Best Harry Winston replica setting

[TraderDude]

My wife now loves the Harry Winston setting with a round center stone and two tapered baguettes on the side. Does anyone know of a jeweler that makes a good replica of this setting? I have checked GOG, WF, Scaasi and a couple others but haven't found anything that comes close. I am guessing Mege can do it, but I don't see pictures of it on his site and see mostly micropave replicas from him.

 

[elmo]

You mean this? I think I'd prefer it with bigger baguettes though.

 

[beach]

That should be very easy to replicate.... Which diamond did you end up going with? It determines the basket size needed and helps with what size the diamonds should be on the side.

 

[TraderDude]

Date: 12/20/2008 4:50:19 PM
Author: beach
That should be very easy to replicate.... Which diamond did you end up going with? It determines the basket size needed and helps with what size the diamonds should be on the side.

That's the problem. I thought the Graff 3.69ct G/IF ring was stunning, and compared to comparable HW or Tiffany rings, decently priced. My wife "wasn't excited" by the Graff setting (first picture) but she loved the HW setting. We looked at a HW 3.79 E/VVS2 ring (with baguettes) for $265K. It was beautiful, but I thought the Graff 3.69 G/IF for 160K (with baguettes), which was also beautiful, was a much more reasonable choice. Of course, reason isn't the primary factor here. My wife was happy with both stones, but she is fixtated on the HW setting. I don't want to spend $265K, so that means going to a smaller stone with lesser quality. As far as HW goes, it probably means an F/VS1 of 3ct or so. It doesn't seem to make sense to me to go for a stone that much smaller just because the setting is slightly different. We're not talking about Tiffany six-prong vs. HW micropave. The round center stone with side baguette settings from HW and Graff are nearly the same to my eye. The Graff setting is in the picture on the left. Picking a 3ct F/VS1 over an equally beautiful 3.69ct G/IF simply because of the minor differences in the setting just doesn't compute with me, especially because she thought the size of the 3.69 or 3.79 was perfect for her hand. I'm just venting here because this is very frustrating. Maybe a woman can explain it to me!

 

[glitterata]

Perhaps you could get Graff to set the diamond in a setting more to your wife''s taste? If you''re going to be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, they might be willing to accommodate you. A plain setting like that costs them a few thousand at most to make. They might think it was worth making a setting you like so as not to lose the sale.

Otherwise, you could consider buying the stone from another dealer and having a setting custom made by a jeweler. As a plus, that would probably save you a few buck.

 

[Mediterranean]

Wink Jones of Winfield''s has an amazing bench, their custom work is top notch.

 

[glitterata]

Hmmm... I feel like I probably missed the beginning of this story. Sorry if my advice was obtuse.

 

[Deelight]

Date: 12/20/2008 4:19:16 PM
Author: elmo
You mean this? I think I''d prefer it with bigger baguettes though.

Ditto Leon, his work is yummy

 

[NeverEndingUpgrade]

TraderDude, maybe you can''t see it, but the HW setting sits about halfway down from the Graff setting. For those of us who prefer lower settings, this is a huge deal. I prefer the HW too judging by the photos. It has a lot to do with proportions and comfort and wearability. With the amount of money you are able to spend, you should get her what she wants. I missed why you can''t get a HW ring with a smaller center diamond. I mean, we''re talking 6 digits here, it''s not like the smaller diamond is going to need to be accompanied by a magnifying glass.

 

[TraderDude]

Thank you all for your input.

I am still left with the question whether it's odd to go from the 3.69ct G/IF to a 3ct F/VS1 because of the minor differences between the Graff and HW settings. They simply aren't that different from one another that I would want to go with a substantially smaller, lower clarity stone.

NeverEnding....in the picture i put up, those are both Graff rings. It's not a side by side of the Graff and HW. I couldn't find a good pic of the HW. But one of the things that my wife liked about the HW was how high the stone sat. I don't have a problem with that. I just think it's strange to want to downgrade the size of the diamond that significantly because of the minor differences in the setting. In the end, I'm not going to buy something she doesn't want, but it drives me nuts that she doesn't want the Graff stone

. I mean, if the setting weren't an issue, wouldn't the larger G/IF generally be more appealing to a woman than the substantially smaller F/VS1?

