Anyone have rings like these?

[Kath]

Hi All! Does anyone have a ring like either of these by Christopher Designs? (Second ring picture in second post)

 

[Kath]

Which of these 2 do you all like best and why? Just seeking opinions : )

 

[rainbowtrout]

I like the first one better, at least for me. I enjoy the milgraining and the more subtle look of the pave.

 

[mrssalvo]

Hi Kath..there is a whole thread on eternity wedding sets..you can check it out here. Both rings you showed are very pretty but will look different on IMO. The shared prong ring will be a lot more blingy while the first ring will look like more subtle sparkle. Have you tried both style's on? If not, I would suggest doing so. I have been back and forth on settings, between rings similar to the 2 you posted. I thought I was going to go with a set that had more bling but when I tried rings on the subtle pave style looks way better on me. Both are very nice though and I don't think you could go wrong with either.

 

[Kath]

Mrssalvo, Can I see a picture of the more subtle one you picked, if you have one? I''ve tried on the bling one, but not the other. My concern is the bling one wouldn''t go well when I''m wearing sweatpants, but I do think it''s absolutely gorgeous on my finger.

Thanks for the opinions!

 

[mrssalvo]

hehe, we''ll I don''t actually have it yet..hubby is keeping me in the dark on the details but here''s the pic of what i chose

i have gone back and forth forever trying to decide on my upgrade..i had decided on a solitare with and eternity band until i tried on the set i posted..you can follow my journey in this thread.

 

[mrssalvo]

Here''s a picture of Matatora''s ring which is similar to the second one you posted..(hope you don''t mind mat)

 

[AlyceC]

Both settings are very nice, but I think I would prefer the second. It looks like it would fare better in ultrasonic cleaners and I would worry less about losing a stone. I''ve had bad luck with pave.

 

[mrssalvo]

there have been a bunch of recent threads here on pave and losing stones. I have researched extensivly in this area to help me make my own decision. Your lifestlye should come into play. If you are hard on rings, want to put them in the ultrasonice like alyceC mentioned, pave might not be the best choice. Here's a good thread going over some of the pros and cons

 

[Kath]

So is the first setting considered pave? (I''m not sure of the exact definition.) And the shared prong setting in the second would probably be more secure?

Matatora''s ring does look a lot like the one I''m considering, although I''d like to know how much carat weight is in her setting (the one I posted is 1/3 carat weight). I''m still making my way through the thread. If you know how much carat weight is in her setting, please let me know!

Also, the center diamond for mine will be .4-.5 carats, so much smaller than hers.

Thanks for all the help in making this decision!

 

[mrssalvo]

it''s hard to tell from the picture but the first setting actually looks like channel set stones to me, not pave. People have lost stones out of pave settings and shared prong. the most secure would be 4 prong like Mara''s where each little stone is held in by 4 prongs.

 

[Caribou]

My ring looks similar to the first picture, except it has a basket of diamonds around the center stone and it doesn''t sit as high.

 

[Kath]

Caribou - Do you have a picture or link to a picture?

 

[Layne]

I like the first one better!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I like the first one better, too. And I think it is channel set, not pave. I am looking at similar rings with milgrain and bead set diamonds with engraving on the sides.

 

[moon river]

I''m useless. I keep going back and forth. I like both.

 

[Mara]

both are pretty but as mrs. s noted, both are different looks...

demelza is waiting for her signed pieces rings to be done but they look alot like the first ring there, just no head because they are just plain pave/channel bands, not e-rings. she has shared prong rings like the 2nd one you posted, in fact her old set was like that, and she did say that the one like your first one there is more subtle sparkle while the second is more kablowie...so just depends on what you want i guess?

my ring is more like the 2nd but with 4 tiny prongs holding each sidestone, not just 2 prongs sharing each stone. it's more secure but a little more metal, however i don't really love the shared prong look anymore, i like the first look with the thin edge of metal better ESP considering you can get the matching w-ring and the two rubbing against each other will not be a problem at all, whereas with the 2nd picture, the shared prong rings, depending on how they are made, people have had problems with the girdles touching metal and eating into the other ring etc.

so just consider all the pros and cons and also care and maintenance after the purchase, pave can come loose over time but that looks like a minimum of stones so you may get lucky. good luck!! both are beautiful.

