Some progress. Now looking for a good RB

[ballercaller]

So I've finally nailed it down to a round three stone instead of a princess three stone. Now the pressures on to find the perfect round diamond. The other half is really gunning for a 1ct centre stone that is really sparkly, three stone setting with side stones on the band. This is completely out of my budget and I have been trying to explain this to her. I don't want to disappoint her, but at the same time I don't want to handcuff myself financially. I'm currently working with a budget of $7000. The setting alone is going to cost $2500 due to the stones on the band. Tried asking if she really needed the stones on the band, and that's what she really wants... That leaves me around $4500 for the centre, and there is no way I can find a good 1ct for that price, even a 0.9 would do but I don't think the budget allows it. I'm basically left with a 0.8ct option to fit in the budget.... I've been sticking with Whiteflash mainly as it has been really easy dealing with them and they've made me comfortable with the process thus far. I'd be open to other vendors, but if the difference isn't that significant i'd prefer to stay with whiteflash, even if I had to pay slightly more just for the convenience.

So I guess the question is, what is the absolutely best centre stone I can get around the $4500 budget? I don't care about things that can only be seen through a microscope. Of course the bigger the better, but not if I have to sacrifice a lot.

 

[maccers]

I'm unclear...do you already have the two side stones? If so, what colour, size are they? Are you open to a preloved stone? Jewels by Erica Grace has a 1 carat round brilliant for $3400 but it's EGL graded. You could also try contacting them directly. Of course for used there's loupetroop and diamondbistro as well.

I'll let others chime in with their picks from online vendors.

 

[ballercaller]

The two side stones are included with the setting.
Currently the setting of choice is the below in white gold. I have requested to remove the stones from the face and back of the band and only have it on the side. I was quoted around $2500. Reason I chose this setting is due to the crown (or prong or whatever you call the thing that holds the stones) isn't thick like other settings and i guess looks nice with the heart shape. Of course this comes at a $$ cost. I haven't been able to find a nice setting where the prongs aren't so thick and actually look nice

http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/3-stone-coeur-de-clara-ashley-diamond-engagement-ring-39.htm

 

[Niel]

OK I know you're keen on working with Whiteflash, which I understand they are wonderful, but here is just another idea.

I would do this, but in 14k, with j side stones(it currently has f/g), and I think that would bring the setting closer to 3k (I'd ask them to millgrain the sides make it look really nice)

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/18k-white-gold-three-stone-round-and-pave-set-diamond-engagement-ring-item-151

JA has a handful of j/k colored .9-1.0 ct stones in the 4k range. If size is a must, drop down to that range.

 

[two_little_birds]

I would honestly keep the band plain and simplistic - and spend the majority of your money on the diamonds. You can always upgrade the setting in a few years, or get a blingier wedding band.

This way you might be able to achieve that 1ct center stone that she wants

 

[ballercaller]

I would honestly keep the band plain and simplistic - and spend the majority of your money on the diamonds. You can always upgrade the setting in a few years, or get a blingier wedding band.

This way you might be able to achieve that 1ct center stone that she wants

well those are my thoughts. but having a difficult time convincing the other half to go this way. she's persistent on wanting the stones on the band.. what's a guy to do?

 

[Niel]

I would honestly keep the band plain and simplistic - and spend the majority of your money on the diamonds. You can always upgrade the setting in a few years, or get a blingier wedding band.

This way you might be able to achieve that 1ct center stone that she wants

well those are my thoughts. but having a difficult time convincing the other half to go this way. she's persistent on wanting the stones on the band.. what's a guy to do?

I am currently working with JA to make me a setting and they are really very helpful. I'd start a live chat with them. Tell them you're trying to get some quote, see what the absolute lowest they could do that setting in 14k with J side stones. I think it'll really be reasonable.. might be more than the Whiteflash, but JAs diamonds are cheaper. You could get a. 9+ j/k stone for that. And a j is still whiter or as white as most of the publics stones, and it'll be a much nicer cut.

 

[ballercaller]

Thanks again for the feedback! especially Niel lol
I have an OCD personality hence the questions and constant uncertainties lol

Another question regarding the ring. I know it's mostly preference, but between a 1ct solitaire (stones on the band) and a three stone 0.8ct centre with 0.5ct sides (0.25ct each), with about 0.3ct worth of stones on the band, which would you pick?

