Cushion - halo or solitaire

[HoratioNelson]

My financee (and I) are having difficulty working out whether to get her stone set as a solitaire or with a halo!

It's an F VS2 1.52ct measuring 6.7 x 6.15 and although the pictures don't quite do it justice, it's pretty firey and we chose it because of how much light it gave off.

The plan was always to have it set as a solitaire on a fairly thin pave band (circa 2mm) - like a Tiffany Novo with a more rectangular ratio stone . Over the last week, however, we have been considering a halo.

Yesterday we saw a mock-up of a ring using the centre stone and 3-pointers (approx 1.9mm pave) on a bluetack mount. It's very crudely done, but was just to get an idea of what it would look like. We think 3-pointers are probably too big and are getting a proper model (wax) made up with stones around the 1.7mm size, which I understand are in the 2-pointer range. Will post pics of the 2-pointer halo when we have them, but below are what we currently have had to choose between. Again, the centre stone looks blue/grey in the centre as we have used bluetack to stick it on the band.

My concern is that a 1.52ct centre stone with a halo will look too large on the finger (which itself takes a 4.5 ring size). If you have a 6.7mm x 6.15mm stone with 1.7mm around it, even sitting flush that works out at 10.1mm x 9.55mm dimensions for the whole halo. This is roughly the spread of a 5ct single stone, and as you can see would take up nearly the whole finger. And I worry that where you've gone for a centre stone which is of a decent size and with great fire/brilliance, putting a halo around it takes away from how great the centre stone actually is. Also, we'll have pave running around 3/4 of the band, so there'll be plenty of bling there.

What are people's thoughts on this? To go solitaire or add the halo?

 

[Slickk]

My personal opinion on this is to be set in a solitaire. You can always upgrade to a halo in the future and it sounds like you really love the diamond so I would let it do all the talking. Also you can stack diamond eternity band or diamond bands with it for more bling. I think solitaires are very versatile and classic. Good luck.

 

[msop04]

My financee (and I) are having difficulty working out whether to get her stone set as a solitaire or with a halo!

It's an F VS2 1.52ct measuring 6.7 x 6.15 and although the pictures don't quite do it justice, it's pretty firey and we chose it because of how much light it gave off.

The plan was always to have it set as a solitaire on a fairly thin pave band (circa 2mm) - like a Tiffany Novo with a more rectangular ratio stone . Over the last week, however, we have been considering a halo.

Yesterday we saw a mock-up of a ring using the centre stone and 3-pointers (approx 1.9mm pave) on a bluetack mount. It's very crudely done, but was just to get an idea of what it would look like. We think 3-pointers are probably too big and are getting a proper model (wax) made up with stones around the 1.7mm size, which I understand are in the 2-pointer range. Will post pics of the 2-pointer halo when we have them, but below are what we currently have had to choose between. Again, the centre stone looks blue/grey in the centre as we have used bluetack to stick it on the band.

My concern is that a 1.52ct centre stone with a halo will look too large on the finger (which itself takes a 4.5 ring size). If you have a 6.7mm x 6.15mm stone with 1.7mm around it, even sitting flush that works out at 10.1mm x 9.55mm dimensions for the whole halo. This is roughly the spread of a 5ct single stone, and as you can see would take up nearly the whole finger. And I worry that where you've gone for a centre stone which is of a decent size and with great fire/brilliance, putting a halo around it takes away from how great the centre stone actually is. Also, we'll have pave running around 3/4 of the band, so there'll be plenty of bling there.

What are people's thoughts on this? To go solitaire or add the halo?

Hello HoratioNelson! First of all, CONGRATULATIONS on your engagement! I don't think you can go wrong with either of the settings, but it is all about the look she is going for...

Personally, I LOVE cushions in delicate halos... (key word: delicate) I would definitely agree with you that 3 pointers are much too large. I think 1 pointers (or even 1/2 pointers) would be your best bet. They wouldn't take away from that beautiful stone, but enhance it's shape and draw the eye in. I think halos provide that extra "wow factor" with a bit of sparkle!

