Novice getting overwhelmed and needing some advice.

[iam_immigrant]

Hi Everyone,

Guess you all know the reason I am here
I've been reading here and all over Google and Youtube and it's starting to get a bit overwhelming. I think I got the basics of the 4C's but I am looking for some advice on both the stone and setting. I want to pick out everything without the special lady finding out so that is one reason for the frustration in trying to find something nice. I am still in the preliminary stages of searching so I may pick out something different. My budget is around $5-6K setting and stone.

These are the two settings I am thinking of:

1. http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/pave-and-side-stones/the-valentine-micro-pave-1-platinum-5688p

2. http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/diamond-settings/channel-bead-set-diamond-engagement-ring-714.htm


And these are the stones I am looking at:

1. http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.750-i-vs1-round-diamond-ags-104054189020

2. http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2781349.htm

3. http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2795120.htm


For the setting I am looking for something simple, classy/classic and elegant. With the setting from WF I am worried about the diamonds on the bottom half getting damaged/loose/dirty/scratching things/etc...are my fears unfounded?

For the stone I am looking for more quality than quantity...although everyone wants both. I have specifically picked out ACA and BGD Signature hoping for that shine!! What I am worried about is the colour...is it worth it to jump from a I to H with these cuts? Will the stone look small with a pave setting?

I am sure I will have more questions and thank everyone in advance.

 

[Mrs.W 514]

Take a deep breath, you are doing great!

The settings you have picked out are beautiful and the diamonds are superb.

I don't think you will notice a difference in the color between an H and an I, ideal cut stones will face up whiter anyway.

I think those settings will look really good with that size stone. The shanks on those rings are thin and a 3/4 ct diamond is not small. What size ring does your gf wear?

As far as the diamonds on the bottom of the shank. Yes they are in more danger of getting damaged but it really depends on your gf. Does she take her rings off to wash dishes, do yard work or sports activities? If she is already careful with her jewelry then I would say you don't need to worry too much about a full eternity. Channel set stones will also withstand more abuse than pave set stones. If your gf is more the type to knock her jewelry around a bit and isn't afraid to get it dirty that a 1/2 eternity or 3/4 eternity would probably be more practical. Another pro to a 1/2 eternity or a 3/4 eternity is that it gives you some room to re-size the ring should the need occur.

 

[dbanner8732]

My friend, I will comment on here because I am looking at buying a simiar ring with a similar stone as you. Depending on how much of a diamond fanatic your ladyfriend is, I wouldn't go with a vs2. If she is anything like mine, she won't be able to tell the difference between J and G color or I1 and Vs2. Now, with that said, and if that is the case for you, after loooking at many stones in person I think the best combination for your dollar is an H or I and an SI1. Anything better than that you're just paying for the cert (which I think is just flat out dumb). She won't be able to tell the difference at all unless she puts that bad boy under her 20x microscope before bed every night.

In my opinion, go with SI1 or even SI2. I'm telling you go look at them in person. You won't have any clue which one is which most of the time. H or I color. Especially for your budget. I'd go with these specs with an Ideal cut which you have picked out. You have the hearts and arrows picked out which is fine, but still if it were me I would bail on that and just get an Ideal cut diamond with all the table and depth percentages that would maximize SPARKLE and double check the pavilion and crown percentages! These are very important.

Then you can maximize carat size without even sacrificing any quality (at least as far as the naked eye is concerned and hell who cares what you can't see! Maximize your carat weight in a beautiful stone is what a smart man does right? ) Then you could probably up to around a carat and still stay within budget.. GO with channel set in my opinion. Those pave bands get stuck on everything from what I hear and plus the channel set doesnt look like she's wearing a chainsaw on her finger. Just one man's opinion.


BEST OF LUCK!

 

[TC1987]

The Brian Gavin and WF ACA diamonds should probably have the same "look," because BG was the one who developed the ACA standards, as I recall. You can search that here, or maybe somebody else remembers the specifics. But BG was at WF before he started his own company.

