Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Purchasing First Diamond - A Cut Above?

SinkingFun|1323875260|3081413 said:
Turnyface|1323871221|3081384 said:
How about this one?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1416820.asp
Click to expand...

Thanks!

I put this one on hold and am having a JA gemologist look to see if the diamond is eyeclean. Is it safe to buy a diamond without an idealscope image and go solely on the ASET image? Or should I request the idealscope?
Click to expand...

the ASET image on the grading report is computer generated and not an actual picture of the diamond, so I would request an idealscope image.

if this one is still available I think it looks really nice! WF also makes custom settings
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2728104.htm
 
You definitely need the idealscope image. I am not usually in favor of SI2 stones with inclusions under the table area, but maybe it is eyeclean. Just ask them if it is eyeclean from the sides, because they will only tell you from the top if you don't specifically ask. I thought the SI1 and VS2 stones posted earlier were within your budget, and I would recommend that for an e-ring if it is within budget. I was basing it on your saying you could spend $4000-5000 if you waited a month or so. It made sense to me for you to use the money you have now to buy the diamond and then buy the setting in a month or so. But if you have changed your budget, you need to tell us so we aren't posting stones that are too expensive.

Here is a nice one from James Allen if you are wanting to buy from them:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1393028.asp
 
What you're posting is good and in my budget.

I'm going to get a really simple ring, so most of my money can go towards the stone. :)
 
You know, it's really about how much debt I want to go into getting a ring. I've been saving for a short period of time thinking I'd spend $2000 tops on a ring. Obviously this is no longer true.

Comfortably, I could put anywhere from $3500-4000 in cash. OR I cold go cash and credit and pay off the credit within the next 3 months (6000 limit). I don't know on average, how much people generally spend on diamond rings. I'm all over the place on a variety of things when it comes to these rings. And it's funny to think I'm spending thousands of dollars on a rock. :naughty:

Keep those recommendations coming, although I'm leaning more and more towards that 0.753 ct diamond from WF.

I need to go look at diamond sizes to see what she'd truly like....
 
SinkingFun|1323894597|3081595 said:
You know, it's really about how much debt I want to go into getting a ring. I've been saving for a short period of time thinking I'd spend $2000 tops on a ring. Obviously this is no longer true.

Comfortably, I could put anywhere from $3500-4000 in cash. OR I cold go cash and credit and pay off the credit within the next 3 months (6000 limit). I don't know on average, how much people generally spend on diamond rings. I'm all over the place on a variety of things when it comes to these rings. And it's funny to think I'm spending thousands of dollars on a rock. :naughty:

Keep those recommendations coming, although I'm leaning more and more towards that 0.753 ct diamond from WF.

I need to go look at diamond sizes to see what she'd truly like....
Click to expand...


It's not my place, but... I would strongly recommend against buying your diamond on credit. They're kinda the definition of useless, and if it's for an engagement ring then you're probably looking at a LOT of other expenses pretty soon with the wedding and honeymoon! And if something else comes up in the next three months you don't want to be dealing with diamond-debt on top of everything else, y'know? 3500-4000 is a really great budget.

Anyway, going back to what you actually want us to opine on, your statement here on the first page stood out to me:

We did try on rings and thought 0.75 looked good. But I do recall her putting on a 1 ct diamond and her eyes got bigger.
Click to expand...

Here's how I (a young just-this-side-of-newlywed woman who spends a ton of time on a diamond forum) interpret that: "I'll love anything you give me. And I think 0.75 looks wonderful on my hand. But if you happen to surprise me with a 1ct I would be over the moon!"

Of course, my personal bias is coming into play here, but... I really do think you should take her out again like you suggest. If you can arrange to have the jeweller show her a variety of stones - some larger and lower colour, some smaller and higher colour, and see which ones she's drawn to that'd be ideal!
 
Yssie|1323896736|3081615 said:
SinkingFun|1323894597|3081595 said:
You know, it's really about how much debt I want to go into getting a ring. I've been saving for a short period of time thinking I'd spend $2000 tops on a ring. Obviously this is no longer true.

Comfortably, I could put anywhere from $3500-4000 in cash. OR I cold go cash and credit and pay off the credit within the next 3 months (6000 limit). I don't know on average, how much people generally spend on diamond rings. I'm all over the place on a variety of things when it comes to these rings. And it's funny to think I'm spending thousands of dollars on a rock. :naughty:

Keep those recommendations coming, although I'm leaning more and more towards that 0.753 ct diamond from WF.

I need to go look at diamond sizes to see what she'd truly like....
Click to expand...


