(Closed) What's more important to you? The setting or the stone?

posted 8 years ago in Rings
  • poll: Setting or Stone?

    Setting

    Stone

  • Post # 47
    Member
    168 posts
    Blushing bee
    • Wedding: October 2015

    Stone by far. It’s an OMC, so it is very old and has lots of character. I would have been happy with it in a solitaire setting but I do love my setting, FH had it customed made.

    Post # 48
    Member
    108 posts
    Blushing bee

    @lavenderstone:  Setting. Stones just need to be good enough to make the setting well.

    Post # 49
    Member
    1503 posts
    Bumble bee

    The stone.  I love to gaze into the stone. But I am definitely a solitaire lady as you can always add bling with a wedding band and change it up because after all, I’m married 25 years (OMG), and styles have changed so much but a solitaire never goes out of style. 

    Post # 50
    Member
    72 posts
    Worker bee
    • Wedding: September 2014

    in hindsight, i would have gone with a plain setting for a few years bc it’s less expensive to replace the setting than a stone you aren’t as happy with

    Post # 51
    Member
    7859 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper
    • Wedding: February 1997

    I am a solitaire kind of person, so I’m all about the stone.

    Post # 52
    Member
    5317 posts
    Bee Keeper

    I think it is like, would you rather have your right eye or your left eye? Both were of equal, high importance. They didn’t necessarily have to be the most expensive (in fact I really believe there are beautiful rings for every budget), but both parts, diamond and setting, were important to us, we wanted to feel that it was a “no compromises” ring. They each took us (mostly my Fiance but he did solicit my feedback throughout) months of effort to figure out.

    It was the exact same (except I took the lead) with his man-gagement ring.

    It was so worth the time and effort!

    Post # 53
    Member
    268 posts
    Helper bee
    • Wedding: August 2015

    @lavenderstone:  both… I’m particular. I wanted something square halo but ended up picking a dainty round setting. The stone I wanted something decent color and cut. I wanted it to sparkle. =)

    Post # 54
    Member
    160 posts
    Blushing bee
    • Wedding: June 2014

    It would be an amazing stone, because one dazzler can stand alone in the plainest of plain pieces of metal and still catch beautiful light and many glossy eyes!

    Post # 55
    Member
    1699 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: August 1997

    @Tyme4AWedNN2014:  +1

    Stone, the setting is just there to showcase the beautiful stone. (the setting is the icing on the cake!)

    Post # 56
    Member
    16 posts
    Newbee

    I’m so torn.

     

    If you’re all about the solitare then it’s definitely ALL about the rock. I’m obsessed with the idea of the “perfect” diamond. But I work in a place where I see hundreds of amazing e-rings on the fingers of very fancy ladies… and no one has ever asked them about the stone itself. Ever. The attention is always on the overall look of the ring.. which is for the most part attributed to the setting.

     

    (Except for the lady that had the 5 Carat diamond on her finger, in that case talk was all about the rock).

     

    Despite my love for the perfect stone, I don’t like the look of a perfect stone on a simple band. Unless that stone is huge, it’s not going to be visually interesting for me. I am not a simple person, and so the setting (for me) has to say something. In the perfect world I wouldn’t compromise for either. But if I had to choose I’m voting setting, I hate that choice, but I feel the setting makes more of a statement.

     

    Post # 57
    Member
    580 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: January 2014

    I stressed over both equal.  I wanted a cushion square stone once I saw one in person.  And even though simple I knew I wanted a substantial tiffany setting.  Lectured my designer to make it strong enough to deal with abuse.  Told him to do what he needed to do to keep stone from falling out.

    Post # 58
    Member
    6 posts
    Newbee

    Setting is more important to me. I’m ambivalent towards diamonds (no offense to those who like them) so I picked a moissanite. I’m determined to pick a unique/unusual contemporary setting, however.

    Post # 59
    Member
    220 posts
    Helper bee
    • Wedding: April 2015

    I already have an heirloom center stone, so I am focusing on the setting right now! It’s in a pretty retro setting at the moment but my SO is going to reset it when the time comes 🙂

    Post # 60
    Member
    939 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: December 2013

    I prefer solitaires (and that’s what Fiance picked out for me) so I would say stone over setting.  He didn’t pick the cheapest solitaire setting out there, but his thinking was to spend more money upfront for the stone and if I want to change the setting down the line, it won’t be as expensive as getting a new stone.

    Post # 61
    Member
    92 posts
    Worker bee
    • Wedding: May 2015

    Is it weird that I chose the setting as the most important but I have a solitaire on my finger? But even solitaire’s can be very varied in appearance! Every single person I have shown my rose gold petit bezel set moissy has said they’ve never seen anything like it, which makes me tres happy. I didn’t like ANY of the “popular” rings that’d pop up on the front page of major jewelers’ websites. And it wasn’t the stones I was turned off by, of course not, a beautiful stone is a beautiful stone! It was the settings that were either too plain jane or too busy. Man this stuff is really subjective, haha.

    For the record, I freaking love my moissy. So sparkly. But the same stone in a setting I didn’t like would be utterly different. This is the perfect setting for me. ^.^

    The topic ‘What's more important to you? The setting or the stone?’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors