.83, VVS1 and VS1.

They both look equally spectacular.

So, i am assuming that you no longer have them?

I still have both.

Have had is not past tense.
Had is past tense.

 

[Tekate]

Pyramid, I find your post(s) very informative and a bit fascinating and a bit nostalgic..as in my own look back.. I have become an advid PS reader because I just retired... I never had the time before to even find this site.. and I didn't have the money to continue to buy or upgrade.. although I can ocassionally coerce my husband.. if I work on him enough.. my background is a lover of sparkly thingy(s) as a child in the 50s.. my mom was engaged in 1949.. she had a 1 carat RB diamond that she and my dad went to NYC and went upstairs and bought the stone then the setting and that was in 1949! I had (obviously to me) ADD so my mother would say when we did road trips (2 miles?? to twirl her rings.. and that is where I first saw the beauty of a diamond first.. AND also my mom's stone had a carbon mark right smack in the middle not huge like a feather but that thing fascinated me also (as in I DON"T WANT THAT my mother's cut was modern for 1949.. and it was set in the boxy style of then - which I am starting to see now. .ugh ugh ugh.. I truly disliked the setting .. because to me it's old school.. waaay old fashioned.. I wanted modern, cool, sleek, thus when I was firstly engaged to my 1st husband he gave me his grandmom/mom's 1.50 OEC engagement stone (which the jeweler told him was a mine cut, but it wasn't it was def OEC) at the time it was obvious to me that it was different than all my g/fs who were getting engaged when I was.. its crown was much higher... I liked the stone.. it was set in 14K white gold, tiffany style set at a Macy's in Long island NY.. that lovely missmarriage ended in 85.. got engaged to my super husband in 87 and we went shopping for a ring in the diamond district in NYC, wanted something different, I wanted an oval.. he bought me a VVS1 D color 1.01 carat oval set in yellow gold because between 1974 and 1985 YELLOW GOLD came in... everyone and their mother had yellow gold - I hated yellow gold and a diamond together seemed just wrong.. but being a non trendsetter I went with the yellow gold, at the diamond district the vendor had an upgrade policy and I just HATED the bowtie.. yes it was a gorgeous stone in it's color, my husband still wishes I'd kept it, because 1.5 years later I traded it in for a RB 1.66 G/H color VS2 stone.. set in YELLOW GOLD.. ugh.. but I wasn't getting white gold as no one had it.. so I have had this stone and it's probably not a H&A stone, when it was appraised for insurance the appraiser said it was a bit shallow.. it throws off light etc. but in pure color the D was nicer.. I've gotten more jewelry over the years from keepersecondhusband .. my point is TRENDS are just that Trends.. in the 70s you saw marquise, round and pear, in the 80s RB only.... now the CUSHION!!! rulz.. a sweet little girl I worked with was recently engaged with a 1 carat cushion/halo, melee thingy.. it's stunning and looks gorgeous on her hand.. and one of the boys I worked with also got engaged and her gave his gf a 3 stone ring for her engagement ring.. I thought of those rings as for old folks (younger than me like in their 40s) who had a yesterday, today and a future tomorrow .... but the trend is your friend... I hate to say that the Kardashian family sets the trends today but it seems they do at least by their hair and their rings and their habit of having kids and maybe getting married .. life is surely different than 74! Jennifer Aniston has a honking stone that I find repulsive.. there is nothing - to me - attractive about a big sort of foggy stone (at least every pix I have seen of it looks like that.. although I've never chatted with her).. but she is continuing the cushion trend (or helped start it dunno)... so in 15 years people will look at cushions and it will date you from the early 2000s.. trends.. basiclly I think a person should go with their desire because one may not be as lucky as some here and even me, we could and did upgrade and change. when we bought my 1.66 carate stone it cost with tax 7.5K with NYC tax!..

 

[Dreamer_D]

Under light that is soft and even (producing no dispersion fire) a Solasfera is a tiny bit brighter than standard ideal-cut round.
Living with both for almost 10 years I can confirm this.

