Your opinion please on these antique rings

[Boom]

I''ve wanted an antique ring for a long time and I''m finally taking the plunge.

I considered ebay where prices are lower, but the risk of being scammed and inaccurate information is too high and frightening, so I decided a reputable jeweler was the way to go.

I found 3 that I like and would love to hear some opinions.

The first ring is priced at 10% more than the other 2.

The first one.
1920s Tiffany & Co platinum ring. 1.11 J/K Si1 antique cushion center, side diamonds 0.20cts
Even though it''s a genuine T&C ring, there is no premium for this. The price is comparable to similar non-T&C rings.

The second one
OEC 0.85-0.90ct H/I VS center surrounded by single cuts (0.3cts) and and baguettes (0.2cts).
This is the one I keep coming back to, I just wish the stone was lower color and bigger.

The third one (Sorry for the small pic)
1.06ct OEC, I-J color and SI2 (there is an inclusion on the side of the diamond). The diamond has a small table, and
an open culet. The setting is of intricate platinum filigree with 12 single cut diamonds in the setting. Undercarriage is fragile.

Which would be your choice? All opinions welcome!

 

[angel_nieves]

I like the first and third ring.
Now I am probably wrong about this but I think the diamond in the first ring is not original. Tiffany & Co doesn''t use lower clarity diamonds such as S1''s. However it is a pretty ring just the same.

As I said before I am most likely wrong about my assumption of the ring. Hopefully someone else will chime in.

 

[bstraszheim]

I vote for #1, I like that it is antique, but it''s not as "busy" as the others, the focus is definitely on the centre diamond. I must say that I am also partial to Tiffany & Co. I think the workmanship is superb.

Let us know what you choose!

I wish you well,

Bridget

 

[coll]

I actually like #2 best. I think it would look like more "bling" on the hand, and I honestly just prefer the VS quality stones. The center stone looks gorgeous. And unless Tiffanys used to do things differently, I think the above poster is right- since at least the 70s (my mom''s ring is Tiffany''s) they don''t use anything of lower quality than VS2.

 

[widget]

Boom: OH MY GOSH...They all look fabulous!!!!

It''s got to be simply a matter of personal taste. Is this for an Ering? Since the stats are so specific, I assume the larger diamonds have reports? GIA? Who is the vendor? (the pictures remind me of Nelson Rarities...a vendor I highly recommend to antique jewelry buffs...)

I guess my personal favorite would be the first one....an authentic Deco Tiffany would be too hard for me to pass up....especially if it was for an E-ring.

Has the vendor given you an opinion of which ring has the most sparkly diamond?

Questions, questions...

YUMMY!

widget

 

[decodelighted]

Is this for a RHR? ''Cause #! looks pretty engagement ring-y to me ... I also agree that almost assuredly it is not a Tiffany stone, because of the color/clarity.

Hard to say without hand pix ... but none of the three really call out to me. I''ve seen more intricate & lovely pieces I''ve wanted to snatch off my computer screen. I might wait.

If you''re dying, dying, dying right now - one of these three - I''d pick #3.

Are these from singlestone.com ... if not, you might want to look there too!

 

[Kaleigh]

Tough choice. If this is for a RHR I''d go for #3, followed by #2. #1 looks more like an enagagement ring. Also I doubt the center stone in that ring is a Tiff''s as they don''t sell that color/clarity combo. Very nice rings, where are they from??

 

[widget]

Author: angel_nieves
I think the diamond in the first ring is not original. Tiffany & Co doesn''t use lower clarity diamonds such as S1''s.

Angel does bring up a good point. I thought about this too, but am not sure that Tiffany''s in the ''20s was as stringent about color/clarity as they are today. Maybe an antique expert would chime in...

If I were considering (and paying for) an vintage Tiffany piece, I''d want to be pretty confident that it was the original stone. You might ask the vendor about this..

widget

 

[Hest88]

I like #1 but it sounds like you like #2. However, if you''re not jumping out of your seat crazy about any of them, why not just wait a bit longer and find something you really love?

 

[jbrookie82]

I like #1 and #2.

 

[Kaleigh]

I am going in a bit to an antque jewlery store and will ask the owner about Tiffany rings from the 20''s. She sells a bunch of old Tiffany rings. Could be back then they sold that color and clarity. I will let you know what I find out. I am hoping she can tell me more about Nanny''s ring...

 

[ScubaDucky]

#1

 

[Caribou]

I like the looks of #2.

I wish we could see a full frontal view of #1, though. It might change my opinon.

 

[widget]

Speaking of Ebay...there is one dealer I''ve done business with that I was very impressed with...I think her ID is "melsantiquejewelry".

Although it says that they don''t accept returns (unless the item doesn''t match the description) I learned that they''ll sometimes waive this and offer a full return policy, I presume for higher ticket items...

widget

 

[Boom]

Thanks for your opinions, ladies! Very interesting, looks like it really is a matter of taste and personal preference.

I should have been more specific, I am looking for a RHR and though perhaps a more ornate ring would be extra bling. I don''t however mind if it''s e-ring like and the name brand does appeal to me. I did notice the lower color and clarity of the T&C ring, but thought perhaps they did things differntly 80 years ago. I''m going to ask the jeweler about that.

The first ring is from Rauantiques and the other 2 from Nelson Rarities (good eye, widget!). I don''t think any of them come with lab reports though. I did check out singlestone, but their prices seem a little higher, and I didn''t find anything within my budget that I like. Example
1.16 LVS OEC in vintage platinum mounting. $5,800

Hest88
I''ve been waiting and waiting for the right one, and now several years have passed. I don''t know when if I''d ever get one if I keep waiting.