I color is where most people can start to see slight tint. But it will still look pretty white in that size. Faceup should look totally white. But some tint may be visible from the side. H or G should be totally safe. J is definitely tinted, but lots of people like J or even K diamonds. Size vs. color and clarity are individual preferences. I don't need totally eye-clean, but I don't think I'd want a J or K color e-ring. But I'd take a L or M, because they are a lovely light candlelight or ivory yellow. J and K are just kind of off-white, to me. It's all individual preference. In my 30s, I'd have wanted a white diamond for an e-ring, and probably not lower than I color.

You can probably go down to SI1 with "the right kind" of inclusions that hide well. But VS2 should be clean enough, especially in .75ct size stones. But also look at some SI1s to see if maybe you could get between .75ct and 1ct and still be eye clean to the naked eye. I looked at some 1ct SI1s a few years ago that had a clear crystal under the table, and all that showed to the unaided eye was a teeny spec. Diamonds, in real life, don't stay perfectly clean. A subtle inclusion might be okay, even if it doesn't totally hide. A subtle one off to the sides might not even be noticed.

Of those two settings, I'd pick the one that only has diamonds partway down the sides. I am hard on ring shanks, and anything on the bottom of the ring might get smashed. I also like the orientation of the prongs on the BG ring. I think they cover the areas where the diamond is most likely to hit something (12, 3, 6, 9 o'clock). I don't like 4-prong heads like on that WF ring. I've managed to bend thin prongs like that, and it's pretty easy for the diamond to fall out of there if you knock just one prong sideways enough. With those thin prongs like that, a 6 prong is better.

 

[dbanner8732]

http://www.ritani.com/engagement-rings/channel-set-diamond-engagement-ring-in-18kt-white-gold/4594

Hey TC1987.. I was born in 87 too if that's what it means.

Anyway what do you think of this ring in the 4 prong with just over a carat center stone? Think the 4 prong will be ok?

 

[Mrs.W 514]

http://www.ritani.com/engagement-rings/channel-set-diamond-engagement-ring-in-18kt-white-gold/4594

Hey TC1987.. I was born in 87 too if that's what it means.

Anyway what do you think of this ring in the 4 prong with just over a carat center stone? Think the 4 prong will be ok?

I'm not a huge fan of that setting because there is so much metal showing. I think the op is looking for a more delicate look based on the settings and diamonds he posted.

 

[dbanner8732]

I don't understand what you mean by too much metal showing. What do you mean by that?

 

[dbanner8732]

It's a 2.2 mm band I dont know how much more delicate you can get

 

[pandabee]

It's a 2.2 mm band I dont know how much more delicate you can get

Since it's a channel set band there will inherently be more metal along the sides in comparison to a pavé or even prong set band. 2.2mm is fairly substantial depending on the ring size. On some it could be too much but it would still look delicate on maybe a 8 or 9 finger. There are many members with rings that have shanks of 1.7 and even 1.5 so you can definitely get more delicate. But it all depends on the person.

 

[dbanner8732]

I dont like the chainsaw look of these other settings. Plus the channel setting is more secure and wont get caught on things as bad. Her occupation has her working with her hands a good bit so I also took this into consideration. The ring size is a 7. I've been told by many jewelers that a 2.2 mm band is a thin band and sleek or dainty. 1.7 would almost be too thin I think, but it's hard to tell. I just whipped out a ruler to look lol.


I mean 2.2 isn't thick by any means is it?

Thanks for the input!

 

[Mrs.W 514]

I don't like how thick the rails are on that setting.

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/diamond-settings/channel-bead-set-diamond-engagement-ring-715.htm
This setting has much thinner rails than the setting you posted, I like this look better more diamond less metal. I don't like the thick chunky metal rails, it looks cheap to me and reminds me of mall jewelry store junk.

This isn't your thread by the way I would suggest making your own thread to ask questions instead of hijacking the original poster's thread

 

[iam_immigrant]

Take a deep breath, you are doing great!

