2ct Solitaire or 1.5ct with Halo?

[sunkissedx3]

Which would you choose? If solitaire, I prefer the clean lines and corners of the princess cut, but in a halo setting I would get a cushion cut. It would probably cost the same amount of $-- larger solitaire stone but less expensive setting or smaller cheaper stone but more expensive micro-pave halo setting.

I would do a micro-pave band on the solitaire, or a micro-pave halo with split shank.

Similar to these:

but with Princess cut and pave on the basket, maybe on the prongs

 

[heididdl]

two carat settings can always be updated upgraded but going from 1.5 to 2.00 is a big leap down the line so I'd go for cut, size, clarity and color and this beautiful setting

sorry didn't see second photo ... I love them both but the solitaire RB photo is gorgous and timeless

 

[endless_summer]

If I were choosing, I would get the best center stone that I could out of the gate because I imagine it would be much easier and less expensive to reset a stone in the future than to upgrade a stone in the future. I personally prefer solitaires to halos in large part because I also like clean lines. Aside from personal preference, if you're thinking that you would like a 2 carat stone now (assuming the difference between the 1.5 and the 2 is just carats and a debate between cushion and princess), I would go for it and add the halo down the road if that's what you'd ultimately like in a setting. Just my 2 cents

 

[Niel]

Assuming cut is great for both, I would hands down choose the bigger stone.

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

I would go for the bigger stone, it's a lot easier to re-set than to upgrade a diamond. I would however NOT get a princess, they are so susceptible to damage with those sharp corners. If you love the pinfire flash a well done crushed ice radiant or cushion are a much better choice IMO.

 

[Niel]

lRe: 2ct Solitaire or 1.5ct with Halo?

I would go for the bigger stone, it's a lot easier to re-set than to upgrade a diamond. I would however NOT get a princess, they are so susceptible to damage with those sharp corners. If you love the pinfire flash a well done crushed ice radiant or cushion are a much better choice IMO.

Ah I neglected to see the SHAPE of the stones. I really don't think a princess is a good idea just as I feel that they have peeked in popularity. And will soon be to this generation what marquise were 10 years ago. Depending on what you like about princesses. I think you could find another shape that won't feel as dated in 5 years. If you like the points. A marquise actually might be a good idea. As they are pointing, coming back around. And face up larger per CTW to other shapes. If you like square, I'd go step cuts or a radiant.


Of course get whatever you like and ignore me if your heart is in princesses. But if you open to shapes, I'd go to a NICE jeweler and ask to see a 1.5 ct solitaire in every shape. And let your eyes decide what looks best on your finger

 

[tyty333]

Im not a big princess fan (especially big ones) so it would be the 1.5 cushion with a halo for me.

 

[Trudii]

2ct. Halos are beautiful but to me they're like "helpers" making smaller stones look bigger. If you have the budget for 2ct, then get that.

 

[Mayk]

I just moved from a 1.30 MRB in a cushion Halo to. 2 ct MRB solitaire. My choice was more about my lifestyle but my initial feeling is I'm very pleased with the larger solitaire.

 

[sunkissedx3]

Thanks for your input everyone! Seems like everyone agreed on larger stone and solitaire setting.

My dilemna is if I got a princess and wanted a halo down the line I don't like the look of the sharp corners in a halo setting. I prefer the halo to contour the shape of the stone perfectly. I could get a larger cushion, and it would solve that problem, but I think I prefer the princess as a solitaire better.

written by Niel » 22 Sep 2013 11:28

Ah I neglected to see the SHAPE of the stones. I really don't think a princess is a good idea just as I feel that they have peeked in popularity. And will soon be to this generation what marquise were 10 years ago. Depending on what you like about princesses. I think you could find another shape that won't feel as dated in 5 years. If you like the points. A marquise actually might be a good idea. As they are pointing, coming back around. And face up larger per CTW to other shapes. If you like square, I'd go step cuts or a radiant.

Do you guys feel the princess cut is declining in popularity? I thought the most popular cut is round and following is princess, but lately I haven't seen as many settings for a princess cut vs. cushion, asscher, emerald etc.

