Post # 1
My boyfriend and I are getting engaged soon. I love the oval cut and we have found a beautiful diamond but I can’t decide between the cathedral setting and the halo setting. Sorry for the poor iPhone pictures, but I would love some feedback!
Post # 2
No halo. So classic and elegant
Post # 3
- Wedding: April 2017 - City, State
I vote no halo. I think the second pic is perfect.
Post # 4
No halo, if it is a beautiful stone it needs to stand alone
Post # 5
Love the halo with no side diamonds!! My pear is like that! So elegant!!
Post # 6
schmeckpepper: No halo. The stone is gorgeous as is!!
Post # 7
If it were me, I’d keep it without a halo.
Having said that, a halo of alternating rubies and diamonds would be lovely.
Post # 8
No halo! Always no halo 🙂
Post # 9
I love plain shank halos (I have one) but I think the shank is too thick for a halo. So in this case I prefer the solitaire
Post # 10
- Wedding: September 2016 - The Wagar Farm B&B
It seems like every ring I see lately has a halo. If you are all about being on trend go with the halo, if you are more about classic elegance, go no halo.
Post # 11
- Wedding: November 2009 - New York, NY
I would go without a halo.
Post # 12
I’m another vote for a solitaire! It’s a beautiful diamond, and I just love the classic elegance of a solitaire. Plus, you don’t have to worry about a teeny stone falling out and the possibilities are endless for a wedding band!
Post # 13
I prefer the solitare. If you are happy with finger coverage with that stone alone, go for the simple look.
Post # 14
Halo. Halos are so pretty! Love them.