Flush wedding sets...

[Mara]

For those who are looking for an e-ring and wed set that sits flush...some beautiful designs at www.precisionset.com. I don''t know pricing or anything, just saw their ad in a mag and their site has some great pix.

 

[coarchitect]

these do look nice! (looked at them while i was deciding) but just a caution, they sit very very high (thus the flush fit) so just a F.Y.I. if that bothers you...

 

[fire&ice]

SPYGIRL! has a dealer near her. She will investigate. Though, it seems that the bands were made to go w/ the wedding set & not as a stand alone type band with other settings besides theirs.

Very clean designs.

 

[Fancy]

They are very nice ... I happen to like sets. Several jewelers have told me that the modern trend is to wear a larger sized stone e-ring on your right hand, and your wedding band on your left ... I still prefer the old fashioned look, even with larger stones, and I still see most people wearing them together.

 

[Kamuelamom]

I know sitting flush is important to many people. They are very beautiful sets and I'm sure this site would be appreciated by those looking for that feature. Thanks Mara!

 

[Mara]

Yes I viewed the website and was impressed at the breadth of their designs. They have pave, channel set, stuff with baguettes, solitaires, etc etc. So it's almost like..something for everyone if you want that flush, matching look but don't want it to be some retro 80's design.

I like cathedral style settings which place the diamond slightly higher up (a necessity usually when dealing with flush settings), so I was really taken by a few of the settings on their site. Nice photography too. Pricey I bet!




SPYGIRL! let us know when/if you view the designs and your findings .

 

[lenore80]

Wow, those are nice but probably very expensive...I did a retailer search, and one of stores that sells it is Neiman Marcus.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 1:01:16 PM Mara wrote:


So it's almost like..something for everyone if you want that flush, matching look but don't want it to be some retro 80's design. -

Mara, I take issue with this. While *new* in the 80's, Gemloks are a classic - just an improved variation on a bar set. My bands were then & remain now very classy. To this day, I have people comment on them. I can assure you they are more than a trend - I'm not a trendy person. I have bands in every different type of settings. By far, this is the most comfortable & easy to wear setting. Except for the price, I would recommend them to anyone. Jean Vitau is still in business & still designing.

Besides, isn't the early 80's retro back in chic? That said, I wouldn't be caught dead in puffy dynasty shoulders.

SPYGIRL! is on the job next week. What I don't like about Precision is that they are not stand alone. I like the bands. I'm not found of the engagement sets. Too bulky for my hand.

 

[Mara]

Yes 80's is now the trend...as sick and wrong as it is...70's at least was COOL...80's was a fashion mistake gone horribly wrong, jewelry included--no matter what you say! There were the random classy pieces but for the most part....very scary.

I do like the music though.




F&I...the wed bands look as though they could be worn on their own..where did you find that they couldn't? Maybe I missed it....

 

[Fancy]

Mara, do you find that people are telling you that e-rings and wedding bands should be worn separate now? All the jewlers have been pushing this to me.

Thanks so much for the poll advice, I read your email AFTER I posted the failed poll, I will have to try again!

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 1:43:12 PM Mara wrote:


There were the random classy pieces but for the most part....very scary.

I do like the music though.


F&I...the wed bands look as though they could be worn on their own..where did you find that they couldn't? Maybe I missed it....
----------------

By stand alone - I meant with other engagement rings besides precision set. It sits way to high up to go w/ regular prongs. I will go take a look next week.

Mara, I'm a little more versed in both the 80's & the 70's than you.

Gemloks have been around since the early 70's. In the 70's I wore simple & elegant neckrings & various pendants - very artsy. Actually, my specialty amoung my specialty is 1970's signed silver jewelry from Scandinavia (Georg Jensen, Lapponia, Bent Knudsen, David Anderson, etc.). Sleek & Elegant - nothing tacky. So, I tend to like the early part of the 70's.