The settings you have picked out are beautiful and the diamonds are superb.

I don't think you will notice a difference in the color between an H and an I, ideal cut stones will face up whiter anyway.

I think those settings will look really good with that size stone. The shanks on those rings are thin and a 3/4 ct diamond is not small. What size ring does your gf wear?

As far as the diamonds on the bottom of the shank. Yes they are in more danger of getting damaged but it really depends on your gf. Does she take her rings off to wash dishes, do yard work or sports activities? If she is already careful with her jewelry then I would say you don't need to worry too much about a full eternity. Channel set stones will also withstand more abuse than pave set stones. If your gf is more the type to knock her jewelry around a bit and isn't afraid to get it dirty that a 1/2 eternity or 3/4 eternity would probably be more practical. Another pro to a 1/2 eternity or a 3/4 eternity is that it gives you some room to re-size the ring should the need occur.

She is a size 5 (a little bit loose but won't come off when is shakes her hand...and gives room if/when she is pregnant )
She is not super hands on type but for day-to-day I assume she will keep the ring on.
And I didn't even think about the resizing factor :facepalm: but I do remember someone saying something that is it not lucky in our culture (Chinese) to ever cut the ring as it's bad luck so that adds one more thing to think about

My friend, I will comment on here because I am looking at buying a simiar ring with a similar stone as you. Depending on how much of a diamond fanatic your ladyfriend is, I wouldn't go with a vs2. If she is anything like mine, she won't be able to tell the difference between J and G color or I1 and Vs2. Now, with that said, and if that is the case for you, after loooking at many stones in person I think the best combination for your dollar is an H or I and an SI1. Anything better than that you're just paying for the cert (which I think is just flat out dumb). She won't be able to tell the difference at all unless she puts that bad boy under her 20x microscope before bed every night.

In my opinion, go with SI1 or even SI2. I'm telling you go look at them in person. You won't have any clue which one is which most of the time. H or I color. Especially for your budget. I'd go with these specs with an Ideal cut which you have picked out. You have the hearts and arrows picked out which is fine, but still if it were me I would bail on that and just get an Ideal cut diamond with all the table and depth percentages that would maximize SPARKLE and double check the pavilion and crown percentages! These are very important.

Then you can maximize carat size without even sacrificing any quality (at least as far as the naked eye is concerned and hell who cares what you can't see! Maximize your carat weight in a beautiful stone is what a smart man does right? ) Then you could probably up to around a carat and still stay within budget.. GO with channel set in my opinion. Those pave bands get stuck on everything from what I hear and plus the channel set doesnt look like she's wearing a chainsaw on her finger. Just one man's opinion.


BEST OF LUCK!

She has diamond pieces (earrings mostly) before my time so not sure how "into diamonds" she is, however I do know that she is kinda/sorta/maybe picky about stuff...she eyeballs everything before she buys!!
I tried to concentrate on cut, colour, clarity, carat (in that order) as I really want something that shines.

The Brian Gavin and WF ACA diamonds should probably have the same "look," because BG was the one who developed the ACA standards, as I recall. You can search that here, or maybe somebody else remembers the specifics. But BG was at WF before he started his own company.

I color is where most people can start to see slight tint. But it will still look pretty white in that size. Faceup should look totally white. But some tint may be visible from the side. H or G should be totally safe. J is definitely tinted, but lots of people like J or even K diamonds. Size vs. color and clarity are individual preferences. I don't need totally eye-clean, but I don't think I'd want a J or K color e-ring. But I'd take a L or M, because they are a lovely light candlelight or ivory yellow. J and K are just kind of off-white, to me. It's all individual preference. In my 30s, I'd have wanted a white diamond for an e-ring, and probably not lower than I color.

