Percentage of budget for setting?

[NoobInNeed]

If I have a $5,000-$5,500 budget for the entire e-ring, what amount would be too much to spend for the actual setting? I found a setting that I like that is $1,175 in WG and $1,400 in platinum, but I don''t want to spend more than I should on the setting and have to compromise on the stone which is the focus anyway. I''m looking for a 1 carat stone.

 

[JulieN]

some people would rather have 1 ct stones in cheaper settings, and some would rather have .75 ct stones in nicer settings. it''s really up to what you/she envisions for her.

 

[Lula]

Hi, Noob-I-N,
It is a personal choice. Some people love the look and feel of platinum (it is heavier than white gold) and others do not like it because of the way it wears (called "patina"). Do a search in the forum archives for "platinum or white gold" or "platinum versus white gold" and you''ll see lots of threads where the pros and cons are discussed.

Has your gf expressed a preference for platinum? Or do you know if she is allergic to white gold (the alloys)?

If she has not expressed a preference and is not allergic to white gold, then I would save the money and put it toward the best diamond you can buy. If you find the perfect diamond for less than you expected to pay, then you can reconsider platinum. But first I would make sure of her preferences and also make sure you''ve seen and compared platinum and white gold settings in person.

 

[E B]

Date: 3/29/2010 4:26:57 PM
Author:NoobInNeed
If I have a $5,000-$5,500 budget for the entire e-ring, what amount would be too much to spend for the actual setting? I found a setting that I like that is $1,175 in WG and $1,400 in platinum, but I don't want to spend more than I should on the setting and have to compromise on the stone which is the focus anyway. I'm looking for a 1 carat stone.

In another thread, you mentioned your girlfriend wanted a ring with side stones, so that's what I'd get her (if I were you).

Which setting are you looking at? Do you have a specific diamond in mind?

 

[Dreamer_D]

The right amount to spend is whatever it takes to get her exactly what she wants

Another option is to get a simple solitaire ($250) and then reset into her dream setting later when funds allow.

 

[I Love My Sailor]

First thing is, you want the best cut stone possible. I looked at BrianGavinDiamonds and you can get a .90 I VS2 Signature ACA (AGS Ideal). Or you can get a 1.07 I SI1 AGS Excellent Cut and still get your setting. My advise is to get a simple $250 setting, find where you stand on color sensitiveness and clarity. later on you can change the setting. But later on, you may not be able to change the stone. Its better that you end up happy with the stone, wanting to upgrade the setting than vise versa

 

[CharmyPoo]

There is no right answer to this. I say spend what you feel right on the combo. For some, the setting is just as important as the diamond. These days - you can upgrade the diamond just as easily as the setting especially when you are buying from someone reputable.

When she opens the box - she is going to see the setting just as much as she sees the diamond. For my first e-ring, I couldn't get over the setting which I didn't like to see the beauty in the diamond.

 

[NoobInNeed]

Well I originally found a JA setting that was in the $700 area. But now I''ve found two that I really like that are $950 and $1,175 respectively. Then I started reading into white gold vs. platinum. I find this topic particularly confusing. I read a popular thread where a number of actual jewelers couldn''t agree on basically anything related to either of the two metals. I can see how if you need to replate white gold every year, the extra initial cost for platinum would become moot after 10 years or so of replating costs of white gold. But I don''t know how significant the need for replating white gold would be. If my budget for the ring is $5,500 or so, I just want to make sure I''ll have enough money after I get the setting to buy a great ~1 carat stone.

 

[clgwli]

Can we see the settings you are looking at now? I know from the other thread that you had found some gorgeous settings.

White gold vs platinum is a very personal thing. Some love one and hate the other and some really don''t care. I love the look of platinum but I do not like the feel of it on all my fingers. That is one thing I would see if her mom or sister can find out for you.

As for replating, I personally haven''t had the need to do it on any of my pieces. I have a channel set band that I''ve had for about 5 years and never replated it. Next to a newer ring that was replated, I can hardly tell the difference. It has a lot to do with the chemistry of a person and their preferences to see if you need replating or not. I choose at this point to not have them dip the rings if I get any work done. I actually like the look of unplated more than plated.

Not everyone will agree with me on that though, because again it is a very personal thing.

As for spending percentages, it totally depends on the person. I prefer a more simple look in general to the more elaborate ones out there with a lot of pave stones and engravings.

I actually don''t agree with those who say to do a simple setting now and upgrade later unless you are sure that she is okay with the idea of upgrading. Not everyone is in the outside world.

IMO though, $1500ish on a setting doesn''t sound too high for me. And if you have no idea on the metal she prefers I would suggest going with platinum over WG. It''s just a "safer" choice to me.

 

[NoobInNeed]

Hi Jean!

Here are the two settings I''m focused on now from the other thread?
Ring #1 - $1,125
Ring #2 - $950

I also found these two which seem extremely similar to me and are a little less:
Ring #3 - $825
Ring #4 - $700

I agree with you in that I''d prefer to get the intended final ring now. I''ll get her mom to get me some details!

