Bezel and Garnet Question

[audball]

Would it be safe/okay to wear a large (3-4 carat) garnet daily if it were set in a full bezel setting? I''m drawn to several of the ones I''ve seen lately (price in big sizes is nice too!) but 7-7.5 on Mohs seems low for a daily wear ring...

If taken the care to remove for showering, sleeping, and dishes, would this stand a chance in a full bezel?

Thanks!

 

[chrono]

Even a full bezel cannot offer protection to the top portion (crown) of the garnet since it is exposed, but yes, with care as you described, it can be worn everyday.

 

[Michael_E]

It''s possible, but you have to remember that you''re wearing it all the time. My sister has blown up two sapphires that were bezel set as the outside stones in a three stone ring and she didn''t even know that she''d done it. If you''re really concerned it''s possible to design a setting which has the stone bezel set so that the top of the crown is below the top of the setting. That way the only thing that can damage it is a direct blow to the table of the stone and this is where the stone is the strongest. I wore a tanzanite ring for years that was set low like this and it only had a few little scratches from all that use.

 

[LD]

I can't remember who it was (AJ perhaps???) who posted up a picture of her friend's Emerald that had been in a bezel but had been fairly severely damaged. I guess the problem is that if you hit a gem in the right place, (or wrong place if you like), no setting will fully protect it.

Having said that, I'm a great believer that gemstones are to be worn and admired so it would be a shame if we limited ourselves to certain gemstones just because they are more potentially hardier than others.

 

[chrono]

Michael,
That sounds almost like it is gypsy set?

LD,
I thought it was Gailey but I could be wrong because I don’t have the best memory recall.

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Date: 1/8/2010 2:08:09 PM
Author: Michael_E
It''s possible, but you have to remember that you''re wearing it all the time. My sister has blown up two sapphires that were bezel set as the outside stones in a three stone ring and she didn''t even know that she''d done it. If you''re really concerned it''s possible to design a setting which has the stone bezel set so that the top of the crown is below the top of the setting. That way the only thing that can damage it is a direct blow to the table of the stone and this is where the stone is the strongest. I wore a tanzanite ring for years that was set low like this and it only had a few little scratches from all that use.

Very interesting! DO you have a picture of this setting?

 

[movie zombie]

and expect the exposed faceting to round out over time.

i''ve seen a sapphire set in a bezel and relatively well protected that over 30 years of wear the faceting was pretty much gone. a garnet will definitely show the daily wear in the exposed facets.

however, that might not be a problem if you love the color of the stone.

mz

 

[audball]

Thanks for the input, that concerns me too. I''m just having a hard time finding something that will stand up to wear. I wear my jewelry everyday and I don''t want my new ring to be the excpetion, but I also want a color that ''wows'' me and suits me. The recommended stones I''ve read about are diamond (obviously), sapphire, ruby, spinel, and chrysoberyl for daily wear as a ring. We''re looking for something in ~equal or greater than 7.5mm, so in this size, diamonds, rubies, sapphires, and even some spinels are out of price range. We had a chrys brought in, but S doesn''t like the yellow/green, so those are out too. I''m just looking for other options. What about tourmaline? Lots of pretty shades and not to expensive...is it better/worse than garnet?

If bezel set, I love the JM1345. Per Michael E, I searched for a setting the would come up higher than the stone, and found this at James Allen. Looks like it covers the crown, but I think may look strange with a large stone as the side ''walls'' would be kind of high?? A smaller stone (maybe more 6.5-7ish mm would be better)...

Opinions?

 

[chrono]

If I’m not mistaken, tourmaline is less durable than garnet.

I agree with your assessment about the JA setting; it looks more suited to a smaller stone.

 

[audball]

Date: 1/8/2010 3:21:22 PM
Author: Chrono
If I’m not mistaken, tourmaline is less durable than garnet.

I agree with your assessment about the JA setting; it looks more suited to a smaller stone.