 

[Niel]

Thanks again for the feedback! especially Niel lol
I have an OCD personality hence the questions and constant uncertainties lol

Another question regarding the ring. I know it's mostly preference, but between a 1ct solitaire (stones on the band) and a three stone 0.8ct centre with 0.5ct sides (0.25ct each), with about 0.3ct worth of stones on the band, which would you pick?

Haha! What's funny is I am going though this exact conundrum! I recently started redoing my e ring. My budget is about 4500. I am quite comfortable with a K color. So for me it was a choice of a 1ct k or an 0.8 ct with side stones. My design is similar to yours but instead of a three stone with pave in the shank it has one more set of stones. So if you can imagine, a .84 center,. 32 ct each sides, then .15 ct each sides after the first set. Here's a picture to explain


The reason I chose this was a few things... the price jump between a. 8ct and a 1 ct is about double! The minimal size increase to me did not warrant the price increase. I could get a little smaller stone and afford to pay for the exact setting I wanted vs getting a bigger stone, but then not being completely happy with the setting. Now personally I don't plan on spending any more money on this ring for years, so I wanted the whole right to be just right, instead of having the stone just right and not the setting.


Now if you plan on putting my money into this ring in the next year or two, go for the solitaire and place it in a 3stone for your first anniversary or something. But if you dont plan on putting any more money into the ring, I say go for the whole look. Not just the stone. From what it sounds like your gf is really attached to the 3stone pave look. So seems like a good idea to give her that look.

To be fair a j is still a very nice color for a diamond, especially at the 1ct or under mark. So if you compromise on color you can possibly get both the setting and a stone close to the 1ct mark

 

[Niel]

I just wanted to add. Where I live a 1ct is not that common. I live in the Midwest where .50 ct and under is the norm, so though I'd love a 1ct, its not that important in regards to "keeping up with the Jones'".... you know? I don't know what the average ring looks like where you live. Might be something worth considering. In your town for your age group. Is a 1ct+ the norm? Are the stones well cut or are the not going to be as nice as the ones you will get?

 

[Niel]

like, for example, heres a nice J at .9ct
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.91-carat-j-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-177998


This setting is in budget already, but id ask them to have the side stones match the center.... so maybe by dropping in color you can either get ideally certed stones or a little bit bigger. I dont know, but JA is really great to work with from my own experience and will at least look into it.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/18k-white-gold-three-stone-round-and-pave-set-diamond-engagement-ring-item-1914

 

[ballercaller]

like, for example, heres a nice J at .9ct
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.91-carat-j-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-177998


This setting is in budget already, but id ask them to have the side stones match the center.... so maybe by dropping in color you can either get ideally certed stones or a little bit bigger. I dont know, but JA is really great to work with from my own experience and will at least look into it.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/18k-white-gold-three-stone-round-and-pave-set-diamond-engagement-ring-item-1914

Yea, the only thing I'm thinking about is how noticeable is the difference between a 0.8ct and and 0.9ct face up in a setting? 0.8 vs 1ct i think you can notice, but between a 0.8 and 0.9ct? I think its about 1-2mm isn't it?

 

[Niel]

If i am not mistaken its a .8 is about 6mm and a .9 is about 6.2 mm

 

[ballercaller]

If i am not mistaken its a .8 is about 6mm and a .9 is about 6.2 mm

yea, as i don't have 2 stones of those sizes on my to compare side by side i try and compare using a ruler and paper cut outs. Doesn't really help lol
also, its weird how even though the three stone would have an higher total ct weight vs the 1ct stone, it comes in about the same price, maybe even cheaper...

 

[Niel]

If i am not mistaken its a .8 is about 6mm and a .9 is about 6.2 mm

yea, as i don't have 2 stones of those sizes on my to compare side by side i try and compare using a ruler and paper cut outs. Doesn't really help lol
also, its weird how even though the three stone would have an higher total ct weight vs the 1ct stone, it comes in about the same price, maybe even cheaper...

