Radiant cuts with Michael B. setting

[radiantgirl]

Hi, I'm new to this forum, and everything I have read thus far have been so helpful and informative. I am in love with the Michael B. petite princess setting. I originally wanted an Asscher cut diamond until I saw a couple of square shaped radiant cuts in person. I am still learning about the quality of the cut and what exactly to look for as far as table % and depth % are concerned. The salesperson that showed us the radiant diamonds said that we can go with an SI1 because the radiant hides the inclusions pretty well.

What does everyone else thinks? Any Michael B. and radiant lovers out there?

Any input or opinions are greatly appreciated.

 

[radiantgirl]

Here is a picture of the setting for those who haven''t seen it. I''m in love!

 

[mrssalvo]

I think it would look fabulous. Here''s a pic from Michael b''s website

 

[vivosogno]

Wow! You read my mind! I want the same Michael B setting (2mm, princess, 3-sided pave, eternity band with pave on the prong). The setting alone runs around $7000+. Our salesperson said that there is another jeweler named Kirk Kara (?) who make an almost identical setting (in platinum, no less) for around 1/2 the price. Still expensive but worth it! I also want THIS setting with a radiant diamond.

We were looking for around a 1.5-2 carat center stone G-H VS2. Do you think it would be ok to go down to SI1? I''ve heard different opinions. I know that we need to look at the ring before hand. What size center stone were you looking at for the radiant? Where have you been looking for your loose stones? I''m trying to find the best value possible!!

Let me know how your search is going!

 

[Scintillating]

Here's Island Dreams' Radiant + Michael B:

Scintillating...

 

[Allisonfaye]

I love this setting. I almost wish I had gone with it instead of the crown lace that I chose. I am not a big fan of radiants but I think you could easily find an eyeclean SI1 if you have some patience.

 

[Goldenrain]

Here's something that's related that may help those wanting Michael B settings:

Note that I have wiped out the references to prices since I'm not sure if that's allowed here. This information comes directly from Matthew B, son of Michael B.

The Petite Princess is about 2.00 mm and the Princess Ring is approximately 2.35 mm (Classic princess, not shown on the website is 2.5mm). They are set with diamonds all the way around, although they are not channel set but rather micro pave set.

The Princess Collection is comprised of the Princess Ring, the Petite Princess, the Three Sided Princess and, although not yet pictured, we now also have a Petite Three Sided Princess. The four prong head is specially made with a fleur de lys design that is not visible on our ads to protect our design exclusivity.

The Princess Ring is a classic eternity engagement ring and can accommodate center diamonds from 1.00 ct. to 3.00 cts. The Princess Ring retails for XXXX not including the center diamond of any size and shape which you can supply on your own or purchase through any of our authorized retailers. The matching Princess Band is XXXX. This is our most popular wedding set.

The Petite Princess is a bit more delicate and is made to accommodate center diamonds from 0.50 ct. to a maximum of 1.50 ct. The Petite Princess is XXXX. The matching Petite Princess Band is XXXX. This is our most affordable and second most popular wedding set.

The Three Sided Princess is slightly larger than the Princess Ring and features diamonds set on all three sides of the shank for a maximum "bling" effect. The Three Sided Princess is XXXX. The matching Three Sided Princess Band is XXXX. This ring is ideal for larger center diamonds from 2.00 carats and up.

The Petite Three Sided Princess is a slighly more delicate version of the Three Sided Princess. The engagement ring is XXXX and the matching band is XXXX.

We can set the Princess Ring and the Three Sided Princess (but not the Petite Princess) with diamond prongs and/or diamond tips. Diamond prongs require us to create a slightly more elaborate head and set diamonds all around the sides of the prongs. Diamond tips means we set one diamond on top of each of the four prongs. Diamond prongs are an additional XXXX and diamond tips are an additional XXX. We can do both for an additional XXXX, and the result is nothing short of stunning.

