Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

I need HELP (budget & setting advice needed!)

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
chris-uk04

chris-uk04

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Dec 9, 2003
Messages
273
First off, women always say “oh you should get a feel for what your woman wants in an e-ring.” I think this can be a bad idea, because of the frustration I’ve been feeling recently. Be careful of what you ask because your woman might just tell you!!! (and without realizing how much stuff costs!)

Most women are generally uneducated about diamonds, which is very dangerous. At best all they’ve ever heard about is the 4Cs. They know they want 1 carat even though have no clue what a one carat diamond is (200 milligrams & about 6.5 mm diameter). They have no clue about cut. They see the sliding color and clarity grade charts, and here they try to be nice without realizing. They’ll say stuff like “Oh you don’t have to get me a IF – D diamond. I’m not too picky. An VVS2 – F would be just fine.” You sit there thinking “mmm… I was thinking more like H-SI1.”
However, I wanted to get a nice big center stone so she never wants to upgrade (like half the women here keep talking about). So after lots of homework, I put a deposit down for a 1.15 G SI1 H&A. I know it’ll be awesome and I know that since she won’t be able to see any inclusions or see any color, she’ll really love it and forget about the other stuff.

The problem isn’t the center stone, but with the setting. She wants platinum with big-enough sidestones and it’s so expensive. It’ll add another 3K and I don’t think she realizes how much it all costs. I don’t want to disappoint her, but I don’t know if I can handle it financially in the long term. I’d be able to pay it fine now, but I wouldn’t have much cash leftover and I’m worried about other big amounts of cash I’ll probably need in next 2 years (honeymoon, house down payment, etc). It takes awhile to save another 3K. I know she will like whatever I get, but will she be secretly disappointed at times?

Should I get her:
a. a simple setting with the promise to upgrade in the future (perhaps 5 year anniverary)? Gold solitaire. Cost $150
b. an “in between setting” – platinum with multiple tiny channel set sides. Cost $1500?
c. or suck it up, worry about the money later, & get what she wants so she is 100% ecstatic and never bothers me for an upgrade: platinum with 40-50 pt sidestones. Cost $3000

I can’t decide and need the advice of the pricescope family!!!
 
That 5cts-I3 avatar of yours did sound like a dilemma... I am sorry to hear all this ! I thought UK E-rings were supposed to be reasonable ?! - PM
 
----------------

Most women are generally uneducated about diamonds, which is very dangerous. ______________

Change "women" to "people" and I agree wholeheartedly. I applaud your decision to include her in the decision making process. I also think you're wise to stick to a budget -- I would vote for choice A. I think hitting that one carat mark -- especially if that's important to her, ought to be the top priority at the moment -- resetting the diamond at your 5th or 10th into another setting will be something to look forward to. I personally think, if it's true that she doesn't know a lot about diamonds, that she will be THRILLED with a solitaire, particularly if you've learned enough around here to find one that can throw light across a room. Part of her desire for substantial side stones may be because she's never been introduced to a diamond that truly deserves to stand alone. :-)

She will love it, and once she realizes how much work you've put into learning about diamonds so that *she* can have the best -- she will love what you've picked out. I know she will. Don't sweat it.

Kris
Click to expand...
 
Absolutely agree with Kris on this one.

She will be happy with a true sparkler at over 1ct...The national average is about .48cts!

When I knew nothing of diamonds, I wanted sidestones and a fabulously expensive band because you think, HEY! I want mine to sparkle like there's no tomorrow and take someone's eye out.

When I searched WITH my guy for the stone, seeing prices, knowing how much he worked for that budget, and seeing what's out there, I decided to get a plain simple platinum setting to totally showcase the gem we got. Why? I apreciated how amazing a find it was, and I want nothing to take away from that.

When you explain the uniqueness of her stone and the details, I know she'll appreciate her stone as much as I do mine, and will need no other stones to sparkle, like the one she has! If not, it's always a nice upgrade later on...
1.gif
 
Now I see that sidestones part... are they supposed to be round? Other shapes (pears, marq, trills, harts etc.) would be plenty big for smaller weight. Those shapes especially cut ONLY for sidestones (tapered baguettes, half moons, trapezoid, etc.) are designed to look big for their weight and many say that step cut sides do a great job emphasizing the sparkle of round centers. If you do go this route and get side stones, than you may discover that the price for “designer” settings with/for sides rises exponentially without much regard to the cost of the side stones. Getting a custom setting for sides makes lots of sense…

However, I would not shy away from a solitaire at this point. Of course, this is just me.
 
