(Closed) My ring finally came in–and it's a huge disappointment

posted 5 years ago in Rings
Post # 21
Member
1231 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: November 2016

I love how it looks. But I’m a fan of high settings. You have to live it OP, if you want it changed do what you can to have your dream ring. But honestly, it’s gorgeous. 

Post # 22
Member
8409 posts
Bumble Beekeeper

View original reply
aclockworklilac :  It looks to me like they had to set it like that to accommodate the size of your stone.

Post # 23
Member
4812 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: January 2010

I do not think it looks too high, or gaudy, etc.

I wonder how large the stone in the sample ring you saw in store was, and whether your expectations were a bit unrealistic, as a 2ct oval/9×7 stone is going to be more substantial and usually end up set higher to accomodate the shape including the assymetrical pavilion (unlike a round, it does not have a nicely even, centered pavilion that can fit lowe between the four prongs). I probably would not go for a 2ct oval if I was trying to be more “subdued”, as it is one of the shapes that faces up the biggest. 

The donut, as I understand, is not just design but is likely for security and stability. I see it with rounds, but even more so if you are doing four prongs only on a larger elongated shape. They ought to have said the customization would require that change, though. 

Post # 24
Member
358 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: April 2018

I’m sorry you’re disappointed but I have to say – It looks exactly the same to me! The donut is for stability, and the stone in the sample is smaller than yours so the prongs don’t need as much space to open up. Because your stone is bigger the prongs need room to widen to fit the stone. The metal ring below it is just to stabilize it, I’m guessing they did that because of the space, and they didn’t want the side of the stone exposed and subject to trauma – not that the metal ring caused more space. I think you may also be reacting to the size of the stone – a 9×7 is VERY large! And the setting is quite ornate and high to begin with. I might consider downsizing the stone, as this may solve both problems. Although IMO I think it’s beautiful! Good luck bee! Keep us posted.

 

ETA: Just to add some perspective, I did a side by side for you. It looks like the same height. The donut is for added stability and safety, and the cathedral you picked is naturally high. Also, the sample is a 1ct which faces 6×6 mm. Yours is 9×7. It’s a huge difference, and will change the look. Especially because it’s elongated. The prongs need room to reach out and accommodate the stone. I think you should wear it a few days before bringing it back. Maybe you’ll fall in love!

Post # 25
Member
4066 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: February 2009

It looks the same as the round, in terms of height.  Teh difference is the extra support in the basket for the elongated stone.  As for why it HAS to be high set. it doesn’t… except that is the style you chose.  The round is high set too.

Post # 27
Member
160 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: September 2017

Absolutely talk to the jeweler and see what they can do. As someone who has worked in customer service for a long time, the best method is always firm and kind. Be polite and calm and remember that the person you’re talking to probably didn’t go out of their way to do something that you don’t like, but as a paying customer, stand by your right to buy what you want!

I also have to agree though that it looks beautiful and not gaudy at all. It’s a lovely stone and looks classic and romantic. I also have a ring that’s taller than I thought I wanted and I got used to it super quickly. 

Post # 28
Member
4812 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: January 2010

View original reply
aclockworklilac :  “I’ve seen plenty of oval rings that don’t sit up that high.”

Well, of course they do not all sit up that high but you chose first, to modify a setting for a round to an oval, second a cathedral setting/setting with “shoulders” that limits the space available, and third, a larger stone. If you want a low setting, then look at a low set bezel, a non-cathedral solitaire, or something totally customized for your stone with the direction you want it to be low set.

Post # 29
Member
2527 posts
Sugar bee

It’s beautiful!! Lots of folks have rings set at that height and it doesn’t look weird AT ALL. It looks weird setting a tiny stone way up like that but it looks really appropriate for your stone. Don’t give that a second thought. It’s a stunner!

By The Way…that ring of metal it’s sitting on is called a donut and it is added for stability and security. 

That setting is a “peg head” type. The entire piece with the prongs and the donut, etc…is attached to the ring on a little peg. It comes out and can be easily replaced. Go to another jeweler and ask them if they can replace the peg head with something lower. The jeweler you used already said it couldn’t be done and now that they’ve dug their heels in, they will likely stick with that. It isn’t an expensive alteration. 

