Seriously thinking about getting my diamond reset.

[peonygirl]

Hey guys! I have a 2.3 mm shared prong diamond band with a 1.23 center stone (four prong setting) and a matching wedding ring. I''m seriously thinking about switching my e-ring setting for the Superbcert Tiffany replica because I''d like my center stone to stand out a little more. Also, I''d like slightly more "graceful" prongs holding up my diamond.

I''ve been married for just over a year and I still feel like getting a plainer band, so I guess the feeling isn''t going to go away. I was just wondering if anyone has made a similar switch and how they feel about it. I would eventually like to get a bigger center stone (about 2 carats) in about 5-10 years, but I love my wedding ring and would never change that.

I also need to broach the topic with my DH, and I''m concerned that he''ll be disappointed. However, I know that he just wants me to be happy, and I was the one who originally chose the setting, so it''s not as if I dislike his "vision" for the ring.

Any feedback would be much appreciated! I also have two questions: will I need to get a platinum setting since my wedding ring is platinum? I prefer the look and price of white gold, but I don''t want my wedding band scratching my e-ring. Also, will the plainer band make my center stone look a bit bigger? I''m sure it won''t make it look a ton bigger, but it couldn''t hurt to make it look a touch bigger. Thanks!

 

[Bliss]

Hi peonygirl!

We''re headed in opposite directions! I have a plain solitaire and am in the process of getting it reset to either a shared prong setting like yours or a delicate halo setting.

I think the solitaire setting will make your stone POP, but as for making it look bigger... I''m not quite sure, unless you get a super high cathedral setting (which can catch on things!).

I''m wondering if my stone will pop less now if I go for a shared prong setting.

Your diamond is a good size -- did you feel like it was getting lost in the setting? I felt that way when I tried on wedding bands with stones that were bigger than .3 each. My center stone got lost in all the bling. More bling yes, but it all blended in.

For a pop, definitely a solitaire will do that! As for bigger, I''m not sure. Maybe it will look bigger because it will stand out more. But you might miss the glimmer of the setting! I''d be interested to hear what others say about making the switch!

 

[shortee78]

Hi Peony (I love peonies btw, used them for my bridal bouquet!).

I am also thinking about going for a simple elegant solitaire setting for my engagement upgrade (but unfortunately that won''t happen for another 6 years, LOL). I currently have a pave knife-edge e-ring and long for something really simple.

I''m not sure if the solitaire setting will make your center stone appear larger. It might help if the band itself was thinner (more contrast between diamond diameter and band) than your current setting. Another thought that I had was that if you do plan on upgrading to a larger size in 5-10 years, maybe you can get a solitaire setting now that can hold a larger diamond in the future (so that you won''t have so many extra settings laying around ^_^).

Good luck!

 

[Bliss]

WAAAAAA!!!

Why are all you ladies with your gorgeous settings reverting to the simple solitaire?

Will I, too, regret going for a blingier setting?

shortee, your setting is STUNNING. Why oh why would you want to leave the land of bling?

 

[angel777]

I had a 4 prong shared-prong setting and I reset my diamond into a 6-prong vatche royal crown.
I definitely adore the 6 prongs, and feel like yes the stone does pop more and it does look a little bigger too.
I think this is due to 6 prongs and the illusion of the stone being more round, with 4 prongs my stone looked a little square.
Royal crown also tapers at the top, so I think that helps the diamond pop too.

I do love 6 prong settings and wish there were stock shared-prong settings that came with 6 prong head, vs. four bulky ucky prongs.

I am converting my shared-prong setting into a wedding band; it’s a simple matter of unsutering the head and adding another diamond.

Make sure you look at all 6-prong solitaire options, there are plenty of beautiful ones by Mark Morrell and Leon and various designers.

 

[shortee78]

Date: 6/16/2008 1:10:41 PM
Author: Bliss
WAAAAAA!!!


Why are all you ladies with your gorgeous settings reverting to the simple solitaire?