Yeah unfortunately diamonds prices do not increase in a linear way

I dont want to confuse you further But i remembered this ring out in the world, so i thought i would share, not the same shape, and a little low in color, but those type of stones lend themselves well to lower colors, so sense its in budget id pass it along.

http://www.diamondsbylauren.com/index.php/jewelry/three-stone-diamond-ring-109-ctr-105tw-sides-daussi-cushons-in-platinum-r3143

also if this helps at all, here are two JA pics, one with about a .8 ct and one with about a 1ct

 

[ballercaller]

yea you can tell the size differences, although the picture is blown up.

looking at posts from a few years ago it looks like the prices of stones have really gone up. should have started the process a long time ago!

 

[Niel]

yea you can tell the size differences, although the picture is blown up.

looking at posts from a few years ago it looks like the prices of stones have really gone up. should have started the process a long time ago!

Haha yeah should we all have! Or look at it this way, in a few years what you pay today will probably be a steal

They do look noticeable blown up you are right. When I look at this thread on my phone though, and the images are shrunk down, not as noticeable. I think a 0.9 would be a good compromise.

 

[two_little_birds]

Another question regarding the ring. I know it's mostly preference, but between a 1ct solitaire (stones on the band) and a three stone 0.8ct centre with 0.5ct sides (0.25ct each), with about 0.3ct worth of stones on the band, which would you pick?

Correct, 100% personal preference.

Personally I think of a 3 stone ring as an anniversary ring - i.e. past, present and future. My husband gave me one for our 7th anniversary. I'm not a big fan of 5 stone rings, but again this boils down to personal preference. Neil is creating a beautiful 5-stone, which will suit exactly what she's looking for. You also have to remember, taste and style can easily change over time. That's why I personally prefer something more classic and simple like a solitaire. Biggest bang for the buck (especially when you're young and have a tight budget), and then you can change it down the road into a halo, 3-stone, etc.

 

[ballercaller]

I need a bit of help here
the below stones have the same criteria but different prices. Can anyone (Niel? lol) explain to me why the slight price differences. I really don't know what to compare. Also, is Ideal better than excellent? The excellent is more than the ideals, but i thought Ideal was better? really wish whiteflash had .9cts in this price range...

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-205444
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-215577
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-180224

 

[Niel]

Not all excellent cut stones are created equal. Basically GIA's criteria for a stone to be EX is loose enough that even within GIA EX stones, some perform better than others. One good tool is the HCA tool you can get the numbers off of the GIA cert, plug them in, and ideally if its under 2, than its a stone worth considering. a stone thats 2-3 can still be good too, but a stone thats under 2 means theres a good chance its cut is nice enough to rule out any problem areas.

When i search on Ja i find it easiest to use the advance search part under the normal search area (for color cut and whatnot) and narrow down the depth to stones 62% and under, and table depth of 58 and under. Stones can be a little deeper and still good, but I just find it easiest to search this way.

heres a nice one i think, its got a little crystal up at the top, but put a prong on that and i bet you couldnt even see it
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-i-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-213709

 

[ScorpioLove]

Round center w/ pear sides?

Hi ballercaller.
Does it absolutely have to be a round 3-stone setting? I found a beautiful 3-stone setting that has a round center and pear sides AND it has the bling in the band. It's a bit cheaper ($1275) and you might have a little extra money for the center diamond. This might be an option if your GF would be open to the pear sides.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagemen...ul-fluted-pear-pave-engagement-ring-item-9229

 

[ballercaller]

Unfortunately yes her orders lol

Overall, is whiteflash a bit pricier than James Allen, or does it vary? I'm having a really hard time figuring out between the two. It seems like JA has a bit more selection in what I am looking for, but not sure if the WF cut above or excellent is better?

 

[MustangGal]

What about one like this? http://www.gabrielny.com/engaged/style/ER7461W44JJ

Or http://www.gabrielny.com/engaged/style/ER7296W44JJ ?

 

[ScorpioLove]

Personal Preference

Another question regarding the ring. I know it's mostly preference, but between a 1ct solitaire (stones on the band) and a three stone 0.8ct centre with 0.5ct sides (0.25ct each), with about 0.3ct worth of stones on the band, which would you pick?

You're right, it's all about personal preference BC. I've noticed that my sense of style has evolved as I've gotten older.

