Please advise if this diamond is a good buy

[ydwang83]

Hi everyone,

I am new to diamonds and only started to do some light research because I am looking to buy an engagement ring. After a couple of days of research, I impulsively made a purchase on Blue Nile. I was hoping that any fellow pricescope users with more experience can tell me if the purchase I made was a decent one, based on the price that I paid.

The diamond I purchased is the following:

Purchase Date: 2012.02.04
Cost: US$ 8,105.00
GIA Laser Inscription Registry: GIA 2135796716
Shape and Cut Style: Round Brilliant
Measurements: 6.48*6.51*3.92 mm
Carat Weight: 1.01
Color: H
Clarity Grade: VS2
Cut Grade Excellent
Polish, Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None

(GIA)
Depth%: 60.4%
Table%: 57%
Crown Angle: 34 degrees
Pavilion Angle: 40.8 degrees
Culet: None

(GCAL Report) - Seems as though Blue Nile Signature Ideal Cut stones also have this report
Optical Brilliance & Symmetry: Excellent
Depth%: 60.4%
Table%: 57%
Crown Angle: 33.5 degrees
Pavilion Angle: 40.6 degrees
Culet: 0.02mm (0.3%)

First let me give a brief explanation of my thought process and what I was looking for when I made the purchase:
1. The most important thing for me was that I wanted the diamond to look good (to the naked eye). I wanted to get the best possible brilliance, fire, etc. Basically a diamond that would reflect almost all the light that enters, which will hopefully also make it look a little larger than it actually is.
2. The second most important for me was the size, which I wanted it to be around 1 carat.

Through my light research it was concluded that cut was by far the most important thing if what I wanted was for it to look good. I figured that many retailers featured their own top of the line cut (Blue Nile - Signature Ideal, White Flash - A Cut Above, etc.), which means they probably already filtered and picked out the "best looking" ideal cuts, meaning it was unlikely I would fine "ideal" ideal if I didn't pick their top of the line (cut) diamonds. The only way I was going to be able to get the best ideals was to go straight to their suppliers, but as I am not from the USA, I was not going to be able to meet the independent supplier and wasn't sure I wanted to forego the extra sense of security offered by the retailers (all well known ones offered 30 day return policies at least, even though some reviews say they will make you jump through hoops before honoring them. Either way, at least I get the peace of mind that if something really happened I was somewhat covered).

Almost all sites I came across said that inclusions, either internal or on the surface, are not visible to the naked eye (untrained) if it is above SI1-2. Thereby meaning that clarity-wise, to get the most bang for the buck would be to pick out a SI1-2 and have the seller do a double check, to see if it is eye clean. My logic was that I didn't want to go that close to the edge, so I picked out a VS2, which should still offer decent value, and be completely eye clean (I later called Blue Nile and they told me all their signature cuts are eye clean).

My girl doesn't have pale complexions but since I picked a platinum ring, I wanted to get as close to colorless as possible. Based on my budget I could not afford a F colored 1 carat ring, so I had to settle for an H (the highest color I could get that still met the 1 carat criteria). Many say it isn't possible to tell difference unless you have a standard to compare, so I wasn't too stress about the color. Am I correct in assuming so?

I input the values of the diamond onto the HCA tool and with the GIA values, I get a 1.0, with the GCAL I get a 0.7. I think it says that anything below a 2 should be okay, so I guess the diamond is okay and doesn't have any flaws that are too apparent. It came back with 3 Excellents and 1 Very Good.

Now, could you guys tell this purchase is okay, money-wise? Based on a stone of the aforementioned specs, size, did I:

Grossly overpaid (US$ 750+)
Slightly overpaid (within US$ 750)

I have a feeling I probably slightly overpaid... But any comment would be appreciated. Thanks in advance!

Antonio

 

[0-0-0]

Why do you think you overpaid? It looks fine by the numbers and a quick PS search shows only 3 stones with similar stats, all from WF and all list for more. https://www.pricescope.com/diamond-search-results/624916

 

[ydwang83]

Thanks for your reply. I didn't realize you are able to search diamonds from different sellers like that, thanks for the info.

After making the purchase, I came across some websites/blogs that said buying a BN Signature more than likely means you overpaid, so I plugging the same filters into a couple of other website, I think it was zoara and another one, and it came back with several diamonds that had similar specs and were about 7,500 or so. I think some even had hearts and arrows, which the one I purchased does not have.

So I am confused as to why the price can vary so much. I tried plugging a couple of those into HCA and they came back below 2 as well, so it seems as though they are no worse than the one I bought, but for several hundred less.

On a side note, does hearts and arrows make a difference? Because from what I read, the diamond has to be perfect symmetrically to obtain it, does this also mean it will give the most brilliance, fire etc.?

I was thinking if it ends up being that I could have gotten something better for roughly the same price, I could return it and get something different.

Thanks in advance for your help!