It's not my place, but... I would strongly recommend against buying your diamond on credit. They're kinda the definition of useless, and if it's for an engagement ring then you're probably looking at a LOT of other expenses pretty soon with the wedding and honeymoon! And if something else comes up in the next three months you don't want to be dealing with diamond-debt on top of everything else, y'know? 3500-4000 is a really great budget.

Anyway, going back to what you actually want us to opine on, your statement here on the first page stood out to me:

We did try on rings and thought 0.75 looked good. But I do recall her putting on a 1 ct diamond and her eyes got bigger.
Click to expand...

Here's how I (a young just-this-side-of-newlywed woman who spends a ton of time on a diamond forum) interpret that: "I'll love anything you give me. And I think 0.75 looks wonderful on my hand. But if you happen to surprise me with a 1ct I would be over the moon!"

Of course, my personal bias is coming into play here, but... I really do think you should take her out again like you suggest. If you can arrange to have the jeweller show her a variety of stones - some larger and lower colour, some smaller and higher colour, and see which ones she's drawn to that'd be ideal!
Click to expand...

Thanks Yssie!

It's funny because I actually JUST got off the phone with her before reading your post and we made plans to go to a local jewelry store tonight to look at sizes and color!

I'm wondering how much of a difference is noticeable between a .63 ct diamond at 5.53mm vs a 0.75 ct diamond at 5.87 mm. I mean, we're talking about 0.34 mm here - and I thought a millimeter was negligible. Not to mention the difference is over $1400 between the two stones! (same cut, color, clarity, both HnA).

I'll see for myself tonight.

And good idea on the CC debt. Shame on me for even considering that. :nono:

I also like the lifetime upgrade at WF, so when we start making real person money, we have the option to upgrade to a larger stone less the shipping costs.

EDIT:

Rereading my above statement makes me think I should just get a 60 - 70 point diamond now and then upgrade at a later date once we're finished with school.

Ideas on the ones listed below?

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2715424.htm (is there light leakage from behind the table?)

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2724675.htm (light leakage from the 9 - 2 o'clock position?)

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2724675.htm (This one look gorgeous!)

Edit again:

I think I've just been putting way too much thought into this and am such a perfectionist at heart that I keep raising my expectations and should just leave well enough alone. I mean, how could a woman be unhappy with a bright shinny diamond ring? And at least to me, it's the thought that counts.
 
You know, I am thinking a little bit differently on this. I think it is unnecessary to take her again. It will be more of a surprise if you don't take her again, plus you can avoid the pressure of the jeweler wanting to sell you a ring. You know you will be safe with any of the .75-.80 stones. That is a very decent size engagement ring but not too large by any means. That size diamond works with your stone budget. I'd pay cash for the stone (in the $3500 range) and just charge the setting which will be one of the simple solitaires. No big deal to pay that off in a few short months.

It is sad for all you guys buying this year because diamonds are quite high now. But if you waited, it could be even worse! So just buy the best you can now so there are no regrets later! That's why I thought you were on track with ACA's or other WF in-house stones.

Is this the one you are talking about?

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2728118.htm
 
diamondseeker2006|1323898839|3081646 said:
You know, I am thinking a little bit differently on this. I think it is unnecessary to take her again. It will be more of a surprise if you don't take her again, plus you can avoid the pressure of the jeweler wanting to sell you a ring. You know you will be safe with any of the .75-.80 stones. That is a very decent size engagement ring but not too large by any means. That size diamond works with your stone budget. I'd pay cash for the stone (in the $3500 range) and just charge the setting which will be one of the simple solitaires. No big deal to pay that off in a few short months.

It is sad for all you guys buying this year because diamonds are quite high now. But if you waited, it could be even worse! So just buy the best you can now so there are no regrets later! That's why I thought you were on track with ACA's or other WF in-house stones.

Is this the one you are talking about?

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2728118.htm
Click to expand...

Yes, or this:

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2728104.htm

Although I didn't see the former linked stone on their site.
 
Ugh, sorry I was writing while you posted. I encourage you to go with .75. I have had diamond stud earrings that were .75 and I now have some that are .65 and I think .75 is a much better size for a long term ring. I really don't think most people outside of PS ever upgrade the e-ring, and you have enough now to get the .75 diamond and just charge a $400 setting. The thing to do is to eventually upgrade the setting to either a halo or a three stone with two smaller sides, in my opinion. It sounds like you can afford the .75 so I would go for it, personally. My husband borrowed the money for my entire ring from his parents because we were finishing school and paid it back over 18 months. I just don't see that there is a thing wrong with that. We have zero debt now other than a mortgage. We pay off cards every month and pay cash for cars. So it is not irresponsible to put part of a ring on credit when you know you can pay it off quickly. She'll wear that ring a LOT longer than you'll keep any car that you finance!
 
