shape
carat
color
clarity

Yet another halo vs 3-stone debate (with pictures)

alene

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
1,640
I had for the longest time planned on getting a 3-stone for my reset. Then got a cheap 3-stone ring to get a better idea and thought it looked horrible with my band and covered too much of it. I then turned my attention to halos, thought I should definitely go this route but I just don't know. At this point I've tried on just about every halo ring available in Manhattan and I still can't decide. Some look great, even complement my band but they just seem to blur together with the stone. I also worry that the whole halo trend is on its way out, I don't seem to see as many of them among the newly engaged than I did a couple of years ago though I certainly have no data on this. I really do want this to be my forever setting though. So I snapped a couple of pictures of a halo (I apologize for the crappy quality) and the 3-stone. What do you think? Should I scrap the idea of a 3-stone entirely? Does a halo look better with my band? (I wouldn't get this exact style of halo, so just in general). Also, the halo is with a 1 ct stone, so smaller than mine, which is 1.6ct. The 3-stone has a equivalent of a 1.5 ct in the center and the sides are supposed to add up to 1.5 but I'm pretty sure they're smaller, I"m getting 5.5 mm when I measure them. I'd get smaller side stones, maybe .4ct each if go with a 3-stone.

012.JPG

141.JPG
 
I personally like the look with the 3 stone better.
This being the 3-stone I love most:
http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/3-stone-butterflies-diamond-engagement-ring-230.htm

For your band, if you really like halos, I'd go with a Bezel set halo. But with your band I genuinely prefer the 3-stone.
You band is quite substantial on it's own and although I'm all for the non-matchy-matchy look, the halo you tried on doesn't work (in my eye)

I'd suggest something like this:
http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/diamond-settings/grace-diamond-engagement-ring-by-vatche-256.htm

Not particularly endorsing WF, I was just on their site at the time.

GL!
 
I actually like the 3 stone much better with your band! A 1.6 center is perfect for a 3 stone. I think the pave halo look needs a thin pave band or thin band period. Plus I think the 3 stone is more timeless and never goes out of style.
 
Three stone, .30ct sides max, custom make the shank to match the width of your wb so the extra width will keep the three-stone diamonds from overhanging the wb.
 
Dreamer_D|1326838714|3105372 said:
Three stone, .30ct sides max, custom make the shank to match the width of your wb so the extra width will keep the three-stone diamonds from overhanging the wb.


agree on all fronts!

For some reason, I just dont think a halo goes well with your WB. I think that if you had a three stone made with a shank the width of your WB it would work very well.
 
Amys Bling|1326839146|3105377 said:
Dreamer_D|1326838714|3105372 said:
Three stone, .30ct sides max, custom make the shank to match the width of your wb so the extra width will keep the three-stone diamonds from overhanging the wb.


agree on all fronts!

For some reason, I just dont think a halo goes well with your WB. I think that if you had a three stone made with a shank the width of your WB it would work very well.

It would be divine!
 
I love the 3 stone with your band! It looks terrific!
 
Another vote for the three stone. I think it looks the better with your wedding band and I love the classic look of three stone rings.
 
This will help you see what different size sides look like...

3 stone ring proportions x1b (1).jpg
 
Another vote for the three stone, timeless.
 
I vote for the halo. With the three stone, all the stones sort of blend together in one big row of sparkle. With the halo, you can see more of your center stone.
 
I also vote for the 3-stone - I think it looks lovely with your WB in the pic you posted!

Very useful size comparison chart diamondseeker2006!
 
I love the three stone with it. I am partial to three stones though.
 
As a 3 stone wearer I may be biased but I like the look of the 3 stone with your WB best.
 
I think the three-stone looks great with your wedding band!
 
Wow, didn't expect such an overwhelming preference for the 3-stone! I guess you guys don't really think it covers my band too much? To be fair, I wouldn't consider a halo with such a thin shank so it's probably not the best illustration but I just feel like I can't get too excited about the whole halo idea for some reason...

Diamondseeker, thanks for the proportion chart! I've pored over it many times and I think I have a pretty good idea of what size side stones I'd want. I really like the .5 to 1.5 ratio, perhaps just a tad smaller, so I think .4 each would be great.

Dreamer, the shank on the ring in the picture is actually a bit wider than my band, though it does taper a bit toward the center. Don't think I could go even wider. Perhaps if the rings are not flush, the stones will cover less of the band? I'd still have to work out all the details.
 
I think it's okay if that center stone comes out over the wedding band some. I think that would happen with all diamonds of larger size. The fact that your wedding band is wider makes it show much more than a thin band would. I agree that .4's would be very nice for sidestones!

(shanhoops, I am glad you and alene found the chart useful!)
 
I too like the three-stone better with your band. I think adding the pave of the halo takes away from the pave on your band, and distracts from it more than the three-stone does.
 
distracts|1326881480|3105742 said:
I too like the three-stone better with your band. I think adding the pave of the halo takes away from the pave on your band, and distracts from it more than the three-stone does.


Agreed.
 
I like the sholdt idea also...but if you really want to do a halo you might consider a split shank with the 2 parts being the same
width of your wedding band.
 
Thanks again, everyone! Mrssalvo, it's funny that you linked the Sholdt rings, I actually was seriously considering them when shopping for an engagement ring and ended up with something very similar to the Sholdt half-bezel. My taste has changed over the past years so I'm now trying to get away from the very modern look but some of their three-stones look interesting.
 
Have you thought about just picking out a new setting that you like and then possibly getting a new band to wear with the new ring and just keeping your original to wear solo from time to time? I think you may be more limited in setting choices if you want it to match your band, although all of our tastes differ so you might find something that works perfectly for you. Your band does look more modern to me and I think one of those sholdt 3-stones would look fabulous!!!
 
mrssalvo|1326926919|3106205 said:
Have you thought about just picking out a new setting that you like and then possibly getting a new band to wear with the new ring and just keeping your original to wear solo from time to time? I think you may be more limited in setting choices if you want it to match your band, although all of our tastes differ so you might find something that works perfectly for you. Your band does look more modern to me and I think one of those sholdt 3-stones would look fabulous!!!

Yeah, I'm sure I'm making it more difficult but it has to work with my band, I'd hate to not be able to wear it with the new ring. I'll probably have to go custom anyway to make it work.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top