Should I give her an heirloom ring?

[Diamond*Dana]

It is set rather high...I think that I would have it reset prior to the proposal.

 

[tberube]

I agree with the peanut gallery - do a reset and present her with the ring. She''ll love it! I promise.

And now I apologize, I''m hijacking this thread....

Surfgirl - I love you because you''re such a great "momma hen" on this board. You''ve put me in my place once or twice, with good reason. I now no longer fail to read a thread before posting (unless I absolutely HAVE TO say something!)

Musey - well said. Just...well said.

MoonWater - I love the comment about the coffee. Very cute way to exit a verbal beating.

I love you PSers.....

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, that is not exactly an antique style setting. So I agree that it should not be the permanent setting. At this point, I really think since she is getting a stone that is not what she originally wanted, and this setting is not going to thrill her, I think you need to let her have input into the permanent setting. So you can spend a couple hundred dollars on a plain inexpensive Tiffany setting to propose with, or you can propose with that one and tell her right before she opens the box that the setting is not special and you want her to choose one that she loves for the heirloom stone.

 

[Chase035]

Moonwater: My point was merely to state that I find this unromantic. I'm not alone in my opinion. There are many people who give gifts who are offended when the recipient insists on getting a certain item. That's not the spirit of gift giving. Nor do I think it should be the spirit of proposals. In no way was I advocating the guy get her what HE WANTS to get her. I made this undeniably clear when I said "EXACTLY what she wants." If he can't get her something she'd pick out herself, he shouldn't try. At that point, he needs to hand over the reigns. There's no denying that. But if he can pour his heart into it and come close, she'd be selfish to insist on ruining the romance of that.


That's my position and I'm sticking to it.


ETA: It's no different when someone is buying me a gift. That's not to say I won't drop a few hints. But if I was going to insist on getting exactly what I want, I might as well go out and get it myself. At that point, I've ruined the spirit of it.

 

[clammer]

I think you should propose with the current setting, but print out some pictures of the different kinds of solitaires that are out there. Tell her that you wanted to make the decision together. I think the pictures would immediately let her know that you are ok with her changing out the setting and she wouldn''t feel like she should keep the original setting.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 11/6/2007 10:55:21 PM
Author: Chase035
Moonwater: My point was merely to state that I find this unromantic. I'm not alone in my opinion. There are many people who give gifts who are offended when the recipient insists on getting a certain item. That's not the spirit of gift giving. Nor do I think it should be the spirit of proposals. In no way was I advocating the guy get her what HE WANTS to get her. I made this undeniably clear when I said 'EXACTLY what she wants.' If he can't get her something she'd pick out herself, he shouldn't try. At that point, he needs to hand over the reigns. There's no denying that. But if he can pour his heart into it and come close, she'd be selfish to insist on ruining the romance of that.



That's my position and I'm sticking to it.



ETA: It's no different when someone is buying me a gift. That's not to say I won't drop a few hints. But if I was going to insist on getting exactly what I want, I might as well go out and get it myself. At that point, I've ruined the spirit of it.

You have since edited your post, which perhaps was wise. But you have a very odd view of what it means to give. You can claim that you simply think it is unromantic, however, the way you chose to phrase that view was insulting to others. Many think giving the option is thoughtful and finding out what a woman wants secretly is doable. Nothing more, nothing less. I will leave you with this and avoid hijacking the poor OP's thread:

"In Southeast Asia, many people are extremely fond of a large, thorny fruit called durian. You could even say they are addicted to it. Its smell is extremely strong, and when some people finish eating the fruit, they put the skin under their bed so they can continue to smell it To me, the smell of durian is horrible. One day when I was practicing chanting in my temple in Vietnam, there was a durian on the alter that had been offered to the Buddha. I was trying to recite the Lotus Sutra, using a wooden drum and a large bowl-shaped bell for accompaniment, but I could not concentrate at all. I finally carried the bell to the alter and turned it upside down to imprison the durian, so I could chant the sutra. After I finished, I bowed to the Buddha and liberated the durian. If you were to say to me, 'Thay, I love you so much I would like you to eat some of this durian,' I would suffer. You love me, you want me to be happy, but you force me to eat durian. That is an example of love without understanding. Your intention is good, but you don't have correct understanding." -THICH NHAT HANH

The spirit of giving is understanding the other person, not about how you feel about them asking (insisting) on getting what they would like to have.

Ta ta!

 

[Chase035]

Doesn''t an even deeper understanding involve being able to know what she''d want without asking. If you took the time to read what I originally said, instead of trying to bite my head off, you''d realize that I wasn''t doing anything more than warning that there are some hopeless romantics out there who don''t share your point of view.

