Ritani or Michael B.?

[ChapmanLovesHarvard]

Hi all! I have had my eye on pave rings for a while (after seeing all of your wonderful rings.) Specifically I have had my eye on the Michael B. single pave ring http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/Product.asp?DesignerID=18&ItemTypeID=1&ItemID=325&start=6. And the Ritani micro pave from the endless love collection. http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/Product.asp?DesignerID=53&ItemTypeID=1&ItemID=2981&start=6.

I respect all of your opinions so much and I would love to know the pros and cons of these rings, or any reason you all think I should lean towards one rather than the other. I think both of these rings are amazing and I would really just love to get a second opinion.

Thanks all!

 

[sevens one]

Here''s Ivanadiamond''s 1.63 G SI1 Michael B setting.
Ring Size 4.5

link

 

[sevens one]

Here''s tba''s 1.3 H SI1 Ritani
link

 

[sevens one]

Here''s Kayla17''''s Ritani 2.03 G VS1

link

 

[ChapmanLovesHarvard]

Thanks so much. I am in love with all of these rings. Does anyone know if Michael B. has a web site? I know there are websites that sell the rings, but does he have a website?

Thanks

 

[fortheloveofdiamonds]

CLH:

www.michaelbjewelry.com

Go for the Michael B.!! you won''t regret it!

 

[aeli]

Oooohhhh...I''ve been looking at those two rings too. Just a quick question, since I don''t have a Michael B retailer close by - does anyone know if the band on the Michael B is any wider than the Ritani? I saw the Ritani in person and tried it on, but the band is just a little too thin for my taste. I still love the look of a delicate, dainty ring, though.

 

[twinkletoes]

i personally like michael b - it''s 2 mm wide.

 

[jaysonsmom]

If price is no issue, then I''d go with Michael B, but if it is, you''ll find that Ritani''s are less expensive. The quality of Michael B settings seem to be impeccable, where as I''ve heard, and personally experienced less than perfection from Ritani. I have Ritani setting with .60 bead set sidestones, and a circle of tiny bead set "halo" around the prongs. My 1.50ct was set kind of crooked in the prongs, and when I asked my jeweler about it, they said that the "halo" part of my setting was a little lopsided, making it hard for the diamond to be set straight.

 

[Mara]

one comment regarding both styles, i love both settings, but i have never been in love with the MB head, it''s too tiffany solitaire knife edgey replica for my taste, while ritani''s seems to be more inline with the fluidity of the rest of the band and more unique.

splitting hairs, i adore both settings but i do recall from the first time i tried on the MB setting a few years back that i didn''t LOVE the head.

 

[ringbling17]

Well, having purchased the Ritani ring, I have to say the Ritani, of course, but the Michael B is beautiful also.

I chose the Ritani because I really liked the side profile, I loved the basket head and the added pave diamonds in the basket. The Michael B. is a peg head, and I just didn''t like the way it sat.
I always liked rings where the head is incorporated into the rest of the ring.

Having said that, I do like the fact that the Michael B is a bit thicker and the diamonds are a little bit larger overall.

At the same time, I think the thinness of the Ritani rings is perfect because with the three rings I have (e-ring and two wedding bands), they measure about 5 to 5.5 mm, so to be any wider would look too fat on my fingers.

As far as budget, my original budget was >$6K and I still chose the cheaper one because for me it was the best one.

Lastly, I think that whichever one you choose, definitely have the company set it. I had a terrible experience when my jeweler tried to set my diamond, likewise, there have been people who purchased Michael B settings that had a problem as well (do a search on Beowulf33).

Actually, I think that there hasn''t been one company on pricescope that has not been knocked for some poor quality/setting/workmanship at some time or another.

Let''s face it, there are going to be fans of both rings, so it''s really you that has to love your ring. It could be that going the custom route is the best way for you.

 

[aeli]

Thanks Kayla! Seeing your ring is actually what prompted me to see it in person. The basket is my favorite part - it''s what sets it apart from similar rings. I''ve never seen the Michael B in person, but the head was the main thing steering me away from it.

 

[fortheloveofdiamonds]

Date: 1/19/2005 1:49:38 PM
Author: Mara
one comment regarding both styles, i love both settings, but i have never been in love with the MB head, it''s too tiffany solitaire knife edgey replica for my taste, while ritani''s seems to be more inline with the fluidity of the rest of the band and more unique.


splitting hairs, i adore both settings but i do recall from the first time i tried on the MB setting a few years back that i didn''t LOVE the head.