Reason: The Idealscope image for the Solasfera is solid blood-red for 100% light return, like the 8-Star but without the painting and digging.
All of the best-cut standard rounds have some 'contrast' leakage, if there is no painting or digging.
Solasferas have no leakage, not even leakage with a pretty name.
In the below pics the standard fine Ideal cut on left, Solasfera on right.
Notice all of the triangular white contrast leakages areas on left diamond.

Again IMO they are both equally beautiful and fiery under spotlighting.
With 10 sections instead of 8 the Solasfera has 25% more flashes but each is 25% smaller so that's could be seen as a wash.
But in soft light the Solasfera is definitely brighter and whiter, and that is reasonable to me because Solasferas don't let any light leak out the bottom.

Nice informative post Kenny!

Now, do you think the difference in performance you observed comparing the two stones would be obvious looking at them individually? To a non-diamond expert?

Many of the things we talk about on PS are really interesting, apparent, and important to us diamond techies. I am always interested in discovering what a typical diamond consumer can discern or is interested in.

For example, no one can distinguish my own diamond from an MRB in my real life, and my diamond may be about as different from an MRB as the Solasfera is from an MRB.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Honestly, if you love the Solasfera and think she wants a round, I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with getting one! It is not a trend and it will always be one of the best cut diamonds in the world. I feel that way about all of GOG's rounds...H&A, Solasfera, and AVR. They are all beautifully cut and will always be classic and beautiful. The average person will just see a beautiful diamond and not know a thing about the difference in cut. I catch people looking at my diamond sometimes like they are trying to figure it out! But no one has ever commented on the cut (since they are seeing them in real life and not under mega-magnification)! On the other hand, I think more modern cut stones like princess, radiant, modern cushions will have a tendency to go more in and out of style. You cannot go wrong with any of GOG's excellent cut rounds as far as I am concerned! Oh, and specialty cut stones cost a little more than standard cuts, so that is the reason you don't see as many of them as you do regular excellent cut round brilliants.

 

[rubyshoes]

Haven't read the whole thread but I adore my Solasfera solitaire. Love, love, love it. I would have bought Solasferas for my studs or my pendant etc except they're pricier than ACAs. To my eye, Solasferas are much more sparkly and fiery than even ACAs and considering how brilliant ACAs are, that's really saying something!

If you're considering purchasing one, get it. You really can't go wrong with one.

 

[pyramid]

Reason: The Idealscope image for the Solasfera is solid blood-red for 100% light return, like the 8-Star but without the painting and digging.
All of the best-cut standard rounds have some 'contrast' leakage, if there is no painting or digging.
Solasferas have no leakage, not even leakage with a pretty name.
In the below pics the standard fine Ideal cut on left, Solasfera on right.
Notice all of the triangular white contrast leakages areas on left diamond.


But in soft light the Solasfera is definitely brighter and whiter, and that is reasonable to me because Solasferas don't let any light leak out the bottom.

I remember when the cut study was being done, Brian Gavin posting posts about the painting and digging and what was being discussed by GIA re eightstar. It was said then that the contrast spots on the diamonds without painting and digging were good and gave 'contrast' and the blood red firescope image of eightstar and the new cut H&A diamonds which Whiteflash produced at that time to have the same flavour as eightstar were knocked for having no contrast. It was also said that large flashes of light came of the edges of eightstar and the new cuts and this was not seen as traditional. Whiteflash then discontinued the new cut diamonds when they sold out their remaining stock or soon after. We don't hear as much of eightstar on pricescope anyway now.

I am sure to most people these differences are not apparent it is just a bit important to us obsessed with diamonds.