I think the step cuts are very beautiful, but my boyfriend thinks they look like "glass". I've looked into some radiant cuts, standard and Hearts and Arrows and don't mind the cut corners. I actually found 3 stones from James Allen, a princess, a radiant, and a cushion, posted in this thread: https://www.pricescope.com/communit...ring-3-diamonds-from-ja-1-7-2ct-range.193604/
Pls let me know what you think!

 

[AprilBaby]

I agree with the larger solitaire but not the princess. Easy to chip, outdated. Get a 2 ct cushion.

 

[sunkissedx3]

Mayk: Did your 1.30ct with a halo have a larger spread on the finger or the 2.0ct solitaire?

 

[kenny]

2ct. Halos are beautiful but to me they're like "helpers" making smaller stones look bigger. If you have the budget for 2ct, then get that.

+1

 

[Niel]

Has your boyfriend seen a well cut emerald in person? I suspect he might change his mind about it looking like glass, if that's what you really want.


And I did notice that all your stones you've picked look like the same size. They all have about the same mm size, if I remember right? If that's the case I feel like this question should be looked at differently. As if all the stones have the same mm size. I'd rather get the exact setting I like rather than being able to "say I have a 2ct". As people would be able to see the difference. Including you.

 

[Mayk]

Mayk: Did your 1.30ct with a halo have a larger spread on the finger or the 2.0ct solitaire?

That's a great question... I'm afraid I don't know the answer too because I never asked that the halo be measured.

My 1.30 was 6.95 x 7.0 (you can see it on the Jewels by Erica Grace Website) where it's listed and she might be able to measure it for you.

The 2.0 is 8.1 x 8.13

my guess would be the 2ct is probably about the same. When I look at my hand it doesn't seem overly larger or smaller than the halo.

The suggestion that you can always halo down the road is a very good one. Go BIG now and go halo later! I loved my halo but felt my lifestyle was better suited to a solitarie.

I don't have any handshots of my solitaire yet.. or I would post for comparision.. I literaly just got it and haven't had the time yet.

 

[Acinom]

I would choose a 2 ct cushion or Asscher in a simple setting and perhaps add the halo later...

 

[sunkissedx3]

Niel: He has seen a step-cut and I think he prefers the scintillation from all the little facets you get from a brilliant cut. I like both because they are beautiful in their own way. I don't really have a preference between the step-cut and brilliant cut, I just like the more square shapes, so if he likes the brilliant cut and he's paying for it then that's what I'd want.

As far as size, I do want a stone that faces up around 7x7mm or larger if it's going to be a solitaire. I'm undecided about shape because I think I would be equally happy with the princess, radiant, or cushion, the most important factor being the cut and how brilliant the diamond is.

I don't care about being able to say it's a 2ct, I figured the difference in the cost of the settings if I don't get a halo would be enough to get a larger stone around 2ct, so the halo isn't really to make up for the slightly smaller size nor am I sacrificing a setting a like better just to get a larger stone. I love the classic look of the solitaire as well as for durability since I'm outdoorsy, but I love how the halo looks more fancy, princessy, which is also me. My finger size is 4.5, and I want the ring to look substantial. The halo would have a larger spread even with a smaller stone, so I'm wondering if others would choose solitaire, halo because it has more spread, or because they simply like the style better.

 

[sunkissedx3]

Trudii » 22 Sep 2013 11:51

2ct. Halos are beautiful but to me they're like "helpers" making smaller stones look bigger. If you have the budget for 2ct, then get that.

So you're saying the 2ct doesn't need any "help"

 

[Niel]

Niel: He has seen a step-cut and I think he prefers the scintillation from all the little facets you get from a brilliant cut. I like both because they are beautiful in their own way. I don't really have a preference between the step-cut and brilliant cut, I just like the more square shapes, so if he likes the brilliant cut and he's paying for it then that's what I'd want.

As far as size, I do want a stone that faces up around 7x7mm or larger if it's going to be a solitaire. I'm undecided about shape because I think I would be equally happy with the princess, radiant, or cushion, the most important factor being the cut and how brilliant the diamond is.

I don't care about being able to say it's a 2ct, I figured the difference in the cost of the settings if I don't get a halo would be enough to get a larger stone around 2ct, so the halo isn't really to make up for the slightly smaller size nor am I sacrificing a setting a like better just to get a larger stone. I love the classic look of the solitaire as well as for durability since I'm outdoorsy, but I love how the halo looks more fancy, princessy, which is also me. My finger size is 4.5, and I want the ring to look substantial. The halo would have a larger spread even with a smaller stone, so I'm wondering if others would choose solitaire, halo because it has more spread, or because they simply like the style better.

