Micropave vs Plain Band - which one makes RB pop more? Your thoughts pls! Tks

[GoodSoul]

Hi,

Thanks to PS and many helpful PSers, I found my stone. It''s a 1.30 RB from GOG and I''m in love with a lot of rings in the SMTR thread.. From Daniel K Rosebud to MWM torchiere petite to LM plain solitaire to LM micropave solitaire and many LM settings that I can''t afford for now. I do like the thin shank look (1.6 - 1.8 mm).

I''m wondering if you think whether a plain setting will make the stone look bigger or pop more than a micropave setting?

I''m torn between these two LM styles:

Plain band

Micropave

Can anyone share your experience or thoughts on this?

Thanks in advance.

 

[absolut_blonde]

Some of it just comes down to preference. At first, I thought I wanted a solitaire on a plain band. Then I discovered micropave settings and absolutely fell in love! I love the sparkle that they give.

So, I prefer micropave... but I do tend to think that a plain band makes the stone pop more. I just think micropave makes the overall ring pop more, if that makes sense.

 

[E B]

Plain....with a micropave wedding band.

 

[LostSapphire]

Date: 10/19/2008 9:11:23 PM
Author: EBree
Plain....with a micropave wedding band.

DITTO.

Plain band = classic style. You can never go wrong with that.

LS

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 10/19/2008 9:20:16 PM
Author: LostSapphire

Date: 10/19/2008 9:11:23 PM

Author: EBree

Plain....with a micropave wedding band.

DITTO.


Plain band = classic style. You can never go wrong with that.


LS

Thritto. It also makes the diamond pop more IMO.

 

[Harriet]

My answer.

 

[swingirl]

Which ever you choose make sure you consider what type of band, if any, you want to wear with it. LM erings don''t usually allow for a band to sit close because the basket extends out.

 

[UCLABelle]

I like both, plain for the e-ring and micropave band but if I had to pick, I would go with the micropave e-ring!

 

[panda08]

I think both are lovely and that it is a matter of preference.

FYI, I just got the Leon solitaire you posted and the diamond is set low in that setting. I''m contemplating a re-do because I don''t think the low setting quite makes my stone pop.

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

Date: 10/19/2008 10:28:26 PM
Author: UCLABelle
I like both, plain for the e-ring and micropave band but if I had to pick, I would go with the micropave e-ring!

That''s my favorite combo. Classic simple elegance for the e-ring (that, in my mind, makes the stone pop more), a bit more bling to liven up the whole set with w-band, and some bling if you choose to just wear the w-band sometimes

 

[Harriet]

The micropave band is not blingy and will not stand on its own. However, it will light up your centre stone ever so delicately.

 

[GoodSoul]

Thank you all for your input/advice!!

absolut_blonde: Definitely make sense!

I also thought that plain setting probably makes the stone pop more but the micropave gives some omph to the whole ring if worn alone. Thanks!!

EBree: Thanks! I definitely plan to have either a micropave w-band or a Tiffany jazz/swing type of w-band.

LostSapphire & Neatfreak: Thanks! That's also one of my concern about the micropave setting being dated someday. Plain setting is definitely a classic!

Harriet: *gulp* Your rings always have an effect on me! Beautiful!! Your set definitely introduced me to Leon and inspired me to the plain setting + micropave look! Thanks!!!

swingirl: Thanks for your reminder on this. I am impartial to whether the rings sit flush to each other... at least I think so now.

UCLABelle: Thanks! My FI prefers the micropave too as he likes the matchy set look.

panda08: I read your thread and I'm sorry to hear that you are not 100% happy with it. I knew that I do not want a high setting as I'm a klutz and thought that I want my stone to sit as low as possible. A few months ago, I saw a few other low setting (DEFINITELY NOT YOURS) and started to have my reservations if I really want it so low as it didn't seem to make the stone POP (IMO). I've decided to go for a medium-low height (probably like the Micropave link I've provided above for the LM solitaire 401 style). Having said that, I really love your ring though. It's so beautiful. Hope you either grow to love it or find a nice home for that beautiful stone soon!

