Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Is Round Too Common

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

Kinger

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
66
Hi All,

I''ve posted a few times before and I have to say again how addictive this site is!

I am really trying to relinquish the rest of the e-ring search to my boyfriend, but I keep coming back! My boyfriend and I have seen several rings together and agree on the quality, style, and size of ring. The problem is, I''ve been back and forth about the shape. I always thought I wanted the classic RB but in the last few months have yearned for something beautiful and more unique. My boyfriend isn''t wild about the round because they seem to be "a dime a dozen," and in fact feels that you can''t see the shape as well because there is so much darn sparkle!

We looked at radiants but have been really inspired by square emeralds and squarish emerald cuts. I really do love them and they certainly are unique and they have a lot of shimmer. But I do wonder if I will miss having the sparkle and fire of a traditional round, and I''m wondering if going with the classic is the best thing. I love BOTH types and hope to someday have one of each!

HOw do the rest of you feel about the "commonness" of the RB? Do others feel like me? FYI, if he got a round it would be between 1.75-2 ct, H&A. I guess that wouldn''t be a dime a dozen!

Trying to let go...

:)
 
I''m admittedly, undeniably a RB lover! I can truly appreciate the diversity and beauty of ALL the different diamond shapes... and I wouldn''t sneeze at ANY shape given to me as a gift
2.gif
-- but ooooh, I just think the RBs are King! They are so classic, so timeless, and so breathtakingly beautiful... what''s not to adore?! That sparkle...that color... and oh, those arrows! Mmmmm, gorgeous!
30.gif
And you are sure right, 1.75s - 2 carats (ideal cut, of course!
2.gif
) are certainly not a dime a dozen!

Just my humble, (biased!) 2 cents!
1.gif


Lynn
 
RBs are definitely the most popular, probably 99% of all PS members have a RB.
There are some of us "odd ducks" that like fancy shapes.

I wouldn''t worry about whether a particular shape is "common" or not, but rather what appeals
to you (and your fiance) the most.
 
Well, I don''t have an RB myself, but I must say that there is a reason they are so common. It is my understanding that optically, they perform like no other shape. That being said, you can do a lot with the setting as well to make it seem less like a dime a dozen. Or you could do a three stone with a round and some other shape. So many options--a round definitely doesn''t have to be the same old same old.

Have you checked out Reena''s and MoreMoreMore''s cushion cut rings? If you are currently favoring a square shape that sounds like it might be right up your alley.
 
Not to sell you on the round, but just wanted to point out that the round WILL look largest for its carat size.

As for "classic, timeless", I would say that emerald cuts do also fall into this category -- they are just a different look than a round. Actually, if I were to get a square cut stone, that would be what I consider the most timeless, whereas the other square cuts seem more part of a trend at the moment due to their popularity. Whether they get a "stigma" attached to them, only time will tell. Like with the marquise cut -- there is nothing wrong with marquise diamonds and I've seen some beautiful ones (actually was my first e-ring) but because they were so popular in the '80s (when I got engaged), that sort of turned into a negative; I think they are just now, very slowly, gaining acceptance again, especially when mounted in plat in a three-stone confirguration, which is in total contrast to the yellow gold, channel settings they were associated with from the '80s.

My RB doesn't look like everyone else's because of the way it is set. It is flanked by trillions on each side which is not commonly found. This gives it more of a contemporary "edge" while it is still a timeless piece in its plat basket setting. Also, I have the stone set extremely low, which is more commonly found on antique pieces, so it isn't common it that aspect, either. And, just the way it sits low, in its four, double prong basket, it takes on a different look than a round -- it doesn't look round yet it doesn't look square... I hvae been asked on more than one occasion if it was a cushion, which I take as a huge compliment but the upside is that a cushion of the same size would look so much smaller.

Wish I could post better pics to illustrate, but for some reason I haven't been able to download my photos. I am actually having the shank re-done next week to be narrow as the wider bottom of shank is too cumbersome for my yucky, short fingers. I will take new pics when I get it back and try to post.
 
I''m a RB lover as well, but I must tell you, I saw a beautiful Emerald cut the other day, and the woman had a pretty 5 stome RB band woith it - it was such a nice contrast, the subtle sparkle of Emerald with the super sparkel of the band was such a nice combo!!
 
I love my RB. I wanted a heart for a long time but I just couldn''t resist the sparkle and the arrows of the RB H&A. How about an emerald cut with round stones on the sides or something like that? You could have your cake and eat it too.
2.gif
 
Fancy shape lover here. I would NEVER get an RB e-ring, but that''s just my need to have a unique and uncommon look. I suppose it''s really all dependant on if you want to fit in or not fit in.

