Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Engagement Ring Advice/Suggestions

N

nine86

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 7, 2015
Messages
8
Hi,

I've got a quite a clear idea on what my girlfriend would like for an engagement ring. I know the design she likes is the Tiffany Novo design setting. So am looking for an engagement ring setting with a similar design. I've got quite a good feel of what the center diamond specs should/would be; but my budget is pretty tight at USD1500-USD1700.

I'm hoping to get some advice on how I can stretch my budget and get the best diamond for my money.

Center diamond specs (in order of importance, first being most important):
Cut: Ideal/Excellent
Shape: Brilliant Round
Carat: 0.45-0.5 (ideally as close to 0.5 or bigger)
Color: G-I (my only worry here is that an I or J would appear too yellow, especially as there are side stones and the ring is white gold)
Clarity: VS1-SI1 (I've been reading about how it's possible to get SI1 or SI2 stones that are eye-clean and I'm having a tough time making a call on this)

Ring Setting:
Design: Pave (similar to Tiffanny Novo and would appreciate suggestions of which online retailers would be a good place to look)
Color: White gold/platinum/palladium
My girlfriend is petite so ideally the ring thickness would be 2.0mm or smaller.

Essentially, the most important features of the centre diamond are ones that are clearly visible to the naked eye. I'm not sure if its possible to get a centre diamond and ring within my budget; I'm mostly seeking advice as to which criteria should I sacrifice to find a ring to suit my budget.

I'm only looking at online retailers at this point. Hope to hear from all of you! Thank you so much!
 
Have you checked out James Allen?

Setting: (this appears similar to the Novo) $575
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/14k-white-gold-thin-french-cut-pave-set-diamond-engagement-ring-item-7092

Stone: (0.47 ct, AGS 0 cut, I in color, SI1 in clarity) $1,070
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.47-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-430814

This is an AGS 0 cut grade, which is great - the only concern might be the clarity. You will notice an inclusion there towards the bottom, but keep in mind that these views are magnified and you might not see this inclusion in person. It would be worth inquiring with James Allen if it is "eye clean". This would certainly bring you in at your budget with a total of $1,645.
 
Hi!

Thanks for the help!

Yes I've looked on James Allen. I agree with the ring setting that seems most like the Novo.

I was actually looking at this other diamond:
Stone: (0.47 ct, AGS 0 cut, H in color, SI2 in clarity) $1,070
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.47-carat-h-color-si2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-430855

Compared with the stone you suggested which do you think would be most "eye clean"?

I noticed that the inclusions in the center diamond I was looking at were either on the perimeter or at the bottom. But I should ask James Allen if it's eye clean.

I was wondering if there were any other reputable online diamond/engagement ring retailers I could look at?

Also if anyone has photos of the 14K WHITE GOLD THIN FRENCH-CUT PAVE SET DIAMOND ENGAGEMENT RING setting from James Allen would love to see them!
 
Yes, ask JA if those stones are eye-clean. My guess would be yes due to the size of the stones but they have to be seen in
person. My choice would be the H if it is eye-clean or prongable.

Nice choices!
 
You Picked Well 986 :appl: :appl:

I think you better reserve that H stone and get it set -
don't want someone to snatch it out from under you !!!
 
nine86|1423109687|3827589 said:
Hi!

Thanks for the help!

Yes I've looked on James Allen. I agree with the ring setting that seems most like the Novo.

I was actually looking at this other diamond:
Stone: (0.47 ct, AGS 0 cut, H in color, SI2 in clarity) $1,070
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.47-carat-h-color-si2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-430855

Compared with the stone you suggested which do you think would be most "eye clean"?

I noticed that the inclusions in the center diamond I was looking at were either on the perimeter or at the bottom. But I should ask James Allen if it's eye clean.

I was wondering if there were any other reputable online diamond/engagement ring retailers I could look at?

Also if anyone has photos of the 14K WHITE GOLD THIN FRENCH-CUT PAVE SET DIAMOND ENGAGEMENT RING setting from James Allen would love to see them!
Click to expand...

Woops I didn't include the SI2's when I searched! :halo: I agree with other posters, this one is better! Great find :) Also, did you notice that they have real pics of the rings listed on the setting page? When you add the diamond and setting to your cart they will show you a pic of a real ring someone purchased with similar specs too. As far as other settings, Gabriel & Co. (gabrielny.com) tends to have some nicely-priced settings, but it seems that the ones most similar to the Novo are a bit more expensive than the JA ones. Perhaps someone else can chime in with a place with some more setting choices. Also, I should note that if you do choose to purchase from JA, make sure to mention that you are a pricesope user. They offer special pricing to users.
 
Thanks everyone for the feedback!

So I've been looking around for as much advice as possible.