All of our rings are hand made from platinum here in our California design studio and are set with exquisite round brilliant cut diamonds of F-G color and VVS to VS clarity. We recommend ordering both the engagement ring and matching band at the same time, if it is within your budget to do so, so that the same jeweler and same diamond setter create the rings. If this is not feasible due to budgetary or other constraints, consider sending your engagement ring back to us through the retailer when it comes time to make the wedding band so that we can be assured to perfectly match the two. We'll even polish up the engagement ring to look like new, so it's worth going without for a few weeks if you have to.

 

[radiantgirl]

I'm so excited!

My boyfriend ordered the petite princess setting from Michael B. a few days ago, but we still have no diamond. We are having a tough time finding the right square radiant diamond we both like. I have seen more than a handful and have not yet found the right one yet. I am looking for the "crushed iced look" I love so much in radiants. There are so many out there that are not well cut.

I think we are getting close though. I never thought we would ever get the diamond off the internet, but they have so much more to choose from. We have narrowed it down to two, both from Dirt Cheap Diamonds. Both are very close, but there are some differences. Below are the specs:

Stone #1
Carat weight: 1.23
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Dimensions: 6.24 x 6.16 x 4.07
L/W ratio: 1.01
Depth: 66.1%
Table: 63%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thin

Stone #2
Carat weight: 1.23
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Dimensions: 6.02 x 5.90 x 4.06
L/W ratio: 1.02
Depth: 68.8%
Table: 67%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thick - Very Thick

Stone #1 is about $250 more than Stone #2. The real major difference, I think, is the girdle thickness. Right now, I am leaning more towards Stone #1, but my only concern is that the girdle is thin. Should this be a concern for radiants? I have heard that it should be a concern if the girdle was Extremely Thin. The girdle is Stone #2 is Thick - Very Thick, which leads me to believe that is why there is a slight difference in the dimensions because more of the weight is in the girdle.

How do these two radiants look so far on paper? I would really appreciate it if the radiant experts or lovers out there to provide input on these two stones if possible. Nicrez? David - Diamonds By Lauren? Thank you so much in advance.

 

[dani13]

Radiantgirl-

Hello and welcome! I love your setting choice. Your ring idea reminds me of diamond_girl''s ring. She got her square radiant from dirt cheap diamonds...check out her story and pics here: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/i-love-my-new-radiant-engagement-ring.29538/=

It is my favorite radiant ring on PS!!!

 

[radiantgirl]

Her ring is so pretty and the diamond is so big! My ring size is very small (size 3), and I hope that the 1.23 will look just as nice on me as it does on hers. Nice and sparkly! Maybe buying on the internet won''t be a bad experience. I can''t to be officially engaged and wear the beautiful Michael B. ring. I tried it on so many times at the jewelry store, and each time, I''m in love with it more and more.

 

[radiantgirl]

Date: 4/27/2006 2:30:08 PM
Author: vivosogno
Wow! You read my mind! I want the same Michael B setting (2mm, princess, 3-sided pave, eternity band with pave on the prong). The setting alone runs around $7000+. Our salesperson said that there is another jeweler named Kirk Kara (?) who make an almost identical setting (in platinum, no less) for around 1/2 the price. Still expensive but worth it! I also want THIS setting with a radiant diamond.

We were looking for around a 1.5-2 carat center stone G-H VS2. Do you think it would be ok to go down to SI1? I''ve heard different opinions. I know that we need to look at the ring before hand. What size center stone were you looking at for the radiant? Where have you been looking for your loose stones? I''m trying to find the best value possible!!

Let me know how your search is going!

Vivosogno - I think it is okay to go down to SI1 as long as you can see anything with your naked eye (eyeclean as PS users call it). If you are going for a 1.5 - 2 carat center, you would probably have to go with the Princess setting which is a little thicker than the one I am getting (princess is 2.2 mm vs 2.0 mm on petite princess). The 3-sided pave is very expensive. We got the least expensive Michael B. setting. Are you going for the more rectangular radiants or the squares? It''s a lot tougher finding square radiants. The rectangular are more abundant, it seems like.

