Big rock or rockin' bling?

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#16
Thanks for all the input, ladies! I can see the majority are big fans of big rocks. :p Keep the opinions coming!

A better resale value is a good point, but I doubt I'd want to sell it or upgrade it in the future. A 2.5 carat is the biggest that I've gone that looks nice on my finger. Also, our jeweler will usually give us whatever we paid for something when we upgrade/trade-in for something new.

A larger solitaire would also be the only piece of jewelry I'd need to insure, which would be approximately $400 a year according to my poorly researched sources that quoted a cost of $2 per $100. Yikes. I've always been wary of accessories that require an investment after you buy them. DH has some watches that need servicing every few years... it drives me crazy.

sinniebunnie said:
an eternity band with .4/.5 stones seems like overkill also i never understood the concept of having diamonds on the back of my finger where nobody can see it plus i be worried about holding onto things like railing or my laptop. i may either chip the diamond or scratch up the laptop.

if you can afford it why not go for a bigger diamond. it doesnt have to be 2.5ct it can be 2ct. i think once you get up to the 8mm mark the extra .5 really doesnt make a difference.
Click to expand...

I haven't looked at this size in real life, but the width of the band is what attracted me in pictures. When the diamonds are smaller, the band is thinner and I don't think it has that "wow" look. Also, I currently have a 3/4 eternity band with blue sapphires; it turns and that annoys me. I was also like "why pay for something no one's going to see?" until I got that ring, lol.

When DH and I are really serious, I will do more "in-store research". :graucho: If I decide I want the band, the research can begin that much faster. If I want the rock, then I have to wait a few years.

As far as the size of the stone, I am looking between 2.2 and 2.4 so I won't pay the 2.5 premium. :smile1: Too bad for DH that I'm ultra color and size sensitive. ;)
 
#17
I chose large solitaire because the prices are more competitive now and if you can afford it now, you may not be able to later. However, the bands will always be more affordable. . . you can always get one later.
 
#18
jan228: Your question prompted me to look through the 2008 - 2009 Tiffany's blue book and look at a page of amazing diamond eternity bands. I completely agree that it is the size of the stones and thus the thickness of the bands that make them stand out! Of course a 2+ carat solitaire will sing as well :D

Diana
 
#20
heart goes boOm said:
oOo! i like both! but since you said both is possible in the future. just go for the solitaire first. coz what's the point in getting the wedding band before the engagement ring?
Click to expand...

I'm already married and a I have a solitaire and wedding band. :smile1: So for me, it wouldn't matter which came first at this point (if I decide that I'd eventually like both).

I also wouldn't be wearing them together. The size of the eternity band would (in my opinion) look ridiculous with the size of the larger solitaire. I'd get a plain gold band to go with the solitaire, so it would get the attention it deserves.

I love hearing everyone's thoughts! :D

I've noticed that a lot of older women only wear a diamond band (not necessarily eternity). To me, it kind of says, "I could care less about showing off," as opposed to a large diamond. My MIL and a lot of her friends do this, and they can all comfortably afford massive diamonds. Any thoughts on this trend?


On a side note:

I saw a woman the other day wearing both. She happened to be the owner of the chain of jewelry stores we were in. Her jewelry was so "wow" I could barely contain myself from asking to try it all on, lol. On her left hand she had a 3 stone emerald cut ring, where the center stone had to have been 6+ carats, with 2-3 carat side stones. Her right hand had an eternity band like the one I showed in my first post, except the top and bottom were detailed with small round diamonds. Add some gold/diamond Roberto Coin bracelets and Van Cleef & Arpels diamond earrings and onyx necklace... I wanted to be adopted right there and then. :drool: :roflmfao:
 
#21
LOL love the jewlery store lady! I guess she's "forced" to wear all the jewlery as a marketing ploy ... would love to have that job responsibility!!!


I'm impatient so I would go with the eternity band because you can get it now and you already have a solitaire. I also love 5-stone rings (I don't have one but I drool over a friend's constantly). It gives you the "look" of an eternity band without having diamonds on the back of your hand which I agree seems like a waste. Plus I believe but could be wrong that they are easier to size.
 
#23
Ok, I happen to LOVE big eternity bands. At least here in SoCal, it seems to be a trend that's taking off and I'm always so impressed when I see them.

However, I do see the clear merits of the solitaire and Gnome and Swanky make very good points.
 
#24
I bought a thick eternity band recently from a gem show and as much I love it, I am still wearing my engagement ring and wedding band more often.

I say go with larger solitaire.
 
#26
What about both lol? Sorry to be an enabler! I love the look of a nice solitaire with a beautiful eternity band. I already have my solitaire and my eternity band is being made as we speak. good luck with your decision!
 
#27
Definitely solitare. I never liked when stones go all the way around, to me its not as comfortable and I dont look at the back of my finger so I wouldn't see those beautiful diamonds back there!
 
#28
Well normally I would say go with a big solitaire but my husband recently purchased an anniversary band for me and I love it. I love the look of the eternity band but couldn't swing the diamonds on the other side of the ring. I've been amazed how much sparkle I've gotten from the stones and what a difference it's made with my solitaire.
 
#29
jan228 said:
I've noticed that a lot of older women only wear a diamond band (not necessarily eternity). To me, it kind of says, "I could care less about showing off," as opposed to a large diamond. My MIL and a lot of her friends do this, and they can all comfortably afford massive diamonds. Any thoughts on this trend?
Click to expand...

I actually like this idea a lot. it's nice to be able to have variety in what you wear. I like the way it looks when women wear large or fancy diamond bands in lieu of their ER/WB. I usually think of that as a more "casual" look...like an every day look.

have you considered buying a 3/4 diamond band so that you have some flexibility? (sizing, cleaning, no wasted diamonds) I think GnomeNisse suggested that earlier.
 
#30
>>>I've noticed that a lot of older women only wear a diamond band (not necessarily eternity). To me, it kind of says, "I could care less about showing off," as opposed to a large diamond. My MIL and a lot of her friends do this, and they can all comfortably afford massive diamonds. Any thoughts on this trend?>>

I don't know if it is so much a trend or just they way things were back when and if they got large diamonds. My mother has a very large stone. She never wore it every day. Only when she went out with my dad or to something "dressy."
She also has a beautiful diamond baguette eternity band. She never would wear that with the diamond on the same hand as it was too much. But most of the time, she just wore simple gold bands that she collected. I guess back in those days, the saying that diamonds are not for daytime was
the way women did it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top