I just found this on ebay

, I''ve watched this seller for a while now and she has really nice stuff. The price is much more affordable too since the center stone is smaller. I know it''s a little ornate for some, but thought I''d add it to the mix.
0.75ct G VS transition cut. Single cut diamonds approx 0.50cts. Just under $3000.

 

[Boom]

Date: 1/12/2006 12:41:25 PM
Author: widget
Speaking of Ebay...there is one dealer I've done business with that I was very impressed with...I think her ID is 'melsantiquejewelry'.

Although it says that they don't accept returns (unless the item doesn't match the description) I learned that they'll sometimes waive this and offer a full return policy, I presume for higher ticket items...

widget

Is it melonypino? She has gorgeous pieces, but quite pricey.

 

[Madam Bijoux]

Hi! If you''re concerned that the stone in ring #1 was switched, you can take the ring to Tiffany and have them check their archives. They have records going all the way back to day 1. They might charge you about $500 USD to check their archives, though.

 

[valeria101]

Speaking of Ebay antiques... This One came up on a random thread earlier on. 'Art Nouveau' knows their store in NYC. Some OTT examples in stock speak some good about the sellers too.



The picture of the Tiffany ring makes me wonder if the original stone had been replaced at some point (thinking not just of color, but also about the cut - I would have expected closer to modern for the maker and age). The setting looks like the real thing.

Of the first three, I would prefer the style of that ring though, for what that matters. And didn't see the last two pictures when writing this! Both are quite lovely, but the last posted it is very much my style, and looks well made even that close up. The slight wear to the millgrain could probably be undone and everything else is just perfect... !

Well, that's just me.

 

[widget]

Hi, Boom...yes, I was referring to Melany Pino.

How much are they asking for the Tiffany? In general, I think Rau Antiques are way overpriced.....

I like that last one you posted, too. Do you know and trust the seller? Have you ever used: www.toolhaus.org/cgi-bin/negs ? (I hope the link works) It''s a great way to instantly pull up a vendor''s negative, neutral, and mutually withdrawn feedback..

widget

 

[Boom]

Date: 1/12/2006 12:58:59 PM
Author: Madam Bijoux
Hi! If you''re concerned that the stone in ring #1 was switched, you can take the ring to Tiffany and have them check their archives. They have records going all the way back to day 1. They might charge you about $500 USD to check their archives, though.

Yikes! $500? If the piece cost $20,000 I''d probably do it though.

I just heard from the jeweler who says the stone is definitely original to the Tiffany setting. The email states that ''The prongs have never been moved from the stone. Possibly tightened, but never pulled back.'' I wonder if that''s a foolproof way of evaluating whether the stone is original. In any case, the ring is on its way to the jeweler, and I should be getting more information soon.

 

[Kaleigh]

Just got back from the antique jewelry store. The owner wasn't there, but her assistant did say Tiffany rings back in the 20's were often a J or K, but wasn't sure about the clarity. Oh well I tried at least.

 

[Boom]

Date: 1/12/2006 1:56:32 PM
Author: kaleigh
Just got back from the antique jewelry store. The owner wasn''t there, but her assistant did say Tiffany rings back in the 20''s were often a J or K, but wasn''t sure about the clarity. Oh well I tried at least.

Oh, so it''s possible the stone is original? Thanks so much Kaleigh, I feel much better hearing it from someone other than the seller.

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 1/12/2006 2:04:03 PM
Author: Boom

Date: 1/12/2006 1:56:32 PM
Author: kaleigh
Just got back from the antique jewelry store. The owner wasn''t there, but her assistant did say Tiffany rings back in the 20''s were often a J or K, but wasn''t sure about the clarity. Oh well I tried at least.

Oh, so it''s possible the stone is original? Thanks so much Kaleigh, I feel much better hearing it from someone other than the seller.

Yes, and she even showed me an old Tiffany ring and the color was definitely a J. It was gorgeous!!!

 

[widget]

Date: 1/12/2006 1:35:03 PM
Author: Boom
I just heard from the jeweler who says the stone is definitely original to the Tiffany setting. The email states that ''The prongs have never been moved from the stone. Possibly tightened, but never pulled back.''.

If the stone has never been removed, how can they quote such an exact (1.11) carat weight?

widget

PS: I PMed you...

 

[Boom]

Date: 1/12/2006 2:07:14 PM
Author: kaleigh

Date: 1/12/2006 2:04:03 PM
Author: Boom

Date: 1/12/2006 1:56:32 PM
Author: kaleigh
Just got back from the antique jewelry store. The owner wasn''t there, but her assistant did say Tiffany rings back in the 20''s were often a J or K, but wasn''t sure about the clarity. Oh well I tried at least.

Oh, so it''s possible the stone is original? Thanks so much Kaleigh, I feel much better hearing it from someone other than the seller.

Yes, and she even showed me an old Tiffany ring and the color was definitely a J. It was gorgeous!!!

Do tell how it looked like, was it a simple solitaire or some fancy setting?

 

[Kaleigh]

There was a lot of filagree on the setting. It had a diamond in the center and was flanked by the most beautiful sapphires ever. I loved it. Like that rich Kashmir blue, yummmm. I didn''t ask the price,

I didn''t want to know,

 

[Boom]

Date: 1/12/2006 2:15:16 PM
Author: kaleigh
.. I didn''t ask the price,

I didn''t want to know,

That gorgeous, huh?

 

[Tacori E-ring]

I love the first ring!!!

 

[Hest88]

Okay, of the last two rings you just posted, the eBay ring is something to think about. It''s actually too ornate for my personal tastes, but it''s so different and so impressive that if it''s authentic and checks out it would be a great piece for you.

 

[bling*diva*]

~~My favorite is #1!! Very pretty!!!