Sorry OP, but the blog-nazi''s ticked me off. I''m done now.

 

[Elmorton]

I'm in the choose a fabulous (simple, as she requested) setting for that fabulous diamond camp, for these reasons:

1) Someone did mention that she said "Heirloom ring," not "stone," but I think to the average person, we think heirloom ring meaning vintage, filigree (right now, I'm picturing both of my grandmothers' beautiful rings that are extremely ornate). I'm not thinking "plain," and as you pointed out, "outdated" setting. So, that's why I assume that your fiancee-to-be won't mind if you update it prior to the proposal.

2)From your previous conversation with her, I'm guesing she's more than likely expecting a ring when you propose, so proposing without the ring or with a "work in progress" might be a disappointment to her. Even though DH and I chose my ring together (sheesh, I'm scared to mention that in this thread! Rrrrrrrrg..), I didn't know what it would really look like, since the sample setting in the store had a huge RB in it and I wanted a smaller EC. So, I had a pretty high level of anticipation. Currently, your intended knows that she's getting a family rock that she hasn't seen - SUPER exciting, but also, she's probably not sure of what to expect! So, back to my example...bummer of bummers when DH opened the ring box (and ohhhhh was I happy with my ring!), went to put it on my finger and it was sized wrong - a size too small. Of course, our jeweler did a rush on the resizing and I had it the next afternoon, AND it was nice to bask in together in our newly engaged bliss and not be distracted by my new bling (and yes, there was plenty of that later!), but...I was expecting to have the ring with the proposal (as DH was expecting to finally see it on my finger!) and we were both a little bummed about the mistake. There is the aspect of engagement that everyone asks the bride-to-be to see the ring right away, and it could be tedious to explain that the ring isn't ready. I know not everyone has issues with delayed rewards like I do, but...I want to think that most women would want to wear the ring right away, especially if there has been some kind of build-up...and that's the main reason why I think it should be re-set prior to the proposal.

3)Also...I think that's a gorgeous stone, but for me, the current setting really takes over. I'd set it in something that shows the sparkler off rather than hides its beauty. It seems like the general reaction from the peanut gallery (myself included) was "Oh..." when we saw the setting. That shouldn't be her response, too! It IS simple, but your description of the setting is pretty accurate, I think. Wow her!

Just my .02, hope it helps!


P.S. Kudos to you for being a trooper and putting up with all the crud on your thread!

ETA: Earlier, there were quite a few mentions of doing a square halo...if she wants a plain setting, I wouldn't do that. I think to most people, "plain" means no sidestones, halos, etc. Several people also mentioned a tiffany setting - you really can't get more classic than that - AND there's all sorts of things you can do with wedding bands, wraps, etc - lots of versatility. Doing a knife-edge or surprise stone at the basket could add a little flair to the setting but still keep it classic as well.

 

[sera]

Since she wants the heirloom- I might go with one of these options:

Present it to her reset as she will always wear it, the Tiffany style is probably the safest. If I recall from the post, didn''t she say she wanted a Tiffany setting?

Present it as is. She said she wants simple, so maybe she would want the very simple 6 prong setting or maybe a bit more fluid/stylized like a Mark Morrel or maybe being an heirloom, maybe she would change her mind and want a more antique-y look, especially if she expects the heirloom to look antique-y.



And I''ve got to say, please nobody love me enough to force me to suffer Durian (or some other real life equivalent just as repulsive)... that is THEEEE most gag-nastiest putrid stench I''ve ever done smelled *shivers*

 

[Elmorton]

Sera, oooooh that is a good point - if she''s now expecting something with filigree or a vintage look, she might want to choose a vintage setting. Hmmmmmmmm....

...but I still think that the tiffany setting or something like it is probably the best choice for this situation?

 

[MoonWater]

Some women like high settings. Is it possible that she''s one of them? If not, I think a simple Tiffany setting to present it in would be good and then you can give her the option of changing it (perhaps to something more vintage looking like she may be imagining with the word "heirloom").

 

[oshinbreez]

I still think you should present it to her "as is". But, also let her know that she can change the setting. I wonderi if a jeweler could do something with the prongs so that the stone would sit down lower? It would probably be cheaper to buy a new setting, but if the prongs could be fixed, she would still have the heirloom ring.