As far as your concern about being too large... I think it would look gorgeous, as long as the melee are not too large - this would give more of a cluster effect that is usually not desired. I used to be "anti-halo" because all those I'd seen IRL weren't made great and/or they were WAY too big. After discovering PS and seeing all the gorgeous rings here, I was shown what a well made halo looks like. I have included a photo of one the most popular and beautiful styles that can be made by many benches. As you can see, it is delicate and feminine, giving just the right "presence."

 

[HoratioNelson]

Thanks for the responses!

msop04 - do you know what the size of the centre stone and pointers are in that picture? There are so many pictures of stones like this online, but it is really difficult to work out how they've been made in practice. One worry we have is that once you start to go to a lower size of melee, they don't sparkle as much (e.g. 3 pointers are much more sparkly than 1 pointers or half pointers) - is this right?

 

[Enerchi]

Of the 2 options you posted above, my preference is the halo and you can always add a diamond band for her wedding ring, adding more fire to her set! Why not start as a solitaire and upgrade later on a milestone event, to a halo, if that is still of interest in a few years?

But - if you are going halo - I totally agree w msop04 that the smaller melee would be far more suitable, adding a hint of halo instead of overshadowing it with a BLAST of halo, kwim? 1pointers would be beautiful on the halo, and maybe 2pointers on the shank... just a thought.

 

[msop04]

Thanks for the responses!

msop04 - do you know what the size of the centre stone and pointers are in that picture? There are so many pictures of stones like this online, but it is really difficult to work out how they've been made in practice. One worry we have is that once you start to go to a lower size of melee, they don't sparkle as much (e.g. 3 pointers are much more sparkly than 1 pointers or half pointers) - is this right?

No problem!

2.43 E/VVS2 (I hope I have this right!!)
7.19x 6.78x 3.78
Table 60%
Depth 57.1%
Finger size 4.5

It belongs to PS member, ginzagirl. Here is the link to the thread:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-anniversary-ring-is-here.84652/

I think you should read the thread below, written by CharmyPoo. It has a wealth of knowledge regarding the HW-esque cushion halo.

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...rience-in-making-a-harry-winston-halo.183473/

Regarding melee size and sparkle... it's my opinion that the smaller (1 pt) will sparkle more because the facets are smaller. If you want your cushion to be the "star," I would stick with 1pt melee. Otherwise, it may look like a big sparkly cluster-y ring like the one on the right.
Maybe not this drastic, but you get the point...



Let us know what you decide!!

 

[msop04]

Thanks for the responses!

msop04 - do you know what the size of the centre stone and pointers are in that picture? There are so many pictures of stones like this online, but it is really difficult to work out how they've been made in practice. One worry we have is that once you start to go to a lower size of melee, they don't sparkle as much (e.g. 3 pointers are much more sparkly than 1 pointers or half pointers) - is this right?

I almost forgot to address this question... I was unable to find out for sure about the size melee. I am no expert, but they appear to be 1 pt. or smaller. I feel 3 pt melee around any size stone is way too much halo -- that look reminds more of a cocktail ring than ering. This is just my preference though.

 

[HoratioNelson]

Definitely agree with you about 3 pointers being too big. I am slightly anxious that our jeweller is one of these who confuses mm diameter of melee (e.g. 2mm) with the weight (e.g. 0.02ct) for the purposes of defining a pointer. We are still waiting for him to get hold of some 1.7mm stones, and perhaps smaller, so will see what they look like around the stone.

There is a fine line as you say between the 'cocktail ring' look with a halo and something which is clearly a delicate engagement ring. I wonder though how halos will stand the test of time in 10-20 years.

 

[Enerchi]

Of the 2 options you posted above, my preference is the halo and you can always add a diamond band for her wedding ring, adding more fire to her set! Why not start as a solitaire and upgrade later on a milestone event, to a halo, if that is still of interest in a few years?

But - if you are going halo - I totally agree w msop04 that the smaller melee would be far more suitable, adding a hint of halo instead of overshadowing it with a BLAST of halo, kwim? 1pointers would be beautiful on the halo, and maybe 2pointers on the shank... just a thought.

Yikes!! just realized I meant my preference is the solitaire but I typed halo. Sorry...that was confusing...

But if going halo, I like that your jeweler is looking for smaller melee.

