Opinions on my three stone ring

[Sky56]

I like the idea of using the 1 carat diamond in the ring and keeping the .70 for a pendant.

 

[Christina...]

Ugh! OK I'm gonna muck things up some more, cuz I haven't been following closely enough. So, you had planned to use the 1ct to upgrade to the 7mm when the right one came along right? But you were never planning to use the 7mm as the center for the three stone correct? If thats the case, I would stay with your intial plan, set the .70 into the three stone and keep searching for the perfect 7mm. Unless of course you already have another stone or project in mind?? Your still holding out on us with your 'I think I know what I will do!'

 

[Dreamer_D]

So, you had planned to use the 1ct to upgrade to the 7mm when the right one came along right? But you were never planning to use the 7mm as the center for the three stone correct?

Correct and correct. I don't at this point hanker for a traditional three stone with a larger center, not with OECs. I have tried a few times with no success to find small (4mm) OECs for sides and it does not float my boat. For a ring with ruby sides like this, 1ct is MORE than adequate in terms of size!

My Aurora is much blingier than any three stone could be.

If one day I get a larger diamond it will go in a different style ring, maybe bullets or something. I dunno. That's a ways off.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Wow those are both beautiful stones! I love the symbolism of the ring too

My engagement ring is a three stone but the setting isn't perfect and there are little gaps between the 3 stones and I can tell you it BUGS me so so much.... So my vote would be to set the 1ct!

Oh, that sucks that it bugs you! It would bug me too. Some mounts just do that. This particular mount has the stone tucked *slighly* so I think with the right size center there would be little or no gap.

Here is a real photo of the mount with a 6mm placeholder popped in for perspective. The stone overlaps the sides much more.

 

[bright ice]

I would go with the 1ct in that mount. Looks great.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I love this look, but I think I'd like the bigger stone in the 3-stone. Maybe your jeweler can put the .7 in the fishtail setting so you can still have a soltaire?

I don't think that would work in this mount, it is a half mm difference and the basket is basically one solid piece. I can put a gemstone into it though.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Dreamer_D,

Could you have the .7 set with a thin "collar" around it to make it look a little bigger and close the gap? My 3/4 ct. OEC has that head with a very thin round collar that isn't a bezel and even though it's thin and you almost can't see it, it makes the diamond look larger.

liz

I think if I was going to need to do something like that I would get a new mount This is a Whiteflash setting that I have adored for years, so I sort of want to keep it "as is" to enjoy its fluid lines.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Bigger stone looks better from a ratio perspective IMO in that setting! Beautiful really.

I'd also sell the .7 for a profit ... I'm not as much a fan of the splintery OEC stones, if I wanted splintery, I'd wear my RB for a day. But it's pretty!

In person it looks like a hybrid between OEC and MRB. But not a transitional the way we always think of them. I think it would be a killer pendant with its optics.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think it would look great with the 1 ct center, and the new OEC in a pendant-one similar to athenaworth's



On a side note, I remember you stating it in another thread, but I can't find it....who made the setting you had the 1 ct in? I loooove it.

The setting is by a company called Amcor, but they have a rep on DB, Poppyseed. It is very reasonably priced, $150! Another PSer has it too and likes it.

 

[Christina...]

I guess I'm the minority then, because I would hands down set the .7 in the three stone. I really like the proportions and I love the idea of 7mm OEC with bullets. I also really really like the current setting for the 1ct and think it would be a shame to mess with it. I would guess you would get a better price for the completed piece as well when the time comes.

 

[armywife13]

I think it would look great with the 1 ct center, and the new OEC in a pendant-one similar to athenaworth's



On a side note, I remember you stating it in another thread, but I can't find it....who made the setting you had the 1 ct in? I loooove it.

The setting is by a company called Amcor, but they have a rep on DB, Poppyseed. It is very reasonably priced, $150! Another PSer has it too and likes it.

Thanks!!!

 

[Mara]

yeah that is an interesting OEC! one thing I love about the old stones is sooo many diff options visually.

i really like that 3 stone setting too. great buy. where'd you find the rubies?

 

[Dreamer_D]

yeah that is an interesting OEC! one thing I love about the old stones is sooo many diff options visually.

i really like that 3 stone setting too. great buy. where'd you find the rubies?

There is a huge variety in these old cuts for sure. The 0.70 is really a bright stone, even in really low lighting. I am going to take some time and get to know it before I make up my mind.