Brown.Eyed.Girl: Thanks! I definitely want to have some bling on my w-band since I do intend to wear it alone at times!!



So far, seems like most prefer the plain setting + micropave band set!! Great!! Coz.. I'm leaning towards that as well. The upside is that I can use the plain setting cost savings towards single cut stones for the micropave w-band!!

Any thoughts on this?

 

[GoodSoul]

Date: 10/19/2008 11:23:07 PM
Author: Harriet
The micropave band is not blingy and will not stand on its own. However, it will light up your centre stone ever so delicately.

Thanks for letting me know on this. Do you think it has a more "shimmering" effect than "bling"? Do you think that single cut stones will help on the bling factor? Now.. if it will not stand on its own..... I''ll just have to find her another companion (when E-ring decide to rest at home) right?!

 

[LtlFirecracker]

For a stone your size, I think you could go either way. I would vote for the plain e-ring with a pave band that had enough sparkle to stand on it''s own without the e-ring.

 

[Harriet]

Date: 10/19/2008 11:51:05 PM
Author: GoodSoul

Date: 10/19/2008 11:23:07 PM
Author: Harriet
The micropave band is not blingy and will not stand on its own. However, it will light up your centre stone ever so delicately.

Thanks for letting me know on this. Do you think it has a more ''shimmering'' effect than ''bling''? Do you think that single cut stones will help on the bling factor? Now.. if it will not stand on its own..... I''ll just have to find her another companion (when E-ring decide to rest at home) right?!

Thanks for your kind words.

Yes, "shimmering" is more appropriate. I left the choice of single or full cuts up to Leon and he picked the latter. Right!

P.S. My band is only about 1.2mm, if that makes a difference.

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

Harriet, I love your ering/wband combo. I think it''s almost exactly what I would want in a few years - I think it''s sooo classic and lovely.

Can you tell me the difference between single and full cuts? Is there a difference, or maybe a significant difference, in terms of sparkle/shimmer between the two?

 

[GoodSoul]

Date: 10/20/2008 12:36:19 AM
Author: Brown.Eyed.Girl

Can you tell me the difference between single and full cuts? Is there a difference, or maybe a significant difference, in terms of sparkle/shimmer between the two?

Hi Brown.Eyed.Girl,

I'm not Harriet but this is what I found from Leon Mege's website:

Typically each stone used in micropave is a “full cut” diamond, which means that it has the same 58 facets that you would count on any ideal cut round brilliant. However, full cut diamonds are not the best to use in micropave. The very best diamonds to use in micropave are “single cut” diamonds because they have far fewer facets (17 total facets). High quality, perfectly cut, single cuts are also known in the diamond industry as “eight cuts.” The fewer number facets on a single cut diamond are proportionally bigger and tend to reflect more noticeable flashes of light.

Hope it helps. You can also search on PS and there are a few threads on the single cuts as well.

 

[Haven]

I think the answer to this has everything to do with personal preference. It sounds like you''re buying this for your loved one--what do you think she will want? I know, easier to ask than to answer.

Could you go to a jewelry store and look at the two different combos in person to make a more educated guess? Micropave looks great in pictures, but it looks even better in person. I''d want to see both combos with my own eyes before making a decision.

Good luck! It''s going to be beautiful, either way.

 

[GoodSoul]

Hi Haven,

If your post is referring to my questions, then I''m a she

. Think I got you confused when I responded to Harriet''s statement of the LM''s WB not able to stand on it''s own with "if it will not stand on its own..... I''ll just have to find her another companion". The "her" refers to the w-band.

Sorry for the confusion.

I could not find a plain setting that has very thin shank at the stores. The closest is Tiffany''s classic 6 prongs with one of their mircopave rings and I liked that look too but not too hot about the E-ring shank''s thickness. I''ve tried the micropave set that looked like LM''s and thinks that it''s very pretty. My FI likes the micropave set look. I''ve not been able to compare the same size center RB stone with the different settings to see which makes the center pop.

