Looking for a tough setting

[AustenNut]

I’m trying to narrow down the styles & settings of rings that I like so that my bf knows what kind of an engagement ring to get. I intend to wear the ring daily, for the rest of my life, 24/7. I don’t go out of my way to bang my rings up, but I don’t coddle them the way some PSers do. They will be worn at the gym, while doing the dishes, while doing everything that I do.

Based on what I’ve read, these are a few assumptions that I’ve made. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

-A pave setting is likely to lose stones, and even rings by the greats like Leon Mege are not supposed to be worn 24/7 through all of life’s occasions.
-A channel setting, though perhaps more secure than a pave, is still going to get knocked around too much and lose stones and whatnot.
-Halos are likely to have problems because they’re generally pave.
-Bezel and hammer set settings should be fairly secure and last well.

My ideal would be to have one of the following with a pale sapphire/spinel as the center stone:

A) The stone by itself on a band with diamonds to give some added sparkle (like on rings #1 & 2).
B) The stone on an engraved band with some surrounding diamonds to give some added sparkle (like on ring #3) or a plain band with an interesting sidestone pattern (ring #5).
C) A stone on an engraved band (like ring #4) but with a halo. (Unfortunately, however, I’m afraid that a halo may not be practical for my lifestyle. Please let me know if it is durable if the rest of the band is not paved.)

If A-C are not possible then I’d prefer a plain engraved band (#4) over a totally plain band.

Do any of the rings pictured strike you as not durable enough for a life with me? And what kind of setting would ring #5 be considered?

 

[chrono]

Ring 1 is out because it looks like a fishtail pave style. You can still have the same look by going with shared prong melees.
Depending on the side view, it looks like Ring 3 might be a little high where the head is just attached to be band, rather than being integrated into the shank (see Ring 4).
Ring 5 is not going to work due to the pave work.
I discourage halos as those are more delicate (pave).

The remaining rings look sturdy enough for 24/7 wear.

 

[QueenB29]

Out of all of these, I think #4 would take the most abuse, and I happen to really like antique-style engraving. That said, engraving can eventually wear off and it sounds like you really want some extra sparkles. I think you''re right and bezel-settings are more secure than prongs. You say that you don''t intend to abuse or coddle your ring, but what is your lifestyle?

I have an E-ring and two wedding bands with pave (they''re about a year old), and they''re in good shape. I don''t especially coddle them, but I spend the day at a computer and take the rings off as soon as I get home. I don''t shower, clean or sleep with them on and I get them inspected twice a year. If you''re planning to wear them all the time, I would also look at what feels the most comfortable to you? And your FF? The one time I fell asleep with my E-ring on, I accidentally scratched DH''s face.......

Any kind of ring will at least need to have its prongs inspected at least once a year, and if white gold, will need to be occasionally re-plated (polished if platinum). The best bet is to get a ring from a company that will provide these services for free, and replace any lost stones for free. My set is from Jared''s (a store many PSer''s hate), but for a small extra charge when we bought the set, we got a lifetime of service on my rings. They''re also insured, so if something happened, I would be devastated, but covered.

I guess this is a long way of saying to try on a bunch of rings, and just go with whatever makes your heart sing, then make sure you have coverage.......

 

[chrono]

If you plan on wearing your gemstone e-ring to the gym, doing dishes, etc, be prepared to have your sapphire or spinel show wear and tear a lot sooner, even possibly chipping. I urge you to seriously consider taking it off for such “rough” activities. I just re-read that statement and feel that a bezel setting will best protect the stone for a very active lifestyle.

 

[MonkeyPie]

Go with a bezel, possibly with engraving on the band if you want it to have a bit more flair. I wouldn''t do side-stones of any kind unless you want a three-stone bezel setting. You will probably also want to go with platinum, as it holds up a lot better than white gold.

 

[AustenNut]

Thanks for the replies so far. In terms of my lifestyle, I never take my rings off. I''ve had a sapphire ring for 11 years that my mom gave me, and a pearl halo for 5 years that my grandmother gave me. I wear them in the bath/shower, to bed, when I do the dishes (though it''s primarily rinsing them off and putting them in the dishwasher

). I teach so I''m not in a profession that requires a lot of manual work with the hands. But I guess I view my rings as parts of my family (and FH) that I carry with me at all times, and I''m probably not responsible enough to keep track of them if I was constantly putting them on and off. And FH is used to me wearing my rings at all times.

