Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Which 3 stone setting would you choose?

S

sohcpunk

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
22
Hello all! I'm sure you get plenty of guys like me who come on the forums with no clue how to select a diamond or setting. I've been lurking on the forums for a bit and have read up as much as possible. I've narrowed down my setting to a 3 stone diamond from either Brian Gavin or James Allen. Wondering if you guys had any input on these 3 designs?

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/classic-three-stone-18k-white-gold-5377w18

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/settings-with-sidestones/Ladies-18kt-White-Gold-3-Stone-Pave-Set-Diamond-Engagement-Ring.html


As you can already tell there is a subtle difference between the two. The one from James Allen being paved with diamonds. I'm also not 100% sure but I believe the setting from Brian Gavin does not include the 2 side stones while a rep from James Allen tells me that their settings come with 0.3 ct side stones. Ultimately I would love to have the paved stones around the ring and if I go with the Brian Gavin ring, I would ask them to pave diamonds around the ring.

I've also looked into a few loose diamonds to pair up with this setting. I've narrowed it down to these so far.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1481203.asp

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2814740.htm

Any advice would be appreciated.
 
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/open-gallery-accented-18k-white-gold-5448w18 This one is more elegant than either of those. Plus it will allow her wedding band to sit closer to the engagement ring than the options you chose would.

Unless you know she wants pave and has to have it, I wouldn't add pave unless she has large fingers (9 or larger) but if she's anywhere in the 5-6-7 size range I think no pave is best. It will give her more options to customize her look with wedding bands that way and also will be much safer for sizing ( some women's finger sizes fluctuate especially after they have a kid or two), and will be much more lifestyle friendly for long term wear.
 
Hi,

I like the BGD Classic 3 stone setting the best, but I like it as is, without the pave diamonds. :love: It's very classic and elegant, and it lets the diamonds be the stars of the show.
 
Do you ladies like the Classic better than the three stone Truth mounting?
 
Thanks for quick responses. The Open Gallery setting that Gypsy suggested looks like a beautiful ring also. Seems like everyone is recommending Brian Gavin for majority of the settings. I'm guessing that's one of the popular vendors to go through. The only thing I'm hesitant is that their pictures don't show a 360 view and how it looks on the hand/finger like how James Allen's website does.

Is there also a reason everyone is suggesting not to pave? When she hinted to me the ring is likes, she mentioned, 3 stones and diamonds around the band. If I decide not to pave the engagement ring, would you guys recommend that I pave the wedding band? Would it be a better look that way?
 
sohcpunk|1343784958|3243994 said:
Thanks for quick responses. The Open Gallery setting that Gypsy suggested looks like a beautiful ring also. Seems like everyone is recommending Brian Gavin for majority of the settings. I'm guessing that's one of the popular vendors to go through. The only thing I'm hesitant is that their pictures don't show a 360 view and how it looks on the hand/finger like how James Allen's website does.

Is there also a reason everyone is suggesting not to pave? When she hinted to me the ring is likes, she mentioned, 3 stones and diamonds around the band. If I decide not to pave the engagement ring, would you guys recommend that I pave the wedding band? Would it be a better look that way?
Click to expand...

Well, if that is what she wants, then by all means get that! Don't ask us, because our opinion doesn't count...she is the one who will be wearing the ring!

It's just personal preference, I like a plain shank with 3 stones. She likes pave, and that is what matters. ;))
 
She wants pave, she gets pave. That's the end of that. I would get the Open Gallery and add pave. If you do go this route, I would request "bright cut pave" for the shank as that will wear the best.

BGD makes each of their signature settings to order for your stone's exact measurements. And their quality is top notch. If you want additional shots/views of any of their settings you only have to ask them and they will provide them for you. They will also be able to customize in any way you want with ease.

I do like the Queen Dinah that Diamondseeker posted. http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/queen-dinah-3-stone-pave-18k-white-gold-5679w18
Here it is in real life (with fabulous photography) with an 80 point center: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/3-stone-hearts-and-arrows-ring-from-bgd.175227/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/3-stone-hearts-and-arrows-ring-from-bgd.175227/[/URL]
 
Hi sohcpunk. Sounds like you're after something similar to me - I'm getting my 3-stone ring with a 3/4 shared-prong shank custom made with Whiteflash, and I'm also getting a 1.2 centre stone. I was also looking at the two designs that you posted - and very nearly went with the James Allen one - but am now getting something more along the lines of the Queen Dinah that others have mentioned. The Queen Dinah is lovely and has the advantage of allowing the wedding-band to sit more flush to the e-ring than the two you posted (which may not be a concern for her, but it was for me as with many 3 stone rings I tried on the centre stones push the wedding band out).

Even though others have said they prefer a plain shank, I really do like having the pave in the band. When I tried on 3-stone rings I always preferred the ones that had diamonds in the shank, whether pave or prong set, so it comes down to personal preference.. And since she's hinted that that is what she wants, then I think you should go with that. Once she has the ring, she can then always decide whether she wants a matching pave wedding band, or prefers a plain ring.