Many people state things in a vacuum. They really don't mean it because they have no frame of reference. I talk about this Las Vegas bet often. If a women is presented with both (and can only keep one)- a G/H SI1 1 carat diamond or 1/2 carat D/IF stone - my bet would be on the 1c.

Put the stone in a less expensive solitaire (btw, nothing says I'm engaged more than this setting). Don't blow your budget. Mention she can upgrade the setting later. Again, my mantra - marriage is hard enough w/o adding financial strain. Your investment should be setting the stage your future - not in a setting.

Good luck.
 
chris,
another option might be to use sapphire side stones. they will truly frame the diamond, make a "g" look like an f, and will make the whole ring look more signficant. then, should you chose, years from now you can replace the sapphires with diamonds...if your then wife still wants to.

i've done this for several clients, and my brother, and it is a fabulous compromise. i'll also mention that most of the clients that chose the sapphire option have not changed the side stones.

good luck!
 
Thanks for the advice so far….

You also have to realize, I can’t take my girlfriend along or tell her much of what I’ve learned, because she only thinks I’ve begun saving and I’m trying to make her expect a proposal in the late fall.

Now, does anyone else also have the feeling that 3 stone rings (perhaps a 1 carat with 40 pt sides) take away from the center stone? It seems like tiny channel side make your eye look toward the center stone, but 3 stone rings make more of a fuzzy blur? I also do think solitares can look classic too and showcase the center stone nicely.
 
Chris, to me a three stone ring is great is you want a gift for an anniversary, but nothing says engagement like a classic solitaire. The point of an engagement ring used to be that the ring repreented continuity and no end, like a marraige vow. The round stone was the symbol of perfection and one. Meaning ONE life together.

Of course tastes prevail, so I would be more likely to get a singular white round stone with semi-precious on the side, or just a solitaire.

I saw a wonderful bunch of three stones, but in the end to me it still all looks like a big glob of sparkles, and the importance is the center stone. If you have had a tough time finding this one, you may have a tough time finding the other two diamonds, and it's not worth it to start out on such a pricey ring.

Symbolically, my BF convinced me that a solitaire is more meaningful, and without much more convincing I saw it for myself. It's elegant, timeless, and if you want an heirloom, it's more likely to go over with the next wearer than if it's "overdone" or something. Also, who knows, her tastes could change and she may want another style.

A simple $100 setting is best, and you can propose, and if she wants to change the band, the loss is minimal, and you can save up from there, or promise the future upgrade. My $.02...
naughty.gif
 
Chris,

Try to get the stone you love now and don't worry too much about the setting. Either the stone or the setting has to be a bit less than what she has been talking about, because you've stated that you're not comfortable spending quite that much. But she's going to love it anyway, because it's from you, and because you did your very best. It probably isn't wise to wipe out your savings right away, but if she's really hung up on the expensive mounting, then you guys can upgrade later! Maybe you can save up together for it. Personally, I've never really understood why such a large purchase has to rest only on the shoulders of the guy, anyway.

Get a simple tiffany solitaire. It's a classy choice, and she can upgrade it later if she sees fit. You also would be wise to explain to her how much what she's been lusting after actually costs!

As far as three stone rings go, there is definitely more overall bling going on there compared to a solitaire. But you have to like the look. It no longer is about the centre stone with a three-stone, but rather about the ensemble. I think they're pretty, but it's all about what you think she might like.

Good luck with all of this!

Daniela
 
----------------
On 2/11/2004 9:29:54 AM chris-uk04 wrote:

Thanks for the advice so far….

Now, does anyone else also have the feeling that 3 stone rings (perhaps a 1 carat with 40 pt sides) take away from the center stone? It seems like tiny channel side make your eye look toward the center stone, but 3 stone rings make more of a fuzzy blur? I also do think solitares can look classic too and showcase the center stone nicely.
----------------
Click to expand...


Yes, there is that thought. And, yes, the solitaire is a classic. As I mentioned - nothing says I'm engaged more.
 
chris,
three stone rings are beautiful, but in those proportions....1ct center with .4 or .5 sides, the visual effect will be a mass of diamonds. though beautiful, it will not define the center stone.
it is however, a very traditional mounting, dating back to the edwardian period.

good luck!
 
----------------
On 2/11/2004 9:29:54 AM chris-uk04 wrote:


Now, does anyone else also have the feeling that 3 stone rings (perhaps a 1 carat with 40 pt sides) take away from the center stone? It seems like tiny channel side make your eye look toward the center stone, but 3 stone rings make more of a fuzzy blur? I also do think solitares can look classic too and showcase the center stone nicely.
----------------
Click to expand...