Will I, too, regret going for a blingier setting?

shortee, your setting is STUNNING. Why oh why would you want to leave the land of bling?

I think we all long for what we don''t have. I long for simplicity and elegance (which YOU have!!!). But of course, knowing me, once I get that simple look, I''ll start thinking about greener pastures again and want my bling back!! Guess it''s good I have 6 more years to think about my setting, LOL.

 

[shortee78]

Date: 6/16/2008 1:13:24 PM
Author: angel777
I had a 4 prong shared-prong setting and I reset my diamond into a 6-prong vatche royal crown.

I definitely adore the 6 prongs, and feel like yes the stone does pop more and it does look a little bigger too.

I think this is due to 6 prongs and the illusion of the stone being more round, with 4 prongs my stone looked a little square.

Royal crown also tapers at the top, so I think that helps the diamond pop too.

I do love 6 prong settings and wish there were stock shared-prong settings that came with 6 prong head, vs. four bulky ucky prongs.

I am converting my shared-prong setting into a wedding band; it’s a simple matter of unsutering the head and adding another diamond.


Make sure you look at all 6-prong solitaire options, there are plenty of beautiful ones by Mark Morrell and Leon and various designers.

Hi angel777, I have 4 prongs right now, and you are totally right - sometimes my diamond looks more square than round That''s why I plan on going with a 6 prong look for my upgrade.

 

[Bliss]

shortee, your setting IS simple and elegant!

It's simple and elegant WITH subtle bling... it's so classy. What u talkin' about, Willis?

Well, I guess the good thing about having a plain plat solitaire on standby is, I can always use it again should the urge arise to change. Wish our settings were "pop out" like earring jackets or paper dolls. Wouldn't that be divine?

On the prong front, I do think 6 prongs help a diamond look slightly larger. My friend has a 4 prong and it looks smaller from the side and also sliiiiightly from the top. So strange, but true! Men seem to like the 4 prong setting (mine did) because you can see more of the diamond. I wanted more security.

 

[peonygirl]

Yep, that''s exactly what I mean, pop! So not necessarily look bigger.

 

[peonygirl]

Does anyone happen to know the answer to my white gold/platinum question? Thanks!!

 

[Lynn B]

I have a thin pave setting, and am hankering BAD for a plain shank, simple solitaire by Leon... but at this point, I just can''t justify changing my setting, which I do still dearly LOVE!

I think the poster who said we always seem to long for what we do not have is spot on! At least for me, and I admit it. It''s not my best quality... but thank goodness it only seems to happen in JEWELRY, and not really anywhere else IRL!

 

[Bliss]

Lynn B!!!!!!

No, she di''int!!!!!!

I LOVE YOUR SETTING! It''s one of my all time favorites. It''s so gorgeous AND simple AND blingy AND classic.

WHAAAAAA? Well, maybe if you got a simple platinum setting you can kind of switch them up from time to time. Although, the risk of chipping while setting is somewhat worrisome. I wish we could snap them in and out of settings!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 6/19/2008 12:16:50 PM
Author: Bliss
Lynn B!!!!!!

No, she di''int!!!!!!

I LOVE YOUR SETTING! It''s one of my all time favorites. It''s so gorgeous AND simple AND blingy AND classic.

WHAAAAAA? Well, maybe if you got a simple platinum setting you can kind of switch them up from time to time. Although, the risk of chipping while setting is somewhat worrisome. I wish we could snap them in and out of settings!

Haha, Bliss, your post made me smile!

I know, it almost sounds sacreligious, huh?! Well, believe me, it is not happening ANY TIME SOON... (if ever!)... but OH! I do look at some of those Leon solitaires and think, "Oh, me really LIKEY that!!!!" But I also do still LOVE LOVE LOVE my gorgeous setting. It''s holding up perfectly, and still looks beautiful.

So... *sigh*! Until the industry perfects the *snap-in, snap-out* settings, I''m afraid girls like me will always be peeking over the fence juuuuuuuuust wondering if the grass is maybe a little greener over there!