We were looking at loose stones at a jewelry store in Texas, where we purchased the setting at, but didn''t have any luck there. We are hoping the internet route will be better for us. I love online shopping, but never thought buying a diamond via internet was the route we were going to take. After reading everyone''s experience on PS though, seems like it''s more popular nowadays to purchase a diamond on the internet.

 

[mrssalvo]

Congrats Radiant girl. that Michael B setting is one of my all time favorites.

I don''t know anything about radiants so I can''t help you there but I think the size you''re looking at will look gorgeous on your tiny finger.

 

[Mokey]

Hey Radiant Girl, Have you checked Good Old Gold? They seem to have quite a few square radiant cuts. Hope you find what you are looking for. Congrats on the Michael B!

 

[vivosogno]

You are so lucky radiant girl!!! I''m so jealous. I really like the 3 sided pave Michael B we know about the cost but still love it. Our jeweler told us we could still get the 2mm band even with a larger stone. i cant wait to see your new ring!!! when do you think he will give it to you?

 

[radiantgirl]

Date: 5/14/2006 1:12:51 AM
Author: vivosogno
You are so lucky radiant girl!!! I''m so jealous. I really like the 3 sided pave Michael B we know about the cost but still love it. Our jeweler told us we could still get the 2mm band even with a larger stone. i cant wait to see your new ring!!! when do you think he will give it to you?

Did you read what Goldenrain quoted about Michael B? Goldenrain: "The Petite Three Sided Princess is a slighly more delicate version of the Three Sided Princess. The engagement ring is XXXX and the matching band is XXXX." I didn''t even iknow this and never saw this particular setting at the 2 jewelry stores we looked at for Michael B. I bet you the petite 3 sided pave is cheaper than his original 3 sided pave. You could look into that, and maybe that might be more affordable? What kind of center stone and size are you looking at? Any luck so far?

I can''t wait to see the ring either and be engaged. We''ve been together for over 6 years now, and I can''t believe it''s actually happening! I am thinking if we get one of the two diamonds quoted above and are satisified with it, I am hoping he will present it to me by the end of June. *Keeping my fingers crossed*

 

[coda72]

Date: 5/13/2006 5:41:18 PM
Author: radiantgirl
I''m so excited!

My boyfriend ordered the petite princess setting from Michael B.a few days ago, but we have no diamond yet. We are having a tough time finding the right square radiant diamond we both like. I have seen more than a handful, and have not yet found the right one yet. I am looking for the ''crushed iced look'' I love so much in radiants. There are so many out there that are not well cut.

I think we are getting close though. I never thought we would ever get the diamond off the internet, but they have so much more to choose from. We have narrowed it down to two, both from Dirt Cheap Diamonds. Both are very close, but there are some differences. Below are the specs:

Stone #1
Carat weight: 1.23
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Dimensions: 6.24 x 6.16 x 4.07
L/W ratio: 1.01
Depth: 66.1%
Table: 63%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thin

Stone #2
Carat weight: 1.23
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Dimensions: 6.02 x 5.90 x 4.06
L/W ratio: 1.02
Depth: 68.8%
Table: 67%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thick - Very Thick

Stone #1 is about $250 more than Stone #2. The real major difference, I think, is the girdle thickness. Right now, I am leaning more towards Stone #1, but my only concern is that the girdle is thin. Should this be a concern for radiants? I have heard that it should be a concern if the girdle was Extremely Thin. The girdle is Stone #2 is Thick - Very Thick, which leads me to believe that is why there is a slight difference in the dimensions because more of the weight is in the girdle.

How do these two radiants look so far on paper? I would really appreciate it if the radiant experts or lovers out there to provide input on these two stones if possible. Nicrez? David - Diamonds By Lauren? Thank you so much in advance.