My tastes just dictate that squarish stones appeal a lot more and are far more interesting to look at. They are just harder to find in a good cut. Have you considered a Jubilee or a Brilliant cushion cut? Me personally, nothing says classy like a beautiful cushion or radiant, even emerald cut or Asscher. All the Sotheby''s and Christie''s catalogues have more shaped stones than round, as the larger stones are cut in fancies.... just a thought.
 
I realize that RB''s are most likely the best cut out there in terms of sparkle and fire. That being said, I am with Nicrez, I wouldn''t get an RB. I think they are pretty stunning and love them on some of my friend''s rings and other women, but my taste also dictates something different. I have a princess cut. Sometimes they get alot of flak because there are discrepancies as to the right depth, crown heights, etc. But I go (mostly) with my eye on them and I love the way my stone sparkles! I''m also starting to develop a thing for asschers and cushion cuts.

Go with what your heart feels! Some women swear they''ll never get a certain shape, then they come across one that just feels "right" and takes their breath away. That is the one I would recommend!

Have fun searching and don''t get too caught up in the numbers!!
35.gif
 
Hi. I got the classic RB and I love it. It''s really timeless and I know that it goes with everything. That being said though I do love other shapes so I use them for RHR same with coloured stones for a long time I wanted an emerald e-ring. That idea died when I realised how many emeralds I''d end up going through with the amount of knocks, bumps etc that my rings get so I have it as an RHR again and the beauty of it is if I get sick of one ring I can always swap it for another which you can''t really do with an e-ring.
 
The funny thing is that rounds are common in that as someone else noted 99% of the people will have them, BUT I don't think many Pscopers have what most would consider 'common' rounds. The group here is pretty discriminating...so they chances are will find a RB stone that will be in the top of it's class whether it's a H&A, or an AGA 1A/B, or have an almost perfect IS image, or have that sweet spot of crown and pav angle, however people will classify their idea of the discriminating pick...the people that come here to do their research most often than not will end up with something that is probably pretty rare for a round in the rest of the world.....a very well-cut stone.

Garry and others have noted that 5% figure so if you use that and figure if you do the research rather than shopping blindly at a local maul store, you may end up with a RB stone that is in the top 5% of it's class, that's not common at all eh?

So I guess it depends onwhat you consider common. Yes many people have rounds but I know that my round stands out amongst the regular crowd. I also don't think any diamond is *common*, shape is a huge preference thing...I love other shapes as well as rounds but it was no question that I wanted a round e-ring when it came down to it. Now I want an Asscher and a Jubilee and all sorts of other cool shapes, but the round e-ring is what got me as the more classic piece which is what I ended up wanting for the engagement ring. Right hand rings are total fair game for other shapes....pendants...earrings...my list is long.
9.gif


Oh and lastly, right now a 1.75-2c round is FAR from common, there are precious few well-cut ones out there right now and if you can find one, GRAB IT. I am looking for one around that size, with H SI2 and exceptional cut requirements and I'm prepared to wait up to a year to find it. I have only seen about one or two stones in the last 6-9 months that fit that bill....so who knows when another one will be handy and if I will be ready. So depending on your color/clarity requirements, that size is going to be slim pickins!

Good luck!
 
Date: 2/2/2005 9:50
6.gif
6 PM
Author: cflutist
RBs are definitely the most popular, probably 99% of all PS members have a RB.
There are some of us ''odd ducks'' that like fancy shapes.

I wouldn''t worry about whether a particular shape is ''common'' or not, but rather what appeals
to you (and your fiance) the most.
Click to expand...
well i don''t know ....i agree rb is definitely the most common BUT, i think princess might be more popular today.
 

Oh and lastly, right now a 1.75-2c round is FAR from common, there are precious few well-cut ones out there right now and if you can find one, GRAB IT. I am looking for one around that size, with H SI2 and exceptional cut requirements and I''m prepared to wait up to a year to find it. I have only seen about one or two stones in the last 6-9 months that fit that bill....so who knows when another one will be handy and if I will be ready. So depending on your color/clarity requirements, that size is going to be slim pickins!


Good luck!

Mara
DI has a 2.31 ct H si1 and the specs looks good on the AGS cert but i want to see some FIC (which nobody has) before i decide. it sure would make me sick paying these higher price compare to last yr.
 