 

[pyramid]

Hi Tekate

I find your story interesting too. I am a person that likes all styles really and both white and yellow gold. I was just trying to write about the history and trends (maybe as I see them ). At the beginning though someone was saying how new posters should listen to those who had been around the block and found out that old cuts gave off like a better look and I do not disagree with them, just that I don't think everyone would feel that was so. I just wanted to say that I didn't see diamonds as a hierarchy of what was better but more to show the history and why round brilliant cuts were most popular in our time as they were the newest technology and a lot of the older cuts were recut with that technology. I also notice another longtime poster writing about the speciality cuts being more expensive and that is why you don't see them around as much. I don't know much about that as I am in the UK and we really don't have access to that. I just remember there never seemed to be any mention of special cuts on pricescope and its predecessor board though until Good Old Gold started coming up with square hearts and arrows, solasferra, and then years later the cushion cuts. I don't see the AVC and AVR as speciality but more a tradional cut being done with todays technology of better symetry. I just thought these speciality cuts were new trends to give people something different to buy like hearts and arrow rounds are in a way as they started in the 80s in Japan. I see H & As as different as they are the natural outcome of perfect symmetry whereas solasferra is a different design which I suppose the round brilliant was when it was new too but that faceting style started in the 1800s with the old mine cut. I see the speciality cuts as being from the late 1990s and 2000s.

Love to hear your story of your ring changes. We don't have that here in UK really, from my generation most got a small diamond and either don't wear it now as ring too small never resized or ring has broken or like myself they divorced. Many also got colored gemstone engagement rings here this was back in 80s cost about $1000, ofcourse some would be more and in the late 90s people may have spent about $2000. Now they are in stores for $5000 and way up. Seeing all these halos coming through now on very slim rings just like Victor Canerra but not hand forged. Rings are hardly ever bought separate from the stone here. Only people who get educated would do that and I don't think many do, they just rely on what their jeweller tells them. I was first engaged in 1986 and even then all the rings were sapphire (since 1981 and Lady Diana's) but my ring and all my peers rings and anyone else I saw had small sapphire with diamond chips around it, the sapphires were always very dark navy or even black, nothing like the sapphires shown on the Colored stone forum. These engagement rings were probably about $500 or so. Before I came on pricescope I had only ever seen a 1 carat stone in a jewellers, never on anyone in real life, and that jeweller may only have had 3 in the store unless it was a chain store with grey looking 1 carat stones.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Pyramid, stones like AVC's and AVR's are definitely based on antique stones but with more precision cutting and better light return, generally. But they are also specialty cuts in that GOG has them custom cut and the supply is extremely limited compared to modern generic round brilliants, princess cuts, emerald cuts, radiants, etc. You can't just go anywhere and access one because only a very few people in the US are even cutting ideal/excellent cut antique style stones.

 

[kenny]

Under light that is soft and even (producing no dispersion fire) a Solasfera is a tiny bit brighter than standard ideal-cut round.
Living with both for almost 10 years I can confirm this.

Reason: The Idealscope image for the Solasfera is solid blood-red for 100% light return, like the 8-Star but without the painting and digging.
All of the best-cut standard rounds have some 'contrast' leakage, if there is no painting or digging.
Solasferas have no leakage, not even leakage with a pretty name.
In the below pics the standard fine Ideal cut on left, Solasfera on right.
Notice all of the triangular white contrast leakages areas on left diamond.

Again IMO they are both equally beautiful and fiery under spotlighting.
With 10 sections instead of 8 the Solasfera has 25% more flashes but each is 25% smaller so that's could be seen as a wash.
But in soft light the Solasfera is definitely brighter and whiter, and that is reasonable to me because Solasferas don't let any light leak out the bottom.

Nice informative post Kenny!

Now, do you think the difference in performance you observed comparing the two stones would be obvious looking at them individually? To a non-diamond expert?

Many of the things we talk about on PS are really interesting, apparent, and important to us diamond techies. I am always interested in discovering what a typical diamond consumer can discern or is interested in.

For example, no one can distinguish my own diamond from an MRB in my real life, and my diamond may be about as different from an MRB as the Solasfera is from an MRB.

