Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Very similar but different settings - Which is nicer? HOF vs. WF

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
J

joker382

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
71
First, does anyone have "real" pictures of either setting. Here are the two I am between. This is the whiteflash. The center stone will be a RB 1.23 carat on either setting and both will be platinum.

Whiteflash - Allegro.jpg
 
Hearts on Fire - Felicity split shank
This is the top view

Heartsonfire - Felecity TOP.jpg
 
Here is the side view of the Hearts on Fire

Heartsonfire - Felecity SIDE.jpg
 
The major difference between these is the height of the center stone. Both are pretty but I think the second setting looks more sleek and seamless because the stone is set lower. The design seems to flow better from the side view.
 
Oh, wow, I see what you mean! As much as I favor trying to get both stone and setting from the same place, I have to say I love that HOF setting! I think I''d have to buy a WF diamond and set it in the HOF setting. Where did you find that picture, by the way? I''d like to see some others.
 
It is on their website (http://www.heartsonfire.com/JC_search.aspx?item=FelHofSpShR&type=8), and the problem is, it is the only two pictures they offer. I sent a message requesting to get more pictures and information on it and I have a local jeweler trying to order it so I can view it in person. I know they are closed until July 6th, but I will keep you posted as to what happens and update the pictures if I get any other ones.

I am planning on putting one of these stones in it. Check the forum below and let me know which everyone thinks would look best.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/down-to-two-stones-which-one.64806/

I am starting to get really excited!!
 
You might want to ask WF if they can set the center stone lower in their setting. I prefer the profile of the WF setting except that it''s a tad too high...
 
I love love love the HOF setting! Someone here has that WF one (pics are somewhere in Pscope land) and I didn''t love it...(just my opinion though). That HOF setting is to die for!
 
Joker, I hate to say this, but I''d steer away from both. I had a real problem with a pave setting where there were no holes drilled behind the pave. I got something under the diamonds and they absolutely cannot be kept clean and some of the diamonds look black. It totally ruins the look of the setting and I had to abandon it after several attempts to fix the problem without completely remaking the ring.

I would look for a setting like that with the holes drilled out behind. I know it seems like all that metal is better, like you are getting more metal and it''s more secure, but it actually can be a problem.

Just FYI.
 
So you would recommend a plain band? You got it professionally cleaned and still nothing? Do they make them with holes behind them? Wouldn''t that put the at risk for falling out?
 
I like the HOF setting better although the WF is very nice. What are the price differences b/t the two?

lumpkin, has your jeweler tried doing and acid bath on your ring? I think one of kaleighs stones on her asscher ring turned black and she ended up sending it back to quest. they gave it the acid bath and it cleared right up.
 
I like the WF one better because the split is more pronounced, but I like how low the diamond is set in the HOF version. Maybe you can get WF to make theirs with the diamond lower? It''s going to be a beautiful ring with either one of the diamonds and that setting!

I also just wanted to point out that a wedding band can look funny with split shank settings, so I would make sure your GF (or if it''s you, you!) doesn''t care that much about wearing a wedding band with her engagement ring.
 
I like the HOF one better due to the profile. I like the added pave on the HOF one.
 
I''m not sue on the price difference yet because the HOF people are on vacation. I''m pretty sure it''s like a $1000 more, but I am not 100%. And yes, I was concerned about the wedding band (this is the guy) fitting because I know she does want to wear a wedding band. I am under the impression that you can get a "bent" one that will fit better than a traditional "regular" cut band. But I am looking into it. Thanks for the heads up.
 
I second Catmom''s post - I really like the added diamonds on the side of the head. Also, I like the less pronounced split as well. Both settings are beautiful!
2.gif
 
Without question, I prefer the HOF setting. I love the open side profile of the diamond and the pave under the basket. Amazing. Beautiful. I"m sold!
 
I''ll tell you truthfully, even though I love that HOF ring, I think it will be a problem if she wants to wear a wedding band. I hate curved wedding bands and I think it would take away from that lovely setting. So I''d only go with that setting for a standalone ring. The exception would be if she picked out this setting. If she did, then I''d get it anyway.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 8:08:24 AM
Author: mrssalvo
I like the HOF setting better although the WF is very nice. What are the price differences b/t the two?

lumpkin, has your jeweler tried doing and acid bath on your ring? I think one of kaleighs stones on her asscher ring turned black and she ended up sending it back to quest. they gave it the acid bath and it cleared right up.
Click to expand...
It's been acid bathed twice, but the darkening returned both times.