One thing to think about, perhaps: In the Queen Dinah, the shoulders of the band are slightly curved and there is a gap between the side stone and where they meet the band, whereas the Open Gallery style that Gypsy posted it is more of a solid bit of metal. Do you have a preference for one over the other? I prefer the former as I think it looks a bit more dainty but that's just me.
 
Skittlejelly|1343819366|3244180 said:
Hi sohcpunk. Sounds like you're after something similar to me - I'm getting my 3-stone ring with a 3/4 shared-prong shank custom made with Whiteflash, and I'm also getting a 1.2 centre stone. I was also looking at the two designs that you posted - and very nearly went with the James Allen one - but am now getting something more along the lines of the Queen Dinah that others have mentioned. The Queen Dinah is lovely and has the advantage of allowing the wedding-band to sit more flush to the e-ring than the two you posted (which may not be a concern for her, but it was for me as with many 3 stone rings I tried on the centre stones push the wedding band out).

Even though others have said they prefer a plain shank, I really do like having the pave in the band. When I tried on 3-stone rings I always preferred the ones that had diamonds in the shank, whether pave or prong set, so it comes down to personal preference.. And since she's hinted that that is what she wants, then I think you should go with that. Once she has the ring, she can then always decide whether she wants a matching pave wedding band, or prefers a plain ring.

One thing to think about, perhaps: In the Queen Dinah, the shoulders of the band are slightly curved and there is a gap between the side stone and where they meet the band, whereas the Open Gallery style that Gypsy posted it is more of a solid bit of metal. Do you have a preference for one over the other? I prefer the former as I think it looks a bit more dainty but that's just me.
Click to expand...

You know that is a good question. I'm looking through so many 3 stone rings and it's really tough for me to pick them out. They all look so wonderful. Unfortunately, I know all rings are subjective and the perfect ring is in the eye of the beholder. I just don't want to make a 10k mistake and get my girlfriend something she doesn't 100% love. The Open Gallery, Queen Dinah, and Trellis all look wonderful but I'm really not sure what style she would be into. It would be great to have her pick but at the same time, I'd like to surprise her.
 
Enerchi|1343822937|3244194 said:
This is what I would choose - only because I'm a HUGE fan of the open trellis style! I like the euroshank because it will help to keep the ring 'upright' and less rolling around. This setting includes the BGD melee and 2 x .25 side stones - you pick your own centre.

I love this setting!:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/trellis-with-sidestones-18k-white-gold-5558w18
Click to expand...

I was going to link the one Enerchi linked, plus the Queen Dinah the diamondseeker linked. Those would be my preferences, and the prices include the sidestones. I love the trellis setting but if that's not your lady's 'thing' then the Queen Dinah for sure. Soo gorgeous.

I think the pave stones are a personal preference, but when I've seen 3 stones as engagement rings, the wedding band is usually a plain band, which then 'matches' the shank of the plain 3-stone shank. If the shank has stones on it, then the band should, too. :naughty:

If you know she wants a 3-stone, is it because she's shown you examples or you've gone to try on things together? If she's gone with the basket styles in what she's gravitated toward, then Queen Dinah is my top choice. But, if she's never seen a trellis, well... maybe you can sneakily show her some of the options, like on Pinterest?
 
rubybeth|1343837927|3244326 said:
Enerchi|1343822937|3244194 said:
This is what I would choose - only because I'm a HUGE fan of the open trellis style! I like the euroshank because it will help to keep the ring 'upright' and less rolling around. This setting includes the BGD melee and 2 x .25 side stones - you pick your own centre.

I love this setting!:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/trellis-with-sidestones-18k-white-gold-5558w18
Click to expand...

I was going to link the one Enerchi linked, plus the Queen Dinah the diamondseeker linked. Those would be my preferences, and the prices include the sidestones. I love the trellis setting but if that's not your lady's 'thing' then the Queen Dinah for sure. Soo gorgeous.

I think the pave stones are a personal preference, but when I've seen 3 stones as engagement rings, the wedding band is usually a plain band, which then 'matches' the shank of the plain 3-stone shank. If the shank has stones on it, then the band should, too. :naughty:

If you know she wants a 3-stone, is it because she's shown you examples or you've gone to try on things together? If she's gone with the basket styles in what she's gravitated toward, then Queen Dinah is my top choice. But, if she's never seen a trellis, well... maybe you can sneakily show her some of the options, like on Pinterest?
Click to expand...

You know I think she mentioned to me awhile back if she were to get a engagement ring, it would be the 3 stones and diamonds all around the band. That is a big hint already and pretty much makes narrowing down a ring easy but there are so many 3 stones styles. We have never looked at rings or went to try any. I'm really not sure how to bring that up to her w/o ruining the surprise that I'm close to proposing. I think the Open Gallery and Queen Dinah are excellent rings and have a really classic style that I can't really go wrong with. The Trellis on the other hand I believe might depend on the woman how she feels about that type of style.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top