What makes CBIs "more contrasty" than other superideals?

[skypie]

I have seen many CBI owners say CBIs have more contrast than other superideal diamonds. What is the reason for this?

 

[gm89uk]

Hey Skypie,

This is quite a controversial topic, and honestly I'm not sure how much more this thread will add to previous discussions.

To summarise, some people believe the excellence in CBI stones lies in the cutting accuracy that is beyond other cutting houses, giving tighter 'averages' and aligning facet to work in conjunction.
Others believe the difference seen in the threads that compared them, is primarily due to the different proportions of the stones compared, which give them different personality.

For me, I haven't seen enough real comparisons (on here or otherwise) to make any conclusions either way, but generally believe if a diamond is cut well, and the proportions are right, you will get a 'contrasty looking stone' regardless of the cutting house.

Nevertheless, the difference in commented on, was very subtle as per the thread creators and for me, the best superideal, at the best price that's available in that inventory at the time (with policies that align well with your requirements) are still the most important things.

 

[skypie]

Thanks GM89uk. Curious - why do you think it controversial?

I guess what I'm getting at is...if there is something different about CBIs, I would think HPD would make it very clear that their product is different and better than other superideals and describe why it's better (without necessarily disclosing their "secret formula").

I.e. if CBIs are cut to tighter standards, then why not just come out and say that?

 

[flyingpig]

Thanks GM89uk. Curious - why do you think it controversial?

I guess what I'm getting at is...if there is something different about CBIs, I would think HPD would make it very clear that their product is different and better than other superideals and describe why it's better (without necessarily disclosing their "secret formula").

I.e. if CBIs are cut to tighter standards, then why not just come out and say that?

You are not the first one who asked this question. I, too, wish CBI provides more information in regards to their cut standards in more detail. Having that said, no vendor really does other than AGS0, leakage, symmetry, proportions, ASET/IS, "precision cut" (whatever that means), and maybe ancillary angles.

The real question is "what's beyond ASET/IS, AGS0, and proportions?"
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...ce-nuances-beyond-aset-h-a-photos-etc.212008/
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...g-h-a-1-29-or-larger-pre-loved-ok-too.211774/
These threads will answer some of the questions you have.

 

[yssie]

I have no insider information on this whatsoever, but I believe BGD's Black documentation - poorly written, condescending, and bombastic though it is - provides some insight:
https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/news/black-brian-gavin-vs-brian-gavin-signature/

By tweaking the minor facets to eliminate as much low-energy refraction as possible, one is left with areas of extremely high-energy output (brighter, 'whiter') and areas of zero-energy output (obstruction) juxtaposed. Add to this unforgiving precision of faceting and you have the (admittedly exaggerated) comparison in 'contrasty-ness' between a white/black chessboard with crisp lines and a cream/brown chessboard with paint bleed at the edges of the squares...


... Now for some clarification: I used the same explanation to lump BGD Black and CBI into the same drawer - I should say that whilst I certainly believe there are similarities in goals and execution, I will always recommend CBI to someone looking for the cream of the crop for the following reasons:

1. CBI doesn't outsource cutting. I believe the only way to guarantee production quality over time is to keep the entire stream of manufacture in-house, from choosing rough to marketing the finished stone, as they do.
2. CBI makes a point to plan inclusions such that they have minimal visibility and impact on light return.
3. CBI sells one line of stones and it is their "best". I find the BGD Black concept to be in exceptionally poor taste - "Here's our Best line! They're the World's Best. Except maybe these are a bit Better. You may or may not notice, and of course making the Better-Best means our Best has improved - so we're not devaluing them - but if you want the Best-Best you should really buy our Better-Best and not settle for Best - which are still the World's Best, of course..."

 

[the_mother_thing]

3. CBI sells one line of stones and it is their "best". None of this nonsense with "Here's our Best line! They're the World's Best. Except maybe these are a bit Better. You may or may not notice, and of course making the Better-Best means our Best has improved - so we're not devaluing them - but if you want the Best-Best you should really buy our Better-Best and not settle for Best - which are still the World's Best, of course..."

