Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternatives

[Medphysdave]

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.538-h-si1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104083536013

I've been using the info I've collected at this site to try and find a real bargain, but without idealscopes and all of the diamond parameters listed, it can be a challenge. I like the flouro., but it doesn't have to be a criteria.

I think the above stone is really nice, and the cut is in the direction I am looking for. If anyone has something that seems equivalent for less money, or larger for around the same, then I'd appreciate the help.

I decided to go a little bigger than the stone I previously posted about.

Regards,

David

 

[psywzrd]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Well I'm not an expert at all, but I bought a stone with very similar specs so I figured I might be able to help a bit. The stone I bought was a brilliant round 1.51ct, I, SI1 (totally eye-clean) and GIA XXX with no fl and it was at least $5000 less than this stone. The stone you're looking at is a tad bigger and slightly better color but has strong blue fluoro. Both stones get a 1.4 using the HCA tool so very similar there. I can tell you that the stone I bought is absolutely gorgeous and my fiancee has gotten tons of compliments in the short time she has been wearing her ring. The stone sparkles like crazy and looks WAAAAYYY bigger than it is. I'm sure this stone is beautiful too, but I feel like you may be paying more than you should just based on what I paid for mine.

I'm sure someone else will chime in, but I thought my experience would be helpful. Good luck!

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Thank you! I certainly appreciate the feedback. That gives me something to think about.

David

 

[solgen]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I don't think it's quite fair to compare signature cuts that are ideal or super ideals to GIA 3ex or AGS Ideal 0 near ideals. There's a level of precision that you can see in the symmetry. Light performance can be somewhat difficult to distinguish though. Perhaps it comes down to whether you are a stickler for precision and specs or whether you are after the the best bang for the buck. I fall in the latter category so I can settle for a near ideal and will compromise on some specs.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I really like bang for the buck, but I'm having trouble distinguishing from the paperwork where I should compromise. Every time I search for a stone, they all seem to fall in the same price range. I assume I'm not loosening the criteria enough.

With that being said, I am willing to pay a premium for top quality, but there is a limit.

Like the previous poster mentioned. He paid for a stone that was about the same size, looks fantastic, but was about 5k less.

I'm not sure how to quantify the performance without seeing a couple of stones. Maybe I just need to get a couple in hand and decide. I'm not sure there would be 5k worth of difference to me between ideal and super ideal. I think top light performance is where I would be happy, and maybe give on the hearts and arrows type symmetry.

I noticed only the whiteflash a cut above have all of the idealscopes etc, how do you choose when that info isn't available? Call vendor?

 

[solgen]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

You'd have to ask the vendor for ASET or IS images. You could buy your own ASET or IS tool and assess them once you receive the stones but that can be a hassle. If you stick with signature line cuts then you have that peace of mind that they'll typically perform well and thus you don't really need IS or ASET images though most lines provide them anyways. You can also look at various images of diamonds and see what might be signs of leakage. But these magnified images are a blessing and a curse. They allow you to see things you might not see in person such as clarity or even symmetry flaws. They can also skew judgement since your are seeing only a very limited view of them.

If your budget permits I would try getting a both a ideal and near ideal(at the same time) and seeing whether you notice the difference in various lighting conditions. I tried ordering them separately and trying to assess but I would always question my memory. Once I had them side by side it made my decision much easier as there was direct comparison.

 

[psywzrd]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I really like bang for the buck, but I'm having trouble distinguishing from the paperwork where I should compromise. Every time I search for a stone, they all seem to fall in the same price range. I assume I'm not loosening the criteria enough.

With that being said, I am willing to pay a premium for top quality, but there is a limit.

Like the previous poster mentioned. He paid for a stone that was about the same size, looks fantastic, but was about 5k less.

I'm not sure how to quantify the performance without seeing a couple of stones. Maybe I just need to get a couple in hand and decide. I'm not sure there would be 5k worth of difference to me between ideal and super ideal. I think top light performance is where I would be happy, and maybe give on the hearts and arrows type symmetry.

I noticed only the whiteflash a cut above have all of the idealscopes etc, how do you choose when that info isn't available? Call vendor?

I'm with you on the bang for your buck thing. I know that for me personally I felt like I truly got the biggest stone I could possibly afford while compromising only in the areas where I was willing to compromise (color and clarity). I was not willing to compromise on cut because I know it's the most important "C", and I'm happy that I didn't. My fiancee and her sister actually asked me if it's a flawless stone, which made me chuckle a little bit since it's far from that. It just looks that good because the cut is great. Unless your girl is a diamond expert, she's not likely to see anything but size and sparkle (and possibly color if you sacrifice too much there). However, if you get the best cut you can afford in the size you want, I think you'll be happy. I did a ton of research before I purchased and the consensus seemed to be that if you can find an eye-clean SI1 (or even SI2 if you're really lucky), that's where you can really get the most bang for your buck. Just make sure that it is indeed eye-clean. And you don't seem opposed to fluorescence either, which should allow you to get more for your money as well.

