Post # 1
Fi and I had decided on getting an eng143 and enclosing it with two paved bands! I was so excited.. U til I ran across the set with the halo. Now I just don’t know!! I love the extra bling the halo adds to the set but I wouldn’t like the halo alone too much. I like how the solitaire can stand it’s ground on its own without needing to be beefed up. But now that I’ve seen the halo one the solitaire looks lonely lol. Which one!?
The plan was to get a H&a moissanite if I get the solitaire. Very excited about that. 1.5c or 2 depending on the availability.
If I do the halo. I’ll have to get a forever one Bc I like the cushion cut. And I guess center stone will need to be 1.25 or so.
Post # 2
I am not a fan of halos. Most of them detract from the stone. That one is a little better because it is a small halo, but I still prefer the solitaire, especially with that band. Really pretty band btw!
Post # 3
I say no halo. I think the center holds it’s own without needing any extra accenting. Plus, the pave shank gives it enough contrast.
Post # 5
- Wedding: July 2017 - The Lodge at Little Seneca Creek
I think you only “need” a halo if your center stone is small, and you want it to be larger than the band. If your center stone is going to be about this size, you should definitely go without a halo. 🙂
Post # 7
No halo! Love the choice, by the way.
Post # 10
I’m with everyone else! No halo 😇
Post # 11
I’m so over halos, and that ring is beautiful without one! I vote no halo!
Post # 12
If my stone was 1.5 ct plus, I would forgo the halo. Especially because your set is sparkly enough with out it !
Post # 13
No halo. but I never like halos….
Post # 14
I vote no halo! With the different bands paired with the solitaire, I think it looks more balanced. 🙂 The halo with all the bands make it too busy, in my opinion.
Post # 15
Love them both, but I think the no-halo option is more stunning.