 

[HoratioNelson]

By way of an update...

Our jeweller has (supposedly) located some smaller melee which he claims are 2 pointers and has made a wax model - see the pic attached.

These still look way too big in my opinion for a halo. The wonkiness of the wax model doesn't do much either (should it really be that hard to line up these things in wax)? The jeweller has said he wouldn't go below 1.25 pointers for the halo.. but I'm sure lots of people have 1 pointers and even down to 0.5 pointers in these sorts of designs? I wonder whether it's because it would be too fiddly for him to do it with lots of smaller stones, rather than anything to do with structural/aesthetic issues. Does that sound odd to anyone?

I'm also having one or two worries as the stone has good (GIA) symmetry. I be imagining it, but it seems the top right corner of the stone (in the image) is ever so slightly at a different angle to the others. I wonder whether this would affect the shape of a halo (or, in fact, if done properly, a well shaped halo could in fact give the whole thing perfect symmertry).

 

[SB621]

I'm going to be frank and honest. I would fire your jeweler or at least go with someone else. Just because your jeweler has done halos in the past doesn't mean he executes them well. If my jeweler had shown me 3 or 2 pointers for a halo I would have walked right out. The proportions are way off and not visually pleasing at all.

As someone already stated halos only really work if they are delicate. Many people use larger melee to make the center stone larger or to up the sparkly factor when really it just looks tacky and detracts from the center stone.

To me there are 2 types of halo. The Tiffany Legacy inspired halos or the HW the one inspired halos. Below is a photo of my old setting showing it with a 1.5mm halo- it is a 2.04ct RB. It seems from your wax model that you are perhaps looking at a more legacy style setting. If that is true I would look at the rings on ERD's website and BGD as they both do very good legacy inspired settings. To me it looks like your jeweler is not seeing the bigger picture here.

 

[HoratioNelson]

Hmm. He was originally referring to it as a "bezel", whereas we have been telling him that we want a "halo", and showing pictures of the type of ring. I thought his term "bezel" was just an old school word for what is today referred to as a halo, but I'm beginning to think it may actually be something technically different with bigger stones.

One other small niggle is that he's reluctant to make the band much thinner than it's current 2.1mm (mainly for strength reasons, so it holds its shape better if knocked, which I can see sense in). But having a 1.5ct stone on a band that size doesn't make the stone as large as it might look on a thinner band.

 

[AprilBaby]

Bezel and halo are different. A halo usually has prongs on the point stones and a bezel is smooth, no prongs. Which is he going to do? His mock up looks like a bezel to me.

 

[JulieN]

Look up the pictures: Tiffany Legacy is a bezel halo. Harry Winston is a prong set halo.

 

[HoratioNelson]

OK. This is making a huge amount of sense now.

I think he's going to have prongs/claws. Although he hasn't shown us a drawing other than the below. Which seem quite rudimentary to me and I was a bit disappointed when it came through as it seems rather generic.

This guy is a great jeweller; he's made some great pieces before but I think he's not in the most familiar territory on this occasion.

 

[Aoife]

Have you seen actual halo rings from this jeweler that you loved? If so, would you consider posting pictures of them here?

If not, I would say that the chances of you getting an end product that you really love are very, very slim. It is never a good idea to have a jeweler try a new design/technique/etc. out on you for the first time, especially with something as important as an engagement ring, and frankly, the photos you have posted of the waxes look pretty dire to me. He may be steering you away from using smaller melee because he lacks the ability to prong-set something that small, or he just may not be on the same wave-length as you and your fiancee. Both of those things are big red flags.

I second the suggestion for taking a look at ERD and Brian Gavin. Both of them do beautiful work.

 

[HoratioNelson]

We (including the stone) are based in London, so as great as people like ERD and Brian Gavin are, it's not the most feasible option unfortunately at the moment.

We are meeting up with our jeweller again today as he has sourced some 1.5 pointers (which I imagine are approx 1.4mm diameter). As the centre stone is just over 1.5ct, I'm not so anxious that we get as small as possible melee (e.g. if 1 pointers look good around a 1 ct centre stone, I suspect 1.5 pointers could look ok around a 1.5ct centre stone), but by gut instinct is that 1.5 pointers may still be too big and we will have to drop down another size or two.

