Classic solitaire or lots of bling??

[nikkikeith]

I've been trying to decide on an engagement ring setting and I find myself debating with this constantly. I need to make a choice shortly.

Should I get a platinum solitaire with a little something in the gallery? It would be classic and timeless and I'm thinking the least maintenance and durable for my clutzy mommy hands...it would also be significantly cheaper than an intricate pave piece.

Or do I get something all blinged out? I'm so attracted to intricate antique and split shank settings with lots of melee. I love the sparkle but I worry about stones falling out and it wouldn't be an easy fix as there's no local jewelers that I'd be comfortable using...

Any advice or opinions welcomed and appreciated!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Hi! This question really needs to be asked over in Rocky Talky. So you might want to click "report concern" and just ask an administrator to move it there for you!

But this is a funny coincidence because I posted a similar thread tonight! You might like to read some of the responses to my question, although mine is about a simple solitaire vs. antique style setting.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/setting-for-an-avr-poll.179578/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/setting-for-an-avr-poll.179578/[/URL]

My answer to you, though, is that a blingy pave setting will mean you don't wear your rings unless you are going somewhere, because you have to treat them with TLC and housework, etc. is not good for delicate rings! I actually have recently gotten a couple of right hand rings with colored stones to enjoy the other look but I've pretty much always had a plain solitaire and my kids are almost all grown now!

 

[Enerchi]

Could you go for a classic solitaire as your original ering, in the event you upgrade later for an anniversary (I've never heard of that.... ) and then go for the blinged out wedding band?

or conversely, go for the plain"er" wedding band with some bezel or channel set diamonds, so they are less likely to be damaged, and then have a blinged out ering which you'd take off for anything that could put the stones at risk? (***this would be what I'd go for, if it were me)

How do you spend your day - you said "mommy hands" so are you busy holding/picking up things/washing your hands/lifting and as such, could be potentially knocking your ring? IF that's the case, I'd suggest a classic solitaire simply because reading on PS, there are risks associated with the delicate and pave styles. That's also why I suggested a bit of bling in your WB but in a less risky manner - the channel or bezel settings.

Do you put your rings on and then never take them off? Perhaps bezel setting BOTH rings maybe an option??

ach! its so hard to decide when you see pro's and con's to all sorts of options!! Go with what your heart tells you - that's usually the one you'll love the most!

 

[nikkikeith]

Thanks DS, I thought that was for finding stones

I'll definitely check out your thread!!

Hmm that is something to consider because I'd like to put it on when I wake up and take it off when I go to bed for the most part (I'd take it off for house cleaning and handwashing etc... though) but the idea of having to baby it or only wear it on special occasions doesn't sound appealing, especially since it will cost more too.



Enerchi,
I'm definitely doing a blinged out 3 stone for my RHR/wedding band.

I work from home at a desk job, I've got a 5 year old and one on the way. Washing, picking up, lifting, and clumsy is definitely me I've knocked low set rings on quite a few occasions, nothing that did any damage (just door frames, cupboards, bedframe etc..) but now that I think of it I wonder how much more often it would happen with a slightly higher setting.

I do baby them and take them off to bathe, wash my hands, clean etc...

My heart wants the bling but my head says it's not practical Its so confusing..

 

[Enerchi]

What about a faux test drive of both options?? pick up something in a "faux stone" in both styles of settings you like. See how they 'wear' for you and how many times you bump or knock one option over the other. Granted, the quality of the ring would not be the same as your setting would be, but you'd get some idea...

Also - i think it makes a difference which your dominant hand is. I'm right handed and I am more likely to bang a RHR than my left, because I use it more. My left hand is just there because the left arm came with it!!

 

[nikkikeith]

What about a faux test drive of both options?? pick up something in a "faux stone" in both styles of settings you like. See how they 'wear' for you and how many times you bump or knock one option over the other. Granted, the quality of the ring would not be the same as your setting would be, but you'd get some idea...

Also - i think it makes a difference which your dominant hand is. I'm right handed and I am more likely to bang a RHR than my left, because I use it more. My left hand is just there because the left arm came with it!!

The 2 settings I'm between are an antique split shank (think JBEG Lily) and a curvy tapered cathedral solitaire (think Julia), so that may sway the opinions

Yea that is an idea, I think both styles are pretty low set though so I'd probably bang them equally lol, or do you mean to see if I knock any stones out of the cheapie?

Im right handed as well so less likely to bang it, my left hand isnt used much either but that means its extra clumsy when it is lol

 

[VRBeauty]

Mike Morrell's settings are my favorite for "classic with a little something extra." They're all elegance but the surprise diamonds and surprise design elements dress them up - and they look like they would be super sturdy. Just something to add to your options!

http://www.mwmjewelry.com/

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Ah, so your choices are a little similar to mine! Both of those are beautiful settings! Hard choice!

(This forum is for selecting diamonds and settings, just FYI!)

 

[nikkikeith]

Mike Morrell's settings are my favorite for "classic with a little something extra." They're all elegance but the surprise diamonds and surprise design elements dress them up - and they look like they would be super sturdy. Just something to add to your options!

http://www.mwmjewelry.com/

Yes I've ogled his pieces quite a bit as well Vatche Swan is another nice one...

 

[kenny]

Since you asked, my preference is for the most simple solitaire.
It also leaves more money for a better diamond.

 

[nikkikeith]

Thanks DS I saw your thread and know why we're in the same boat!!! VanC is amazing stuff but your solitaire is just so classic and timeless and elegant

Thanks for sharing your choice Kenny