Which Wedding Ring/Eternity Band Would You Pick?

[endless_summer]

Hey there!

We've narrowed wedding bands down to two, and I'd love your thoughts as to which you would pick. Both are eternity bands, would cost the same, and would be handmade with well-cut, F/G, VS melee. Option 1 is a 2mm shared prong band, while Option 2 is a 1.5mm 4-prong/micro pave band. For reference, the shank of my e-ring at it's widest is 4mm.

I love both of them for different reasons. I think option 1 is well proportioned to my e-ring, looks better as a stand alone ring, is very, very low set, and will have a higher carat weight. It is a little more prominent on my hand than option 2 without over-doing it or overshadowing my e-ring. Option 2 is more subtle and a nice accent - while it doesn't quite look right as a stand alone ring, I like that the 4-prong setting around each tiny round squared them off without looking heavy or like a lot of metal. I think the more squared-off look complements the princess cut channel stones nicely, but this very dainty ring also gets kind of lost from a normal viewing distance.

I'm thinking that I couldn't go wrong with either, but, I'd like to know if you think the mixing the slightly more accentuated rounds in option 1's shared prong setting with the radiant and princess cuts in my e-ring works. I *think* I'm inclined toward option 1 because I like the proportion in terms of its width to my e-ring and because it looks better as a stand alone ring than option 2. I also feel like the shared prong is a bit more sturdy and wouldn't have to be babied quite as much as the daintier band. That said, I really like the squared-off look of the daintier band. I couldn't take many pictures as I was in the shop where we are planning to make the purchase, but I posted the closer in-focus pics, and the ones that are a bit more blurred (sorry!) but at a slight distance for perspective.

I'm really excited, and I think we'll be pulling the trigger on one late tomorrow afternoon, so I really appreciate your thoughts! Thanks so much!

 

[endless_summer]

Does anyone have any thoughts or preferences? I really would feel better making this decision with your input, especially with respect to whether it would work or look funny to more overtly mix shapes by going with the shared prong over the thinner 4-prong ring. Any input that you might have is more than welcome!

 

[kmystery]

firstly, I LOVE your engagement ring. Radiants are my favourite cut and I have been drooling over yours ever since you first posted it!

Secondly, and personally, I prefer option 1

 

[junebug17]

Hi endless summer, This is embarrassing, I voted for 1 but now I think I'm changing my mind lol - I see what you mean about the squared off shape of number 2 and I think it goes with your ering a little better.

 

[tyty333]

Option 1 would be my choice. To be honest, they look very similar But option 1 has a little more presence to stand up next to your ering.

 

[endless_summer]

Hi endless summer, This is embarrassing, I voted for 1 but now I think I'm changing my mind lol - I see what you mean about the squared off shape of number 2 and I think it goes with your ering a little better.

Junebug - Yes! That's my hitch - otherwise, I would pick option 1 hands down!

Do you think it's a dramatic difference between the two, such that option 1 would look "off" by comparison? These pics were taken pretty close up, but from a normal viewing distance option 2 is very much a subtle accent, whereas with option 2, it's still very dainty but shows up a little more and almost makes the center stone look brighter (how, i have no idea). I found a pic of another PSer's 2mm shared prong, since she had a pic of her band farther away, if it's helpful to see how squared off or not squared off the shared prong would look to anyone other than me

I tried on both channel bands and even a tiny plain platinum band to try to achieve a more matched look, but they just end up looking like too much metal/more heavy, so I'm going for a little band of white

 

[endless_summer]

firstly, I LOVE your engagement ring. Radiants are my favourite cut and I have been drooling over yours ever since you first posted it!

Secondly, and personally, I prefer option 1

Kmystery - thank you soooooooo much! You really just made me blush I appreciate your thoughts very much!

 

[missy]

I think they are both pretty options but if I had to choose I prefer 2 as it flows better with your ER IMO. Btw your ER is Gorgeous!