 

[NeverEndingUpgrade]

Date: 12/20/2008 10:34:51 PM
Author: TraderDude
Thank you all for your input.

I am still left with the question whether it's odd to go from the 3.69ct G/IF to a 3ct F/VS1 because of the minor differences between the Graff and HW settings. They simply aren't that different from one another that I would want to go with a substantially smaller, lower clarity stone.

And I just gave you the answer. The settings are different, at least to her. You said you needed a woman's input, and you got it. For one thing, many of us feel that buying IF diamonds are a waste of money, because you are talking about something you can't even see. Second of all, there is no way that F/VS1 is substantially lower. Dude, many of us wear H/SI1's with a smile on our faces. I have a ring like the Graff, or the high one whichever that is, set with a tanzanite, and I hate the setting and want to have it redone into something lower. It sits too high off the hand for my taste, I just didn't know it when I bought it. At least your wife knows what she wants. There is a difference, just trust me on this!

OK, I just read your posts and I guess I am confused about what the Graff looks like vs. the HW, but I stand behind the notion that no one here would turn their nose up at a 3 ct. F/VS1 diamond!!!!

 

[tradergirl]

Do you work for John Paulson''s fund?

?????

Just askin''

 

[TraderDude]

Finally found a pic of the HW. Not a great pic...but a pic. So it''s HW on the left and Graff on the right.

NeverEnding, I appreciate your input. Good to hear a woman''s perspective. Normally I would agree that an IF isn''t necessary and that the VS1 is a great clarity. But it seems most people generally sacrifice clarity in order to gain size. In my case, I would be going from IF to VS1 and getting a smaller stone. But if that is what she wants, that''s what she''ll get. I mean, no, a 3ct HW ring is not a "consolation prize" by any means. I was just expecting her to leap at the 3.69 Graff ring.

 

[TraderDude]

Date: 12/20/2008 10:49:42 PM
Author: tradergirl
Do you work for John Paulson''s fund?

?????


Just askin''

TraderGirl...If I did, then I would just go for the 5 carat D/IF from HW and be done with it!

 

[NeverEndingUpgrade]

Date: 12/20/2008 10:58:58 PM
Author: TraderDude
Finally found a pic of the HW. Not a great pic...but a pic. So it''s HW on the left and Graff on the right.

NeverEnding, I appreciate your input. Good to hear a woman''s perspective. Normally I would agree that an IF isn''t necessary and that the VS1 is a great clarity. But it seems most people generally sacrifice clarity in order to gain size. In my case, I would be going from IF to VS1 and getting a smaller stone. But if that is what she wants, that''s what she''ll get. I mean, no, a 3ct HW ring is not a ''consolation prize'' by any means. I was just expecting her to leap at the 3.69 Graff ring.

Thanks for the pics. I prefer the HW too. We women can be so unreasonable!!! I understand why it seems backwards to go down in size and sacrifice clarity too. There must be something about that HW ring that attracts her to it. But if you really want to get the Graff ring because it seems liks such a great deal, you could send it to me for Christmas. I guess I could live with the setting.

 

[TraderDude]

Date: 12/20/2008 11:06:52 PM
Author: NeverEndingUpgrade



Thanks for the pics. I prefer the HW too. We women can be so unreasonable!!! I understand why it seems backwards to go down in size and sacrifice clarity too. There must be something about that HW ring that attracts her to it. But if you really want to get the Graff ring because it seems liks such a great deal, you could send it to me for Christmas. I guess I could live with the setting.

If my wife were as reasonable as you, that''s what she would say...I could live with the Graff setting....but she isn''t and she didn''t so ....keep an eye on your mailbox.

 

[NeverEndingUpgrade]

With any diamond 3 ct. and over, I am not picky at all. Please see my other thread!!!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/have-you-picked-out-your-christmas-present-yet.102759/

 

[Imdanny]

Your wife has good taste. The Harry Winston ring is much more beautiful. Sorry.

 

[Lorelei]

Maybe it is the appeal of having something from Harry Winston? As with Tiffany, sometimes the name can be very important. Also maybe something about the personality of the HW diamond was calling to her....