 

[0-0-0]

In most cases stones on the virtual lists are likely to be cheaper than the branded/in-house stones from BN, WF, etc. In essence you are paying BN, WF, etc. to screen stones for you on your behalf when you buy a branded/in-house stone. The branded/in-house stones usually have better buyback/upgrade policies as well. How much value you attach to the extra services and better policies is entirely up to you, but it doesn't automatically mean that you overpaid.

It's debatable, even on PS, whether the differences between true H&A and near H&A are visible in person with the unaided eye, and whether one is preferable over the other. The answers can vary a lot depending on who you ask. The more important thing is whether you or your SO can see and care for the difference. The same can be said for color.

BN appears to claim that their Signature rounds are H&A cuts, but unlike WF, doesn't provide H&A images for each individual stone to back up the claim. The only way to know for certain is to check the stone in a H&A viewer.

 

[LizH]

The hearts and arrow visual effect comes as a result of the diamond being cut to ideal mathematical proportions; the diamond's main facets need to be precisley aligned to 180 degrees opposite of each other. However, not all H&A diamonds are the same. If the diamond isn't cut precisely, the appearance of the H&A pattern will look faded, incomplete, distorted, or misaligned in its appearance.

H&A diamonds are typically more expensive due to the time it takes to polish (can take up to 4 days) as well as sacrificing carat weight to yeild a smaller diamond with perfect proportions. If cut right, these diamonds are offer exceptional brilliance and light reflection.

As for Blue Nile Signature, I've found that these diamonds have a large range of what Blue Nile considers "ideal". You just need to pick through and evaluate each stone individually. From looking at your stone's specs, it looks like this is a very good choice.

 

[ydwang83]

It's debatable, even on PS, whether the differences between true H&A and near H&A are visible in person with the unaided eye, and whether one is preferable over the other. The answers can vary a lot depending on who you ask. The more important thing is whether you or your SO can see and care for the difference. The same can be said for color.

I went to a couple of brick and mortar stores and whenever it was applicable, they always emphasizing that diamond was selling was H&A and always wanted to show me with the H&A viewer. I understand that due to the longer time and also higher difficulty to cut, it carries a premium. However, as my main concern is the look of the diamond under "normal" viewing conditions by the naked eye, my question would be:

Hypothetically, if we could get two diamond roughs, and cut them so they have the exact same
1. Table %
2. Depth %
3. Total Depth
4. Crown Angle
5. Pavilion Angle
6. Girdle
7. Culet

Basically, having two diamonds that are the same size, same color, same clarity, same cut, however one being a perfect H&A cut, the other being an ideal (AGS 0/GIA Excellent cut) that is NOT H&A, would the H&A show more brilliance, more fire, more scintillation, etc.? Or does having all the above the same, automatically mean both would be H&A diamonds?

You see the issue for me is that in the situation that my SO's friends or families see her ring, it is 99.9% certain that none of them are going to suddenly take out a perfect D diamond standard, a perfectly white piece of paper, a 10x magnifier and a H&A viewer and start examining the diamond to judge it's color, clarity, etc., this is why having the H&A "extra" if you will, is something that has little appeal to me. Plus, as the diamond is going to be placed on a ring, the hearts will not be viewable anymore.

I did a quick wiki on H&A and they have the following,

QUOTE "A Hearts and Arrows diamond takes up to four times longer to cut than other diamonds. That's why Hearts and Arrows diamonds look like no other diamond comparing Color, Clarity and Carat weight and shines with the utmost brilliance, fire and sparkle." UNQUOTE

QUOTE"Although the «Hearts and Arrows» property is indicative of a top-tier cut, it does not always mean the diamond will be the most brilliant, and should be looked at in conjunction with the cut grade."UNQUOTE

You see it is quite confusing, now they say it shines with utmost brilliance, etc, etc. but then the next paragraph it is indicative of top tier cut yet does not mean it will be the most brilliant. So that is why I am a little bit confused and just wanted to clear this up.

BN appears to claim that their Signature rounds are H&A cuts, but unlike WF, doesn't provide H&A images for each individual stone to back up the claim. The only way to know for certain is to check the stone in a H&A viewer.

BN does indeed neglect to give magnified red colored images of their signature diamonds viewed from the crown and the pavilion position so it is hard to judge whether the diamond is H&A. However, I am pretty sure it is not (at least the one I bought isn't). The reason being that they offer an additional certificate, the GCAL report, for all their BN Signature Ideal Diamonds, and no where on the certificate does it guarantee it to be H&A, GCAL actually can provide a different certificate if it conforms to H&A standards (the following link is for said H&A GCAL certificate: http://www.diamondid.com/pages/SERVICES/CERTIFICATES/Certificates_HEARTS_ARROWS_GUARANTEED_CERTIFICATE.html)

So yeah, it would be awesome if someone can clarify whether the brilliance, fire, etc. of an idea H&A diamond is indeed superior to that of a traditional ideal cut (AGS 0, GIA excellent) when view by the naked eye, or is this H&A business just pure marketing gimmick and it is all looks and no substance.

Thanks!

