Which of these settings would you choose?

[jibs13]

I have been searching for a setting for the following stone:

1.92ct I SI1 Superior Round Hearts & Arrows Diamond

Carat Weight: 1.92ct
Color: I
Clarity: SI1
GIA Cut Grade: Excellent
Optical Symmetry: Superior
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Lab Report: GIA
Width: 7.93mm
Length: 7.95mm
Depth: 4.95mm
Table Percentage: 55.00%
Depth Percentage: 62.40%

And I have narrowed done my search to the following 3 settings: Which one would you choose?
a. http://www.gabrielny.com/engaged/style/ER4124W44JJ (this is the link to the 14k gold version, I would buy the platinum version)

b. http://www.gabrielny.com/engaged/style/ER4181PT4JJ

c. http://boards.weddingbee.com/topic/obsessed-with-this-ring-help-me-with-the-details-please (images attached below)

Thanks!

 

[TC1987]

^ That one. I don't like the heads on the two Gabriel Brothers rings. A large diamond is heavy, and also top-heavy. You want prongs that set it down, and that support the stone well. Those two Gabe's rings just don't have the right type of head for a large diamond.

I like this Brian Gavin ring http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/pave-and-side-stones/fishtail-pave-with-straight-head-18k-yellow-gold-5354y18 because the head gives the 4 prong look but underneath there's a ring that helps support a stone of that size.

 

[jibs13]

Thanks TC1987. I also like option C more than the others. My only concern is that it looks like the pins that hold the 2 point diamonds in place come out past the band. Is that an optical illusion? It makes the band look pointy from the sides. Is that normal because of the size of the melee diamonds? That's my only concern with that one. It does not look as smooth on the sides as the other two. Thoughts? The Brian Gavin looks very nice, unfortunately it's above my budget ($2,000) and I don't think Good Old Gold carries it. Thanks again!

 

[Gypsy]

I prefer the third as well.

 

[jibs13]

Thanks Gypsy! Does the side view of the band look normal to you or are the little "half moon shapes" cut too deep? Is that how it should look since the diamonds are 2 points each and the band is approximately 1.9mm? I might be over thinking this but I just want to make sure that it won't look weird in person. I really like everything else about this setting.

 

[jibs13]

Thank You

Dear PriceScope Extraodinairs...

Thank you...thank you...thank you! Thank you for making the purchase of my engagement ring such an amazing experience. Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that I would purchase an engagement ring online. Your patience, openness and friendliness with me has been incredible. All your comments and advice eased my doubts and helped me make the best possible decision when buying my engagement ring. My fiancee LOVES her ring. She can't stop talking about it and shows it to everyone she meets. It really is perfect. EXACTLY what I was hoping it would be. Words really can't describe how much gratitude I have for you all. PLEASE never stop doing what you do. You have earned a fan for life.

Here's a picture of the actual ring on my fiancee. THANK YOUUUUUU!!!!!

 

[LLNN213]

I'm looking for a very delicate, thin setting like the one in this post. Does anyone know what setting is pictured here?

 

[jibs13]

Hi LLNN213...it is a custom made setting. Good Old Gold made it. Here are the specs:
2mm platinum band
18 round cut side stones
4 prong head
Weight: 2.3 dwt

 

[Gypsy]

You may also like this one that is similar:

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/pave-and-side-stones/legera-pave-platinum-5861p

 

[LLNN213]

Thank you! Would these be considered fish tail or beaded?