I agree. A solitare or solitare with small stones in the band sets off the center stone like nothing else. Another thing to be careful of with a 3 stone ring is that they don't always look as good on the hand as a less wide setting. I loved the look of the 3 stone when they first became popular, but everytime I try one on, I'm disappointed. They don't have the right shape to really show off the center stone on my hand and generally just look like a wide blur -- not the affect I'm looking for!
 
Chris, I love a 3 stone ring, but to me it looks like an anniversary ring, not an engagement ring.

I'd go with a solitare but with diamonds in the band...pave set or channel set. So she has the look of an engagement ring but the extra small diamonds for the "wow" factor.
 
Another very strong vote for Option A.....get the stone in a simple setting now and upgrade the setting down the line.




I opted for this.....and since I've gotten my ring (2 mos ago), I think I've changed my mind 14 times on what I want for a setting. Trust me.....she will too. If you plan for an upgrade at the 5 year mark or so, she'll have had plenty of time to figure out what she'd like more permanently.




I also agree that the 3-stone isn't a great option......unless you plan on putting VERY small stones on either side (.10 or so). I agree that anything more does take away from the center stone.
 
Check out this setting:
http://www.platinummfg.com/htm/product/design/SF2001-R100.htm

It's beautiful, it will be much more unique than a solitaire, and it's platinum with diamonds - all under $1000.

Personally, I would be a little disappointed with a plain gold solitaire if I wanted platinum with diamonds, though if you made it clear that she could reset later it would help... in any case, make sure you get white gold! if she wanted platinum, she probably did not want yellow.
 
I love solitaires because all the focus is on the one perfect center stone you spent so much time looking for. Channel set stones (round, princess or baquette) can add a little extra sparkle and interest on the sides if she doesn't like plain solitaires. Putting 40 point diamonds next to your center stone will just distract from the center stone. Of course, that is just my taste. Has she tried on 3 stone rings like you are describing and is that really what she loves?

I don't think you should wipe out your savings to buy her the large sidestones now. I like the idea of buying her a simple white gold or platinum solitaire and telling her she can upgrade for a future anniversary if she still wants the sidestones once she sees the amazing center stone you picked. Alternatively, I would go with a platinum solitaire with channel set diamonds. I think the Vatche Royal Crown setting with channel set side stones is amazing, but I'm sure there are also lower priced non-designer versions.
 
I love simple settings myself, but if your girlfriend has expressed an interest in sidestones, I think that is what counts. I think I would try to save some money with the center stone (maybe get a .9 to 1 ct, H, SI1, Ideal) and then use that extra money to get her the setting she likes (maybe with slightly smaller sidestones). I don't think she'll notice any difference in the size/quality of the stones, and you could still spend an amount that you are comfortable with...

You are spending so much money, and you are giving her this amazing gift -- you don't want it to have to come with a disclaimer (explanations/excuses/promises of something better someday...) It's too good for that. IMO, it could take away from the moment if you feel like you are giving her something that is not her dream ring -- or if you let her know that you wish you could give her more.

If it were me, it would make me sad to know that my boyfriend felt like he couldn't/wasn't giving me what I really wanted... I would rather believe he felt like he was giving me my dream ring. Especially since I probably wouldn't notice the difference anyway -- and the ring he gave me would be my dream ring.

But good luck with whatever you decide. I am sure she will be happy with whatever you give her.
 
Another vote for "A." The e-ring is your gift to her, but when you start shopping for her w-ring you'll do it together. Perhaps she'll fall in love with a wedding set she can replace her e-ring setting with, but then not only will she know what the actual costs are but she'll be in a position to help pay for it.
 
I agree with the simple solitaire, but I'd have the ring made in platinum rather than gold, since she wants platinum. This will be around $300 and is a good compromise.

Michelle
 
I vote simple solitaire. I agree that the 3 stone rings tend to be sported by longer married women. 3 stone says "Annivesary" while solitaire says "I'm engaged!".

If you are poetic, or literary, you might include a touching note with a promise to upgrade the set as a celebration of "X" years of bliss together.
9.gif
 
Here I am, the lone dissenter...

I vote ring w/ sidestones. I picked out my ring myself, and we had a very specific budget. Because I insisted on a ring w/sidestones (ok, eternity setting), I got a smaller diamond, but that was okay by me. I really didn't want a solitaire -- all of my friends had them, and I wanted something more individual. Perhaps your GF is the same way?
As another thought, you could always do a setting with sidestones in white gold -- it really cuts back the price of the setting versus platinum. I know she said she wants platinum -- I did too, but once I realized it was either platinum solitaire or white gold blinging ring, I went the white gold route merrily.
 