I think the difference between well cut and poorly cut rounds would be noticeable to anyone, but the difference between a Solasfera AVR and ACA would not be.
Civivians are just not tuned into that.
I think even a group of senior PS members would not notice the difference between an ACA and Solasfera round if they were not side by side and they were told one was a Solasfera.
They both just sparkle like crazy.
Now, the AVRs do have a very different facet pattern that I suspect would be more likely to be noticed than the difference between an ACA and a Solasfera.

Good point!

 

[kenny]

Honestly, if you love the Solasfera and think she wants a round, I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with getting one! It is not a trend and it will always be one of the best cut diamonds in the world. I feel that way about all of GOG's rounds...H&A, Solasfera, and AVR. They are all beautifully cut and will always be classic and beautiful. The average person will just see a beautiful diamond and not know a thing about the difference in cut. I catch people looking at my diamond sometimes like they are trying to figure it out! But no one has ever commented on the cut (since they are seeing them in real life and not under mega-magnification)! On the other hand, I think more modern cut stones like princess, radiant, modern cushions will have a tendency to go more in and out of style. You cannot go wrong with any of GOG's excellent cut rounds as far as I am concerned! Oh, and specialty cut stones cost a little more than standard cuts, so that is the reason you don't see as many of them as you do regular excellent cut round brilliants.

+1

 

[kenny]

Reason: The Idealscope image for the Solasfera is solid blood-red for 100% light return, like the 8-Star but without the painting and digging.
All of the best-cut standard rounds have some 'contrast' leakage, if there is no painting or digging.
Solasferas have no leakage, not even leakage with a pretty name.
In the below pics the standard fine Ideal cut on left, Solasfera on right.
Notice all of the triangular white contrast leakages areas on left diamond.


But in soft light the Solasfera is definitely brighter and whiter, and that is reasonable to me because Solasferas don't let any light leak out the bottom.

I remember when the cut study was being done, Brian Gavin posting posts about the painting and digging and what was being discussed by GIA re eightstar. It was said then that the contrast spots on the diamonds without painting and digging were good and gave 'contrast' and the blood red firescope image of eightstar and the new cut H&A diamonds which Whiteflash produced at that time to have the same flavour as eightstar were knocked for having no contrast. It was also said that large flashes of light came of the edges of eightstar and the new cuts and this was not seen as traditional. Whiteflash then discontinued the new cut diamonds when they sold out their remaining stock or soon after. We don't hear as much of eightstar on pricescope anyway now.

I am sure to most people these differences are not apparent it is just a bit important to us obsessed with diamonds.

If popularity indicates quality then McDonald's would be best restaurant on earth.

I don't know that New Line ACAs were discontinued because they were inferior.
They were different.
I know that different is scary.
Many people cling to what's 'normal', or as you say "seen as traditional".

Contrast leakage is a marketing spin on an unfortunate reality of the 'standard' well-cut round.
No leakage in the Solasfera means slightly larger flashes of color from facets that are next to where a contrast leakage area would be.
IOW if a particular flash was say 0.05 square mm in a standard round the 'same' flash in a Solasfera or a 8* might be perhaps 0.06 square mm.

That the universe got used to contrast leakage in rounds does not make it better or even equally good.
I want the largest possible flashes of color from my diamond.
I don't want contrast when it means some of the light and color leaking out of the bottom.
I want all of the diamond shooting off colors.
The contrast to a little more beautiful fire is little black dead spots from leakage ... no thanks.

I think arguing that contrast leakage is a good thing is just cognitive dissonance, or marketers turning a negative into a positive.

Just because a diamond cut vanishes does not mean it was inferior.
Betamax videotape format had superior performance to VHS but Betamax vanished because VHS had longer playing time.

I suspect 8* and maybe ACA New Line could not recover from GIA dinging them for painting and digging.
There's nothing wrong with P&D but the buying public is not well-enough informed to dig deep and learn this, kind of like how many poorly-informed buyers avoid fluorescence.

One piano maker, Kawai, use ABS plastic action parts inside the piano.
Mason and Hamlin use carbon fiber action parts.
One reason these materials are superior to the traditional wood is because they do not absorb moisture and are therefore more stable, but buyers are scared of anything different and new.