 

[NeverEndingUpgrade]

Date: 12/21/2008 3:57:47 AM
Author: Lorelei
Maybe it is the appeal of having something from Harry Winston? As with Tiffany, sometimes the name can be very important. Also maybe something about the personality of the HW diamond was calling to her....

Lorelei, I wish so many diamonds didn''t have my number, hee-hee.

 

[bee*]

If she prefers the HW, then I''d go with that. A 3ct HW would be amazing and I do prefer it to the graff as well.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 12/21/2008 8:55:38 AM
Author: bee*
If she prefers the HW, then I''d go with that. A 3ct HW would be amazing and I do prefer it to the graff as well.

ditto

 

[TraderDude]

It appears to be unanimous.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/21/2008 8:52:46 AM
Author: NeverEndingUpgrade

Date: 12/21/2008 3:57:47 AM
Author: Lorelei
Maybe it is the appeal of having something from Harry Winston? As with Tiffany, sometimes the name can be very important. Also maybe something about the personality of the HW diamond was calling to her....

Lorelei, I wish so many diamonds didn''t have my number, hee-hee.

ROFL!!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I'd rather have the 3 ct. F VS1. F VS1 is very high color and clarity, so it's not like that is much of a sacrifice!

The sad thing is, you pay a VERY high premium for a Graff or HW setting. In fact, we have had people on here before who reported stone specs, and many of us have higher quality cut stones than G and HW!

So technically, if you could decide on a setting, you could get as good or better quality diamond for a lot less money. Although she might enjoy the name brand of the ring...I understand that.

Vatche makes a beautiful, high quality setting like this (and Good Old Gold does carry Vatche). Here is one set with a 1.6 ct. stone which belongs to a PS member:

Oh good grief! This is obviously NOT the Vatche setting! I'll try that again!!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Trying the Vatche setting again:

 

[LGK]

While of course you are going to have to stick with whatever she decides within reason & budget, I am definitely not getting why she'd want the smaller stone with worse specs for the same price.

I mean, a setting is important, but is it $100K worth of important? Maybe if your wife is absolutely, positively set on that decision it is, but I don't get it either.

I'd suggest to her getting a replica setting. Maybe she'll be all about the brand name, and horrified at the suggestion, and you'll have to go with the F/VS1 HW and be done with it, but I'd totally try. She could have a beautiful stone with whatever specs she wants and total control of what she wanted as a setting. I'd also think that unless she went with a ginormous D/IF, you'd save some money in the process.

Or, perhaps you could keep shopping... there are other stones and settings out there by wonderful designers! Maybe something else will catch her fancy.

Oh and wait- the first pic you posted- what's the second setting in it on the right? It isn't the HW, is it? I'm assuming it's just a random setting that you didn't crop out of the pic, right? The final two comparison pics you posted, the settings look absolutely freaking identical to me; I'm not grasping why everyone is saying there's a vast difference... unless I'm confused and the first single pic you posted includes the HW setting on the left. Have you asked your wife what it is that she sees differently?! I'm curious!

 

[hoorray]

I don''t see a difference in the 2nd picture that you posted, but that doesn''t mean they don''t feel different. A big part of a setting to me is the feel, and I''m always surprised at the variability in weight, fit, feel, etc that settings have. That said, if it were me, I''d go to Mark Morrell or maybe Leon since he''s local to you, and have them make the perfect setting for me and either have them source the stone or get Jon at GOG to source the stone. Then you have complete control and a completely custom ring to boot! It''s just me, but I''d rather have that than the name anytime.

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

I understand the appeal of owning a "brand" in the same way I understand the appeal of a IF stone. Exclusiviity.

Have you looked at Cartier? Some of the most stunning rings I have ever seen have been under this label.....

cheers--Sharon

 

[kindred]

If it were me, I would buy the 3.69ct G/IF less expensive stone and have a setting custom made to my specifications. Maybe you can find out if the name appeal of Harry Winston is the reason your wife prefers the other one. If so, she may not be willing to get a custom made ring. Maybe you can convince your wife that custom made has better snob appeal.