 

[NoobInNeed]

Scratch ring #3 from the possibilities. I'm looking at actual sold ring examples of 1, 2, and 4 right now. Here they are:
Sold Ring #1
Sold Ring #2
Sold Ring #3

I literally can't tell them apart at all.

 

[yssie]

Date: 3/30/2010 10:22:55 AM
Author: NoobInNeed
Scratch ring #3 from the possibilities. I'm looking at actual sold ring examples of 1, 2, and 4 right now. Here they are:
Sold Ring #1
Sold Ring #2
Sold Ring #3

I literally can't tell them apart at all.

1-fishtail pave
2&3 both shared prong, diff of 0.54 vs 0.3 ctw - shanks slightly different widths too

 

[NoobInNeed]

Yes, but as far as appearance from top on the actual sample rings, they look basically identical to me. At that point, the $950 model seems best. Twice as many carats, middle price.

 

[yssie]

Well then, there you go

FYI if you're interested in seeing a fantastic example of fishtail pave take a look at LynnB's old set
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/finally-gorgeous-new-fishtail-pave-set-from-wf.46129/



It does look quite different from "regular" common prong work in person. I personally prefer it.

 

[NoobInNeed]

Just so I'm clear about the difference between fishtail and prong settings (and to post another picture!)... take a look at this.

The setting on the left has individual prongs that secure the diamond.

The setting on the right has a smooth, single string of gold-looking setting to secure the diamond.

Is this the difference between fishtail and prong settings you speak of?

I'm also not sure if this is indicative to all settings of these types or just these two examples, but the fishtail is much lower profile in height. This would reduce snags on garments, etc. I would imagine, but would it also make flush fitting a wedding band more difficult?

 

[yssie]

No - I''m talking about the shank itself, the way the melee are set and secured into the shank. Nothing to do with the centrestone.

 

[lovemybling]

Date: 3/30/2010 11:09:30 AM
Author: NoobInNeed
Just so I''m clear about the difference between fishtail and prong settings (and to post another picture!)... take a look at this.

The setting on the left has individual prongs that secure the diamond.

The setting on the right has a smooth, single string of gold-looking setting to secure the diamond.

Is this the difference between fishtail and prong settings you speak of?

I''m also not sure if this is indicative to all settings of these types or just these two examples, but the fishtail is much lower profile in height. This would reduce snags on garments, etc. I would imagine, but would it also make flush fitting a wedding band more difficult?

Hi again

Looking at your photo, if it were me, I like the one on the right. Which I believe is the fishtail prong. I have a ring that has that kids of setting. It is VERY smooth. Doesn''t snag things. Is very easy to put addition band flush against it. Personally I like the look of the crown holding the diamond better too. It seems to me a little softer in shape. Some how more feminine. I believe James Allen has a fishtail pronged band.

 

[lovemybling]

You could do a band like THIS and it would sit flush I believe. And would be AWESOME and Beautiful.

 

[RaiKai]

I don''t think you can set an average "percentage". I will say that for me personally, the setting is VERY important. Of course, so is a well cut, nice, mind clean, attractive stone, but if I do not like the setting......it will really bother me no matter how lovely the stone is! I am quite picky about settings to be honest and am willing to spend for a good setting - $1500 does not seem unreasonable to me at all. For others, settings are less of a concern. Some do choose to get very basic settings and upgrade later, but not all women like to "upgrade" their engagement rings (be it the stone or the setting, some are okay with one, but not the other, etc).

For the record I prefer white gold. I have never replated my white gold. I also rather prefer the warmth of quality unplated white gold alloy over the "cool white" of platinum, etc. Good quality white gold alloy does not need to be plated, and some very white alloys also exist. Plating is an option if she prefers to keep that super-white rhodium look, but it is not that expensive to do unless she has to do it very often due to poor quality plating or high acidity in her skin, etc. Some do find they need/want to replate often, so it really varies from manufacturer to manufacturer (ie quality of the gold and the plating), and person to person.

Platinum also costs money to upkeep should she not like the patina and want it polished regularly as there are some people who really actually do not like the patina (though many do!). It costs more to polish platinum than gold, I believe, due to it being a more time consuming process (I have never actually polished either though!). However, many people prefer the heft of platinum, or how it patinas, or for other reasons. It does cost more to buy the same ring in platinum than in gold though, as platinum both costs more per ounce, and it is more dense than gold meaning more ounces of platinum make up the setting. I would not say one metal is "better" than the other, each has its pros and cons and characteristics which you can find reviewed on these forums, though it is a common trend according to my local jewelers for people to come in with platinum in mind based on the idea it costs more so must be better...however, pricing reflects market demand as there is a market for these metals for other than jewelery too - there are times platinum has been cheaper than gold, and so on - platinum really shot up when demand for its use in catalytic converters jumped I think, for example. It just depends what characteristics work better for you.

 

[NoobInNeed]

Thanks again for everyone''s help. I hope I''m not annoying anyone with my obsession with minutia!

yssie: So the fishtail/prong comments are in reference to how the sidestones are secured like this, correct?