Good to know! Maybe a if a smaller stone comes up the JA could be a good option as it seems to protect the North and South ends of the stone and seems ever so slightly higher than the crown.

 

[chrono]

Date: 1/8/2010 3:21:22 PM
Author: Chrono
If I’m not mistaken, tourmaline is less durable than garnet.

I agree with your assessment about the JA setting; it looks more suited to a smaller stone.

I am back to correct my own post.

Tourmaline and Garnet have very similar hardness on the MOH scale. This will vary per the variety of garnet (demantoid is only 6.5, I think) and tourmaline in question. That said, a garnet will sparkle more due to having higher RI.

 

[audball]

Date: 1/8/2010 3:36:38 PM
Author: Chrono

Date: 1/8/2010 3:21:22 PM
Author: Chrono
If I’m not mistaken, tourmaline is less durable than garnet.

I agree with your assessment about the JA setting; it looks more suited to a smaller stone.

I am back to correct my own post.

Tourmaline and Garnet have very similar hardness on the MOH scale. This will vary per the variety of garnet (demantoid is only 6.5, I think) and tourmaline in question. That said, a garnet will sparkle more due to having higher RI.

It's all good! Thanks for letting me know. The garnet I'm looking at right now is a Rhodolite Garnet, does that help? I defintely like sparkle, so that makes the garnet more appealing. Garnet is also my honey's birthstone, so that could be sweet...

 

[movie zombie]

i wear my garnet only when i leave the house....no matter where i go whether the lumber yard, garden center, movies, farmers market, etc. however, i remove it along with all my other jewelry except for my wedding band and my necklace. those are the only two pieces that are worn 24/7. if you were to implement a similar protocol, you could wear your garnet w/o much fear and w/o a complete bezel but a partial. the RI for garnet is what makes me prefer it over tourmaline all other things being more or less equal.

must you have a faceted stone? have you considered a high quality cab?

mz

 

[audball]

Date: 1/8/2010 5:06:28 PM
Author: movie zombie
i wear my garnet only when i leave the house....no matter where i go whether the lumber yard, garden center, movies, farmers market, etc. however, i remove it along with all my other jewelry except for my wedding band and my necklace. those are the only two pieces that are worn 24/7. if you were to implement a similar protocol, you could wear your garnet w/o much fear and w/o a complete bezel but a partial. the RI for garnet is what makes me prefer it over tourmaline all other things being more or less equal.


must you have a faceted stone? have you considered a high quality cab?


mz

I guess I don''t have to have a faceted stone, just all I''d thought about. I don''t know that I''ve seen any high quality cab?? Any examples you care to suggest?

 

[Michael_E]

Date: 1/8/2010 2:30:10 PM
Author: Lady_Disdain

Date: 1/8/2010 2:08:09 PM

Author: Michael_E

It''s possible, but you have to remember that you''re wearing it all the time. My sister has blown up two sapphires that were bezel set as the outside stones in a three stone ring and she didn''t even know that she''d done it.

Very interesting! DO you have a picture of this setting?

I just dug up a picture of the ring, pre-damage. Both outside stones have been badly chipped and when I showed her she said,"I didn''t think you could break a sapphire" Oh well, live and learn.

 

[Michael_E]

This is what I meant by deeply set. This sapphire is lower than the ridge surrounding it and is almost impossible to damage.

 

[movie zombie]

no suggestions re pictures of cabs.......but i''m sure they are out there. in the past i''ve seen some nice higher end high crystal ones that were affordable.

you would be in luck about now: the tucson show is right around the corner and you could get a vendor to source one for you.

a cab might make you feel more confident about not causing damage. it could still happen but it would already be rounded.

didn''t someone recently post here at pricescope a red cab in a halo setting?

mz

 

[audball]

I know spinel would cost more than garnet, but how is it''s RI in comparison to garnets? Is it more lively at night? I''ve read that garnets tend to be more ''daytime'' stones.

