Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Which setting - opinions needed

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
H

hawk

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 10, 2008
Messages
32
Hi PSers,
i am debating among these three settings. I have a 1.6-1.70 RB stone. I am looking for a setting that is elegant and classy. What I have in mind is a Halo. I picked out three that I am considering. Please chime in what you think of these settings.
Setting No. 1
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/ring/item_412-1962_design.asp?module=setting
Setting No. 2
http://www.jamesallen.com/designer-jewelry/meno-collection-by-danhov/ring/item_294-1129_design.asp?module=setting
Setting No. 3
http://www.jamesallen.com/designer-jewelry/meno-collection-by-danhov/ring/item_294-2409_design.asp?module=setting

Thanks!
 
The first option is too busy for me. The center stone is kind of getting lost in all of the pave with the double halo. It kind of looks like the diamond is wearing a pave shawl.

Thoughts on the second option:

1. You get a GREAT side view of your diamond.
2. The halo isn't too busy and is quite classy.
3. Because of the way the ring is designed, you'll have no problems getting a wedding band to sit flush.
4. It's kind of "flat" from the side.

The third option is gorgeous as well:

1. You still have a great side view of your diamond, although you do see a bit more pave then center stone from the side.
2. The halo isn't too busy and is quite classy.
3. Looks like a wedding band will fit flush quite nicely.
4. The head of the ring looks more integrated to me.

It think the third option is my favorite. The whole ring seems to flow better to me. That said, for $700 less, option 2 is pretty darned spectacular, and has that great clear profile view of the stone.
 
I agree with Gecko, the first one is super busy, not what I would call elegant. Either of the other two are closer to the mark. I like that #1 is so low, but I also like the flow of #2.

Can you ask JA for real handshots? The CGI versions always look wonky to me.
 
Of the three you posted, I like the second one best. Of the Danhov halos, I personally love this one because of how low it sits compared to other halos:

http://www.jamesallen.com/designer-jewelry/meno-collection-by-danhov/ring/item_294-2033_design.asp?module=setting

I know that 2Danes has this ring, here is the link to her thread and a profile shot (hope she doesn''t mind):

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/a-small-accident-leads-to-a-beautiful-halo.88570/

crazyprofileout.jpg


I own a Danhov ring myself (the ME10, it''s a split shank set with a radiant) and they are absolutely gorgeous and delicate looking in person. I don''t feel you''d be disappointed with any of the rings in Danhov''s Meno Collection.
1.gif
 
Thanks everyone for offering your opinions.
girliegirl, I saw the Danov ME29 as well and I love it too. The only reason I didn''t pick it was because it seems that the culet is fully exposed and I wasn''t sure if it would cause the diamond to break more easily. Does anyone have an opinion of the durability on this setting?
I had some concerns over the first one as well as I thought the double pave could be too busy and it may take the attention away from the center stone.
I like the profile of ME44 but it is more expensive than ME11.
This discussion is very fun and informative. I really appreciate the different perspecitives. Please chime in.
 
Date: 8/27/2008 11:12:53 AM
Author: girlie-girl
Of the three you posted, I like the second one best. Of the Danhov halos, I personally love this one because of how low it sits compared to other halos:

http://www.jamesallen.com/designer-jewelry/meno-collection-by-danhov/ring/item_294-2033_design.asp?module=setting

I know that 2Danes has this ring, here is the link to her thread and a profile shot (hope she doesn''t mind):

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/a-small-accident-leads-to-a-beautiful-halo.88570/

crazyprofileout.jpg


I own a Danhov ring myself (the ME10, it''s a split shank set with a radiant) and they are absolutely gorgeous and delicate looking in person. I don''t feel you''d be disappointed with any of the rings in Danhov''s Meno Collection.
1.gif
Click to expand...
OMG THIS ONE.
I love this setting. The culet is not really exposed to anything other than her skin, so it is unlikely it will be broken. It would be protected on one side (at least, unless two wedding bands) by the other ring, too.
 
Hi Gacko, I like the whiteflash Halo setting as well and it is a lot less expensive, but it says they won''t ship the setting until the diamond is set in it. Does anyone have experience of buying loose stone from vendor and having it set by another vedor? Any pros and cons.
 
Date: 8/27/2008 1:08:30 PM
Author: hawk
Hi Gacko, I like the whiteflash Halo setting as well and it is a lot less expensive, but it says they won''t ship the setting until the diamond is set in it. Does anyone have experience of buying loose stone from vendor and having it set by another vedor? Any pros and cons.
Click to expand...
If you already have a stone, WF will set it for you for a fee. I''ll be mailing them my diamond in a month or two to be reset as well. If you like the setting, it''s worth shipping your diamond, in my opinion.
1.gif
 
I purchased my stone from Abazias and my setting from JamesAllen. JA had me send the stone directly to Danhov to be set and there was a small setting fee (was about $100) added on to the cost of the setting. Then Danhov made my ring for my stone, shipped it to JA for final inspection and then they shipped the finished ring to me.

Check with WF to see how they handle situations like this. I''m sure it''s something similar to what I encountered at JA.

Good luck deciding!
1.gif
 
Ditto on the first setting being too busy. My favorite is the second, because it's lower set on the finger, and I prefer rings set low. It's also a more modern look than the third (third is very antique looking, which is not my preference, but it's a matter of personal style).

ETA: WOW at the setting girliegirl posted! IMO, that beats any of the other 3 hands-down!
 
# 3
would be my pick out of those three.

#2 looks like a UFO on a launch pad, too thin and flat from the side (profile), then again..that''s just my opinion!
emcrook.gif
 
I have always loved #2 - and paired with 2 eternity bands it would be lovely!

I also love the WF option, possibly even a little bit more?
 
I personally like No 3 the best. It is not overwhelming, and doesn''t sit overly high either. Quite nice.
 
I also like #3. The first one is too busy. I don''t like the side view of the second one. The edge of the halo seems unfinished, somehow.
 
I would pick setting two or three myself...
 
Date: 8/27/2008 6:06:02 PM
Author: Lady_Disdain
I also like #3. The first one is too busy. I don''t like the side view of the second one. The edge of the halo seems unfinished, somehow.
Click to expand...
That''s what''s odd about #2, looks great from the top, very weird, flat, from the side. I know with my own ring, I see it (as do others) from the side more than I see it straight on..if that makes sense. I could never wear a ring , if the profile bothered me alot, since that view seems to be as important (if not more) than what it looks like facing up!
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top