Post # 1
After sending back a supposedly one of a kind vintage ring that wasn’t at all one of a kind, let alone vintage, it’s back to the drawing board–which means more setting shopping.
This time, instead of going the antique route, I’m looking into settings with a vintage feel, but that aren’t actually old. In my search, I came across this one.
Now, I’ve already been in discussion with the jeweler because I think the center stone is sitting up too high. That’s 1.5 carat diamond that he’s got sitting loose in the prongs, and from the top view, it hides the inner halo. This ring would be a better fit for a 1.25, but he said that he could make the setting for a 1.5 easily. And the prongs are removable–it would be a four prong when the center stone is lowered.
And what sort of band
would you pair with it?
Thanks in advance!
Post # 3
I agree, the setting is really high. However, the design is gorgeous!
Post # 4
@taterjuice: I like the lower part of the ring, but the stone is waaaaay to high. I like halos to be flush or almost flush with the center diamond
Post # 5
Hi. I liked it a lot from the top. It’s the profile I’m not wild about. I would rather the stone be seated in the halo lower. That’s just me. It’s unique and vintagy though.
Post # 6
Woah! That is crazy high. I think it’s pretty, but I’m not the hugest fan of the outermost halo. I like the idea of using marquise stones, but I don’t like the rounds in the marquise shaped bezel. French cut stones in the inner halo would look a bit cleaner and look more vintage to me. I think they are a bit sturdier than the pave ones also. They are basically square so you see less metal and more diamond! Like this but diamond.
Post # 7
Stunning! I agree that it looks a bit too high. I would be a bit concerned about knocking it or getting it caught on things. But the setting is very vintage looking!
Post # 8
@taterjuice: Gorgeous setting! I would prefer a more flush halo. Can the stone be lowered?
Post # 9
The setting is pretty. The center stone would sit too high for my taste.
Post # 10
I’m entirely in agreement. The bottom pics were enough to leave me wondering how the setting would look with the center stone, so I had him put a loose stone in and take pics just so that I could see it. Way too high is what I thought as well. He said that he could lower the center stone easily, in which case it would be a four prong.
I think I’m going to order the larger setting to accommodate the 1.5 carat center, because it’s what I had my heart set on and I don’t really want to go smaller–my finger is a 9, I think. While he’s doing that, I’m going to ask about upgrading the G-H, SI stones in the setting to at least VS.
Any thoughts on bands, bees?
Post # 11
A very thin, engraved, milgrain simple band would look perfect. 2mm wide tops. In My Humble Opinion, you have a knockout ering, wring should not compete. of course I am biased as that is the band I am wearing.
Post # 12
That size stone would look perfect if it was sitting lower within the setting. More flush top.
Post # 13
I like it a lot. I agree with previous bees who said it looks really high. I think if the stone was lowered it would be perfect.
I also prefer simple bands with a very detailed ring. I think a band with complimentary milgraine would be TDF with that ring.
Post # 14
Loved it untill I saw the profile. Centre stone sits waaaayyyy to high for me. Would Amazing if the table of your chosen centre stone sat flush with the top of the halo. I could see a lovely blue or yellow saphire working with this too!
Post # 14
I LOVE THIS RING!!!! Where is it from? I have a halo and it is a bezel set. I think this set would suit this ring.