Which has more hand presence...3 stone or halo?

[yssie]

A great three-stone has strong presence, but in a more subtle way than a halo. IMO, halos are more, "Look at me! Look at meeeeee! I will dazzle you with my blinding blinginess! It's great, isn't it? All this bling? Don't you love it????" and three-stones are more, "Why, yes I am beautiful. How kind of you to notice. What's that you say? My proportions? Indeed, they're stunning, aren't they?" Not sure if that makes sense, but that's what these two styles say to me.

Well a halo can symbolize the Duggars....

::snort::

 

[Christina...]

I vote three stone. Classic, wears well with anything and can have meaning(3 kids or hubby you and one kid or past present future). I'm not a fan of halo rings, to me, it's just a diamond who wishes it was bigger. Gemstones in halos look great because you can see the diamonds accenting the color of the gem but a diamond halo with diamond in the center make me feel like it's a fancy a cluster ring.

Well a halo can symbolize the Duggars....

I just shot milk out of my nose! Awesome!

 

[Laila619]

I vote three stone. Classic, wears well with anything and can have meaning(3 kids or hubby you and one kid or past present future). I'm not a fan of halo rings, to me, it's just a diamond who wishes it was bigger. Gemstones in halos look great because you can see the diamonds accenting the color of the gem but a diamond halo with diamond in the center make me feel like it's a fancy a cluster ring.

Well a halo can symbolize the Duggars....

I just shot milk out of my nose! Awesome!

I know, hilarious!

 

[Laila619]

I'd vote three stone. I think there are things you can do to make it less a blob of diamonds, separating the stones a little bit, semi bezel/bezels, etc.

Yes, that's a good point Packrat. I'd like my stones to be a bit more separated so they don't just blob into one another. I want it to look like less of a band, and more like a center stone with two sides.

 

[TravelingGal]

I'd vote three stone. I think there are things you can do to make it less a blob of diamonds, separating the stones a little bit, semi bezel/bezels, etc.

Yes, that's a good point Packrat. I'd like my stones to be a bit more separated so they don't just blob into one another. I want it to look like less of a band, and more like a center stone with two sides.

Are the sides on yours set lower than the center? If not, that would help.

 

[alene]

I think three-stones and halos are SOOOOO different, that you really need to wear fakeys of both styles for a bit to see which one you prefer.

A great three-stone has strong presence, but in a more subtle way than a halo. IMO, halos are more, "Look at me! Look at meeeeee! I will dazzle you with my blinding blinginess! It's great, isn't it? All this bling? Don't you love it????" and three-stones are more, "Why, yes I am beautiful. How kind of you to notice. What's that you say? My proportions? Indeed, they're stunning, aren't they?" Not sure if that makes sense, but that's what these two styles say to me.

Funny, I felt exactly the opposite. Decided against a 3-stone as it just felt very blingy in a look-at-me sort of way. A small halo actually felt subtle in comparison. It's probably all about proportions for both styles.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I vote three stone. Classic, wears well with anything and can have meaning(3 kids or hubby you and one kid or past present future). I'm not a fan of halo rings, to me, it's just a diamond who wishes it was bigger. Gemstones in halos look great because you can see the diamonds accenting the color of the gem but a diamond halo with diamond in the center make me feel like it's a fancy a cluster ring.

Well a halo can symbolize the Duggars....

I just shot milk out of my nose! Awesome!

I know, hilarious!

Brilliant...really!

 

[Haven]

I think three-stones and halos are SOOOOO different, that you really need to wear fakeys of both styles for a bit to see which one you prefer.

A great three-stone has strong presence, but in a more subtle way than a halo. IMO, halos are more, "Look at me! Look at meeeeee! I will dazzle you with my blinding blinginess! It's great, isn't it? All this bling? Don't you love it????" and three-stones are more, "Why, yes I am beautiful. How kind of you to notice. What's that you say? My proportions? Indeed, they're stunning, aren't they?" Not sure if that makes sense, but that's what these two styles say to me.

Funny, I felt exactly the opposite. Decided against a 3-stone as it just felt very blingy in a look-at-me sort of way. A small halo actually felt subtle in comparison. It's probably all about proportions for both styles.

If the center stone of the halo is smaller than a carat, and if you don't have melee in the band, I can see how a halo might seem more subtle. But in general, they are very blingy and LOOK AT ME! IMO. Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course!

I've never seen a three-stone IRL that wasn't subtle, to be honest. I think they are so very classy and discreet, despite being so substantial.