SinkingFun|1323899117|3081650 said:
diamondseeker2006|1323898839|3081646 said:
You know, I am thinking a little bit differently on this. I think it is unnecessary to take her again. It will be more of a surprise if you don't take her again, plus you can avoid the pressure of the jeweler wanting to sell you a ring. You know you will be safe with any of the .75-.80 stones. That is a very decent size engagement ring but not too large by any means. That size diamond works with your stone budget. I'd pay cash for the stone (in the $3500 range) and just charge the setting which will be one of the simple solitaires. No big deal to pay that off in a few short months.

It is sad for all you guys buying this year because diamonds are quite high now. But if you waited, it could be even worse! So just buy the best you can now so there are no regrets later! That's why I thought you were on track with ACA's or other WF in-house stones.

Is this the one you are talking about?

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2728118.htm
Click to expand...

Yes, or this:

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2728104.htm

Although I didn't see the former linked stone on their site.
Click to expand...

Both of those stones would be gorgeous for sure! I'd go by what you feel you can best afford. I prefer the H if you can swing it, but if the cost of the I color is your maximum, then I'd go with it just to get the .75.
 
All of those are lovely choices, no problems with any of them :love: And I think going w/ WF for their generous policies is a great idea, if you think you might make use of them sometime down the line.

The difference of 0.35-0.4mm is actually pretty substantial IRL, because of the surface area the larger diametre affords you - I would definitely go with the bigger if she liked the way 0.75s looked on her finger last time.


And - of course some people like DS finance and are very happy with their choice, and don't have any problems! I'm just very scared of the credit card - always have been - so I'm wearing that hat when I give advice on that front... I do think that 0.75 is a nice choice though, esp. if you can do it w/ cash ::)
 
Yssie, I am in complete agreement when the situation is that a couple is in lots of debt and wants to finance a $20k+ diamond (or whatever the price above their means) that would put them in jeopardy of being able to pay their bills. But when most of the money for the ring is saved and we are talking about a few hundred dollars to complete the ring, I don't think it matters at all. In fact, if a person came with a responsible plan to pay for part of the price of a ring over a year or so, I would support that, too, as long as they were paying low interest rates and could easily afford it. And I mean that for e-rings only, not for general jewelry gifts. Debt is a problem in this country. Some people get 40 year mortgages and 6 year car loans and pay for vacations on credit. I don't think that is wise at all. I just think an e-ring is a unique, hopefully once in a lifetime item, and responsible people can handle a few payments if they find what they want before they have all the money saved. Most people will never upgrade their e-ring, so I really think it is good to get something that will work long term that is reasonably near the target budget. What absolutely blows my mind are people who pay for extravagant weddings on credit!

You know what? Someone who bought their diamond on credit last December and paid for it over this year at a decent interest rate would have come out much better than those who waited to buy this fall! So it isn't always even a financial negative to pay part on credit!

(Sorry SinkingFun for the philosophizing!)
 
diamondseeker2006|1323909116|3081730 said:
Yssie, I am in complete agreement when the situation is that a couple is in lots of debt and wants to finance a $20k+ diamond (or whatever the price above their means) that would put them in jeopardy of being able to pay their bills. But when most of the money for the ring is saved and we are talking about a few hundred dollars to complete the ring, I don't think it matters at all. In fact, if a person came with a responsible plan to pay for part of the price of a ring over a year or so, I would support that, too, as long as they were paying low interest rates and could easily afford it. And I mean that for e-rings only, not for general jewelry gifts. Debt is a problem in this country. Some people get 40 year mortgages and 6 year car loans and pay for vacations on credit. I don't think that is wise at all. I just think an e-ring is a unique, hopefully once in a lifetime item, and responsible people can handle a few payments if they find what they want before they have all the money saved. Most people will never upgrade their e-ring, so I really think it is good to get something that will work long term that is reasonably near the target budget. What absolutely blows my mind are people who pay for extravagant weddings on credit!

You know what? Someone who bought their diamond on credit last December and paid for it over this year at a decent interest rate would have come out much better than those who waited to buy this fall! So it isn't always even a financial negative to pay part on credit!

(Sorry SinkingFun for the philosophizing!)
Click to expand...


No worries.

Just an update. Got back from the jewelry store where I was able to compare 0.5, 0.6t, 0.75 and 1.02 ct Lazare diamonds. Except for the 0.5 ct which was an SI2, the diamonds all had H color and VS2 clarity. All the diamonds carried the AGSL 000 ideal cut.

