Center Stone Diameter : Ring Width Ratio QUESTION

[thread]

So I have a round brilliant - 1.08 carat - 6.60 to 6.64 diameter center stone. I would like people''s opinions on going with the Michael B. 3-Sided Pave that''s 2mm wide VERSUS the same ring that''s 2.5mm wide.

Is there an ideal ratio between the diameter of the center stone and the width of the ring?

I figured 70% of the diamond will hang over the 2mm width of the ring VERSUS 62% will hang over with the 2.5mm ring.

 

[thread]

forgot to say. the ring size is 5. may be a consideration on this.

 

[gee5088]

Hello there,

OOOOHHH...I love that setting!

My RB 1.03 ct is 6.59-6.63 in diameter and my band is about 1.7mm wide, single-row pave which is bead set. These dimensions are somewhat similar to what your RB and the 2.0mm width ratio would be. I personally LOVE how the narrow band helps the center stone just "pop". It helps my center stone appear much larger IMHO. Another thing I discovered I had to consider was the length of my fingers. I wear a 5.75 and have relatively short fingers, so a narrow band helps elongate them. I guess it''s a matter of preference, but I think the 2.0mm would be the perfect match. I''m sure it will be FANTABULICIOUS either way!

 

[eks6426]

thread--have you had a chance to try on both widths of the Michael B 3 sided pave?

 

[kaylagee]

My e-ring is 1.08 too. I changed from a 2mm to a 2.5mm ring and I didn''t like the thicker band at all.

Depending on the effect you''re after(I like the top heavy look..like a lot of us)- the thinner bands can be more dramatic, dainty...make the center pop more IMO.

I''m really liking the under 2mm bands lately too.

 

[fortheloveofdiamonds]

Does the 3-sided pave come in those two sizes...that is news to me?

 

[Mara]

The thinner the better, my ring is a 1.29c with a 2.9mm band and I wish it was more like my 2.3mm wedding band, because the difference would be visible. Surprisingly enough it would be.

So I''d go with the thinner, esp with a 1.08c stone. It will look bigger.

 

[Lynn B]

Yea, I''m w/ Mara. Thin is IN, baby!!!

I don''t have a LOT of room to talk here, as I am still brand new (1 day!) to the "Thin Band Club" ... but I am a very happily converted member!!!

My center stone is a 1.53 RB (about 7.5 mm diameter) and the (size 4.75) melee band it''s on is about 2.2 mm. The w-ring is a little wider at about 2.5 mm. And if I had it to do over again, I think I''d even have both bands be the thinner width.

(But I love it!)

Lynn

 

[headlight]

I just had the shank on my ring narrowed (I need to make a new avatar). So now it is approx. just under 3 mm and the stone is a 9.59 mm. I LOVE it!

 

[thread]

i have and they are both awesome. of course, they had faux 3ct diamonds in them - so it didn''t help me with my decision really.

 

[thread]

yes, there''s a 2 and 2/5 in the 3-sided.

 

[thread]

interesting comment re: your fingers being short. my fiance''s fingers are only a 5, but they are very long. maybe the 2.5 would look better. after seeing how unreal michael b is at pave, i think the 2.5 will show it off more - slightly larger diamonds. i am so torn.

 

[chellebelle]

Hey, Thread!

I'm sorry you're so torn! I don't think there's an "ideal" ratio... ultimately I believe it's just preference. I can give you my opinion though! I have a Ritani Endless Love e-ring and the band is super thin. About 1.7mm and my center stone is a round brilliant (about 1.15 carats). It is a bezel setting and has micropave surrounding the diamond, so I guess that makes the center look a little bigger. Anyways, the ring is a size 5 (finger size is about 4.75) and I have been told I have long fingers. (I'm mentioning this because it sounds like your fiancee and I have similar hands!) Well, I LOVE how the ring looks! It looks so delicate and it really does make the center stone *pop*, just like the others have mentioned. You can view some pics in this thread: Engaged to the Love of my Life with the Ring of my Dreams!!!. (That's my first time posting a link, so hopefully it works!) So, IMO, I LOVE the thin band!

