Upgrade from halo to bigger solitaire? Don't know what band to get!

posted 2 years ago in Rings
Post # 2
Member
13004 posts
Honey Beekeeper
  • Wedding: June 2011

I dont think adding a pave band to it will make it look too blingy at all.  It’d be a pretty normal looking set to me and not scream ostentatious if that’s what you mean by looking too blingy.  If upgrading is an option though, I’d definitely go for a 1.1 solitare with pave band if that is an option.  Personally, I prefer a larger solitare over a halo and love the look of plain solitare and pave wedding band. 1.1ct would be a very nice size without being even remotely ostentatious/blingy.

Post # 3
Member
2169 posts
Buzzing bee

I don’t think option 1 would look too blingy. It would look pretty normal as far as I am concerned and have seen.

This example seems to have thinner bands than your ring but I think it would look even lovelier if the bands were a little thicker. Not too blingy, just blingy enough in my opinion. If you find it too blingy for you, then obviously don’t go with this choice lol.

I think that option 3 is also a great choice. I don’t know how set/not set on upgrading you are but I think you should go with what feels right for you. Sentimentality aside, I think it’s better to have a larger solitaire than a halo/more pave/blingier band. You can always add a different setting or a blingier band later on in honor of an anniversary and that way you’ll have the plain band to wear to work and the blingier band to wear socially/for other occasions.

I have to admit, I really like the classic look of a solitaire and a gold/platinum band. It looks very classic and refined. What would irk me is if the bands were too thick or too thin (which will depend on your finger, you should them on together before deciding on something). I think the bands in this example are a great thickness IMO and the design of each ring complements the other well.

Post # 4
Member
945 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2014 - Savannah, GA

cbj9:  I’m in the same boat as you except I do not have a halo setting.  We went and looked at rings Saturday and I thought the pave wedding band with my pave band engagement ring looked too blingy for me.  I’m also thinking about changing to a plain setting instead.  I’m thankful my fiance is ok with it.  I’ll be following to see what you end up doing.  

Post # 5
Member
1317 posts
Bumble bee

Is your ring pave or shared prong? Looks shared prong to me, in which case I think a pave would like strange. A matching band would look nice and not too blingy. I am sentimental so would try to get a band that matches my ering but i’m also a bif her fan of solitares than halos so if you don’t mind changing your ering, I would go an option 4- upgrade to solitare and get a blingy band. Best of both worlds that way 🙂

Post # 6
Member
567 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2014

I think your engagement ring is beautiful and it would be a shame to “upgrade” everything…I would just get a nice band to go with it. I don’t think a plain would be strange at all. You just need to decide if you want there to be contrast or a blended sort of look…

Post # 7
Member
1244 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: August 2015

cbj9:  I’d go with option 2 rather than changing the entire ring. I like the combo of pave and plain bands.

Post # 8
Member
2738 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: August 2012

Your halo ring is really beautiful! I would keep that for sure! Go for the plain band if that’s just enough bling for you. You might get used to the diamond band also…

Leave a comment


Sent weekly. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Find Amazing Vendors