Thinking about getting my setting changed.

[Demelza]

Here''s another of the 1.5 ct if that helps at all....

 

[Snooper]

Tough call. Demelza''s before and after pics of the same setting are night and day!! I think your bands aren''t too thin or too large. I think the smaller bands make the stone pop more, but your ring has a lot of command! I love it!! I wouldn''t change it quite yet. Maybe if you love your setting, save up a bit for a larger stone?

 

[Demelza]

Date: 6/8/2006 3:08:06 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Demelza, you ended up with the Superbcert Tiffany, right? Have you been happy with that decision? I am debating about that setting right now but will have a smaller stone than you do. So I''m not positive how it would look. I hate trying to pick out a setting without trying them on! (please excuse the diversion, pg!)

Yes, I am generally happy with my decision. Of course, I often fantasize about changing settings, but I still am pleased with the overall look of the solitaire. It really showcases my stone. I''m honestly not sure, however, how much I would like a smaller stone in this setting. I tend to like a six prong head for "biggish" stones (maybe 2ct and above???). I think you''re thinking of a 1.4 or so, right? Hard to say. I might be more inclined towards a 4 prong for a stone of that size??? Sorry, not much help there.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 6/8/2006 3:18:34 PM
Author: Demelza

Date: 6/8/2006 3:08:06 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Demelza, you ended up with the Superbcert Tiffany, right? Have you been happy with that decision? I am debating about that setting right now but will have a smaller stone than you do. So I'm not positive how it would look. I hate trying to pick out a setting without trying them on! (please excuse the diversion, pg!)

Yes, I am generally happy with my decision. Of course, I often fantasize about changing settings, but I still am pleased with the overall look of the solitaire. It really showcases my stone. I'm honestly not sure, however, how much I would like a smaller stone in this setting. I tend to like a six prong head for 'biggish' stones (maybe 2ct and above???). I think you're thinking of a 1.4 or so, right? Hard to say. I might be more inclined towards a 4 prong for a stone of that size??? Sorry, not much help there.

I think you have an excellent point. I have a 1 ct. now in a 4 prong, so I know exactly what you mean. I see why people end up changing settings, because it is really hard to tell what you'll like just by choosing a picture on the internet!!! Ugh!!! (Yes, I am looking for around 1.4).

 

[anika]

PG,
This thread is very timely. I have been exactly where you are and also with a 1.23ct. My wedding band which I adore is substantial with 8-10 pters and I don''t want to touch this. My solitaire has channel set diamonds (4pts) and with both on, I feel the1.23ct looks small- it gets lost. It explains why going to a mall store and trying on 1cts in plain cheap settings seem to look bigger to me.
However before I got to this set, I kept changing the setting and changing it and really it hasn''t satisfied what I think I am itching for: A bigger diamond. I am now thinking instead of pouring money into the setting and not being happy, its better to invest in a bigger diamond. I contemplated whether I should get rid of side stones and go plain band but really I think there was a reason I went with side stones in the first place and again, I could do this and it wouldn''t be satisfying. I
don''t hate my set at all but I really think the diamond gets lost. However after contemplating it, I think even if I upgrade (which is what I want to do), I feel that I shouldn''t change my setting; it has a story and my hubby also had input and really to change it now only after a year would be wrong on my part and it may not satisfy me! I think your setting is gorgeous, timeless. I think maybe its about proportions and if you can think long term about getting a larger stone that may be what you are really desiring. As everyone has said, having thinner bands will probably help the stone pop but going larger will too. I also wonder if you change the setting now, so early whether a couple of years down the track, you may get the itch for something larger?
What I would do is weigh up the cost of changing setting with going to say a 1.5ct or 1.7ct. Obviously changing the setting might be cheaper than a 1.7ct but how long would it take to get there and is it worth hanging in there.
I was wondering if you like the idea of a very thin spacer in the meantime. This has worked well for some people.
Anika.

 

[dbgaap]

Your ring set is really beautiful just the way it is. But if you need to talk about changin your setting, you came to the right place!!

If you need to talk about getting a bigger diamond, you came to the right place!!

personally I have always gone for a simple solitaire because I do feel the diamonds on the band have a way of detracting from the center stone (until you go up into the really big stones, anyway...)

Lynn B, Mara and demelza''s rings with diamonds on the shank certainly do not detract from the center stone.

But for my 1.20, it wouldn''t do anything for it IMHO.

I have an eternity band with 3mm width stones and I usually wear it on my right hand. It has just enough presence to look good by itself.

ANYWAY.... rambling here >>>>> good luck on your decision making!!

Your rings REALLY do look LOVELY just as they are!!!

 

[Lynn B]

Thought this might help. My old 1.53 on the shared prong (.03 pointers) band...

 

[headlight]

Peonygirl,
Do you mind my asking your age? If you are a *young* bride-to-be, I can understand why the width of the two rings would seem too much for you -- but give it some time. I am 41, married 17 years this year, and trust me when I say that when you get to be an old married hag like me (LOL!!!) you no longer want such a "dainty" ring that screams "I just got engaged!". It is like w/ clothing: I no longer wear short, short mini skirts anymore; I still have the body to get away with it, but it just doesn't seem apropriate, nor does it feel "right".
Also, I think Alj made an excellent point in that you clearly have not worn the two together long enough for it to feel "natural". I think Mara's story in how her upgrade now finally makes her set look correct is the way I've felt with setting/diamond combinations I've had in the past. I would wait and go for an upgrade down the road, if you don't have an issue w/ upgrading your engagement stone. Also, you are not even married yet, so I think it would seem odd to change things up even before the wedding.
BUT, if you feel compelled to change anything... you know WE WILL BE HERE TO SUPPORT YOU

 

[peonygirl]

Hi headlight. You might be right. . . I''m 23. I think also the fact that I''m pretty petite (4.75 ring size, 5''1'''', 110 pounds) does tend to make the ring feel overwhelming on me. I''m a huge girly-girl when it comes to clothing and personal style, and I''ve always liked very delicate and intricate jewelry.

I guess I''ll just have to think over the next year and plan "my next move." Perhaps if I keep the wedding costs on the more modest side I''ll have a couple thousand left over for an upgrade on our first anniversary. Gosh, that would have sounded so nuts to a pre-PS me, but now that you guys have brainwashed me. . .

 

[dbgaap]

That sounds like a great idea. I agree with headlight, as you get older your tastes will change.
There are some rings I love, but I would not get one for myself because I consider it to be a "young" look that isn''t such a good idea on a lady my age.

And I know it is weird to consider dropping a few grand on rings, but as long as it''s not putting you in the poor house, it''s OK.
i mean, you wear it every day, you know? Divide cost by number of days worn and it''s not so much at all!