What would you do?

[idreamofice]

Hello everyone!

I am looking into different settings for my engagement ring. Although I''ve always wanted a 3 stone ring, being on pricescope has opened my eyes to new possibilities! I want to make sure I make the right decision. I''ve started looking around and after a long talk w/ my FI, he was more open to looking at different solitaire settings.

I told him that if he still wanted to surprise me with side stones, he is more than welcome to do so! I can always use another pair of studs and he liked the idea

So..I want to do as much research as possible before making my final decision and could use your help since I’m VERY indecisive!

So far this is what I''ve come up with....I''m open to suggestions! (I''m a simple girl and would like to keep the ring pretty simple as well...I think...)

#1 : Keep as is and get a to die for wedding band

#2 : http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=367 - Not sure how he works but I LOVE this setting!

Thanks in advance!!

 

[mirre]

I really like the ring you posted a link to in option #2 (I wouldn''t pick it for myself just because I don''t like the feel of the diamonds that go around the band like that) But it is a lovely ring.

Since you say you would like to keep it pretty simple I would say go with option #1 or #3. With #1 there''s less maintance and you can get LOTS of different kinds of bands to go with it. My reasoning for option #3 is that you said you would still kind of like to have a 3-stone ring but also like solitaires. This is sort of a nice mix of both. It''s simple and very pretty and you can still have fun with wedding bands for it.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[Ellen]

I''m a simpler gal too, and I love letting a pretty stone have the spot light. So out of these choices, I would opt to keep what you have and get a nice band to go with.

I like Leon''s work, but that particular setting is not one of my favorites...

 

[sera]

Option #1 seems to fit "simple girl keeping the ring simple." And like was already mentioned, to go with it you could get a TDF band and others to fit your simple moods or blingy moods and every mood in between.

Option #3 is fairly simple and classy. You still have some flexibility with bands.

Option #4 I think would be very flashy... it would be simple in the sense of not a lot of fancy stuff going on with the setting, but still very blingy with less flexibility with a band. This option with smaller sidestones might give a more simple look.

Option #2... I really love Leon''s work, but I don''t get the sense of "simple" from it. It would be recommended that you do not wear a band with it.

Have you tried on these styles? You may like the style in a picture or on someone else, but it''s important to know if you like it on your hand.

I''m a blingy-type-of-girl on the lookout for a fancy, blingy setting... but with an EC, I think I would want a simple setting with clean lines. If you like all the styles on, my preference for you would be Option #1, Option #3 (or #4 with smaller sidestones), Option #4, and Option #2.

 

[idreamofice]

Thank you very much ladies!

You guys are all right about #2. After looking at it again and again, I realize that it is not me. I still think it is lovely but my initial excitement over it has dissolved.

As for # 3, I''ve never tried this setting on before so I''m not too sure about it. I will have to take a trip to a jewelry store to try it on.

I''ve tried on quite a few 3 stone rings so I know I like them. I think my FI has in mind for side stones is .5 carat ea. but I think maybe .3 carat ea. would be better so the center stone will still be the main forcus.

Option # 1 sounds good too but while I am a simple girl with simple tastes, I sometimes think the ring is a little too plain...no? Maybe a nice band will jazz it up a little.

Thanks again for your input Mirre, Ellen and Sera, it is greatly appreciated!