 

[Haven]

I vote three stone. Classic, wears well with anything and can have meaning(3 kids or hubby you and one kid or past present future). I'm not a fan of halo rings, to me, it's just a diamond who wishes it was bigger. Gemstones in halos look great because you can see the diamonds accenting the color of the gem but a diamond halo with diamond in the center make me feel like it's a fancy a cluster ring.

Well a halo can symbolize the Duggars....

LOVE IT!

Maybe we should contact Neil Lane. He's all about supplying rings for reality show stars!

 

[Laila619]

I'd vote three stone. I think there are things you can do to make it less a blob of diamonds, separating the stones a little bit, semi bezel/bezels, etc.

Yes, that's a good point Packrat. I'd like my stones to be a bit more separated so they don't just blob into one another. I want it to look like less of a band, and more like a center stone with two sides.

Are the sides on yours set lower than the center? If not, that would help.

Just the tiniest bit, but they are basically almost even. Are yours? I thought it would be more blingy with all of them sitting up top, so I requested that with the CAD.

 

[Laila619]

"Look at me! Look at meeeeee! I will dazzle you with my blinding blinginess! It's great, isn't it? All this bling? Don't you love it????" and three-stones are more, "Why, yes I am beautiful. How kind of you to notice. What's that you say? My proportions? Indeed, they're stunning, aren't they?" Not sure if that makes sense, but that's what these two styles say to me.

Haven, I love this!!! I think I belong in your club where inanimate objects talk, because I TOTALLY get what you are saying there! I'm still voting for a 3 stone for you, Laila, because I love what the diamonds are saying above! Which person are you in your 'real life' - are you a halo or a 3 stone? Are you a LOOK AT ME or a How kind of you to notice...?

Enerchi, I'm a subtle person, but I like my jewelry to be eye-catching and noticed!

 

[onedrop]

I am going to have to agree with the many others on this thread: a three stone seems to have more finger presence to me. Granted I have never owned or worn a halo, but I have had a three stone setting, and people just seem to *notice* my engagement ring more as a three stone setting. Halos might possibly have the same presence but I think it's more dependent on the specific setting. I hope you find something you love finally!!

 

[TravelingGal]

Mine are even. It might be blingier that way, but it also is "blobbier" as you say. It might be better to make it less blobby by setting the sides lower to emphasize the center.

 

[Gypsy]

Have you thought about colored sidestones OR a different shape to the sidetones? If you want differentiation-- that's the way to go for it. If you did white pears or sapphires or rubies. That would give you differentiation.

 

[TravelingGal]

Have you thought about colored sidestones OR a different shape to the sidetones? If you want differentiation-- that's the way to go for it. If you did white pears or sapphires or rubies. That would give you differentiation.

I was going to suggest that, but thought she wanted blingpact. While colored stones would have nice finger coverage, it doesn't give much blingpact.

 

[Laila619]

Have you thought about colored sidestones OR a different shape to the sidetones? If you want differentiation-- that's the way to go for it. If you did white pears or sapphires or rubies. That would give you differentiation.

I was going to suggest that, but thought she wanted blingpact. While colored stones would have nice finger coverage, it doesn't give much blingpact.

Yes, good idea but definitely not as much blingpact. It's also why I ruled out pears and baguette sides. They are a lovely look, but more subtle than rounds, IMO.

I think I'm leaning towards staying with a 3 stone, but halos always seem to tempt me.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Bezels also separate the diamonds. Lowering them and tilting the sides will do that too. Or maybe slightly smaller sides.

My only advice is to get a nice fancy high quality mount No cheapies allowed!

 

[Gypsy]

Okay good point. Maybe a halo with Cadillac sides? Here's an example http://www.tacori.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/2628-RD-P_multi.jpg

 

[mich_t]

Could you get a three stone which includes two pear or half-moon sidestones? This way your centre stone will still be the main attraction and may not look blobby.

 

[TravelingGal]

Could you get a three stone which includes two pear or half-moon sidestones? This way your centre stone will still be the main attraction and may not look blobby.

Thought of that too. I won't speak for pears, but on a stone that size, the half moons wouldn't give the coverage that full rounds do, PLUS they'd also contribute to blob factor...unless the half moons were much smaller...in which case...not enough blingpact!

I like half moons on colored stones OR bigger diamonds, especially ovals!

 

[mich_t]

Could you get a three stone which includes two pear or half-moon sidestones? This way your centre stone will still be the main attraction and may not look blobby.

Thought of that too. I won't speak for pears, but on a stone that size, the half moons wouldn't give the coverage that full rounds do, PLUS they'd also contribute to blob factor...unless the half moons were much smaller...in which case...not enough blingpact!

I like half moons on colored stones OR bigger diamonds, especially ovals!

