I Want to Cry! Don't Like My Vatche Royal Crown Settng.

[FancyDiamond]

FInally, My ring is ready to be shipped to me. The jeweler sent me photos. When I saw the profile photo, I wanted to cry. The setting is not graceful looking at all. What attracted me most about the Vatche Royal Crown setting are its gracefule curves/lines. I saw many photos of the setting from various websites (BGD, WF, and Vatche), and they all look great. My setting was made by Vatche, but it looks very different. The shanks do not curve in towards the stone, the center curve is more like straight line triangle than curvy waves, and the tip of the center curve does not extend high enough. Instead of being graceful looking, my setting appears awkward. Am I the only one thinking this way? Does my ring look good to you?

I am very sad and do not know what to do. My jeweler ordered the setting directly from Vatche. Don't know if the setting can be fixed to my satisfaction. Am I stuck with it?

First, a photo of the Vatche ring with which I fell in love.

 

[FancyDiamond]

Here is my ring (left) and the Vatche setting that I like.

 

[luv2sparkle]

I have two thoughts: either your setting was not ordered from Vatche but a look-a-like copy or your stone is so much bigger than
the stock photo that this is the way the setting looks.

I am leaning more to it's not a actual Vatche.

I would return it and try to find another vendor who sells Vatche. Does your vendor have a good return policy?

 

[pancake]

I think it's an issue of proportion - your stone is MUCH larger in comparison to ring size than the sample photo.

 

[TravelingGal]

I actually think it is vatche...the lines themselves (the "thickness" and flow) look like Vatche. However, the size of your stone and the where the girdle is affects the flow of the head.

The prongs curve up around the stone on the stock photo because it appears to be a princess cut. The crown on your stone is higher.

When ordering a setting, it's important to see what shape the stone is in the stock photo, and how big the stone is.

You should still see it in person before you make any final decisions...I hope it works out!

 

[Dreamer_D]

I have two thoughts: either your setting was not ordered from Vatche but a look-a-like copy or your stone is so much bigger than
the stock photo that this is the way the setting looks.

I am leaning more to it's not a actual Vatche.

I would return it and try to find another vendor who sells Vatche. Does your vendor have a good return policy?

I agree, but I think it is vatche and it is because the stone is so big it changes the proportions completely. Have you seen it in person? You often cannot judge by pictures anyways.

 

[FancyDiamond]

I have two thoughts: either your setting was not ordered from Vatche but a look-a-like copy or your stone is so much bigger than
the stock photo that this is the way the setting looks.

I am leaning more to it's not a actual Vatche.

I would return it and try to find another vendor who sells Vatche. Does your vendor have a good return policy?

It never crossed my mind that the setting could be a look-alike copy. I paid $2,900 for this plain setting. It better be Vatche. Thanks. I'll check with vendor to double check.

Do you agree with me that the profile of this ring looks awful? Do you see anything graceful about it?

 

[marcy]

It certainly doesn't look the same but I wouldn't say it looks awful. When you see your ring in person you may like it but if not hopefully your vendor will work with you and get you the ring you want.

 

[TravelingGal]

Also, I think it's not that the tip of the center curve doesn't extend high enough (although your girdle placement is an issue), is that they didn't curve it LOW enough...it's like they took the same amount of metal for a smaller stone and just stretched it, if you know what I mean? I there was more metal, and they swooped it lower and a little farther out before it hit center, it might look better.

But fixing the line of that curve would make it much more of a custom job.

This definitely looks to me to be a proportion issue.

 

[FancyDiamond]

Also, I think it's not that the tip of the center curve doesn't extend high enough (although your girdle placement is an issue), is that they didn't curve it LOW enough...it's like they took the same amount of metal for a smaller stone and just stretched it, if you know what I mean? I there was more metal, and they swooped it lower and a little farther out before it hit center, it might look better.

But fixing the line of that curve would make it much more of a custom job.

This definitely looks to me to be a proportion issue.

You got a good point about the curve does not swoop low enough. Don't know if any fix can be done.

Never expected problems from a simple, solitaire setting. Never thought there would be a proportion problem. Shouldn't the jeweler know enough about settings to warn me ahead of time? It is difficult to find any jeweler with a stock setting that can accomodate large stone size, so there is no beforehand checking possible.

I guess I have to contact my jeweler to see what can be done and what my options are.