I was specifically comparing the 0.67 and 0.75 ct. Side by side there is a noticeable difference, albeit very minimal, it is there. When trying on each one independently, it was extremely hard to tell which size she had on. Maybe it was the lighting, I don't know.

More importantly, I was paying attention to her reactions and listening to her options and of course, she liked the 0.75 ct diamond better.

I wish I had done this sooner as it would have alleviated all this stress I've been having about picking out the "perfect ring." So that 0.75 H or I ACA diamond it is. I also saw an example of an I diamond and couldn't really tell a difference with the color, although it may have been their magical lighting. I still have to decide on color.

I'm also going with this setting from JA, although I can't decide if I want 1.5 mm or 2 mm:
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/18k-Yellow-Gold-1-5mm-Knife-Edge-Engagement-Ring.html....

The 1.5 mm will be so delicate that I think it'll make the stone look a bit bigger.
The 2 mm give me the option to engrave something into the ring.

Thoughts?

This is where I'm at. I sure hope she loves it. :love:
 
I would go with 2 mm on the setting...2 mm is still very thin.

did you pick a diamond from JA? it is much easier to get both from the same vendor. I'm sure WF has a similar setting if you wanted to get one of their diamonds...but I'm also sure that JA has some good candidates. they will review three and provide idealscope images.
 
slg47|1323914122|3081834 said:
I would go with 2 mm on the setting...2 mm is still very thin.

did you pick a diamond from JA? it is much easier to get both from the same vendor. I'm sure WF has a similar setting if you wanted to get one of their diamonds...but I'm also sure that JA has some good candidates. they will review three and provide idealscope images.
Click to expand...

Ditto!!! Definitely 2mm. And absolutely get the setting where you get the diamond. Diamond first, and then choose setting! She said she definitely wants yellow gold?
 
You can ask WF if they can get their simple 4 prong tiffany solitaire with a knife edge band, but these are their prettiest solitaires, in my opinion. I am showing you the yellow gold with the assumption that is what she has stated she prefers.

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/legato-sleek-line-solitaire-engagement-ring-1022.htm

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/classic-tiffany-style-knife-edge-solitaire-engagement-ring-1094.htm

These settings above are nicer quality than the least expensive ones, plus WF is currently offering 12% off the price of settings if you buy an ACA or Expert Selection diamond. So really, that is a good deal for nice quality settings!
 
diamondseeker2006|1323921226|3081941 said:
You can ask WF if they can get their simple 4 prong tiffany solitaire with a knife edge band, but these are their prettiest solitaires, in my opinion. I am showing you the yellow gold with the assumption that is what she has stated she prefers.

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/legato-sleek-line-solitaire-engagement-ring-1022.htm

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/classic-tiffany-style-knife-edge-solitaire-engagement-ring-1094.htm

These settings above are nicer quality than the least expensive ones, plus WF is currently offering 12% off the price of settings if you buy an ACA or Expert Selection diamond. So really, that is a good deal for nice quality settings!
Click to expand...


Yes, she would like yellow gold.

I know for sure she won't like the sleek line legato with it's cathedralesque appearance. She's commented on cathedral settings before and mentioned she didn't like them. This is my conclusion after viewing this page over the past few days.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-wonderful-e-ring-upgrade-thankyou.89827/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-wonderful-e-ring-upgrade-thankyou.89827/[/URL]

And the classic tiffany from WF is wider than I think she wants. I don't like the taper and would just rather have it be a uniform 2 mm. When we tried on different style rings in the past, she has always been drawn to the very simple thin bands such as that knife edge from JA.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/2mm-18K-Knife-Edge-Yellow-Gold-Ring.html

or the comfort fit minus the little pinch at the top:

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/gold-solitaire-engagement-rings.html

If I recall correctly, she said something along the lines of, "I like it when the diamond is it's own entity above the band." With the tiffany band knife edged band from WF, the head and diamond are sort of "in" the ring. And their 4 pronger has that taper.

I could ask if they could do something similar to the JA setting, although once the price exceeds $530, then it's better to just get the one from JA.

I prefer the 2 mm knife edge because it give it the appearance that it's thinner than it actually is.

What do you do when you love a diamond from one place and a setting from the other? I there some sort of warranty benefit or something for getting the setting the same place I get the diamond?
 
If you requested a 4 prong head, that might make that ring custom and cost more. That is basically the same setting as the knife edge one except the shank doesn't have a knife edge. I think you should just call and ask if their basic 4 prong solitaire can be ordered with a kinfe edge band and that would solve your problem.