It is so real that it is a personal choice. Unlike Mara, I LOVE the Michael B. head. It is perfect for my taste. So therefore, make sure you look at both of them and decide.

 

[ChapmanLovesHarvard]

Thanks for all of the advice. I really think I need to see the Michael B. setting in person. I have tried on the ritani 4 or 5 times (they probably know my name at BB&B by now!) I also saw a setting that was similar to both the Michael B. and the Ritani at a store called Nathan Alan Jewelers at South Coast Plaza. It was about .37 of diamonds around the ring and it had diamonds on the posts as well. It was about $2,800 for white gold, but they said they could do it in platinum for about $800 more. It is really amazing.

 

[SJS1234]

I am crazy in love with this Michael B. setting and have posted some information on different threads about it. I also REALLY wanted to see it in person, but no jeweler in town had one. Bill Pearlman at pearlmansjewlers.com overnighted it to me last week so I could play with it and I AM IN LOVE!

This thread has a lot of info on that setting -- scroll down and see where I outlined the details and options. Notice -- you can get the princess setting in either 2.0 OR 2.2 mm

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/the-quest-to-find-my-dream-ring-setting.23979/

 

[cello]

This is the same Princess MB ring that I just received and posted about. This is a side view that was taken before it arrived. I was excited when I saw it, but when i came down and I saw it in person I was blown away!!

 

[cello]

 

[fortheloveofdiamonds]

It is a beauty Cello!!!!!!!! Congrats!

 

[onedrop]

Cello: That ring is just GORGEOUS! I am glad that you posted a pic of the side profile of the Michael B setting. I love that one too. I vote for the Michael B!!!

 

[psuheather]

Like most everyone else has pointed out, choosing your setting is really such a personal thing. I have decided on the Ritani for myself. One of the things that I really loved about it was how, despite the four prong setting, the diamond really maintained its round appearance. While I love the Michael B. setting, the shape and position of the prongs, in my opinion, give the diamond somewhat of a squarish appearance. I personally prefer a round stone, so it was a priority to me to choose a setting that showcased that circular shape. However, both settings are absolutely gorgeous, so just follow your heart! With these two options, you can''t really go wrong!

 

[fortheloveofdiamonds]

Yup! PSUheather is correct! I went with the Michael B. because it did give my stone a "squarish" appearance. When I began my search for the upgrade diamond, I wanted a square shaped diamond!! However, my husband wanted a round. Then, when I began educating myself..a round was a better choice for me as well...but I still wanted it to look a little square...the Michael B. was perfect for that.

Psuheather is great to point this out to you. Do you want your rb round looking or square looking? The answer to that question might provide help with your dillema!

 

[Demelza]

Here''s one more consideration. If the Michael B actually is a peg-head (I''m not sure that it is) and could easily be changed out, you wouldn''t have to get a new setting should you ever want to upgrade your stone. I don''t know that you would want to, but it''s just a thought.

 

[sdunique]

CLH-
what did you decide??? I''m going through the same exact dilema

I''m so confused... don''t know which to pick. let me know what and how you decided. thanks so much.

 

[mrssalvo]

sdunique,
Have you seen any of these settings in person? many times rings look different in person or actually on your hand and that can help in you decision making process.

 

[mepearl53]

Let me shed some light on the Michael B. prong style. The head and ring are handmade and not a peg. You have a choice of prong styles also. If you like his classic pointed tip the style should use the squared prongs. If you would like a rounded tip he also can round the prongs. Discuss with your jeweler the different options available and have them call Michael B to make sure you and they understand all of the options available. As for the person who had the crooked Ritani head your jeweler should send that back to Ritani and have it corrected.

 

[TheDiamondangel]

I would suggest you try on several styles of micropave rings before deciding on one to purchase. Some women (such as myself) cannot STAND the feeling of the rough shank against their fingers, and yet others have no problem with it. You should also take into consideration how much abuse your ring will take on a daily basis.

 

[kbaker]

I bought the Ritani endless love collection and COULDN''T BE HAPPIER. I love, love it. I feel like I have carpel tunnel syndrome from looking at it so much!
So, my vote is for the Ritani because of the pave in the setting mount. Several co-workers have commented on that. I have a .95 princess , F color in in and it looks fab----------of course I wish it was bigger, but you know...............

PSU Heather, what year did you graduate?

 

[MelissaSue]

I personally like the Michael B a bit better. I like the style of pave better.. and I like the way the stone is set better as well. It looks like it shows off the stone better.