Help me find solitaire setting for my cushion diamond please!

[Kel]

I''m purchasing a 0.90ct cushion cut diamond and am looking for suggestions as to how to set it. It will be platinum but I would quite like a simple setting that won''t date (but not too "common")! I like the Mark Morrell and Leon Mege type styles.

All suggestions are gratefully received!

Thanks

 

[mrssalvo]

Hey Kel,
I''d check out Pearlmans, he has one of the best selections of settings anywhere.

 

[Kel]

a lot of these are pave or split shank though - I''m looking for a plain platinum setting for a cushion (but with a twist rather than just tiffany style - love Mark Morrell!)

 

[gailrmv]

Check out the vatche x prong - www.dvatche.com. I would think the princess one would work for the cushion.
I''m a little biased b/c I have this setting (for round), but I chose it for the same things you are looking for: a little different than the tiff style, but classic and unlikely to go out of style.

 

[Kel]

I do love this style - only I prefer to enhance the cushion more so it doesn''t look too rounded. I''ve got an idea on a variation of the vatche and a Mark Morrell style with flat claws - I want it to sit completely flush against a plain wedding band.

 

[orbaya]

Seeing as you love Mark Morrill (you''ve mentioned him in all your posts in this thread), then go with him. I''m sure he can create something to go flush with a band. Or, talk to Whiteflash and have something custom made...maybe they can do something that is Mark Morrill-ish, and give you what you want.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/20/2005 12:04:36 PM
Author: Kel

I do love this style - only I prefer to enhance the cushion more so it doesn''t look too rounded.

Sidestones? A pair of trapezoids would make the lot looks more ''straight lined'' than roundish. Half moons or any other shape that is also used to flank rounds and ovals would probably do the opposite.

Since these are rather spready, specialized shapes, I don''t think the result would be a ''three-stone'' ring.


Case in point:

cushion with step cut trapezoid sides

and with straight bullet shape sides

 

[Kel]

I live in London therefore I can''t get Mark Morrell to set my ring! I''m just looking for examples of designs that I can show my jeweller here in London.

 

[valeria101]

And this is what I was thinking of precisely:

 

[Kel]

It''s lovely but I can''t afford side stones as well! Just want the cushion to be as enhanced as possible (please see my previous post about 0.90ct and 1.0ct)

Thanks - you are all really helpful!!

 

[Scintillating]

What about something like anne h's?

It looks great with a cushion.
It's quite an affordable "off-the-rack" platinum setting, sells for about $1350.
Looks like you can definitely fit something flush next to it.
She purchased it through Engagement Rings Direct
It's made by the man who runs Antiqueengagementrings.com
For the surprise stone you can opt for a pink or blue sapphire, or a diamond I think.
I really like it, that's obvious I know. : )

Scintillating...

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/20/2005 12:49:34 PM
Author: Kel

It's lovely but I can't afford side stones as well! Just want the cushion to be as enhanced as possible (please see my previous post about 0.90ct and 1.0ct)

Wait a minute... F-VS1 doesn't sound like a savings option to me at all.

Are you sure G-H/ - VS2/SI1 are not as good looking? I am asking, because around 1 ct many may not tell any difference at.



There have been several british diamond buyers who ended up ordering from the sellers posting or talked about on this forum - and I suspect that british prices were mostly responsible. You may find the relevant cases with a search. One is quite recent.

Mark Morell isn't either - so it didn't occur to me to look for the something cost effective.



For example...

Bringhing up the cushion (link to cushion post)

The specs read:
Carat: 0.90
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Measurements: 5.92-5.61-3.58
Depth: 63.8%
Table: 63%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: NON
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thin-Very Thick

There might be larger for the weight & cost too. And the specs are no guarantee of a brilliant cut. Unless the price is great, I am left with little reason to preffer this over any other listing in the database, let alone some that are descibed better than this to make a more informed choice.

Assuming the stone is about 4k and this is the budget, this one below is allot larger by size, 1 carat and close by in price. It could have been SI1 too - just didn't look for it.


Link to listing (any stone may be available through several sellers - this is just one)

Weight: 1.06
Size: 7.11-5.94X3.71 Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 62.5
Table: 62
Girdle: TN
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: No

And if the settings with small diamonds along the shank look good to you, this (LINK) may just do the trick ($900-$1300, either gold or platinum). There is one ring like this on the 'Show me the ring' already.




If youi find a seller to call in a stone for you and do the setting for the budget you have in mind, this would be just one more international purchase recorded here. There have been quite a few.

Just a thought. If anything, I can't talk about the local jewelers in your area. The ones with lots of feedback on Pricescope could as well be 'neighbours' after this many posts!

 

[Kel]

So are you saying it doesn't matter that the diamond is F and VS1 - that I could get a lesser colour and inclusions in my stone for cheaper and larger??

I have seen this particular stone in photos and is the right sort of shape that I like - it's quite a traditional square cushion as opposed to a rectangular shape.

what's the lowest colour I should opt for on a stone this size - I have taken into consideration EVERYTHING, the girdle, the depth (a lot are very deep) and the table etc.