You can probably go down to SI1 with "the right kind" of inclusions that hide well. But VS2 should be clean enough, especially in .75ct size stones. But also look at some SI1s to see if maybe you could get between .75ct and 1ct and still be eye clean to the naked eye. I looked at some 1ct SI1s a few years ago that had a clear crystal under the table, and all that showed to the unaided eye was a teeny spec. Diamonds, in real life, don't stay perfectly clean. A subtle inclusion might be okay, even if it doesn't totally hide. A subtle one off to the sides might not even be noticed.

Of those two settings, I'd pick the one that only has diamonds partway down the sides. I am hard on ring shanks, and anything on the bottom of the ring might get smashed. I also like the orientation of the prongs on the BG ring. I think they cover the areas where the diamond is most likely to hit something (12, 3, 6, 9 o'clock). I don't like 4-prong heads like on that WF ring. I've managed to bend thin prongs like that, and it's pretty easy for the diamond to fall out of there if you knock just one prong sideways enough. With those thin prongs like that, a 6 prong is better.

I looked at many different styles with different # of prongs and I want a "sleeker" look but the "security" of the stone was also a factor.


I am also thinking that because I am looking specifically at platinum settings (don't want to fade and avoid any skin allergies) I want to avoid a stone that may not look 'white' in contrast to the setting. I will have to look thru some more stones and figure out/narrow down what is best for me...lots of good advice here, thank you all.

 

[iam_immigrant]

Hi All,

I'm back again needing some advice. Long story short but some unexpected 'expenses' came up and I was not able to get the ring that I was looking for and the stone I was eyeballing has now been sold. The situation now allows me to once again try to tackle this 'beast'.

I've narrowed it down to these 3 stones, in order of my choices. I just need some reassurances that I'm picking out a good/great stone.

1. 0.810 G VS2 (HCA 1.4)
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.810-g-vs2-round-diamond-ags-c-104061350095#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/1/

2. 0.735 H VS2 (HCA 1.3)
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.735-h-vs2-round-diamond-ags-c-104063428021#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/0/

3. 0.760 I VS1 (HCA 1.5)
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.760-i-vs1-round-diamond-ags-c-104063428101#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/0/


#1 seems to have quite a 'few' inclusions to to VS2 or is it just me?!

I've also looked at going down to SI1 to move to a larger stone (1ct) but then it starts to get out of my price range. And also tried looking at J but I really want to stay in the 'white' range because of the platinum setting.


And this will be the setting (size 5 ring).

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/pave-and-side-stones/the-valentine-micro-pave-1-platinum-5688p


Let me know what you think and don't hold back! And of course I will be asking for some pictures before purchasing.

 

[JulieN]

You might want to make a new thread, since this is pretty old.

You don't have to worry about inclusions with BGD, any VS is going to be eye-clean and free of durability risks. Technically J color grade is still "near colorless."

I'm only seeing one SI1 at BGD right now under 5K: http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.801-h-si1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104063639040

 

[VRBeauty]

Hi All,

1. 0.810 G VS2 (HCA 1.4)
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.810-g-vs2-round-diamond-ags-c-104061350095#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/1/

#1 seems to have quite a 'few' inclusions to to VS2 or is it just me?!

Actually, those look like pretty minimal inclusions to me - less than what you might see in an SI 1, the next grade down. More inclusions than the other two stones you're considering, but then, you're also getting a larger stone. Of course, ask the sales rep to verify that it's eye-clean.

BTW I like your choice of settings. It should be a beautiful ring!

 

[iam_immigrant]

You might want to make a new thread, since this is pretty old.

You don't have to worry about inclusions with BGD, any VS is going to be eye-clean and free of durability risks. Technically J color grade is still "near colorless."

I'm only seeing one SI1 at BGD right now under 5K: http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.801-h-si1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104063639040

I didn't want to 'clog' the place up with new threads and I wanted to edit my original post but couldn't find the option, if there is one.

I've looked at some threads on here and other forums where many are recommended to move from VS1/2 to an SI1/2 to up the carat but as I mentioned in my other post she is picky as hell when it comes to this stuff and I just want piece of mind. Can't explain it...but I just 'feel' better.

