Harry Winston... About to buy but torn.

[cutes814]

Just want to add my 0.2

As a female, brands are very important, but it''s not for everything. I''m with the majority of the group here. I don''t think getting a branded diamond is the best move unless that brand means A LOT to the two of you. I would much rather spend the extra money on a non-branded BIGGER stone, than a branded smaller stone. When someone sees the ring, they only see the diamond (especially the size), they do not see the HW brand. But if the HW brand is very important to you and your gf, then go for it.

Based on her commment when she told you to forget the brand and get the bigger stone, I''m pretty sure she''ll appreciate a non-branded 2.0-2.5 carat diamond over a branded 1.5-1.8 carat.

Now to answer your question of round vs. sq EC. I absolutely adore sq EC (aka asscher), but for an engagement ring, I much rather preferred the classic round because I can always get the fancy shapes later for a RHR, anniversary, etc.

If you find yourself even considering getting a non-branded diamond, just holler and hundreds of us will help! Well, maybe not hundreds.....but close.

 

[Kaleigh]

Thanks Door Knob, but WS wants a HW. I don''t think we can steer him in another direction right now. All we can do is help him choose between the round and the emerald cut or square emerald cut.

 

[Demelza]

WhiteSox -- I hope we haven''t scared you off or made you feel like we''re not listening to you. As you can probably tell, many people on this board simply cringe at the idea of spending tons more money on a designer diamond that may not be the biggest or best cut available. What you''re witnessing is our collective bias against high-end retailers such as HW, Tiffany''s, etc. Clearly, you have a healthy budget and many of us are fantasizing about what that could buy. It''s like a bunch of kids in a candy store with no parental supervision. I think Mrs Salvo is right that it''s important for you to make an educated decision (i.e. know that you can probably get a diamond that is significantly bigger and possibly better cut elsewhere). But I think you''ve made it very clear that you have your heart set on HW. I think we need to respect that. You didn''t come to PS asking whether HW would be a good choice. I think everyone would agree that HW sells beautiful jewelry and you will certainly end up with a gorgeous ring. Any more thoughts on round vs. square ec?

 

[Mara]

Between the two ... if that round and baguette setting is the only option for the round, I say square emerald...because it''s more unique than a round, and also because I think round and baguettes for me are more of a ''mature'' taste. Can you do a halo with the SE or something a bit different?

 

[door knob solitaire]

Oh Mr. White Sox,

I am sooo sorry. Ooops. I misread or misunderstood the direction of the conversation. This is a perfect example of why not every one should chime in until we understand what the intention of the poster asked. (I really had read that string from start to finish.)

With my sincerest apology-DKS

Agreed. I do have breakfast at Tiffany''s...out side on the sidewalk...just as Audrey did. However your bride to be...gets to enter the doors of HW...and not just dream in the reflection of the glass. How thrilling. And very exciting. Besides the upgrade there are many bells and whistles she will be thrilled!!!!! And this board will be thrilled as well, honest.

 

[WhiteSox]

WOW. I''m quite shocked with the number of posts. I just woke up actually

Appreciate everyone''s comments. To clarify,I am pretty much dead set on the HW.
I didnt intend on it but she found out and seemed quite shocked and excited. She''s 100% against me going to a place like Tiffany''s but HW seems to ring a different bell.
So that''s why I''m going with HW.

Then, there is the size issue but she''s not into the huge stones. I think a 2 ct will be the max because she tried on a 2 ct and felt it looked to big
I was happy about that and that is when I decided to check out HW and see what they had.
We''re not going to resell this thing so I just want to buy her the ring that will make her happy...
That''s the dilemma

So, I look at it another way... correct me if I am wrong. I dont have the luxury of picking out my diamonds upclose as I am working in Europe and want to buy from the US.
So, after this trip, first hand research is probably out.
I could go for specs but I could also trust HW to have quality diamonds... BUT I can also trust them to mark them up for the brand and their effort.
I doubt they would select crap as this would hurt their brand image.

