Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

PLEASE - what setting is better????

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
A

azbuyer

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
119

One is the Michael B and the other is a simple Halo bead set. I am aiming for a 3-3.5ct cushion diamond.


My girlfriend is very petite (5'', 100lbs) and has a 4.5 size finger. (if that matters when considering setting).


I think the Michael B obviously may sparkle more since it has more diamongs but the other does have a certain elegance to it as well (and is less expensive I imagine).


Thanks in advance!

PS - i think i need to add the other pic to a diff post.

option2azring.jpg
 
here is the other simpler one

the_ringdiaband_az.jpg
 
well, they''re very different, don''t you think?

one has a halo, one doesn''t. this is a huge difference. I think most women either like halos or think it''s not their style.
 
Honestly I am a halo-LOVER so I really love the 2nd one. ALTHOUGH, a cushion that big, on a tiny lady with tiny fingers, could be overwhelming with a halo . . .
 
VERY different styles and I think thats my problem so was hoping to get a sampling of what some women like. I know she likes Halos as she has made comments in passing about some of those styles. She commented recently on one that was on cover of martha stewart magazine while at a book store. The other 3-sided one i just came across on these forums and thought it looked nicer. my jeweler said its $500 more since there are more diamonds. Given the total expense, i think its more of a style question than budget.

So which would you choose?
 
for that size ring and that size finger, i would personally skip the halo. both rings are gorgeous though!
emlove.gif
 
Date: 6/18/2008 3:35:07 PM
Author: azbuyer
VERY different styles and I think thats my problem so was hoping to get a sampling of what some women like. So which would you choose?
Click to expand...
Ditto to the above comments, about how different they are and both gorgeous. Since you''re asking for a sampling, I''m with lisamarie, for that size ring and that size finger, i would personally skip the halo. But if she likes halos, she might not!? Good luck!
 
thanks for the quick replies! This selection process is certainly nerve racking. Never been so indecsive but I guess never had so many different options. I''m sure she will love either but I agree the halo may be trying to make the middle one look bigger and on a small hand might be too much. The other issue is sizing - if she did "grow" and/or her finger got bigger for some reason, I imagine the top one wouldnt be able to be made bigger without major work. Or I will have to pray she doesnt swell up. :)
 
Date: 6/18/2008 3:50:13 PM
Author: old-fashioned girl
Date: 6/18/2008 3:35:07 PM

Author: azbuyer

VERY different styles and I think thats my problem so was hoping to get a sampling of what some women like. So which would you choose?
Click to expand...

Ditto to the above comments, about how different they are and both gorgeous. Since you''re asking for a sampling, I''m with lisamarie, for that size ring and that size finger, i would personally skip the halo. But if she likes halos, she might not!? Good luck!
Click to expand...

Same here, I''d skip the halo. Let the cushion shine all on it''s own. Is there any sneaky way you could find out her preference?
 
I also think that you should go with the first setting for the same reasons that some of the previous posters had mentioned
1.gif
 
I was thinking about it but I am trying to get this settled in the next week or so.

I may need to just make some sly comments if she happens to be perusing a magazine and there is an ad in there somewhere. Not sure how without making it obvious. I mean, I dont think she will say no either way but if its something she is to wear forever (i hope!) i want her to love it. I mean I dont think there is anything not to like about the non-halo option.
 
It looks like the first one is a full eternity, so it probably isn''t easily sizeable. If it''s going to be a custom job, get the shank made with a sizing region, an area without any stones.
 
When she mentioned she thought she liked halos did she have any clue that she might be receiving a 3 to 3.5 carat stone? If not, then she might have been envisioning the typical 1 carat stone that a halo would make look larger
2.gif


I much prefer the first setting myself.
 
Date: 6/18/2008 4:13:32 PM
Author: purrfectpear
When she mentioned she thought she liked halos did she have any clue that she might be receiving a 3 to 3.5 carat stone? If not, then she might have been envisioning the typical 1 carat stone that a halo would make look larger
2.gif


I much prefer the first setting myself.
Click to expand...
Absolutely ditto.
Personally, I would not halo a gorgeous, killer stone of that size. Let that baby SHINE!!!
 
the stone may be big in size but right now looking at G, H or I colors and VS2 / SI clarities from GOG

so maybe better to halo it if its not perfect - although GOG tends to have pretty sparkly stones and he said they are "eye clean". Will have to rely on his judgment.

I guess i should have mentioned quality of stone along with setting - since its not a D flawless, maybe showing it like that (with no halo) may not be as advised.
 
Personally I would skip the halo on a ring that size. Remember you could always reset into a halo later if she really wants one. I would go simple solitaire for a stone that size.
 
On that size stone I'd def. opt for the G or H color & spend the $$ there rather than a halo or three-sided pave. Cushions do NOT hide color like ideal cut rounds. And I think you'll see color in an "I" (maybe even the H).

Re: the settings ... both are beautiful but both have drawbacks. A halo on a 3+ct stone may overwhelm a small hand. And three-sided pave CANNOT be worn next to a wedding band without chewing it up badly.

What about something like #1 but with one sided pave (top of the band) and 3/4 eternity style so it can be sized in the back if her fingers change with childbirth etc ... I'm sure Michael B has similar ones.
 
If you''re going to stick with that size center stone, I wouldn''t halo it. When you find the right stone, you won''t feel like you need to ''hide'' anything like you mentioned. This is just my opinion of course, but that size stone on that tiny finger is gonna be enormous!! Then to add another 1mm with a halo? She won''t be able to move her hand!
2.gif
If you like the Michael B design, you could make something similar that has 1 sided pave and a sizing region for much less than the designer name.

