ACA New Line / Classic Owners - Tradeoff

[AmyMarie]

Hi everyone!!! I am a long-time reader of PS, but this is my first post. I have followed most of the posts by the ''experts'' on the differences between the different types of ACA''s - Classic vs. New Line. However, I am curious what the owners of these different types of ACA''s, or those that have compared both in the various lighting conditions think of the differences.

Note that when I say New Line vs Classic, I am trying to classify the cut, not necessarily the brand. So a GOG stone with a Classic-type cut or Newline-type cut would be fine also .

I am considering purchasing an ACA as an upgrade to my existing center stone. I have a few questions that I hope you can help me with.

1. I like both the fire and sparkle (which I gather is called "scintillation") aspect in diamonds. My understanding is that the Classic diamonds have more "sparkle" than the New Line, but not as much "fire" that occurs with the New Line in lighter lighting conditions (such as a candlelight dinner). I love when I see a big, noticeable flash of light and consistent sparkles from friends'' diamonds!

My question is how much of a tradeoff is this? I would think that the sparkle would be more important since it would be what people would see most of the time. I know I am not lucky enough to have many candlelit dinners! HAHA. Am I oversimplifying this?

2. Since these are both top-notch cuts, would there be a very noticeable difference? For example, yesterday I was in an airport and noticed a very sparkly diamond ring on someone''s finger from about 5 yards away. I don''t know if I would notice colors, but I DEFINITELY noticed the sparkles. If I went with a New Line, would this type of scenario occur significantly less frequently and with not as strong of ''flashing sparkles'' since it is not good for maximum scintillation? Or would it just occur very slightly less frequently and very slightly less stong?

3. As with most of you here (I''m guessing!) I would love to blind other people (and me!!) with flashes from my ring every once in awhile. Any thoughts on which type might do this?

4. I would in an office building with normal fluorescent lighting (at least I assume it is fluorescent!). Would both of these types of stones be fairly dead in this lighting? Or just not quite as flashy? Does one outperform?

5. Which would you choose in a trade-off of maximum scintillation or maximum fire?


Any advice is welcome. I am trying to educate myself as much as possible before making this big decision!!!! I''ve tried to search the forums and read as much as possible, but I am hoping to hear even more opinions!!


Amy

 

[AmyMarie]

Anyone?? Help!! I''m not expecting everyone to answer all these questions, I''m just looking for opinions!!!


Thank-you!!

 

[Mara]

Both are lovely and it''s very hard to tell them apart if they were on different hands in different rings. Side by side sure you can see some differences, but they are not like night and day. Both are very sparkly, both have excellent light return. I would say that the Classic has more ''shards of glass'' small sparkles and the New Line is broader flashier larger sparkles. But both are beautiful.

I don''t think there is a trade-off with either one, it''s just what you think your eyes will prefer AND what sort of inventory is in stock for what you are looking for. They may only have a New Line or a Classic and that may make your decision for you if you are not sure. Having owned 2 ''new line'' type cut ones (that just missed the mark), they are really beautiful and I loved them. I wouldn''t mind owning a Classic next but it''s all about the inventory really for me.

Office buildings aren''t super impressive for any ideal cut stone in my opinion, mine does some stuff sometimes but it''s not as nice as restaurant lighting, our kitchen recessed lighting or our bathroom lighting, that''s for sure! And streetlight lighting is great too.

I would not trade off scintillation or fire...I would get the best blend of both and brilliance also. For me either Classic or New Line offer this..I think it''s very hard for the naked basic consumer eye to see a huge difference in one or the other. My thoughts.

 

[aljdewey]

I own both. My engagement stone is a Classic style; my pendant is a New Line.

To me, the classic style reminds me of glittery flashes going off intermittently......think of being at a concert arena in the dark and seeing thousand of bursts of light as the flashes fire on people''s cameras. Think of a celebrity interview where the cameras just keep flashing, flashing, flashing......a very glittery, *constant* MOVEMENT of light.

The New line style seems more like the intense, bold flashes from a lighthouse beam....it lights up the room even when it''s pointing away from you, but when it points at you full on, it''s BIG and INTENSE.

I personally prefer the liveliness and texture and movement of the classic style.....but I''d never turn away EITHER! lol

 

[butterfly 17]

I have had both and I could not really tell a difference between the two.
I originally had a 1.5 carat New line and traded it in for a 2 carat classic line and I honestly could not tell a difference, but then again, I never had the chance to compare both side by side.

I agree that it basically comes down to availability in whatever diamond specs you want. You may want a G color VS1 stone that is 1.25 carats and it may be available only in the new line, if available at all.
Also, from what I gather, the new lines are cut similar to eightstars, so you may want to check out eightstars and check out if you like their look.

 

[AmyMarie]

Thank-you for the comments! I appreciate you all sharing your thoughts. I was leaning towards the new line initially, but I like the idea of the constant sparkling that you mention, aljdewey!!! That sounds like the type of diamond that I often notice when I am a few yards away and catch a glimpse of a great ring!

