Van Cleef & Arpels Solitare for 1.11 square EC

[woofmama]

I have been pondering what to do with my square EC. After visiting a few local jewelers I found a setting that I love.
It's a very strong geometric looking setting, very art deco and based on an original design by Van Cleef & Arpel.

I had been drawn to settings by Singlestone, Bev K, Sholdt, Durnell, Gelin Abaci & quite a few of the asscher settings on the Dimend Scassi site.
As much as I love halo's and pave on others, that wasn't the right look for me. I found that I prefer wide shoulders tapering off the center
stone and interesting prongs. I've always been drawn to unique clothing and jewelry, spend my life in jeans but wear very fashion forward tops, lots of color and cool details.

The jeweler I am working with only does custom and had prototypes of all previous rings they have made. After looking thru the
options this one really stood out.

 

[woofmama]

I'm trying to decide between three options based on this setting.

1. Sleek solitare with no sidestones

 

[woofmama]

Or another option : Round diamonds in graduated size down each side like this

 

[woofmama]

We are also discussing square cut sidestones, either carre cuts or small asschers. Of course that option stretches my budget a little past my comfort zone. The designer is going to call in a couple of parcels so we can lay them out with my stone to get a visual. She also did a CAD with milgrain but I liked the setting better without it.

Here's a better pic of my stone since the original ones were blurry.

 

[distracts]

No sidestones. I think they make the setting way too busy, when it should be strong and sleek.

 

[Enerchi]

I prefer the strong, clean lines of either #1 or 2, I think that the added channel set side stones just disrupt the flow - they are lovely, but IMO, they are competing for attention with your gorgeous asscher stone! Are they the same just with a mock up of an RB vs EC cut? Or is there a subtle difference in width at the 'cathedral' portion of the shoulders??

 

[woofmama]

So Distacts & Enrichi you both like the sleek better. That is the ring she had made for me to try on.

Enrichi she plugged the exact dimensions of my stone in her CAD software and that is how the ring appeared. I'm sure the shoulders are different due to the square sides rather than a round. Here's another view of all versions.

 

[sixbillionstars]

Really cool and modern looking! I like the setting much better without sidestones.

 

[Gypsy]

Unless you want it to look like a tension setting, I would slim that shank and those prongs a bit. In the original, the setting is balance by the stone. And that's also a function of the brilliant cut faceting. The CADs and the step cut faceting are resulting in the setting overwhelming your stone (and it is made worse with the sidestones). If you want a balanced look I would slim that shank and those prongs a bit.

 

[SomethingSinful]

I also prefer the design without sidestones. I can't wait to see how it turns out whatever you choose

 

[isoe]

I'm not sure if it's just my eyes (or if it really matters), but is the taper of the no-sidestones solitaire slightly different than that of the rings with sidestones?

Personally, I've found that slight changes in the taper or width of the shank can make a huge difference in the overall look of the ring. Whichever setting you choose, since you are going custom anyways, I might suggest fine tuning the shank width and taper to whatever your heart's desire.

All that said, I vote for the no-sidestones solitaire. To me, that setting is really meant to show off a single extraordinary diamond, which you certainly have!

--Iohan

 

[Enerchi]

Thanks for the multi shot photo - for me, that really highlighted the cleanliness of the solid shank. I still vote for that - especially if you want your diamond to be the focus. I think the sparkle would be too contrasting - bright white sprinkles of flash and fire vs. the classic of the EC "yes, dahling, I am here, smoking my cigarette in a long holder, under my Audrey Hepburn big black brimmed hat, bored watching the world go by...you amuse me, dahling..." - you know, that level of sophistication???

Totally agree with the thinner tapered shank. What will you be wearing this with? (say, perhaps an "Audrey Hepburn/cigarette holder/white linen suit" eternity band of all asschers or a channel set band with baguettes? ) That may influence how wide you want this to be.

Do you want a soft curve as the shank meets the prong/head or do you want to keep a strong angle as shown?

So fun - lots to think about, woofmama!

 

[beaujolais]

No side stones. No. Way too busy. Lovely stone, btw.

