shape
carat
color
clarity

Opinions please! To match or not to match?

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by carbonfan, Nov 28, 2016.

Which combination appeals to you more aesthetically?

  1. BGD Novela matching set

    4 vote(s)
    26.7%
  2. Plain engagement ring with eternity band

    11 vote(s)
    73.3%
  1. carbonfan
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    714
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by carbonfan » Nov 28, 2016
    I am going through a quandary and would welcome any and all opinions. In honor of our 14th wedding anniversary I recently upgraded to a 2.2 carat MRB which I absolutely love. It is currently set in a BGD Novela 4-prong setting which is absolutely beautiful. I absolutely love BGD's craftsmanship and I love my new stone, but for some reason I am not 100% sure about the set as a whole. I am wondering if perhaps a plain engagement band coupled with an eternity band (e.g., my current Novela eternity band or perhaps at some point the BGD dream eternity band) would be a more tasteful way to showcase the stone. In the past I have always had a matching set with sidestones in the e-ring so the idea of a plain engagement band did not occur to me until recently. I am a bit frustrated with myself for not considering this prior to the upgrade, but I suppose if I decide to go the plain e-ring route I can have a colored gemstone mounted in the Novela e-ring at some point to wear as a RHR. I realize that there is no right or wrong and it is truly a matter of personal aesthetic preference, but regardless, I am just really torn and I would love to know what others think about this. I am attaching a few photos of my current set in case this is helpful. Please feel free to share as many insights, experiences, and opinions as you wish!! Many thanks in advance!!

    442.jpg

    610.jpg
     
    


    


  2. LLJsmom
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,964
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    by LLJsmom » Nov 28, 2016
    Is the eternity band a specific match to the e-ring? I personally love the matchy matchy look, and I think the eternity band in the pic is just a tiny little bit different from the e-ring. It looks like the melee on the eternity aren't as closely spaced as on the ering. Is that what you don't like? Or do you NOT want the matchy-matchy look? I prefer the existing set to a plain band.
     
  3. carbonfan
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    714
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by carbonfan » Nov 29, 2016
    Hi LLJsmom, and thank you for weighing in on this! I really appreciate your thoughts on the matching set. When my husband and I got engaged 15 years ago matching sets were all the rage, and as this is what I had always worn I never considered anything different when I pursued the upgrade. So I just wasn't sure if matching sets are still as common or if I had missed the plain engagement ring/diamond eternity band train somehow! :lol: Regardless, although I may not have been entirely clear in my original post, I definitely want to stick with a diamond eternity band; I am just on the fence about whether a plain engagement ring or one with melee would showcase the stone better. I can't decide if the stone gets too "blurred" with the melee on the engagement ring. I thought I had this all figured out, and now it feels like the upgrade decision is a continually evolving process which is certainly not what I intended. Unfortunately what I am probably craving is a slightly bigger stone... aaack! I wouldn't want to go up much more, but perhaps just a touch!

    In answer to your question, the bands are ever-so-slightly different, so good eyes! =) The original Novela set I ordered featured .02 melee in each band, and the wedding band was SO thin that I felt like it virtually disappeared in the set. This bothered me from the word go, so luckily I was able to work out an exchange and BGD custom made a Novela full eternity using .025 stones. I was assured that the discrepancy would be imperceptible, but I guess they didn't account for eagle eyes like yours! The idea was to bump the wedding band up ever-so-slightly to give it a bit more "backbone," and I really do like the effect. The difference between the bands really isn't so noticeable in person, but I suppose if it ever bothers me I can have one of the bands redone at some point. I have also played with the idea of using a stacking ring in between them (I really like BGD's Yogo sapphire stacker!) just to change up the look. Decisions, decisions!

    Anyway, thank you for sharing your thoughts! I always love to hear from fellow PSers, and it is BEYOND helpful!!
     
  4. LLJsmom
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,964
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    by LLJsmom » Nov 30, 2016
    Oh, I see carbonfan. You were asking about the shank on the ering. I thought you were talking about the wedding band.

    In that case, I would prefer a plain band on the ering, and a full diamond eternity for the wedding band.

    I am thinking something like this, right?
    dream_oec_and_band.jpg

    Anyway, if you are going to upgrade your stone, you can start all over, right? Strangely enough, it took me a long time to figure out that this is my ideal set, because it forces the eye to focus on the stone, and the diamond eternity also enhances the look of the center stone. I'm with you.
     