 

[audball]

There we go! I''ve been trying to post on this thread for two days and kept getting an error that wouldn''t let me.

Anyway...another question.

What are the best things to look for when shopping for a garnet? For a spinel?

 

[Liane]

Here are my thoughts, in no particular order:

1. A rhodolite is an inexpensive stone. Even a nice one in the 3-4 carat range shouldn''t run you more than a few hundred dollars. At that price, I''d say wear it and enjoy it. If it picks up a few small dings here and there, oh well, it wasn''t super expensive, and the happiness you derive from it matters more. I agree that it''s a shame to keep pretty rocks locked up instead of taking them out to be admired, and that is doubly true when there''s not much to be gained by locking them up. If it''s not a bank-buster, wear it with pride!

2. Since you know that your stone isn''t diamond-hard, it''s likely that you''ll consciously baby the ring, and that improves the garnet''s chances considerably. Most damage to ring stones seems to come from wearers who, like Michael E''s sister, didn''t know their stones could be broken and so wore them carelessly.

3. If you pick a low setting, as several posters have suggested, that should increase the garnet''s protection. I''m not sure what cut you''re considering, but I''d note that some of them (like asschers) tend to be cut deeper and will therefore sit higher on the hand. For maximum protection, I would recommend a stone, and a ring, with a fairly low profile above the finger.

4. What to look for in a spinel, a garnet, or any other colored gem, is a stone that makes you go

.

 

[audball]

Date: 1/11/2010 11:16:20 AM
Author: Liane
Here are my thoughts, in no particular order:

1. A rhodolite is an inexpensive stone. Even a nice one in the 3-4 carat range shouldn't run you more than a few hundred dollars. At that price, I'd say wear it and enjoy it. If it picks up a few small dings here and there, oh well, it wasn't super expensive, and the happiness you derive from it matters more. I agree that it's a shame to keep pretty rocks locked up instead of taking them out to be admired, and that is doubly true when there's not much to be gained by locking them up. If it's not a bank-buster, wear it with pride!

2. Since you know that your stone isn't diamond-hard, it's likely that you'll consciously baby the ring, and that improves the garnet's chances considerably. Most damage to ring stones seems to come from wearers who, like Michael E's sister, didn't know their stones could be broken and so wore them carelessly.

3. If you pick a low setting, as several posters have suggested, that should increase the garnet's protection. I'm not sure what cut you're considering, but I'd note that some of them (like asschers) tend to be cut deeper and will therefore sit higher on the hand. For maximum protection, I would recommend a stone, and a ring, with a fairly low profile above the finger.

4. What to look for in a spinel, a garnet, or any other colored gem, is a stone that makes you go

.

Hi Liane! Thanks for responding...and I just have to say (again) how much I adore your new set, it's wonderful!

It's true, the garnet's aren't super expensive and now that I know more about stones and their care, I know better how to care for a ring this time around. I'm set on getting a full bezel and am down to two settings. The James Meyer 1345 that we all know and love, or one I found I Richard Wise's site just last night. I've contacted him re: the price to see if it's similar to the JM.

It can be seen here: Richard Wise

Any thoughts/preferences on the settings?

ETA: I'm looking at round stones, so hopefully depth won't be an issue...

 

[lavatea]

Date: 1/11/2010 12:19:11 PM
Author: audball

It can be seen here: Richard Wise


Any thoughts/preferences on the settings?

I LOVE that setting!

 

[audball]

Date: 1/11/2010 12:28:53 PM
Author: lavatea

Date: 1/11/2010 12:19:11 PM
Author: audball

It can be seen here: Richard Wise


Any thoughts/preferences on the settings?

I LOVE that setting!

Thanks! I liked it a lot too...I''m hoping it won''t be over budget. This is an ''upgrade''/replacement of my promise/commitment ring as we''re a few years from engagement. I do wear the ring on my left ring finger and I really don''t want it to LOOK like an engagement ring and I think this really doesn''t.

