Invisible Setting for E Ring

posted 7 months ago in Rings
Post # 2
Member
501 posts
Busy bee

widenercl :  if I were you, I would have them incorporated into a wedding band!! Many years ago, I had an invisible setting with 4 princess diamonds and a halo around them.  The ring was a little too big, so I took it to my small independent jeweller to size it as the store I bought it from had a lot of horror stories about sending rings away to be sized and being gone for several weeks and coming back with even more problems (you can probably guess which chain store I’m referring to).  My guy does sizing same-day as well, and I didn’t want to wait 4-6 weeks for my ring to get back.  Anyhoo, when I asked him to size it down, he told me sorry but he won’t touch quad-set rings.  I was a little pissed lol but he explained that there is a very small frame of metal surrounding each stone, and it doesn’t take much for that metal to pull away from the stone, subsequently loosening the diamond and possibly losing it.  He said it’s not as simple as tightening a prong and that, structurally, they aren’t the best option.  So I would be weary of that option solely based on my experience and due to the fact that these are special diamonds that mean a lot to you and it would be sad to lose one. 

Post # 3
Member
4092 posts
Honey bee

I would do a wedding band. For personal reasons I dislike the invisible set, but from a practical and sentitmental standpoint I think a WB makes the most sense. 

Post # 4
Member
646 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2017

I also agree on the wedding band idea. I’m sure you would be heartbroken if you lost one of those diamonds due to the way they would be set.

Post # 5
Member
1031 posts
Bumble bee

You could do a cluster that is more structurally sound. 

Post # 6
Member
413 posts
Helper bee

I’d put them in a wedding band if I were you just to keep them safe and sound, and you say you’ll be wearing that ring the most so the diamonds will be with you at all times which I think is lovely 

Post # 7
Member
1386 posts
Bumble bee

I wouldn’t do the invisible setting because I’d worry about losing them. What about putting them into a band and for your wedding getting a more solitaire looking ring? Basically doing the rings in the other order to give you time to save?

You could also set them like this this. Maybe buy a single colored stone to put in the center of the same size to give it a little bit of flaire? (It shouldn’t cost more than $50 to find a 3mm princess gemstone)

Post # 8
Member
268 posts
Helper bee

I have a 3ct quad that my husband bought for me on the spur of the moment as a surprise just because he liked it and thought it was ” different” from the items I usually wear. I do not wear it very often as the stones are very white and it is set in white gold.( I prefer diamonds with a little colour in them and yellow gold). I get it checked at my jeweller every 4-6 months just to make sure the stones are still secure which is not too much of an inconvenience but still something that I would rather not have to do.  I agree with missbennett. I would go for the wedding band using all the stones that way it is safe and secure and you have them with you everyday.

Post # 9
Member
5334 posts
Bee Keeper

widenercl :  Congratulations (in advance!) on your upcoming engagement. It’s exciting to start saving for a ring and to start looking and dreaming about what type of ring you might have. I’m happy and excited for you!

My anniversary ring is this type of setting. It has one main center stone, and then invisibly-set princess cut diamonds on the shoulders and partway down the band. I’m a stay-at-home mom, but I wear this ring nearly every day. I’ve had it for 4 years now (which I totally can’t believe … it still feels new to me, ha, ha!), and I haven’t had any problems with it. I was wearing it when we were in a car wreck, which damaged the bottom of the ring. But the stones on the setting are still tight and in place.

As a previous poster commented, resizing this type of setting can be a problem. Changing the metal around the framework that holds the stones in place can stretch that framework. I lost about 1.5 ring sizes, and my ring was way too big. Instead of resizing it, I had them put a sizing hump into it. If I lose any more in my ring size, I will have to take a chance and actually resize my ring. But I am trying to avoid that. Because of the way the setting is made (metal framework around the stones), if one stone falls out, you are likely to lose even more. Because the pressure from the stones being lined up with each other exactly is what keeps everything in place. It’s not like a prong setting, where you could lose one stone but the others would still be held in place. Also, I’m not sure how your stones are currently set into your necklace, but putting them into an invisible setting might involve cutting or altering the stones to allow them to click into the metal framework. (I hope this makes sense. I’m not sure I’m explaining it very well. Sorry.)

I love my setting. It has amazing sparkle, and I would definitely do it all over again with purchasing this ring. It’s worth the risk to me, and I think an invisible setting can be stable and fantastic if you take care of it. BUT … the stones in my setting aren’t sentimental at all. They are just stones. If I lost them, I would be sad. But I would collect the insurance on the ring and get something else. The stones in your necklace are much more special. They are from your grandmother and have a beautiful history behind them. If it were me, I don’t think I would take the chance on losing them by putting them into an invisible setting.

Post # 10
Member
472 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: October 2005

I agree with PPs that a wedding band is your best option here. I owned an invisible set ering and band (it was a set) many years ago when I was a graduate student teaching college science labs. Not the same thing as a high school science teacher but probably quite close. I lost stones from that set on multiple occasions, and had them replaced, which cost me about $50 each time. I never found any of them, they were way too small and probably some got dumped in gloves. After about 3 years of this ordeal I finally gave up, saved the center stone and traded the rest for scrap. Please set yours in a wedding band😊

Post # 11
Member
2939 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: November 2018

I would go with whatever option has the least amount of risk to it. 

Post # 12
Member
2328 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2017

widenercl :  could the jeweler set the 4 stones together to look like one stone (this may be what an invisible setting is idk) but then also put a bezel around that and then also bezel set the halo? That’s what I’d do. Like this, but without all the stones on the band, I’d do a plain split shank band.

Post # 13
Member
1386 posts
Bumble bee

nykkee :  This is an invisible setting and it is unfortunately significantly less safe than any other setting. Even with the additional bezel. The reason is if one stone is knocked or chipped in such a way that the tension between stones is lost or one falls out, they will all be at risk for falling out because they’re just resting on eachother in the middle (no metal holding them together).

Leave a comment


Find Amazing Vendors