----------------
On 2/11/2004 5:05:53 PM Robyn12 wrote:

I

You are spending so much money, and you are giving her this amazing gift -- you don't want it to have to come with a disclaimer (explanations/excuses/promises of something better someday...) It's too good for that. IMO, it could take away from the moment if you feel like you are giving her something that is not her dream ring -- or if you let her know that you wish you could give her more.

----------------
Click to expand...


Again thanks for all of the advice. I’m afraid to disappoint her. I don't want to "ruin" the moment, even slightly by any disappointment or explanation. However, it’s not even just only the money. I know she wants a 3 stone ring (right now), but I don’t care for them. I think they detract from the center stone. Like others have added, it also seems more like an anniversary ring and a blur of sparkles. I know it's a ring for her, but I've been the one doing, all the research and all the homework. Perhaps she doesn't "really" know what she wants.
What I hope is that I get her what I think she would love in a year’s time. If in a few months, she says “wow, I am so glad you got me this setting instead of the 3 stone” I would be very happy. She did start out wanting a princess cut and I secretly tried to steer her toward a round brilliant. After she saw her aunt’s RB, she wanted one instead of a princess. So, like all girls, she might realize what is better and change her mind.

You also have to realize I am not comfortable talking to her about it. If I mention things she will assume I am looking. When two people are dating and you’ve discussed marriage, the main way to maintain a significant surprise is to make her believe that she won’t be getting a ring for a while, and then give her the ring sooner.

So right now I am leaning towards platinum with channel settings. I’ve seen some very pretty ones from precisionset.com, like the one below. They seem to be about $1300 or so. They also have very pretty matching wedding bands for roughly the same price. I think it’s pretty and different while showcasing the center stone. (Of course, this is what I think today. I’m been changing my mind several times of the past few days! Ugh, the stone was so much easier!)

ENG_DSM_7978_Pic_Arrow.jpg
 
This kind of proves my theory that each couple has to decide for themselves how they will clinch the deal. Sometime last fall, I told my boyfriend that I would be happy to marry him and we sealed it with a kiss. Some time soon thereafter, we talked about rings (among a zillion other things). I had a romantic vision of us selecting matching wedding bands together soone before we actually tied the knot. This is a 2nd marriage for both of us and we look forward to a private, simple wedding.
Then he said "Oh but you have to get an engagement ring!"
Since then we have come to a few conclusions; that we will marry, I will get a diamond ring, we will pick it out together and we will pay for it together. We are opening a joint account as part of our Valentine's Day celebration.
It has been a very enjoyable process to talk through these issues and decide each step together. So much different from my first engagement 20 years ago.
Having said that, if surprise floats your boat, then GO FOR IT. Given the context of your question, get the ring that is closest to her heart's desire. Maybe a little compromise on size of center stone, or get white gold instead of platinum, but give her the looks she wants and enjoy the excitement. It sounds like your heart is in the right place.
 
Ooooh! I love Precision Sets! They are SO nice! You have made your choice, and I say go for it! It looks lovely and when you DO get the ring, post pictures!!! Congrats!
 
I like those sets!
3.gif
They are gorgeous!!
love.gif


I also like that the diamonds don't go all the way around. It will allow for resizing in the future if necessary. When we go married, I wore a size 4. With kids and age, the size has increased to 5.75-6 depending on the thickness and style of the band/shank.

I actually like the look of accent diamonds. When you said "3 Stone", I thought of the rounds or princess rings with 1 larger center and 2 smaller sides. A round center with pears, trillions, baguettes, etc., those are very nice. Same thing with other cut style center stones.
1.gif
 
----------------
On 2/12/2004 10:58:45 AM pqcollectibles wrote:

I like those sets!
3.gif
They are gorgeous!!
love.gif


I actually like the look of accent diamonds. When you said '3 Stone', I thought of the rounds or princess rings with 1 larger center and 2 smaller sides. A round center with pears, trillions, baguettes, etc., those are very nice. Same thing with other cut style center stones.
1.gif
----------------
Click to expand...


When I wrote 3 stone I did mean 1 large center with 2 smaller sides (option C from my original post)

The accents are option B! Good tip for the band though- never thought about it!
 
Those are beautiful sets, Chris! I definitely think you're on the right track.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top