Numbers aren''t everything

[taualum23]

Just wanted to relate my story to those of you looking for your first stone. I have been shopping for an engagement ring for months now. I have dived in to the numbers behind princess stones, looked at hundreds, and looked at thousands of them online. I recently went to a family connection in NYC to look at their stones. this is a very high-end designer. I asked them to show me stones in the 2 carat range with the numbers I have picked up through my research here. THey were happy to do so, and showed me a dozen stones within the top of the line categories. Then, she pulled out a 2.04, G VS2 , 63.8% depth, 73% table. Slightly outside the "ideal" accordig to this chart: http://diamonds.pricescope.com/fnc1.asp
and also according to most experts.
The stone is georgeous. it is in the pricerange of those with similar #''s on pricesope (15,500) and is from a major designer, and I got the setting right there. I agreed to buy it on the spot.
While the numbers are close, this was the BEST looking stone out of all of them. ALso, it appears to be at least 1/4 carat larger than the others that were in the range on the chart. The fire, brilliance and stunning nature of this stone had me sold the minute I looked at it. It was slightly mroe included than the others, but it is stil VS2, with nothing (of course) visible to the eye, and only with some work visible through a 10X loupe.

I AM NOT saying that the numbers don''t mean anything, nor that they are not a good tool in learing and picking out stones, but only that it is unnescarry (and couterproductive) to automatically rule out stones that are not "perfect" accordning to the numbers.

Now, the only downfall is that they are building the ring and setting from scratch for my girlfriend, and it will not be ready for close to a month. Hopefully it will be here by the time I want to propose!!!!!!!

Hope this at least gives you something to think about (I know, it is hard enough)! It can be fun, though, good luck findig that perfect stone.

 

[chrono]

taualum23,

You are correct that numbers aren''t everything. However, it is a starting point and is used as a tool to cull out stones are are most likely to be duds or have inherent problems. The best tools are to use our own eyes but then again, how many stones have we seen in our lifetimes to be able to make a good judgement on what is a good or excellent performing diamond? So as a start, we use the numbers as a guide to narrow the selection. It doesn''t have to fit all the parameters of the AGA chart. Even Dave Atlas himself said it is only a recommended chart and not a final tool. There are many beauties that do not fall in the 1A chart. After narrowing the selection, pick your favourite(s) and send it (them) to an independent appraiser to make sure you''ve got the right one.

I myself don''t have the best numbers (1B) but it''s far above the average numbers and it is a gorgeous stone. The other thing is that we are talking fancy stones. There is really no set parameters for fancies right now so what is ideal is anyone''s guess. I''m happy for you that you''ve found a beautiful princess stone that makes both of you very happy. I sure hope to see pictures of it here at Pricescope soon.

 

[fire&ice]

Yep, numbers aren''t everything. I know nothing about squares; but, people have often said that the numbers of fancies are less reliable for performance than rounds.

Glad you found the stone of your dreams.

 

[belle]

i echo chrono''s thoughts exactly.

i am glad you found a stone that you *love* taualum23! i hope that you will show us pics when the ring is done!!

best of luck on your proposal!!

 

[taualum23]

Hey there Chrono, I know they are still an important tool, that's why I included

"I AM NOT saying that the numbers don't mean anything, nor that they are not a good tool in learing and picking out stones, but only that it is unnescarry (and couterproductive) to automatically rule out stones that are not "perfect" accordning to the numbers"

I think mine would be a 1B, I'll have to check.
Thanks for all the congrats and weell-wishes, everyone.

As soon as the ring is done you shall have your pictures, I promise!!

Take care,

T23

 

[Mara]

I highly agree that for fancies, numbers are not as effective as a tool for judging as with rounds...but the numbers do help rule out horrible fancies...even though yours is slightly out of the ''ideal'' (as you noted), that does not mean I would have ruled it out from it''s numbers. However if a stone was rated a 4B on the AGA chart or one with a girdle so thick it''s visible in pictures or with a depth that rivaled the pools of one''s eyes, that would definitely not be a stone I would consider, fancy or round!

Congrats on finding what sounds like a great stone!

 

[taualum23]

Mara, so true. When I started this whole process a few months ago, I decided I NEEDED D or E, VVS1 stones. As I saw more, and learned about cut, I NEEDED "perfect" ideals. I have absolutely ruled out stones that were so deep they lost a half mm on each side, and ones with a table wider than my mother''s with both leaves in.
I can''t wait to post pictures. I hope to have the ring within the next few weeks. They told me four, but I have asked for sooner if at all possible.

And to everybody here at pricescope, especially those who answered my questions via PM when I was too embarresed to ask in public, thank you...I would have done much worse without you!