I really hope this helps you out! Good luck!

chelle

 

[thread]

thank you so much for this.

 

[thread]

your hands are so similar - this is really helpful. 1.7 is really thin - it does look really beautiful. still on the fence. hmmm...

 

[Mara]

I don''t like ratios where the diamond is too small looking for the band..not to say that that would be the case with yours but I would stay on the thinner side with a 1c diamond...around 2mm. My diamond is a 1.29 on a 2.9mm band and it looks nice but I wish that the band was thinner to make the diamond really pop out. The thicker the band IMO the more it takes away from the center stone. The ring will BLING out all over because of the pave regardless, so I would try to keep the focus still on the center stone, that is why it''s a solitaire.

 

[thread]

this is great. thanks. after weighing all the info, i am deciding on the 2.5 - for 1 main reason. her fingers are long and i am afraid of the whole piece looking a 'tad' unsubstantial. or a tad too danty. here is the actual diamond in a 2.5 single row of pave - which is the ring i gave her before deciding to go to the 3-sided pave (then getting it botched), now getting the michael b. what a time i have had. so, you can see how it looked (with the real, true diamond in it at 2.5mm). what do you all think of this proportion?

 

[thread]

here it is.

 

[thread]

here''s one on my pinky (my fat pinky - probably a ring size of 7)

 

[thread]

btw - the ring as you see it here is a 7. i was off by 2 - she''s a 5.

 

[sparkling]

I think it really depends on the length of your fingers. My ring size is about a 5 1/4 and my fingers are long and my nails are rectangular. I feel like any ring I try on with a thin band looks ridiculous. My BF wonders why I want an EC or a Big Big round, its so I can have some length to the fill up the miles of space between my hand and my first knuckle. The endless love or other halo rings might make the dinkiness of a smaller band less noticeable and of course if you''re planning a wedding band too make sure you like the look of the two together.

Sparkling

 

[eks6426]

thread--is there a price difference on the 2.5 vs 2.00? Does the size of the melee stones change?

 

[thread]

the cost is only $400 more and YES, the melee are bigger. which is one of the reasons i am swaying that way.

 

[eks6426]

thread--thanks for the education on this setting. You may have answered a question my fiance & I have. We picked my ring up on Feb 12 and my fiance said he thought it looked a bit thinner than the one we saw as a sample. I kind of thought so too but when I asked about the widths of the 3 sided Michael B ring the jeweler had said 2.3mm. No mention of options. We chalked it up to my ring size being smaller than the sample. But now maybe it wasn''t. Not that it is a big deal...but something I would have liked my jeweler to have informed me about. I probably would have picked the thinner version anyway because by the time I add the wedding band it will be substantial enough for my size 5.25 average length fingers. The price we paid for the 3 sided pave was good so I''m not going to quibble on the $400 difference for now. But I certainly will bring it up when it comes time to order the wedding band. Can''t wait to actually get to wear my ring. It drives me nuts knowing that he has it and is waiting for the "right" moment. Ugh

Good luck with your ring. I bet the 2.5mm will be beautiful.

 

[lafawnduh]

PJ- that is great that you figured out which width to go with! I think that the 2.5mm will look BEAUTIFUL. I personally like thin bands, or as some people consider them, "dinky" bands. I guess I like the "dinkiness"! (And I like them with halo settings too!)

It sounds like your fiancee has long, elegant fingers and I think the ring you chose will look perfect on her hand! It all boils down to personal taste, and I must say you have great taste! I think the original ring is gorgeous and the Michael B is stunning as well. You can''t go wrong with that setting!

Don''t forget to post pics! I can''t wait to see this beauty!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 2/25/2005 12:33:51 AM
Author: thread
here it is.

Thread,

I LOVE the photo you posted, and MHO? PER-FECT!!!!!

Lynn