However, if she has mentioned that she likes halos, would you consider going down in carat size a tad? Blasphemy! I know. Ha.
 
jeez...i never thought about what it would do to a wedding band. Not sure the setting (#1) works at the top (by the prongs) without it being three sided on the way down. I agree 3/4 may be good for future sizing considerations. But I guess i need to see if i can get a rendering of how the top part looks with diamonds all around but the band only one-sided. Thanks for these considerations.

As for color, I would love a G or H with the other specs if I can find one.
 
Hello azbuyer! I love both rings and I am sure she will be thrilled with either however you might want to ask yourself how self conscious will she be wearing a big stone/ring.... with the addition of the halo making it most definitely larger in appearance. With that being said I am having my engagement ring made right now and it is a 3.5 with a halo on a size 5 finger (I am only 5''3'''')... similar to the 2nd picture. My jeweler has told me that it will look close to a 6 carat stone when all is said and done. I asked myself that same question because I am not really all that flashy of a girl. My friend gave me some good advice last night... she said if I am going to have a big ring then I had to make sure I was proud of it and confident about wearing it. If I was then she said I would be able to pull it off and everyone would love it. However if I was self-conscious and embarrassed about the size then that would translate to anyone who saw it on my finger. I thought that was excellent advice! My stone is my FF family heirloom and I am the one deciding to make it look even larger, but I have decided that I am going to wear it proudly.
1.gif


Again it is such a personal preference as to how comfortable any one person is in regards to stone size. I have already had many friends comment that they would not be comfortable wearing a stone/ring the size of mine. Oh and my jeweler wears a ring very similar to the 1st ring and it is gorgeous!!!! Her stone is a 6 carat round and who wouldn''t notice it, but if I wasn''t so in love with the halo look I would do something like hers/your 1st picture.

Good luck!!!
 
I vote for no halo with the stone size you are considering. I have a G SI2 cushion and it''s perfectly eyeclean. I agree with deco that cushions will show more color, although it''s personal based the the wearers sensitivity to color. If you are getting a michael b setting then he does allow for the matching 3-sided pave wedding band. A couple of gals here have the sets and have yet to report any problems. however, do keep in mind that pave sets are delicate and not made for everyday wear and tear. I have a 3 sided pave ring and I adore it, but I do baby it. no wearing it to the pool, the gym etc.
 
I vote Michael B, but my wedding set is a different Michael B design so I may be partial! Seriously, 3 ct is big. I am a big girl with bigger hands and would opt out of haloing a stone that size and let it go solo.

I have not had problems with my pave rubbing on the sides, but have only been wearing both rings for ~1 year. However Michael B does seem to have a good rep on that front.

I would, however, strongly recommend getting the ring made/remade with a sizing bar at the bottom (ie. 3/4 eternity or something.) Who knows what the years will do to her ring size?
 
Both are beautiful, but I like the first one a bit more.
 
I prefer the second setting, but without the halo for a stone of that size (and on such a small finger). Something like the Ritani Endless Love without the halo would be beautiful.
 
I discovered something about wearing a larger stone- I have a 3.5ct OEC with a halo setting. It was already set and I''d been thinking about resetting into something simpler.

Well, I have realized I absolutely HAVE to wear a stone that large with a halo or some other protection around the diamond. It sits as low as it can, but I still bang it into stuff on a horrifyingly regular basis. The halo, though I''ve only had it for about two months, already has a small dent in it. I don''t do anything strenuous with it on, but nevertheless, I will hit it against doorways, when getting into cars, etc. I swapped it to my left hand and I don''t abuse it quite as much as when I wore it on my right hand.

My smalller diamond I don''t abuse half as much, even on my right hand now.

Definitely insure it, whatever else you decide to do!

With setting your GFs stone, you might take into consideration how active she is, what her daily activities are etc. and if she is even a little accident prone, personally I''d halo it just to keep the stone safer. Yeah, it''ll be pretty big and sparkly, but it''s gonna be at 3+ cts anyway... and I do think halos on larger stones can look perfectly lovely. Just track down CrookedRock''s thread- she has a halo on a 4 ct cushion and it''s perfect looking!
 
thanks everyone for your opinions. Definitely a lot to consider other than just looks. Seems to be some practical considerations as well.

I have to say most folks like the first one albeit with some caveats about perhaps making the band one-sides or just going down 3/4 of the way.

Also, seems like H is probably as low as I can go with a cushion cut - even thought the I @ GOG looks pretty sweet.

Thanks again and I appreciate everyone''s thoughts!
 
Here is a 3rd option i found. Another non-halo that has nice pave around the bottom. Could also make band one-sided and 3/4 of way down.

anyone like this over the others??

lol2_1571.jpg
 
If she likes the halo look, I would WOW her with a halo ring! It's a great size!!! I've never heard a girl saying, "This diamond is TOO BIG!"
30.gif
Of course, there are some exceptions with those ladies who have to work with their hands and work in places where it would not be appropriate. That having been said, since you are getting her an awesomely big rock -- it's clearly going to be fine in your social circles and in her daily life. Kudos!

Maybe you can try to custom make a delicate halo setting -- if you go the custom route, it will look tasteful with all the right proportions. And it will Knock Her Socks Off...and the socks of everyone who sees it! The other settings are lovely, too. But you said she likes halos! I'd get her a halo!
 
Hi Azbuyer,
I am the same size as your GF and also have a 4.5 finger.
My center stone is 2.44. (RB, not cushion) I think I could pull off a 3 -3.5 solitare, but probably not a halo.
I like the Michael B. or the third choice, which I think is a Richard Landi.
Also, the higher the stone sits in the setting, the more it will turn on her finger (which drives me crazy)

I know that the element of surprise is important, but maybe you want to include her in the decision if you are really unsure.

Good Luck
35.gif


IMG_2722_2.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top