 

[Laila619]

I really don't think it looks like a Vatche. The swoop is all wrong, as is the way the cathedral shoulders meet the head. Sorry

 

[mrssalvo]

I'd email your pictures to Vatche and your Jeweler and ask them. I do think agree that it almost looks like they used a smaller setting for your larger stone and stretched it out. But, we've seen plenty of Vatche RC's around here with large stones that are still swoopy so not sure what happened with yours. Personally, I'd make them fix it or remake it. Have you seen it in person though? I would probably wait until you have a least seen it and viewed it in normal conditions before doing anything else. I can see why you are disappointed but Vatche has been around a long time and I do believe they will make this right!

 

[FancyDiamond]

I really don't think it looks like a Vatche. The swoop is all wrong, as is the way the cathedral shoulders meet the head. Sorry

Does this photo help? It shows more details of the setting. Unfortunately, none of the photos I got show any Vatche marking. If such a marking exists, it is blocked from view.

I'll find out next Tuesday.

 

[luckky]

I really don't think it looks like a Vatche. The swoop is all wrong, as is the way the cathedral shoulders meet the head. Sorry

I agree with Laila, that the first thing I noticed on the picture. Hope you can find out and do something the way you will be happy with it, sorry this happen to you.

 

[FancyDiamond]

I'd email your pictures to Vatche and your Jeweler and ask them. I do think agree that it almost looks like they used a smaller setting for your larger stone and stretched it out. But, we've seen plenty of Vatche RC's around here with large stones that are still swoopy so not sure what happened with yours. Personally, I'd make them fix it or remake it. Have you seen it in person though? I would probably wait until you have a least seen it and viewed it in normal conditions before doing anything else. I can see why you are disappointed but Vatche has been around a long time and I do believe they will make this right!

I agree with your observation/suspicion about Vatche stretching out a smaller setting for my larger stone. Still, like you said, they should maintain the swoopy curves and overall shape of the shank. Looks like I need to pay the jeweler a visit instead of having them ship the ring to me. I live too far away, but I guess I have no choice. You are right about viewing the ring in person before deciding what changes to be made.

 

[FancyDiamond]

I really don't think it looks like a Vatche. The swoop is all wrong, as is the way the cathedral shoulders meet the head. Sorry

I agree with Laila, that the first thing I noticed on the picture. Hope you can find out and do something the way you will be happy with it, sorry this happen to you.

Here is the 3rd photo. Does the setting still look wrong to you?

 

[anitabee]

when put side-by-side with that other ring it definitely looks different. i attribute this to the fact that your stone is MASSIVE! it's hard to compare the size of your stone to the other typical rings since your stone is so big.

however, on the bright side, before the direct comparison i thought it looked very "vatche royal crown'ish" i love that setting and i think it looks perfectly fine.

i've seen the same thing happen to settings where the stone is relatively small. in order to fit the size, the ring is skewed in proportions to accomodate. it seems that there is a sweet spot in carat size for certain settings. one that comes to my mind is the tiffany etoile semi-bezel setting. bigger stones don't seem to work in that setting, imo.

 

[04diamond<3]

i also think it's a matter of porpotion, but the setting does look a bit off. I'd double check with your jeweler. I still think it looks nice!

 

[frankiextah]

i think the problem here (putting aside the possibility that the setting may not be from Vatche), is that the stone is set a lot lower than the other stones in the other photos. if your stone were set as high (or at least 1/2 as high) as the other stone, the "curve" would look more in proportion and less "horizontal" and "angular". it seems as though having the stone set that low, everything has to stretch "horizontally" to accommodate the width of the stone...

I would definitely go to the jeweler and have them send the ring back with your specific instructions. bring the photo that you really liked and have them set it that way. Granted your stone is a cushion, meaning that it has a deeper pavilion (lower half portion), i would refrain from having it set way too high (causing the proportion to go wrong again but the other way, being too vertical and long). i would recommend the culet to dip just below the upside down "V" so that the diamond is set just right in terms of hight, and the rest of the proportion should follow.

 

[FancyDiamond]

i think the problem here (putting aside the possibility that the setting may not be from Vatche), is that the stone is set a lot lower than the other stones in the other photos. if your stone were set as high (or at least 1/2 as high) as the other stone, the "curve" would look more in proportion and less "horizontal" and "angular". it seems as though having the stone set that low, everything has to stretch "horizontally" to accommodate the width of the stone...

I would definitely go to the jeweler and have them send the ring back with your specific instructions. bring the photo that you really liked and have them set it that way. Granted your stone is a cushion, meaning that it has a deeper pavilion (lower half portion), i would refrain from having it set way too high (causing the proportion to go wrong again but the other way, being too vertical and long). i would recommend the culet to dip just below the upside down "V" so that the diamond is set just right in terms of hight, and the rest of the proportion should follow.

Thank you very much for your great suggestion about the stone setting's height.