 

[Nicrez]

My $.03:

Be practical. You can''t mind read. Your intentions and actions can be romantic. Present her the heirloom and let her decide how to proceed with it. Tell her she has carte blache to change it and reset it or keep it just as it is. I am not a fan of destroying estate pieces, but to each his own. It''s the thought behind your actions and behind an heirloom ring that makes this whole process sweet and romantic.

As for romance, the best (and most romantic) proposal I EVER heard took place with a piece of rubber tubing as a ring. (It was later replaced for a shiny one, but she still has it in the box!) If one''s not getting "the perfect ring" is what makes a proposal unromantic, then I suggest the person reevaluate what they are doing marrying that person and why. You have already shown love and care for her wants and whims, so frankly, in my book you could propose with rubber tubbing at this point and still be safe!

Good luck and really I do suggest don''t waste your money on a setting and all that, UNTIL she figures out what she wants. Otherwise that''s one expensive waste of money for the sake of romance, without really being romantic in my book...

 

[iceman72]

Thanks to all for your help. Still sitting on the fence here. I guess the sensitivity for me is I really wanted to present her with a beautiful finished product for the reasons that ELMORTON said in her post:

2)From your previous conversation with her, I''m guesing she''s more than likely expecting a ring when you propose, so proposing without the ring or with a "work in progress" might be a disappointment to her. Even though DH and I chose my ring together (sheesh, I''m scared to mention that in this thread! Rrrrrrrrg..), I didn''t know what it would really look like, since the sample setting in the store had a huge RB in it and I wanted a smaller EC. So, I had a pretty high level of anticipation. Currently, your intended knows that she''s getting a family rock that she hasn''t seen - SUPER exciting, but also, she''s probably not sure of what to expect! So, back to my example...bummer of bummers when DH opened the ring box (and ohhhhh was I happy with my ring!), went to put it on my finger and it was sized wrong - a size too small. Of course, our jeweler did a rush on the resizing and I had it the next afternoon, AND it was nice to bask in together in our newly engaged bliss and not be distracted by my new bling (and yes, there was plenty of that later!), but...I was expecting to have the ring with the proposal (as DH was expecting to finally see it on my finger!)

I guess what I''m saying is that i really hate that setting! not to mention it looks like it''s lost it''s luster a little. I would like to the proposal to sweep her off her feet and then just knock her over with the ring! I think that it''s what she would really want. I know that there are many who like to have a hand in this and i respect that, but I just have a feeling that it would be more special to her if she knew that I put tons of thought and care in picking something etc.

NOW - should i get it reset - would you all recommend that i get appraised first while it''s out of the setting and before it goes in a new one?

 

[tberube]

Date: 11/7/2007 10:46:03 AM
Author: iceman72
Thanks to all for your help. Still sitting on the fence here. I guess the sensitivity for me is I really wanted to present her with a beautiful finished product for the reasons that ELMORTON said in her post:


2)From your previous conversation with her, I''m guesing she''s more than likely expecting a ring when you propose, so proposing without the ring or with a ''work in progress'' might be a disappointment to her. Even though DH and I chose my ring together (sheesh, I''m scared to mention that in this thread! Rrrrrrrrg..), I didn''t know what it would really look like, since the sample setting in the store had a huge RB in it and I wanted a smaller EC. So, I had a pretty high level of anticipation. Currently, your intended knows that she''s getting a family rock that she hasn''t seen - SUPER exciting, but also, she''s probably not sure of what to expect! So, back to my example...bummer of bummers when DH opened the ring box (and ohhhhh was I happy with my ring!), went to put it on my finger and it was sized wrong - a size too small. Of course, our jeweler did a rush on the resizing and I had it the next afternoon, AND it was nice to bask in together in our newly engaged bliss and not be distracted by my new bling (and yes, there was plenty of that later!), but...I was expecting to have the ring with the proposal (as DH was expecting to finally see it on my finger!)


I guess what I''m saying is that i really hate that setting! not to mention it looks like it''s lost it''s luster a little. I would like to the proposal to sweep her off her feet and then just knock her over with the ring! I think that it''s what she would really want. I know that there are many who like to have a hand in this and i respect that, but I just have a feeling that it would be more special to her if she knew that I put tons of thought and care in picking something etc.


NOW - should i get it reset - would you all recommend that i get appraised first while it''s out of the setting and before it goes in a new one?

I dunno - if I were you I''d reset it. And if I were your girlfriend, I would like the reset. Something shiny and new and finished is much better of a presentation than the alternative. Just my $.02...

I say go for it.