I didn't see a budget posted but I'm sure if you post what it is, the experts here will help you find something great. To me there's a fine line between good enough and overkill, and I was careful not to cross that line. Like I said, my fiancee is absolutely in love with her ring and it's SO far from a perfect stone - that says something to me. It makes me feel good that I didn't pay more than I could afford just so that I could get a D, E or F, VVS1-VV2, etc. My fiancee likely wouldn't know the difference anyway and she's happy as can be. Now if I bought her something tiny that didn't sparkle, that would be a different story.

Bottom line, buy only what you can afford and be smart about what you really need to make your soon-to-be fiancee happy. It sounds like you're on the right track anyway and you're in good hands here.

 

[ame]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.538-h-si1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104083536013

I've been using the info I've collected at this site to try and find a real bargain, but without idealscopes and all of the diamond parameters listed, it can be a challenge. I like the flouro., but it doesn't have to be a criteria.

I think the above stone is really nice, and the cut is in the direction I am looking for. If anyone has something that seems equivalent for less money, or larger for around the same, then I'd appreciate the help.

I decided to go a little bigger than the stone I previously posted about.

Regards,

David

This is beautiful--is it eyeclean--confirm with them.

RE the posts saying that someone got a "similar stone for way less:"
You can't "priceshop" something that is not "the same". An I vs an H is not "the same," nor is it "similar." An H vs an I is actually very different when it comes down to it (visually similar, yes) and commands a different price per carat. So someone else might have bought a stone that was 5K different, but spec for spec, were those stones the same? NO. They were not. One was an I and one is an H. One is also branded. Saying they were "similar" is not saying they were "the same." This stone is branded, and cut to the brand's specifications. Where did this person buy their stone? Was it branded? What were the specs? When did the vendor come into the stone? Was it when diamonds were at a higher price per carat or a lower price per carat and therefore the stone costs more or less than this one? Not at all a fair comparison. Too many variables.

Something I'd consider, if this stone is NOT eye clean is perhaps allowing for an I or J (esp if you stay in the BGB range), and going up on clarity--if that's a concern for you. I am a clarity nerd. But I like an HIJ stone, and I LOVE Fluorescence.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Good points ame, thank you for that.

I just got off the phone with Becca from WF. I'm glad I took the time to talk. I almost blew off the opportunity because I was busy. She looked up four stones, her recommendation of the four based upon my criteria is this.

http://m.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3565116.htm

The downside is no flouro. I know it's a negative to most.

How would you say this would compare to the BGB? Do u think there would be a noticeable difference to the eye?

 

[ame]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

To the average eye probably not. The cutting on the BGD is going to be tighter--bec it is a signature stone. An ES from WF missed the mark for a particular reason, and the ASET and IS look a little sloppy to me. The arrows in the center are wonky. It could be the photo, or it could be the cutting.

The spread is also interesting by comparison. The WF is a few tenths spreadier. Visually you won't see that, but it's worth noting.

The VS2 is a nice one--they say eye clean--and the location is much nicer than that of the BGD being centered.

I personally LIKE fluorescence, as do very many on here. I look at that as a pro. Ultimately, is it worth it to you to have the slightly better cutting, albeit it a lower clarity grade, to have that fluorescent stone. Or would you be interested in seeing if they have more stones in that range that might be higher clarity/lower color in your budget so you don't feel like you're sacrificing either?

 

[telephone89]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

what kind of setting are you looking at? Maybe you can request fluor melee? There is another poster here doing a fluor halo which sounds like it'll be beautiful. Not sure if you'd have that option though.

I think they are both lovely though. If you really want the fluor and have the extra $1k, I think the BGB is a great stone. If you want to save a bit and don't mind the lower colour, go for the WF. Make sure to compare settings if you're doing a 1 stop shop.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I'm thinking about a custom setting. There's a designer near by that speaks to me. My girlfriend has a ring that belonged to her great grandmother. She's very fond of it, and I want to take some of the design elements. Primarily the opal. Since opal tends to show florescence and phosphorescence, I thought it would pair well with a BGB. Part of the design element will be to ensure it looks nice under UV. Mokume Gane for the metal since it can look like wood. Hopefully it doesn't turn into a complete failure, but I think it will turn out nicely.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Opal is way too soft for an engagement ring.


I agree with Ame.

It comes down to what is important to you. I've worked with BGD a number of times, and been thrilled each time. They are a great vendor.