In terms of fishtail pave, is that what the jewelers call it? Because I went back to the website for ring #1 and they said that the sidestones and the stones on the band are bezel set (the center stone is prong). Here''s the website for clarification http://www.danforthdiamond.com/diamond-rings-with-matching-wedding-rings/5228/14K-White-Gold-Flat-Edge-Engagement-Ring-and-Band-Matched-Set-with-All-Around-Bezel-Set-Round-Diamonds-(1.01-ct.-tw.)/details.htm

Would a shared prong melee be durable for my kind of life?

When you''re saying that the head on ring 3 is a little high as it''s not integrated with the shank does that mean it''s liable to break off or something if I knock it against something? Or what does that mean? (By the way, am including a picture of the side view for clarification.)

Thanks for the responses!

 

[AustenNut]

Don''t know why it didn''t work before, but here is the side view of ring #3.

 

[litebrite]

I have a bezel set solitaire in plat which I wear with a channel set half eternity band in WG. I understand not wanting to take them off for fear of losing them.

The most secure setting is really a bezel. You could go with a semi bezel as well. Especially if you wear your rings at the gym.

James Meyer has some really lovely bezels and 3 stone bezels. James Meyer

 

[Fly Girl]

I suggest you take a look at Cross Jewelers' Active Wear line of jewelry. Link Any of these styles will work well for you.

I wore my prong-set 0.20 ct solitaire 24/7 for many years. After about 10 years the prongs needed to be retipped. So, it can be done with a prong style setting, but I recommend a smaller diamond or colored stone (i.e., 1 ct or under) so it doesn't interfere with your activites. Channel set diamonds on a band or for a half-eternity ring will work well for extra bling.

If you want your diamonds to sparkle, you will need to clean them regularly. Daily is best.

 

[AustenNut]

Thanks for the links. The James Meyer rings are something to think about, but they''re a bit more minimalist than I would like for this occasion. (Yes, I realize the irony of saying it''s too minimalist when I''m looking a hardy ring.)

At Cross Jewelers I liked the Fiddlehead ring, and they even have one with close to the right shade of sapphire I want. But I''d still like a little diamond bling somewhere and I don''t think that I could get a wedding band to lay flush with it, which I really want as well. I know, I know, I''m being difficult!

 

[Fly Girl]

Date: 8/6/2009 7:45:18 PM
Author: astphard
Thanks for the links. The James Meyer rings are something to think about, but they''re a bit more minimalist than I would like for this occasion. (Yes, I realize the irony of saying it''s too minimalist when I''m looking a hardy ring.)

At Cross Jewelers I liked the Fiddlehead ring, and they even have one with close to the right shade of sapphire I want. But I''d still like a little diamond bling somewhere and I don''t think that I could get a wedding band to lay flush with it, which I really want as well. I know, I know, I''m being difficult!

Two ideas here. First, a custom curve wedding band, to fit around the ring. Cross has a page of these in their wedding band section. The ring could be set with diamonds.

If you want a straight wedding band, the engagement ring would need to be modified. I''d call the jeweler to see how they might be able to modify the ring.

Oh, and I strongly suggest that you and your FI go ring shopping together. It will increase your chances of getting a ring that you love.

 

[Lady_Disdain]

That ring is lovely, but I see it more as a RHR. I don''t think it would work well with a band.

 

[AustenNut]

I understand about RHR settings, Lady D, as I have a big Word document filled with settings that I love that won''t work for me as an engagement ring. I think the Fiddlehead will probably be added to that list.

