Is a true H&A diamond worth the premium over nearly H&A (true heart diamond)?

[chung ka ming]

after some research online . It seems that true heart diamond from James Allen may not necessarily a true H&A diamond

1.74 Carat round diamond

This True Hearts TM diamond, 1.74 carat F color vs1 clarity has ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

With the diamond above. It cost 19900USD. It does have a dense cloud and crystal in the table but it should be eye clean accounting to James Allen stuff. The arrow image does look a bit unbalance with closer look and it shows some light leakage

Diamond | 1.72 ct F VS1 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4678027

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.72 carat F color VS1 clarity loose diamond is graded by the Gemological Institute of America (GIA). | 4678027

www.whiteflash.com

While this diamond cost $24975 USD.it is a true H&R diamond. There is no doubt in its cut quality

Is it really that much of difference in both light performance and worth the price difference to buy a true H&A diamond from white flash?


Sorry I’m new to this area. True H&A diamond will perform better for sure.But with my tight budget I wonder if I should go for the white flash true heart diamond even it is kinda out of my budget

 

[tyty333]

Whiteflash has tighter cutting parameters and stricter vetting requirements compared to other (most) vendors. A lot of Pricescopers
own ACAs and we can vouch for their beauty and feel like the extra time and rough that goes into cutting them is worth the extra cost.

Here is my ACA...1.65 K/SI1. Outside lighting

 

[Old_Fossil]

Hello @chung ka ming I find your question to be intriguing as I find myself in the same situation as you, and have asked (and still ask) the same questions. I am in the process of purchasing a JA True Hearts stone for an engagement ring upgrade, and have recently bought 2 Whiteflash ACA products (pair of studs and a right hand ring).

I find that when speaking to a Hearts and Arrows stone, we are referencing the level of cut precision needed to produce the distinctive optically symmetrical pattern when viewed from the top and the bottom of the stone. Not all ideal cut stones will exhibit this pattern, and even those can still display exceptional beauty. The precise angles and symmetry provide the greatest potential for exceptional light performance, reflecting light with minimal leakage.

Now we come to the subject of light leakage. This particular JA stone you shared above has a crown angle/pavilion angle relationship of 35/40.8, which is the exact same CA/PA proportions of the JA True Hearts stone I have selected, and I have learned that this relationship requires additional attention. I am including the consideration for that relationship that PriceScope has made available through their guide to proportions in the excerpt below:



Note the last line in the entry above.

Although 35/40.8 angles fall within the potential for super ideal cut stones (and potential for symmetrical hearts & arrows), the tradeoff of having a steeper crown angle is that the lower girdles have the potential to leak light once the crown angle exceeds 35 degrees, even with a 40.8 degree pavilion. Since the GIA averages their numbers, it is possible that there can be light leakage under the table, as potentially shown in your face up Ideal Scope image. As I look at the hearts image, I see that the hearts may be suitably far away enough from their respective Vs, which may infer the lowers are closer to 80% which mitigates the potential. However, there still is the potential for leakage that has to be validated with an ASET image, which WF happily provides, and JA simply will not (I have asked many times to no avail) with a GIA graded stone. JA still has some AGS graded stones that will reference light performance.

As shown below in the Ideal Scope image of the JA stone I am purchasing on the left compared to the ACA stone I purchased on the right, you have to account for variation in photography techniques



I, too, thought there may be an issue with light leakage under the JA stone table. But it also turns out that the various JA vendors often take their Ideal Scope images with very strong backlighting. So the challenge is to determine if you have strong backlighting or table leakage. Something that I learned from @Karl_K via @lovedogs is to look at the center of the Ideal Scope image, and use the lightest color there as a reference to the rest of the image as a consideration for the strong lighting. As long as the color in the rest of the image is not lighter than the reference point, then the potential for light leakage is lower and the lighter areas are most likely the strong light coming up from the bottom of the stone. So I am hoping for strong backlighting in my case, and when my ring arrives, I will use my own Ideal Scope and ASET scope to validate the light performance. If it passes, I keep it, if not, it goes back. I will post those images here and rely on the expertise of PSers to help me determine what I have (or don't).