In this case, I have to feel comfortable with the diamond quality and the price.
I think in the same way folks here value the diamonds quality, someone else could put value in the brand and the look of the diamond.
In the same way that no one is going to ask her the brand, I feel no one is going to ask her the diamond''s internal qualities. It''s her call to tell them either.
The look however is important of course

So that means the other argument that remains is: should I trade the brand for a bigger diamond BUT I know she doesnt really want something much bigger so I''m thinking I can give her more satisfaction through the brand.
OR I can go for diamond quality but...
I''ve also looked at eightstar diamonds and they look great but I felt they were quite expensive and I would have to do so much explaining to say why they are good diamonds.
I dont think the arrows are necessarily the most beautiful look... I liked them at first but I think that is a preference call more than a standard.

Dont know if this makes any sense at all but I think she wants a HW and the only problem is she thought I was getting her a 1 ct.
If I get something in the size she wants, I''m sure she will be happy.
But what look?

Does anyone have pics of a 1.5-2.0 ct square emerald cut diamond on a hand? Harlowqueen''s ring looks so huge. Wondering if maybe she has small fingers

WS

 

[Kaleigh]

Now you have me confused. You want a HW ring, or are you wavering a bit and looking for the best cut diamond. From your post it seems like you are wanting a HW but are concerned about their cuts. Maybe I didn''t read you right. Help me understand exactly what you want, then we can help. Thanks

 

[door knob solitaire]

Mr White Sox,

Glad to see you are still at the plate. Thought you left the ball park.

I wanted to tell you I just watched a news segment on my computer last week.. If I can find it I will send you the link. It may have been 60 minutes or something. Anyway...it was a diamond buying espose...they sent a reporter out to find a diamond ring. Same specs...visited either tiffanys or HW and then Sams club-or costco....

Then took the stones to the world reknowned apprasier...yadda yadda yadda..Anyway...the specs came back suprisingly on target. The grading were right. He commented how both stones were what they were represented as being. But he made more positive leaning towards the store brand...again Tiffanys or HW...because of the paperwork...trade in...and legacy. I think in this example the price difference was $8,000. But he said as an appraiser that $8000 definatley had the value for the life of the heirloom it would become. (I realize you are beyond the Tiffany thing...but similar in the HW I mean as in name recognition...)

Again...thrilled that you are able to shop at HW. Even more thrilled now that she knows...ans is expecting it.

Door Knob

PS. GO TIMELESS and CLASSIC....GO ROUND. oops. it just slipped out. Sorry.

 

[decodelighted]

If she tried on a 2ct & thought it looked "too big", and was hoping to inch you up to a 1.5 ... I can't fathom that 1.7 wouldn't be THE SWEET SPOT. Don't worry about photos of peoples hands. Pictures trick you & the chances of someone having a hand that looks EXACTLY like your girlfriend's are NIL. Also, the photo wouldn't really represent what it would look like IN PERSON, ON HER HAND.

Couple things to consider: do you think she'd ever want to change the setting? Add sidestones etc? Would you go back to Harry Winston for that? If you didn't - it wouldn't exactly be a Harry Winston anymore would it?

Also ... 1.5 SE rings in nice platinum settings can go for 10-12K. If you're spending 250% more than that ... you should get a little sumptin, sumptin extra right?

Have you looked at Daniel K rings?

ETA: if you look at the ad that appears at the top of the Pricescope page often (facets collection) it is a 1.5ish round with baguettes exactly like the HW you're considering. (throat clear + cough) "not unique".

 

[ame]

I still say round with the baguettes. If you can inch up past 1.5 in a round do so. I just don't care for the 1.7 Square EC option, her friends all have ECs. Make sure her's stands out.

 

[pebbles]

If you go to www.harry-winston.com and click on "engagement", the first picture that comes up is called "the pave diamond setting". Their heading is "A ring that offers an elegant alternative to the Harry Winston solitaire." It looks like a cushion in there.