In my younger 20's, I absolutely did not want anything that remotely resembled a solitaire. The plain band was definitely out, and the dainty-type, pave band wasn't appealing either. I was also not a fan of round stones. I was only attracted to wider bands with LOTS of BLING (preferably pave). And I lusted after the fancy-shapes (i.e.-asscher, emerald, radiant) because I wanted to be different. During this time, a .75 - 1 carat center diamond was perfect for me.

In my late 20's, I discovered Pricescope. It was then that I realized that thinner bands really make the center diamond pop. Nonetheless, I still liked the extra sparkle that the thin pave band offered. I also discovered that it was much easier to get the best cut diamond by selecting a round stone, and that round diamonds offered the best finger coverage (had a large face-up appearance for a stated carat weight). So, a round diamond on a thinner-pave band became my ideal, dream e-ring. Also, a 2 carat center diamond was my sweet spot.

Well, as time has progressed, I've got a wee-bit older, and my life has continued to evolve into the "corporate, conservative (by day..lol), Monday through Friday, 8 to 5" type of lifestyle. As such, I've really grown to adore the solitaire setting. And of course, with my love of the simplistic setting comes my love for a larger center stone....3 carats is my dream stone!


Sooooo to answer your question, I think it's all about personal preference. I believe our (women's) e-ring tastes change as we grow, develop and change....or as the seasons change....or as the wind blows. Hey, we're women! It's a part of our makeup ya' know! WE JUST LOVE BLING!!!!

 

[bunnycat]

Re: Personal Preference

Another question regarding the ring. I know it's mostly preference, but between a 1ct solitaire (stones on the band) and a three stone 0.8ct centre with 0.5ct sides (0.25ct each), with about 0.3ct worth of stones on the band, which would you pick?

You're right, it's all about personal preference BC. I've noticed that my sense of style has evolved as I've gotten older.

In my younger 20's, I absolutely did not want anything that remotely resembled a solitaire. The plain band was definitely out, and the dainty-type, pave band wasn't appealing either. I was also not a fan of round stones. I was only attracted to wider bands with LOTS of BLING (preferably pave). And I lusted after the fancy-shapes (i.e.-asscher, emerald, radiant) because I wanted to be different. During this time, a .75 - 1 carat center diamond was perfect for me.

In my late 20's, I discovered Pricescope. It was then that I realized that thinner bands really make the center diamond pop. Nonetheless, I still liked the extra sparkle that the thin pave band offered. I also discovered that it was much easier to get the best cut diamond by selecting a round stone, and that round diamonds offered the best finger coverage (had a large face-up appearance for a stated carat weight). So, a round diamond on a thinner-pave band became my ideal, dream e-ring. Also, a 2 carat center diamond was my sweet spot.

Well, as time has progressed, I've got a wee-bit older, and my life has continued to evolve into the "corporate, conservative (by day..lol), Monday through Friday, 8 to 5" type of lifestyle. As such, I've really grown to adore the solitaire setting. And of course, with my love of the simplistic setting comes my love for a larger center stone....3 carats is my dream stone!


Sooooo to answer your question, I think it's all about personal preference. I believe our (women's) e-ring tastes change as we grow, develop and change....or as the seasons change....or as the wind blows. Hey, we're women! It's a part of our makeup ya' know! WE JUST LOVE BLING!!!!

I think Scorpio is right on the money. If you're youngish right now, a smaller stone is probably not a bad choice, but probably it won't stay the "best" choice forever. Kudos if it does, but my bet would be on her tastes changing eventually and hopefully y'all are both open to that possibility.

 

[bunnycat]

Not all excellent cut stones are created equal. Basically GIA's criteria for a stone to be EX is loose enough that even within GIA EX stones, some perform better than others. One good tool is the HCA tool you can get the numbers off of the GIA cert, plug them in, and ideally if its under 2, than its a stone worth considering. a stone thats 2-3 can still be good too, but a stone thats under 2 means theres a good chance its cut is nice enough to rule out any problem areas.