 

[Rod]

Here's my .02 worth. I compared my stone (GIA graded 58 facet round brilliant, G VS2), which I suppose is a classic, to a hearts on fire and an 88 recently. My stone fared just as well in the sparkles arena. I guess under a scope the branded new lines are very nice and they also have nice price tags, but a well cut (and to me that's the most important thing) stone with fewer facets can have tremendous fire.

Also, in flourescent lighting in my office, there isn't a lot fire in my diamond, but it does appear completely clear (no milkiness one often sees). In candle light, my stone dances with light. I guess I just don't get all the "hooha" over the fancier branded stones. For me, as long as it's a really well cut stone that sparkles beautifully, it wouldn't be worth spending more for a "new line" diamond.

Again, just my .02

 

[belle]

you are going to see madd sparkles in both of those cuts. the differences are subtle and best compared side by side. the casual observer is not going to notice the difference between them, they will only see sparkle. the difference is more in the way the sparkles react and ''dance''. and yes, you will see that sparkle in BOTH of them from 5yards away.

here is a link to the differences between new line and classic aca

 

[Rod]

Thanks Belle.......I thought "new line" meant more facets. Obviously, I was wrong. Thanks for posting the link. And I felt so intelligent ranting about the differences between a HOF or 88 compared to few faceted stones........so much to learn, so little time to learn it.

 

[belle]

you''re welcome rod

i learn something new here everyday... ps is the best!
one more tidbit...hof is also a traditional 57 facet stone...even though the price tag would suggest it is something more

 

[Rod]

See......there I go again. I didn''t know HOF is the standard number of facets and I thought standard was 58, not 57!! And, I completely agree with you. PS is great! I used to participate in an alternate forum, and I would have been blasted if I had written something not completely accurate, even though I''m a novice. It''s such a warm community here on PS and thanks to more knowledgable people like you, a terrific place to learn.

Thanks again Belle!!

 

[Kaleigh]

We are all still learning Rod. I make mistakes all the time. But it''s fun to learn from such great warm and caring people.

 

[belle]

indeed we are all still learning

the difference betwee 57 and 58 facets depends on whether or not the diamond has a ''culet'' a culet is a small facet at the very tip of the pavilion. with a culet, the traditional round goes from 57 to 58 facets....voila!

 

[Rod]

Does that mean that since my stone has a "very small culet" that my diamond is 58 faceted?? When I looked at my stone under a microscope, I couldn''t find the little black center dot I was supposed to find, nor could the jeweler who sold me the stone, but GIA said the stone had a "very small culet."

 

[Cind11]

I had asked Lesley at Whiteflash the difference between the two because I''m going to upgrade my diamond this year and she said she doesn''t think the average person can tell the difference. Course I know you''re not all "average". LOL I was wondering which one I should get if I go with a Whiteflash diamond, but I think now I''m not going to worry about it. I''ll take what is available in the size I want.

 

[belle]

Date: 1/16/2006 2:44:13 PM
Author: Rod
Does that mean that since my stone has a ''very small culet'' that my diamond is 58 faceted?? When I looked at my stone under a microscope, I couldn''t find the little black center dot I was supposed to find, nor could the jeweler who sold me the stone, but GIA said the stone had a ''very small culet.''

yes! that is exactly what it means.

 

[belle]

Date: 1/16/2006 3:13:38 PM
Author: Cind11
I had asked Lesley at Whiteflash the difference between the two because I''m going to upgrade my diamond this year and she said she doesn''t think the average person can tell the difference. Course I know you''re not all ''average''. LOL I was wondering which one I should get if I go with a Whiteflash diamond, but I think now I''m not going to worry about it. I''ll take what is available in the size I want.

i would absolutely agree with this. most people are not going to perceive the differences. they are both awesome cuts. it''s hard enough to get the planets to align with getting the size, color and clarity you want, much less new line or classic. get what you can!

 

[Rod]

Since I absolutely LOVE my stone, should it bother me in the least it has a very small culet?? I would anticipate your answer would be no, but I''m just curious. Thanks Belle!!!

 

[Mara]

Cind I think that is a great way to look at it...personally having seen them both I would not hold out for one or the other, because both are EXTREMELY beautiful and as Belle noted, the differences are hard to see and even if they are side by side you really have to peer and focus on them to SEE the difference. IMO both will sparkle from 5 or 10 yards etc away. The cut is still exceptional, regardless.

 

[belle]

Date: 1/16/2006 4:12:22 PM
Author: Rod
Since I absolutely LOVE my stone, should it bother me in the least it has a very small culet?? I would anticipate your answer would be no, but I''m just curious. Thanks Belle!!!

not at all. it is absolutely nothing to worry about. enjoy your diamond rod! your ring looks awesome.