shape
carat
color
clarity

Would you dismantle this ring?

nala

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
7,354
I don’t own it yet but am contemplating it. Actually, have been for 2 years and now it’s on sale, lol.
The setting is warped—but salvageable.
The diamonds measure 3.9 mm with the center a little over. I don’t know if they are peruzzi. I don’t know if they would make good side stones for my old mine cut.
Thoughts?
IMG_5088.png
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5087.png
    IMG_5087.png
    688 KB · Views: 55
  • IMG_5086.png
    IMG_5086.png
    709.3 KB · Views: 50
  • IMG_5075.jpeg
    IMG_5075.jpeg
    151.1 KB · Views: 51
  • IMG_5065.jpeg
    IMG_5065.jpeg
    138.1 KB · Views: 55
  • IMG_5064.jpeg
    IMG_5064.jpeg
    179.6 KB · Views: 55
No one? Here goes. Apologies in advance!

OK: it holds no appeal for me in its current form. That's pretty unusual; I like most old stuff. It just seems clumsy-looking, almost like it's not jewelry.

I can't tell if it's worth breaking up -- I'm not savvy enough to evaluate the cut of those diamonds.

if you owned it and the question was wear or disassemble, I'd vote for the latter.
 
Another vote to break it up. I love the cut of the stones (I think they’re more of an antique cushion that Peruzzi, possibly with the exception of the one on the left, but happy to be wrong) but the setting does nothing for me at all.

I would let someone with dreamy olde world talent (CvB) make something new with them.
 
I think I would need to see them next to the mine cut but certainly they have potential. I don’t think that setting is doing them much justice.
 
Haha. As usual I’m the odd one out. I think the left and center are “Peruzzi like” but ultimately Old Mine Cuts.

If you look on Instagram, apparently Peruzzi set some very specific parameters which were deliberately modified by other diamond cutters and then cuts transitioned away from the Peruzzi specs to be Peruzzi inspired old mine cuts. Old Mines came out of the Peruzzi style of cutting. Old Mines are all over the map no firm cut specifications. That's my impression.

I adore this ring as is. I adore the design details of setting (except for the blocky frame holding the diamonds which is a little thick and plain. I adore that it is warped. Etc. I am so romantic, don’t listen to me on if you should scrap the setting. I love the entire thing. LOL :)

In terms of scrapping and using these stones as side stones: if they hold their own in terms of cut structure (if they are not mushy and if the have nice broad facets that reflect larger panels of light) I think they could be used as side stones. Matching might be an issue because that Left sided diamond has a very high crown and the Center one has a lower crown. If the non matching crown height would bother you, it IMO is something to consider.
 
Last edited:
Ty all! I am on the fence bc the truth is I wonder how these stones perform. They do look kind of cloudy.
I am also considering this monstrosity.

IMG_5192.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5191.jpeg
    IMG_5191.jpeg
    178.9 KB · Views: 17
I was to ask if the stones sparkle bc they look lifeless in the photo but I know photos cannot be reliable.

That dinner ring is cool though!
 
One vote for the monstrosity!

I have to say that it I know it is not the art deco period and the stones may be moderns? It is not as refined and detailed as art deco but it is a statement ring and the milgrain and bezeling is growing on me!
 
I was to ask if the stones sparkle bc they look lifeless in the photo but I know photos cannot be reliable.

That dinner ring is cool though!

The dinner ring was not love at first sight for me, lol. It was more of a let me see that wannabe art deco retro ring. But it is growing on me bc of the sheer size!
 
Um, I LOVE the monstrosity!!
 
I was to ask if the stones sparkle bc they look lifeless in the photo but I know photos cannot be reliable.

That dinner ring is cool though!

I was going to ask if the ring was dirty because the stones looked cloudy to me. I assumed it had been cleaned by the seller, so because, assuming it is clean, I would pass on it because of the cloudiness.
I like the bracelet or bangle idea for the "monstronsity"!
 
Does “it looks cool” count as a reason? Is it platinum? It has a lot of presence and it’s interesting to look at.

By the way, all I can think about when you posted “tell me why” is the commercial for Downy Rinse and Refresh with the Backstreet Boys :lol:
 
I have a three-stone not unlike the original ring you posted that I love - even though the stones are rather small and there’s very little light play. The ring is comfortable to wear, and the setting has enough intricate detail that I get to enjoy. It’s my go-to right-hand ring when I travel - which is rather often.

That said, it looks to me like one side of your original ring has been mangled a bit? Or maybe repaired badly? That would bother me. Overall, it seems to me that the setting doesn’t really do that era justice - so I wouldn’t feel bad about breaking it up.

But that’s just me. It may well “sing” to somebody else!
 
Ty all! I am on the fence bc the truth is I wonder how these stones perform. They do look kind of cloudy.
I am also considering this monstrosity.

IMG_5192.jpeg

That’s a Yes!
 
I say yes to the monstrosity. It would look great on your middle finger. Hey, then you could get by with innocently "showing your new ring" to people you don't like hahaha.

I'd probably skip on the small ring because there's no assurance that the diamonds would work with the other project.
 
So I went back for a closer look and it turns out the center stone is a cubic zirconia!! I did suspect it was but wasn’t even sure that I was serious about it. They refused to drop the price so I lost interest.
 
Seriously! Who are these scoundrels?
 
LOVE!
 
Gorgeous!
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top