shape
carat
color
clarity

My Vrai oval engagement ring(s)!

love succulents

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 26, 2020
Messages
31
Hi everyone! Posting this in case it is helpful for other folks, as I have learned a lot on these forums and have enjoyed seeing everyone's bling.

FI and I have been ring hunting, and we zeroed in on Vrai because of their carbon neutral MMDs and their recycled metals. Summary of my journey (and pics below):

1. I read up on consumers' misgivings about Vrai (mostly that some of their settings were possibly too dainty and that their stones had brown or pink tint). In the end, their company missive, the potential of a one-stop shop, and the attractive pricing reeled me in.

2. Their customer service is quite good and friendly. I had asked to see extra videos, which they said they could not accommodate, but they are able to get additional descriptions and qualitative assessments from their gemologists. Since I was on the hunt for ovals, it was useful for me to get a more detailed description of tint, bowtie, and eye-clean inclusions. This was especially helpful when I was asking to compare multiple stones. The gemologist in those instances was able to tell me, for example, which had the strongest tint (and whether it was more brown or pink) and which had the least amount of bowtie.

3. I saw a lot of I and J in stock and was miffed as to why there were no stones of better color grades. Turns out that inventory is refreshed regularly (I was told once a week), and it was my experience (in obsessively refreshing the inventory daily lol) that the H+ stones just get snatched up much more quickly.

4. Despite #3 above, I realized from this board and just looking at these stones in general, that the brown and pink tints were actually pretty cool and I seriously considered getting a pink-hued stone (especially since the price on them is pretty stellar).

5. In the end, once I saw a good H+ stone of the right size, I pulled the trigger. I ordered a 2.52, H, VS2, 3X set in their Classic setting (4 curved prongs) since I like clean styles. The shank is 1.7 mm, with a depth of 1.8 mm.

6. I received that ring and really quite liked it! The setting actually felt pretty substantial and the stone was beautiful. But then, I started thinking if I might prefer their lower-set setting (Signature). And then I saw that a 2.71, G, S1, 3X came into inventory at a good price...

7. So I ordered the 2.71 stone in their signature setting to compare (and to see if I could notice the size difference). Their return policy is such that once you return one ring to them, the others are final sale -- which I was comfortable with since I already was ready to keep the Classic ring. (And you can also pay a fee to reset a particular stone if you bought it in a setting you want to swap out.)

8. That second ring came today!

I think both stones are beautiful. Both the color and size differences are pretty negligible in person IMO. Although I was initially drawn to the clean style of the Classic setting, I actually quite enjoy the floating gallery and the signature "sling" from the Signature setting (it's fun to see the diamond "floating"). Plus, I do slightly prefer the lower height of the setting on the Signature. However, the Signature while having the same shank width, only has a depth of 1.6mm -- and it is enough that I feel less weight from the setting. So I'll be playing around with both for a little bit to see which grows on me more. In the meantime, thought I'd give you guys some real world pics in case it helps other folks in the future.

Excuse the poor focus on some of these -- I will say that the stones are much whiter, clearer and sparklier IRL. Pics are on right hand since the rings are a little loose on my left hand.

2.52, H, VS2 in Classic (in indirect bright-ish daylight indoors, and then in more shaded area at my desk)

tempImagefxvirx.jpg tempImageD5G4BF.jpg
tempImageFrNN6P.jpg


2.71, G, S1 in Signature (in indirect bright-ish daylight indoors, and then in more shaded area at my desk)

tempImagedVYSm7.jpg
tempImage791ZKh.jpg
tempImageXdLCIB.jpg
tempImage2tf8rN.jpg

Comparison profile and video (G stone on top)

tempImagerp7epU.jpg
 
Last edited:

AprilBaby

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
13,246
Both gorgeous, the second looks like it will allow a wedding band to sit next to it with no gap.
 

Kim N

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
6,463
Wonderful summary and photos! Can you share more thoughts about the color--the G vs H in different lighting, and the two of them compared to GIA/AGS colors? How much of a pink/brown hue do you see in person?
 

love succulents

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 26, 2020
Messages
31
Both gorgeous, the second looks like it will allow a wedding band to sit next to it with no gap.

Thank you! Yes, I think that’s right! I think the first one might be able to fit one as well if it is low/flat enough.

