Need advice - something not generic on a budget

[karrotwin]

Hi All - After lurking for a bit I decided to make an account based on all the great help I've seen from people on this forum. I am hoping some of you can assist me. I'm looking to buy an engagement ring sometime over the next couple of months and am having a hard time narrowing down my options on stone, setting, etc. Here's what I've figured out so far:

- I don't like the look of any ring where the rock looks much nicer than the band it's set on

- When I look at a stone in person I inherently go for the ones that reflect light well based on their cut but have very little interest in paying for attributes that require detailed inspection (or magnification!). Is this a mistake or a smart way to keep the price down? Is cut all it's cracked up to be in terms of having a rock that looks nice from a distance?

- I doubt that I want anything bigger than 1ct and would probably be fine with something as small as half a ct (or maybe a multi stone ring with several small stones).

- My girlfriend actually cares less about the ring than I do, she's told me that she wants it to be practical to wear every day and would be terrified of losing it or damaging it if it were too expensive. Since expensive is a relative term, my guess is that she would be quite happy with something in the $1k range, but I'd like to spend more than that if it got her something that I thought looked special. That said, to respect her wishes, I don't think I would spend more than $5k.

- I don't have any preference for whether the ring/stone is new or used, but it doesn't seem like the used ones I've looked at come at much of a discount to deal with the hassle of not always knowing what quality the stone is, dealing with non professional sellers, etc.

- I love the look of bands that have some texture, whether mesh or weave or some sort of design. The ones that I can find examples of, however, vary wildly in price and I'm having a hard time figuring out if there are big differences in quality/workmanship. Here are a few images I found online of things I thought looked nice (sorry if it's an issue to post links, i don't know anything about the reliability of these places other than the fact that they had nice pictures that I liked):

http://www.greenlakejewelry.com/gallery/gallery_detail.aspx?Imgid=55183
http://www.greenlakejewelry.com/gallery/gallery_detail.aspx?ImgID=50046
http://pearls-necklace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Abstract-Engagement-Rings2.jpg
http://www.topazery.com/antique-jewelry-item-rg1750m.htm

That is what I've figured out so far. I'd be happy to try to answer any questions and appreciate any advice.

 

[TC1987]

- When I look at a stone in person I inherently go for the ones that reflect light well based on their cut but have very little interest in paying for attributes that require detailed inspection (or magnification!). Is this a mistake or a smart way to keep the price down? Is cut all it's cracked up to be in terms of having a rock that looks nice from a distance?

^ Cut is the one thing to not compromise on. AGS 000, GIA Excellent, or sometimes Very Good, are the cut grades to look for. Clarity is where I personally can made a compromise. I don't mind seeing a discrete inclusion that is visible with the naked eye. Color is an individual preference. Some people only want white (D-H or maybe I) but J/K are going to show tint from the side if not as much tint face-up. Land M are a pale yellow, like candlelight ivory color. I like L and M, and those color grades are a lot less expensive than the color less and G-H-I range.

The third setting you showed is channel-set. The first is a filigree mounting. The 2nd and 4th are kind of in the filigree style.

So, cut is first priority. This [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/preferred-specs-cheat-sheet-for-rounds.88548/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/preferred-specs-cheat-sheet-for-rounds.88548/[/URL] is the shortcut to picking the best-cut rounds based on the "paper." The HCA can be round under the Tools tab at the top of the page.

I recommend decide on a budget first. Then decide whether the center stone is more important, less important, or equally important to the mounting. It's easiest if you get the diamond and the mounting from the same place, but it's not required. A well-cut .75ct - .8ct will run you maybe $3000 - $4000 for the center stone. There is a Diamonds Search at the top, under Resources tab. I just look at the in-house diamonds, because the vendors post all of the ASET image and whatnot online. The others are called "virtual stones" and may be at the cutter's and may be listed at different prices by different vendors. GoodOldGold's web site as well as this site have a lot of diamond education that you can read through.

 

[Riesz]

Maybe try looking through Gabriel & Co's styles of rings.

Here's a link for all of their rings:
http://www.gabrielny.com/engaged/styles?category=ER

and here's another link with only the victorian style rings filtered:
http://www.gabrielny.com/engaged/styles/1?category=ER&collection=Victorian&metal=W4

I love highly detailed antique-style jewellery and ended up ordering my ring from Gabriel. I ordered online through ID Jewelry though you may be able to find a local dealer. Many people on these forums have posted pictures of their Gabriel rings as well, so you can do a search to get an idea of the quality. I'm pretty sure most people are very happy with their rings though.

Hope this helps.

 

[JulieN]

You like antique style. How "not generic" you can get depends on how much you can spend.

 

[karrotwin]

TC - I think I am more interested in the setting than the rock itself. I don't think my girl will be stacking up her diamond side by side with others; truth be told, I think I am more interested in the rock being a diamond than she is. It sounds like, given that, I should focus on a good cut and compromise on the other features relatively evenly. Looking at the tool on the site, what about something like:

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.72-carat-j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-212280

I doubt I would go any more expensive than that, maybe I should even go smaller in ct size. Does that cut seem appropriate? I tried to pick it out based on the guidelines posted in your link.