Less is More.

Sleek & strong setting for this, yes - but perhaps a bit softer and more tapered to the stone than the settings you posted. Settings that are somewhat wide or widen near the stone make the stone look smaller and de-emphasise the stone.

 

[woofmama]

I am so glad I posted my CADs! Both my husband & I were drawn to the sleek look but I kept second guessing myself due to seeing so many settings with sidestones. I was a bit concerned my stone needed some additional oomph. So if you all think sleek is the way to go that seals the deal.

Gypsy Thanks for the suggestion to thin the prongs and shank.I thought maybe they looker thicker due to being CADs but will definately address that with the designer. I don't want my stone swallowed up or for it to look like a tension setting. I really appreciate your input.

Isoe Regarding the width difference between the plain or sidestone version it's an optical illusion I think. I sat with the designer and she had a monitor mounted on the wall so you could see the design coming to life. It was very cool. Neither she nor I discussed thinning the shank in the sidestone version so I don't believe it was. Per your suggestions I am going to request the shank & prongs be thinned a bit.

Sixbillion & Somethingsinful Thanks for compliments on my setting choice. It is a big departure from most of what I see all of the lovely PSers choosing but damn it spoke to me. I'm not a blushing young bride and this ring is just because I have always wanted a stepcut.
I usually seek out unusual styles in clothing, decor, jewelry. So this is me

Enerchi First off sorry I mis-spelled your name. I loved your Audrey Hepburn analogy...so fun! I read it to my DH and we both got a chuckle out of it. I'm actually more like Mortica Addams meets the Beverly Hillbillies but I'll take Audrey Hepburn anyday

As a matter of fact I do have a band in the works, I'm getting it in a week or two. It's from a family owned jewelry store and is 2.15cts 5 stone comprised of delicious east west set emerald cuts! This is my true anniversary ring and was in the works before I found the diamond I bought on JA.
After these two purchases I am done! My DH will slaughter me if I even mention another ring. I am happy as a clam to be getting these two glorius pieces.
I am going to wait until I get it to finalize the setting for my solitare but really think each will need it's own finger and be a stand alone piece.

I'm attaching band pics for your viewing pleasure

 

[Enerchi]

um... excuse me DAHLING, while I sink my manicured toes upon the plush settee, light up an extra slim cigarette in my long silver holder while sipping a bit of champagne... then... I will grace you with an assessment of that bobble.....puff/sip/puff/sip sip sip/ponder....



HOLY FREAKING SMOKES!!!! OMG!!! (jaw drops, "Audrey" has left the building...) MY GaWd that is TDF!!! You rock it woofmama!!!!


That seals the deal - your CADS have just *got* to be seriously thinned out and keep your cool prongs, but scale back the way to thick shank. Yikes - I can NOT WAIT to see this pair in action!!! YIPPEE!!!!

 

[woofmama]

No side stones. No. Way too busy. Lovely stone, btw.

Less is More.

Sleek & strong setting for this, yes - but perhaps a bit softer and more tapered to the stone than the settings you posted. Settings that are somewhat wide or widen near the stone make the stone look smaller and de-emphasise the stone.

Thanks for the feedback Sonoma. I am going to have the setting refined. No sidestones. I do want my diamond to be the star.

 

[woofmama]

um... excuse me DAHLING, while I sink my manicured toes upon the plush settee, light up an extra slim cigarette in my long silver holder while sipping a bit of champagne... then... I will grace you with an assessment of that bobble.....puff/sip/puff/sip sip sip/ponder....



HOLY FREAKING SMOKES!!!! OMG!!! (jaw drops, "Audrey" has left the building...) MY GaWd that is TDF!!! You rock it woofmama!!!!


That seals the deal - your CADS have just *got* to be seriously thinned out and keep your cool prongs, but scale back the way to thick shank. Yikes - I can NOT WAIT to see this pair in action!!! YIPPEE!!!!

