what do you all think of this setting/band?

[b5s4]

I know a setting is a very personal choice but I wanted to see what everyone thought of this wedding set? It is made by Jabel and from what I have read, their work is very high quality. I initially thought about a scott kay setting but wanted a matching wedding band. I personally loved the van craeynest 812/912 but I think she wouldn''t like something as dainty. To me, this set seems feminine but also classy in a simplistic, straight forward way. The accenting diamonds seem larger than other melee settings but not necessarily in a bad way. It''s being sold at a discount price of 1800 for both and that is cheaper than other Jabel sets but at the same time, for that price there are other sets out there so if you have any suggestions in yellow gold, feel free to post them here. I feel like there''s light at the end of the tunnel for this whole ordeal so without further ado, here it is: Thanks so much for all of your help.

 

[b5s4]

Also out of curiousity, when women wear an e-ring and band together, is the e-ring usually on top or the bottom?

 

[sassy_sax]

Usually wedding band is closest to the palm and the E-ring on top. The tradition is thought to stem from keeping your wedding band closest to your heart.

 

[outatouch0]

That is a beautiful set you have there.
My girl and I want a somewhat similar style set and I WISH I we could get it for that cheap!!! Just the E-ring is $1400-1500 and the matching band is $1100-$1200 online. A few retail stores have something similar to what we want, but not as good, for double the price!!!
Price the set you have elsewhere and you will likely see that you are getting a great deal.
Congratulations on getting to some light at the end of the tunnel. I think picking the setting can be the hardest part.

 

[swingirl]

For my personal taste the setting is too chunky. I like the look of smaller stones that blend together rather than large stones that show space around them. Of course this is a personal choice but you are asking opinions.

This one has smaller side stones. http://www.whiteflash.com/Engagement-Rings/Styles/Diamond-Settings/-Flush-Fit--Diamond-Engagement-Ring_1063.htm#

Is the $1800 for the setting and band only, no center stone?

If you really like the channel-set look this one, http://www.whiteflash.com/Wedding_Bands/14-Stone-Bead-Set-Diamond-Band_974.htm# comes in yellow gold and there is a matching ering.

 

[b5s4]

outatouch,
I know exactly what you mean. I just assumed the diamond would be the harder purchase but when I stumbled upon a 1.21 J ags 000 at a great price the decision was made for me. I called a local retailer and they said this set would cost 2800 so it is a great deal. Are you looking for this same design in yellow gold or white?

Swingirl,
I asked my sister what she thought of it and she said the same thing. 1800 is for the setting and band only. I have my own center stone. I''ve been looking at whiteflash too. Thanks for the input.

 

[swingirl]

I think you can do better for $1800. WF is a good place to look. Good luck with your search. Can't wait to see what you plunk the center stone into!!

 

[mitsui4]

I saw one 18k Rose gold on ebay and the seller bought from a reputable Singapore local jewelry store.
New one cost at only $480.
I find that gold and workmanship etc is much cheaper in Singapore as compared to US.
For eg: If i custom made a complex halo ring in Singapore cost only US$1k.
But in US, a solitaire + some extra pave diamonds already cost US$1k.
So i think this ebay auction should be worth buying: Auction

Hope it helps

 

[outatouch0]

Date: 9/9/2009 12:42:17 AM
Author: b5s4
outatouch,
I know exactly what you mean. I just assumed the diamond would be the harder purchase but when I stumbled upon a 1.21 J ags 000 at a great price the decision was made for me. I called a local retailer and they said this set would cost 2800 so it is a great deal. Are you looking for this same design in yellow gold or white?

Swingirl,
I asked my sister what she thought of it and she said the same thing. 1800 is for the setting and band only. I have my own center stone. I''ve been looking at whiteflash too. Thanks for the input.

Of course there are a lot of nice sets that cost a lot less but of course she doesn''t like those lol
The one she likes is expensive compared to many other fine choices available. However, the one she likes is the one she likes and I really want to be able to get it for her one day.
http://www.uniondiamond.com/jewelry/jewelry.php?item_id=838&action_type_id=2&pic_name=&shape_id=
http://www.uniondiamond.com/jewelry/jewelry.php?action_type_id=2&sku=JFB1045W
Fortunately I found PS and am learning how to make every dollar count towards my center stone purchase. With some smart and patient shopping I might be able to do it.