Wonderful summary and photos! Can you share more thoughts about the color--the G vs H in different lighting, and the two of them compared to GIA/AGS colors? How much of a pink/brown hue do you see in person?

I should preface that I don’t think I am very color-sensitive and I actually like warmer stones. With that said, I don’t see a material color difference between them. In some angles the H looks whiter, in others it is the G. I *might* see some very slight brown tint in the upper and lower “bellies”, but after a while it’s hard to tell what I am making myself see from staring. I am no diamond pro, though!

The only other diamond jewelry I have is a tiny bezel-set diamond bracelet from Brilliant Earth, and they say they use stones of “average color H/I”. I believe the BE grading (irrespective of the lab) probably is more stringent than Diamond Foundry/Vrai, so I’ve included some additional photos with the comparison to see if it might help you. (Recognize the bracelet is tiny lol). Also adding some shots in the crappiest lighting I could find (in order: by window with overcast daylight, in bathroom corner, in shaded corner, outside in overcast late afternoon light). To calibrate, the setting is platinum and I have skin with olive undertones.

4AC206BA-D1F1-4758-88FD-A41D22A3B0F4.jpeg
07A10B28-059A-4C8B-967C-35CF556888F0.jpeg F9D3E753-1210-4098-9F00-6677157ED1CA.jpeg
7D1EBE99-2E2F-401E-B8BF-C9A96E538DC2.jpeg 01F1B585-F58F-42AB-BA19-59AB6930FEA4.jpeg
21122F45-7FF7-4E18-926F-187CE25577E4.jpeg
 

Kim N

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
6,463
Thank you so much for the info and additional photos! This is all very helpful to know and gives me more confidence in buying a stone from Vrai. They both look beautiful on you!
 

mrsthirdcharms

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
233
Hi there! I think they’re both gorgeous stones. Either one is a stunning choice. I personally prefer the classic setting, especially in profile. Either way, you can’t go wrong with either. Congratulations! I have a Vrai diamond and I love mine ❤️!!
 

sprinklesparkles

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
283
Thank you for posting this! I have an older ring of theirs and was considering getting it reset in the signature setting, but it's hard to find images of it in profile.

Would love to see more photos of that one around the band meets the stone.
 

love succulents

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 26, 2020
Messages
31
Thank you for posting this! I have an older ring of theirs and was considering getting it reset in the signature setting, but it's hard to find images of it in profile.

Would love to see more photos of that one around the band meets the stone.

I love your ring and read up on your experience previously! Here are some additional profile shots — apologies for the focus on some of these and the distracting blue fuzz piece I didn’t notice until later haha.

A7B556E8-B3AA-412C-BBDB-3F4375D6AE7F.jpeg
5AA36F88-4104-4F80-967E-1D1B6D753057.jpeg
30709B89-22ED-4FE2-AE35-80ECC8EF9F83.jpeg
F63E8368-796F-4AE3-A738-0B6582C102A6.jpeg
16A10AB9-3AAD-4FFF-8AFE-757C98786D97.jpeg
EF064837-5411-4A9A-BB31-CFC0731AED19.jpeg

Would you consider the Classic? I will say that the extra 0.2mm in depth of the Classic does make the shank feel sturdier. But since I like the profile of the Signature and since we are keeping it as a plain shank, we’re keeping that one!
 

sprinklesparkles

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
283
I love your ring and read up on your experience previously! Here are some additional profile shots — apologies for the focus on some of these and the distracting blue fuzz piece I didn’t notice until later haha.

A7B556E8-B3AA-412C-BBDB-3F4375D6AE7F.jpeg
5AA36F88-4104-4F80-967E-1D1B6D753057.jpeg
30709B89-22ED-4FE2-AE35-80ECC8EF9F83.jpeg
F63E8368-796F-4AE3-A738-0B6582C102A6.jpeg
16A10AB9-3AAD-4FFF-8AFE-757C98786D97.jpeg
EF064837-5411-4A9A-BB31-CFC0731AED19.jpeg

Would you consider the Classic? I will say that the extra 0.2mm in depth of the Classic does make the shank feel sturdier. But since I like the profile of the Signature and since we are keeping it as a plain shank, we’re keeping that one!

Thank you so much for the additional photos of the signature!

The way the basket and shank meet on the classic isn't what I'm looking for personally, so I don't think it would be my top choice if we do reset.

I love how low the stone is set in the signature.

Happy you've found one you love!
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top