In the 80's all I remember wearing were pearls, simple gold or silver chains w/ charms, lapis beads, rope bands, small floating gold heart on a chain (maybe this one was the late 70's), Cartier Tank watch (very popular), Antique Cameos. I don't remember the 80's jewelry as offensive. Except for lots of beads, I remember the jewelry as pretty boring or retro 1920's.

Show me something to jog my memory.

The only trend in engagement rings that was "new" was the three stone. I can assure you that it was not w/ baguettes on the side. Having all of my friends become engaged in the 80's early 90's *none* received that style unless it was a family ring from generations ago. Also introduced at the later part of the 1980's were colored stones for engagement rings. Diana made this trend popular. Most people opted for a diamond. Some friends did reset their diamond w/ colored stone sides. I don't find anything offensive here either

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 4:35:39 PM Fancy wrote:

Mara, do you find that people are telling you that e-rings and wedding bands should be worn separate now? All the jewlers have been pushing this to me.

/twirl.gif'>----------------

Fancy, this is the latest marketing push from Debeer's. They are encouraging women to wear a "right" hand diamond ring - even if they have a left hand e-ring. There is nothing wrong w/ a women wearing a "right hand" ring - I just find the marketing ploy transparent - I think the diamond pinky ring will be next.

Wear what you want - where you want to! Are you the one w/ the large pear - love to see a pic.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 4:36:35 PM fire&ice wrote:

Mara, I'm a little more versed in both the 80's & the 70's than you

And this means what....that your opinion is somehow more valid? I lived through the 80s, too, and I'm quite sure I couldn't profess to know everything there is to know about the period. One doesn't necessarily have to live through a period to know a lot about it, and those who lived through it don't know everything about it or have an exclusive on it.

I will say, however, that I do remember many horrible trends......fushcia colored lipstick, lavendar eyeshadow, horrendous hairstyles, and yes, some very tacky jewelry.

Also introduced at the later part of the 1980's were colored stones for engagement rings. Diana made this trend popular. Most people opted for a diamond.

Actually, colored stones as engagement rings were the rule *long* before DeBeers successfully marketed the idea of a diamond as engagement stone. Colored stone engagement rings were the norm in Europe for several hundred years......and I know that even though I didn't live through that time, either.
----------------

 

[Mara]

F&I--sounds you were much more classy 80's than most. Hmm something to jog the memory. I remember the 80's as being fraught with huge gaudy gold pieces, lots of weird small baguette set stones, instead of the simple solitaire there were 'multi-stone' rings with something like 20 small stones in some funky pattern or shape. Lots of gold. Lots of gold.

I'll see if I can dredge up some frightening pictures. Late 80's to early 90's is when I recall most of this type of stuff surfacing, and I had older friends who had very scary engagement rings. Classic pearls and gold chains were not what I am thinking of at all!!

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 4:46:04 PM aljdewey wrote:

----------------
On 10/13/2003 4:36:35 PM fire&ice wrote:

Mara, I'm a little more versed in both the 80's & the 70's than you

And this means what....that your opinion is somehow more valid? I lived through the 80s, too, and I'm quite sure I couldn't profess to know everything there is to know about the period. One doesn't necessarily have to live through a period to know a lot about it, and those who lived through it don't know everything about it or have an exclusive on it.

, and yes, some very tacky jewelry.

Also introduced at the later part of the 1980's were colored stones for engagement rings. Diana made this trend popular. Most people opted for a diamond.

Actually, colored stones as engagement rings were the rule *long* before DeBeers successfully marketed the idea of a diamond as engagement stone. Colored stone engagement rings were the norm in Europe for several hundred years......and I know that even though I didn't live through that time, either.
----------------

----------------

As an ADULT in the 70's & 80's I *am* more versed on what people wore & what *I* wore.

As a dealer in objects from this century, it's my job to be well versed. My specialty stops at the 70's. I asked simply to show me some tacky jewelry from the 80's jar my memory. As far as engagement rings, I was of the age when people became engaged. I was paying attention to what people received in context of the time. Marquise were the it stone. And as mentioned in my post, the emerging "trends". I don't remember the scarry rings Mara spoke of.