 

[Bliss]

Lynn!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

Whew! I am sooooo glad you are not resetting your gorgeous stone because your current setting is a WORK OF ART. ART. I love Leons, too. But yours supercedes the Leon. It''s so special. I just love it. It''s the most incredible thing. And it DOES make your diamond POP so much. You get the glimmer and then the POP. POW BAM! The super fine, delicate diamond band just makes your center THAT MUCH MORE COMMANDING. And the head! It''s so graceful.

OMG. I''ve gone off the deep end! But when the greatest settings of all time are exchanged for simple settings, what will us girls have to dream about??? Give us something to aspire to, will ya?

 

[angeline]

Bliss I have bad news for you..

I have a halo, 3-sided pave by Maytal and all I can think about is a plain jane Tiff replica.

To try to answer the OP, I feel like my diamond gets lost in all the sparkle. That might be the halo though, I can''t see the center as clearly.

I think with the plain shiny band the eye just rests on the center. With more sparkles the eye is whizzing back and forth, trying to take all the sparkle in.

Just my .02c

 

[Bliss]

Angeline....NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really? I don't believe it!

Really??????

I'm soooo going to look up your ring... Wow, a Maytal? I love her halos. They are so delicate and gorgeous. REALLY?????? You're going from gorgeous sparkly halo to a simpler design?

I was in the diamond district and the vendors were all discouraging me from getting a halo or blingy setting. You'd think they would try to sell me a setting, but no! They said the focus should be on the Hero.

AAAAAAAAAAA! I'm in the process of resetting! Will I, too, succumb to a longing for my old classic setting?

 

[Bliss]

Date: 6/19/2008 6:55:42 PM
Author: angeline
Bliss I have bad news for you..

I have a halo, 3-sided pave by Maytal and all I can think about is a plain jane Tiff replica.

To try to answer the OP, I feel like my diamond gets lost in all the sparkle. That might be the halo though, I can''t see the center as clearly.

I think with the plain shiny band the eye just rests on the center. With more sparkles the eye is whizzing back and forth, trying to take all the sparkle in.

Just my .02c

Angeline.... I am stunned. I LOVE YOUR RING!

Yours is the one I bookmarked and saved to my computer. Mine is going to be VERY similar to yours, only just a little closer to the Legacy design.

ARE YOU SURE YOU''RE CRAVING A SIMPLE SOLITAIRE SETTING?

I think your stone looks HUGE in the setting and I mean that in a STUNNING way.

Wow, does this happen to all halo owners? The halos I tried on all had very delicate halos. So it emphasized the beauty of the stone. I tried on a .9 carat legacy design -- and the proportions were such that it emphasized the stone and made it look bigger & yummier. So I can only imagine what that would do for a 2+ carat rock. Mine has the spread of a 3c so I''m thinking with the right proportions, it will subtly enhance the stone, not detract from it.

I LOVE YOUR RING!

It''s GORGEOUS!

 

[Odilia]

Date: 6/18/2008 10:10:01 PM
Author: peonygirl
Does anyone happen to know the answer to my white gold/platinum question? Thanks!!

I really can't say for sure, although I know folks who wear both (i.e. plat. next to WG wedding set). Since the one band would be diamonds and the other plain metal, it probably would look fine. You might try on some WG settings at stores to see. Also, since you asked about it scratching, my understanding is that platinum actually scratches more easily, so maybe you'd be better off w/ WG? Although I'm no expert, and after the past few months I hear so many conflicting stories on jewelry etc.. that I give up on it all....

 

[Odilia]

Date: 6/16/2008 1:10:41 PM
Author: Bliss
WAAAAAA!!!


Why are all you ladies with your gorgeous settings reverting to the simple solitaire?


Will I, too, regret going for a blingier setting?

shortee, your setting is STUNNING. Why oh why would you want to leave the land of bling?