Now I am very confused!!! I meant to say that this diamond is approximately $3400 - however for me in England that is £1900 approx - which is VERY VERY cheap - I would pay almost double that if I got the diamond from London.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/21/2005 6:39:39 AM
Author: Kel
So are you saying it doesn't matter that the diamond is F and VS1 - that I could get a lesser colour and inclusions in my stone for cheaper and larger??

I have seen this particular stone in photos and is the right sort of shape that I like - it's quite a traditional square cushion as opposed to a rectangular shape.

what's the lowest colour I should opt for on a stone this size - I have taken into consideration EVERYTHING, the girdle, the depth (a lot are very deep) and the table etc.

Now I am very confused!!! I meant to say that this diamond is approximately $3400 - however for me in England that is £1900 approx - which is VERY VERY cheap - I would pay almost double that if I got the diamond from London.

Sure. I would bet any combination down to G-SI1 would be hardly distinguishable for the most inquisitive person ever to set eyes on your ring. So if you wanted larger, go for it by all means.

That stone was among the ones with the best spread (size for weight) listed - this is why I mentioned.

And... I wouldn't worry much about tight limits for table & depth etc. If you can get details about shape and brilliance, that would mean allot more, IMO.

Also, unless you totally hate rectangular cushions... it may be worth looking into, because they tend to look larger on the hand. By some freak of nature, the rectangular ones seem to have better spread anyway - it may be because of the type of crystals they are cut from... Just don't know. And don't have to (IMO) because the size (i.e. diameter) is given anyway.


Just some 2c (or is that 2p?) worth

Hope some helps.



PS. About the color grades, someone has a three stone ring with cushions here (2 cts and half carat sides) E, F and G. They match to a tee and the 'case' has gotten quite a bit of attention (=posts) because of it. Perhaps it is those differences in price between the top grades tat make you (and many others) think there is some very striking visual difference. In fact, it is difficult to tell them apart.

PS: I feel your pain with the US/GBP exchange... every time some payment gets into my UK account

With jewelry, for some pieces it seems like prices re just 'transferred' from US to British currency without even making use of the exchange rate. Pretty much like you say. Don't ask me why this even works

 

[Kel]

What about this stone??

http://www.michaeljay.com/index.cfm?action=diamonds.search.do&color_from=&color_to=&clarity_from=&clarity_to=&carat_from=&carat_to=&price_from=&price_to=&lot_number=114-540&Image24.x=65&Image24.y=15

I''m at my wit''s end!

 

[lmurden]

Albicocca has a gorgeous vera wang setting for her cushion.

 

[lmurden]

Another...

 

[lmurden]

Last one.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/10/2006 5:03:21 AM
Author: Kel

What about this stone??

What''s not to like? ... before seeing the stone.

At first the ''extremely thick'' part of the ''medium-extremely thick'' girdle note on the GIA lab report stood out but then, the inclusion plot gives a good excuse - there is an ''indented natural'' on the girdle - which means that a tiny bit of it is wider and that is what the range of girdle width catches. The real thing may not match this guess, but... it has a good chance to match it, IMO.

The cert doesn''t tell me much about brilliance and looks, but does say that this stone is relatively large for the weight (6.12 x 5.21 for 90 pts) and is colorless and clean looking (G under 1 carat is one safe bet for me, and so is VS1 in any size). Lovely rectangular shape too!

Have you seen it?



PS: the stone is also listed in Pricescope database.

 

[SoonIHope]

Date: 1/10/2006 11:14:35 AM
Author: lmurden
Albicocca has a gorgeous vera wang setting for her cushion.

Hehe thanks for posting me lmurden!

Kel - I cannot recommend my setting highly enough!!! I adore it and have gotten soooo many compliments on it!!!

 

[Kel]

It''s between the stone you commented on valeria101 (thank you!) and this stone - so both of these...

The specs read:
Carat: 0.90
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Measurements: 5.92-5.61-3.58
Depth: 63.8%
Table: 63%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: NON
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thin-Very Thick
Carat: 0.90
Shape: C
Cut: n/a
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Measurements: 6.15-5.21-3.37
Depth: 64.7%
Table: 59%
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Medium-XThick Faceted

These are the two in the photo above - I was going to go for the F cut - it''s more of the traditional square shaped however am leaning towards the G in that it''s more rectangular and may not look round once set (this concerns me as my stone is only 0.90 as opposed to 2 carats like some of the beauties on here)

Will 0.90 in either of these measurements just look like a Round Brilliant stone or am I just being paranoid about my final decision??!!

Desparate now as need to purchase pretty soon!

I love the Vera Wang setting for the stone but I am love with anneh''s cushion setting (but with a plain platinum band) - will mine look teeny weeny like this or is this the best setting to maximise the stone size?

I''m going mad now I think....

 

[Hest88]

Date: 1/10/2006 12:19:23 PM
Author: Kel

I love the Vera Wang setting for the stone but I am love with anneh''s cushion setting (but with a plain platinum band) - will mine look teeny weeny like this or is this the best setting to maximise the stone size?

It''s impossible to tell unless you try it on. A stone that looks large for your finger will really pop in a setting like this, since nothing overshadows the stone. However, if you have wider fingers or really long fingers a slender setting may just make the entire ring look insubstantial and thus NOT make the stone look large.