And I checked with Diamonds.Pro for advice. They recommended:
Stone: (0.51 ct, AGS 0 cut, I in color, SI1 in clarity) $1,110
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.51-carat-i-color-si2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-430794?a_aid=dmnd1357&chan=x

Any thoughts on this? I like the fact that its a larger diamond. But I've realised that the side stones in the setting a H-I in color. So I'm concerned about getting a centre diamond in I color.

This centre diamond also seems to be eye clean.

And yes, I think so far JA has offered more bang for my buck especially when it comes to finding a setting. Might have my heart set on making my purchase from JA.
 
Is that site where you got the recommendation charging for the advice? Someone else recently came on here and said their was a charge from another diamond advice site. Our advice is free and there is a lot of experience on this board!

That last stone they recommended, the I SI2, has a horrible feather (crack) inclusion. No way would I recommend or consider that one.

I might be a little hesitant about the quality of that James Allen setting, to be honest. As long as you realize it may eventually need to be replaced, I guess it is okay to try it. But I don't consider it like the Novo other than having diamonds on the shank.The head is not the same.

My advice probably would be to go for H or I VS2 or really eyeclean SI1. Go down a little in size if you have to.
 
If you are going to use a paid referral site, please only use this one: http://www.prodiamondadvisor.com/

It's affiliated with Pricescope and is run by two of our most respected experts: John Pollard and Neil Beaty.

Why? Just read this tab: http://www.prodiamondadvisor.com/why-pda/

Other diamond referral sites are not there for Consumer's best interests, but their own. They will recommend stones that get them most money. Not ones that are best for you. PDA doesn't do that. They get the same referral payment no matter what vendor they recommend. So they don't have a stake in steering you wrong.

That said, as DS so correctly pointed out-- we are happy to help you for free.
And those diamonds are not ones you should buy.

I also would advise you to stick to I Si1 or better WITHOUT cracks in it, or other issues that would pose a threat to durability.

If you want to post your budget we'll be happy to help you get the best value for your budget.
 
diamondseeker2006|1423282677|3828605 said:
Gypsy|1423282191|3828603 said:
If you are going to use a paid referral site, please only use this one: http://www.prodiamondadvisor.com/

It's affiliated with Pricescope and is run by two of our most respected experts: John Pollard and Neil Beaty.

Why? Just read this tab: http://www.prodiamondadvisor.com/why-pda/
Click to expand...

Well what planet have I been on??? :eek: I have not seen that site before.
Click to expand...

It's fairly new and in Beta. Discounted while in Beta too, so totally worth it.

A lot of PSers come on here, then go to sites with "experts" that charge for diamond recommendations. Most poeple who visit PS, never post here. The stats on it are actually quite alarming. (You can see the stats here: http://www.prodiamondadvisor.com/about-us/from-pricescope/ ).

Unfortunately, these 'experts' are no-such thing, and there is no transparency, and these experts are out for themselves while claiming to be working for the consumers.

Currently PDA works only with Whiteflash, B2C, and GOG. But like I said, it's new. It's goal is transparency and Customer value.

Still it's run by John and Neil, and the two of them, as you know DS, have a ton of experience between them.

I think it's a great way for people who are too shy to post on PS to get the help they need. And I trust John and Neil-- and Andrey, as the site is affiliated with PS.
 
Hi DS and Gypsy!

Sorry for the late replies.

No it wasn't a paid service. It was a free service website is The Diamond Pro (www .diamonds.pro).

And yes I'm finding the forum here a lot more useful! Really appreciate all the help.

Has anyone had problems with JA settings? What would be a good alternative for me (within my budget or maybe slightly higher say $100) if not that one from JA? My problem with Enchanted Diamonds is that I can't seem to find a setting that would come within my budget.

I've seen some photos of that setting on the forum and they've been pretty satisfied with the choice.

Basically the reason for that setting is that I know that my GF would like a setting where the metal of the band isn't so prominent. So a petite/dainty pave setting is ideal - doesnt necessarily have to look like the Novo.

My budget is pretty strict/tight at USD1500-USD1700 for the stone and setting.
 
Yeah, I know about that site.

It is, unfortunately, riddled with mis-information. The Diamond Pricing information for example is pretty much garbage.
In fact the owner of that site tried posting here on PS, but because he kept posting so much false information that we refused to agree with, he doesn't post on here anyone (or he was banned, I didn't ask, though I did myself report him several times for policy violations).

It's a nice looking site, but the 'expert' is not one at all. He's just a guy with a pretty website.

It's exactly sites like that PDA was created to counter.

That guy has his own interests at heart. Not yours.

And I wouldn't buythe diamonds that he recommended to you.

Personally, I am saddened that James Allen even works with him.

Are you on a timeline for the proposal? Or do you have time to find a nice ring?
 
