- 9 years ago
- Wedding: January 2015
I’ll post what I deleted from the other thread. I could post a lot of the chemisty and chemical makeup information, but to be honest I’d probably botch the terminology and sound like an idiot.
One thing that I see as “proof” that DNL uses CZs is this exchange that took place. This is a post on DNL’s FB page. It was, of course, removed, but here is a screenshot:
Signity is a brand of CZs. Normal, everyday CZs. Here is a picture that BetterThanDiamond took of a DNL ring. They were replacing the stone with an Asha (in the tweezers)
Notice the cut pattern (also notice the cloudiness and “film” already on a months old DNL stone, but I guess that’s subjective…)
Here is a screenshot of the “square brilliant” stone from the Signity Website
They are practically identical. Like I have said previously, there is nothing wrong with a cz. But there is something wrong with selling a CZ, and touting it as some amazing, revolutionary new “stone.”
That being said, there are tons of posts about Ashas (old and new) and they did not, for a single moment, claim Ashas are anything other than a CZ. They have the spectographs (not to mention the happy customer base) to prove the existance of the amorphous diamond coating that strengthens and fills the porosity that is present in CZs. I know that my CZ will probably look dull eventually (as in, 5-7 years of daily wear) but I knew that going in, and I knew it was a CZ.