 

[tyty333]

Date: 9/8/2009 11:31:34 PM
Author:b5s4
I know a setting is a very personal choice but I wanted to see what everyone thought of this wedding set? It is made by Jabel and from what I have read, their work is very high quality. I initially thought about a scott kay setting but wanted a matching wedding band. I personally loved the van craeynest 812/912 but I think she wouldn''t like something as dainty. To me, this set seems feminine but also classy in a simplistic, straight forward way. The accenting diamonds seem larger than other melee settings but not necessarily in a bad way. It''s being sold at a discount price of 1800 for both and that is cheaper than other Jabel sets but at the same time, for that price there are other sets out there so if you have any suggestions in yellow gold, feel free to post them here. I feel like there''s light at the end of the tunnel for this whole ordeal so without further ado, here it is: Thanks so much for all of your help.

I''m not diggin this set either. I agree with swingirl...to chunky...almost manly looking. I really like the ones
that swingirl recommended. I say keep looking.

 

[iloveny]

I agree with swinggirl and tyty. I like the Whiteflash option much better. But that''s just me- if you know that she likes thicker chunkier bands, then go for it!

 

[D&T]

I like channel set, but this is bit too chunky. There seems to be too much gold (too wide) on the side for the diamonds, if it were a bit thinner then maybe.

 

[b5s4]

Maybe it's the picture but I should mention that each band is 3.5mm wide. The channel flush wedding band from whiteflash is 4.2mm and 2.6mm so it's about .7mm thinner total. One selling point about the jabel is that the color of the yellow gold seems to be darker than some of the other 18k alloys. From the pics on pricescope, doesn't the whiteflash 18k yellow gold appear to be lighter?

 

[b5s4]

ok let''s try take 2. Let me know what you all think. Thanks!
The width of the jabel set would be 7mm total and I think that might be too much as her hands are on the smaller side (ring size about 5). After reading some threads here I came across the James Meyer 1345 setting and really like how a thin wedding band can sit flush to it underneath the bezel. Here''s my idea:

James Meyer 1345 in 18k gold with the two sides that are normally in platinum in 22k gold and possibly with millgrain added there to stand out a little. It would still have the platinum bezel along the diamond.
Here is a picture of it in yellow gold (but with the round bezel of course)

I found a cathy carmendy 20k diamond eternity band and thought it would go well with the 22k gold sides on the 1345. I also thought the millgrain on the ring would go well with the millgrain on the 1345 too.

 

[D&T]

ok, your second look, I

Great choice!!!

 

[Tuckins1]

I agree with some of the others... The first set looks too chunky for my taste, but the second look is STUNNING!

 

[LaurenThePartier]

Yup, I have to say, I''m a fan of the JM plus miligrain wedding band. That will look stunning paired together!

 

[AprilBaby]

The second set gets my vote! The first one looks really dated to me.

 

[tigian]

Love, love, love the second look!

 

[b5s4]

it looks like I may have a winner here. Jim advised against 20k gold because it may be too soft but I feel that with the band tucked inside the e-ring and worn on the inside it won't have much (if any) impact and will be protected. I actually don't like bezel settings in general but Jim's design is so slim it really compliments the diamond and even makes it look bigger. The added security is a huge selling point too. Keep the opinions coming!

 

[b5s4]

Does anyone have pictures of the 1345 in yellow gold? The only one I could find is arjunajane''s which has a cushion garnet in it.

 

[Lynn B]

You're asking for our personal opinions, right? (And of course opinions are like noses, we all have' em!!!)

Weeeeeeeeeelllll... I am not speaking for the workmanship or anything; just the style. It's just not my favorite, either. IMVHO, it looks kinda "dated"... awfully "80's". I'm not a huge channel set fan, anyway, but I'm just not loving it.

BUT... that's the thing with jewelry and settings are so personal, and one person's

can be another person's

or

or even

!!! So hey, if YOU GUYS love it, then go for it!!!

(BTW, congratulations on your engagement!)

ETA: OY! Just NOW saw the addtional photos.

The above was written regarding the FIRST wedding set pictured. Sorry for any confusion!!! I'm tired and going to bed now!!!