Emerald Cut Engagement Ring Reset

[Mikla]

I'm resetting my three-stone emerald-cut diamond engagement ring. The original mounting cracked, and since I didn't care that much for the original setting, I sold it for scrap value. Then I sent the stones to GIA for new reports because my husband only ever got copies of the reports when he had the ring made in 2004. What a relief that the new reports came back with the same details as the copies!!!

Anyhow, I've been in limbo about how to reset the stones now that the stones are back from GIA. Here's the original setting:

 

[Mikla]

So after searching and searching and searching . . . well, you know how it is . . . I have found some inspirational photos:

 

[Mikla]

More . . .

 

[Mikla]

Center Stone:
8.73 x 6.76 E/VS1

Side Stones:
5.86 x 4.47 F/VS1
5.61 x 4.46 F/VS2

I'm leaning towards traps for sides with a smaller proportion to the center than the original emerald side stones are. If I do that, then do I save the ECs for another ring or make dangly earrings out of them? Or should I pick a mounting that preserves the original three stones that my husband picked out for me? I wouldn't have picked out those stones because of their depth but he chose them and made the original ring as a surprise and that makes the diamonds very special to me. I could always make a second engagement ring with new stones that I pick and keep the original style for these stones. That might be considered wasteful though. Acckk! I don't know what to do! I need help from the experts on this forum!!!

Mikla

 

[pandabee]

Personally I prefer the aesthetics of an emerald flanked by traps but the proportions on your emerald 3-stone look nice too. I think it'll really be up to you but it would be nice to get a new set of earrings out of it if you choose to go with different side stones than your current emeralds!

 

[Mikla]

Thanks, pandabee! What do you think of this earring design as inspiration?

 

[m-2-b]

Oh, totally agree upon EC w/ trap sides! I really like the 2 SK versions you posted above!

 

[artdecolover71]

I love all the combos ....but my fave designs are ec with step cut traps...the leftover stones would be gorgeous as earrings! I would love ec earrings-yum!

Oh and what is your wedding band? that looks gorgeous too!

 

[Mayk]

I love the Cartier three stone... And then the EC and Traps with the plain shank.. What a fun project! Can't wait to see what you choose!

 

[marcy]

I like the Cartier 3 stone with traps and think using the other 2 EC for earrings would be a fabulous idea!

 

[Mikla]

Thanks, mom2boys, artdecolover71, Mayk, and marcy for your opinions! It seems the traps are winning over the EC sides. Of course, that's mostly what I posted so no surprise, right?

artdecolover71, I have several wedding bands. The original was a plain, 1.8mm flat platinum band. Then I got a 2mm three-sided Leon diamond band, and a 3mm round diamond and french cut ruby band. Also pictured with the original ring is a lovely 3mm French cut diamond band that I was trying on at Lang's about a year and a half ago. I was there on a trip with a friend who isn't into jewelry (gasp!). I didn't buy it and have regretted it ever since!

 

[Gypsy]

Without even knowing the depth of your stones I can tell you they are fine? Why? Numbers are meaningless with emeralds. So wear them with piece of mind.

PERSONALLY I like the three stones together. I think they are well matched and the proportions are great with one another. I'd get Steven Kirsch to do this setting style for you, but have him tuck the sidestones in and tilt them in a bit.



I wouldn't change them out for traps. But that's me. I think your diamonds are just lovely as a set.

 

[heididdl]

WEll I am kinda partial to the Steven Kirsch traps with thicker platinum as mine is similar but has two puny trilians . Love that look

 

[yennyfire]

I agree with gypsy (big surprise!). Normally, I'd prefer trap side stones with an emerald, but there's something about your stones that just work together. Personally, I'm partial to the first design your posted.

 

[Mikla]

heididdl, please post a link or picture of your ring!

Gypsy and yennyfire, my husband is thrilled to hear that you think his choices work so well! They do, don't they? I have just been so torn between the original side stones and the traps! The problem is that I like them both and maybe I am just looking for a change? I don't know.

 

[Mikla]

If I use the original three stones and forego the traps idea, is there only one setting option (traditional three-stone)? I got bored with the original setting after awhile but maybe it's just a foregone conclusion that I should expect that to happen. It also was a bit heavy-looking. I have to admit I also have DSS. I thought about setting the center in a halo to give the illusion of a larger size but I really didn't find any mountings that I liked. Am I making too much out of this whole thing?

 

[Acinom]

What a a fun AND nerve wrecking project
I love the original ring , but the first Steven Kirsch ring will complement your stone so well. I would make studs from the other stones as they are so versatile for everyday wear and luxurious enough to take them from day to evening.

Another possibility:

Good luck making your decisions and keep following your heart.

 

[artdecolover71]

well your stones are gorgeous but I completely understand needing a change...I think it comes down to listening to your heart and LOVE the French cuts with EC's too....delicious!

 

[Acinom]

One more for inspiration and eye candy:

 

[Mikla]

Thanks for the pics, Acinom! Nerve-wrecking is right. I don't want to make a mistake on this oh-so-important ring.

 

[Mikla]

Acinom's photos got me thinking about different side stones. I'm posting a couple more photos for your consideration and input:



I'm so close to choosing. Any of these or one of the original rings posted? Thanks for your input, ladies!

 

[Gypsy]

I like the original sidestones best. So that's #1. Setting by Steven Kirsch.

#2 caveat: these exact proportions:


#3 shields:

 

[Acinom]

I like the first Steven Kirsch from the original selection best. Which one sings to you?

 

[Mikla]

When I think about my objectives for the ring, I think this is the list:

1) Keep original diamond(s)
2) Keep somewhat true to classic three-stone design
3) Design should focus on center stone (no distracting details)
4) Design should accommodate a matching band
5) Ring should be well-made and durable for daily wear

Every design I posted meets at least some of these criteria. But I'm having a hard time committing to any one. Maybe it will be a combination of design details.

 

[Mikla]

I think I'm close to a decision! Here is where I am leaning:





I'm going to think about it for a few days before I pull the trigger.

 

[tyty333]

The first one you just posted by SK!!! That is just lovely. There is something about pave with step cuts that just really
makes them stand out so much more (IMO).

 

[Acinom]

The first one you just posted by SK!!! That is just lovely. There is something about pave with step cuts that just really
makes them stand out so much more (IMO).

+1 The first one you just posted is so very well balanced. Love the subtle split shank!! And it will be so lovely with a pave band indeed. See which one sings to you. That's the only thing that matters.

 

[yennyfire]

I love your choice! It's going to be gorgeous!

 

[Mikla]

This is kind of funny. I wrote notes under each picture but they didn't make the intended impression. What I was trying to say was that the basic design was the Steven Kirsch split shank with the split a little wider (or farther down, I guess) and with a band like the third picture. Should I be concerned that there is so much melee when I really want the focus on the center stone?

 

[lambskin]

I agree with Gypsy. The original setting is perfect. If you want something a little different perhaps put bullets or baguettes on the sides next to the side stones making it a 5 stone ring. Not a fan of melee and especially with square cuts.