Of course from the distance most will be seeing your rings they probably won't even notice a difference but you know we PSers certainly can. So I don't think you could go wrong with either option but I think 2 works better with your ER.

 

[endless_summer]

Option 1 would be my choice. To be honest, they look very similar But option 1 has a little more presence to stand up next to your ering.

Thanks Tyty - FI likes this one ever so slightly more for the reasons that you prefer it. I also think with the slightly wider width and shared prongs instead of the super delicate metal work that option 1 might hold up better over time

 

[endless_summer]

I think they are both pretty options but if I had to choose I prefer 2 as it flows better with your ER IMO. Btw your ER is Gorgeous!

Of course from the distance most will be seeing your rings they probably won't even notice a difference but you know we PSers certainly can. So I don't think you could go wrong with either option but I think 2 works better with your ER.

Missy - thank you! I'm glad you think both work Do you think that option 2 would work as well as a stand alone band or be as durable as option 1? I feel like the consensus is that, no matter how skilled the setter, the 4-prong/micro pave is more risky in terms of losing stones, but I'm happy to be mistaken. I would love to not worry about losing stones in the course of normal wear.

 

[missy]

I think they are both pretty options but if I had to choose I prefer 2 as it flows better with your ER IMO. Btw your ER is Gorgeous!

Of course from the distance most will be seeing your rings they probably won't even notice a difference but you know we PSers certainly can. So I don't think you could go wrong with either option but I think 2 works better with your ER.

Missy - thank you! I'm glad you think both work Do you think that option 2 would work as well as a stand alone band or be as durable as option 1? I feel like the consensus is that, no matter how skilled the setter, the 4-prong/micro pave is more risky in terms of losing stones, but I'm happy to be mistaken. I would love to not worry about losing stones in the course of normal wear.

As a stand alone band I prefer a thicker band personally and for me I find even 2 mm is too thin for a stand alone. That is, it doesn't make enough of a visual impact for me. Having said that it is personal preference. How do you like either of these bands alone?

As for durability it depends on how well made it is and how tough you are on your bands. I don't know enough about durability of a 1.5 mm band with micropave to give you an accurate answer as to the durability of that vs the 2 mm shared prong. For stand alone I would probably choose the 2 mm shared prong though I am not crazy about either as a stand alone. But that could have more to do with my huge hands.

 

[endless_summer]

I think they are both pretty options but if I had to choose I prefer 2 as it flows better with your ER IMO. Btw your ER is Gorgeous!

Of course from the distance most will be seeing your rings they probably won't even notice a difference but you know we PSers certainly can. So I don't think you could go wrong with either option but I think 2 works better with your ER.

Missy - thank you! I'm glad you think both work Do you think that option 2 would work as well as a stand alone band or be as durable as option 1? I feel like the consensus is that, no matter how skilled the setter, the 4-prong/micro pave is more risky in terms of losing stones, but I'm happy to be mistaken. I would love to not worry about losing stones in the course of normal wear.

As a stand alone band I prefer a thicker band personally and for me I find even 2 mm is too thin for a stand alone. That is, it doesn't make enough of a visual impact for me. Having said that it is personal preference. How do you like either of these bands alone?

As for durability it depends on how well made it is and how tough you are on your bands. I don't know enough about durability of a 1.5 mm band with micropave to give you an accurate answer as to the durability of that vs the 2 mm shared prong. For stand alone I would probably choose the 2 mm shared prong though I am not crazy about either as a stand alone. But that could have more to do with my huge hands.

I like the 2mm band on its own (by comparison) and find that it's a little more balanced/proportioned with the e-ring, even if it's not quite as squared off. The micropave band it literally the width of one side of the 'channel' holding the princess cuts in the e-ring and doesn't look quite ring by itself. That said, I was first drawn to the micropave I know the 2mm shared prong ring has never lost a stone for my jewelers' clients, which I think says something. I was told that I wouldn't have to worry about the micropave band, but it is a more delicate setting.