 

[chrono]

Absolutely get it appraised while it is unmounted before getting a new setting for it. The Pricescope list of independent appraisers is what I''d recommend. As for a setting, I''d go with a Tiffany replica to be safe. My favourite of all the replicas is Superbcert''s setting:
http://www.exceldiamonds.com/-Engagement-Rings-5/Diamond-Solitaire-Engagement-Rings-11/Classic-Diamond-Engagement-Ring-640.html

 

[iceman72]

I''ve been advised by her friends that i''m on the right track with resetting the stone! My feeling was that a tiffany replica with 4 or 6 prongs in platinum would fit the bill. Is it true that the 4 prong setting might give an illusion of being more "square"? Would it be any less safe for the diamond than a 6 prong setting?

Thanks,

 

[lyra]

I bought my stone in an estate ring which was a 6 prong setting. I went with a 4 prong setting (my stone is 1.77ct)for my temporary setting until I pick a permanent one, and I think it really shows off the size and sparkle better. Plus my jeweller reassured me completely that 4 prong was totally safe for my diamond. I personally feel that 6 prong settings minimize the size of the center stone unless it is really big to begin with. Good luck!

ETA: If she really likes a square shape, you could look at square type halo designs, or a fishtail prong setting. The fishtail (which looks like 3 prongs in each corner, but is really one large prong) really does make a round stone look square. Otherwise, most regular 4 prong settings don't make it look square.

 

[musey]

iceman, lyra's suggestion of a squarish halo is a great one! That's definitely what I'd do. I've seen some pics of that around here, I'll see if I can find any to link you to!!

Date: 11/6/2007 10:55:21 PM
Author: Chase035
Moonwater: My point was merely to state that I find this unromantic. I'm not alone in my opinion. There are many people who give gifts who are offended when the recipient insists on getting a certain item.

Chase, I don't know how many times we need to tell you that "insistence" is not what we're advocating. We keep saying it, yet somehow it never gets across.

Here's what we advocate:
-Finding out whether she'd like to have involvement in the ring selection process
-Respecting HER wishes

That's it. Plain and simple. No one says that even if a woman doesn't want to be involved, you should still make her pick her own ring. No one is suggesting that ALL women would like to have a say, or that that it's fair for ANY woman to demand the right to insist upon design elements.

So, unless you're misunderstanding the entire basis of the points that we're making, you're saying that you find it unromantic to respect your significant other's wishes. Is that what you're saying? Because again, if not, you're ENTIRELY and selectively misinterpreting all of what we've said.


You can think it's unromantic all you want. That's completely your prerogrative because, after all, what is right for any of US won't necessarily be right for YOU. But don't come here and tell us that our wonderful boyfriends/fiancés/husbands were "taking the easy way out" or are blatantly "unromantic" because of the choices that WE made as a couple. That is what is offensive.


For your reading pleasure:
Hate My Ring
I am an ungrateful brat...HELP!
Are my feelings unreasonable?
Men: Please involve your ladies in the process...
Did you let her choose her ring?
Did you have a say in your ring?
Amount of female involvement...

 

[musey]

Here's one fantastic example, if you do decide you might want to do a departure from the classic solitaire. It is quite different from what you were thinking though, so not sure if you'd want to consider it... I just couldn't resist posting the pic in case it peaks your interest.

Anyway, this GORGEOUS ring belongs to singer:

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 11/7/2007 11:54:59 AM
Author: musey



You can think it's unromantic all you want. That's completely your prerogrative because, after all, what is right for any of US won't necessarily be right for YOU. But don't come here and tell us that our wonderful boyfriends/fiancés/husbands were 'taking the easy way out' or are blatantly 'unromantic' because of the choices that WE made as a couple. That is what is offensive.

I am blowing you internet kisses. Thank you so much for posting. I do not get why that was so hard to comprehend. It was really making me

 

[winternight]

Date: 11/7/2007 12:34:07 PM
Author: musey
Here''s one fantastic example, if you do decide you might want to do a departure from the classic solitaire. It is quite different from what you were thinking though, so not sure if you''d want to consider it... I just couldn''t resist posting the pic in case it peaks your interest.

Anyway, this GORGEOUS ring belongs to singer:

That is a gorgeous ring! Also, I''d ask your girlfriend her preferences. Maybe she was shy to suggest additional stones when you were going to purchase a ring but maybe her dream ring really is a fancy setting.

Frankly, I think the most romantic thing in the world is when my fiance says let''s go to Tiffany''s (or wherever they sell jewelry that I like) and pick out something for you. To me that utter abdication of his wants/interests to make me happy is really romantic and lovely. Sigh.

