How small of a solitaire is worth it?

[abcdefg]

Nice pictures, Maisie - your ring looks bigger than I would have expected from a 0.5ct. It also easily looks worth getting that over 0.33ct.

So my next question is - if I could possibly get up to 0.7ct by downgrading to J/SI1 - would it be worth it? Or am I better off sticking with a 0.5-0.6ct stone of better colour/clarity? A bigger size would be nice, but not if it''s going to look occluded or noticeably yellow (in a platinum setting).

 

[RBsearch]

I think a J/SI1 or J/SI2 is exactly what you should be looking for. If it is well cut (and the ones posted above are), it will look perfectly white. Just verify with the retailer that it is "eye clean" first. Some SI2s are, others are not.

 

[rainydaze]

i thought this might be worth pointing out
http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/jewelry-specials/previously-owned-jewelry/rings/130PO1/16/

.68 ct, D, VS2, AGS000

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

With all the other great advice...this might be a long shot....

http://www.signedpieces.com/item.cfm?item_id=10644

cheers--Sharon

 

[motownmama]

I hope you''re feeling encouraged. There are alot of great suggetions here that are on budget!!!

 

[allowingtoo]

I know a better Tiffany. I buy from this seller all the time and can vouch for her. Tiffany Ring

You might offer her $3,000.00 cash for the ring AND the Tiffany necklace and see if she takes it.

 

[laughwithme]

My best friend has a 3/8 carat RB diamond that is ideal-cut, color F, VS1 or 2 clarity. While I don''t know the exact price, I believe her husband paid about $1,000 for it. It is so beautiful and because it sparkles due to it''s excellent cut, you hardly notice that it''s a smaller diamond. I would be very happy with her ring. Please note that she originally had it in a solitaire setting and it looked fairly small, but she re-set in a band with channel-set diamonds (wedding band has channel-set diamonds, too) and so now it''s basically blingin''. The newer setting def. made the center stone look larger.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Hi,

My diamond is slightly under .50 and I prefer smaller diamonds. Just a personal preference. My ring size is 4.5ish.

With your budget, I'd spend $1,600 on a diamond and spend the rest on the setting (and get a more elaborate one). . .OR go with one of the pre-owned ones posted by others.

I do think, if you're going to go with a .5-60, that getting an I or a J is an excellent color range. . .My eng. diamond is a G and I also own D, E, & F diamonds and the "warmer" G color has more depth and personality to it. If I ever purchase another diamond, it'll be an I/J.

 

[LGK]

I think a J/SI is a good idea. First of all, smaller stones show less color. Also, well cut stones ditto. I'd probably go check out a few in person- Hearts on Fire are a line of ideal cuts you can find in B&M stores. Also Jared's carries AGS0s. I do suspect you'll be pleasantly surprised at how white a nice J is.

Also, I'd consider going with a plainer setting initially- possibly even white gold if you don't have a really specific reason for platinum- and putting most of the $ into the setting; then, you can change the setting to a more ornate one at a later date if you want. While it's definitely a personal preference, platinum is not inherently superior to gold, it's just... different. I generally like platinum fine in settings that are really ornate and/or have a lot of melee, and white gold if more metal is showing- I myself don't love the look plain platinum gets after a while (it scratches verrrry easily, more so than gold, and gets a patina). Just a thought!

Also palladium is another option- cheaper than PT, and doesn't need rhodium plating. However, it is lighter weight in feel, and can be harder to find palladium settings.

Oh, and I wanted to add that a half carat stone is pretty substantial looking IMO. I work retail and tend to check out customers' jewelry a lot, and I'd say a half carat is above the average size I see during the day. A nicely cut .5 ct should be stunning.

 

[Daisi2112]

I don''t think it matters what the size is. It''s a symbol of love and commitment. So long as you wear it proud and happy it will stand out no matter what

 

[Diamond*Dana]

I think a .50 (give or take) would be lovely!
The center stone of my three stone is .51 and I love the size of it...it really does sparkle and that is what matters

 

[Maisie]

How about this beauty?

http://www.highperformancediamonds.com/index.php?page=view-id-diamond-infinity&id=342

Works out at around $1985 with your PS discount

Its on hold but that doesn't mean its sold yet. Worth calling Wink and asking about.