Ha, this is funny because in a way that is what I am doing as well, although my situation is weird. But my engagement diamond is going back into a solitaire setting, after I just spent 3 years on PS and a lot of time & money to have it set in a blingy setting. I am switching back for other reasons, but it is good to hear others appreciating the simplicity of solitaires. I just wish my solitaire setting were prettier, but I don''t feel like spending close to $1000 for a new one, when I can just get a new head on my old shank for $175.

 

[Odilia]

Date: 6/19/2008 3:08:07 PM
Author: Lynn B

Date: 6/19/2008 12:16:50 PM

Author: Bliss

Lynn B!!!!!!


No, she di''int!!!!!!

I LOVE YOUR SETTING! It''s one of my all time favorites. It''s so gorgeous AND simple AND blingy AND classic.


WHAAAAAA? Well, maybe if you got a simple platinum setting you can kind of switch them up from time to time. Although, the risk of chipping while setting is somewhat worrisome. I wish we could snap them in and out of settings!

Haha, Bliss, your post made me smile!


I know, it almost sounds sacreligious, huh?! Well, believe me, it is not happening ANY TIME SOON... (if ever!)... but OH! I do look at some of those Leon solitaires and think, ''Oh, me really LIKEY that!!!!'' But I also do still LOVE LOVE LOVE my gorgeous setting. It''s holding up perfectly, and still looks beautiful.


So... *sigh*! Until the industry perfects the *snap-in, snap-out* settings, I''m afraid girls like me will always be peeking over the fence juuuuuuuuust wondering if the grass is maybe a little greener over there!

Lynn, I love your setting as well! But in a strange way it makes me happy to hear that even someone with as perfect a set as you still "peeks over the fence" etc. I kinda know what you mean, because when I looked for a good setting to match my wedding band a few years ago, I couldn''t find a setting but found a ring at an antique shop. It just has the tiniest little melee & carving, so that, although from a distance it looks like a solitaire, it doesn''t have the "clean look" of a solitaire. While searching for my reset, I would switch back & forth from the antique to the plain solitaire. And there is something nice about switching -even though the looks are so similar, probably nobody but me notices they''re different. Well, anyway, I guess I am going back to the "switching" again, since my reset didn''t work out. I guess it''ll have to be the next best thing to "snap-in, snap-out" - which I always did wish they could make!!!

 

[angeline]

Date: 6/20/2008 2:16:15 PM
Author: Bliss

Date: 6/19/2008 6:55:42 PM

Author: angeline

Bliss I have bad news for you..

I have a halo, 3-sided pave by Maytal and all I can think about is a plain jane Tiff replica.


To try to answer the OP, I feel like my diamond gets lost in all the sparkle. That might be the halo though, I can''t see the center as clearly.


I think with the plain shiny band the eye just rests on the center. With more sparkles the eye is whizzing back and forth, trying to take all the sparkle in.


Just my .02c

Angeline.... I am stunned. I LOVE YOUR RING!


Yours is the one I bookmarked and saved to my computer. Mine is going to be VERY similar to yours, only just a little closer to the Legacy design.


ARE YOU SURE YOU''RE CRAVING A SIMPLE SOLITAIRE SETTING?


I think your stone looks HUGE in the setting and I mean that in a STUNNING way.


Wow, does this happen to all halo owners? The halos I tried on all had very delicate halos. So it emphasized the beauty of the stone. I tried on a .9 carat legacy design -- and the proportions were such that it emphasized the stone and made it look bigger & yummier. So I can only imagine what that would do for a 2+ carat rock. Mine has the spread of a 3c so I''m thinking with the right proportions, it will subtly enhance the stone, not detract from it.


I LOVE YOUR RING!


It''s GORGEOUS!

*blush* my ring and I thank you for your kind words! I think there was not the definition of the center that I wanted. Like I think that a colored stone, or putting the center in a bezel would have provided that. Also there is a milgrain edge around the outside of the halo so the halo actually looks kind of large to me, not so delicate. I mean it is beautiful, and the setting sure won''t go to waste, but I would love to just see my center in all it''s glory kwim?