When i search on Ja i find it easiest to use the advance search part under the normal search area (for color cut and whatnot) and narrow down the depth to stones 62% and under, and table depth of 58 and under. Stones can be a little deeper and still good, but I just find it easiest to search this way.

heres a nice one i think, its got a little crystal up at the top, but put a prong on that and i bet you couldnt even see it
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-i-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-213709

This one looks like it could have potential, and it measures a little over 6.2mm. A 1ct stone measures about 6.4mm so it's only .2mm away and ought to face up pretty similarly to a 1ct and the sidestones ought to help fill that out to, I would think.

 

[ballercaller]

ok so i need some opinions/help. I have the option for the below 0.9ct, or at about the same price an 0.8ct that is a cut above with better colour and clairty. From my thinking process, of course I would like the best fire and brilliance. I'm trying to get the best combination of what she wants. Going with the 0.9, it is closer looking to the 1ct. Going with the 0.8ct, it would possibly have a better colour/clairity, and maybe better cut if getting ACA? Between the stones i posted, is the difference between the 0.9 and 0.8 really unnoticeable, or is it noticeable?

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-205444

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2928620.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2803947.htm

 

[Niel]

ok so i need some opinions/help. I have the option for the below 0.9ct, or at about the same price an 0.8ct that is a cut above with better colour and clairty. From my thinking process, of course I would like the best fire and brilliance. I'm trying to get the best combination of what she wants. Going with the 0.9, it is closer looking to the 1ct. Going with the 0.8ct, it would possibly have a better colour/clairity, and maybe better cut if getting ACA? Between the stones i posted, is the difference between the 0.9 and 0.8 really unnoticeable, or is it noticeable?

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-205444

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2928620.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2803947.htm

Are you not interested in that I that was posted, i really think itll be nice, has nice clarity, and honestly its a going to be a very white stone. If you're interested in that H, have JA reserve that one, the I, and one other stone (you can reserve 3) and they will review them for you. Give you ASETS, tell you what they think of the performance, clarity, and color. I really think that I is a strong contender, but they can tell you how tinted it looks, about its light performance, and if you'd like, which between that H you like and the I they would recommend. Its free, and they are very honest and helpful in their reviewing. I do think going with JA is a good idea. A bigger stone will get you closer to her dream ring, and the cut will still be very nice.

 

[bunnycat]

I would put the H and the I on hold with JA and get idealscopes and gemologist recs.It doesn't cost anything to do it. I didn't run the I on HCA (maybe Niel did) but the H got a 2.5. Could still work, but if it were me, I'd want to see the idealscope first as the numbers are right on the edge of ideal cut parameters and so if you are going for the best and brightest, it might be good to have a couple of choices.

The Whiteflash ACA G stone, will of course, be fabulous because it's ACA. Look at the idealscope image (red and black). You don't see any leaky white areas under the table area. The Expert Selection one seems like it has something odd in both the IS and ASET and I am not as comfortable or experienced at recommending stones that run outside ideals specs (crown angle is 35.8 on it) so maybe if someone with more experience else sees this they might explain that one.

 

[ballercaller]

ok so i need some opinions/help. I have the option for the below 0.9ct, or at about the same price an 0.8ct that is a cut above with better colour and clairty. From my thinking process, of course I would like the best fire and brilliance. I'm trying to get the best combination of what she wants. Going with the 0.9, it is closer looking to the 1ct. Going with the 0.8ct, it would possibly have a better colour/clairity, and maybe better cut if getting ACA? Between the stones i posted, is the difference between the 0.9 and 0.8 really unnoticeable, or is it noticeable?

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-205444

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2928620.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2803947.htm

Are you not interested in that I that was posted, i really think itll be nice, has nice clarity, and honestly its a going to be a very white stone. If you're interested in that H, have JA reserve that one, the I, and one other stone (you can reserve 3) and they will review them for you. Give you ASETS, tell you what they think of the performance, clarity, and color. I really think that I is a strong contender, but they can tell you how tinted it looks, about its light performance, and if you'd like, which between that H you like and the I they would recommend. Its free, and they are very honest and helpful in their reviewing. I do think going with JA is a good idea. A bigger stone will get you closer to her dream ring, and the cut will still be very nice.

Yes I was looking at the I you suggested, but was also wondering about the H. I think it is more a psychological thing about choosing an H over the I, but of course I would like to compare it.

Also, why would you pick JA over WF overall?