You want a HW ring to wow your gal.....I would go with that one.

 

[Jelly]

pebbles, I agree...that ring is quite stunning!

I vote for the emerald cut ring.

 

[Jelly]

If you go with the name brand, how about Neil Lane? Seems to be the most popular with movie stars.

 

[Odilia]

Just wanted to throw a few more cents in, for what it''s worth. I''m with those who said they''d much rather have size or quality for the money than the brand name; of course that''s just me and just another opinion.

Also as someone says, think about what she will want in 30 years, not just today. So even if her friends have such and such today, she may not care about that later down the road.

Also, have you thought about what wedding ring she will wear with it? That might help break the tie.

I also thought of something like what ame said, "EC is a look you have to love. Ask the sales lady if you can exchange it if she doesn''t like it and" change the stone.

 

[katiecatt]

Obviously this is just my opinion... however... I would choose the round brilliant with the baguettes hands down. Again - this is just my personal opinion, but I think the square cut is very trendy right now and not as classic as the round. Emerald cut is more timeless than square I think. Also, a 1.5 round will definitely look bigger than the 1.7 square - no question. And... there is nothing like the sparkle of a round brilliant. It will blow all of her friends rings out of the water. Good luck!

 

[bling*diva*]

~~I think you should go with the round with baguettes. I love the way the sleekness of the baguettes balance out the sparkle and brilliance of a round. Good luck!!!

 

[MissGotRocks]

Let me preface this by saying it is just my opinion - but I think you are looking for opinions! You may now have more than you wanted but women diamond lovers never tire of giving their opinions. . .

My vote has to be the round with baguettes - it is a timeless, classic look. If you plan on her having that for the next 30 years, it will never go out of style. Trends come and go - you could have purchased a round and baguette ring 20 years ago or you can purchase it 20 years from now and never have to explain what it is. It will always speak for itself.

She is a lucky girl to have someone so interested in trying to please her. Frankly, I would ask her preference though. Surprises are wonderful - but if it is for something you have to wear and love everyday - she might want to have input into the decision. At least about shape - you can then determine brand, size, etc. My husband would have been one to buy something different - something that you didn''t see everyday - but I wouldn''t have been as pleased. When in doubt don''t - tried and true works everytime.

Good luck to you - let us know what you decide.

 

[decodelighted]

Attention WHITE SOX ...

Your thread has landed. Check out

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/need-help-with-asschers-square-emeralds.34766/

For a whole bunch of pix of a brand spankin new 1.8ish Asscher (Square Emerald) ON A HAND!!! A female hand!! She is not Harlowqueen so it will be a WHOLE NEW HAND!

I''m just joshin'' ya, White Sox! But I did think of you when I saw it...

LOVE
DECO

 

[Kaleigh]

deco,
You are too cute, love that!!!

 

[Demelza]

Date: 10/19/2005 2:03:26 PM
Author: kaleigh
Now you have me confused. You want a HW ring, or are you wavering a bit and looking for the best cut diamond. From your post it seems like you are wanting a HW but are concerned about their cuts. Maybe I didn''t read you right. Help me understand exactly what you want, then we can help. Thanks

I''m a little confused too. It sounds like now you''re unsure about whether to go for the best cut possible or the brand name?? Just curious why she''s so opposed to Tiffany''s but doesn''t have a problem with HW? Anyway, it sounds like the size issue has been resolved. She doesn''t want anything bigger than a 2 ct stone (can''t imagine why

). So, the 2 choices are: round or square EC, and HW or not?

 

[valeria101]

Date: 10/19/2005 1:52:30 PM
Author: WhiteSox

Does anyone have pics of a 1.5-2.0 ct square emerald cut diamond on a hand?

All you wrote makes perfect sense to me - you've found the one thing that will make this ring special and know very well what to look for, etc. Obviously you can't go wrong!

THIS tells the story of a 1.5 cts square and shows it on hand (ring size 5.25).

It is not a solitaire though...