My g/f wanted rounds. She wanted something that will still be in style when we're all old and wrinkly. It's a classic and since she doesn't ever intend to sell it, it's got to have lasting power.

Plus, she, like most people, think that the sparkliness is a good thing. The more, the better.

If you wanna be unique and that's what you truly love, go with that. Pick princess, asscher, whatever you like, but pick the one you like. However, try to keep it sparkly. Otherwise, what's the point of spending all that money on that little thing? There's a specific reason why real stones cost as much as they do.

IMO, if you don't want sparkle and just want size, buy costume jewelry. Plastic should be the cheapest with plenty of selection as to shapes and colors. Cubic is more durable though. It's not like diamonds are a good investment or anything. You basically pay the prices you do for stuff that the general public likes. For diamonds, it's how pretty they look and the sparkle is a big part of that. If you're totally gonna go against that line of thinking, buy cubic. People on the street won't be able to tell anyways.
 

You will be wearing this for a long time. In the end, go with whatever shape you prefer.


And, it sure does seem like princess/squares are very popular now.

 

I love rounds. I don''t care if they are the most common. I didn''t even consider getting another shape. However, I DO think that other shapes are pretty. I love diamonds.

2.gif


I doesn''t matter how common a shape is. Get what YOU like because YOU will be wearing this ring forever...

 
I think shape is an intensely personal decision. I yearned for something different, yet loved the rb''s. I never even asked this one jeweler to bring in an EC, but I tried it on and that was THAT! I don''t care for asschers/sq emeralds, but it sounds like you might. I believe EC and RB are both timeless.

I thought I would LOVE cushions and radiants, but I tried them on and they didn''t do it for me (for my wedding ring, anyway). Can you narrow it down to 3? Then, find a jeweler who will have all 3 shapes there. Does one shape speak to you, but you are hesitant to get it b/c of it being "trendy" or such? It seems as if asschers are hot right now, so you might be able to find a nice one. Anyway, I wish you the best of luck--what a fun search!!!
 
Date: 2/2/2005 5:26:55 PM
Author:Kinger
Hi All,

I''ve posted a few times before and I have to say again how addictive this site is!

I am really trying to relinquish the rest of the e-ring search to my boyfriend, but I keep coming back! My boyfriend and I have seen several rings together and agree on the quality, style, and size of ring. The problem is, I''ve been back and forth about the shape. I always thought I wanted the classic RB but in the last few months have yearned for something beautiful and more unique. My boyfriend isn''t wild about the round because they seem to be ''a dime a dozen,'' and in fact feels that you can''t see the shape as well because there is so much darn sparkle!

We looked at radiants but have been really inspired by square emeralds and squarish emerald cuts. I really do love them and they certainly are unique and they have a lot of shimmer. But I do wonder if I will miss having the sparkle and fire of a traditional round, and I''m wondering if going with the classic is the best thing. I love BOTH types and hope to someday have one of each!

HOw do the rest of you feel about the ''commonness'' of the RB? Do others feel like me? FYI, if he got a round it would be between 1.75-2 ct, H&A. I guess that wouldn''t be a dime a dozen!

Trying to let go...

:)
Click to expand...
2.gif
Mine''s an RB..I say sparkle on baby! But that''s just MO.
 
Ahhhh, I love emerald cut stones. I have a beautiful carat and 1/2. Do your research and check out David Atlas'' AGA charts and you improve your liklihood of getting an emerald that sparkles and is beautiful. Also check other threads on what you should look for in an emerald. You''ll learn a lot on this site. BTW, David if you''re reading this, thank you for all your help and great information.
 
Date: 2/3/2005 12:15:41 AM
Author: Nicrez
Fancy shape lover here. I would NEVER get an RB e-ring, but that''s just my need to have a unique and uncommon look.
Click to expand...
Me too! I have a marquise. I used to have a radiant before the upgrade.
 
See, I disagree with Headlight. I think that pears, marquise and ovals look larger for their carat size than rounds. Asshers and emerald cuts are so elegant. There is something about all of the shapes that makes them appealling in their own way. Just get what you like.
 
Date: 2/4/2005 9:57
6.gif
0 PM
Author: pearcrazy
See, I disagree with Headlight. I think that pears, marquise and ovals look larger for their carat size than rounds. Asshers and emerald cuts are so elegant. There is something about all of the shapes that makes them appealling in their own way. Just get what you like.
Click to expand...
Judge for yourself. Here is a photograph of a template that was given to me during GIA Diamond Grading Class. It is not actual size since it is a picture but you can compare the relative sizes of the different shapes for a given weight.

small diamond template-a P2011901.JPG
 
Thank you cflutist that chart is going to come in very handy :}

subliminal message:
asscher asscher asscher you want a very very well cut asscher.
asscher asscher asscher you want a very very well cut asscher.
asscher asscher asscher you want a very very well cut asscher.
 
