LoveToKnow EngagementRings:AllComments

Comments

Thank you for your comment. You raise some useful points and making sure that an engagement ring can be worn with a wedding band is extremely important.

-- Contributed by: K Pullen

---

I appreciated your information here. I just wanted to add my own reasons for preferring the Tiffany styled bands. I had my engagement diamond reset into a Tiffany band in order to have my wedding band sit flush with it. A lower mounting made it difficult for me to find a band; so I had to change it. It also is important if a woman wants a wrap or diamond enchancement; as the lower settings, again can cause problems with the fitting part.

-- Contributed by: Interesting info..

---

Interesting idea, Lynn; thanks for sharing. I agree that there seems to be a real lack for unique solitaire settings, but you might be on to something with the idea that more diamonds equals more money for the jewelers and the industry. Many, many brides today prefer more accent stones and more elaborate settings, but in part that may be because of a lack of solitaire options!

-- Contributed by: Mayntz

---

Perhaps someone who is in the jewelry trade can answer this question: Why is it that there are so few variations on the simple solitaire setting — meaning a greater selection and variation of ring mounts of the type that do not include side stones? Almost everything on the market is shoved to one extreme or another. On the one side of the coin we have the classic solitaire with a handful of variations on the prongs (X-prong, Tiffany, etc.), and only the same few shank options (knife edge, domed, cathedral). On the other side of the coin, meanwhile, consumers have a whole host of creative setting configurations that contain side stones to choose from among. Yet with the sole exception of the classic wheat grass pattern (engraving), what is missing from the solitaire setting selections on the market are catchy looking shank designs that do not contain side stones (Stuller continues to produce a few designs, but they are the exception).

For the designers out there, why not borrow some solitaire design inspiration from the unique and gorgeous wedding bands on the market — woven, braided, tri-color, rope, antiqued, filigree/openwork, textured, hammered, fluted, scalloped, etc.?

There would appear to be a need for additional solitaire setting design choices on the market because while classic, the traditional six-prong Tiffany-style solitaire, while certainly no less elegant, is nevertheless so common that it has become almost cliché. On the other hand, settings with a lot of side stones are not only more expensive, but require more maintenance because without a setting check every three to six months, there is a high likelihood that eventually a stone, particularly the popular pavé types, will fall out when subjected to daily use (as most bridal rings are). The other risk in selecting a setting with side stones is that in addition to being more delicate, it is possible that the side stones will overshadow, detract or compete with the center stone.

So it would seem like an idea whose time has come: A greater variety of settings that keep a sharp focal point on the center stone in the tradition of the classic solitaire setting, while at the same time pairing a single-stone focal point to the added visual draw that a unique or more ornate shank design can provide. As it stands, however, those design elements can be found in wedding bands, but not, for the most part, in solitaire settings.

Perhaps market demand isn't there, or perhaps it simply isn't as profitable to offer the public a greater selection of solitaire ring mounts that do not include profit-increasing side stones.

-- Contributed by: Lynn
> Return to article