But it''s different for everyone, maybe a halo is YOU!

I must go check out all your threads now, 3ct.. mmmm ...*scurries off*

 

[Bliss]

Angeline!

But I love that part of your ring!

I really love how it's so razor crissp around the edge and not bumpy with stones. It's just crisp. And delicate! Of course the halo is large in diameter! Your ROCK is LAAAAARGE! LOLOLOL. But the halo itself isn't large, it's perfect.

And I think you can CLEARLY see there is a LARGE stone inside the halo! That's the FIRST thing you see. Ahhh, impressively big rock! Wow, then you see the setting. Of COURSE you will see lots of sparkles! As my friend would say, ".....CHA." LOL.

I love love love the Maytal and was even considering it myself. It was in my Dream E-Ring Folder. At the top!

ETA: You know, allycat's ring was also in my dream e-ring folder. She also mentioned the same thing: that she wished her center stone stood out more instead of looking like a blur of bling. Someone once said it looked like a cluster ring? (SO NOT TRUE, clearly that person was blind!) But I wonder...

Some designers say NO airline. Some say yes to airline because it differentiates the stone. Ditto on milgraining around the center stone. Some say it shouldn't be there, others say it should and makes the center stand out.

Aaaaaaaa.....

Any thoughts???

 

[facetgirl]

Bliss,

I am a long time lurker.....I upgraded last summer and Pricescope was a tremendous help to me.

I recently have been coming back to the site as I am looking for ideas for a pendant or RHR...and your avatar caught my eye. I feel that your ring is simply stunning.

Probably not want you wanted to hear, but I must say, after seeing it, I thought "Now why didn''t I do something like that when I changed my setting?".

STUNNING.......having said that, I am sure your new setting will be equaly beautiful.

 

[Bliss]

facetgirl, THANK YOU!

And AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRR! Really? Maybe I should not reset. Actually, I will just keep my plain setting in case I ever want to change back. Poor FI!

Thank you for the very sincere and warm compliments.

May I ask what your setting is now? Is it a halo?

TGIF!

 

[angeline]

Date: 6/20/2008 5:38:43 PM
Author: Bliss
Angeline!

But I love that part of your ring!

I really love how it''s so razor crissp around the edge and not bumpy with stones. It''s just crisp. And delicate! Of course the halo is large in diameter! Your ROCK is LAAAAARGE! LOLOLOL. But the halo itself isn''t large, it''s perfect.


And I think you can CLEARLY see there is a LARGE stone inside the halo! That''s the FIRST thing you see. Ahhh, impressively big rock! Wow, then you see the setting. Of COURSE you will see lots of sparkles! As my friend would say, ''.....CHA.'' LOL.


I love love love the Maytal and was even considering it myself. It was in my Dream E-Ring Folder. At the top!


ETA: You know, allycat''s ring was also in my dream e-ring folder. She also mentioned the same thing: that she wished her center stone stood out more instead of looking like a blur of bling. Someone once said it looked like a cluster ring? (SO NOT TRUE, clearly that person was blind!) But I wonder...


Some designers say NO airline. Some say yes to airline because it differentiates the stone. Ditto on milgraining around the center stone. Some say it shouldn''t be there, others say it should and makes the center stand out.


Aaaaaaaa.....

Any thoughts???

I was all about a bezel halo initially because I wanted the center to stand out. Then for some strange reason I changed my mind. The good thing about the prongs is that I can reset another stone into it fairly easily. I think taking a stone out of the bezel would require a lot more work to repair and replace with another stone.

I should mention that I had a plain X-prong type Mark Morrell before this and went the other direction entirely. I am thinking that maybe I will settle in the middle with no halo but one-sided pave shank maybe. Better get it right soon, I could have upgraded my stone with the setting costs. Trouble is I just love everything! Seriously considered tension set too for a while. Oh and don''t get me started on Van Craeynest! sigh...