Gypsy, for learning purposes, could you please be more specific about "breaking the surface?" Also, would this concern also have something to do with not wanting the feather to interfere with cleavage points? Thanks!
 
Sparkly Soprano, I'm going to ask you to use the search function here and see if you can find the answers to those questions yourself. There is a treasure trove of information here to mine. I know you can do it!

I'll give you a hint though. Some feathers are internal to the diamond. Some aren't.
 
Hi Gypsy I am very new just beginning to learn so I am sorry if this is a stupid question the last diamond (nice price) you posted seems to has something at the 1, 6 and 9 o'clock position I see the report says feather but is that not a crystal at the six o'clock position.
 
Gypsy, I'm on the case. I love the challenge. I'll return...
 
Gypsy, Here is what I found out after reading articles and posts on the subject. The information I include here is all based upon my PS readings. Some interpretations are mine, so I welcome any clarification needed.

First, the term "feather" means a fissure within a diamond. This "fissure" can actually be called other things. So, it's still in essence a "feather," but it depends upon where how it is included as to what it is actually called. But for the sake of clarity, I will use the term "fissure" in my humble definitions below, which are based upon GIA grading "rules."

Feather = a fissure that is close to the surface of the diamond without breaking the surface
Cavity = a fissure that breaks the surface by creating an opening
Included crystal = a fissure that is included but not at the surface
Needle = a fissure that is actually straight (a 'straight feather' is how I've seen it described, so does this mean it could be defined as not having broken the surface?)

Most feathers were created when the diamond was formed or when it was pushed to the earth's surface. The formation likely happened billions of years ago.

The size and position of the fissure is important when considering the diamond. Three main questions to ask are:
1) Does it create an opening on the surface? (My follow up question to this: 'Wouldn't this inclusion actually be called a cavity in a GIA report?')
2) Does it reach the girdle edge? (Having surmised from the readings that extremely or very thin girdles would be most at risk, I would ask: what if the girdle is medium to slightly thick? Would that be a better scenario?)
3) Does it make a connection to other feathers near the surface? (I'm theorizing that this would not be good because more than one together at some point just compounds the potential negative impact.)

After surviving the cutting process, it is unlikely that a feather will worsen. Some experts in the main report I read were more concerned than others. What I surmised is that generally, if one can satisfactorily answer the three questions posed above, that should create considerably less worry about the situation. Of course, the lower in clarity grade, the more concern one could have. Some felt that SI2 is where that doubt really seeps in, whereas, some felt even lower, e.g. I2.

I also learned regarding cleavage planes that if a feather is located on one, "it can extend as a result of impact, but this is rarely seen in fully faceted diamonds. If it's going to split as a result of cleavage, it will split during cutting. Cleavage is an uncommon clarity." (Quote possibly somewhat paraphrased from PS report; I'm using my notes.)

I'm still feeling a little confused about cleavage and cleavage points, in particular how one can see them. Is it only upon viewing the magnified diamond itself? I read that diamonds have perfect cleavage in 4 directions. The cleavage plane is an internal direction of weakness. Cleavage also has something to do with the cutting process, although I believe in older methods. Cutters would sometimes use cleavage to divide the rough before faceting.

So, going back to my earlier post's questions:
SparklySoprano said:
Gypsy, for learning purposes, could you please be more specific about "breaking the surface?" Also, would this concern also have something to do with not wanting the feather to interfere with cleavage points? Thanks!
Click to expand...

I would now say that "breaking the surface" means that the inclusion is actually a cavity (or should be listed as one on the GIA report). A "feather" should be one that is close to the surface without breaking it. And "breaking the surface" from what I saw on various picture examples, makes the diamond look chipped in my humble opinion.

And the concern about the feather interfering with the cleavage points would be a more unlikely scenario since the diamond would likely have split during the cutting process. However, the feather could extend as a result of impact in this case, but is rare in fully faceted diamonds.

So, Gypsy, I humbly submit this report and eagerly await your response. I may have more questions about a particular diamond's report in regard to all of this, but will post at a later time (and thread). Thank you again for the challenge! It was fun!

~Sparkly
 
Gypsy|1423373088|3829207 said:
Yeah, I know about that site.

Are you on a timeline for the proposal? Or do you have time to find a nice ring?
Click to expand...


Hi No I'm not on a tight timeline. But I've realised that finding the ring isn't easy and you've got to invest a lot of time into it. So I'm glad I'm getting started already. Am learning so much!

Gypsy said:
This one, if the feather doesn't break the surface.... MAY be okay: http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.47-carat-h-color-si2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-430855
Click to expand...

This was the one that I had initially found and was asking for some feedback from the forum. I was thinking that this would be a better choice compared to the other one you suggested:

Gypsy said:
How about this one: http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.50-carat-i-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-400907

No feathers.
Click to expand...