As an Art & Antique dealer whose specialty is jewelry, I am fully aware of trends through the generations. Diamond edged out colored stones long before they became fashionable *again* b/c of Lady Di's engagment ring. As a simple fact, I happened to mention what became popular in "my" generation of the newly engaged. I was stating a here & now fact. It was not in relation to history.

As an aside to Mara, I think any "decade" is chock full of scarry "interpretations" of what may be "current". And, the rings I think you are referring to are still being sold today.

But, still want pics. They only thing I remember as being tacky was this Mimi de Mimi stuff that was huge elephant heads & odd looking frogs.

 

[Mara]

I didn't necessarily want to post pix of what I think is hideous, because what I don't like...others may adore. But I will brave potential flames and post this small sampling of what represents to me..the late 80s and early 90s, gaudy bright gold and lots of cluster and baguette diamonds.




I remember a girl getting engaged when I was in my late teens, her ring had 22 diamonds, spoken of in quiet reverence...wow..22 diamonds. In a cluster. Expensive. If only I knew. That thing probably cost all of $2k, but looked huge and impressive.




Yes rings like these are still in commerce, I found all of these in a quick eBay search and have seen them frequently in jewelry special mailers in my mailbox, but I don't see them worn or purchased like they used to be...all the time. Now more solitaires and the like seem to be the fashion for newly engaged or similar. Also the 'set' trend was really early 90's and late 80's especially--tons of people buying the sets (kind of like you see here in these pix). That is why I really don't like 'set' rings...I have such a bad memory of them. I like the flush fit ones because they are more like what I'd buy...simple but classy and fits well...rather than the 'wrap' or the 'lets cloak in a flower of 100 more diamonds and hide that there is even a lovely stone in the middle there' look.




While trends will come and go..and come again....I hope this cluster baguette multiple ring and stone look stays out of sight for a long while.

Oh and one more scary item was that Tiffany style you said was popular..the dome thing. Arrgh!!

When was that around anyway?!




Enjoy!

 

[fire&ice]

Mara, you obviously don't shop the department stores & low end maul stores. These still abound. And people still sport them. Some of those pictured are "wraps" more a product of the late 80's- 90's. Not my taste -but different strokes I suppose. I can assure you; I didn't know anyone who received such ring.

That said, I have seen some nice wraps. I think often - it's good idea gone bad though. And in America - why do something if you can *over do* it.

 

[Mara]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 5:26:14 PM fire&ice wrote:





Mara, you obviously don't shop the department stores & low end maul stores; These still abound; And people still sport them

_____________

Yes that is the scary part...ha ha. Actually as I noted..I see them frequently advertised in the 'jewelry special' mailers in my box say from maul stores...for $999 or similar. People may still sport them...but I see them maybe 1 out of every 10.

Definitely to each their own--everyone has their own tastes...so hope no one gets offended by my pictures.

It's kind of like diamond nugget pinky rings. SCARY. Capital S. But my beloved better half loves them (must be the Jersey in him..hee hee). I got him a little fun one with miniscule diamonds for his bday last year and YES he wears it..to my absolute chagrin.

 

[antiquediamond]

I wonder if the trend in the 80s towards those god-awful cluster diamond rings had something to do w/ the price of diamonds being outrageous about 20 years ago. I remember reading -- I think on this forum -- that the avg/ price of a one carat stone was much higher than it it today. Something like $20K. Anyone know if that's true? With the looks of those "genuine diamonds" posted above, I'm glad I got engaged in 2003!!

 

[aljdewey]

I guess we're speaking from two different experiences. I was also an adult in the 80s, and I remember quite a bit of "gaudy" stuff......clothes, jewelry, make-up, etc. You name it......the name of the game was "overdone"!




"Retro-80s" to me evokes memories of Dynasty, Studio 54, Mr. T., etc. where the credo was "bigger/more is better", and that typically included jewelry. It didn't tend to matter if it was tasteful.......only that there was a *lot* of it.