I got the rubies from my jeweler. I don't know nuttin' bout nuttin', just thought they were pretty. I am not much of a colored gem type

Christina Those are indeed the arguments in favour of putting the .70 in the three stone!

 

[ihy138]

I guess I'm in the minority, but I like the .7 in the three-stone. For whatever reason, the proportions are more pleasing to my eye. You absolutely CANNOT go wrong either way. They seem like different stones though, so maybe choose the better performer for the three-stone, since you don't want to mess with it. Gorgeous find on the .70, btw!

I think it would look great with the 1 ct center, and the new OEC in a pendant-one similar to athenaworth's



On a side note, I remember you stating it in another thread, but I can't find it....who made the setting you had the 1 ct in? I loooove it.

The setting is by a company called Amcor, but they have a rep on DB, Poppyseed. It is very reasonably priced, $150! Another PSer has it too and likes it.

Thanks!!!

Yep, I have it, too! I loved the price mostly, but it turns out that I really like it with an antique stone.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, Dreamer, I am very late to this party! But I really, really think you ought to do this ring RIGHT...as in put forever stones in it and then have a special finished piece to keep. In thinking about the future, I really think it is good to balance out your pieces. You already have a pretty blingy wedding band, and you hope to eventually find a 7mm OEC solitaire. I think the family ring would look just a little too small with a 5.xmm center unless you have size 4 fingers or something. I have that 6mm family diamond, and I think it is too small as a center stone for me and I think we wear close to the same size. So I do think the 6.2mm 1 ct. would be much better for this particular project. Then it will look balanced if you eventually have that 7mm OEC on the other hand!

Love,
DS, your friendly jewelry consultant

 

[Dreamer_D]

I guess I'm in the minority, but I like the .7 in the three-stone. For whatever reason, the proportions are more pleasing to my eye. You absolutely CANNOT go wrong either way. They seem like different stones though, so maybe choose the better performer for the three-stone, since you don't want to mess with it. Gorgeous find on the .70, btw!

I think it would look great with the 1 ct center, and the new OEC in a pendant-one similar to athenaworth's



On a side note, I remember you stating it in another thread, but I can't find it....who made the setting you had the 1 ct in? I loooove it.

The setting is by a company called Amcor, but they have a rep on DB, Poppyseed. It is very reasonably priced, $150! Another PSer has it too and likes it.

Thanks!!!

Yep, I have it, too! I loved the price mostly, but it turns out that I really like it with an antique stone.

My only beef with the mount is the basket is very closed and it is hard to clean the pavilion. With old cuts that is an issue because their optics are affected pretty badly by grime and grease.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Okay, Dreamer, I am very late to this party! But I really, really think you ought to do this ring RIGHT...as in put forever stones in it and then have a special finished piece to keep. In thinking about the future, I really think it is good to balance out your pieces. You already have a pretty blingy wedding band, and you hope to eventually find a 7mm OEC solitaire. I think the family ring would look just a little too small with a 5.xmm center unless you have size 4 fingers or something. I have that 6mm family diamond, and I think it is too small as a center stone for me and I think we wear close to the same size. So I do think the 6.2mm 1 ct. would be much better for this particular project. Then it will look balanced if you eventually have that 7mm OEC on the other hand!

Love,
DS, your friendly jewelry consultant

Balance -- this is a very interesting way to think about it! My right hand is actually almost a size 8, so larger diamonds are better on that hand for sure. I might even size the ring for my middle finger, not decided, because I find it more comfortable to wear rings on the middle on the right, which is then an even bigger size. VERY good food for thought!

And I agree with the bolded 100%. That is my plan. The setting is so well made and it is platinum, it is a great mount I have always admired, and with the right stones, it will indeed be a piece to keep and enjoy long term!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yes, I meant to say, great mounting and beautiful rubies, too!

 

[decodelighted]

Okay, Dreamer, I am very late to this party! But I really, really think you ought to do this ring RIGHT...as in put forever stones in it and then have a special finished piece to keep. In thinking about the future, I really think it is good to balance out your pieces. You already have a pretty blingy wedding band, and you hope to eventually find a 7mm OEC solitaire. I think the family ring would look just a little too small with a 5.xmm center unless you have size 4 fingers or something. I have that 6mm family diamond, and I think it is too small as a center stone for me and I think we wear close to the same size. So I do think the 6.2mm 1 ct. would be much better for this particular project. Then it will look balanced if you eventually have that 7mm OEC on the other hand!