My boyfriend and I have talked about marriage, and even have a decent idea of when (next summer) and so I figure the official engagement will probably come within the next several months (we don''t plan on having a super long engagement...obviously

). My mom''s probably already gotten him scared to death about how picky I am when choosing anything out (more than one story has been relayed) and so when the time felt appropriate I was going to give him a document with some ideas of things I liked with a range of different price points. If he asks me to go jewelry shopping I will, but at the same time I sort of want the ring to be a surprise when he proposes. Because I do have a reputation of being so picky (which is pretty true) I get very few surprise presents. Most of the time I was present when a gift was bought so the person could make sure I''d like it. And the romantic in me wants something that he picks out for me, but the practical in me says he should at least be given some very definite clues as to my likes so that I''ll be really happy with the ring as well. (Not that I wouldn''t be thrilled with a crackerjack ring if he proposed, but I think y''all know what I mean.)

I''m also rather well-known among my friends and family for researching the heck out of something before doing it. And I guess this is in the some vein, as I don''t want to fall in love with something that won''t suit my needs in the long-term. Does this make sense?

 

[ma re]

#4 has six prongs so it might do a bit better job at protecting the stone than the others, but it''s not a style one would choose for a lot of wear (after all, those are prongs). Whatever style you choose, pay attention that it''s got enough metal (depends on the style, but 5 grams should be enough for most of them to make a sturdy ring) and if possible go with platinum. The profile (side view) should be as low as possible, so that you don''t accidentally knock the stone around, and it''s best if the stone is bezeled. Flush (gypsy) set accent diamonds are a good option for a lot of wear (they can look "sprinkled" onto the shank) and it''s good if the shank itself is slightly curved and doesen''t have sharp corners as those will show wear first. Shape of the stone is also important when it comes to daily wear as stones without sharp points are best suited (round, oval, cushion...). If you''d like some engraving, it would be best if it would sit on the rings profile, as it would get less wear. Hope this helps.

 

[chrono]

Oh dear…I am worried about your pearl ring – pearls are the most delicate and prone to damage. It is an organic piece of gem that is sensitive even to the human sweat; enough for the top shiny nacre layer to wear down easily.

Back on topic:
Setting 3 is out – it is so high up that it bound to get knocked about and damaged. The side view shows that it is integrated but looks as high up as the Sears Tower. It won’t break off but it is very likely to scratch someone and the stone is also more likely to be damaged. I still stick with my suggestion of a bezeled setting for the best protection and worry free wear in platinum. If you like some extra bling, those should also be bezeled.

 

[QueenB29]

Date: 8/7/2009 8:01:53 AM
Author: Chrono

Oh dear…I am worried about your pearl ring – pearls are the most delicate and prone to damage. It is an organic piece of gem that is sensitive even to the human sweat; enough for the top shiny nacre layer to wear down easily.

Back on topic:

Setting 3 is out – it is so high up that it bound to get knocked about and damaged. The side view shows that it is integrated but looks as high up as the Sears Tower. It won’t break off but it is very likely to scratch someone and the stone is also more likely to be damaged. I still stick with my suggestion of a bezeled setting for the best protection and worry free wear in platinum. If you like some extra bling, those should also be bezeled.

Chrono: I was thinking the same thing...one should never even use hairspray or perfume with pearls on......Astphard, if I were you, I''d get that pearl ring checked out by a jeweler ASAP. One the other hand, if you never take your pearl ring off and that seems to be okay, you might be fine with a prong-set diamond or sapphire with sidestones......

Even if you don''t go with your BF, I highly recommend going to a few jewelry stores to try on different rings and see what you actually like on your hand. You can also look at them with wedding bands to see if a particular style sits flush with a band....

 

[AustenNut]

Thanks for the responses!

Okay, first let me address some of the concerns. The pearl halo appears to be in good shape, though I probably should go and clean the diamonds to make them sparkle more (haven’t lost any in the first 5 years). And my sapphire, which is in a 4-prong setting, hasn’t had any issues either. Now it was a department store purchase (actually, they both were) so it isn’t one of the bright, sparkly sapphires that y’all keep posting. I’d say it’s an opaque navy stone but there aren’t any scratches, at least not on the top. They’re both white gold and I don’t get either of them rhodium plated.

And yes, ma re, I am avoiding the square stones, but primarily because I really like the oval and a rectangular cushion. A round isn’t out of the running if I find a setting I love if it only fits rounds, but the elongated shapes make my finger look better.

