I have always liked unusual rings. One of my engagement rings (I have been engaged three times, to two different men, both of whom I married) was a black gold and black diamond ring.
I like the Marc Jacobs rattle ring because it looks like a plain gold ring, but it contains diamonds inside it. Naturally I will never be able to afford one and I won’t be getting married or engaged again, but I love it!
The design that John Reinhold hashed out with designer Marc Jacobs over dinner one night is an interesting concept.
Following the trend of anti-bling, The Diamond Rattle Ring is unique in that the diamonds are contained in the hollow gold band within eight interior compartments, with each segment capable of holding a .25 carat diamond.
When the inner part of the ring is rotated, a window appears over one of the compartments, which enables the wearer to remove one of the stones, giving them the ability to feel the stones and hear their “delicate music.”
The 18 karat Rattle Rings can be ordered with as few as two diamonds, which equal One-half carat ($4750), to as many as 8 Diamonds equaling two carats, ($10,750) and sizes in between.
In addition to diamonds, the ring also can be ordered with eight gemstones: Amethyst, Aquamarine, Sky Blue Topaz, Swiss Blue Topaz, London Blue Topaz, Citrine, Garnet, Peridot, Rhodalite, Green Tourmaline and Pink Tourmaline, but not emeralds as they are too soft.
To complete the set, a matching Rattle Bracelet can be purchased for $11,500.
“People thought I was nuts, hiding a diamond. But for some people, it’s about discretion. A lot of men love them because this way they can have the diamonds, without the Las Vegas effect. For me, just knowing the diamonds are there is enough.” (Source)
The present invention relates to a ring and, more particularly, to a ring having a plurality of hidden internal compartments for concealing small articles.
The ring contains outer and inner parts, which rotate opposite one another. The inside ring contains nooks for storage, which are only accessible by removing the ring and rotating the parts until proper alignment is reached, revealing the secret compartments.
Rationale Behind Invention: Rings with secret compartments existed long before this designer came along. But Jacobs decided that he had to conceive of his own because the old models weren’t suitable; the compartments weren’t secret enough. Jacobs wanted to create a ring that would safely hold tiny, precious items:
Such rings are not suitable for secret storage of valuables, such as small diamonds or other small articles, first, because an inspection of the ring easily reveals the presence of the hidden compartment, and second, the hidden compartment can easily be opened even while the ring is being worn.
Jacobs thus created designer jewelry that doubled as a safe for valuables. (Source)
I have one for sale. It is platnium. Size 7.5 if interested please email me nlhudy@gmail.com
Very interesting review! I love these rings and that particular shape ring with the inner part mobile. I have one that comes from Piaget which is a two-tone gold (do you know them?).
Now you show these unusual rings l will have to go to Jacobs and try one on. Christmas is coming quickly and I am still looking for ideas.
Thank you very much, Janet, Santa will have make a stop at Jacobs before visiting me this year!
Very interesting, I would like to see one in person.
Talking of unusual rings, and knowing your love of rings in general, do you like or own a poison ring, as used in the past for carrying poison in a secret compartment? Fascinating objects and still available today. I guess Marc Jacobs is a more civilised, and expensive, modern twist?
Yes I have two poison rings. Given that I love the Borgias AND rings, it was kind of a must, ha ha! I also have a nice collection (!) of rings with secrets inside https://thisbugslife.com/2014/08/09/some-favorite-rings/
There was something about the Borgias that is fascinating and even attractive, yet evil and corrupt. Many years ago there was a dramatised series on TV here in England which was well done. Thanks for the link. I shall take a look now, although I’m sure I’ve seen it.
I love the series with Jeremy Irons as the Borgia Pope. He was brilliant! Plus it shows the rise of Cesare, who Machiavelli wrote about in The Prince.
Oh, the series I’m referring to was from the early 80’s I think. In my opinion the better one. I shall see if I can find out more and pass it on.
By the way, did you know that all the images of Jesus that we are familiar with are actually images of Cesare Borgia? His father used his image to portray Jesus during the late 1400s and early 1500s, and those images have kind of stuck, even to this day.
Interesting design and concept…..
To you, I’d say 2 things…….
“Never say never….”
and
“Third time’s the charm….”
😉