Help decide between these two settings...

[james88]

So, I've narrowed it down (I think) to these two, princess-cut channel settings from James Allen. They are very similar and I just wondered if anyone had experience with either of these, or just a general opinion. Specifically, I'm concered about having a ring that is too thick. It will be size 7.5, probably around a 1 ct center stone.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channelset-rings/ring/item_58-2809.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channelset-rings/-Platinum-Princess-Cut-Engagement-Ring.html

Thanks!

 

[yssie]

So, I've narrowed it down (I think) to these two, princess-cut channel settings from James Allen. They are very similar and I just wondered if anyone had experience with either of these, or just a general opinion. Specifically, I'm concered about having a ring that is too thick. It will be size 7.5, probably around a 1 ct center stone.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channelset-rings/ring/item_58-2809.asp
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channelset-rings/-Platinum-Princess-Cut-Engagement-Ring.html

Thanks!

I prefer 11106P - IMO the concave inflection at the shoulders makes for a more flattering rise to the basket than the convex shoulder of the other.

At 2.5/2.2-2.7mm I would call both "thin rings" - neither will be "thick" or "too wide" on her finger unless she specifically prefers an ultra-thin look.

 

[Amys Bling]

I prefer the first.

 

[bigsparkles]

I prefer 11106P-- it appears more graceful.

 

[Christina...]

I prefer the first as well!

 

[Lotus99]

Add me to the list for preferring the first one.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

At first glance I chose the first one because the shank is thinner. However, after realizing that the second one will be made with different size shanks depending on the size of the stone, I think I might prefer the second one because I like a basket setting better with a cathedral shank, usually.

 

[Enerchi]

I prefer the thinness of the shank on the first but the basket of the second. Does JA do any customization? Is it possible to combine and then have a sleek slim looking setting all over?

Both are very nice tho... good luck!

 

[chel180]

I prefer ring number 2, http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channelset-rings/-Platinum-Princess-Cut-Engagement-Ring.html

I think it just looks better put together, more sleek. I think that it will look very elegant on a size 7.5 finger so I don't think that will be an issue.

If you look to the bottom right hand side of the JA page above you will see photos taken of actual rings that have been made for previous customers with various sizes and shapes of diamonds. That should help you visualize the quality and effect.

 

[tyty333]

I prefer ring #2.
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channelset-rings/-Platinum-Princess-Cut-Engagement-Ring.html

Have you looked at the Sold Rings? I dont like how the end of the catherdral shows on the first ring for a 1 carat stone.
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/sold/channelset-rings/5977/Channel-Set-Eternity-Rings.html
View it with the Round 1.01 G stone and you can see the end metal on the catherdral. This image is not taken straight on
though. I would ask JA if those ends would show with a 1 carat stone. I wouldnt like that.

With the ring that I like the ends of the shank come all the way up and either touch or almost touch the basket so
you dont see the ends when looking at the diamond straight on. I also like the head better on this setting.

 

[Amys Bling]

Oh seeing the actual sold ring pics do make it easier to decide.