Brilliance 86 · Fire 48 · Scintillation 86 · in our census, where the T73 scores 86 · 50 · 80 in tourmaline
How the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows handles light in tourmaline, measured: brilliance 86, fire 48 and 14% leakage, set against the T73 in the same stone and against the same cut in diamond.
Tourmaline has a refractive index of 1.603 to 1.655 and a dispersion of 0.017. Its critical angle, from the low end of that range, is 38.6°, so a round design needs a pavilion of at least 38.6° for head-on light to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. We trace it with one index, 1.629, the midpoint of the published range, and a fire spread of 0.015, 0.86 of the published dispersion. Every picture here is our Light Return tracer at 1.603, and every figure is from the same light census that scores the other gemstones; the 3D Gemstone Simulator shows the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in tourmaline live. Tourmaline is strongly doubly refractive (birefringence up to 0.040), so its back facets can look doubled. Our census traces one index (1.629), so the doubling is not in these figures.
The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows has 89 facets, a table of 53.0% of its width and a total depth of 61.7% of its width; its pavilion mains sit at 40.8°. In tourmaline, the census returns 86 of 100 for brilliance and 48 for fire, against 86 and 50 for the T73, our benchmark, in the same stone; the same DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond reads 93 and 78.
Compared with the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline and with the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond. A difference counts from 3 points (Brilliance, Fire, Tilt, Leakage), 5 (Scintillation, Symmetry), 4% (face-up size per carat) or 5% (weight); Tilt counts as a pro only for a stone within 5 points of the brilliance it is compared with. How we measure.
At a glance: the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in tourmaline (white) against the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline (dashed): solid white where it reaches further, hatched where it falls short. Each pro and con is explained, with pictures, below.
Against the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline: ahead on 2, level on 3, behind on 3.
0.90 ct at 6.5 mm, against 1.01 ct for the same cut in diamond (−11%)
Weight follows specific gravity: 3.13 for tourmaline against 3.52 for diamond, so the same model at the same size weighs 0.90 ct here and 1.01 ct in diamond, 6.5 mm across. Nothing about the light changes with it.
Try it yourself: Weights in every gemstone on the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows page
Scintillation 86 against 80 for the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline: 6 points higher
Scintillation follows the number of facets the stone shows: 100 × (1 − e^(−facets / 45)). The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows has 89 facets and the T73 73, so 86 against 80. It depends on the geometry alone, so it is the same in every stone.
DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows · 89 facets · Scintillation 86
T73 Round Brilliant · 73 facets · Scintillation 80
Try it yourself: Compare the Scintillation spoke in the Cut Performance Wheel
Fire 48 against 78 for the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond: 30 points lower
Fire is the share of the returned light that splits into color at the exit facet: the census traces each exit again at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread (0.015 in tourmaline) and counts a ray as fire when the two directions differ by more than 0.6°. The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows reads 48 against 78 for the same cut in diamond. The figure is the census's; the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders tourmaline's fire live.
The fire figure is the census's, traced at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread. See the fire in the 3D Gemstone Simulator: the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in tourmaline under the sunny-day lighting.
What helps: the Oval Cut reads 80 for fire in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.
Tilt 77 against 93 for the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond: 16 points lower
Tilt is how much of its face-up brilliance a stone keeps when the census tilts it 20° about its long axis, with 2,200 rays. The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows keeps 77 against 93 for the same cut in diamond. The tilt strips below show the maps at 0°, 10°, 20° and 30°, with each picture's own leak share under it.
DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in tourmaline · Tilt 77
DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond · Tilt 93
What helps: the DG-Miliano reads 86 for tilt in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.
Try it yourself: Compare the Tilt spoke in the Cut Performance Wheel
Leakage 14 against 2 for the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond: 12 points higher
Leakage is the share of the census rays that enter the stone and leave through the pavilion, or through the crown heading down. The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows leaks 14% in tourmaline against 2% for the same cut in diamond. Grey in the maps below is leaking light; the share under each picture is that picture's own.
DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in tourmaline · Leakage 14
DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond · Leakage 2
What helps: the DG-M5 reads 4% for leakage in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.
Try it yourself: Tilt it yourself in the simulator's light map
Brilliance 86 against 93 for the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond: 7 points lower
The same cut in diamond returns 93. Tourmaline bends light less than diamond: its critical angle is 38.6°, diamond's 24.4°, so a pavilion facet has to be steeper before light reflects off it rather than passing out. The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows's pavilion returns less of tourmaline's light than of diamond's, as the two maps show.
DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in tourmaline · Brilliance 86
DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in diamond · Brilliance 93
What helps: the DG-M5 reads 96 for brilliance in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.
Try it yourself: Open this Light Return map in the simulator
Pick the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows in tourmaline for this: it weighs less than in diamond and has more facets to sparkle with. The catch: it shows less fire than in diamond, loses more light when tilted than in diamond, leaks more than in diamond and returns less light than in diamond.
If that catch matters more to you, the Oval Cut reads 80 for fire in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.
Every figure on this page is from our light census, traced at one refractive index: a simulation of the geometry, not a grading report. The 3D files and cutting files below are the same DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows model we traced.
In our census the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows returns 86 of 100 for brilliance and 48 for fire in tourmaline, against 86 and 50 for the T73 in the same stone. Against that round and against the same cut in diamond it has 2 pros and 4 cons by our thresholds; the summary above names them.
At least 38.6° for a round design: tourmaline's critical angle is 38.6°, from the low end of its refractive index range, and head-on light has to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows's pavilion mains sit at 40.8°.
At 6.5 mm across, 0.90 ct in tourmaline, against 1.01 ct for the same cut in diamond (-11%): tourmaline's specific gravity is 3.13, diamond's 3.52.
Yes: the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders it live, with tourmaline's own refractive index and dispersion. Tourmaline is traced by the same light census as the other gemstones, with its refractive index and fire spread derived from published values, so its scores are on the same scale; the pictures here are our Light Return tracer, and the Cut Performance Wheel sets it against any other cut and stone.
The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cut as exact geometry: 89 planar facets, real-world scale, ready for CAD, rendering, printing and casting.
The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows Cut as a faceting design: 73 + 16 girdles = 89 facets, 96 index, 8-fold mirror-image symmetry, ready for the machine.
Not sure the files open in your software? Get the cube free: the same six formats, for your email address, used only to send them (privacy).
Questions before you buy? Email us.
Tourmaline: optical properties and the top ten cuts · The DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows: specifications, model and files