Down this link is a 1.8 cts asscher cut solitaire. Perhaps not the kind of ring you have in mind, but closer and the ring size matches.

Best of luck!

 

[door knob solitaire]

I am with the round team. I agree the classic lines of that round and baguettes are simply timeless. And yet the classic look will set her apart from the in crowd. I must tell you there are days I look down at my round and wonder about another shape...the square is truly beautiful. And in a HW...isn''t anything classic? He does nothing Avante Guard. No mohawks. No leg warmers.

I just noticed, I wonder if we aren''t actually choosing teams here and rooting for our side- ROUND TEAM VS SQUARE TEAM. My post may sound argumenative...that is not my intention. When asked about our opinions...each of us are able to bring up points WhiteSox may not think of or know to ask. He is getting quite an education, don''t you think?

Since both teams are suited and lathered up...what about the subject that hasn''t been addressed here, may not have been considered, and that is the durability of the shape? You know how they say sharp cornered stones are more likely to crack...break or chip than a round stone. Every jeweler I have visited has tried to convince me that my 2 ct round stone should be in a 6 prong setting for the protection...they then bring up all the young girls choice today is princess cut and how dissappointed they are when they crack their stone and wish someone would have told them about the fragility.

Don''t worry board, I think I am worn out...this is my last contribution on this one.

DKS

 

[WhiteSox]

Thanks everyone... just to add some more flame to the fire, these are images they have sent me.
The attached is the SqEC 1.71 F-VS2.
ws

 

[widget]

Well....it looks gorgeous to me, but then I''m a member of the Square team...

widget

 

[WhiteSox]

edit: dupe.

 

[WhiteSox]

This is actually slightly smaller than the 1.5 I am looking at because that diamond is not set. So the 1.5 should look slightly bigger.
I wish I had a hand model. haha.

If I go with the Square I will probably up it a little and take it to 1.8-1.9 ct.

I have to say I love them both.

Deco, thanks for the post. I went to it and found she was a size 4. Looked really big on her

ws

 

[Kaleigh]

I have to say that picture is just stunning even though I''m a RB gal at heart. I do love it especially if you go bigger. It''s a wow, seriously!! I love the setting, the double claw prongs and the sleek band.

 

[widget]

Author: WhiteSox

This is actually slightly smaller than the 1.5 I am looking at because that diamond is not set. So the 1.5 should look slightly bigger.

If I go with the Square I will probably up it a little and take it to 1.8-1.9 ct.

WS...It''s important to remember (especially with ECs) that size difference does not necessarily correspond to weight difference.

A good example of this would be the two stones pictured in the thread mentioned above. Although they were only about 20pts different in weight, one looked considerably bigger than the other. This was because the "inferior" one was, among other things, quite a bit shallower.

Are you going to be able to view your choices in person before you decide?

widget

 

[WhiteSox]

Date: 10/19/2005 9:37:44 PM
Author: widget

Author: WhiteSox


This is actually slightly smaller than the 1.5 I am looking at because that diamond is not set. So the 1.5 should look slightly bigger.

If I go with the Square I will probably up it a little and take it to 1.8-1.9 ct.

WS...It''s important to remember (especially with ECs) that size difference does not necessarily correspond to weight difference.

A good example of this would be the two stones pictured in the thread mentioned above. Although they were only about 20pts different in weight, one looked considerably bigger than the other. This was because the ''inferior'' one was, among other things, quite a bit shallower.

Are you going to be able to view your choices in person before you decide?

widget

I have seen the 1.5 round. I''m happy with that one but I havent seen the 1.7. I hope to but I dont know if it will be possible. I may ask someone in to examine it for me.
Regarding the size, thanks for that insight. I asked for the measurements so that I can estimate how it would look on a hand although I know I should see it up close.
Physically, it seems impossible given my locale.

WS

 

[Mara]

Between those two I really do not love the round at all the way it looks there...I love the way the square looks (But I''d set it in the pave setting!!)..I adore rounds but I think the square may be the way to go here.