Here is an example of what *I* think would be better regarding the drilled holes. Note the under side of the ring that touches your finger, not visible when the ring is on:

127_2743%20(2).JPG


I have looked a bit for a split shank setting with this feature but I'm very surprised that some of the most prominent designers don't do it. Well, maybe it's my bad or I had a bad ring, but it wasn't cheap. If I ever do a pave setting again it will definitely have the drilled seats.

Maybe some other pave owners will tell their experiences. I don't mean to be a downer, and both rings are really beautiful, so maybe it was just me. I found that the micropave even on Leon Mege's on line catalogue didn't have drilled seats, which really surprised me. When I took my ring to three local jewelers looking for help, they all told me the same thing, that there was no way to really get behind the pave and clean it. One jeweler had it over a week trying to clean it, and it did look better, but within a week it was already getting dark under the pave again.
 
Well she didn''t pick it out, but she wanted "the grey''s anatomy" ring. So i scoured the web and found some of these that were similar. But yesterday I had her sister show it to her and act like she was bored at work and was looking at engagement rings. It worked great because she told me she loved it and then my girlfriend later in the day told me how her sister has such great taste on rings and that she showed her the nicest rings. I was holding in my laughter as much as I could. By the way, the two that she saw was these two (she liked the HOF much better) and a 3/4 eternity band.

Should I get it even though a wedding band may look weird with it?
 
I think if she loved it, then you are safe. I''d get a very thin wedding band that has the same kind of pave as that ring does. There will be a gap between the two rings, but I think that will be good so that the design of the e-ring will be easily seen. You may want to ask the HOF dealer if they sell a thin pave band that would match. That would be the easiest way to get one that looks good.
 
Lumpkin, this pave looks more prong set to me. I think I can see space under the diamonds that would allow for cleaning.
 
Date: 7/2/2007 9:30:59 PM
Author: jstarfireb
You might want to ask WF if they can set the center stone lower in their setting. I prefer the profile of the WF setting except that it''s a tad too high...
Click to expand...
Yah, ask WF. I do like the look of the HOF.
 
Date: 7/3/2007 11:32:59 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I think if she loved it, then you are safe. I''d get a very thin wedding band that has the same kind of pave as that ring does. There will be a gap between the two rings, but I think that will be good so that the design of the e-ring will be easily seen. You may want to ask the HOF dealer if they sell a thin pave band that would match. That would be the easiest way to get one that looks good.
Click to expand...


ditto DS. I''m not a fan of curved bands either but a very thin pave band with a small gap might be great. I''d see what HOF has, they may even make a wedding band to go with it??
 
I tried on this HOF ring and it is gorgeous
30.gif
Ask the jeweler if HOF has a wedding band that will go with this ring. You willl pay a premium, but it will be beautiful. I had my ACA set in a HOF semi-mount. My w-band is also HOF. The quality and the diamonds are excellent, but pricey!
 
I''m loving the HOF setting! I just prefer how it looks lower set and how the paved gallery makes the whole ring looks more together.
10.gif
 
another vote for the HOF setting. something about it, it just has more feminine lines, stucture, and balance. very romantic.
 
Risingsun - Did you like how it looked in person when you tried it on? Did it look nice on your finger?
 
I like the HOF setting better as well.
 
Date: 7/4/2007 6:16:10 PM
Author: joker382
Risingsun - Did you like how it looked in person when you tried it on? Did it look nice on your finger?
Click to expand...
It looked big and beautiful. Rings look different on each of us, so you must try it on yourself. My ring size is 4.5 and that makes most rings look pretty big on me. Of course, this ring was not in my size, so I can''t say how it would have looked if it was made to measure. Enjoy shopping for your ring
1.gif
 
Hi all, I''m a new member but long time viewer.

I got engaged last night, and now have the split shank HOF band that you are looking at. I LOVE IT! The other one sat up too high for my taste.

If it is any help, talking to our jeweler, the side stones are termed pave because of their obvious closeness, but if you see it in person and look very closely, they are actually all prong set. There is the slightest area to clean inside and around. This also depends on the size of the sidestones. My band is .33 ctw total, and holds a .75 princess nicely. Not as large as the diamond you are scoping, but I know they come in larger sizes for larger center stones.

Hope this helps, and I apologize to all for my lack of terminology (newbie).
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top