I am looking through the pictures on the gabriel page, many of those look like the kind of designs I would like. Excellent resource. One thing I don't like though is that they all seem to look very much like traditional jewelry settings. Is there something similar for the more filigree styles - what I like about those is that they look like something straight out of a fantasy novel. However, the sites that I found seem to mostly make them by custom design which adds quite a bit to the price.

In terms of overall price I think something like $1.5k for the stone and $2k for the band seems in the right ballpark.

 

[JulieN]

Maybe you'd like something by Beverly K, they aren't very expensive: http://www.elizabetajewelry.com/products/beverley-k-diamond-engagement-ring-semi-mount-center-stone-not-included-number-9421-slash-65

 

[mcosme]

TC - I think I am more interested in the setting than the rock itself. I don't think my girl will be stacking up her diamond side by side with others; truth be told, I think I am more interested in the rock being a diamond than she is. It sounds like, given that, I should focus on a good cut and compromise on the other features relatively evenly. Looking at the tool on the site, what about something like:

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.72-carat-j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-212280

I doubt I would go any more expensive than that, maybe I should even go smaller in ct size. Does that cut seem appropriate? I tried to pick it out based on the guidelines posted in your link.

I am looking through the pictures on the gabriel page, many of those look like the kind of designs I would like. Excellent resource. One thing I don't like though is that they all seem to look very much like traditional jewelry settings. Is there something similar for the more filigree styles - what I like about those is that they look like something straight out of a fantasy novel. However, the sites that I found seem to mostly make them by custom design which adds quite a bit to the price.

In terms of overall price I think something like $1.5k for the stone and $2k for the band seems in the right ballpark.

Specs seem good. Ask them if the gemologist can check its performance and if eye clean and for an idealscope.

 

[TC1987]

That James Allen stone has dark crystals in the table area. I doubt that it's going to be eyeclean close-up. Dark inclusions in the table area tend to show up at least at a tilt or under some lighting conditions, at least some of the time if not all the time.

And yes, I still say go with a top cut grade. There is no sense buying a lesser diamond, imo. There are some "very good" stones that look great, but it's harder to pick them and definitely impossible to evaluate them long-distance over the Internet, at least not without a video. And Good Old Gold is the only one that I have seen make such videos.

If the setting is more important, then maybe consider some sort of colored gemstone and not a diamond? http://www.hugokohl.com/ has antique-style filigree mountings. But what you have to remember in choosing a mounting for a ring that will be worn every day is that the mounting has to be durable and not just pretty. Buy a flimsy or thin mounting, especially with a thin shank, and it will soon bend all to heck. A mounting needs to have substance, and that adds to the price. Someone from Europe pointed out a month or so ago that USA seems to hold down the diamond prices but increased the price of settings.

 

[TC1987]

There is a jeweler in Los Angeles named David Klass who had made some custom settings at what people say are reasonable prices. Someone posted his contact info on this forum a while back. No web site. If you google David Klass rings you can find some pics various places on the Internet.

Gordon Clark has more Victorian and vintage settings but you might see something you like there. Stuller.com is a big USA casting company. Southeastern Findings, Adwar, Overnight Mountings are some others, and most jewelers have their catalogs. Stuller has been adding some mountings that are less cookie-cutter, lately.

 

[TC1987]

"premium cut" was the other label that I was trying to think of. Avoid good, fair, poor.

I.D. Jewelry is a vendor that people on here recommend for tight budgets. You could contact a vendor like Good Old Gold and ask them to try to locate a stone meets your needs and budget. Some people have bought from B2C Jewels but they are a drop-shipper. And since you are looking at diamonds under a carat, sometimes secondhand or upscale pawn shops or stores that sell estate, consignment or used jewelry will have something nicely-cut for a low price, but there are risks of getting taken in that kind of deal, too.

 

[karrotwin]

Thanks, I will google those and see if they have more ideas for what setting I like. The Hugo Kohl pictures were a bit too "antique" for me but I liked many of the David Klass images; I'm a bit hesitant to go with someone who isn't local to me and doesn't have a website for easy comparisons. I have not yet had a chance to look through your other suggestions.

Can you clarify a bit about what the impact of those dark crystals will be - Is that going to interfere with the shininess of the rock from a distance or is that only an issue when you are examining the diamond up close?

Right now I am using the tool on the website to look through rocks that are approximately SI1 to SI3 clarity and J to M color and size of 1/2ct to 3/4ct; within those stones I am trying to filter for the ones that have the depth, table, and angle proportions from your link above. I am hoping that this will give me as much of the "sparkle" effect as possible when viewing the ring from a distance while keeping the overall price down by avoiding stones that are more perfect up close. Is this the right way to search for what I'm looking for?