I just adore your ring, I have it saved to MY favourites folder! (acme prongs and all!) Simple, classic, understated look that screams class to me.

Anyway I should probably have posted this on your halo thread...

a

 

[facetgirl]

Bliss,

I have a 3 stone ring- its beautiful and simple, I love it, but I do see how my center stone kinda gets lost with the other stones though.

On the flip side, while I think solitaires are beautiful and timeless, they just weren''t for me (I''ve always had my heart on a 3 stone ring.) Your ring though, opened up my eyes to how really beautiful solitaires can be (and now I can see why Peonygirl wants one!)

I will tell you that a good friend of mine recently went from a solitaire to a halo (Tacori I beleive), and her new ring is exquisite. Her diamond looks amazing (it brings new life to her stone if that''s possible). She has no regrets whatsoever.

I''m not helping either of you....am I. It''s such a personal decision...and probably the one signature piece of jewelry that you get to look at everyday. I say as long as your DH''s are OK with it, go with what your heart tells you and don''t look back

 

[kcoursolle]

I do think a plainer shank with a flowy head will help your stone pop more. I love the look of plain settings with shared prong bands, so please keep your wedding band instead of switching that to plain too! You will probably have to go platinum to avoid the rubbing issue, but best to ask the jeweler who is going to make your new ring. I would also keep the new setting thin to help the stone pop even more.

Personally, I think if the hubby is on board and you''ve thought about it for a while then I say go for it! However, I agree with others who say that sometimes we just want change, or a new ring, etc. even when the old one is fine. If this fits you, then I would give yourself some kind of limit as to how long you will keep the new setting before changing something again.

 

[sna77]

My FI switched her setting to the SC Tiffany replica... And she couldn''t be happier... and I couldn''t care less that its not the one I origianlly purchased--after all, I want her to be happy with it--thats all that matters...

Anyhow, if your wedding band is platinum, definitely get the platinum e-ring. They will match much better together, pluys the platinum will hold up better when they are next to each other... Also, the cost difference is only a few hundred $ so it is totally worth it...

 

[butterfly 17]

Have you considered the WF Tiffany version. They redesigned it about a year ago and it looks very similar to the real T&Co. one.

I just got my new diamond and I had it set into that setting temp. until I could decide on a permanent one. I got mine in 18kt white gold since it is only temp.

I was at Mohegan Sun last weekend and I wore it with my T&Co. shared prong wedding band and they really could not tell the difference. They thought it was one of theirs, offered to clean it for me and when I mentioned it was not from Tiffany''s, they could not believe it.

It looks very very similar and I do have a real T&Co. engagement ring, smaller of course, and the only difference I can see is the donut is a litter higher in the Tiffany one and the prongs are more pronounced in the Tiffany one as well. The prongs in the WF one are smaller and pointier, which I actually prefer anyway.

 

[sna77]

Date: 6/21/2008 9:53:27 AM
Author: butterfly 17
Have you considered the WF Tiffany version. They redesigned it about a year ago and it looks very similar to the real T&Co. one.

I just got my new diamond and I had it set into that setting temp. until I could decide on a permanent one. I got mine in 18kt white gold since it is only temp.

I was at Mohegan Sun last weekend and I wore it with my T&Co. shared prong wedding band and they really could not tell the difference. They thought it was one of theirs, offered to clean it for me and when I mentioned it was not from Tiffany''s, they could not believe it.

It looks very very similar and I do have a real T&Co. engagement ring, smaller of course, and the only difference I can see is the donut is a litter higher in the Tiffany one and the prongs are more pronounced in the Tiffany one as well. The prongs in the WF one are smaller and pointier, which I actually prefer anyway.

I have had both the WF T&C replica and the SuperbCert one.. The WF one is very nice, but the SC one is a much better replica... It is custom made and hand made (like the T&C one). The WF one uses a universal basket... Search my u/n for pics comparing both...