I''m a very low maintenance person (jeans and running shoes at work) and is quite a klutz as well. I''m leaning towards the plain setting as it''s more classic and for more practical reason - lower maintenance. It''s probably my secret inner princess trying to come out when I saw Tiger007 and Diamondnut''s sets. I have the tendency to get pretty things but don''t use/wear it at all. After seeing the response here about plain setting is more classic and may make the stone pop more, I think a plain Ering setting + a slightly blingy Wband is probably a good balance for my two persona.

Thanks!

 

[vespergirl]

I vote for the micropave. I have a platinum solitaire now, but I hope to upgrade to that exact Leon micropave setting. I just love the way it adds extra sparkle without overwhelming the center stone.

 

[CDNinNYC]

I prefer the micropave band on an e-ring but I'm biased.

You can't go wrong with either look, though.

 

[beau13]

Plain setting makes the diamond stand out FOR SURE!! Micropave adds more "bling"..more sparkle..but I find the diamond gets lost, kind of blends in with the setting. I LOVE having a plain gold setting, because you can wear a plain band, or add any kind of diamond band, or two (one on each side of the plain) and have a very versatile ring.

 

[CharmyPoo]

I still love micropave for both!

 

[purrfectpear]

I don''t think it matters whether micropave or plain band. What matters is the width of the band.

Go with 1.8 or smaller and your stone will *pop*

 

[CDNinNYC]

Date: 10/20/2008 3:32:26 PM
Author: purrfectpear
I don''t think it matters whether micropave or plain band. What matters is the width of the band.

Go with 1.8 or smaller and your stone will *pop*

Agreed!

 

[HollyS]

I have a couple of differing viewpoints, but both are valid, I suppose.

The round brilliant you have, in the size that you have, will certainly ''pop'' more on the micropave. However, you will be more limited in w-ring choices than if you had a non-competing shank on the e-ring. Also, depending on what you do for a living, and if you intend to wear the e-ring after the wedding, you need to remember that micropave can be a style that needs more careful handling and wearing.

While I find the micropave look to be a beautiful one, I would personally probably choose the classic style because of its wearability and versatility.

 

[Haven]

I''m sorry Goodsoul--I clearly did not read the post carefully before I responded! (I had a classroom full of teenagers, if that serves as an excuse . . . )

Anyway, if the ring is for you, then I would definitely go out and try on the two different styles you''re interested in, if you aren''t already set on the plain band.

In general, I am all about timeless classics in style for both clothing and jewelry. I chose to set my engagement ring on a shared-prong eternity band, so I of course believe that that look is timeless and classic. But go for what you want, and what you think will make your stone look its best.

I agree with Purrfectpear that the width of the band really influences the "pop" factor.

Good luck, and do post pictures once you have your ring!

 

[GoodSoul]

Thanks LtlFirecracker,vespergirl, CDNinNYC, beau13, CharmyPoo, purrfectpear, HollyS & Haven !! I appreciate all your comments!

I do think that the micropave is very pretty and was lemming it for awhile.... and I also like the understated look of plain with micropave Wband. Hmmm..... will have to go down to the stores to try out again. Let see if my FI let me check out the stone to try it at the stores so that it''s an apple to apple comparison. Hopefully I can find similar settings to compare.

Thanks again!

 

[Harriet]

Date: 10/20/2008 12:36:19 AM
Author: Brown.Eyed.Girl
Harriet, I love your ering/wband combo. I think it''s almost exactly what I would want in a few years - I think it''s sooo classic and lovely.

Can you tell me the difference between single and full cuts? Is there a difference, or maybe a significant difference, in terms of sparkle/shimmer between the two?

Hi and thanks! Leon has used full cuts on my rings. It may have to do with my wanting the pave to be as small as possible.

 

[tberube]

I really do think it''s all about preference, but to me there''s something so delicious about little tiny sparkling diamonds all along the band, and then one large diamond in the center, crowning it all.