I'll take some photos anyway, as it would be useful to get people's feedback on appropriate melee size.

 

[ooo~Shiney!]

Hi I know I'm very late to this party, but I really really think (if this were my diamond)
that I would stay with a solitaire and maybe a delicate, pretty and twinkly pave band.....

That diamond is an F ( my sweeet sweeeeet spot ) and it is going to be amazingly white and sparkly
in its own right....
I vote that you think on it, maybe see how she feels after wearing it for awhile....
That is a beautiful diamond and it does look pretty substantial on your
sweet fiancee's hand.....

 

[chrono]

I am sorry to say that 2 pointers are still much too large. 1 pointers or even half pointers will be such an understated and elegant halo. I am not getting the feeling that this jeweller can create the right look for your ring. My oval measures 10x8 mm and the bench is using 1.5 to 1.1 mm melees which are 1 and half pointers.

 

[marcy]

Hi I know I'm very late to this party, but I really really think (if this were my diamond)
that I would stay with a solitaire and maybe a delicate, pretty and twinkly pave band.....

That diamond is an F ( my sweeet sweeeeet spot ) and it is going to be amazingly white and sparkly
in its own right....
I vote that you think on it, maybe see how she feels after wearing it for awhile....
That is a beautiful diamond and it does look pretty substantial on your
sweet fiancee's hand.....

Ooo Shiney said pretty much what I was going to say.

 

[Aoife]

We (including the stone) are based in London, so as great as people like ERD and Brian Gavin are, it's not the most feasible option unfortunately at the moment.

We are meeting up with our jeweller again today as he has sourced some 1.5 pointers (which I imagine are approx 1.4mm diameter). As the centre stone is just over 1.5ct, I'm not so anxious that we get as small as possible melee (e.g. if 1 pointers look good around a 1 ct centre stone, I suspect 1.5 pointers could look ok around a 1.5ct centre stone), but by gut instinct is that 1.5 pointers may still be too big and we will have to drop down another size or two.

I'll take some photos anyway, as it would be useful to get people's feedback on appropriate melee size.

As I suggested before, please also post some photos of halo rings that this jeweler has produced that you love. Previous work is the very best prediction of how happy you will be with the end results of your own halo ring. We see so many unhappy clients posting on this board who have not followed this basic rule: if there are not examples of a certain type of work in a jeweler's portfolio, it is probably because he/she doesn't know how to do it/has never done it before. Just make sure you aren't the unhappy guinea pig!

 

[soxfan]

I'm going to be frank and honest. I would fire your jeweler or at least go with someone else. Just because your jeweler has done halos in the past doesn't mean he executes them well. If my jeweler had shown me 3 or 2 pointers for a halo I would have walked right out. The proportions are way off and not visually pleasing at all.

As someone already stated halos only really work if they are delicate. Many people use larger melee to make the center stone larger or to up the sparkly factor when really it just looks tacky and detracts from the center stone.

To me there are 2 types of halo. The Tiffany Legacy inspired halos or the HW the one inspired halos. Below is a photo of my old setting showing it with a 1.5mm halo- it is a 2.04ct RB. It seems from your wax model that you are perhaps looking at a more legacy style setting. If that is true I would look at the rings on ERD's website and BGD as they both do very good legacy inspired settings. To me it looks like your jeweler is not seeing the bigger picture here.

+1 She is right. See how the halo on her ring makes that center stone the "star of the show" and doesn't take away from it? I wouldn't go bigger than 1/2 to MAYBE one pointers. And if you really really want that look of the center stone being the star, you have to go with a jeweler who is REALLY a master of pave.

I was in this situation, was going to go with my jeweler, but in the end I KNEW it wouldn't look the way I wanted it to. So I chose to go with Victor Canera. Like others have said Leon Mege, Steven Kirsch, and ERD do a nice job with this style.

Good luck- I really like a halo on this stone rather than a solitaire.

 

[soxfan]

[quote="HoratioNelson|
This guy is a great jeweller; he's made some great pieces before but I think he's not in the most familiar territory on this occasion.[/quote]

Then DON'T have him make it.