The downside to ordering a setting elsewhere is that it will have to be sent to WF and they will charge you to set the stone, more than likely. Then you'd be paying a setting fee and losing the 12% discount on WF settings.

A well cut diamond is not going to look darker with more prongs, no.

It almost sounds like she just wants the traditional tiffany solitaire.

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/4-prong-tiffany-style-solitaire-engagement-ring-1023.htm
 
I went back to the store this morning and saw a 0.72 Lazare diamond in this setting:

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/contemporary-tiffany-style-solitaire-engagement-ring-1417.htm

Well, very similar - the only difference being the head had a little design on it.


I love the 6 prong setting. It makes the diamond look rounder and like you said, it's very brilliant with and ideal cut. I couldn't tell the difference in brilliance or darkness between the 4 and 6. I also like how it give the appearance that the diamond is bigger from a distance.

This is what I'm getting. Just need to move money around and purchase this ring!

I finally feel settled. :)
 
SinkingFun|1323974087|3082285 said:
I went back to the store this morning and saw a 0.72 Lazare diamond in this setting:

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/contemporary-tiffany-style-solitaire-engagement-ring-1417.htm

Well, very similar - the only difference being the head had a little design on it.


I love the 6 prong setting. It makes the diamond look rounder and like you said, it's very brilliant with and ideal cut. I couldn't tell the difference in brilliance or darkness between the 4 and 6. I also like how it give the appearance that the diamond is bigger from a distance.

This is what I'm getting. Just need to move money around and purchase this ring!

I finally feel settled. :)
Click to expand...

Yay! 6 prongs is the way to go for sure. It does give the diamond a bigger appearance.
 
Which ideal-scope / ASET image looks better?

1
ideal%201.jpg

ASET%201.jpg

2
ideal%202.jpg

ASET%202.jpg
 
Both are outstanding. Can't choose one over the other based on these alone.
 
SinkingFun|1324016839|3082721 said:
Is it just me or are the sides completely flat on this setting?

http://pics.whiteflash.com/jewelry/thumbnail.ashx?itemcode=gi_1465_b.jpg&type=jewelry (looks flat)

http://pics.whiteflash.com/jewelry/thumbnail.ashx?itemcode=gi_1465_f.jpg&type=jewelry (looks rounded)

http://pics.whiteflash.com/jewelry/thumbnail.ashx?itemcode=gi_1465_th.jpg&type=jewelry (looks rounded)
Click to expand...

Site is down at the moment so I can't see these. What are the names of the settings?
 
diamondseeker2006|1324051918|3082842 said:
SinkingFun|1324016839|3082721 said:
Is it just me or are the sides completely flat on this setting?

http://pics.whiteflash.com/jewelry/thumbnail.ashx?itemcode=gi_1465_b.jpg&type=jewelry (looks flat)

http://pics.whiteflash.com/jewelry/thumbnail.ashx?itemcode=gi_1465_f.jpg&type=jewelry (looks rounded)

http://pics.whiteflash.com/jewelry/thumbnail.ashx?itemcode=gi_1465_th.jpg&type=jewelry (looks rounded)
Click to expand...

Site is down at the moment so I can't see these. What are the names of the settings?
Click to expand...

All of those are images of the contemporary Tiffany setting. I just don't want the sides (the sides that would lay flat if completely on its side) to look like this:

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/solitaire-rings/ring/item_57-8919.asp
 
I am pretty sure the edges are more rounded on that. Not completely rounded like their basic 4 and 6 prong settings, but the edges are not sharp like that JA picture at all. If you choose that setting, just tell them that you want the stone set medium height so that it is not set too low down to the shank.
 
diamondseeker2006|1324051820|3082840 said:
Both are outstanding. Can't choose one over the other based on these alone.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

One is the I color while the other H. I'm leaning towards the H.

Since both are within the ACA bounds, I'm certain they'll both perform equally as well. Especially if you can't choose from the images. I just don't want any light leakage, etc. :)
 
I don't even need to look at the IS or ASET for ACA's because they are all excellent. So it really does boil down to color. I would recommend the H, personally. I think it will be worth it in the long run not to have possible regrets. I color is that borderline color where some people can start to see the tint especially from the side, and in the ones I have seen, they are just a tiiiiny bit less bright looking than a higher color stone. The light performance will be great in both, but in certain lighting, you may prefer the H. But if it causes you to go higher than you budget, then the I color ACA would be a lot better than 90+% of the rest of the stones out there, that's for sure!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top