    


    


  5. carbonfan
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    714
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by carbonfan » Nov 30, 2016
    Your set is absolutely gorgeous, LLJsmom!! I really love the way the plain shank on your engagement ring showcases your OEC. :drool: What an amazing combo!! I am definitely considering going a plain band route, perhaps BGD Grace, VC Classic, or VC Trueste, something simple and classic that will showcase the stone more. I am posting a few of my favorite contenders just for fun. All opinions are welcome!!

    bgd_grace.jpg

    vc_classic_solitaire.jpg

    vc_trueste_solitaire.jpg
     
  6. Alex T
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,955
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    by Alex T » Nov 30, 2016
    I also prefer a plain engagement shank. I had diamond shoulders in my pear cut engagement ring, but then had a new setting made with a plain shank & I love it. I have a plain wedding band & full eternity, so I do have some sparkle in there.

    Personally, my pear "popped" as soon as it was in the plain shank.
     
  7. LLJsmom
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,964
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    by LLJsmom » Nov 30, 2016
    Carbonfan, lol!! That is not my set, except in spirit. I also am considering the Trueste. The difference is whether you like the cathedral setting. I know I do. I have had the non-cathedral and I prefer the view with the sides of the setting rising to meet my eye. To me, it gives the ring a better flow. Kwim? hard to explain.
     
  8. chamomiletea
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    by chamomiletea » Nov 30, 2016
    The classic 4 prong plain e ring setting with an eternity WR is exactly the same as my set. Obviously I like it. However I love your set also. I think there is nothing wrong with matchy matchy, I see a lot of sets about with matching ER and WR bands. I think what you are wearing is very pretty and elegant. Here's mine for reference, similar sized stone as well. I don't think you should feel you have to change for fashion if you don't want to as it looks fashionable imo, however if you fancy a change go for it.

    20161117_134034.jpg
     
  9. chamomiletea
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    by chamomiletea » Nov 30, 2016
    I forgot to add the Cathedral part of my setting is my favourite bit, I love how it raises, suspends and showcases the stone and I am used to it so I don't find it catches. I think it makes it look bigger as well. I love all of the settings you have posted.
     
  10. MissGotRocks
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    11,369
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    by MissGotRocks » Nov 30, 2016
    With a solitaire ring, I much prefer a plain shank with an eternity band. You are not looking to upgrade the stone - correct? I think you just got your new gorgeous diamond. You might want to consider a six prong setting too. They tend to make the stone look rounder and sometimes larger. It would be worth going to a jewelry store to try on some of the different solitaire settings to see which look you prefer. Is there a Tiffany's near you? Try on their six prong classic solitaire and see if it looks good to you - many versions of the Tiff repro that could be had.
     
    


    


  11. carbonfan
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    714
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by carbonfan » Nov 30, 2016
    Thank you to everyone for sharing your opinions! LLJsmom, my apologies for the goof; I just assumed that was your ring! But I just looked up your actual ring and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, it too is absolutely gorgeous!! And you are correct; I am not looking to upgrade (although I have no doubt that DSS will set in at some point!)... I just want to find the best way to showcase my stone! I have never owned a VC piece but have admired his work vicariously, so the Trueste is a bit tempting... :)

    chamomiletea, thank you for sharing the photo of your set... also incredibly beautiful!! This is incredibly helpful in providing a comparable reference point. And I love your thoughts on cathedral settings. I have never had a cathedral type, so this is definitely something to consider! I agree with you and LLJsmom... the cathedral silhouette really flows well and is aesthetically pleasing! And if it keeps the ring from catching on things that is an added bonus!

    Alex T, thank you for sharing your experience in switching to a plain shank. I can see how a plain shank makes the stone pop!

    I am really torn on this one, but then again I have a tendency to second guess things at times, and as I waited 14 years to upgrade this feels like a pretty big deal! I will continue to mull things over, but in the meantime, please feel free to keep the votes and feedback coming! :)
     
  12. Gypsy
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    40,198
    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    by Gypsy » Nov 30, 2016
    I would also go for a plain shank. Personally, BGD has some of my favorite all time solitaires. It's just depends on your style.

    I like diamonds for the wedding band to pair with it. Classic look, IMO.
     