I appreciate the comparison that you’re making, and agree that is annoying when some vendors do that, but I can also appreciate having options from a reputable seller with regard to what level of quality I may want/need (which may differ from others) coupled with the other benefits that vendor offers by purchasing from them. Not everyone needs ‘the bestest best’ right now, but appreciates the option to get what they can afford now, and upgrade to the very bestest best down the road, something many other vendors do not offer (not including CBI in that though).

The best example of that though that REALLY irks me is how GIA grades diamond characteristics with “good”, “very good” and “excellent”. For someone not well versed with what those terms really mean, I can see someone thinking a “very good” is - in fact - very good when in reality, we know it’s really not. Even some ‘excellent’ cut GIA diamonds aren’t really all that ‘excellent’.

Sorry, didn’t mean to get off topic.

 

[TreeScientist]

I appreciate the comparison that you’re making, and agree that is annoying when some vendors do that, but I can also appreciate having options from a reputable seller with regard to what level of quality I may want/need (which may differ from others) coupled with the other benefits that vendor offers by purchasing from them. Not everyone needs ‘the bestest best’ right now, but appreciates the option to get what they can afford now, and upgrade to the very bestest best down the road, something many other vendors do not offer (not including CBI in that though).

The best example of that though that REALLY irks me is how GIA grades diamond characteristics with “good”, “very good” and “excellent”. For someone not well versed with what those terms really mean, I can see someone thinking a “very good” is - in fact - very good when in reality, we know it’s really not. Even some ‘excellent’ cut GIA diamonds aren’t really all that ‘excellent’.

Sorry, didn’t mean to get off topic.

Totally agree. I get more upset with the GIA grading lingo than any marketing or psudo-marketing campaigns out their by the SuperIdeal vendors. At least when the SuperIdeal vendors claim that a diamond has excellent performance, it is the truth, while most people on PS known that the accepted parameters to make the GIA excellent grade are much too broad to guarantee excellent performance. And like you said, it's very easy for the uninformed buyer to think the "very good" grade is good enough.

 

[gm89uk]

Thanks GM89uk. Curious - why do you think it controversial?
Because there are happy customers of both that swear by their choice of superideal vendor, but there are no metrics I know of to distinguish in quality over one and the other.b additionally there are not enough controlled comparisons to make informed conclusions. Thirdly, what is best is subjective and people will not agree on which look is best.

I guess what I'm getting at is...if there is something different about CBIs, I would think HPD would make it very clear that their product is different and better than other superideals and describe why it's better (without necessarily disclosing their "secret formula").

I.e. if CBIs are cut to tighter standards, then why not just come out and say that?

 

[yssie]

Completely agree re. GIA's scale being shamefully misleading

I.e. if CBIs are cut to tighter standards, then why not just come out and say that?

Re. the other topic... it is not, to me, altogether off-topic, as the title implies some amount of comparison. WF has three lines - Premium Select, Expert Selection, A Cut Above, and the ordering of good/better/best is a function that transparently takes one parameter - cut quality (as WF defines cut quality); characteristics and proportions (AGS0, no fluorescence, etc.) requirements are publicly available on the site. In Black BGD explores quantitative improvements to cut quality, and simultaneously urges customers to embrace those improvements but reject the notion that an older line not subjected to these tweaks is and will remain inferior. CBI has never said "you may see the difference" - they assert that you will, and encourage you to take advantage of their See It To Believe It programme to do so. Is this an option for you @skypie?

 

[the_mother_thing]

Totally agree. I get more upset with the GIA grading lingo than any marketing or psudo-marketing campaigns out their by the SuperIdeal vendors. At least when the SuperIdeal vendors claim that a diamond has excellent performance, it is the truth, while most people on PS known that the accepted parameters to make the GIA excellent grade are much too broad to guarantee excellent performance. And like you said, it's very easy for the uninformed buyer to think the "very good" grade is good enough.

This is why I like AGS’s grading methodology using numbers. GIA’s terms are literally descriptive in nature and thus misleading to the average Joe/Jane buying a diamond. But even a caveman can decipher (when the AGS number scale is explained) that 0=best and that the further from ‘0’ you go, the ‘less best’ it is - it doesn’t use vague, flowery terms to make you falsely feel like you’ve got a great performer when buying “very good” anything.