Ok, I now have three modifications.
1. Move the upside down V curve lower while keeping the tip at the same height so as to make the curve swoop lower.
2. Set the stone higher such that the cutlet dips just below the upside down V (i.e., about 1/3 way down instead of the current 2/3 or more).
3. Move the shank inward a little where the shank meets the stone.

What else can be done to make my setting more Royal Crown like?

I am not trying to have a custom made setting. What I am trying to do is to point out how my setting is different from a typical Royal Crown setting that I adore and expect to own.

 

[FancyDiamond]

i think the problem here (putting aside the possibility that the setting may not be from Vatche), is that the stone is set a lot lower than the other stones in the other photos. if your stone were set as high (or at least 1/2 as high) as the other stone, the "curve" would look more in proportion and less "horizontal" and "angular". it seems as though having the stone set that low, everything has to stretch "horizontally" to accommodate the width of the stone...
.

frankie, The more I think about your suggestion, the more I realize how setting the stone lower in my setting results in the squattish ("horizontal") look that my setting has. If the stone were set higher, the shape of the basket/cup that holds the stone can be made more "V" than "U". Subsequently, the shanks would "collapse" and curve inward towards the stone, and there will be enough metal for the swoop to occur. Now, I understand completely what you mean.

 

[pancake]

FancyDiamond - what is the depth of your stone? I would be concerned that if you elevate the stone further in the setting that it will be very high indeed. You would achieve the concavity that you want in the cathedral arms and increase the acuity of the angle in the crown bar but looking at the size of the center stone you may find that a setting of such a height is a problem in terms of practicality.

 

[frankiextah]

i would absolutely have your jeweler send the setting back to Vatche and start from scratch without doing any kind of "fixing". sucks that you will have to wait again, but this is a large company and they have the obligation to make it perfect for you at no additional charge in any circumstance. Make sure your jeweler gives you the UPS/FEDEX tracking number so that you yourself can trace the package and make sure that the ring is indeed going to Vatche and not somewhere else.

I remember reading on another forum that someone had trouble with her royal crown not being perfect also, and it was sent back to Vatche 2 times until it was perfect. you paid way too much money to settle for mediocrity.

btw all your points are valid in making the setting look the way you want. i just don't agree to have it partially fixed. i just don't see how they can make every part of the ring flow perfectly seeing how the ring looks at the moment. every part is related to create the perfect proportion, so if you change one thing, you should just have it completely re-done. i would make sure they re-do your ring from scratch!

 

[TravelingGal]

FancyDiamond - what is the depth of your stone? I would be concerned that if you elevate the stone further in the setting that it will be very high indeed. You would achieve the concavity that you want in the cathedral arms and increase the acuity of the angle in the crown bar but looking at the size of the center stone you may find that a setting of such a height is a problem in terms of practicality.

I don't think this is the answer either. It may warp the lines of the ring further.

 

[frankiextah]

wanted to show you this photo i found online ... this ring has a larger diamond but is still able to keep the elegance of the head (this is a vatche royal crown with 6 prongs but wanted to show you how the culet of the diamond dips 1/3 below the upside down V)... so my advice is, don't give in and get what you want !!

 

[FancyDiamond]

wanted to show you this photo i found online ... this ring has a larger diamond but is still able to keep the elegance of the head (this is not a vatche royal crown but wanted to show you how the culet of the diamond dips 1/3 below the upside down V)... so my advice is, don't give in and get what you want !!

Thanks for the example photo and encouragement (much needed). I shall discuss with my jeweler and show her your photo as well. Glad to know that Vatche is willing to remake settings instead of doing patch-up modifications.

 

[FancyDiamond]

FancyDiamond - what is the depth of your stone? I would be concerned that if you elevate the stone further in the setting that it will be very high indeed. You would achieve the concavity that you want in the cathedral arms and increase the acuity of the angle in the crown bar but looking at the size of the center stone you may find that a setting of such a height is a problem in terms of practicality.

It is about 6.3mm deep. Perhaps, setting 2mm higher would still be OK? I shall first try out the ring to see if it is already too "top heavy", and I shall ask my jeweler for advice.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think in the second two photos you posted the ring looks gorgeous.

See it first before you start listing changes for the jeweler.

 

[lknvrb4]

I think it looks nice. Your comparing it to a RB which is not the same as your stone, it is going to look different.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think in the second two photos you posted the ring looks gorgeous.

See it first before you start listing changes for the jeweler.

Ditto! I think it is certainly a Vatche, and there is no way it is going to look like the ring with the small stone you posted first. I don't think you'd want it set higher. And the curve of the side looks like it goes as high as it can with the shape of the stone. I think the magnified images are deceiving a lot of the time. It is probably gorgeous in person!