  13. motownmama
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    6,972
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    by motownmama » Nov 30, 2016
    Your set looks VERY pretty! However, I've ALWAYS preferred a plain shank on a solitaire. Paired with a diamond eternity is my fav look. Good luck!
     
  14. VRBeauty
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    10,069
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    by VRBeauty » Nov 30, 2016
    Plain shank. What can I say? I'm just a sucker for the elegance of the classic solitaire. Aesthetics aside, it also gives you a durable ring that won't have to be babied.
     
  15. coda72
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,525
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2005
    by coda72 » Nov 30, 2016
    I love the look of a solitaire with a diamond wedding band. In fact that's what I'm wearing for my wedding set right now.
     
    


    


  16. carbonfan
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    714
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by carbonfan » Nov 30, 2016
    Thanks so much, everyone!! All of this resonates with me on so many levels... I love my current set but just feel like it is missing something. I have never had a plain shank solitaire and I think I would really enjoy changing up the look and showcasing the stone (letting it be the star!). I really appreciate all of your insights!

    Do any of you have any favorite solitaire settings to recommend? Gypsy, you probably don't know this but I have been a long-time lurker on PS and your advice to others has meant a TON to me as well! So if you have a favorite setting or two (or three or four!), I am all ears! :)

    Thanks again, everyone... looks like I may have a fun project to take on for the new year!!
     
  17. carbonfan
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    714
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by carbonfan » Dec 1, 2016
    I had somewhat of an epiphany during my 5:30 workout this morning (strangely enough my morning workouts always seems to lead to "eureka!" moments in work, parenting, and so many other areas of life!). It struck me that there are basically two philosophies when it comes to the aesthetic properties of an engagement ring (obviously durability, practicality for everyday wear, etc. are separate considerations). The first school of thought is that the engagement ring may serve to "dress up" the stone (i.e., embellish the center stone with side stones, halo, etc.), whereas the second philosophy is that the stone may be the star in its own right without competing with melee, etc. Previously I just conceptualized the selection of an engagement ring as a choice between "fancy" versus "simple" styles, but this morning's realization cast new light on the role of the engagement ring. It can serve one of two purposes, either an enhancing role with more detail or more of a showcasing role with less detail. Both have their merits and there is absolutely no right or wrong... as with most things it really comes down to a matter of personal preference. Fun considerations to say the least!

    I guess I am just surprising myself because for 15+ years I have subscribed to the first perspective (engagement ring with side stones) and lately I find myself leaning toward something simpler so the stone can speak for itself with less distraction. That said, I really do like embellished styles as RHRs. Isn't it interesting how our tastes and preferences evolve over time?

    If anyone wants to share their favorite plain solitaire setting(s) I would love to take them into consideration! I am thinking toward a delicate (~2mm) shank with clean lines. All ideas are welcome, and many thanks again for sharing them! :twirl:
     
  18. chamomiletea
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    by chamomiletea » Dec 1, 2016
    Trying to get a close up of my setting so you can see how the stone almost hangs in the air. It is a custom setting from an NYC jeweller but it's similar to the cathedral setting you posted. It is 4 prongs with a basket and the cathedral arms attach to the basket. I absolutely love this setting because I can see and clean all the way around the stone, there is also nothing to block light going through it. I don't find the height catches on things, I have never scratched my baby with it or anything but I wear it all the time so maybe I am used to it. I also think it makes the ring and stone look bigger from a distance as it sticks out more. It really hold the stone up and says look at me!
    Now there is one issue... the 4 prongs does make it look a bit like a cushion from some angles. Now I like this. I like how it can look dead round from the top or a cushion if I tilt it to the side and of course it doesn't affect the performance it's just a different look.
    For 6 prong settings I would go with a tiffany setting all the way. It's the best for a reason imo. The swoop of the basket prongs is just stunning. It's pure class but I do think it hides the stone from the side more than my setting. It's also lower and some people would prefer that.
    It's all down to personal preference. Maybe you should have fun and go and try on lots of different solitare rings to see what speaks to you the most :).

    20160909_161335-1.jpg
     
  19. chamomiletea
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    by chamomiletea » Dec 1, 2016
    The shank is 1.8mm and tapers (it is pinched) towards the stone.
     
  20. carbonfan
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    714
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by carbonfan » Dec 2, 2016
    Your set is absolutely gorgeous, chamomiletea! I am a four-prong girl myself so I really love that look and the way it changes slightly at different angles. Thank you for sharing!!
     

Share This Page