 

[Mara]

Yes like 30 jelly bracelets up and down the arms.

 

[Hest88]

My eyes! My eyes! Yes, when I think back to typical 80s rings those cluster types are exactly the ones I imagine. I do see them still, but I think back then they were definitely the trend.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 6:32:38 PM antiquediamond wrote:

I wonder if the trend in the 80s towards those god-awful cluster diamond rings had something to do w/ the price of diamonds being outrageous about 20 years ago. I remember reading -- I think on this forum -- that the avg/ price of a one carat stone was much higher than it it today. Something like $20K. Anyone know if that's true? With the looks of those 'genuine diamonds' posted above, I'm glad I got engaged in 2003!!----------------

You may really have a point. We were on the bubble. Things settled down a bit. History often dicates trends.

Although, Hest, I don't know what in the world is a bubble bracelet. Any pics?

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 7:08:18 PM aljdewey wrote:


I guess we're speaking from two different experiences. I was also an adult in the 80s, and I remember quite a bit of 'gaudy' stuff......clothes, jewelry, make-up, etc. You name it......the name of the game was 'overdone'!




Define "adult". Your right about the overdone. My husband has a good head on his shoulders. So do I. The Development industry was frought (word? spelling - love it though) w/ quite a bit of money going up one's nose. But, Al, that's really the momentum of the latter part of the 80's. I still don't remember much tacky jewelry. That wasn't a focus. Except for Mr. T, I can assure you my circle was much more focus on Lady Di.

Strange time indeed. Probably a reaction to the bad economy in the 1st part of the 80's.

Funny, those that track trends - jewelry does tend to mimic times, influences, etc.

 

[Mara]

fraught (frôt) adj.

1. Filled with a specified element or elements; charged: an incident fraught with danger; an evening fraught with high drama.

(from Dictionary.Com)

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 8:01:28 PM Mara wrote:


fraught (frôt) adj.

1. Filled with a specified element or elements; charged: an incident fraught with danger; an evening fraught with high drama.

(from Dictionary.Com)

----------------

Thanks Mara - high drama indeed.

I've thought about this. I still want people to post bad jewelry (other than those cluster rings which Antiquediamond had a very good point as to their existence). I don't remember nor do my friends remember the 80's being particularly loaded with tacky jewelry. Aside from Mr. T, all that gold wasn't the norm. With the influence of Nancy Reagan & Lady/Princess Diana, I remember *alot* of pearls & smallish tasteful jewelry. The only tacky trend I recall was in the costume jewelry area. Big glass stones to mimic some of the Dynasty stars jewelry. I didn't own any of those.

After all, Bling Bling wasn't added to the dic. in the 80's. I believe it was added this year. There are tons of Mr. T's walking around now.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/13/2003 7:59:02 PM fire&ice wrote:

Except for Mr. T, I can assure you my circle was much more focus on Lady Di.
----------------

Maybe that's where the disconnect is coming into play. Mara's initial comment was about the general perception of the 80s.....not necessary reflective of your circle. That isn't meant to negate your experience having lived through it.....apparently, you had more taste than the norm. Kudos. Perhaps your being married young had something to do with that, too.....your perspective as someone who was already settled down would surely be different from mine......I was VERY much single, very much into the club/dance scene.

But your individual experience isn't necessarily indicative of the norm. Your circle was evidently conservative, but much of the 80s (at least for the single population) was anything but. I *know* that first hand.....I was a card-carrying member of the "less" conservative group for a while (although I was never into the groups who put the money in their noses instead...not my style).

VH-1 is running a series on the 80s right now......catch a few episodes, and I'm sure you'll see what Mara was referring to. Laughed my head off watching some of them this weekend!

 

[Hest88]

----------------
I don't know what in the world is a bubble bracelet. Any pics?

----------------

F&I, sorry, no pictures of a bubble bracelet. But I'd suspect it would look like a 10 carat tennis bracelet sitting under the glass at a pawn shop.