 

[Enerchi]

Hi I know I'm very late to this party, but I really really think (if this were my diamond)
that I would stay with a solitaire and maybe a delicate, pretty and twinkly pave band.....

That diamond is an F ( my sweeet sweeeeet spot ) and it is going to be amazingly white and sparkly
in its own right....
I vote that you think on it, maybe see how she feels after wearing it for awhile....
That is a beautiful diamond and it does look pretty substantial on your
sweet fiancee's hand.....

Ooo Shiney said pretty much what I was going to say.

Add me as another to this - this is not the right jeweller for a halo, if that's where you ultimately end up. Why not start w a solitaire, enjoy that for a while. Explore other halo options if that is still a desire, and if you DO go that route - go with a PS vendor who specializes in them. Have you read Charmypoo's thread on creating the perfect HW cushion halo? (sorry if it is already linked here... ) THere's a wealth of knowledge in there that is going to give you lots to think about and well worth the read.

I'll see if I can find it, but i think its in the Rocky Talk Forum, and I'm not sure if it is a pinned thread or not. Or you can search under Charmypoo's threads.

 

[HoratioNelson]

We've decided to go for.... a halo, with a split shank.

My fiancee came to this decision when trying on rings elsewhere in London last week and fell in love with a ring which had a halo and split shank (although the stone in that case was an emerald) - see the pic for this below. Since then, she is adamant that she wants her cushion put into a similar design.

We are still working with the same jeweller and saw him at the weekend. He put the 1.5 pointers around our centre stone just in blue tack to illustrate the relative size. We think it's better, but still too big. (See below). He is getting some 1 pointers and 1.25 pointers today.

We are sticking with the same jeweller for better or for worse (family/social ties mean that it is not really possible to change in any moral sense). Not ideal but that's the situation we're in and I've warned the finacee that the halo may not be as good as if we were to go to a micropave specialist.

 

[soxfan]

We've decided to go for.... a halo, with a split shank.

My fiancee came to this decision when trying on rings elsewhere in London last week and fell in love with a ring which had a halo and split shank (although the stone in that case was an emerald) - see the pic for this below. Since then, she is adamant that she wants her cushion put into a similar design.

We are still working with the same jeweller and saw him at the weekend. He put the 1.5 pointers around our centre stone just in blue tack to illustrate the relative size. We think it's better, but still too big. (See below). He is getting some 1 pointers and 1.25 pointers today.

We are sticking with the same jeweller for better or for worse (family/social ties mean that it is not really possible to change in any moral sense). Not ideal but that's the situation we're in and I've warned the finacee that the halo may not be as good as if we were to go to a micropave specialist.

It is ALWAYS possible to decide not to go with a particular jeweler. I was JUST in this situation. Our jeweler is not only a CLOSE friend, but our neighbor. I told him "look, this might be my "forever" ring. I want it to be 110% EXACTLY what I want. I want to go with Victor Canera. He makes this ring every day, it's the EXACT ring I want." He was FINE with it. It actually freed up his schedule a bit as he is one of the only custom forger in the area, and we still bought the diamond from him. It was a win/win.

I just don't want her to be disappointed with the ring. I wouldn't use any bigger diamonds than half pointers on that stone. Just my opinion.....

Also, my jewler came back with a more expensive quote than Victor! That made it easier too. Can you ask Victor for a quote and compare the two?

Good luck!

 

[Aoife]

We've decided to go for.... a halo, with a split shank.

My fiancee came to this decision when trying on rings elsewhere in London last week and fell in love with a ring which had a halo and split shank (although the stone in that case was an emerald) - see the pic for this below. Since then, she is adamant that she wants her cushion put into a similar design.

We are still working with the same jeweller and saw him at the weekend. He put the 1.5 pointers around our centre stone just in blue tack to illustrate the relative size. We think it's better, but still too big. (See below). He is getting some 1 pointers and 1.25 pointers today.

We are sticking with the same jeweller for better or for worse (family/social ties mean that it is not really possible to change in any moral sense). Not ideal but that's the situation we're in and I've warned the finacee that the halo may not be as good as if we were to go to a micropave specialist.