You may note that PSers here will strongly advocate for a small set of vendors and their version of super ideal cut H&A stones - which I have found to be excellent recommendations, as through them I have recently acquired two WhiteFlash ACA products. However, you may find yourself in the position where they don't have what you are looking for available, or are much more expensive than other vendors and are outside your budget. You illustrate this above, citing the JA stone price at $20k, and the WF stone at $25k. This is a significant difference, so your question is - will there be visual evidence in light performance to support the $5k difference in price.

To truly answer this question, the most important evaluation criteria is in-person examination of light performance under all possible lighting conditions of the two stones in question - I posit that everything else is anectdotal - theory and conjecture. In order to answer your question, you have to physically examine both the stones together at the same time - which is not always possible. The number of people who could tell the difference in light performance in two stones that match across all the 4 Cs, including all angular proportion variables, where one is identified as a "true" H&A stone and the other a "near" H&A stone (e.g. WF Expert collection) is very, very small. It appears that most of those people who may be able to tell the difference are members here who opine on various topics providing their expertise, yet their deep expertise is not representative of the general population. The ability to detect differences in color, brilliance, brightness, fire, scintillation, and contrast primarily depends on the photoreceptors in our eyes, and as such, not everyone perceives light performance the same way, and every diamond is unique.

The small differences in optical symmetry may or may not result in a perceptible difference in light performance to you. Even if there is a detectable difference, you have to determine if you like one more than the other, and if you do, is that difference worth $5k?

Any JannPaul Unique Series, Brian Gavin Black, or Whiteflash ACA Collection Series and similar super precision-cut stones will have the absolute best light performance potential available. But only when you have one in hand and compare it to another stone will you know if the perceptible difference, if any, is worth the added cost. Now when we come to the "mind clean" aspect of this, these vendors are an easy button to some, and many like to cite they have a "insert vendor here" stone. James Allen has some stunning True Hearts H&A stones, but not all of them are - you have to search through a lot of stones to find them, specifically in larger carat sizes. But when you do, you likely have found a great value in a super ideal cut stone that will perform beautifully. I would recommend order both if feasible, evaluate in hand, and select one and return the other.

A long answer to your question, but I find myself in the same position you are, and look forward to what others have to offer on this subject.

 

[Dreamer_D]

There are other reasons for the price difference, including different business models and business practices. Just FYI.

But IMO there is no reason to buy an “almost perfect” H&A like the JA stone. There is a premium even there for the brand designation, and if it’s not perfect, then why am I paying for that? Especially since the H&A designation doesn’t necessarily create a diamond that is visually different from a well selected diamond with great proportion and imaging but without the label.

Part of selecting an H&A has to do with the buyers personal preferences regarding cut precision, even if those preferences are not visible to most people in most lighting. Kind of like having a preference for very high clarity or other things that are not necessarily visible. And if that level of cut precision was important to me — and it is lol — then I want a perfect H&A and the price is worth it to get it. If I was buying a stone where that did not matter, for earrings for example in my case, or for smaller side stones for a ring, then I would not look for H&A at all. I would save even more money and buy a very well cut non-H&A.

 

[chung ka ming]

Hello @chung ka ming I find your question to be intriguing as I find myself in the same situation as you, and have asked (and still ask) the same questions. I am in the process of purchasing a JA True Hearts stone for an engagement ring upgrade, and have recently bought 2 Whiteflash ACA products (pair of studs and a right hand ring).

I find that when speaking to a Hearts and Arrows stone, we are referencing the level of cut precision needed to produce the distinctive optically symmetrical pattern when viewed from the top and the bottom of the stone. Not all ideal cut stones will exhibit this pattern, and even those can still display exceptional beauty. The precise angles and symmetry provide the greatest potential for exceptional light performance, reflecting light with minimal leakage.

