Not happy with the quality of the heirloom diamond

[femmechic]

I''m in a dilemma right now. For my engagement ring, my fiance gave me his late mother''s wedding ring, which has a center diamond originally from his grandmother''s wedding ring in Bezel setting. It, of course, has high sentimental value to him. We then went to a jeweler and pick out a new setting so we could transfer the diamond from his late mother''s wedding ring onto the new ring. When the jeweler removed the diamond and examined it, it was discovered that the quality of the diamond is pretty poor with many inclusions and imperfections visible to the eye (clarity ~ I1 or I2). Because it was originally set in the bezel setting, those inclusions and imperfections were not as visible. Now, my new ring is in four prong setting, these inclusions are more visible to the naked eye. I really want a diamond with much better quality (at least eye clean) but I also know that this diamond means a lot to my fiance. When I told him that the diamond has a lot of visible inclusions, he didn''t offer to buy a new diamond (which he originally suggested as an option when he proposed - that I can take the diamond or he would buy a new one). Now, I''m not sure what I should do. I want to be happy with my e-ring but I don''t know if I should just simply keep the diamond or insist on getting a new diamond.

 

[ringthings]

The shiniest, cleanest diamond in the world doesn''t have half the sentiment and meaning of this one.

Passed down 2 generations, I''d consider bezel setting it after all, or accept the inclusions. Could a 3 stone ring work, perhaps? I can''t imagine turning down something with decades and decades of memories for 2 late loved ones. But, I can understand you wanting something new. Would a RHR, or pendent, from the heirloom diamond be an option? Maybe a wedding pendent, or something? I suppose you could express concern about wearing it in a 4 prong setting and potentially damaging/scratching such a cherished heirloom if you''re wearing it as a ring for decades. At the end of the day, any diamond is just a rock. The meaning and caring behind it makes it really count. I''m sure there will be plenty of clean diamonds of your own in the future, whether or not it''s the engagement ring or not.

 

[RaiKai]

If you are not happy with it you are likely just to become more and more disatisfied with it. No matter what its history if you do not enjoy wearing it than...well you don''t. It sounds like for you the heirloom factor does not outweigh other factors.

I suggest you really talk to FI about your feelings...not just that it has inclusions as I think that is not really getting to the root of it. You need to express, with compassion of course, you are disappointed and would like a new stone.

He is by no means obligated to get you a new one but perhaps together you can come up with a plan to save together for a new stone either now or at an anniversary and to reset the heirloom in a pendant or something.

 

[Black Jade]

His mother is dead; this was her ring. He thinks a lot of you because he offered it to you and I''m sure he''s happy you agreed to wear it. Don''t make it about quality at this point. It will make it seem like you''re rejecting his mother and grandmother and the quality that THEY accepted. People are funny about things like that--he may not say anything but people feel things like that.
Look for a bezel ring you like or an antique filigree ring--these also hide imperfections and are probably what the ring was originally set in. He will get you other jewelry later, I''m sure, but I would really go with this ring now--the possible hurt feelings are just not worth it.

 

[Circe]

It sounds like a piece with tremendous sentimental value. If possible, I think I''d have the stone put back into the original setting, or one like it to conceal the inclusions, or possibly a bezel pendant inspired by the original setting if you choose to get another e-ring.

As for how to approach this with your fiance? Hm. It''s tough to communicate to men, I think, because they''re not the ones wearing the stones, and they''re not inculcated with the same cultural baggage. So, a) they probably won''t see the flaws, and, b) won''t understand why we obsess over them! That said, I think I''d very gently say that the ring meant so very much because of the sentimental value, was your greatest treasure, etc., but that the clarity made you concerned about wearing the stone in an exposed setting because god forbid anything happen to it.

(If he says anything about how his mother wore it without problems, gently point out that it is because of that that you are concerned - for a stone to be rated I2, there are frequently surface-reaching fractures which can affect durability, and if the stone has luckily survived this long to achieve such great emotional value, why risk it further?)

As for how to raise the question of a different stone? Well, why not just say "When you proposed, you mentioned the possibility of getting another stone - I do not want to ''replace'' this stone or its meaning of my joining your family, but if you''re still open to it, I''d love to choose something together to represent the two of us." Do you think he''d be amenable to that?

 

[CasaBlanca]

Date: 4/21/2010 1:58:45 AM
Author: ringthings
The shiniest, cleanest diamond in the world doesn''t have half the sentiment and meaning of this one.


Passed down 2 generations, I''d consider bezel setting it after all, or accept the inclusions. Could a 3 stone ring work, perhaps? I can''t imagine turning down something with decades and decades of memories for 2 late loved ones. But, I can understand you wanting something new. Would a RHR, or pendent, from the heirloom diamond be an option? Maybe a wedding pendent, or something? I suppose you could express concern about wearing it in a 4 prong setting and potentially damaging/scratching such a cherished heirloom if you''re wearing it as a ring for decades. At the end of the day, any diamond is just a rock. The meaning and caring behind it makes it really count. I''m sure there will be plenty of clean diamonds of your own in the future, whether or not it''s the engagement ring or not.

+1, well written RT!

Femme Chic, especially because you are a PSer, we understand your disappointment. It seems that all we talk about here in CUT etc. So it is your nature to lean towards that. So I empathize with you. I think all along you were hopeful that removing it from the bezel would "make over" the stone. How disappointing it must be to realize it didn''t and now you have gone backwards! I would still focus on RT''s first sentence-No other stone would have the sentiment this one does. I realize you feel as if you are settling, when most of us support the fact that the sentimental factor trumps the quality. WAY COOL! Honest.

I would focus on the fact that your friends are going to be in awe of the heritage-theirs were just stock bought stones. So you trump them! And remember that upgrades and anniversaries will approach for opportunities to get another stone later. If this is really important to your Finance, I would just accept it with grace and love. It will be returned to you 100 fold- I just know it!

Can you switch your setting choice to embrace a bezel halo? Ask owners of Halo''s that make an impressive statement. And there is the fact that apparently no one knew the inclusions existed before the bezel was removed. So just tuck it back into a halo. Later the bezel halo can be made into a pendant and worn with the same sentimental wonder as he is hoping it will now-passed to your daughter or DIL. (would you be open to looking at bezel halo''s? I am sure psers will return with great options for you to consider! We love to shop!)

I think approaching the subject now, after seeing the flaws, well, I would just advise you to refrain from doing so. I really don''t want to hurt your feelings in what I write, and I want to help you protect his feelings as well (I think the gesture of offering you the stone is proof of his sentimentality, not frugality. If that assumption is wrong, then perhaps we could approach it differently).

All I can do is just offer suggestions on how to handle it. I mean nothing but helpful viewpoint, and support.

PS. Is it out of the realm to have BGD recut it?

 

[Loves Vintage]

Would you consider setting it in a bezel or semi-bezel setting? Can you see the inclusions? Or, are you stuck on what the jeweler said? And, do you trust his assessment?

How is the cut of the stone? Any chance you have a pic that you can post? I''d love to see it. I love old stones, so I always ask for a pic. It could have a stunning faceting pattern, and also a few inclusions.

I assume you were happy with the stone in its original setting, otherwise you would have mentioned at the time that you would prefer a new stone. Would you still be happy with the stone in a bezel? There are so many setting options available, that I''m sure you could find something that works with the stone (i.e., hides visible inclusions) and that you love.

I personally would love to have a stone like the one you have, inclusions or not. It has so much more meaning than an off-the-shelf stone that anyone else could have for the same price. If you liked it when you first received it, I would give a new setting a chance.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 4/21/2010 8:50:14 AM
Author: Circe
It sounds like a piece with tremendous sentimental value. If possible, I think I''d have the stone put back into the original setting, or one like it to conceal the inclusions, or possibly a bezel pendant inspired by the original setting if you choose to get another e-ring.

As for how to approach this with your fiance? Hm. It''s tough to communicate to men, I think, because they''re not the ones wearing the stones, and they''re not inculcated with the same cultural baggage. So, a) they probably won''t see the flaws, and, b) won''t understand why we obsess over them! That said, I think I''d very gently say that the ring meant so very much because of the sentimental value, was your greatest treasure, etc., but that the clarity made you concerned about wearing the stone in an exposed setting because god forbid anything happen to it.

(If he says anything about how his mother wore it without problems, gently point out that it is because of that that you are concerned - for a stone to be rated I2, there are frequently surface-reaching fractures which can affect durability, and if the stone has luckily survived this long to achieve such great emotional value, why risk it further?)

As for how to raise the question of a different stone? Well, why not just say ''When you proposed, you mentioned the possibility of getting another stone - I do not want to ''replace'' this stone or its meaning of my joining your family, but if you''re still open to it, I''d love to choose something together to represent the two of us.'' Do you think he''d be amenable to that?

This is a tough one - I like Circe''s approach.

I would reiterate that you understand how meaningful the stone is, and that it means a lot to you, which is why you would love to wear it close to your heart, by setting it in a pendant you could wear every day without risk of damaging the stone.

Good luck!

 

[Clairitek]

Date: 4/21/2010 9:45:58 AM
Author: CasaBlanca

Date: 4/21/2010 1:58:45 AM
Author: ringthings
The shiniest, cleanest diamond in the world doesn''t have half the sentiment and meaning of this one.


Passed down 2 generations, I''d consider bezel setting it after all, or accept the inclusions. Could a 3 stone ring work, perhaps? I can''t imagine turning down something with decades and decades of memories for 2 late loved ones. But, I can understand you wanting something new. Would a RHR, or pendent, from the heirloom diamond be an option? Maybe a wedding pendent, or something? I suppose you could express concern about wearing it in a 4 prong setting and potentially damaging/scratching such a cherished heirloom if you''re wearing it as a ring for decades. At the end of the day, any diamond is just a rock. The meaning and caring behind it makes it really count. I''m sure there will be plenty of clean diamonds of your own in the future, whether or not it''s the engagement ring or not.

+1, well written RT!

Femme Chic, especially because you are a PSer, we understand your disappointment. It seems that all we talk about here in CUT etc. So it is your nature to lean towards that. So I empathize with you. I think all along you were hopeful that removing it from the bezel would ''make over'' the stone. How disappointing it must be to realize it didn''t and now you have gone backwards! I would still focus on RT''s first sentence-No other stone would have the sentiment this one does. I realize you feel as if you are settling, when most of us support the fact that the sentimental factor trumps the quality. WAY COOL! Honest.

I would focus on the fact that your friends are going to be in awe of the heritage-theirs were just stock bought stones. So you trump them! And remember that upgrades and anniversaries will approach for opportunities to get another stone later. If this is really important to your Finance, I would just accept it with grace and love. It will be returned to you 100 fold- I just know it!

Can you switch your setting choice to embrace a bezel halo? Ask owners of Halo''s that make an impressive statement. And there is the fact that apparently no one knew the inclusions existed before the bezel was removed. So just tuck it back into a halo. Later the bezel halo can be made into a pendant and worn with the same sentimental wonder as he is hoping it will now-passed to your daughter or DIL. (would you be open to looking at bezel halo''s? I am sure psers will return with great options for you to consider! We love to shop!)

I think approaching the subject now, after seeing the flaws, well, I would just advise you to refrain from doing so. I really don''t want to hurt your feelings in what I write, and I want to help you protect his feelings as well (I think the gesture of offering you the stone is proof of his sentimentality, not frugality. If that assumption is wrong, then perhaps we could approach it differently).

All I can do is just offer suggestions on how to handle it. I mean nothing but helpful viewpoint, and support.

PS. Is it out of the realm to have BGD recut it?

I think the idea of a bezel halo is wonderful. It adds more sparkle and puts the stone in a setting that enhances it. Plus you get more finger coverage.

The OP didn''t mention cut quality but that sort of thing might help if cut can be improved. However, with a stone that has many visible inclusions I''m sure structural integrity could be a concern. Recutting is pretty cheap though (for the return you get, IMO) so it might be worth asking Brian Gavin Diamonds about this option.

 

[Black Jade]

Date: 4/21/2010 8:50:14 AM
Author: Circe
It sounds like a piece with tremendous sentimental value. If possible, I think I''d have the stone put back into the original setting, or one like it to conceal the inclusions, or possibly a bezel pendant inspired by the original setting if you choose to get another e-ring.


As for how to approach this with your fiance? Hm. It''s tough to communicate to men, I think, because they''re not the ones wearing the stones, and they''re not inculcated with the same cultural baggage. So, a) they probably won''t see the flaws, and, b) won''t understand why we obsess over them! That said, I think I''d very gently say that the ring meant so very much because of the sentimental value, was your greatest treasure, etc., but that the clarity made you concerned about wearing the stone in an exposed setting because god forbid anything happen to it.


(If he says anything about how his mother wore it without problems, gently point out that it is because of that that you are concerned - for a stone to be rated I2, there are frequently surface-reaching fractures which can affect durability, and if the stone has luckily survived this long to achieve such great emotional value, why risk it further?)


As for how to raise the question of a different stone? Well, why not just say ''When you proposed, you mentioned the possibility of getting another stone - I do not want to ''replace'' this stone or its meaning of my joining your family, but if you''re still open to it, I''d love to choose something together to represent the two of us.'' Do you think he''d be amenable to that?

Circe, this is so tactful, yet makes OP''s point. And also, it is true. It would be best to protect such a stone.

I don''t know that I''d go on to the part about ''something to represent us'' just yet. Men''s brains only process one thing at a time well, in my experience. I''d wait on this part, at least a little bit--maybe till after the wedding. But you know your fiance best.

I just want to repeat, it is so amazing to me that you are getting to wear something worn by mother AND grandmother, this is really very special. Not a lot of people had diamonds in their family so far back, those that did have often lost them and this is just rare and really, really precious.

 

[Black Jade]

Don''t mean to offend anyone and I do love the information on PS which has been SO useful to me. But PS can skew your priorities, if you let it. It''s great that we have vendors here sharing their expertise, but I am sure that they are all well aware that a site which has all these beautiful stones and rings continually under the regulars'' eyes (rings that you rarely see in real life among your circle of acquaintances); in which many talk about their ''upgrades'' a great deal; and on which a kind of super-perfectionism has become the norm (mere AGS-0 ideal diamonds seem to be seen now as lacking) and on which there is such hyper-consciousness about style--I''m sure they are aware that this will keep many people buying many more diamonds than they otherwise would. This is fine, I am not judging it, but sometimes one needs to take a step back and think about what one''s real priorities are. And also to remember that in real life, few have Pricescope quality diamonds, and they manage to be happy somehow without this.

This post is not aimed at any one--I think I may be kind of talking out loud to myself and trying to keep my own perspective.

 

[Hest88]

I agree that if you approach your fiance you should only talk about it in terms of the durability/potential damage to the ring. I woud *not* talk about how unattractive it may look. I also agree that another option is to place it back into the original setting or place it into another vintage-like setting to mask the issues.

The stone obviously has a lot of sentimental value to your fiance, and I gather more so than the ring itself (or he wouldn''t have gone removing it from the setting), so I would tread very carefully here.

 

[Imdanny]

Maybe I'm going to be the dissenting voice (and that's fine) but I say just take him up on his offer that you can get a new stone.

"I thought about when you said I could have a new stone if I wanted one and I do want one. I've decided after carefully considering how precious and irreplaceable this stone is that it won't stand up to being in a four prong setting and I think it's best if we save this one in a place it can be safe and I want to find a new stone for the new setting in the meantime."

He didn't offer later, but it doesn't seem you asked directly at that time, either.

I think you should be able to say you want what he offered you. He did make the offer. It's not like it's even your idea.

 

[Cehrabehra]

this is tongue in cheek response but....

just be sure to have kids right away so that you can pass this on to the next generation and get on to YOUR upgrade asap

 

[winternight]

I say get a new ring and just ask for what you want. I''m not a big fan of family rings unless they''re a really great diamond or a style of ring. I know that lots of people love that idea but if the ring didn''t come from my grandmother I personally would just never be that attached and it would have to stand up on its own merits.

Besides grandmother got a new ring when she got married, why can''t you? I agree that setting it as a pendant sounds like a good idea.

 

[yssie]

Date: 5/1/2010 9:30:24 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
this is tongue in cheek response but....

just be sure to have kids right away so that you can pass this on to the next generation and get on to YOUR upgrade asap

HAH. *snort*.

 

[karpouzi]

Date: 4/21/2010 10:08:31 AM
Author: Loves Vintage
Can you see the inclusions? Or, are you stuck on what the jeweler said?

This is a key question! The jeweler is NOT impartial here--he wants to tell you your diamond is lousy and oh looky over here at all these beautiful diamonds for sale! Just make sure you''re seeing what''s really there and not seeing inclusions that the jeweler wants you to see.