Double vs Single Row Micropave Halo?

[missmelee]

I am new to the forum (this is my first post) and was prompted to join because I am having trouble deciding between a double versus single row of micropave around my center stone. I have a 1.51 carat cushion brilliant and know that I want a halo (as well as micropave around the band). Steven Kirsch is doing my ring and I need to decide so he can start!

Single row halo would look something like this:

http://engagementringsdirect.com/DiamondJewelryDetails.aspx?ID=34

or

http://www.victorcanera.com/jewelry/engagement-rings/the-emilya-halo-solitaire-with-antique-cushion.html


Double row halo would look something similar to the attached photo -- but better made (I am told by SK that the beadwork on this ring is poorly done). I should also say that this photo doesn't do the double-halo concept justice, as it was *gorgeous* in the store ... it's a tiered double halo of half point stones (almost looks like a halo of glitter), whereas a single halo would be one pointers ...

Any input welcome!

 

[CharmyPoo]

I personally find that a double halo is too much. What size is your finger?

On the topic of the ring in the picture, I don't like it at all. The setting is bulky and the pave work is rough and not delicate. The diamond itself is yuck ... there is no sparkle or fire. It looks dead.

 

[stargurl78]

I vote for single halo. In the double halo picture you attached, the halo looks too "prong-y".

 

[slg47]

I agree that the setting in the picture looks too 'prongy' but I think SK could execute it much better. it really depends on what you prefer!

 

[missmelee]

Thanks for all the input! My ring size is 5.25 ...

I agree that the ring in the photo above is not executed properly ... just trying to figure out if I like it better conceptually. That being said, seems like most folks on here vote for single halo.

On another note I should let folks know that the ring photographed above is from Marisa Perry ... they claim it is their finest work, and ask $9500 for the setting alone. I'm pretty disappointed with the quality of their work and how marked up their prices are ... has anyone had better experience with them?

 

[tyty333]

I'm another one that finds double halos on engagement rings a little too much. You have to wear it every day so I tend to go more
conservative (single halo).

 

[SC86]

Another vote for the single row halo. I am also currently doing a project with SK and am very sure he can execute a double row halo delicately. But I think that the small melee size usually used for double halo designs ends up looking like gray specks in real life instead of a row of sparkle. That's just my opinion though. If you end up deciding on the double row halo I would discuss the halo width and size of melee with Steven and agree on what size would look the best. Good luck! Sounds like it will be lovely!

 

[Mayk]

another vote for a single.. I think when you go to a double it starts to look more like a cocktail ring and less like an e'ring.. IMO.... can't wait to see the finished design..no matter what you choose!!!

 

[Amys Bling]

I'm another one that finds double halos on engagement rings a little too much. You have to wear it every day so I tend to go more
conservative (single halo).

Agreed. I think a double halo on a cocktail type ring is divine- I would tend to go single halo for an ERing though.

 

[GreenBling]

i have a double halo... definitely NOT something i'd wear everyday.

If you wanted the halo for the extra sparkle then perhaps you'd want to consider slightly bigger side diamonds?

Eva

 

[Gypsy]

I'm another one that finds double halos on engagement rings a little too much. You have to wear it every day so I tend to go more
conservative (single halo).

Ditto.
Plus less risk of repairs!

 

[Phoenix]

Am I the only one who lurves multiple-micropave halo, lol?

Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2_RMKirBE&NR=1

 

[Gypsy]

Am I the only one who lurves multiple-micropave halo, lol?

Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2_RMKirBE&NR=1

I think so, cause when I see that all I think is that it looks like diamond barnacles attacked that poor ring. *shrug*

 

[Phoenix]

Am I the only one who lurves multiple-micropave halo, lol?

Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2_RMKirBE&NR=1

I think so, cause when I see that all I think is that it looks like diamond barnacles attacked that poor ring. *shrug*

snort!

 

[missmelee]

haha. yes i saw the emilya double halo solitaire on victor canera's website - very pretty but maybe i should think about dialing it back a bit for the e-ring ... it never occurred to me that i could also do a cocktail ring down the line ...

another two questions for you folks with opinions:

(1) with a single micropave halo cushion, should i do a cathedral or no cathedral? i want to do stackable matching wedding bands (probably just two) but i'm wondering if that would be a bit overwhelming with a cathedral. input welcome!

basically we're talking this:

http://www.victorcanera.com/jewelry/engagement-rings/the-emilya-halo-solitaire-with-antique-cushion.html

versus this:

http://www.engagementringsdirect.com/DiamondJewelryDetails.aspx?ID=16

(keep in mind i'm talking about side view only).

(2) if i do a single row of micropave, i am torn about having stones on the side of the basket (see second link above). thoughts?

 

[tyty333]

I like the first one without the cathedral sides. Did you see Frankies ring make-over. It does show one version of her ring with
diamonds on the side of the basket and one without. Again, *I* find it a bit too much but take a look and see if you like it or not.

Look at the Steven Kirsch side view pictures. Frankie decided she didnt want it either and went back to the single row on
the top only.
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/comparison-photos-of-my-victor-canera-sk-leon-ring-setting.166496/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/comparison-photos-of-my-victor-canera-sk-leon-ring-setting.166496/[/URL]

Edit - there is a picture at the top and then another one about 1/2 page down with it on her finger.

 

[Gypsy]

... it never occurred to me that i could also do a cocktail ring down the line ...

Ahh... see now THAT'S what we are best at. Enabling!

 

[Gypsy]

Mine is cathedral and I highly recommend it. My profile allows for flush fit bands so I could, in theory, stack as many as I want. Plus it provides a TON of stability. I prefer Victor's halo over ERDs btw, by a lot.

 

[sillyberry]

Am I the only one who lurves multiple-micropave halo, lol?

Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2_RMKirBE&NR=1

I can't quite tell because of the angle of the video, but is that two rows of halo (like two circles) or a halo and a vertical set? Does that even make sense?

I love love love the halo with diamonds both as you look down AND as you look at the profile (which is good, as that's what I have!), but not so much with two top-down halos.

 

[MissStepcut]

I agree with previous posters that a double halo says more "cocktail ring" than "e-ring."

 

[Ossola]

Am I the only one who lurves multiple-micropave halo, lol?

Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2_RMKirBE&NR=1

I can't quite tell because of the angle of the video, but is that two rows of halo (like two circles) or a halo and a vertical set? Does that even make sense?

I love love love the halo with diamonds both as you look down AND as you look at the profile (which is good, as that's what I have!), but not so much with two top-down halos.

As the owner of the ring, the question makes perfect sense. The halo has a horizontal row of diamonds surrounding the diamond, then a vertical row, rather than two rings of diamonds surrounding the larger diamond. Both sides blend seamlessly together. So yes, when you look at the profile of the ring you see diamonds, not metal.

As for the "barnacle" comment, keep in mind that the video was shot using micro photography. The pave is much smaller and much more delicate than it appears on film. The ring may not be to everyone's liking, but that comment was in poor taste.

 

[Gypsy]

Am I the only one who lurves multiple-micropave halo, lol?

Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2_RMKirBE&NR=1

I can't quite tell because of the angle of the video, but is that two rows of halo (like two circles) or a halo and a vertical set? Does that even make sense?

I love love love the halo with diamonds both as you look down AND as you look at the profile (which is good, as that's what I have!), but not so much with two top-down halos.

As the owner of the ring, the question makes perfect sense. The halo has a horizontal row of diamonds surrounding the diamond, then a vertical row, rather than two rings of diamonds surrounding the larger diamond. Both sides blend seamlessly together. So yes, when you look at the profile of the ring you see diamonds, not metal.

As for the "barnacle" comment, keep in mind that the video was shot using micro photography. The pave is much smaller and much more delicate than it appears on film. The ring may not be to everyone's liking, but that comment was in poor taste.

I'm SO sorry if I hurt your feelings with the barnacle comment. I hope what I said doesn't take away from your enjoyment of your ring. If Victor made it I'm sure the pave is impeccable and that you are thrilled with it and that's what matters.

 

[missmelee]

Thanks tyty333 for posting the link (repasted below). It was super helpful to look at those photographs side-by-side. I think I vote in favor of the single row as well ...

I also looked through the thread you sent:

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/comparison-photos-of-my-victor-canera-sk-leon-ring-setting.166496/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/comparison-photos-of-my-victor-canera-sk-leon-ring-setting.166496/[/URL]

This made me realize that I should be as specific as possible with the instructions I give to SK about the specs of my ring. Do any of you have advice as to the actual size of the halo?

My stone is a 1.51 cushion brilliant with the following dimensions: 7.17 x 6.95 x 4.16

Thx!

 

[petrock<3]

I've seen a very fine double halo in person and it was divine!! I personally loved it and didn't think it was too much, because they were very thin rows and done very well. It was like a glitter ball.

It looks best I think if they are tiered down or if the outside ring is angled down.

 

[missmelee]

Can anyone recommend a good appraiser in NYC? How long does that process typically take?

Still torn about single versus double row ... sigh. But this is a good problem to have, at the end of the day.

 

[Christina...]

I agree with most of the others, I prefer a single row of pave. Your ring is going to be amazing btw! What a great problem to have!

 

[missmelee]

i have a double halo... definitely NOT something i'd wear everyday.

If you wanted the halo for the extra sparkle then perhaps you'd want to consider slightly bigger side diamonds?

Eva

Eva, if you don't mind me asking, what are the specs of your ring, and why wouldn't you wear it every day? I met with SK today and he seems to think the double halo is the way to go ... he mentioned doing stones slightly smaller than one pointers and said he would make it look more delicate than in the picture above. Also, is your double halo done on two separate planes, or all on the same wire? For example, if you look at the side profile of the Tiffany Soleste (http://www.tiffany.com/engagement/item.aspx?GroupSku=GRP10060&selectedSku=27087973#f+) you can see that there are two separate, tiered halos. That is also the design of the ring I posted above, but it had much smaller stones.

Thoughts?

 

[slg47]

i have a double halo... definitely NOT something i'd wear everyday.

If you wanted the halo for the extra sparkle then perhaps you'd want to consider slightly bigger side diamonds?

Eva

Eva, if you don't mind me asking, what are the specs of your ring, and why wouldn't you wear it every day? I met with SK today and he seems to think the double halo is the way to go ... he mentioned doing stones slightly smaller than one pointers and said he would make it look more delicate than in the picture above. Also, is your double halo done on two separate planes, or all on the same wire? For example, if you look at the side profile of the Tiffany Soleste (http://www.tiffany.com/engagement/item.aspx?GroupSku=GRP10060&selectedSku=27087973#f+) you can see that there are two separate, tiered halos. That is also the design of the ring I posted above, but it had much smaller stones.

Thoughts?

I think it depends on the angle/placement of the halo, the size of stones involved, the size of the center stone, and the finger size. if you really prefer the double halo I am sure that Steven can execute one rather nicely! what is your finger size and what is the size of the center stone?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

A halo is already going to make the ring look pretty blingy. To me personally, a double halo looks overdone for an e-ring and more appropriate for a cocktail ring (although I would prefer single on a colored stone ring as well). But I am more into simple and elegant...to each his/her own!

 

[mrssalvo]

I would do single. More isn't always better and I think too much pave actually takes away from the main diamond which I like to be the focus. Just my .02. I'm sure whatever Steven does will be gorgeous.