Post # 30
Member
1540 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: April 2018 - Our Backyard

View original reply
aclockworklilac :  ok I was expecting something so gaudy the way you described it and it is not at all! It may be a little higher than you expected but it is not too much at all. It looks proportionate and beautiful. Rock it, girl! 🙂

Post # 31
Member
2722 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: April 2017

With all due respect, a 9×7 mm oval is not subtle. I have to agree with RayKay. You were modifying a setting meant for a round stone. From what it looks like, they put the head of the oval into this existing setting and because of the shoulders, they could not be pushed out further to accomodate the head.

It doesn’t look too high at all. The head is also higher to allow a wedding band to sit flush,.something that is important to a lot of women.

I think you may have had unrealistic expectations. I tried that setting on and I think your ring is beautiful.

Post # 32
Member
90 posts
Worker bee
  • Wedding: November 2017

View original reply
aclockworklilac :  I think it’s stunning. Being a teacher myself, I would wear that ring. But the fact your fiancé isn’t proud of it… That would bother me too. My fiancé put a lot of thought into my engagement ring and seeing how excited he is about it.. He even takes it off my finger to look at it when I’m sleeping  haha, that is one of my favorite parts of being engaged. Plus I love it too! I can’t stop staring at it!! 

Recently, I picked out my wedding band with him and it was kinda a rushed shopping trip, they were really busy. And I left second guessing my custom made ring we ordered. It bothered me for a week and I honestly lost sleep over it. I was honest with him and we went back to the store, and luckily switched it.

you both want to love the ring, and if you feel doubts, then go back to the jeweler. They should even want you to love your ring! I hope you get the outcome you want! 

Post # 33
Member
1560 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: April 2017

 That’s a freaking STUNNING ring

Post # 34
Member
8601 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: September 2015

I mean you could take it somewhere else to see if they could lower it somehow but it really doesn’t look insane or anything. Agree with Ray Kay though that there’s nothing subtle about a 2 carat oval no matter how it’s set! 

Worst case you have a jeweler make you a setting from scratch and you sell that setting. Try and wear it for a while… if you both seriously hate it then sure, move on.

Post # 35
Member
42 posts
Newbee
  • Wedding: November 2019 - City, State

 

View original reply
aclockworklilac :  I have a 2.2ct oval stone that sits up as high as yours.  My stone is a little deeper and that’s the reason it doesn’t have the gap yours has in the bare of the ring.  However your ring is absolutely beautiful!  You will get used to it.  The reason for the space at the bottom is because ovals are so much wider and the result is the prongs need to be set wider and that lifts the stone up.  I hope that makes sense.  Don’t worry!! It’s beautiful!!!  Here’s my ring (for an example) it is REALLY dirty it’s usually super clear and sparkly so please don’t look at that part.  Lol.

Post # 36
Member
558 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: May 2017

I have a slightly smaller oval (8×6) but mine sits really close so the band. It’s hard to get a photo because of the ‘shell’ but I can see through and there’s only about 2mm between the band and the bottom of the stone. I think your ring is gorgeous, but I do agree with you that it’s very high and if you aren’t comfortable with that, you should speak to he jeweller. 

Post # 37
Member
39 posts
Newbee

This is my ring, just to give you comparison. the stone does hover a bit above the band but I assume this as medium setting.

 

 

This one is high setting. Very high setting. both are oval stones

Post # 38
Member
3058 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: November 2017

View original reply
sunnierdaysahead2 :  exactly.  

Aclockworklilac: you chose an almost 2 carat equivalent, modified an ornate setting that was meant for a diff shape stone but say the goal for the look was “subtle”.

 Suspect you’re stuck with it at this point. It’s a little obvious but not awful. 

Post # 39
Member
7850 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: February 1997

IMO, a cathedral setting will always look slightly higher than the average ring. I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to see that the setting you chose, along with the size of the stone, would result in a ring that stood as high as yours does. I think it looks fantastic just the way it is. However, if you want to change it, that is your prerogative. But don’t think the jewelers did anything wrong because I don’t think they did.

The topic ‘My ring finally came in–and it's a huge disappointment’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors