Current Diamond fads?

[Gwens492]

I am about to propose to my girlfriend and I am looking for a ring and a diamond.

I went to Pearlmans Jewelers website and found a solitaire,
http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/jewelry-designers/durnell-jewelry/rings/59AA1/

However I am a bit overwhelmed by the diamond specifications.
The diamonds on Pearlmans website are pretty reasonable, compared to other websites I went to.

I am still undecided about what ring to choose; this will be based on the diamond.

What are the diamond fads that I should avoid when buying?
I'm looking to get something that will not be dated as the years progress.

 

[AprilBaby]

That looks to be a classic beautiful ring! Marquise were out but now coming back, Princess cuts seem to be out. Cushions will always be classic. The split shank will hold its own. I think the halo will be dated in two years. Rose gold will be dated also. My opinion.

 

[kenny]

Halo settings.
Ultra thin bands, especially if set with tiny diamonds.
Little surprise stones 'hidden' in the setting.

IMO the most timeless ering is a round diamond in the simple solitaire.
The solitaire also happens to be the least-costly setting so more of the budget can go towards a better diamond.

 

[HappyNewLife]

halos seem like a fad, but not sure if it will leave any time soon

that setting is gorgeous, but $6K for a setting to me seems ridiculous. I'd rather get a bigger/better diamond and receive a simple platinum solitaire setting

 

[Gwens492]

I would have thought that a halo would have more staying power and not be a fad.

I guess a round cut is the safest bet.

Thanks

 

[Gwens492]

A bigger/better diamond as appose to a nicer ring is what I was thinking too.

I think my girlfriend might be in the same boat as you with the simple platinum solitaire with a nice diamond

 

[blingbuyer]

Let me ask this. For a simple solitaire setting, is there a particular size the stone must be for that to look nice? If under 1ct would you recommend a solitaire over a halo?

 

[kenny]

Let me ask this. For a simple solitaire setting, is there a particular size the stone must be for that to look nice? If under 1ct would you recommend a solitaire over a halo?

Define, "look nice".

How a size 'looks' depends on your income/family/social circle/ location.

The same diamond will look huge to one person but tiny to another person.

 

[Gwens492]

You have a good point.

With the responses from people above I have decided to go with a solitaire setting and focus more on the diamond.

http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/jewelry-designers/sholdt-jewelry/rings/34ZZ1/

I guess I should consider the quality over the size of the diamond.
Anything over 1 carat might be too big for her figure.

 

[EvangelineG]

Let me ask this. For a simple solitaire setting, is there a particular size the stone must be for that to look nice? If under 1ct would you recommend a solitaire over a halo?

There are a lot of factors that influence this- #1 being the recipient's personal tastes in concert with the giver's budget. Finger size makes a big difference; a smaller diamond solitaire will look proportional on a smaller finger and vice versa. Location, culture, occupation and age also seem to play a role in what size solitaire is considered big enough to look "nice".

For example: I have a size 5.5 finger, and found that anything at or over around 6mm looked proportional to me as a solitaire on my finger (about 0.75-0.80 carat), bear in mind that I like simple, fairly casual clothing and don't live in a geographic area where big diamonds are the norm. For others on here a 6mm diameter would feel way too small not to halo, and for some women a diamond of even much smaller size would feel cumbersome or ostentatious in a halo and they would prefer a solitaire. There's no rule. It is dependent on budget and tastes.

 

[denverappraiser]

What’s wrong with fads?

I have no problem with that ring or with any of the above advice but I thought I would answer the fad question. Some current trends as I see them are:

White gold.
Platinum.
Round center diamonds diamonds.
Cushions.
Halos.
Imitation pave (the kind done with a CAD)
Complex engineering.
‘Ideal’ cuts.
GIA lab grading.
Two rings, not one. Not trios with the gents ring.
Designers

 

[cflutist]

halos seem like a fad, but not sure if it will leave any time soon

that setting is gorgeous, but $6K for a setting to me seems ridiculous. I'd rather get a bigger/better diamond and receive a simple platinum solitaire setting

I feel the same way. Being a Gemologist I am more into the center diamond itself which is why my next RHR will be set as a solitaire in a Vatche U-113 mounting. It is for the same reason that I chose a plain Fancy Yellow Solitaire from Tiffany over their popular Soleste line.
I normally just get what I want and don't follow fads. Although halos are pretty, they are just not for me.

 

[Niel]

IMHO you dont get more traditional and classic than the classic 6 prong tiffany solitaire.

Its been around for a century and itll be around for another. It looks amazing with a half ct or a 1.5 ct. Size 3 or size 8.





Now I wouldnt pay Tiffany prices, so Tiffany is out.

The best tiffany repro is the Vatche U-113.