 

[Liane]

I''m having difficulty posting but let''s hope this one gets through...

I love the Richard Wise ring. It''s so sculptural. Streamlined, unique, and just beautiful. The rhodolite appears to be excellent as well -- the raspberry pink looks perfect.

I don''t know whether it looks engagement-y or not. It''s certainly not traditional, but it''s also a gemstone solitaire, so if I saw it on the street... well, I''d probably just compliment the wearer and leave it at that.

The James Meyer setting is also very beautiful, but I usually vote for whatever''s more unique, and I''ll follow that pattern here. For what it''s worth, I''d vote for the Richard Wise ring.

 

[movie zombie]

another plus one for the RWise ring/setting.
the stone is excellent. trying to beat richard''s eye and get a stone for less $ that will perform as well is, well, foolish.
setting a stone of lesser quality in that setting after seeing this picture would be impossible for me.
most rhodies are DARK. this one is not. exceptional stone and styline to show it off.
sigh. it is times like this that i regret knowing the difference between a fine stone and an ok stone......more sighing.

mz

 

[audball]

Date: 1/11/2010 1:30:39 PM
Author: movie zombie
another plus one for the RWise ring/setting.
the stone is excellent. trying to beat richard''s eye and get a stone for less $ that will perform as well is, well, foolish.
setting a stone of lesser quality in that setting after seeing this picture would be impossible for me.
most rhodies are DARK. this one is not. exceptional stone and styline to show it off.
sigh. it is times like this that i regret knowing the difference between a fine stone and an ok stone......more sighing.

mz

Hi MZ,

Thanks for responding! I really like the RW setting as well. I''ve had my eye on a Tanga Garnet by Barry...it''s a little larger than this one and is a pink/purple garnet, not reddish at all.

What do you guys think? 3.45ct Tanga Garnet

I was thinking about commisioning Richard to set this stone in that lovely setting. Depending on much it would cost to reproduce that is, will be talking to him later this week.

 

[audball]

Date: 1/11/2010 1:19:28 PM
Author: Liane
I''m having difficulty posting but let''s hope this one gets through...

I love the Richard Wise ring. It''s so sculptural. Streamlined, unique, and just beautiful. The rhodolite appears to be excellent as well -- the raspberry pink looks perfect.

I don''t know whether it looks engagement-y or not. It''s certainly not traditional, but it''s also a gemstone solitaire, so if I saw it on the street... well, I''d probably just compliment the wearer and leave it at that.

The James Meyer setting is also very beautiful, but I usually vote for whatever''s more unique, and I''ll follow that pattern here. For what it''s worth, I''d vote for the Richard Wise ring.

Thanks Liane! I really just fell for it when I saw it. I really wanted a more pink/purple garnet which is why I was thinking about having them redo the setting for the stone when I find it, but depending on cost, we may just go for the already made setting with his amazing stone.

 

[Arkteia]

I love Richard Wise''s setting. I should have looked at his website, too, he has so many interesting things.

 

[audball]

Date: 1/12/2010 1:28:21 AM
Author: crasru
I love Richard Wise''s setting. I should have looked at his website, too, he has so many interesting things.

 

[movie zombie]

the tanga is nice......but it is not a high crystal stone or in the same category as the stone in richard''s setting. nothing wrong with that....most of us do not have unlimited resources to have nothing but high crystal stones.

the tanga is going to be darker than the picture.....99.9% of the time. it is indeed affordable but it may be affordable as it may have a lot of over saturation going on....in other words, you''ll see flashes of color coming from an otherwise dark stone.

you won''t know until you see it. and you may decide that for the price it is just what you''re looking for. there is something for every budget and beauty is always in the eye of the beholder. most people wearing or purchasing color stones are not as "picky" as some of us are that participate in this forum.

most importantly, i hope you''re having fun with this! it really is supposed to be [imo] fun and joyful!

mz