 

[ame]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Be really careful going this custom on a surprise. Gypsy is right on about the opals--those are too soft for an engagement ring setting. It's asking for trouble.

I might suggest you get a very simple setting--cheapest you can get, if possible--from whichever vendor that you get the stone from. Use that to propose. When you propose, tell her you want to work with her on the setting, mentioning that you thought that her great-grandmothers ring was the model you wanted to base it on, but since that it is a very personal and important design, doing so as a surprise felt like it was stealing something magical from her. As much as she loves that ring, she might not want that as her engagement ring, believe it or not. She MIGHT, but it's not something I would risk as a surprise.

You really won't lose with either stone but pick one before someone sneaks in and nabs one from you.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

That's solid advice. I may do the simple setting first. That's good to know that an opal inlay is not a good idea. It sure would simplify things.

One you get beyond eye clean..... My eye clean is up close and really looking. That's how I've been presenting it to three diamond shops.

Is beyond eye clean a personal preference, or do you gain something from it? I thought as long as it's eye clean, and doesn't impact light gathering that is more of a personal preference. Kind of like color. The only BGD blue in J color had blobs in the idealscopes. I'm told it wouldn't impact brilliance, but I'm not convinced that you couldn't see it. Then again I think it's only barely visible at 40x.

I actually like the cape diamonds, but m afraid society has headed then to much. I don't want my girlfriend to feel like es bring judged be people. Unfortunate, but m sure it happens.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Be really careful going this custom on a surprise. Gypsy is right on about the opals--those are too soft for an engagement ring setting. It's asking for trouble.

I might suggest you get a very simple setting--cheapest you can get, if possible--from whichever vendor that you get the stone from. Use that to propose. When you propose, tell her you want to work with her on the setting, mentioning that you thought that her great-grandmothers ring was the model you wanted to base it on, but since that it is a very personal and important design, doing so as a surprise felt like it was stealing something magical from her. As much as she loves that ring, she might not want that as her engagement ring, believe it or not. She MIGHT, but it's not something I would risk as a surprise.

Very WISE advice. I would go this route.

BGD can get this setting in for you: http://www.stuller.com/products/122415/?groupId=122309 It's a nice elegant and classic choice. And will let her try on bands next to it that fit flush. It will be cheaper and nicer than than any of their similar settings.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Thank you everyone. I just read a couple of posts that I had missed. I asked my girlfriend, and size is certainly higher on the priority than color and clarity. Cut is my top priority. The top of my budget is 13k for the stone.

My expertise has me capped at around 1.5ct. I measured her figure at 15mm across. She has small fingers. 7.5mm looks good, and above 8mm started looking a bit too big if there is such a thing.

If anyone has any last minute stone suggestions, I'd love to see them. My shopping cart has a stone in it.

I apologize to those that I didn't thank directly for their comments.


David

 

[ariel144]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Did you see this stone on GOG? There is a video comparing it's performance to a H &A hand picked by GOG. And it is $1,000 cheaper.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/ecommerce/1-5ct-i-vs2-hand-selected-premium-round-ideal-cut-diamond.html

And 2c AGS triple Ideal for the same price would be tempting $11,841:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/ecommerce/2ct-i-si2-platinum-select-round-ideal-cut-diamond.html

There is no such thing as too big. Especially here on PS.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Wow, the first link. I can't tell the difference between the two. The 2ct looks different on paper, but I wonder if it could be seen in viewing.

Any other opinions between these stones and the BGD blue?

 

[ariel144]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Wow, the first link. I can't tell the difference between the two. The 2ct looks different on paper, but I wonder if it could be seen in viewing.

Any other opinions between these stones and the BGD blue?

You would need to get their opinion on the clarity of the 2c SI2. MRB's hide inclusions well. Would be nice to see a video comparing the 1.5 to the 2c

If the inclusions are not affecting the performance of the diamond I could care less as long as there are no black carbon spots which are easily seen. If the diamond performs well which the 2c does it would be my choice. Some ppl are very picky about clarity, but I am not. Give me CUT/performance, size, color, and clarity in that order.

GOG will do a video comparison for you of those 2 stones.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I sent a video request between the two GOG diamonds. Hopefully I get something back today.

 

[ame]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

That's solid advice. I may do the simple setting first. That's good to know that an opal inlay is not a good idea. It sure would simplify things.

One you get beyond eye clean..... My eye clean is up close and really looking. That's how I've been presenting it to three diamond shops.

Is beyond eye clean a personal preference, or do you gain something from it? I thought as long as it's eye clean, and doesn't impact light gathering that is more of a personal preference. Kind of like color. The only BGD blue in J color had blobs in the idealscopes. I'm told it wouldn't impact brilliance, but I'm not convinced that you couldn't see it. Then again I think it's only barely visible at 40x.