Date: 2/4/2005 9:57
6.gif
0 PM
Author: pearcrazy
See, I disagree with Headlight. I think that pears, marquise and ovals look larger for their carat size than rounds. Asshers and emerald cuts are so elegant. There is something about all of the shapes that makes them appealling in their own way. Just get what you like.
Click to expand...
Pearcrazy,
With all due respect, I was ONLY comparing rounds with square-shaped stones, as the poster was debating between round or emerald cut. I never said anything about pears, marquise or oval. But, now that you mention it, I believe pears do look smaller, but marquise and oval larger because of their elongated shape.
 
Date: 2/5/2005 1:30:33 AM
Author: headlight

Date: 2/4/2005 9:57
6.gif
0 PM
Author: pearcrazy
See, I disagree with Headlight. I think that pears, marquise and ovals look larger for their carat size than rounds. Asshers and emerald cuts are so elegant. There is something about all of the shapes that makes them appealling in their own way. Just get what you like.
Click to expand...
Pearcrazy,
With all due respect, I was ONLY comparing rounds with square-shaped stones, as the poster was debating between round or emerald cut. I never said anything about pears, marquise or oval. But, now that you mention it, I believe pears do look smaller, but marquise and oval larger because of their elongated shape.
Click to expand...
OoooKaayy, and when did pear shapes stop being elongated? To each his own Headlight
20.gif
That''s why I said that she should just get what she likes. There''s really no point to debating what looks bigger to whom, it''s all in eye so they say-- right?
 
You have limited shapes to pick from on diamonds. Dont worry if the shape is common or not. Let the setting be the one that is uncommon :)
 
Date: 2/5/2005 9:16:45 AM
Author: pearcrazy

Date: 2/5/2005 1:30:33 AM
Author: headlight


Date: 2/4/2005 9:57
6.gif
0 PM
Author: pearcrazy
See, I disagree with Headlight. I think that pears, marquise and ovals look larger for their carat size than rounds. Asshers and emerald cuts are so elegant. There is something about all of the shapes that makes them appealling in their own way. Just get what you like.
Click to expand...
Pearcrazy,
With all due respect, I was ONLY comparing rounds with square-shaped stones, as the poster was debating between round or emerald cut. I never said anything about pears, marquise or oval. But, now that you mention it, I believe pears do look smaller, but marquise and oval larger because of their elongated shape.
Click to expand...
OoooKaayy, and when did pear shapes stop being elongated? To each his own Headlight
20.gif
That''s why I said that she should just get what she likes. There''s really no point to debating what looks bigger to whom, it''s all in eye so they say-- right?
Click to expand...
I was just relating my experience from friends that got pears and they were visually smaller than friends who had approx. same weight rounds -- that is all. I did , however, also have a friend who had a gorgeous pear that didn''t look small for its size but it was of substantial size to begin with, so perhaps when pear shapes get over a certain size (this particular one was over 2 carats) they begin to really "show".
Honestly, I am in total agreement with you above and beyond all this because one should get the shape that appeals to them or looks best to them on their hand. Unfortunately, I have really ugly hands so no shape really looks good on me -- I guess round is probably the best as it draws the least attention on my hand, thus drawing the least attention to my unattractive fingers. Also, I find it very hard to choose one shape over the other because, quite frankly, I never met a diamond I didn''t like! I guess for me sticking with round was the most "neutral" choice. I did formerly have a marquise. I have mixed feelings about them right now. But if I were to get a second diamond ring, I think I would go with emerald cut or perhaps radiant. I know I''ll upgrade this one down the road and I think I will definitely be ready for a shape change.
 
Different people will like different things. As with most personal items, get what speaks to you and your style most and forget about what''s common or not.
 
i posted a similiar question, and thought the tread may help. Good luck!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/2-ct-rb-asscher-or-cushion.32148/
 
I like all the shapes! It was hard for me to decide as well. I didn''t want a round or princess because it was too common amongst my circle of friends. I was drawn to both the Cushion and the Asscher. I checked out both and honestly would be happy with either. The asscher was just very "me." I love the patterns! We are having my asscher ring made right now! Good luck with the very tough decision just go look at all the shapes and one will "speak to you"
 
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