Post # 1
so you all have been amazing help in me deciding on what size diamond would suit my hand but now I need advise on the band and setting!
im going with a 1.52 round brilliant, H colour, excellent cut diamond but I’m now unsure of the setting. We are originally going to go for this setting
but now I don’t know if the bands will be too much and thick!! They are 2.3/2.5mm wide in total. Do anyone else have bands this thick to show how thick they look??
otherwise I am maybe leaning towards a simpler setting like this ( I am just going to go for a 4 prong setting btw)
What do you guys think will be timeless??
thanks v v much
Post # 2
I like the single band best. It definitely more classic than the double band.
Post # 3
I prefer the look of the single band. It’s not as busy and all the attention will be paid to your stone (which I would love to see). 🙂
Post # 4
I think with the single band the focus is on the rock, the double band is a bit distracting. Single is def more classic
Post # 5
idk…the double band may not look the best/be distracting…but it’s definitely more interesting! that’s why i voted for it.
Post # 6
Harriet1234: I think the double band is cool. It’s different with out being “out there”. I would go with the double personally. But truly its up to what would fit your style better.
Post # 7
I definitely like the single band better. The double band may look “off” when you add a wedding ring to it due to how the different textures would line up.
Post # 8
The finer single band is the prettiest 🙂
Post # 9
Harriet1234: I voted for the double band because I tend to like a thicker band, in general. But all the PPs who mentioned pros for the single band have very good points! It’s really hard to decide, just based on a computer image, how the ring will look in real life … and how it will look once you put wedding bands with it. For me, the double band and the differences in texture wouldn’t feel distracting. But I agree with PPs that the single band is more classic.
I have a rose gold wedding band that is 2.5 mm thick. Although it doesn’t have a stone, I’ll include a picture of it so that you can get some idea of what 2.5 mm might look like on a finger in real life. Unfortunately, I don’t have a picture of the band by itself. (I thought I did but couldn’t find one. >.O) Apologies for that!
Post # 10
I like the single band, especially if you’re looking for a more timeless look. They are both pretty though!
Post # 11
I voted single band but to answer your question about the double band, 2.5 mm total (I assume that means for both the bands together) is not very big. My band is a bit smaller so it won’t help you to see, but maybe some other people can post their bands. It would defnitely not be a thick band.
Post # 12
Harriet1234: Sorry for posting a second time. I grabbed a couple of quick pics of my 2.5 mm band on its own. Again, no stone, but it might give you a better idea of how wide the band is in real life, and I think it’s easier to see when it is by itself. I would have edited my previous post to replace the picture, but too much time had passed. >.O
As “honeybee2014” mentioned, it is not a wide or big band at all. (For reference, I wear a size 8 and this ring is sized to 8.5.)
Post # 13
I like the single but you could look at going a little bit wider. With a 1.5ct centre a 2 or 2.5mm band will not distract from the stone. If anything, it may balance it out better. I think mine is 2.2 but my centre is only .75 so I feel that does take away from it a bit.
I agree with a PP, the double is pretty cool as it’s unique but you may struggle to find a wedding band that suits.