Now we come to the subject of light leakage. This particular JA stone you shared above has a crown angle/pavilion angle relationship of 35/40.8, which is the exact same CA/PA proportions of the JA True Hearts stone I have selected, and I have learned that this relationship requires additional attention. I am including the consideration for that relationship that PriceScope has made available through their guide to proportions in the excerpt below:



Note the last line in the entry above.

Although 35/40.8 angles fall within the potential for super ideal cut stones (and potential for symmetrical hearts & arrows), the tradeoff of having a steeper crown angle is that the lower girdles have the potential to leak light once the crown angle exceeds 35 degrees, even with a 40.8 degree pavilion. Since the GIA averages their numbers, it is possible that there can be light leakage under the table, as potentially shown in your face up Ideal Scope image. As I look at the hearts image, I see that the hearts may be suitably far away enough from their respective Vs, which may infer the lowers are closer to 80% which mitigates the potential. However, there still is the potential for leakage that has to be validated with an ASET image, which WF happily provides, and JA simply will not (I have asked many times to no avail) with a GIA graded stone. JA still has some AGS graded stones that will reference light performance.

As shown below in the Ideal Scope image of the JA stone I am purchasing on the left compared to the ACA stone I purchased on the right, you have to account for variation in photography techniques



I, too, thought there may be an issue with light leakage under the JA stone table. But it also turns out that the various JA vendors often take their Ideal Scope images with very strong backlighting. So the challenge is to determine if you have strong backlighting or table leakage. Something that I learned from @Karl_K via @lovedogs is to look at the center of the Ideal Scope image, and use the lightest color there as a reference to the rest of the image as a consideration for the strong lighting. As long as the color in the rest of the image is not lighter than the reference point, then the potential for light leakage is lower and the lighter areas are most likely the strong light coming up from the bottom of the stone. So I am hoping for strong backlighting in my case, and when my ring arrives, I will use my own Ideal Scope and ASET scope to validate the light performance. If it passes, I keep it, if not, it goes back. I will post those images here and rely on the expertise of PSers to help me determine what I have (or don't).

You may note that PSers here will strongly advocate for a small set of vendors and their version of super ideal cut H&A stones - which I have found to be excellent recommendations, as through them I have recently acquired two WhiteFlash ACA products. However, you may find yourself in the position where they don't have what you are looking for available, or are much more expensive than other vendors and are outside your budget. You illustrate this above, citing the JA stone price at $20k, and the WF stone at $25k. This is a significant difference, so your question is - will there be visual evidence in light performance to support the $5k difference in price.

To truly answer this question, the most important evaluation criteria is in-person examination of light performance under all possible lighting conditions of the two stones in question - I posit that everything else is anectdotal - theory and conjecture. In order to answer your question, you have to physically examine both the stones together at the same time - which is not always possible. The number of people who could tell the difference in light performance in two stones that match across all the 4 Cs, including all angular proportion variables, where one is identified as a "true" H&A stone and the other a "near" H&A stone (e.g. WF Expert collection) is very, very small. It appears that most of those people who may be able to tell the difference are members here who opine on various topics providing their expertise, yet their deep expertise is not representative of the general population. The ability to detect differences in color, brilliance, brightness, fire, scintillation, and contrast primarily depends on the photoreceptors in our eyes, and as such, not everyone perceives light performance the same way, and every diamond is unique.

The small differences in optical symmetry may or may not result in a perceptible difference in light performance to you. Even if there is a detectable difference, you have to determine if you like one more than the other, and if you do, is that difference worth $5k?

Any JannPaul Unique Series, Brian Gavin Black, or Whiteflash ACA Collection Series and similar super precision-cut stones will have the absolute best light performance potential available. But only when you have one in hand and compare it to another stone will you know if the perceptible difference, if any, is worth the added cost. Now when we come to the "mind clean" aspect of this, these vendors are an easy button to some, and many like to cite they have a "insert vendor here" stone. James Allen has some stunning True Hearts H&A stones, but not all of them are - you have to search through a lot of stones to find them, specifically in larger carat sizes. But when you do, you likely have found a great value in a super ideal cut stone that will perform beautifully. I would recommend order both if feasible, evaluate in hand, and select one and return the other.