I’ve actually looked at some rings in person but found out afterwards that they’re not really suitable to what I want out of a ring. Which is sort of why I’m researching more now, then when I go back to a B&M place I can have a better idea of what types of rings I should be looking at.

And on to my numerous questions:

1 Are the sidestones in ring #1 a fishtail pave, or a bezel? Here is the website http://www.danforthdiamond.com/diamond-rings-with-matching-wedding-rings/5228/14K-White-Gold-Flat-Edge-Engagement-Ring-and-Band-Matched-Set-with-All-Around-Bezel-Set-Round-Diamonds-(1.01-ct.-tw.)/details.htm?

2. Would a shared prong melee be durable for me?

3. Would channel set diamonds within a band/shank work, or is that too iffy?

4. Has anyone seen a band with LOTS of gypsy/flush/hammer set diamonds? Not just a couple sprinkled in, but almost more like an eternity or something? (Something reminiscent of ring #1.)

 

[Lady_Disdain]

There is a limit on how close together gypsy or flush set stones can be, because the surrounding metal is pushed onto the stone to hold it in place. This type of setting is really more appropriate for the scattered look, but perhaps one of the custom jewellers can give you their opinion on how close is too close.

I wonder if you are not over thinking this, as the rings you are wearing 24/7 seem to be holding up well.

 

[movie zombie]

bezel will help. anything with scrolling, etc. will show wear over the years. wider/thicker settings/shanks will also hold up better.

please reconsider and do not wear your e-ring when doing housework, gardening, etc. even a diamond will chip/break under the wrong conditions......and i''ve seen a sapphire worn 24/7 over many years that had completely lost its faceting.

mz

 

[chrono]

It’s difficult to tell if ring #1 being bezel set. The picture does not show enough detail for me to make it out. Perhaps it is something you can ask the company.
A shared prong will not take the abuse of 24/7 wear with housework, gardening, gym, etc.
I don’t think it is possible to have a gypsy set eternity because it needs metal to hold everything together. As suggested, a scattered diamond look is possible though.

 

[Selkie]

I would also second the bezel-setting, or other low-profile setting. I have a three-stone "Victory" ring from Cross, with a round sapphire as the center. My original thread is here: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/victory-my-sapphire-3-stone-ering.46111/. I was also looking for something sturdy with a vintage look. It''s a 90/10 platinum/iridium setting, so that helps with the durability and the ease of repairing any dings I have managed to create. It''s super low-profile, and has engraving and triple-prongs which really protect the stone. I''ve worn it pretty much 24/7 for the past three years except for doing major home repair/gardening projects.

 

[ma re]

I don''t think shared prongs would significantly increase safety/durability, compared to classic ones. Channel setting isn''t really a 24/7 thing cause in it, stones are secured from only two sides. Can''t answer you with the other questions as I''ve never seen gypsy setting with a lot of stones, but I believe (and that might interest you) a halo could be done that way and look very interesting (of course, it wouldn''t be very delicate, but still...). And what I saw once with pave might be useful to you. An area with pave set stones was (don''t remember what was the piece exactly) nicely "framed" with an engraved line around it and slightly recessed. Because of that, top surfaces (tables) of stones were slightly lower than the surface of surrounding metal and were slightly more protected. That might work if an area covered with pave isn''t large. Or you can have stones set in the side of the ring, maybe on the basket or a shank itself. Profiles of rings are much less prone to damage than the fronts.

 

[AustenNut]

Selkie, your rings are beautiful! You inspired me to go back to Cross Jewelers where I went beyond the active styles to look at their rings again. Which style is yours? I ended up calling them about the Dubliner and the Woodstock. They can add the engraving onto the Dubliner but the largest center stone they can take is on the smallest range of what I was hoping for. But it is definitely a possibility as it would be a pretty durable ring with diamond sidestones plus engraving. Even though they could add a bezel setting for the main stone on the Woodstock, they did not recommend it for someone with my lifestyle due to the pronged side rings.

He also recommended the Cape Town II which has hammer set diamonds within a channel, and they could add engraving to that band as well. The appearance isn''t quite what I was looking for, but it''s something to consider. Unfortunately I live too far away to just drop in the store to see their rings in person. But there''s definitely potential there.