I like stone #1. The dimensions are bigger and I like the depth better. I don''t think the thin girdle will be a huge problem. Extremely thin would be a problem. Medium would be best, but sometimes it''s hard to find everything you want in a stone. I don'' t like the thick girdle and depth on stone #2. Have you seen pictures of these diamonds? It might be easier to judge them that way. Radiants can be bought by the numbers, but each of them look completely different, and it would be easier to tell your preference if you can see the stones themselves or at least pictures of them.

 

[radiantgirl]

Date: 5/14/2006 8:21:51 PM
Author: coda72

Date: 5/13/2006 5:41:18 PM
Author: radiantgirl
I''m so excited!

My boyfriend ordered the petite princess setting from Michael B.a few days ago, but we have no diamond yet. We are having a tough time finding the right square radiant diamond we both like. I have seen more than a handful, and have not yet found the right one yet. I am looking for the ''crushed iced look'' I love so much in radiants. There are so many out there that are not well cut.

I think we are getting close though. I never thought we would ever get the diamond off the internet, but they have so much more to choose from. We have narrowed it down to two, both from Dirt Cheap Diamonds. Both are very close, but there are some differences. Below are the specs:

Stone #1
Carat weight: 1.23
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Dimensions: 6.24 x 6.16 x 4.07
L/W ratio: 1.01
Depth: 66.1%
Table: 63%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thin

Stone #2
Carat weight: 1.23
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Dimensions: 6.02 x 5.90 x 4.06
L/W ratio: 1.02
Depth: 68.8%
Table: 67%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thick - Very Thick

Stone #1 is about $250 more than Stone #2. The real major difference, I think, is the girdle thickness. Right now, I am leaning more towards Stone #1, but my only concern is that the girdle is thin. Should this be a concern for radiants? I have heard that it should be a concern if the girdle was Extremely Thin. The girdle is Stone #2 is Thick - Very Thick, which leads me to believe that is why there is a slight difference in the dimensions because more of the weight is in the girdle.

How do these two radiants look so far on paper? I would really appreciate it if the radiant experts or lovers out there to provide input on these two stones if possible. Nicrez? David - Diamonds By Lauren? Thank you so much in advance.

I like stone #1. The dimensions are bigger and I like the depth better. I don''t think the thin girdle will be a huge problem. Extremely thin would be a problem. Medium would be best, but sometimes it''s hard to find everything you want in a stone. I don'' t like the thick girdle and depth on stone #2. Have you seen pictures of these diamonds? It might be easier to judge them that way. Radiants can be bought by the numbers, but each of them look completely different, and it would be easier to tell your preference if you can see the stones themselves or at least pictures of them.

I haven''t seen pictures of any of these two diamonds. They are not in their stock, so they don''t have actual pictures of them. I agree with you though about stone #1. We are going to call Dirt Cheap about the first one tomorrow. Thanks for your help.

 

[eks6426]

Thanks to scintilating for posting my rings pics.

Just an FYI for you. My rings are the petite princess 3-sided pave rings. My stone is 1.20 carats and I though the smaller, more delicate rings would look better since we spent the money on Michael B rather than on the center stone. (I know, not what most people do on this forum, but I really loved the Micheal B setting--nothing else compared so I had to choose.) I also have the matching wedding band.

It was a couple thousand cheaper to go with the Petite Princess rather than the regular Princess.

 

[radiantgirl]

Just an update: We decided to go with Stone #1 from Dirt Cheap Diamonds. I was a little uneasy about purchasing over the internet, but the experience was wonderful. Dirt Cheap was great to work with, and I highly recommend them. We ordered the diamond yesterday, and it came in today. it is just beautiful! It''s as white as can be, a perfect square shape, and most importantly, sparkles like crazy. The symmetry is good, but yet it has a bit of the "crushed ice look" that I love about the radiant. We are going to keep the stone and send it off to the jewelry store where we purchased the Michael B. setting. They will ship it directly to Michael B. to have him set the diamond on the setting that they are working on. I''m so excited to see the finished product. Pictures will come when I get the actual proposal and get to wear the ring!

 

[coda72]

I''m glad you liked the stone. Radiants are better judged in person. Please post pictures when you get the final product!