 

[iceman72]

Here''s something i saw in person today. The setting was actually a little more delicate than it appears here and i got a green light from one of her friends. Will this go out of style? Opinions on the setting/price/Fina?

http://www.michaelcfina.com/ic/mcfina/sections/wedding_engagement_rings/engagement_rings/michael_c_fina_engagement_rings/:product/sku/PL066500000002.html


Thanks!!!

 

[erica k]

Date: 11/7/2007 11:41:45 AM
Author: iceman72
I''ve been advised by her friends that i''m on the right track with resetting the stone! My feeling was that a tiffany replica with 4 or 6 prongs in platinum would fit the bill. Is it true that the 4 prong setting might give an illusion of being more ''square''? Would it be any less safe for the diamond than a 6 prong setting?


Thanks,

Singer''s ring is gorgeous!

i have a 4 prong jean=francois albert setting and the stone looks square from a distance. mind you, the prongs are huge, cartoony round posts (i love them, but they''re not for everyone).

i''d love to see a side view of the michael fina ring that you posted. it reminds me a bit of the Whiteflash Legato Sleekline. The Legato head is one of my all time favorites, classic and unique!

 

[iceman72]

Date: 11/7/2007 4:05:06 PM
Author: erica k

Date: 11/7/2007 11:41:45 AM
Author: iceman72
I''ve been advised by her friends that i''m on the right track with resetting the stone! My feeling was that a tiffany replica with 4 or 6 prongs in platinum would fit the bill. Is it true that the 4 prong setting might give an illusion of being more ''square''? Would it be any less safe for the diamond than a 6 prong setting?


Thanks,

Singer''s ring is gorgeous!

i have a 4 prong jean=francois albert setting and the stone looks square from a distance. mind you, the prongs are huge, cartoony round posts (i love them, but they''re not for everyone).

i''d love to see a side view of the michael fina ring that you posted. it reminds me a bit of the Whiteflash Legato Sleekline. The Legato head is one of my all time favorites, classic and unique!

No side views on the web unfortunately, but I thought it was gorgeous from the side.

 

[musey]

Date: 11/7/2007 3:56:21 PM
Author: iceman72
Here's something i saw in person today. The setting was actually a little more delicate than it appears here and i got a green light from one of her friends. Will this go out of style? Opinions on the setting/price/Fina?

http://www.michaelcfina.com/ic/mcfina/sections/wedding_engagement_rings/engagement_rings/michael_c_fina_engagement_rings/:product/sku/PL066500000002.html

That is a BEAUTIFUL solitaire!!! It will absolutely not go out of style, don't worry about that a bit. Gorgeous, gorgeous!!

Do keep in mind, though, that with the "donut" at the bottom of the head, a wedding band will not sit flush. Some people are bothered by this, others are not. It's all a matter of preference

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 11/7/2007 3:56:21 PM
Author: iceman72
Here''s something i saw in person today. The setting was actually a little more delicate than it appears here and i got a green light from one of her friends. Will this go out of style? Opinions on the setting/price/Fina?

http://www.michaelcfina.com/ic/mcfina/sections/wedding_engagement_rings/engagement_rings/michael_c_fina_engagement_rings/:product/sku/PL066500000002.html


Thanks!!!

You''re on the right track, but this one has such a large base that a wedding band will not sit next to it. I don''t mind a small gap, but this one looks like it will cause a bigger gap. I like the basket, though...it is similar to Leon Mege''s solitaire setting. We can find a better one than that.

I think maybe the Ritani endless love solitaire might be a good choice for you. It is delicate, has a little sparkle, is a solitaire but has a slight antique look. Let me find a link for you.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, here are a few:

Ritani solitaire with diamonds on shank:

http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/jewelry-designers/ritani-jewelry/rings/12QQ1/18/

Ritani solitaire with 4 prongs, no diamonds on shank:

http://www.pearlmansjewelers.com/jewelry-designers/ritani-jewelry/rings/28QQ1/12/

Vatche makes some high quality solitaire settings:

http://www.winkjones.com/store/vatche.php

 

[Joolskie]

The setting from Michael C. Fina is very similar to the Sleek Line Legato from WF which is simple, classic and lovely.

I'm a four-prong fan. Personally, I see more stone than prong and it is a look I prefer. My setting is from Knox. I am a simple solitaire girl myself. This setting is simple and classic but the tiny stones in the shank give a hint of sparkle. As I wanted a palladium setting, I needed to work with a jeweler who uses it.

 

[oshinbreez]

If you''re going to reset, have you considered the swan?