Channel Setting Opinion...

[verticalhorizon]

Two items:

1. I don't recall too many people on the list getting channel settings. Are there inherent down-sides? Harder to clean, harder to replace in the event of damage? Harder to resize?

2. What would you think about a square I-color (5.66mm) center diamond in a princess channel setting? Is that not big enough to pull off?

Would a slightly larger (6.2mm) solitaire w/o the channel be more impressive, you think?

Thanks!

Edited: Here's an example on Whiteflash.

 

[StevL]

I think the channel option is a good one. Many may feel the styling is a bit dated, but it wears really well, no prongs to pick clothing and stones generally stay secure.

Only you can really decide on the balance between the side stones and your center. Look at a few and you will know what you like.

Best of luck!

 

[sevens one]

Channel settings are beautiful. They definitely add sparkle. They are a very secure setting.
But,,,,,, What ever you like is what matters. Look through websites and other areas here to see examples. Who knows you may be driven closer to or away from the channel. Check out precisionset.com and go to the collections under engagement - then go to channel and contemporary settings.
have fun
Nan

 

[valeria101]

The ring at Whiteflash should have a really thin band - there are 10 princess cut accents there with a total weight of less than 0.4cts! Those are tiny - less than 2 mm wide. So the band could be at most 5 mm wide - but more likely 4 to 5. Pushing the assumpion further, the princes center in the picture would be about 7mm wide...

Channel settngs work best with square stones, and since the round is king, this might skew choices. One can find channel settings in allot of trendy designs though. Also, one would use sloghtly bigger diamonds in a channel setting (not that there aren't plenty made with really small ones) - so they might be a bit more expensive. Anyway, I totally agree that your choice is really nice. It would be easy to decide on the size of the center - pen and paper help

Also, if you look for a better, not so deep cut center stone, it would showw off really well for the weight. Given the large variation of "accepted" depths, step cuts vary allot in size for the same carats.

 

[verticalhorizon]

Actually, my initial tendency was to go towards a non-channel setting. Not b/c I don't like it, but b/c I thought the money could be put towards the center diamond instead.

Now, I'm getting a diamond smaller than I had originally hoped, but still want to use the budget allotment in the setting.

Are channel settings, generally wider than non-channel to accommodate the diamonds? Specifically the Vatch X-prongs? The wider band may detract a bit from the center stone.

 

[valeria101]

So... your 6.2mm would look very close to the poster kid

Also, there seem to be more versions of the setting, with the sidestones getting smaller to match smaller centers, so no matter which version of the setting was used in the pic, the proportions would likely be the same with the band getting less wide to match the center...

 

[StevL]

The Vatche is wider, but that isn't the rule of thumb. Almost any width can be found or made according to your personal taste.

 

[verticalhorizon]

Val,

Not sure how you calculated those numbers, but what you're saying is that the stone in the pic is most likely a 7mm and the width of the band is 4.5mm?

The stone I have on hold currently is 5.66mm and I'm afraid that the channel setting might make the stone look smaller than it already is.

I've been reading the other topic re: prose and her guilty feelings toward her small rock... and it freaks me out. My GF isn't much of a jewelry person, but my thought is that if I'm going to do this once, to make it as good as I can afford up front.

Can I really communicate to Vatche that I want, say, a 3.5mm band at the top? Are we getting into custom setting prices now by doing that?

Thanks again!

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 4/26/2004 10:40:31 AM verticalhorizon wrote:



Can I really communicate to Vatche that I want, say, a 3.5mm band at the top? Are we getting into custom setting prices now by doing that?

----------------

Yeah... it would definitely not help lower the cost asking for custom work from this jeweler! But it would if you ask it from almost anyone else... How about just having such a ring made? Or the X-prong by Whiteflash which should be thinner?

I am not sure I understand the deal with the varying size of the stone... Are you looking to change it ? Squares are not exactly known for showing lots of face for the weight...


BTW: my guess o ring width is just based on the ~0.04cts average weight of the princess cut accents (given with the description of the setting: total weight of channel sets and their number) and the info bit that such stones are less than 2mm accross

 

[verticalhorizon]

I am not sure I understand the deal with the varying size of the stone... Are you looking to change it ? Squares are not exactly known for showing lots of face for the weight...

I have the deposit down on the .9 (5.66mm) and would love it if something bigger came in that measured more like 6.2mm. That's why I think when trying to picture set diamonds, it's easier to talk in measurements. For me anyways.

But if I put the remainder of my budget into a channel setting for the .9, I don't want the setting to overpower the diamond.

 

[cmcwill]

VH,
If you want a size reference, my ring (page 13 eye candy) is 5.54x5.4 and the band is 3mm with channel set princesses. Dont forget the prongs add a little size to the overall diamond.

Colleen

 

[verticalhorizon]

Cmcwill,

That's terrific! Thanks. I read your original thread too, it looks great! I think the 3mm band really helps! If mine looks anything near that good, I think I'd be ok with it!