Simple setting vs Fancy setting: $2K more on stone???

[mintve]

HEee are some images I am working with.. you will have to excuse my "editing", as I am worse than a child when it comes to staying in the lines with the mouse as a paintbrush. I will attach the painrbrus version and the actual images as tehy appear online. Just bear in mind I am not a fan of the wb, so I will find something else to go with it...

I was originally looking at a halo, but the decided to look at a setting with a collar, now I am leaning toard a simple RB in a band w/ some stones on it. The photos do not do this setting justice as its really pretty in person (its Lieberfarb). It sits low to my hand and it has a wider band. It is also very affordable when you buy it w/o the center stone.

My other options is a fancier setting that will cost upwards of an add''l $2K.

In your opinion, is it best to get a simple timeless setting that is less expensivie so you have more money to spend on a stone (Wtih the first setting I can proabbly get about 1 1/2 carat)

or to get a "fancier" setting w/ lots of details that will cost more and may not be as "timeless", but is unique...with this type of setting I can get about a 1 carat...

 

[mintve]

with my airbrushing

 

[mintve]

and another angle

 

[mintve]

an example of a "fancier" setting

 

[robbie3982]

For me, the diamond itself is more sentimental than the setting so I''d go for the more expensive diamond with the thought of possibly upgrading the setting at some point in the future. If you go for the less expensive diamond with the more expensive setting and want to upgrade in the future, you''d most likely need a new setting to accomodate a bigger stone so no part of the ring would be your original. Some people aren''t bothered by this, others are.

 

[Joolskie]

Date: 11/7/2007 4:52:52 PM
Author:mintve
In your opinion, is it best to get a simple timeless setting that is less expensivie so you have more money to spend on a stone (Wtih the first setting I can proabbly get about 1 1/2 carat)


or to get a ''fancier'' setting w/ lots of details that will cost more and may not be as ''timeless'', but is unique...with this type of setting I can get about a 1 carat...

I feel that it is best to go with the simple timeless setting which would allow for you to put more of the budget toward the stone.

 

[Sharon101]

I agree with putting more budget towards the centre stone as that is the `real estate` of the ring. (I made that up!). But really, as long as you like the setting, it does not have to be over the top. A nice sized diamond will always be appreciated for what it is. And I feel its easier to change settings one day than to upgrade. Here in Australia (and Im sure elsewhere in the world!) there are really beautiful precast diamond settings which are made in different parts of Asia eg hHong Kong. The settings are spectacular (beautiful pave and diamond setting work) and much cheaper than getting the same thing made locally from scratch. That may be an option for you???

But to answer your question I would always work from the stone forwards.

 

[musey]

I think I'm a PS weirdo in that I have a lot more sentimental attachment to the setting than the stone. If I did ever upgrade my stone (which I don't really plan to), I plan to find a way to fit it into my old setting OR have the setting recreated for that different stone (if it won't fit).

So for me, it would be more important to get the setting I want with the stone I can afford w/ the leftover money. I am very much in the minority, though

 

[kellyfish]

Without a doubt, put the money on the stone. You will not regret it at all.

 

[sera]

For me, the setting is extremely important so that makes me a weirdo too. I could have decided to take a couple thousand away from the setting and put it towards a bigger diamond; but there is NO way I would want a plain setting- it''s just not me and I would be really unhappy with it. I got a .99ct diamond and the setting is yet to be decided upon; I am happy with that size, but maybe if it was a choice between a .25ct in a fancy setting and a .5 ct in a plain setting, my choice might be different. I will pretty much have the same budget for the setting as I had for the diamond- and that''s what I want- a killer diamond in a killer setting (at least imho and that''s what counts).

 

[gemgirl]

I agree. Put the extra money into the stone for sure.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 11/7/2007 5:30:41 PM
Author: musey
I think I''m a PS weirdo in that I have a lot more sentimental attachment to the setting than the stone. If I did ever upgrade my stone (which I don''t really plan to), I plan to find a way to fit it into my old setting OR have the setting recreated for that different stone (if it won''t fit).

So for me, it would be more important to get the setting I want with the stone I can afford w/ the leftover money. I am very much in the minority, though

That''s it! I am tired of agreeing with you! WTH!?! When I first read this thread I was thinking to myself...my setting is expensive, I could get a bigger diamond if I put that money toward the stone and got a cheap plain setting. I even looked at the prices of bigger diamonds just to see. But you know what, I wouldn''t even want the darn thing without the setting I chose! It would bore me to tears. Maybe I don''t fully appreciate diamonds?! I just think the setting that frames it makes it more of a piece of art. It represents my personality better than a huge stone in a simple setting.

 

[KristyDarling]

It really depends on what you''re more sentimentally attached to -- the stone, or the setting. If it''s the stone you''d care about more, then spend on the stone and save on the setting. And vice versa. Personally, with diamond prices constantly on the rise, I''d put more $$$ toward the stone and talk to DH about reserving the right to switch out the setting later down the road, if that''s what I wanted.

