Help me finalize my setting design!!!

Well, I have GOT to finish my re-set, and I need your help in finalizing my design.  After exploring various possibilities, I am leaning very strongly toward a ring where my engagement diamond is flanked by two side rounds on each side, despite this style being the “loser” in my  poll !    I am assuming that it lost the poll because folks like 3-stones better, and hopefully not because they dislike  two side rounds.  Please do give me feedback if you don’t think this is a good style.  I don’t think I want eternity for various reasons.  I tried on 3-stones, and they are just not me.  I like more stones to provide finger coverage from the top down, and smaller stones so they still allow the center stone to really POP.   I thought about baguettes, but decided to steer away from them as well.  So the two side rounds seems the best in the end.

I will probably have to go custom, because I can never find just exactly the right design, so here is where you can help me.  I will post some pictures of rings I have seen in stores, and then I need help with design details, such as the size of the side stones, the profile, prongs, etc…   One key question is size of the side stones:  what is the best proportion with my stone?  What's the smallest I can go to still allow the center stone to take center stage, without them being too small for side stones?   My diamond is ~1.1 ct. 

The first picture, shown below, is a Scott Kay design.  For purposes of this discussion, we'll call it the Scott Kay crown.

For review for those who are unfamiliar with my situation:
My diamond is a 1.097ct ASG Ideal 0 RB, H SI1.  (6.68 – 6.72 mm)   I want something very classic and timeless; nothing very modern or trendy.  But, while classic, I like a bit of uniqueness, rather than too common.   I like for the whole ring to flow well, a work of art, rather than awkward transitions from shank to head and so on.
Smooth shank rather than carved.   Not eternity due to sizing issues.   “Elegant, clean lines, that never go out of style.”   “classy, delicate look.”   “I love attention to detail, clean lines and also, some FRU-FRU on a smaller scale! rather than BIG, BOLD and BANG”   “allow the center stone to take center stage while still providing finger cover.” 
 
Incidentally, since I have another wedding set, this ring will probably often be worn alone on the right hand.  Thus it does not have to match a wedding ring.  I plan to get a hinged shank, since no ring will really fit my right hand properly (knuckle is more than a ring size larger than ring part of finger), and this way it will also fit my left hand when I want to wear it there.  With the hinged shank, it can be size 5.  (w/o hinge, it would have to be about size 6.5, and thus will flop terribly on right hand, and be way too big for left hand). 

This one is an A Jaffe.  It is similar to the Scott Kay Crown, but slightly different.  Actually, I tried on an A Jaffe at a store, similar to this, but different.  I haven’t been able to find a good photo of it, but came up with this one.

-----------------------------
A deal is only a deal if you are getting exactly what you want.

-----------------------------
A deal is only a deal if you are getting exactly what you want.

Thanks!  When you say, you like the little surprise diamond, do you mean, better than the relatively larger one on the Scott Kay, or just in general?  And thanks for the feedback on the 'rib'!  

{{{ I also like the prongs on the first AJaffe better. }}}}

When you say "better" do you mean 'better than the second A Jaffe' or 'better than the first Scott Kay'?  

***********************************
Nothing is worth more than this day.

-Goethe