I think you're right TravelingGal on the half-moons. Pears would be though (but I'm a bit biased!!)

 

[Gypsy]

Could you get a three stone which includes two pear or half-moon sidestones? This way your centre stone will still be the main attraction and may not look blobby.

Thought of that too. I won't speak for pears, but on a stone that size, the half moons wouldn't give the coverage that full rounds do, PLUS they'd also contribute to blob factor...unless the half moons were much smaller...in which case...not enough blingpact!

I like half moons on colored stones OR bigger diamonds, especially ovals!

Very true about the blob thing. http://www.shopedc.com/catalog/z_tacori-2628rdsp.jpg Sapphire sides on a halo three stone.

 

[Dougsgirl]

I vote Halo!!

To me... 3 stones are pretty and elegant, but they don't scream "BLING" to me like a beautiful halo! Now, I agree that there are some designs that one could get tired of. I'm actually struggling with that right now because I'm in mid-design process with my new halo ring. And I want to be careful not to make it too busy. But halos are also a very classic setting that have been around for ages.
But I don't want a "cluster", I want a "nestled" halo that accentuates my center stone. I'm actually leaning toward a design very similar to this ring posted here by Anne_h.

The bottom line is that the halo just makes me happier than the 3-stone. It has a princess feel to it.
Go with what makes your heart sing!!

 

[sillyberry]

I think three stones have so much more white on the finger that they have more hand presence -- it's like a solid band of white, even with stones on the smaller side. Up to you whether you think that is more or less "showy" than a halo.

Haven, that's exactly the tone of voice my Sparkles de Lafayette uses.

 

[Laila619]

Thanks everyone for your opinions!! Everyone made some good points. Maybe I should just flip a coin, haha.

Dougsgirl, that halo is beautiful! Is that what you are having made for your AVC?

Gypsy, I absolutely luuurve that Tacori halo, and I've seen it in person, but the stones in the halo are TINY. Like smaller than half pointers tiny!

 

[TravelingGal]

Thanks everyone for your opinions!! Everyone made some good points. Maybe I should just flip a coin, haha.
Dougsgirl, that halo is beautiful! Is that what you are having made for your AVC?

Gypsy, I absolutely luuurve that Tacori halo, and I've seen it in person, but the stones in the halo are TINY. Like smaller than half pointers tiny!

LOL, no don't flip a coin. You've reset enough where you should really think about this, but don't over think it. Even though nothing is forever, it would be great to get a setting you really love. I agree with the others...quality setting, please.

 

[february2003bride]

Both but for difference reasons (IMO). Halos give that round finger coverage, the bigger center stone look. Three stones have the finger coverage spread, from finger side to finger side. Having had both, people definitely noticed the halo more than the three stone, however halos are so common now, that I think back when I had one, it was new and different.

Do you still have your 1.80 haloed? Would you want two halo rings?

 

[Laila619]

Thanks everyone for your opinions!! Everyone made some good points. Maybe I should just flip a coin, haha.
Dougsgirl, that halo is beautiful! Is that what you are having made for your AVC?

Gypsy, I absolutely luuurve that Tacori halo, and I've seen it in person, but the stones in the halo are TINY. Like smaller than half pointers tiny!

LOL, no don't flip a coin. You've reset enough where you should really think about this, but don't over think it. Even though nothing is forever, it would be great to get a setting you really love. I agree with the others...quality setting, please.

Well I did actually love my current 3 stone setting until the jeweler botched the prongs. It was a clean, classic look. Ah well. I'm a chronic re-setter though, the hunt for the new setting is part of the fun for me!

 

[Laila619]

Both but for difference reasons (IMO). Halos give that round finger coverage, the bigger center stone look. Three stones have the finger coverage spread, from finger side to finger side. Having had both, people definitely noticed the halo more than the three stone, however halos are so common now, that I think back when I had one, it was new and different.

Do you still have your 1.80 haloed? Would you want two halo rings?

Feb! Good to see you. Nope, I sold that diamond for a nice little profit that went into the bling fund! I was able to use the crazy diamond price increases to my advantage.

 

[february2003bride]

Both but for difference reasons (IMO). Halos give that round finger coverage, the bigger center stone look. Three stones have the finger coverage spread, from finger side to finger side. Having had both, people definitely noticed the halo more than the three stone, however halos are so common now, that I think back when I had one, it was new and different.

Do you still have your 1.80 haloed? Would you want two halo rings?

Feb! Good to see you. Nope, I sold that diamond for a nice little profit that went into the bling fund! I was able to use the crazy diamond price increases to my advantage.

Oh, wow! That's awesome! So just so I'm up to speed, you only have your .98 now?