~~A. Jaffe Setting Critiques Needed!!!

[jimutc]

I have a very nice stone, an emerald cut, F in color, VVS2 in clarity, to put in this A. Jaffe setting(below). There is a matching band that I want to get as well. It is .80 carat, and has a length to width of 1.35. I have searched far and wide to come up with a good setting; and here is a bit about the woman:

She is elegant (hence the emerald cut I think) but still contemporary. She likes to be different than other women (with style). She has told me she likes things simple, and prefers a solitaire setting. However, I have watched engagement ring commercials with her, and sometimes she hints at having a setting that has a couple SMALL stones on the sides to make it sparkle a LITTLE more(nothing like a paved setting). She thinks it''s "very pretty." The attention grabber on the ring should be the diamond, not anything else. She has long, bony fingers FYI too, and this ring and band seem to be on the narrow side.



That''s why I am opting for baguettes, so they aren''t as sparkly, but add to the overall appearance.
What do you guys/gals think of this setting, wedding band and all?

 

[jimutc]

imagine an F-color emerald in here. Well I would say it's an E, but GIA downgraded it to an F. Good for me cause it's cheaper!

 

[jimutc]

And the band....

 

[decodelighted]

From the description you gave of your gal, she sounds similar enough to myself that I''m happy to weigh in.

First of all lemmie say that I''m not a fan of mixing emerald cuts with round brilliants. So with that in mind ... I like the e-ring setting without the round stones tagged onto the end of each baguette BUT I really, REALLY don''t like the band AT ALL. It looks very masculine to me. And though it has clean lines metal-wise, the channel set style & mixed stones take away the "modern" look you''re going for.

There are bands that have just baquettes channel set - that might be nice to pair with the e-ring ... I''d just stay away from round/emerald combos.

 

[freckles127]

That setting is unique but not as elegant as others. Purely my opinion but when I think elegant, I think of a thinner band. What about this nice Leon piece of art? The round and the emerald pairing looks a bit off to me.. what about just sticking to bullets or baguettes which are simple and have clean lines?

 

[decodelighted]

Would ya consider something like this? From Pearlman''s - designer: Sasha Primak

 

[decodelighted]

This is an unusual, modern-looking way of doing channel set baquettes -- from the same designer as above.

 

[decodelighted]

I also LOVE this set by Vera Wang ...

 

[gailrmv]

Unfortunately I am not loving the original setting posted. I think for me having the 3 different shapes (emerald, round, and baguette) as well as 2 diff setting styles (prong, channel) makes it just too busy for me. Also, A Jaffe is a great designer, but this setting does not seem up to the design standards I''d expect from them. what I''m saying is, it seems like something you''d see at the mall.
Sorry to be negative. You know her of course, and I don''t. Also, it may look better in person.
I think the emerald cut sounds lovely. If it were mine, I''d like to see it stay a solitaire, or be set with a smaller emerald cut on either side. You could then do something unique like a tiny round "surprise" diamond. Another idea is to do a baguette on either side (similar to Kaleidoscopic''s ring, although her center stone is a princess).
Hope this helps!

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 12/20/2005 8:13:22 PM
Author: decodelighted
I also LOVE this set by Vera Wang ...

WOW, I love that too!

 

[mrssalvo]

I'm not a huge fan of the rounds mixed with the baguettes either. Also from Pearlmans is this set by A. Jaffe too. I wonder if the head could be chaged to put in an emerald cut?

 

[Mrsgardener]

My 2 cents---I like the simple thick band that has the one big emerald cut diamond. --Why don''t you just take the chosen lady shopping after you pop the question, since Engagements rings are so personal?

 

[decodelighted]

Mssalvo!!! You''ve done it again. You find the BEST stuff. That''s a brilliant idea & would offer big savings on a designer setting. The center on that one is a CZ now ... wonder if it COULD be changed.

I think that set is LOVELY & would work for "elegant" "modern" "feminine" "unique"

 

[jimutc]

mrssalvo, I like your choice.
The other ones look a little bit too "busy." I am sure "busy" is a very subjective term.

Thank you all for your comments; but I have one more question. What is it that you see not attractive about mizing baguettes and rounds, and now that decodelighted metioned it, I think the band does look a little masculine, but then again, she is kind of a tomboy...

 

[jimutc]

Ooo. I forgot to add.... The band doesn't look as "masculine" when it sits next to the ring. Of course, that is subjective again.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 12/20/2005 9:38:20 PM
Author: jimutc
mrssalvo, I like your choice.

The other ones look a little bit too ''busy.'' I am sure ''busy'' is a very subjective term.


Thank you all for your comments; but I have one more question. What is it that you see not attractive about mizing baguettes and rounds, and now that decodelighted metioned it, I think the band does look a little masculine, but then again, she is kind of a tomboy...

So many ring styles look completely different in person than in pictures. I love the look of pave rings but when I saw them in person I realized I like seeing some platinum too.

I think the band looks a little masculine b/c it''s similar to how many men''s rings look that have diamonds in them. The stones are channel set and doesn''t look very dainty to me. Of course i''ve never seen baguettes in a man''s ring