 

[musey]

Date: 11/7/2007 7:23:43 PM
Author: MoonWater

Date: 11/7/2007 5:30:41 PM
Author: musey

I think I'm a PS weirdo in that I have a lot more sentimental attachment to the setting than the stone. If I did ever upgrade my stone (which I don't really plan to), I plan to find a way to fit it into my old setting OR have the setting recreated for that different stone (if it won't fit).

So for me, it would be more important to get the setting I want with the stone I can afford w/ the leftover money. I am very much in the minority, though

That's it! I am tired of agreeing with you! WTH!?!

LOL MoonWater!!

 

[Fly Girl]

My mom doesn''t know much about diamonds, but the one thing she taught me was that best place to put your hard earned $$$ was into the best diamond you could get. The setting is just there to hold the darn thing. So, it was a simple solitaire for me. it''s all about the diamond.

 

[Beeweaver]

Date: 11/7/2007 5:30:41 PM
Author: musey
I think I''m a PS weirdo in that I have a lot more sentimental attachment to the setting than the stone. If I did ever upgrade my stone (which I don''t really plan to), I plan to find a way to fit it into my old setting OR have the setting recreated for that different stone (if it won''t fit).

So for me, it would be more important to get the setting I want with the stone I can afford w/ the leftover money. I am very much in the minority, though

Count me in as another WEIRDO! I have to LOVE the setting. I''m not so concerned about size. LOL!
I don''t care for really big stones as I think they are a bit ostentatious myself. Just my opinion. But, I also like a Marquise stone which probably makes me a double werido. I also love Emerald cuts. A 1.5 carat would be as big as I ever go for my hand. But, I have seen so many gorgeous stones under a carat. It''s not all about size in my book.

 

[Diamond*Dana]

I would put the money into the stone

 

[erica k]

if you really love the setting, you should spend your money on it. the ''simple'' setting that you posted looks pretty fancy to my eyes (understated, elegant, with a little extra sparkle), but i understand your dilemma. a 1ct stone is hardly ''small,'' either, so it isn''t like you''re sacrificing that much in terms of size in order to get a fancier setting. sure, a 1.5ct is definitely larger, but it''s all about proportions and your own preferences. it doesn''t sound like you''re planning on upgrading (although one never knows), so if i were you, i would buy the setting of my dreams.

personally, i would order a very simple solitaire setting and put the rest of the money towards the best quality and size diamond i can afford. but that''s because i''ve been known to be fickle...

 

[neatfreak]

The RING as a package was important to me, so I decided to get my fancy setting instead of a bigger stone and I don''t regret it one bit!

 

[Sharon101]

To clarify....it does depend on what size diamond we eare talking about and what we mean by simple.

Out of the two rings here , I took simple to mean still with bling detail but not all the extra details such as collars etc. So for me, I would go bigger on the diamond and still have sime bling in the ring to accent the centre diamond. I would still choose a setting I like, not one I am dissappointed in or that would defeat the purpose. I would also imagine that a very ornate ring might not suit a very small diamond, not that I would class a 1 carat as small!!!

 

[tberube]

I like fancy settings in general, but for the examples you showed here, the simple one is the prettiest. JMO.

 

[marcy]

I would rather have a plainer setting and spend more money on the center stone. I can''t wait to see what you get.

 

[Gypsy]

I REALLY like that setting.

But at the same time... size difference is big. I know the expensive setting would tempt me, but I would ultimately want the larger diamond.

 

[asscherisme]

I would go for the bigger stone.

 

[iheartscience]

Another vote for the bigger diamond! 1 carat to 1.5 carats is a pretty huge jump. You can always upgrade the setting later for an anniversary (your 1st, perhaps?

) or another special occasion.

 

[Eva17]

definatly put the money towards the stone.

 

[lumpkin]

I would decide on the TYPE of setting I wanted so I would know what size/shape diamond is appropriate for it. If that setting is expensive and I could not get the size stone I wanted for it and get the setting as well, I''d wait on the setting and get the biggest diamond I could -- they are only going to get more expensive. But I probably would not stretch beyond being able to get the setting by a specific deadline, like the wedding or 1 year anniversary or some other special date. Although I think the diamond is center stage, from experience I feel that the right setting can make your diamond far more visually compelling. I know I''m in the minority here, but having had a bigger diamond that was a PITA to find a setting for, bigger is not always the be all and end all. Just keep all the points on your wish list in mind and find the right balance.

 

[fairywings]

I started with a simple setting for my ring, just a plain solitaire, but recently reset my diamond (1.3 carat european cut) into a much fancier pave Verragio setting. I love the stone and I loved it when it was in the simple setting, but I have to say, I love it even more in the Verragio setting. Now it is my dream ring. So, I guess I am a setting weirdo too.