Yes dahling Enerchi...I shall set my plush tushie down, drink diet Dr Pepper, maybe smoke a cigar and stare at my bejeweled chubby fingers non-stop whilst gasping with delight at the sparkly carbon I completely blew my budget on

Then I shall flaunt my chubby little hands all over Target' and the local grocery store while taking numerous pictures with my smart phone to post on here ad nauseum until you all wish I would simply disappear.

Back to reality now. So do you think both rings will seriously fit on the same finger? I was doubting that it would work. I notice most of the women on here with the five stone rings wear the band as a stand alone. I am going to bring the band to the designer to see if it will work.

I found the band at a local family owned store run by two handsome Italian brothers. I spotted the band & begged to try it on. When I finished drooling, I looped it, took it out in the sun, looped it again & told them it was sold! I wear a 7 1/2 so it has to be sized up a bit. I checked comps with the diamond tool here and know I bought it at a very fair price. It's set in 18k white gold. The stones are G-H VS2 & about .42ct each. I've had it on layaway for two months and am picking it up in two weeks. This is my official anniversary ring

 

[Enerchi]

Dahling.. we can share rings!!! I'll happily squish my teeny tiny 7.75 stumps and model them from afar for you!! I'll meet you at walmart- in the chip aisle!!! I promise I will NOT tire of any photos you end up posting - 2 weeks from now. And may I say... good call on finding 2 handsome brothers!! woot woot!!

Reality calls...

I don't know if both would fit - that would require some serious tapering of your new ering design - and probably a spacer so the girdles of the band don't damage your ering - but picture the FIRE FACTOR!! Get input from your designer - sounds like you have a good rapport going with her and she seems open. Is it possible she could add that into her CAD program and work out a way the two may be able to be worn together? But I agree, most seem to have the band as a stand alone on the LH and the ering moves as a RHR. If that's the case, then too thin would be a concern. Oh the wonderful dilemma of it all

I am so excited for you! This is such a fun phase of the purchase - planning/designing/altering/decisions - fun, but stressful!

 

[woofmama]

Enrechi my dear...can we please meet in the cookie aisle, I adore cookies I would happily let you model my blingage in exchange for your delicious 3 stone platinum princess

Alas the handsome Italian brothers are married, as am I, but there's nothing wrong with a bit of eye candy whilst shopping,no?

I am a bit perplexed as to what to do with the setting. Hopefully it will become clear at my next visit. We shall see...

 

[Enerchi]

chips, cookies...potAYto, potAHto... all the same to a hormonal woman of a certain age!!

I am eager to learn what your designer says. 2 more weeks till pick up seems so far from now....

 

[princessfeedme]

Hi there Woofmama,

This may be a bit late, but I found this ad of the VCA ring with an EC that might help you decide!!! I personally like it with side stones, and these look like yummy carre cuts.

 

[woofmama]

Hi there Woofmama,

This may be a bit late, but I found this ad of the VCA ring with an EC that might help you decide!!! I personally like it with side stones, and these look like yummy carre cuts.

Hi princessfeedme,

I did see a picture of that version. The designer & I discussed doing the carre cuts and setting my stone east west, though it would be much more subtle because my stone is a 1.09 ratio, so just slightly off square. North South makes my stone appear larger and gives me more finger coverage.

So you like this version more than the solitare? If it weren't for the 5 stone I'm getting, I would want a more elaborate setting but even if I don't wear the rings together on one finger I think I have my mind set on plain setting.
If I went with anything like this I would have to wear it as a stand-alone ring.

Thank you for replying and posting that picture.

 

[princessfeedme]

Oh okay, I get what you're saying with your eternity band (delish btw!) Sorry I just skimmed the thread and didn't see your concern re that point . If that's the case, the plain shank is definitely the way to go, otherwise your center stone may get lost in all the step cuts. Don't let my personal bias towards non-solitaires dissuade you. Your particular situation definitely warrants the plain shank solitaire to let your EC shine through. However, if you notice the VCA pics, all four corners seem to be the same size, but your CAD images seem to have the vertical corners wider than the horizontal ones, which may cause the design to be bulkier than you would prefer. G'luck with your project and can't wait to see the final product!!!