 

[AprilBaby]

I think a .50 is a lovely size ring. Almost everyone so far has had some amazing options for you!

 

[allowingtoo]

Never mind on the Tiffany ring I posted. The Cut Adviser doesn''t like it. Who would think Tiffany would sell inferior diamonds?

 

[kcoursolle]

A half carat solitaire is a lovely look and certainly large enough. I would check out knoxjewelers.biz for some affordable settings. He can make all of his settings in platinum and has many WG options that are very affordable.

Ditto what others have said that SI stones can be very eye clean. I have an SI2 and I wouldn''t hesitate to buy another!

 

[chrono]

J/SI1 would be an excellent option and will get you a nearly 0.7ct stone. However, some people are rather sensitive to colour while others don''t mind it or can''t see it. It would be a good idea to take a look at a few J coloured stones in high end stores (like Leo diamonds) o get a feel if a J colour would bother you or not.

 

[mtjoya]

I have a sweet spot for under 1 ct. My FI got me a .58 ACA from WF I VS1 and it sparkles like crazy. I think that the cut should be your 1 followed by your personal taste in regards to color & clarity. You can go as low as a J and a SI1 or SI2 if the diamond is eye-clean.

I think that you should really try WF. They have beautiful & simple styles. My FI spent a total of $2300. We originally had a budget of $4000 but I fell in love with the .58 & the simple tiffany setting.

Good Luck and post pics!

I will try to post pics of mine but I still need to master taking pics. I have a blurry one, but I will post anyway! I am a size 6 btw.

 

[Noahsmom]

Just for shiggles, here ya go:

My center stone is .52, and the loose stone next to it is a .87 H SI2 Ideal cut, the appraiser said just looking at it, it looks like a 1ct. I got my stone from Jamesallen.com and it cost me a smidge over $1700. Sorry for the bad picture, it''s actually a stunning diamond.

 

[Gypsy]

There you go, perfect.

Date: 2/18/2009 9:34:48 AM
Author: rainydaze
i thought this might be worth pointing out
http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/jewelry-specials/previously-owned-jewelry/rings/130PO1/16/

.68 ct, D, VS2, AGS000

 

[Kim N]

Date: 2/19/2009 12:28:12 AM
Author: Gypsy
There you go, perfect.

Date: 2/18/2009 9:34:48 AM

Author: rainydaze

i thought this might be worth pointing out

http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/jewelry-specials/previously-owned-jewelry/rings/130PO1/16/


.68 ct, D, VS2, AGS000

Ditto, that''s a great find! Perfect!

 

[abcdefg]

Date: 2/18/2009 8:31:31 PM
Author: mtjoya
I have a sweet spot for under 1 ct. My FI got me a .58 ACA from WF I VS1 and it sparkles like crazy. I think that the cut should be your 1 followed by your personal taste in regards to color & clarity. You can go as low as a J and a SI1 or SI2 if the diamond is eye-clean.


I think that you should really try WF. They have beautiful & simple styles. My FI spent a total of $2300. We originally had a budget of $4000 but I fell in love with the .58 & the simple tiffany setting.


Good Luck and post pics!

I will try to post pics of mine but I still need to master taking pics. I have a blurry one, but I will post anyway! I am a size 6 btw.

Hm, looks nice. How thick is the band on your ring? I mean the width.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 2/17/2009 11:33:49 PM
Author: grapegravity

Date: 2/17/2009 11:24:34 PM
Author: Moh 10
I''d get this .707 ct, H VS1 with an AGS report.

It is an Expert Selection round from Whiteflash and if you mention Pricescope and wire the funds you''ll get the discount price of $2317.


It gets an HCA score of 1.0 Ex Ex Ex Ex, and is right in the center of the AGS window!

Have them set it in their platinum solitaire setting, which is $250.


The total is just $2567 for a super cut which is about 3/4 carat.