I heard that with white settings (white gold/platinum) it may be better to have something more on the 'white' scale which is why I want to stay in the GHI.

Hi All,

1. 0.810 G VS2 (HCA 1.4)
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.810-g-vs2-round-diamond-ags-c-104061350095#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/1/

#1 seems to have quite a 'few' inclusions to to VS2 or is it just me?!

Actually, those look like pretty minimal inclusions to me - less than what you might see in an SI 1, the next grade down. More inclusions than the other two stones you're considering, but then, you're also getting a larger stone. Of course, ask the sales rep to verify that it's eye-clean.

BTW I like your choice of settings. It should be a beautiful ring!

I just wanted to make sure that they were not substantial inclusions but just wanted to make sure even though I know it's a VS.

Thanks!! I looked through many and had sooo many ones picked out but wanted to stay with one vendor and kinda kept coming back to this one...so I stuck with my gut feeling.


And I will definitely get them to check for eye clean and send me over pictures. But so far I am leaning pretty hard on #1...unless someone can talk me outta it. And I don't really want the blue line...I want this baby to sparkle and shine no matter the place/light/situation. I just want her to smile everytime she looks at it no matter where she is.

 

[Fly Girl]

I suggest you contact them to put a hold on the diamond you are considering.

That will be a gorgeous ring. A VS2 will be a great choice. My son just purchased his girl a ring from BGD last month. Great product and she is soooo happy with the diamond and the ring. She tells me she catches herself checking out the sparkle several times a day. Of course, I coached her to keep the diamond clean!

 

[JulieN]

And I don't really want the blue line...I want this baby to sparkle and shine no matter the place/light/situation. I just want her to smile everytime she looks at it no matter where she is.

Regular won't sparkle or shine inside a Disneyland ride or other place with insufficient light... Blue fluorescence also won't sparkle or shine inside a dark Disney ride but it will actually glow.

 

[iam_immigrant]

And I don't really want the blue line...I want this baby to sparkle and shine no matter the place/light/situation. I just want her to smile everytime she looks at it no matter where she is.

Regular won't sparkle or shine inside a Disneyland ride or other place with insufficient light... Blue fluorescence also won't sparkle or shine inside a dark Disney ride but it will actually glow.

Really?!?! It really glows? This just added a new factor....man it just got a bit tougher to choose now. Let me have a look into his blue line...just when I was starting to get a hang of things.

 

[JulieN]

yes, that is what fluorescence is! in the presence of UV light, a diamond that fluoresces will emit light... if it has blue fluorescence it will glow blue.

 

[iam_immigrant]

yes, that is what fluorescence is! in the presence of UV light, a diamond that fluoresces will emit light... if it has blue fluorescence it will glow blue.

Ahhhhh!!! I always thought that meant the diamond wasn't white and would exhibit some wierd rainbow effect.

My mind = blown!!

 

[JulieN]

Yeah, some people think it is pretty cool...

I'm not trying to swing you one way or the other, any of the Signature or Blue is going to be stunning and you can't go wrong.

 

[iam_immigrant]

Yeah, some people think it is pretty cool...

I'm not trying to swing you one way or the other, any of the Signature or Blue is going to be stunning and you can't go wrong.

Julie, you are one wise woman!!! Thank you for your time and help!!

I didn't even bother looking at the blue page on BGD until you showed me the way! After watching the video on that page and looking at some pictures I was sold!! I kinda like the very strong blue colour...kind of like a mini torch.

I think I've made my choice (#1) but would like some feedback.

1. 0.724 H VS1 HCA - 1.1
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.724-h-vs1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104062572009#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/2/

2. 0.716 G VS1 HCA - 1.5
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/0.716-g-vs1-round-diamond-ags-bl-104061006053#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/2/


I looked at both the ideal scope and aset images but is it just me that 1 looks 'duller' in the pictures?? Or am I just be nit picky and beating a dead horse....

 

[JulieN]

Probably has something to do with lighting/photography, you can see the background colors are different.
#1 is a fine choice.