Antonio

 

[ydwang83]

The hearts and arrow visual effect comes as a result of the diamond being cut to ideal mathematical proportions; the diamond's main facets need to be precisley aligned to 180 degrees opposite of each other. However, not all H&A diamonds are the same. If the diamond isn't cut precisely, the appearance of the H&A pattern will look faded, incomplete, distorted, or misaligned in its appearance.

H&A diamonds are typically more expensive due to the time it takes to polish (can take up to 4 days) as well as sacrificing carat weight to yeild a smaller diamond with perfect proportions. If cut right, these diamonds are offer exceptional brilliance and light reflection.

As for Blue Nile Signature, I've found that these diamonds have a large range of what Blue Nile considers "ideal". You just need to pick through and evaluate each stone individually. From looking at your stone's specs, it looks like this is a very good choice.

Thanks a lot for your input, now I can rest easier knowing that even if I did overpay, I got lucky and the diamond is not going to be a bad performer. I'll keep my eyes open these couple of days just in case something else pops up.

 

[winternight]

I think people are going to have some very different opinions on this but personally I only have directly compared smaller H&A stones with smaller non-H&A stones when I was looking for a diamond earring purchase. I could not see a visual difference between the two at all in any lighting. My guess would be that you wouldn't see a difference in what matters either, but I haven't compared directly, say two 1 ct diamonds.

 

[0-0-0]

What do you think after having seen them in person? Did you compare H&A AGS 0/GIA EX vs near H&A AGS 0/GIA EX under diffierent lighting? Can you spot the difference under normal viewing conditions? At the end of the day the only thing that matters is your or your SO's preferences. Personally, I can only see the difference between a true H&A vs a near H&A in normal viewing conditions if the arrows are not aligned properly.

The numbers on the lab reports are rounded averages of multiple measurements around the stone, and don't take into account the variances that can go into the numbers. Two stones can have identical numbers on the reports, but one may be a true H&A and one only a near H&A.

This article is helpful for some background in H&A cutting and grading: https://www.pricescope.com/journal/hearts_and_arrows_diamonds_and_basics_diamond_cutting

I think it's easier to understand H&A in terms of cut precision and optical symmetry. The fact of the matter is that true H&A stones are cut more precisely, generally with less variances among the angles, and as a result display more symmetrical patterns. The problem is that there's as yet an objective way to accurately measure any potential increase in observable performance that most people agree on.

I must caution that even a H&A certificate is not a guarantee the a stone is a true H&A as there are varying standards and definitions. For example, the guidelines set by WF in the article is some of the strictest I have seen. I have seen many stones that vendors claim to be H&A, but would not meet the WF criteria once you look at it in a H&A viewer.

 

[ydwang83]

What do you think after having seen them in person? Did you compare H&A AGS 0/GIA EX vs near H&A AGS 0/GIA EX under diffierent lighting? Can you spot the difference under normal viewing conditions? At the end of the day the only thing that matters is your or your SO's preferences. Personally, I can only see the difference between a true H&A vs a near H&A in normal viewing conditions if the arrows are not aligned properly.

The numbers on the lab reports are rounded averages of multiple measurements around the stone, and don't take into account the variances that can go into the numbers. Two stones can have identical numbers on the reports, but one may be a true H&A and one only a near H&A.

This article is helpful for some background in H&A cutting and grading: https://www.pricescope.com/journal/hearts_and_arrows_diamonds_and_basics_diamond_cutting

I think it's easier to understand H&A in terms of cut precision and optical symmetry. The fact of the matter is that true H&A stones are cut more precisely, generally with less variances among the angles, and as a result display more symmetrical patterns. The problem is that there's as yet an objective way to accurately measure any potential increase in observable performance that most people agree on.

I must caution that even a H&A certificate is not a guarantee the a stone is a true H&A as there are varying standards and definitions. For example, the guidelines set by WF in the article is some of the strictest I have seen. I have seen many stones that vendors claim to be H&A, but would not meet the WF criteria once you look at it in a H&A viewer.

I think it's because 1 carat isn't that big, so under normal viewing conditions I could not see a difference between the H&A and non H&A. The ring I bought actually just arrived today, even though it isn't a true H&A, I personally find it really hard to even see the arrows. I think one of the arrows being slightly out of alignment will not be a big issue.

Also, stupid me, I only just realized after getting the package from FedEx, that I had to pay duty, so exchanging will probably be too much of a hassle, as I would have to deal with customs officials to get the money back. I had some bad exp when dealing with them before, so I will probably just keep the ring, even if I do stumble upon something else better out there.

In any case, thanks a lot for your help, I have learned quite a bit. I'll be much more careful next time when my SO decides to upgrade/get a new ring.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think you made a pretty good impulse buy

 

[Christina...]

I think you will be very happy with you diamond, it appears to be an excellent choice. There is great debate about whether or not you can visually appreciate a HA when compared to an AGS ideal or GIA excellent. And your paying as premium to say that you have a HA diamond. I personally wouldn't pay for a characteristic that I couldn't see or appreciatate. Enjoy your diamond!