Now I believe in plat (which i would recommend ) is 1900? I dont know what the rest of your budget is, but seeing as how you were going to drop 6k on the setting, I would imagine your budget is enough to get a 1 ct.... again, just guessing. I would, if it were me, get the best darn 1 ct you can find for your budget, within reason. I wouldnt overpay for a E, IF or something, but we know she thinks anything over a ct looks to big....

She will almost certainly change her mind after wearing it for a few years, but if she doesnt want to go over a ct now, id respect that.

I dont believe pearlmans sells Vatche. Whiteflash and Good Old Gold does, though. I know you said you thought pearlmans has a better price on stones, but then again i dont know what youre searching for.

Also, I might even suggest considering a AVR at good old gold that way, she has the best of both worlds. And absolutely without a doubt most traditional ring ever (1 ct 6 prong platinum tiffany repro) yet something none of her friends will have in an AVR.....

 

[Niel]

What’s wrong with fads?

I have no problem with that ring or with any of the above advice but I thought I would answer the fad question. Some current trends as I see them are:

White gold.
Platinum.
Round center diamonds diamonds.
Cushions.
Halos.
Imitation pave (the kind done with a CAD)
Complex engineering.
‘Ideal’ cuts.
GIA lab grading.
Two rings, not one. Not trios with the gents ring.
Designers

I guess when i define fad i take particular notice of the last part of the definition.

an intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, especially one that is short-lived

I would not consider Round diamonds a short lived enthusiasm.

Now I would consider cushions and halos a fad. However, I do believe all fads can have an element of timelessness to them.

in the 80s yellow gold and marquise were the rage... Sure guards and baguette sunbursts dont transcend time periods well, but give me a big marquise in a well made yellow gold setting and Ill rock it for the next 50 years.... Its just a matter of recognizing timeless elements. If you want to incorporate a fad within that, thats cool.

An cushion may very well be a fad, but a well made cushion solitiare in 20 years will still be lovely, even if people can guess what decade its from

 

[Gwens492]

Thank you for your suggestion.

The photos of your ring are amazing.

I'm looking at a 1 carat diamond. I went on Pearlmans diamond search and looked at diamond from an E-G range.

It was easier than I thought to look for a specific diamond. I called them and they walk me through my options.
I feel confident in focusing on the diamond and going with a simple solitaire.

I looked at Vatche, however I do like what Pearlmans has for Sholdt rings.

 

[denverappraiser]

It's not so much that round is new but rather that shapes other than round are less popular. I don't have the stats handy but 20 years ago I used to see a LOT more in things like marquise, heart, pear, ovals and the like. People bought a much greater variety. These are still there, and they're just as lovely as they were when your grandfather bought them, but sales of these things have dropped to near zero. An exception is with very large stones by the way. 10 caraters come in all sorts of shapes and round is no longer the rule.

I would add to the list fancy colored diamonds, and they usually come in shapes other than round by the way.

 

[Niel]

Thank you for your suggestion.

The photos of your ring are amazing.

I'm looking at a 1 carat diamond. I went on Pearlmans diamond search and looked at diamond from an E-G range.

It was easier than I thought to look for a specific diamond. I called them and they walk me through my options.
I feel confident in focusing on the diamond and going with a simple solitaire.

I looked at Vatche, however I do like what Pearlmans has for Sholdt rings.

is this all you are looking for? Color clarity and ctw are not the only thing that make a good diamond. And overwhelmingly what DOES make a good diamond most is its cut... just make sure youre getting a well cut stone, or else that might be why it seems like pearlmans has better prices

 

[Lizabeth]

What about ovals? Fad?

 

[Niel]

What about ovals? Fad?

I don't think so. They aren't that popular in the first place, so its hard to call them a craze.

 

[blingbuyer]

Very informative thread

 

[cflutist]

What about ovals? Fad?

Instead of worrying whether it is a fad or not, why not just buy what appeals to you and what looks good on your finger.

In my younger days I wore a size 3.5 ring. At that time the marquise appealed to me because I thought the shape looked good on my skinny finger. That 1.47 F-VS1 marquise is now set in a RHR. Then I bought a 2.05 D-VS2 oval, again because I liked the elongated shape. Loved that diamond but it was slightly deep. Years later I traded that diamond in for my current 3.01 F-SI1 pear, again because I wanted something different that I thought looked good on my small fingers. Note: my pear is 7.93 mm wide and 12.99 mm long versus a 9.3 mm diameter 3ct round which I thought would look slightly out of balance on my small finger. Fast forward to now, when through old age and weight gain, I am now a size 4.5 and have decided it is now time to start looking for a round brilliant (slow learner I guess)

If you like ovals, get one. They are also less expensive than rounds, but watch out for the bow-tie.

 

[Gwens492]

Color diamond does seem like a fad, but I've heard the value of most will increase over the years; making it a good investment.

Brown diamond especially seem like a fad.

However most color diamond look great!

 

[Dancing Fire]

A bigger/better diamond as appose to a nicer ring is what I was thinking too.

I think my girlfriend might be in the same boat as you with the simple platinum solitaire with a nice diamond

Yup, a simple 6 prong solitaire will always be in style even 100 yrs from now.

 

[denverappraiser]

Color diamond does seem like a fad, but I've heard the value of most will increase over the years; making it a good investment.

Danger Will Robinson. Danger.

The problem with diamonds as an ‘investment’ is that the selling market is stacked against individual sellers for a variety of reasons, most of them pretty good. Buying is easy. Selling is hard. Fancy colors are even worse. They have gone up dramatically in the last decade and that’s attracted the attention of people flogging them for their investment potential. Sometimes it works out but past performance is not a guarantee of future results and even if THEY can get more for in 10 years doesn’t mean that YOU can. Do not go into a diamond deal expecting ever to see your money again.

However most color diamond look great!

Absolutely!

 

[WinkHPD]

I would have thought that a halo would have more staying power and not be a fad.

I guess a round cut is the safest bet.

Thanks

I think with diamond prices in an upwards pattern, in spite of recent small drops, that halos will be around for some time as they do make a smaller diamond look larger. Long term, prices will continue to rise as world wide production declines and demand continues to rise with the introduction of engagement ring traditions in both China and India, as well as other nations around the world.

As far as "guaranteed" staying power, I think I agree with the comment that the round brilliant cut is the "safest". With new understanding of diamond cutting there will be new cuts, but while I see many of them becoming popular, I am unable to see any of them dethroning the simply elegant round brilliant cut.

To be sure, I am enjoying many of the new cuts and also the resurgence of the new "old" cuts such as the modern Old European cut.

One thing for sure. The diamond world is NOT becoming boring! The world of beauty is rapidly expanding and will become even more fascinating in the years to come!

Wink

 

[kenny]

What’s wrong with fads?

They are temporary, and therefore go out of style.
You expect to wear an ering maybe 50 tears so wanting to avoid a fad is understandable.

Then again to each their own.
If you like what's hot now then by all means buy it.
You are free to update it to the next 'thing' whenever you want.

 

[Niel]

What’s wrong with fads?

They are temporary, and therefore go out of style.

Avoiding this is understandable if you intend to live more than 5 years.

Then again to each their own.
If you like what's hot now then by all means buy it.

Your theory implies two things

1. The wearer will tire of the "fad"
2. The wearer cares to have their ring in vogue.

Not always the case. For example, the star burst baguette marquise ring. QUITE the fad. But, if the individual purchased it because they genuinely liked the style, rather than just because pop culture told them to like it, what's wrong with that? Will it be less popular in 5 years? Sure. So? If the wearer never tires of the style, then who cares if it was a fad from the 80s or a timeless style?

 

[kenny]

What’s wrong with fads?

They are temporary, and therefore go out of style.

Avoiding this is understandable if you intend to live more than 5 years.

Then again to each their own.
If you like what's hot now then by all means buy it.

Your theory implies two things

1. The wearer will tire of the "fad"
2. The wearer cares to have their ring in vogue.

Not always the case. For example, the star burst baguette marquise ring. QUITE the fad. But, if the individual purchased it because they genuinely liked the style, rather than just because pop culture told them to like it, what's wrong with that? Will it be less popular in 5 years? Sure. So? If the wearer never tires of the style, then who cares if it was a fad from the 80s or a timeless style?

Yes.
Obviously.
People vary.
Everyone is perfect.
If you love what is NOW a fad and will happily wear it for 60 years, great!
If you change it every 6 years for the latest fad, also great!
Everyone is pefefct.

But let's not forget what the OP said ...
"What are the diamond fads that I should avoid when buying?
I'm looking to get something that will not be dated as the years progress."

This thread is about the OP's perspective, which is to avoid fads.

 

[Karl_K]

Buy what she loves not just because it is popular and you don't have to worry about fads.

 

[denverappraiser]

The longest running fad going is the round brilliant cut ‘colorless’ diamond set in a platinum solitaire style setting. 1 diamond, tapered shank, 4 prongs. Rounded shoulders. That’s been nicely popular for 70ish years now. That’s a pretty good run. Will it still be popular in another 70? I think there’s a decent chance but there’s definitely no guarantee. As mentioned above, it doesn’t much matter. She is the only one who hast to like it.

FWIW, I know ladies who are downright proud of the fact that their ring is out of fashion. It’s a sign that their marriage has lasted a good long time.