Since it is cut so well it will look even larger.


Personally I''d spend all the dough on the stone and get the simplest setting.

For me it is all about the stone.


http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-1874236.htm

Ditto...

Another ditto!

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-1874236.htm

Seriously, why go to J or SI when you can get a .70 with a good spread for $2389 (minus a couple percent if you pay by wire)?! Their plain tiffany style setting in platinum is $600.

 

[Imdanny]

1/3 if the quality of the cut and clarity are high enough is as low in size as I would go. I don't think people should worry about .5 stones. .5 is just fine. .4 is nice. .6 is very nice, if you can get there.

You know, a study said the average e ring in the US is something like .38 ct (someone can correct me with the exact figure but it was under .4).

Heck, I just got my VC&A catalog and it has pictures of the following (this is Van Cleef & Arpels, the best of the best imho):

.40 E VVS1 $7,400.
.50 D VVS1 $8,850.
.30 E VVS2 $3,850.
.50 E VVS2 $9,250.

And that's IT as far as what they put in this catalog, and they listed prices in this catalog up to $94,000, and after that they didn't list the price for the item. So you could say that there's nothing wrong with .5. You might even say that it's a fashionable size.

Not everyone says, "I have to have a 2.0 ct engagement ring"- some people do, but don't get the wrong impression and think everyone feels that way. That is most certainly not the case.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/17/2009 10:13:48 PM
Author:abcdefg
Due to budget constraints and my searches on bluenile.com, etc., it seems that 0.5ct is the largest possible solitaire I can get for my e-ring. Do you think that's large enough to be worth getting, or should I just go with some kind of flat diamond band instead? What about 0.3ct with smaller diamonds around the band?

Yes definitely.

And you could also consider J SI no problem if you wanted to try to go larger.

 

[Rhea]

Have you found anything of interest yet?

 

[abcdefg]

Date: 2/21/2009 10:25:27 AM
Author: Addy
Have you found anything of interest yet?

I thought I had, until today when I just had an alarming jewelry store visit that I will post about shortly!

 

[mrscushion]

Date: 2/17/2009 11:24:34 PM
Author: Moh 10
I''d get this .707 ct, H VS1 with an AGS report.

It is an Expert Selection round from Whiteflash and if you mention Pricescope and wire the funds you''ll get the discount price of $2317.
It gets an HCA score of 1.0 Ex Ex Ex Ex, and is right in the center of the AGS window!

Have them set it in their platinum solitaire setting, which is $250.
The total is just $2567 for a super cut which is about 3/4 carat.
Since it is cut so well it will look even larger.
Personally I''d spend all the dough on the stone and get the simplest setting.
For me it is all about the stone.
http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-1874236.htm

This sounds like a fabulous idea to me. I would do that, too. Plus, if you like, you could upgrade later to a fancier setting and keep the original center stone. I think the size you are looking (0.5-ish) at is a great size. The ring will look lovely.

 

[catlwade]

There is nothing wrong with .5 carat! Why does everyone need to have such a huge stone? I think larger stones can look gaudy and "too much" on a lot of people. I personally prefer .75 and below - simple and delicate.

I think America is too caught up in size of stone- bigger is not always better. I would love to know the average size stone in New Zealand or Canada..I know it is much much smaller.

 

[Rhea]

Date: 2/21/2009 5:39:49 PM
Author: catlwade
There is nothing wrong with .5 carat! Why does everyone need to have such a huge stone? I think larger stones can look gaudy and ''too much'' on a lot of people. I personally prefer .75 and below - simple and delicate.


I think America is too caught up in size of stone- bigger is not always better. I would love to know the average size stone in New Zealand or Canada..I know it is much much smaller.

The OP isn''t American, she''s Canadian. People of all cultures come to expect how something that costs thousands should like on their hands.

 

[catlwade]

I agree, I agree! I wasn''t talking to anyone in particular - just venting. I have just been around so many friends lately who are way too concerned with a large diamond - I just feel like everyone is trying to outdo the other. The title just caught me off guard - sorry!!!!