 

[LLJsmom]

Such a fascinating thread!! I love hearing everyone's personal experiences and their opinions on diamonds and diamond trends. Hope more people keep chiming in!! Thank you. So educational.

 

[ame]

If you can change your diamond multiple times then it doesn't matter apart from financially so go with the trend you like, otherwise make up your own mind. I believe there is a poster here Ame who has had two Solasferas and it is obviously the diamond cut she prefers.

Actually I've owned multiple Star129s, never a Solasfera. I went to GOG to view the Solasfera, AVC and AVR, more Star129s and Octavias in person before sticking with the final Star129 from GOG. I had a few sent to me in the meantime, as well, before that one. My original was purchased locally long before GOG was able to become a Star129 dealer. My husband and I went together to pick out a range of stones that met my criteria, and despite him being disappointed with my size range, he went with the biggest I picked out. When that got stolen, I upgraded a little in size, somewhat in part to supply and somewhat because of clarity "requirements." This stone spoke to me all along, and we upped my intended budget to make it happen.

I am a big proponent of "modified" cuts. I LOVE the Star129, I liked the Solasfera, I LOVE the Octavia and I am slightly obsessed with Crisscuts as well. I think they're unique, and in your case, I think having a unique super-performer would be kind of cool.

 

[Tekate]

Pyramid, thank you for you posting/reply.. England is my favorite place in the world.. I love London and everything UK.. I hope to make it back..

It's interesting that Princess Diana made such a splash with her quite stunning ring.. I don't remember that kind of statement here in the U.S, but that was when I was having my kids so I'm sure there are plenty of girls here with a Diana inspired ring.

I was first engaged in '74 and then in '85 (two different guys between those 11 years white gold faded out and yellow gold came in ... I have an assortment of rings in yellow gold.. and different rings in white gold... my mom's engagement ring was white gold and I've been always partial to white gold but in reading these forums I see how a yellow gold setting really enhances a higher colored stone... I grew up near NYC and no one had anything smaller than 1 carat

I have a hard time understanding what the difference between an old mine cut is vs cushion but I'm sure as I read more here I will get it.. I hope to buy an emerald style diamond (the original looking emerald style not the square one) and have a pendant made.. but not now, no funds.... I have learned so much here.. when I go to get my emerald style diamond I'm going to ask for help here.. to be honest I truly don't understand why people buy rings in stores anymore.. it's quite a bit better to come here and seek help.. I read recently that not many vendors/knowledgeable people are here vs in the beginning.. that is too bad.. because I would never have heard of Victor Canera or ERD... etc... change is always good my mom always said...

Again thank you for your kind reply.. I continue to put my .0222222 cents in probably when not appropriate but I am, like you and every here a diamond/colored stone jewlery lover..

Kate

 

[sn618]

The input from this thread has been absolutely amazing and such a unique educational experience. It's always interesting to hear people discuss their passions. This site and the users have been the most helpful tool in this entire shopping experience.

I'm still on the fence, I was so set on going with GOG, but the sales experience has been lacking, to say the least. I was hoping to get to work with Jon directly, but I started off with an associate and may now end up going with another vendor entirely. I'll try to get in touch with Jon again tomorrow and then make a decision.

I still need to do some thinking. I definitely need to make a decision by tomorrow so that I can place an order either way. The discussion has been very educational nonetheless!

 

[Rhino]

Hi sn618,

My apologies if there was a delay by any of my staff in responding. Our store is closed on Sunday and Monday's so if you sent one between Saturday pm and Monday we generally come into a load of email on Tuesday which are generally all answered at the latest by Wednesday. If you have a question for me personally put URGENT RHINO in the subject header and I'll be happy to answer whatever questions you have. Otherwise if you sent your email over the days we're closed expect an answer shortly.

Kind regards,
Jonathan

 

[Rhino]

Just reading through this thread ... awesome input by all and thanks for taking me on this little stroll through memory lane. Can't believe it's been 12 years (going on 13!) now for me participating here. I didn't age right?