Love,
DS, your friendly jewelry consultant

Agree 100%. At first I was liking the .70 in the setting .... and THEN I saw the 6mm placeholder photo for reference & the whole thing just looked more substantial & OOMPHY. Like "FAMILY RING"! And then DS's perspective cemented my vote for the 1ct.

I can just feel your wheels turning. The cert. The setting. The investment. Blah blah ... if you do it RIGHT, you want crave the switch! I think you WANT the 1ct in there. And you have the Aurora for the other hand. So the wait for the blammo 7mm might be a tish bit longer if you're selling the .70 (& perhaps fishtail setting) than it would be if you sold the 1ct w/cert but WHO CARES!!!

 

[Dreamer_D]

OK, you all convinced me I love the .70 and how it is so bright, but I love the size and liquid optics of the 1ct.

And the size. Did I say that already?

Oh, and its bigger.

 

[aljdewey]

This is primarily a RHR I wear my Aurora as a WB all the time. My hands are different sizes, but I might sometimes wear the three stone as an e-ring.

I think my main hesitation about using the larger diamond is that I paid to set it in the solitaire and don't want to feel that money was wasted! Stupid.

Hubby said he likes the bigger center.

I'd agree with him - the bigger looks MUCH better proportioned.

As for waste, I think it would be a bigger waste to set the .70 into that lovely setting and have it not reach its full magnificence. Then, the $$ you invested into that gorgeous setting is wasted instead. You can always scrap the solitaire OR hang on to it for the next adopted stone. No sense compounding the potential for waste by setting something you ultimately might regret, and I do think you'd regret not going to the 1 ct in that ring.

 

[Gypsy]

I think you can resell that setting for the 1 carat-- it was an affordable setting. Or keep it for now see if you find another one carat you might want to re-sell and offer it to the buyer as an option for a temp for them.

I think the 6mm stone looks much better in the three stone and I think using the 70 pointer in there would be a waste. And that seventy pointer will find a nice home with another person or in a pendant for you. Or you can keep hunting for a match for it for earrings.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Very good arguments, all. I am convinced.

Hubby has informed me that he vastly prefers diamond sides (though his opinion does not *really* matter, but I happen to agree in my heart). I have tried twice to find 4mm OECs on my own for a deal to no avail, so I have decided to just order some from a dealer that are still well priced if not a crazy deal. Once I have those and see how they look, I will know for sure which way to go.

 

[Amys Bling]

Can't wait to see what you end up with! For what it's worth the ruby sides look divine

 

[SparklyOEC]

I can't wait to see if you like the diamond sides better. You're going to have a couple of really lovely options. I absolutely love ruby side stones.

 

[decodelighted]

Intriguing! I kinda liked the dash of color as contrast to the Aurora on your other hand. But if the new diamonds are lovely it will be hard not to bling-out the bling-holes.

 

[Dreamer_D]

HA! I too enjoy bling in all the bling holes I have placeholders that we have put into the bling holes and that is where DH got the idea he likes it better. I do to, really, but had slightly given up because of my two failed attempts to find 4mm OECs with good optics and prices. So I caved. If these stones from the dealer are not appealing then rubies it is.

 

[TravelingGal]

HA! I too enjoy bling in all the bling holes I have placeholders that we have put into the bling holes and that is where DH got the idea he likes it better. I do to, really, but had slightly given up because of my two failed attempts to find 4mm OECs with good optics and prices. So I caved. If these stones from the dealer are not appealing then rubies it is.

Dreamer, what was it about the optics that didn't work? I swear, some PSers are so eagle eyed! FK told me my stones all matched. Then I looked at her stones (as she was showing me examples of how they didn't match) and I thought...well, I'd use all these for sidestones...they look pretty and sparkly and MATCHY to me!

I think you are smart to try for the diamond side stones though...it is what you what. However, hubba hubba, love the rubies too.

 

[Mara]

DD I have 3.5mm OEC's in my ring as sides and they are really beautiful... I think once set all together things just take on a new life. Esp seeing those high crowns together. Solo they were somehow not as spectacular. So there's hope.

 

[TravelingGal]

DD I have 3.5mm OEC's in my ring as sides and they are really beautiful... I think once set all together things just take on a new life. Esp seeing those high crowns together. Solo they were somehow not as spectacular. So there's hope.

Ooh, so you did find new stones to replace the modern cuts in your ring? Excellent!