If the top photo is of the ring that your fiancee loves, then it looks nothing at all like the mock-up your jeweler has produced, which you obviously already know. I'm sorry that you feel obligated to use this jeweler because of family connections: if you knew how many times we had seen variations of that situation on this forum, and how seldom the end result makes anyone happy....

If you feel obligated to use this jeweler, I strongly suggest that you and your fiancee rethink the type of ring she wants. I agree with others that a solitaire setting is your best bet. If you have shown the photo of that setting to your jeweler, and the mock up was his best effort to approximate it, you are clearly not going to get anything that looks like that from him, and I'm afraid that the chances are good that you and your fiancee are not going to be happy.

 

[msop04]

We've decided to go for.... a halo, with a split shank.

My fiancee came to this decision when trying on rings elsewhere in London last week and fell in love with a ring which had a halo and split shank (although the stone in that case was an emerald) - see the pic for this below. Since then, she is adamant that she wants her cushion put into a similar design.

We are still working with the same jeweller and saw him at the weekend. He put the 1.5 pointers around our centre stone just in blue tack to illustrate the relative size. We think it's better, but still too big. (See below). He is getting some 1 pointers and 1.25 pointers today.

We are sticking with the same jeweller for better or for worse (family/social ties mean that it is not really possible to change in any moral sense). Not ideal but that's the situation we're in and I've warned the finacee that the halo may not be as good as if we were to go to a micropave specialist.

It is ALWAYS possible to decide not to go with a particular jeweler. I was JUST in this situation. Our jeweler is not only a CLOSE friend, but our neighbor. I told him "look, this might be my "forever" ring. I want it to be 110% EXACTLY what I want. I want to go with Victor Canera. He makes this ring every day, it's the EXACT ring I want." He was FINE with it. It actually freed up his schedule a bit as he is one of the only custom forger in the area, and we still bought the diamond from him. It was a win/win.

I just don't want her to be disappointed with the ring. I wouldn't use any bigger diamonds than half pointers on that stone. Just my opinion.....

Also, my jewler came back with a more expensive quote than Victor! That made it easier too. Can you ask Victor for a quote and compare the two?

Good luck!

Wow, sox... Deja vu, huh??

I agree with sox. 100%.

OP, I really think you should take soxfan's advice to heart regarding your issue, as someone who really struggled with this same type of situation, but ultimately went with a bench (VC) that is known to deliver perfect pave time and time again. I understand family ties and all, but this is her engagement ring. Won't you just wanna kick yourself if the jeweler delivers a "less than" product? If you still feel the need to buy from the family friend, then get her some earrings or a pendant...

Your GF loved the halo above (with the emerald cut). If your jeweler uses anything over 1/2 pointers, the ring will look totally different from this ring... not similar... not even close. It would have a more "cluster" asthetic to it. Now, if that is what she wants, then great, but it's not what she keeps showing you. Please don't think we are trying to push you to get something "just because" -- we have been adamant because we want you both to have a great ring that will make her very happy.

 

[msop04]

If the top photo is of the ring that your fiancee loves, then it looks nothing at all like the mock-up your jeweler has produced, which you obviously already know. I'm sorry that you feel obligated to use this jeweler because of family connections: if you knew how many times we had seen variations of that situation on this forum, and how seldom the end result makes anyone happy....

If you feel obligated to use this jeweler, I strongly suggest that you and your fiancee rethink the type of ring she wants. I agree with others that a solitaire setting is your best bet. If you have shown the photo of that setting to your jeweler, and the mock up was his best effort to approximate it, you are clearly not going to get anything that looks like that from him, and I'm afraid that the chances are good that you and your fiancee are not going to be happy.

+1

 

[HoratioNelson]

I can see where people are coming from here.

But are micropave/halos such a specialism that they can't be done by a skilled jeweller who doesn't do them that often?

Obviously the size of the melee shown to date has suggested that he hasn't quite got the idea of what a typical halo is (as compared with a bezel), but I am hopeful that he is getting there. His aversion to melee being too small is that the rings which have stones as small as half pointers are typically drilled in the far east or in a factory, and don't hold the stones in securely as the way he proposes to set them. We'll see if we can get him to use stones at or under the 1 pointer mark and go from there...