Returning a ring; I simply don't like it

[ladybugkd03]

I am wondering what everyone thinks of returning a ring plus diamond because I simply don't like it. It is from a reputable online retailer and I got it and I just don't like it. I didn't receive pictures until I got the shipping confirmation.

 

[nicoleanne]

What don't you like about it? Is the problem with the stone or setting?

 

[distracts]

If you're within the return policy, just return it.

 

[kenny]

I am wondering what everyone thinks of returning a ring plus diamond because I simply don't like it. It is from a reputable online retailer and I got it and I just don't like it. I didn't receive pictures until I got the shipping confirmation.

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks except for you and the vendor's return policy, which you should re-read carefully.
I'd even print it out now, just in case it changes when the vendor reads this thread.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yes, of course you can return it (if there is a return policy). But I'd also be interested to know what you did not like, the diamond or the setting.

 

[ladybugkd03]

It's mostly the setting. The setting is much, much smaller than in the pictures and it makes the whole ring look very, very fake.

 

[junebug17]

Is this the 2.59 in the Elegance setting from BGD you mentioned in another thread? I would think it would be so pretty...but certainly you should return it if you don't like it. Maybe you could choose a different setting?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Well you don't have to return the diamond just because you don't like the setting. Many here favor delicate solitaires to make the center stone stand out and look larger. I don't think they look fake at all. Actually, I currently have a thin solitaire setting and so do many people on the forum. But it is absolutely fine if you prefer a heavier setting! So return it and get a better setting! The size of your stone is great!

 

[SB621]

Well you don't have to return the diamond just because you don't like the setting. Many here favor delicate solitaires to make the center stone stand out and look larger. I don't think they look fake at all. Actually, I currently have a thin solitaire setting and so do many people on the forum. But it is absolutely fine if you prefer a heavier setting! So return it and get a better setting! The size of your stone is great!

++1

 

[msop04]

Simply return it and get a setting you like better. Vendors get returns all the time -- they would much rather you return it to get something you'll love than be unsatisfied with their product.

 

[distracts]

It's mostly the setting. The setting is much, much smaller than in the pictures and it makes the whole ring look very, very fake.

It's important to remember that the stone size and ring size in the sample pictures are often not the same as yours will be. In this case, both are much smaller. The Elegance is 2.2mm wide on the top and 2.7 on the bottom, so you're looking for something thicker than that for your next setting.

Here are two settings BGD sells that have 3mm bands, if that would be thick enough:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/cathedral-solitaire-18k-white-gold-5550w18
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/nora-sholdt-platinum-5770p
Remember they won't look as wide with your diamond, which is much bigger than the example diamonds, which appear to be 1-1.5 carats.

However before making any choices I think you should go try on settings, find ones you like, and find out the measurements of them, so you can be sure to do it right this time. I think this is your second ring return, so I bet you're really anxious to get the right one next time!

 

[ladybugkd03]

I decided to return the whole thing. The sparkle factor is very high but there are some very obvious dark spots in a lot of different kinds of lighting.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Was it a virtual stone and not a Brian Gavin Signature or Blue stone? Because honestly, if I was buying from Brian, the whole reason I'd do so would be to buy a stone that he had specially cut for his line. It's worth it to get a superior cut diamond!

 

[BhavinJ]

I believe that online stores should start keeping replicas of each of their design so that one can pay a nominal amount and order the replica's of their choice and then take the decisions wisely. This would surely solve such kinda problems.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Was it a signature H&A stone form them? If yes, then the optics are about as good as you can get for a classic H&A. You may want to consider other types of cuts if you did not like the way the diamond looked.

 

[distracts]

Was it a signature H&A stone form them? If yes, then the optics are about as good as you can get for a classic H&A. You may want to consider other types of cuts if you did not like the way the diamond looked.

Yes, if you don't like a traditional brilliant cut but still want a diamond, perhaps consider a good radiant.

 

[msop04]

I decided to return the whole thing. The sparkle factor is very high but there are some very obvious dark spots in a lot of different kinds of lighting.

When you say "dark spots", so you mean like black carbon deposits or something else? The ASET looked good, so I'm confused...

Do you think you may like the faceting of another cut better than MRB?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Was it a signature H&A stone form them? If yes, then the optics are about as good as you can get for a classic H&A. You may want to consider other types of cuts if you did not like the way the diamond looked.

Yes, if you don't like a traditional brilliant cut but still want a diamond, perhaps consider a good radiant.

A radiant would not be my "go to" recommendation My suggestion would depend on what the OP disliked about the round she had. Another variety of MRB could do it -- a 60/60 type will favour brightness over fire and might stay brighter in more lighting, for example.

 

[bunnycat]

Was it a signature H&A stone form them? If yes, then the optics are about as good as you can get for a classic H&A. You may want to consider other types of cuts if you did not like the way the diamond looked.

I looked at the old thread on it. It was a BG Select rather than one of his boutique stones, for whatever that may mean. The optics could have been fine or maybe not so much. It seems fine from what I saw, though I could see some odd relics of possible inclusions in the IS image.