Well that's good you guys agree on what shape you want to get. I was just saying you should get what you like.... as you're wearing it. But that's nice to hear that on top of you liking it, he does too.


I think from what it sounds like, all mm size being equal. I'd get a halo. Sounds like they are more your style. Plus, they will definitely be a LOT of presents in your tiny little fingers (lucky!)


When you say outdoorsy, do you plan on wearing your ring while doing outdoorsy things?

 

[Trudii]

Trudii » 22 Sep 2013 11:51

2ct. Halos are beautiful but to me they're like "helpers" making smaller stones look bigger. If you have the budget for 2ct, then get that.

So you're saying the 2ct doesn't need any "help"

Well maybe 2ct could use some help later on, but it seems that it should be given a chance to sparkle on its own.

 

[MissGotRocks]

I would choose the 2 ct. stone hands down. I truly would not choose a 2 ct. princess stone though. Look at the other shapes - a two carat round stone is beautiful as well!

 

[Gypsy]

Bigger stone. Especially in a fancy.

Much more lifestyle friendly. If you have kids or plan to, are very active with your hands, or have certain jobs (lots of handwashing) a halo is just not as lifestyle friendly.

 

[GreenBling]

I have a RB that went from solitaire to halo. The total look in that setting is gorgeous with lots of presence too. However I feel that the true beauty of the RB is now hidden. I am now considering resetting it into a 3 stone or a pendant, something that allow me to see top and profile of my beautiful baby.

I think it depends what you are in love with - the diamond or the ring with the "total look".

 

[MissGotRocks]

I have a RB that went from solitaire to halo. The total look in that setting is gorgeous with lots of presence too. However I feel that the true beauty of the RB is now hidden. I am now considering resetting it into a 3 stone or a pendant, something that allow me to see top and profile of my beautiful baby.

I think it depends what you are in love with - the diamond or the ring with the "total look".

I think this is very well said and sums it up nicely. There truly is a difference between the stone and 'the ring'. Some folks want the biggest, most well cut stone they can have and some folks are more interested in the whole package. Everyone is different!

 

[Laila619]

I would go for the 1.5 in a halo. For me, it's more about the total package, and not just the size of the diamond.

 

[junebug17]

Out of the 2 choices, I would go with the 1.5 cushion in a halo, not really based on finger coverage or hand presence but because I prefer that look over a princess cut. I really love the look of a cushion in a halo.

For a larger solitaire, I would go with a round or a cushion, again because I prefer those shapes over a princess cut.

 

[sunkissedx3]

Thank you all!!

I have decided to get a cushion regardless of size Still undecided on halo or not.. I think it's too hard to decide without having the stone. Originally I was thinking if I knew exactly what I wanted I would want at least 7x7mm for solitaire, or save some $ looking at smaller stones if set with a halo. But I guess after getting the stone if a halo is what my heart desires we'll just have to spend a bit more on the setting I looove Victor's halo settings, the craftsmanship is incredible, but I still can't justify spending that much on the setting.

by Niel » 22 Sep 2013 15:31

When you say outdoorsy, do you plan on wearing your ring while doing outdoorsy things?

I definitely want to wear it almost all the time with the exception of at the beach-- I'd be more afraid of it getting lost in the water than actually being banged up. With the halo I'd probably have to clean it a lot more, worried about the melees discoloring... but I do want the total package to really stand out.

 

[Niel]

My concern is if your going to be wearing it and being very active, this type of pave will not be conducive, halo or just in the shank.


There are types of pave that are more durable. And o think you'd be OK with a halo if you went that route. I might also seriously consider a bezel, depending just how active you are.

 

[msop04]

My concern is if your going to be wearing it and being very active, this type of pave will not be conducive, halo or just in the shank.


There are types of pave that are more durable. And o think you'd be OK with a halo if you went that route. I might also seriously consider a bezel, depending just how active you are.

I agree with Niel about lifestyle concerns. However, I prefer a cushion in a delicate HW-esque halo as opposed to a solitaire, especially since cushions tend to face up smaller. That said, I'd want a "chunky" cushion over a crushed ice style.