Post # 1
The SO has been asking questions surrounding my e-ring style and despite looking at far more elaborate settings in the past, I’ve actually narrowed it down to the bottom two. Maybe I will change my mind again but for now, I am really liking the elegant timeless look of these two rings but am still unsure which I prefer.
Centre stone – app. 2 cts or so
RING 1 – Classic 6-prong round solitaire (the very thing I never thought I wanted…lol)
Buuuuttt, I am thinking an OEC diamond with a trellis type setting on a very thin shank, like the below ring. SO likes the softer, ‘flowy’ look of this ring and of course, it is a timeless look with endless wedding band options but I am not sure if it’s too…average, I guess?
RING 2 – Classic emerald cut with tapered baguettes
This is the one I keep coming back to and I think it is so elegant and classic, but I am wondering if it would look too glassy. I am not sure if I’ll regret the lack of sparkle. If I go this route, again I would go with a fairly thin band and pair it with a baguette & round or french cut band.
So Bees, tell me what you think and which one you would choose please. If anyone has an emerald cut like the one I posted above, please tell me if you think it’s sparkly and fiery enough for you. Thanks!
Post # 2
I like the first but I feel the band looks too thin for the stone.
Post # 3
I would choose the round solitaire. Yes, it’s classic. However, it’s a fairly uncommon choice right now since so many women are choosing blinged out rings. Therefore, I think it will stand out.
Post # 4
tough choice! I love the setting and the cut of the OEC, but that emerald cut is really stunning.
Honestly, I think I’d go with the emerald. 2 carats will really show off the unique “hall of mirrors” look to the emerald cut. I’m not crazy about the OEC at that size for some reason.
Post # 5
I voted for the emerald cut. I like the first ring, but I can see a ring that thin easily getting bent out of shape.
Post # 6
The styles are very different — have you tried them on? I feel like if it were me, one would be bound to jump out at me more once I saw each of them on my hand.
I agree with PPs about the band of the round looking too thin. Plain bands that thin tend to look a little cheap to me.
Post # 7
I guess it depends on how classic you want the ring to be. The solitaire is the more classic and simple to me. I personally like the tapered baguettes on the second ring. That’s what I have on my ring, and I like that it’s simple but still distinct.
Post # 8
- Wedding: April 2016 - Bell Tower on 34th
I voted for the first ring! It’s beautiful and you can do any band with it!
Post # 9
Definitely choice one but with a thicker band at least a 2.5mm band for me.
Post # 10
oooww, my fav designer of all time! The first one is a Mark Morrell piece, I love it!!. Though I’m very partial bc my ER was made by him hehehe
Post # 11
It’s actually an ERD design (for Valmanin of PriceScope) but I definitely see the similarity to the MM Torchiere. 🙂
Post # 12
Yes, i too have seen it on PS. Def a close replica, and a beautiful one at that
Post # 13
Both styles are classic, and one is not more classic than the other. Personally, I would go for the OEC for myself, as OEC is my favorite cut. But for you I’m thinking the Emerald cut, since you say you keep coming back to it–that’s your gut telling you which direction you want to go in.
Post # 14
- Wedding: October 2011 - Bed & Breakfast
If we had been willing to pony up for a 2ct stone (we weren’t), I would go for that emerald in a heartbeat. No hesitation. Emerald is my favorite cut. But, you can’t go wrong with an OEC solitaire either. Both options are timeless and stunning.
Post # 15
I go with the emerald cut, no question. An OEC isn’t big on sparkle, not in the way a MRB would be, so there will be a hint of the “glassy” effect with either stone. But a step cut in a size like that is stunning, and really showcases colour and clarity.