But back to the suggestion that @yssie made, the only true comparison one can make between CBI/ACA/et al is to see them beside each other (assuming they are able to do so; not everyone can afford to buy two diamonds at the same time), and decide IF they can see/appreciate the difference and what their eyes prefer because everyone’s preferences and observations are going to be different. I was aware of CBI’s “see it before you buy it” option, so I looked at CBI inventory when I chose my WF/ES to see if there was anything close to my specs in my budget for more options and to compare the two, but there was nothing in stock without going down in size considerably (which I didn’t want to do) or increasing my budget several thousand dollars (which I was not willing nor felt like I needed to do, especially since the ES really did tick all of my boxes). But if someone is a die-hard CBI fan who can see and prefers the difference in CBI, they’d probably give my ES some side-eye, and I’m fine with that because the only opinion that matters belongs is that who’s name is on the checkbook.

There will always be something bigger, better, more sparkly, more contrasty, more fiery, etc. out there if you look hard enough for it. I bet - in 3-5 years - we’ll have even a new level of “super-duper ideals” and some will be scrambling to upgrade.

 

[TreeScientist]

This is why I like AGS’s grading methodology using numbers. GIA’s terms are literally descriptive in nature and thus misleading to the average Joe/Jane buying a diamond. But even a caveman can decipher (when the AGS number scale is explained) that 0=best and that the further from ‘0’ you go, the ‘less best’ it is - it doesn’t use vague, flowery terms to make you falsely feel like you’ve got a great performer when buying “very good” anything.

But back to the suggestion that @yssie made, the only true comparison one can make between CBI/ACA/et al is to see them beside each other (assuming they are able to do so; not everyone can afford to buy two diamonds at the same time), and decide IF they can see/appreciate the difference and what their eyes prefer because everyone’s preferences and observations are going to be different. I was aware of CBI’s “see it before you buy it” option, so I looked at CBI inventory when I chose my WF/ES to see if there was anything close to my specs in my budget for more options and to compare the two, but there was nothing in stock without going down in size considerably (which I didn’t want to do) or increasing my budget several thousand dollars (which I was not willing nor felt like I needed to do, especially since the ES really did tick all of my boxes). But if someone is a die-hard CBI fan who can see and prefers the difference in CBI, they’d probably give my ES some side-eye, and I’m fine with that because the only opinion that matters belongs is that who’s name is on the checkbook.

There will always be something bigger, better, more sparkly, more contrasty, more fiery, etc. out there if you look hard enough for it. I bet - in 3-5 years - we’ll have even a new level of “super-duper ideals” and some will be scrambling to upgrade.

I also really appreciate the numeric, quantitative nature of the AGS grading scale. This, and the fact that AGS grading is ACTUALLY quantitative, as it is based on actual light performance rather than ranges of external dimensions (as with GIA), is the reason why I think AGS grading is vastly superior to GIA. Not that there aren't excellent stones out there that are graded by GIA, but it's much more difficult for the average consumer to select them (unless they find PriceScope ). I appreciate AGS's efforts to make selecting a diamond based on performance as transparent as possible, as the new diamond buyer who goes out and buys an AGS000 with the platinum light report will get a well-performing diamond regardless of whether or not they understand the effects of diamond geometry on performance, knowledge that is required for selecting a well-performing stone from the GIA XXX line.

Also agree regarding the "need to see for yourself" to determine whether you can tell the difference between the SuperIdeals. The best option would be to do a blinded viewing, where you don't know which one is which, and the see if you can tell the difference and, if so, which one you actually prefer. Outside of seeing and deciding for yourself, everything that can be said about the differences is purely speculation with the current imaging technologies (ASET/IS/etc) showing nearly identical performance among the different SuperIdeals.

 

[MissGotRocks]

I also really appreciate the numeric, quantitative nature of the AGS grading scale. This, and the fact that AGS grading is ACTUALLY quantitative, as it is based on actual light performance rather than ranges of external dimensions (as with GIA), is the reason why I think AGS grading is vastly superior to GIA. Not that there aren't excellent stones out there that are graded by GIA, but it's much more difficult for the average consumer to select them (unless they find PriceScope ). I appreciate AGS's efforts to make selecting a diamond based on performance as transparent as possible, as the new diamond buyer who goes out and buys an AGS000 with the platinum light report will get a well-performing diamond regardless of whether or not they understand the effects of diamond geometry on performance, knowledge that is required for selecting a well-performing stone from the GIA XXX line.

Also agree regarding the "need to see for yourself" to determine whether you can tell the difference between the SuperIdeals. The best option would be to do a blinded viewing, where you don't know which one is which, and the see if you can tell the difference and, if so, which one you actually prefer. Outside of seeing and deciding for yourself, everything that can be said about the differences is purely speculation with the current imaging technologies (ASET/IS/etc) showing nearly identical performance among the different SuperIdeals.

I totally agree. There is not much more that can be said beyond this in terms of comparison. Blind viewing is the key here. Your eye would - given enough time - pick your favorite. Who produced it would be anyone's guess. I have a WF ACA stone. I could want for nothing more in terms of performance from a stone. Does that mean I wouldn't consider a CBI or BDG stone? No, absolutely not. I would expect a stone with the same size, clarity, color and specs to be on par with what I have.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I totally agree. There is not much more that can be said beyond this in terms of comparison. Blind viewing is the key here. Your eye would - given enough time - pick your favorite. Who produced it would be anyone's guess. I have a WF ACA stone. I could want for nothing more in terms of performance from a stone. Does that mean I wouldn't consider a CBI or BDG stone? No, absolutely not. I would expect a stone with the same size, clarity, color and specs to be on par with what I have.

..I want a 3 stone ring one stone from each of these 3 vendor...

 

[KristinTech]

..I want a 3 stone ring one stone from each of these 3 vendor...

This makes me laugh! Can you imagine how we would all be hunched over, inspecting the stones? Then we’d scurry from corner to corner in any room, analyzing performance in different light sources. People would think we’re crazy, but really we’re just scientists.

 

[skypie]

To answer my own question - here is the info copy/pasted from HPD's website. I guess my followup question to other superideal vendors is....DO YOU DO THESE THINGS TOO? Or is HPD the only one who focuses on all 57 facets' critical angles, fine tunes internal mirrors in 3 dimension, etc? If HPD is the only vendor who does these things then perhaps that is the "secret sauce"!

Focused crafting goals

1. By concentrating on all 57 facets' critical angles (not group-averages as the labs measure) every Crafted by Infinity displays robust edge to edge brightness, causing them to look bigger and face-up whiter than other diamonds of the same spread and color.
2. By fine-tuning all of the internal mirrors in three-dimensions (not measured by the labs) larger internal reflections are created, widening disperion, sharpening contrast and intensifying scintillation.
3. It takes proprietary planning, more time, more expense of material, and greater skill to achieve Infinity's focused crafting goals. The costs are higher. But the results are undeniable:

BETTER BRIGHTNESS
Edge to edge brightness makes Crafted by Infinity diamonds appear larger than others of the same weight, and face-up whiter than others of the same color.

MORE FIRE
By precisely aligning the diamond’s external facets, internal reflections remain unbroken, creating wider dispersive fans, seen by the eyes as Bigger, Bolder Bursts of Fire.


MORE SPARKLE
Crisp, precision-faceting promotes sharper contrast, more intense ‘on-off’ scintillation and vivid dynamic flashes seen as superior sparkle.


MORE LIFE!
Better brightness, bigger, bolder bursts of fire, and superior sparkle. When combined at maximum levels; the definition of life in a diamond!

 

[LLJsmom]

To answer my own question - here is the info copy/pasted from HPD's website. I guess my followup question to other superideal vendors is....DO YOU DO THESE THINGS TOO? Or is HPD the only one who focuses on all 57 facets' critical angles, fine tunes internal mirrors in 3 dimension, etc? If HPD is the only vendor who does these things then perhaps that is the "secret sauce"!

Focused crafting goals

1. By concentrating on all 57 facets' critical angles (not group-averages as the labs measure) every Crafted by Infinity displays robust edge to edge brightness, causing them to look bigger and face-up whiter than other diamonds of the same spread and color.
2. By fine-tuning all of the internal mirrors in three-dimensions (not measured by the labs) larger internal reflections are created, widening disperion, sharpening contrast and intensifying scintillation.
3. It takes proprietary planning, more time, more expense of material, and greater skill to achieve Infinity's focused crafting goals. The costs are higher. But the results are undeniable:

BETTER BRIGHTNESS
Edge to edge brightness makes Crafted by Infinity diamonds appear larger than others of the same weight, and face-up whiter than others of the same color.

MORE FIRE
By precisely aligning the diamond’s external facets, internal reflections remain unbroken, creating wider dispersive fans, seen by the eyes as Bigger, Bolder Bursts of Fire.


MORE SPARKLE
Crisp, precision-faceting promotes sharper contrast, more intense ‘on-off’ scintillation and vivid dynamic flashes seen as superior sparkle.


MORE LIFE!
Better brightness, bigger, bolder bursts of fire, and superior sparkle. When combined at maximum levels; the definition of life in a diamond!

I’m not expecting the other vendors to respond to this question. You’re asking them to sell you on their stone in this thread. I think it would be distasteful as a vendor to come here and reassuare you they do all these things and please buy their stone. I might be wrong.

I think there have been enough testimonials on PS from people who have bought from each of these super ideal sellers that you read about what they love about their stone. Do the eye test for yourself. Each person’s eye can have a different preference. Regardless of what others like, when you’re spending that much money, you want to be assured that YOU love it.

 

[skypie]

Oh, I don't expect any vendor to sell me on their stone. But perhaps someone can weigh in and say "yes, our cutters also focus on those things"? I don't see why that would be distasteful to confirm that. After all, many vendors happily share the requirements diamonds must meet to qualify as one of their branded lines.

I’m not expecting the other vendors to respond to this question. You’re asking them to sell you on their stone in this thread. I think it would be distasteful as a vendor to come here and reassuare you they do all these things and please buy their stone. I might be wrong.

I think there have been enough testimonials on PS from people who have bought from each of these super ideal sellers that you read about what they love about their stone. Do the eye test for yourself. Each person’s eye can have a different preference. Regardless of what others like, when you’re spending that much money, you want to be assured that YOU love it.

 

[LLJsmom]

Oh, I don't expect any vendor to sell me on their stone. But perhaps someone can weigh in and say "yes, our cutters also focus on those things"? I don't see why that would be distasteful to confirm that.

Even if they all say they do, when it comes down to super ideals, don’t you want to see it for yourself? Would a yes from one vendor and a no from another vendor change your decision, when there have been so many happy experienced diamond enthusiasts from both sides of the aisle? I would only trust my own eyes.

 

[skypie]

Oh yes, of course. I always advocate doing a in-person, blind test if possible.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your message but are you saying (1) the question shouldn't be asked or (2) isn't worth asking?

What's the harm in a vendor saying "Yes, we also focus on those aspects during the cutting process?" I am just having a hard time imagining a vendor being offended if a consumer asked a question about their cutting standards.

Now maybe if a vendor DOESN'T do those things they would prefer not to weigh in. But if your product undergoes rigorous scrutiny, I'm sure you would want your customers to know all the time and effort that went into it!

Even if they all say they do, when it comes down to super ideals, don’t you want to see it for yourself? Would a yes from one vendor and a no from another vendor change your decision, when there have been so many happy experienced diamond enthusiasts from both sides of the aisle? I would only trust my own eyes.

 

[missy]

Even if they all say they do, when it comes down to super ideals, don’t you want to see it for yourself? Would a yes from one vendor and a no from another vendor change your decision, when there have been so many happy experienced diamond enthusiasts from both sides of the aisle? I would only trust my own eyes.

This exactly. From an objective perspective I’d say some vendors advertising/publicity is heads above others and that’s all I can say. You really need to see all the diamonds in question in person for yourself.

 

[MissGotRocks]

These vendors operate with integrity. Many of them have extensive descriptions on their website or would be happy to field your questions in a phone call. They do not pit themselves against the other. I personally do not believe in this 'secret sauce' but if you do or choose to buy from a particular vendor because of it, that is your prerogative. It is a free market and the most important thing is that you buy from the one that best suits your needs or criteria.

 

[LLJsmom]

Oh yes, of course. I always advocate doing a in-person, blind test if possible.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your message but are you saying (1) the question shouldn't be asked or (2) isn't worth asking?

What's the harm in a vendor saying "Yes, we also focus on those aspects during the cutting process?" I am just having a hard time imagining a vendor being offended if a consumer asked a question about their cutting standards.

Now maybe if a vendor DOESN'T do those things they would prefer not to weigh in. But if your product undergoes rigorous scrutiny, I'm sure you would want your customers to know all the time and effort that went into it!

That’s my point. When you get down to comparing respected super ideal vendors on PS, it doesn’t matter what they say. It’s a matter of personal preference. Or seeing it to prove it to yourself. Words won’t get you there.

 

[LLJsmom]

These vendors operate with integrity. Many of them have extensive descriptions on their website or would be happy to field your questions in a phone call. They do not pit themselves against the other. I personally do not believe in this 'secret sauce' but if you do or choose to buy from a particular vendor because of it, that is your prerogative. It is a free market and the most important thing is that you buy from the one that best suits your needs or criteria.

Thank you @MissGotRocks So well said.

 

[gm89uk]

I think vendors would probably avoid getting involved in these discussions as there is little incentive and probably bad for business. There has been very little involvement in other likewise discussions for good reason.

Because professionalism comes much higher than proving a point. And I echo all the previous few posts.

 

[skypie]

That’s my point. When you get down to comparing respected super ideal vendors on PS, it doesn’t matter what they say.

I have to disagree with this. I absolutely trust what a respected super ideal vendor has to say about their product. Again, agree you need to see it yourself, but that doesn't mean you don't consider what they say about their product.

 

[skypie]

I agree that I doubt any vendors will comment in this thread.

However, I disagree that it is unprofessional for a vendor to detail their standards/practices. HPD details their standards on their website for their CBIs. WhiteFlash lists their standards for ACAs. I'm sure other vendors do too. I don't find it unprofessional at all.

Now, I think it would be unprofessional for a vendor to disparage its competitors. But I find nothing unprofessional in a vendor saying "hey, we also do that."

I think vendors would probably avoid getting involved in these discussions as there is little incentive and probably bad for business. There has been very little involvement in other likewise discussions for good reason.

Because professionalism comes much higher than proving a point. And I echo all the previous few posts.

 

[gm89uk]

To clarify, I meant for vendors to comment here rather than on their own websites.

With regards to information to consumers there's an art to delivering as much depth as enthusiasts will need to reaffirm their decision in the brand vs overwhelming the average consumer with excess of jargon, where each vendor will strike a balance suitable for them.

 

[LLJsmom]

I have to disagree with this. I absolutely trust what a respected super ideal vendor has to say about their product. Again, agree you need to see it yourself, but that doesn't mean you don't consider what they say about their product.

And their websites have said what they’re gonna say. As @gm89uk said, I don’t see the incentive to come and rehash it all here.

 

[skypie]

I understand there are forum rules prohibiting trade members from commenting on specific diamonds due to the obvious conflict of interest.

However, if a PSer asks on this forum if a vendor considers X aspect when cutting their diamonds and the vendor choose to respond "yes, we consider that." or "no, we don't" I would find that response very useful and not unprofessional at all.

Again, it would be unprofessional for one vendor to disparage another on this forum (or anywhere) but merely providing information on their own practices whether on Pricescope or on their own websites would be totally acceptable in my opinion.

To clarify, I meant for vendors to comment here rather than on their own websites.

With regards to information to consumers there's an art to delivering as much depth as enthusiasts will need to reaffirm their decision in the brand vs overwhelming the average consumer with excess of jargon, where each vendor will strike a balance suitable for them.

 

[skypie]

Perhaps some vendors feel that way. Yet some vendors actively post on PS, field questions and provide information beyond "just look at our website, it's all there". So for some vendors, there clearly is an incentive to say more than "it's all on the website".

And their websites have said what they’re gonna say. As @gm89uk said, I don’t see the incentive to come and rehash it all here.