HOF Setting

[NewGuy12]

Does anybody have any opinions for the following setting/band?

http://heartsonfire.com/#/us/en-us/diamond-collection/view-details.php?item_id=3429&item_name=%20Envelop%20Twist%20Solitaire&style_name=EnvelopR&type_id=1&type_name=Rings&subtype_id=1&subtype_name=Engagement%20Rings&type=1

AND

http://heartsonfire.com/#/us/en-us/diamond-collection/view-details.php?item_id=3428&item_name=Envelop%20Split%20Shank%20Eternity%20Band&style_name=EnvelopEB&type_id=1&type_name=Rings&subtype_id=2&subtype_name=Wedding%20Bands&type=1

I brought my girlfriends sister with me and she said that the setting looked "flimsy" (they didn''t have the band on site so we couldn''t look at it in person). Anybody have any other pictures/opinions?

Thanks again!

 

[lulu]

I don''t think they''re at all flimsy. I like both of them.

 

[Rockit]

I can''t speak to the two specific rings that you''ve linked to, however, I do wear a HOF five-stone band in all platinum. I prefer a weightier ring than most, and this one is quite substantial (although I could always go heavier). It is worn just about 24/7 and I am quite rough on my rings. After nearly to years, the band has held up well. Flimsy? No.

If I were to criticize it, I would say that the stones are not quite as appealing and don''t seem quite as well matched as those on the identical band in WG that I passed on in the jewelry store because I wanted platinum. Mine was special ordered and came two days before our wedding... the first WG band had been sold, and I wasn''t about to disappoint my fiancé by turning up my nose at this one. Moral of the story – EVERY stone (branded or not) and EVERY setter, and EVERY ring is unique. Trust your eyes and trust your touch when choosing.