I actually like the cape diamonds, but m afraid society has headed then to much. I don't want my girlfriend to feel like es bring judged be people. Unfortunate, but m sure it happens.

Ahhh eye clean and it's definitions... For *ME* eye clean means if I can see it without a loupe, it's not eye clean. ANY distance, ANY angle, ANY direction, ANY lighting. It's not eyeclean if I don't need a loupe to see the inclusions. But that's not really the "Standard Vendor Definition." I am a freak with the vision thing. I will find it and I will lose my mind over it. That's really my thing with eye clean, it's more than seeing it, it's knowing it's there and will it drive you nuts seeing it. My current stone is from GOG and is a VS1 that was a B!TCH to find the grademaking inclusion in. But I finally found it. Weeks later. And I have to have the light coming in at the right angle and use a 30x to see it. And that for me is the comfort level. THAT is my mind clean.

I think the Cape line is beautiful--and for the antique style setting would actually be amazing. But that's one of those things that you need the wearer's input on before you surprise them with.

RE the GOG stones--that SI2 might be a needle in a haystack, so see what they think, but the VS2 would be my pick of those two. Really, any of these you can't lose on. But I would be between that GOG VS2 and the BGD Blue...Assuming both met my standards of eye clean. And since I have extensive history with both vendors, they'd both probably know the answer FOR ME because I am a special snowflake of a customer.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

2ct was no longer available, but Charles is going to do some digging. It has really been a pleasurable experience speaking with the dealers.

 

[ariel144]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

2ct was no longer available, but Charles is going to do some digging. It has really been a pleasurable experience speaking with the dealers.

I knew it wouldn't take long to sell. AGS Ideal light performance is rare. Too bad. Not even all custom cut AVR's get AGS Ideal light performance. Have you seen the AVR's? ...they are little disco balls....face up smaller because they are cut deep compared to MRB's.

there is a J 1.85 AVR that looks really nice and in your budget you might want to consider.

 

[ariel144]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I'm digging this 2.01 I VS1 H&A $13,500 with SBF!
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R201-ATVU8Y

Better buy for the money to go with a 2c diamond. I would get this one.

Love the high crown! 16% and the SBF!!! It does have a small amount of leakage under the table.
See the pink instead of red on the ASET

Clarity is high too. You might want to secure this stone.


Another one with MBF under budget and high color:

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R170-PJHXA3

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R179-TUSKZZ

I only searched for stones with med - strong BF.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R173-6YFM1T

Nice ASET...clarity questionable:
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R215-QKBHP8

GOG can call in any of these stones.

 

[ariel144]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Great ASET and under budget:

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R151-A961DX

 

[ame]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I'm digging this 2.01 I VS1 H&A $13,500 with SBF!
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R201-ATVU8Y

Better buy for the money to go with a 2c diamond. I would get this one.

Love the high crown! 16% and the SBF!!! It does have a small amount of leakage under the table.
See the pink instead of red on the ASET

Clarity is high too. You might want to secure this stone.


Another one with MBF under budget and high color:

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R170-PJHXA3

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R179-TUSKZZ

I only searched for stones with med - strong BF.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R173-6YFM1T

Nice ASET...clarity questionable:
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R215-QKBHP8

GOG can call in any of these stones.

First one is really deep, so pass
Second one has a HUGE table, so pass
Third one is deep, so pass

This one, the fourth, is nice. But clarity I'd want to know more about
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R173-6YFM1T

Fifth one with the SI2 questionable clarity has a huge table, so pass
Sixth one is a little big on the table too, the 1.5 "underbudget", outside of what I'd consider at a 58 anyway

 

[solgen]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Great ASET and under budget:

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R151-A961DX

It's not eye clean though. Or at least not when viewing the pavilion. Or course my standard of eye clean is in align with ame's. By conventional standards they probably would deem it eye clean though.

 

[Medphysdave]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

I got an email about a 2ct stone and thought it was the one from earlier for such a good price. I found at as I was paying, that it was over my budget. I think it was one of these.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/ecommerce/2ct-i-si2-gold-select-gia-excellent-round-diamond.html

http://www.goodoldgold.com/ecommerce/2.0ct-i-si2-platinum-select-round-ideal-cut-diamond.html

Would either of these be worth the extra $2500 over the previous mentioned stone?

 

[ame]

Re: Really considering this stone. Anyone have any alternat

Neither of those seem like they'd be eyeclean. If a clean 2ct is not in budget (and it's not, evidently) stick with the size range you were working in. The first one has a huge table as well.