 

[TC1987]

Yes, for cut. Those dimensions help evaluate cut. Table size is related to fire, with a smaller table size and a steeper crown angle leading = fire. Flatter crown angle, larger table = more of a tendency toward brilliance, or the fire happening out at the "rim" of the diamond. Crown and pavilion angles have to balance each other because they work as a team. If you make one steeper, then the other has to be made shallower or else light leaks out of the diamond instead of all being reflected back.

Sparkle is mainly due to the cut. Inclusions except for clouds or interior graining don't usually affect that.

Inclusions are a different issue. Most people want an eye-clean diamond for a ring. The person who wears it gets to study it and stare at it, and might get fed up with visible inclusions after a while. (Depending on the person and the inculsions, lol.) Inclusions in the table area are easier to see than ones that are out in the star/kite/girdle facet area. The star/kite/girdle facets are a busy part of the diamond, because they are many small facets reflecting light. The table area, to simplify, acts more like one big facet, or perhaps a quiet pool of water. Inclusions in the table area are likely to be noticed. Inclusions out at the rim in the midst of all those busy facets are not. Did you notice that you can see dark specks in that JA diamond and also a clear or white crystal under the table? My general advice is to avoid dark inclusions. Or, maybe just have one small and discrete one. But not that many.

I think that not all of the vendors inventories are showing up in the PS database today. Whiteflash, Good Old Gold, Brian Gavin all provide ASET image and Idealscope image and that's why I prefer them. With JA, you have to request it, and also JA doesn't provide a full GIA report with the inclusion plot a lot of the time. They just show the dossier. If you can look up the complete GIA report online, fine, but there have been times I've tried that for a JA diamond and I can't get the report. JA doesn't have all of those diamonds in stock, either. Some are at cutter's or a wholesaler or something.

eta: SI3 is an EGL lab grade. It supposed to be a "good" I1, meaning you still see some inclusions but the diamond is still relatively clean. Treat it as I1 for price/value comparisons. Also, EGL is a soft-grading lab. They might overrate the color by 2 grades compared to how GIA would grade it, and maybe overrate clarity one grade. Also consider that when comparing prices. EGL gets a lot of modern round diamonds that have big tables like 60%-%70% because AGS and GIA want smaller tables in the top cut grades.

You could use the Quotes feature to broadcast a request to PS vendors, and see if any respond with diamonds that are not showing up on the Search. I've never asked for quotes, though.

If you are not in a huge hurry, you can start working with ID Jewelry or Whiteflash or someone to find a diamond in your price range.

 

[TC1987]

This site has pictures of inclusions http://www.allaboutgemstones.com/diamond_inclusion_library.html

You can look through marleneharriscol.com. But I think what you really want is going to be custom or near-custom and expensive. Like VanCraynest, vancraeynest.com?

 

[TC1987]

Look at etsy vendors, too. anjaysdesigns has some rings with floral shanks. There might be other vendors on there, too. $1375 for this with a white sapphire set in it. But you could probably order a mounting for, say, 5.8mm or whatever diameter diamond and have the seller of the diamonds set it in the ring.
Unique 14kt rose gold diamond leaf and vine wedding ring,engagement ring ADLR224


Jewelice is another seller on there. I don't know anything about the quality or the service. I just did a quick search for floral rings.

 

[karrotwin]

That floral band you linked looks amazing, definitely a very strong contender. If anyone sees more in that style please keep them coming but this has already given me many terrific ideas.

My current thought is that I might buy a loose stone online and then bring it to a local custom designer along with several pictures of bands online that I really love. Seems like this also just avoids a whole tier of retail markup on buying a stone from a brick & mortar location. Is this a smart way to go?

I think I'm going to drop the rock size down to something like 0.5 to 0.6ct, I am following your advice and sticking with GIA certs. I figure since I'm doing this over the internet based on an appraised quality, I might as well have confidence in the rigor of that assessment.

What do you think of something like this - seems relatively cheap on a $/ct basis. Any particular reason why?
http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.55-carat-j-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-211435

Also, regarding your advice to reach out to the vendors directly - is that because the ones in the search are generally a bit more expensive? Something else?

 

[TC1987]

GIA or AGS certs. Still use the HCA cut adviser on GIA diamonds buy you can skip it for AGS 000 diamonds. Sorry, but I lack time to help you locate a diamond.

I said earlier that not all vendor's inventory seems to be showing up in the PS diamond search database, so look at their individual web sites. Also, vendors might have inventory not listed yet, or may know of stones that cutters will be making available soon. Or they can work with their cutters to locate something that fits your price range.

If you are planning to upgrade later, then pay attention to the conditions of the tradein policy. JA might have a requirement that you buy something 2x as expensive. Good Old Gold doesn't do that.

It all comes down to priorities. I would rather have a larger diamond than an elaborate setting. But if you have your setting made with a peg head that can easily be changed, you could upgrade the diamond later and reuse the same setting. It's just another point to ponder.