I'm curious to understand why you think the I, SI2, 0.5 one would be a better choice. It seem's to me that the H, SI2, 0.47 would be better because the feathers/inclusions don't seem as spread all over the stone as the inclusions in the 0.5 one.
 
Bumping for Gypsy :wavey:
:)) SS
 
SparklySoprano|1423422356|3829393 said:
First, the term "feather" means a fissure within a diamond. This "fissure" can actually be called other things. So, it's still in essence a "feather," but it depends upon where how it is included as to what it is actually called. But for the sake of clarity, I will use the term "fissure" in my humble definitions below, which are based upon GIA grading "rules."

Feather = a fissure that is close to the surface of the diamond without breaking the surface
Cavity = a fissure that breaks the surface by creating an opening
Included crystal = a fissure that is included but not at the surface
Needle = a fissure that is actually straight (a 'straight feather' is how I've seen it described, so does this mean it could be defined as not having broken the surface?)

Most feathers were created when the diamond was formed or when it was pushed to the earth's surface. The formation likely happened billions of years ago.

The size and position of the fissure is important when considering the diamond. Three main questions to ask are:
1) Does it create an opening on the surface? (My follow up question to this: 'Wouldn't this inclusion actually be called a cavity in a GIA report?')
2) Does it reach the girdle edge? (Having surmised from the readings that extremely or very thin girdles would be most at risk, I would ask: what if the girdle is medium to slightly thick? Would that be a better scenario?)
3) Does it make a connection to other feathers near the surface? (I'm theorizing that this would not be good because more than one together at some point just compounds the potential negative impact.)

After surviving the cutting process, it is unlikely that a feather will worsen. Some experts in the main report I read were more concerned than others. What I surmised is that generally, if one can satisfactorily answer the three questions posed above, that should create considerably less worry about the situation. Of course, the lower in clarity grade, the more concern one could have. Some felt that SI2 is where that doubt really seeps in, whereas, some felt even lower, e.g. I2.

I also learned regarding cleavage planes that if a feather is located on one, "it can extend as a result of impact, but this is rarely seen in fully faceted diamonds. If it's going to split as a result of cleavage, it will split during cutting. Cleavage is an uncommon clarity." (Quote possibly somewhat paraphrased from PS report; I'm using my notes.)

I'm still feeling a little confused about cleavage and cleavage points, in particular how one can see them. Is it only upon viewing the magnified diamond itself? I read that diamonds have perfect cleavage in 4 directions. The cleavage plane is an internal direction of weakness. Cleavage also has something to do with the cutting process, although I believe in older methods. Cutters would sometimes use cleavage to divide the rough before faceting.

So, going back to my earlier post's questions:
SparklySoprano said:
Gypsy, for learning purposes, could you please be more specific about "breaking the surface?" Also, would this concern also have something to do with not wanting the feather to interfere with cleavage points? Thanks!
Click to expand...

I would now say that "breaking the surface" means that the inclusion is actually a cavity (or should be listed as one on the GIA report). A "feather" should be one that is close to the surface without breaking it. And "breaking the surface" from what I saw on various picture examples, makes the diamond look chipped in my humble opinion.

And the concern about the feather interfering with the cleavage points would be a more unlikely scenario since the diamond would likely have split during the cutting process. However, the feather could extend as a result of impact in this case, but is rare in fully faceted diamonds.

So, Gypsy, I humbly submit this report and eagerly await your response. I may have more questions about a particular diamond's report in regard to all of this, but will post at a later time (and thread). Thank you again for the challenge! It was fun!

~Sparkly
Click to expand...


[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/for-the-experts-play-nice-feathers-and-cavities-clarity.210537/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/for-the-experts-play-nice-feathers-and-cavities-clarity.210537/[/URL] :wavey:
 
Hi All

Apologies for being so quiet for such a long time. Anyway I really appreciate the feedback from everyone here. Unfortunately I wasn't able to pull the trigger on the JA e-ring I found earlier.

I've been looking at some retailers here in Malaysia and I've narrowed it down to the following two:

http://www.gia.edu/otmm_wcs_int/proxy-pdf/?ReportNumber=2186574893&url=https://myapps.gia.edu/RptChkClient/reportClient.do?ReportNumber=6E6D4C90D99F136AB3A2A1DA00D8B41A
The diamond above is retailing at about USD2,290.


http://www.gia.edu/otmm_wcs_int/proxy-pdf/?ReportNumber=6201262280&url=https://myapps.gia.edu/RptChkClient/reportClient.do?ReportNumber=02BF67A6BBAB9C5F3ECD7AB3179325FC
This one is is retailing at about USD2,278.

The prices are inclusive of the ring (pave setting similar to Tifanny Novo).

Any thoughts? The first one is 0.53 carats and the second one is 0.51. But there doesn't seem to be much difference in price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top