 

[lovemybling]

Date: 3/30/2010 11:55:22 AM
Author: NoobInNeed
Thanks again for everyone''s help. I hope I''m not annoying anyone with my obsession with minutia!

yssie: So the fishtail/prong comments are in reference to how the sidestones are secured like this, correct?

I believe the fishtail ones are the ones on the left photo. Thone ones on the right photo look like shared prong to me.

 

[yssie]

Date: 3/30/2010 11:55:22 AM
Author: NoobInNeed
Thanks again for everyone's help. I hope I'm not annoying anyone with my obsession with minutia!

yssie: So the fishtail/prong comments are in reference to how the sidestones are secured like this, correct?

yup that's it exactly - your picture-finding skills outclass mine!


ETA: no such thing as diamond minutiae

 

[Rockout]

My budget shifted from 5%-95% to 20%-80%, setting to stone ratio.

Left to my own devices I was going for the biggest stone in a simple solitaire setting until I had her into a B&M for a battery change in her watch and I nudged her over to the ''other stuff'' in the store. Her taste was completely different to what I would have expected and as a result I ended up getting the stone from a PS vendor (USA Certed) and the setting from that Jeweller.

She saw numerous settings over the course of a few weeks while we were looking for a birthday gift for her of a diamond cross and she kept going back to that one so I couldn''t argue with her choice. As a result, the stone went from a 1.63 J SI2 GIA EX to a 1.04 G VS2 AGS000 Ideal and the overall budget dropped a touch in the process.

 

[E B]

How about a combo like this, Mike?

.904 ct. H, SI1 BGD H&A

Truth Micro Pave Ring

Total = $5498

 

[NoobInNeed]

Thanks E B!

Perhaps it''s my requirement for attention to detail or maybe JA has spoiled me*, but I just don''t like BGD''s website. JA has images of every setting at just about every possible angle while BGD has three pictures that I personally find are at odd angles with unflattering light. I''m both frustrated and disappointed with that fact because everyone on her keeps pushing BGD so I can imagine the high quality of products they have to offer. But if I don''t feel totally confident with a setting because I don''t think I am getting a good enough visual of it, how can I commit to it?

* I stare at tons of images of nearly identical settings on JA to figure out how I feel about every part of the ring!

 

[RaiKai]

Date: 3/30/2010 5:02:53 PM
Author: NoobInNeed
Thanks E B!


Perhaps it''s my requirement for attention to detail or maybe JA has spoiled me*, but I just don''t like BGD''s website. JA has images of every setting at just about every possible angle while BGD has three pictures that I personally find are at odd angles with unflattering light. I''m both frustrated and disappointed with that fact because everyone on her keeps pushing BGD so I can imagine the high quality of products they have to offer. But if I don''t feel totally confident with a setting because I don''t think I am getting a good enough visual of it, how can I commit to it?


* I stare at tons of images of nearly identical settings on JA to figure out how I feel about every part of the ring!

BGD''s gallery has more pictures, as does the blog. I bet if you contacted them they could provide more pictures as well. You can also search the forums here and find TONS of pictures of settings they have done (like LynnB''s) including handshots. Really, their work IS amazing.

I am working with BGD now on a ring, so I admit some bias, but I did spend months looking for someone to do my custom work (and it is not particularly complicated, but I did have a very specific idea/inspiration in mind and needed someone whose style worked for what I had in mind). BGD was the one I felt completely comfortable going with.

Your experience may vary. If you prefer JA, and feel more comfortable with JA, go with JA.

 

[cara]

So one thing is while you know what you are getting with JA, what you are getting is a mass-produced setting. Not that they aren''t lovely... but there is a certain quality to them.

One thing you haven''t mentioned, at least in this thread, is your gf''s style preferences? How is that playing into the ring selection? And have you seen things in person or just on the computer screen - cause how they look in JA''s HD section is NOT how they will look in real life, haha!

Also one biggie for me was that, in pictures, I loved thin bands with micropave like you are looking at now. I thought that was it for me - reasonably priced and a little more decorative than a solitaire and thin band helps the modest center stone look bigger - Great! But when I tried them on, often they were scratchy and the micropave didn''t really give enough sparkly for me to like them. I preferred larger melee stone IRL, like 1-2 pointers not sub-1 pointers. But I still wanted a fairly thin band so I ended up going a different direction.

Oh, and Lynn B''s old fishtail pave set is to die for, though I too haven''t seen that IRL! But if you look closely at her pics, I think the fishtail pave quality is better than the JA one. Plus I prefer the way the legato head sits on top of her band ESPECIALLY for a princess, if that is still what you are going with. And it doesn''t looking as much like a peg-head as the prong set JA one. The head on the JA fishtail pave is integrated into the band, so the stone will sit lower (might be desirable or not) but it will be harder for a wedding band to sit flush, if that is a concern for you.

 

[CharmyPoo]

Personally, I don't like the amount of metal showing in all the JA settings you showed. Then again, I like very delicate settings with almost no metal showing.

 

[violet3]

personally, I am a setting girl myself -- i would rather have a slightly smaller diamond in a setting i love. I know, however, that lots (if not most) of people would disagree and want the absolute best diamond they can get for the budget.