 

[Patty]

I think that for a center stone of .40-.50, I''d go with setting #1. It''s more delicate and will let your center stone shine more.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Date: 1/18/2006 1:45:21 PM
Author: Patty
I think that for a center stone of .40-.50, I''d go with setting #1. It''s more delicate and will let your center stone shine more.

I agree. I think the first one is very elegant and would look great with that size center stone.

 

[Kath]

Now I don''t know what to do! I was really leaning toward the second ring, but so many of you prefer the first!

I had decided on the second option (tried it on, price is right, BF likes it too), but I''m a mind-changer so I went online looking for different settings......and found the first one.....and started questioning that setting 2 is "the one."

I just don''t know what I like!! Should I just go with my gut? The diamonds in the band # 2 are smaller than they look in that picture - they''re not really that big. When I put a .4 carat diamond next to them, I didn''t think they overpowered it, just enhanced it - but it''s hard to know how it would look in the prong setting. I just need someone to make up my mind for me - and I guess that''s what my boyfriend is for!

 

[Kaleigh]

I say go with your gut. They are both very lovely settings. If you keep going back to #2, then that''s the one.

 

[Odilia]

I don''t know if this helps any, but have you tried it on with a wedding ring? It might be that once you get the two rings together it will help you decide. For me, I like a more blingy ring alone, but if I put a blingy e-ring next to a blingy w-band, it might start to get too blingy, and then I go for the more subtle ones like pave, for example. For what it''s worth.....

 

[Patty]

Can you see them both in person together?

If not, go with your heart/gut and get the second one.

 

[valeria101]

About the channel vs shared prong vs pave... well, any has problems if not properly made. And I am afraid I can''t quite tell from pictures where those two score on the ''safety'' scale.

Perhaps with channel settings I would not worry much about actually loosing a stone, but if the rings are not solid enough to maintain shape and the stones are not seated well one by one, they get easily dislodged and start getting tilted in every direction. Pave doesn''t do that, but you could loose some bit of diamond along the way, and although replacing them is not hard or expensive, it may not hold... depending on how bad the setting was to begin with.

The one issue that stood out about shared prong settings round here was that sometimes the diamonds are set so that the girdles lay slightly outside the setting and scratch wedding bands near them. This may get the diamonds chipped. If the settings are too thin to hold shape the diamonds may get dislodged out of shared prong settings too... although I don''t remember of a Pricescope report with exactly this form of disaster.

All in all, neither model is totally fool proof to cost saving and poor craftsmanship - what else is new

Both styles you mention are quite classic and popular - chances are you could get to compare quality and prices quite a bit.


My 2c

 

[Jelly]

Hi Kath,

Have you seen my ring? It''s presently .55ct in a shared prong setting. I think it looks fabulous in sweatpants AND black evening dresses!

I also considered a milgrain ring, but I ended up going with the shared prong setting because it was so beautiful.

My ring is the petite sister of Matatora''s!

Link to my thread

 

[Jelly]

Here's a pic

ETA...nevermind...can't get the pic up!

 

[Kath]

Jelly - you''re ring is exactly what I want!!! Was it also custom made by Whiteflash?

Kath

 

[Jelly]

Yep it was custom made by WF. I''m planning on getting the matching wedding band with it too when the time comes.

 

[Caribou]

Date: 1/18/2006 10:53:13 AM
Author: Kath
Caribou - Do you have a picture or link to a picture?

Sorry, I just saw this.

I can e-mail you pictures of my ring.

 

[Kath]

Sure, I think you can email through Pricescope if you click on the person''s name. I''d love to see some!