And thank you, ma re, for your ideas and recommendations. I''m actually going to hit a few jewelry stores today and I''ll look for halos with a slightly lower profile (in relation to a metal wall providing some protection). I''ll let everyone know how it goes when all these rings are on my fingers!

 

[ma re]

Date: 8/8/2009 11:30:02 AM
Author: astphard

And thank you, ma re, for your ideas and recommendations. I''m actually going to hit a few jewelry stores today and I''ll look for halos with a slightly lower profile (in relation to a metal wall providing some protection). I''ll let everyone know how it goes when all these rings are on my fingers!

I think you misunderstood my post a bit. When I mentioned a halo I said it could be done with gypsy/flush set stones in it (instead of with prongs - it would make some contemporary version of a halo), and when I mentioned protection with surrounding metal I was refering to an area of pave set stones, where they''re slightly recessed in relation to the metal around them. I guess you mixed those two into one idea, or I''m missing something...English isn''t my 1st language so who knows...

 

[AustenNut]

I hit several jewelry stores yesterday and tried on a bunch of rings. Towards the end of my visit at the first store the lady said she was beginning to believe me when I said I needed a hardy ring, in part because I''m such a klutz as I dropped at 30-40% of the rings while handling them. Obviously I''m not the best contender to be one of those who takes my rings on and off for occasions that might be more stressful on a ring.

I tried on a ring that seemed virtually identical to the Dubliner, and it looked nice on my hand. It just didn''t feel engagement-y to me though. It was my favorite of any of the three-stone styles (either in the Dubliner style or the traditional 3 stones with a larger center held by prongs). In fact, I wasn''t a big fan of the rings with any sidestones. It either seemed too blingy (is that even a word), or too heavy, or just too wide on my finger or not wide enough. Basically, it never seemed to suit me. I also had a gander at the pave rings, and though they were gorgeous, everyone agreed I should probably stay away from them, and I could totally see myself doing damage to some of those pretties, particularly the micropave.

By far my favorite style was the one most reminiscent of ring #1. It''s a shank with three sides of either bead set or channel set diamonds. I didn''t run across any that were considered bezel set (and the store that carries ring #1 was closed on Saturday when I called to get clarification on it). Though I know that the bead set and channel set aren''t as highly recommended for me, I just love that look with a single solitary sapphire on top. Elegant, classy, but still simple (and yes, looks engagement-y). My favorite of the stores has free visits for them to check all the prongs and clean it pretty much whenever you want, so maybe that would work for me if I end up with that kind of style. Nobody carried anything at all similar to ring #2, so I don''t know how something like that would look on me. And the one engraved ring I tried on just didn''t do anything for me.

Anyway, just wanted to let everyone know how it went!

 

[chrono]

I like the Dubliner because it is low set and bezeled but I guess it's not your style. I also like the 3rd one you posted, the Capetown. It is bezeled to protect the stone and is also low set, while giving you the solitaire look. For the lifestyle you lead, I'll stay away from any bead set stones as well.

 

[Selkie]

The Victory solitaire is shown in the attached pic, and this is the link to the Cross page: link. I have the 3-stone shown in the bottom right corner. The solitaire can be up to a 1.5ct stone. I seriously considered the Dubliner too, but DH didn't like it. They have a few new rings that caught my eye too. The engraving on most of their rings is MUCH better than anything I saw locally, but I agree that it's really critical to be able to try on rings, so it's great that you're going to some stores.

.

 

[chrono]

Selkie,
The ones you show seem durable for daily wear; low set and still pretty with engraving.

 

[Selkie]

Date: 8/10/2009 8:14:23 AM
Author: Chrono
Selkie,

The ones you show seem durable for daily wear; low set and still pretty with engraving.

Bingo. They are die-struck rather than cast, as well, so the plat is extremely dense. I can''t tell you how many times I''ve bashed my left hand against something and not found a mark on the stone or band. Astphard, did you happen to look at the Aspen? Same triple prong head as mine, but with bead-set side stones and the possibility of engraving as well.

 

[ma re]

Go here:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/show-us-your-bezel-rings.121897/

and scroll down to the last photo on the first page - interesting?