A long answer to your question, but I find myself in the same position you are, and look forward to what others have to offer on this subject.

Thank you for your analysis. Getting both to examine the differences may not be an option for me it would be nice to directly compare how the light performance different from each other.

But sure thing the extra 5k can buy guaranteed quality and best performance diamond which is very attractive

I think i will wait for the JA stone arrive first. If I’m not satisfied with dense cloud and crystal in the table which JA stuff said it is guaranteed eye clean. Then I will return it to get one from Whiteflash

I’m buying this as my engagement ring so I want to be as perfect as possible within my budget. But the whiteflash stone makes me want to invest more even it is outbudget

 

[Old_Fossil]

@chung ka ming I also offer you consider the possibility of coming down one step in color grade from an F to a G. The perceptible difference is very, very small if at all noticeable once a super ideal cut round stone is mounted in its setting, especially WG or Platinum. This Black by Brian Gavin stone is the same size as the ones you are looking at, G color, VS2, is eye clean and could save you a considerable sum. The cut specifications for a Black by BG stone are about as precise as it gets - take a look at the images of this stone as well.

Link for the Black by BG stone below is here, and you can read about the Black series here:





I have found that G color is well suited for a super ideal cut round stone, and personally I would not go above a GIA graded G color - the leap to F will incur significant price increases for potentially no perceptible difference. I am in the process of ordering a 3.8 ct JA True Hearts stone in H color, and expect it to face up icy white. The setting will mitigate profile viewing of the stone to hide any potential perceived warmth. I note in @tyty333 post above her K color ACA is a dazzler.

All the best in your journey, and congratulations. I am getting my better half the upgrade she deserves after 30+ years together, and this process has been both informative and daunting - but rewarding. Happy for you.

 

[chung ka ming]

Hi guys, just to follow up here. Really appreciate anyone who gave their advices throughout the decision making progress.
@tyty333 @Old_Fossil @Dreamer_D @Karl_K @lovedogs @Kim N

I think there is value of having the comfort of knowing I got the finest cut diamond. Also I know the inclusion in JA diamond will disturb me
Just by knowing it is there.

I end up cancelled James Allen order and went for this Whiteflash ACA

 

[SoaRFaabz]

Definitely go to either Jannpaul, whiteflash or Victor Canera

 

[LilAlex]

To answer only the question in your thread title, I am going to say no. I am not able to see the difference unless it is in highly magnified photos.

That said, I am not able to see the difference between a heated and unheated sapphire and almost always favor the latter for rarity. I think many folks feel that same way about diamond cut and clarity.

 

[0515vision]

Congratulations! It looks beautiful!!

 

[Old_Fossil]

Very nice find @chung ka ming , that is a winner. Most here will agree it is hard to go wrong with an ACA stone. I have to say I really like the ring and prong combination - beautiful. Not only great taste in jewerly, but can't help but notice the beautiful Omega watch in the photos - I'm a long time Omega fan - their movements are congruous to ACA cuts - so you are in great company. Enjoy in good health.

 

[tyty333]

It looks lovely on her! Congratulations!!!

 

[MissGotRocks]

Hi guys, just to follow up here. Really appreciate anyone who gave their advices throughout the decision making progress.
@tyty333 @Old_Fossil @Dreamer_D @Karl_K @lovedogs @Kim N

I think there is value of having the comfort of knowing I got the finest cut diamond. Also I know the inclusion in JA diamond will disturb me
Just by knowing it is there.

I end up cancelled James Allen order and went for this Whiteflash ACA

It looks beautiful! I don’t think you can ever regret buying first water quality.

 

[Kim N]

Congrats, it looks beautiful on her!

 

[caf]

Beautiful! You made a great choice.