Please help this newbie choose a one carat

[diamond8]

Hi everyone. Please help this newbie. I am trying to decide between the below two diamonds. Choice 1 is with James Allen and they do offer some cheaper settings that I like but with choice 2, the setting that I like at Whiteflash is more expensive that the ending price between these two diamonds set will only be different by approximately $500. If choice 1 is a much better diamond, is it worth it to buy that and go with a cheaper setting? How do the measurements of these two diamonds effect the visual look of the diamond? Any advice that you have is much appreciated on these two diamonds. Thanks!

Choice 1:
1.14 carat, H, SI1, Hearts & Arrow ideal, AGS, $5,590
Measurements 6.69*6.72*4.14
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131&item=1007249

or

Choice 2:
6.50*6.52*3.99
1.04 carat, H, SI2, Round Ideal Cut, AGS, $4,583

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-183727.htm

 

[JulieN]

If the SI2 is completely eye-clean, no impact on performance, then I''d rather have a nicer setting.

 

[Regular Guy]

Rock / hard place / non-AGS0 light performance based cert / WF desire to differentiate their ACA line / inferring consequently about the decision to not have a cert with the possibility of showing AGS0 performance

not fun

 

[justjulia]

I think I''d call Whiteflash and have someone describe the stone to you in detail. If eyeclean, then I''d go for it. Then you''d have the best of both worlds with a stone and the setting you like. With diamonds, there is no "absolute," (there is always another one out there better or worse in some negligible way) but in the end you want to be happy with what you''ve put together and it sounds like you have put a lot of thought into the setting.

 

[Ellen]

Both stones look nice and face up well for size. The one from JA is an FIC, which means it will have slightly more fire. That might or might not help your decision. Also, you can always buy the setting from one and the stone from the other. Of course clarity needs to be checked on both.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 4/2/2007 8:53:35 AM
Author: Ellen
Both stones look nice and face up well for size. The one from JA is an FIC, which means it will have slightly more fire. That might or might not help your decision. Also, you can always buy the setting from one and the stone from the other. Of course clarity needs to be checked on both.

An FIC that also faces up well for size. An oxymoron, but I like it. Ellen, good catch, and your implementation suggestion seems attractive to me.

 

[Ellen]

Thanks Ira.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 4/2/2007 1:28:43 AM
Author: Regular Guy
Rock / hard place / non-AGS0 light performance based cert / WF desire to differentiate their ACA line / inferring consequently about the decision to not have a cert with the possibility of showing AGS0 performance

not fun

Ira, I like you, but sometimes I wish you''d try less hard to be colloquial and just keep it simple, yanno?

Honestly, I don''t see what the big deal is (or where you think the big deal is). Gosh, there is no ''rock/hard place''; both appear to be gorgeous stones. All you have to do to see that is look at the stones (meaning look past the paper!)

I''ll admit that I love a really cherry grading report as much as the next guy/gal, but it''s still just a piece of paper! It''s not what you wear; you wear the diamond! A diamond doesn''t *have* to come with an AGS0 grading report to be beautiful, Ira.

I''m with Julie; I''d pick the SI2 if it''s eyeclean. It offers a huge price break over the SI1 stone, and they will have materially the same ''presence'' on the hand.