 

[missy]

I think they are both pretty options but if I had to choose I prefer 2 as it flows better with your ER IMO. Btw your ER is Gorgeous!

Of course from the distance most will be seeing your rings they probably won't even notice a difference but you know we PSers certainly can. So I don't think you could go wrong with either option but I think 2 works better with your ER.

Missy - thank you! I'm glad you think both work Do you think that option 2 would work as well as a stand alone band or be as durable as option 1? I feel like the consensus is that, no matter how skilled the setter, the 4-prong/micro pave is more risky in terms of losing stones, but I'm happy to be mistaken. I would love to not worry about losing stones in the course of normal wear.

As a stand alone band I prefer a thicker band personally and for me I find even 2 mm is too thin for a stand alone. That is, it doesn't make enough of a visual impact for me. Having said that it is personal preference. How do you like either of these bands alone?

As for durability it depends on how well made it is and how tough you are on your bands. I don't know enough about durability of a 1.5 mm band with micropave to give you an accurate answer as to the durability of that vs the 2 mm shared prong. For stand alone I would probably choose the 2 mm shared prong though I am not crazy about either as a stand alone. But that could have more to do with my huge hands.

I like the 2mm band on its own (by comparison) and find that it's a little more balanced/proportioned with the e-ring, even if it's not quite as squared off. The micropave band it literally the width of one side of the 'channel' holding the princess cuts in the e-ring and doesn't look quite ring by itself. That said, I was first drawn to the micropave I know the 2mm shared prong ring has never lost a stone for my jewelers' clients, which I think says something. I was told that I wouldn't have to worry about the micropave band, but it is a more delicate setting.

It sounds as if you prefer the 2mm band with and without the ER so this might be the way to go even if it is not as squared off as the Ering. Balance and proportion are critical so it sounds like a winner and you can wear it by itself.

 

[Agnasia]

I vote option 1! I actually prefer that it's not as squared off, I think it makes your set softer, it's very pretty and I find squareness of the second ring visually just a little too harsh with your e-ring (just my personal preference though). I agree with other comments that a 2mm band looks more substantial as a wedding ring. You will be wearing it, so go with your gut and the one you love. Love your e-ring BTW

 

[endless_summer]

I think they are both pretty options but if I had to choose I prefer 2 as it flows better with your ER IMO. Btw your ER is Gorgeous!

Of course from the distance most will be seeing your rings they probably won't even notice a difference but you know we PSers certainly can. So I don't think you could go wrong with either option but I think 2 works better with your ER.

Missy - thank you! I'm glad you think both work Do you think that option 2 would work as well as a stand alone band or be as durable as option 1? I feel like the consensus is that, no matter how skilled the setter, the 4-prong/micro pave is more risky in terms of losing stones, but I'm happy to be mistaken. I would love to not worry about losing stones in the course of normal wear.

As a stand alone band I prefer a thicker band personally and for me I find even 2 mm is too thin for a stand alone. That is, it doesn't make enough of a visual impact for me. Having said that it is personal preference. How do you like either of these bands alone?

As for durability it depends on how well made it is and how tough you are on your bands. I don't know enough about durability of a 1.5 mm band with micropave to give you an accurate answer as to the durability of that vs the 2 mm shared prong. For stand alone I would probably choose the 2 mm shared prong though I am not crazy about either as a stand alone. But that could have more to do with my huge hands.

I like the 2mm band on its own (by comparison) and find that it's a little more balanced/proportioned with the e-ring, even if it's not quite as squared off. The micropave band it literally the width of one side of the 'channel' holding the princess cuts in the e-ring and doesn't look quite ring by itself. That said, I was first drawn to the micropave I know the 2mm shared prong ring has never lost a stone for my jewelers' clients, which I think says something. I was told that I wouldn't have to worry about the micropave band, but it is a more delicate setting.

It sounds as if you prefer the 2mm band with and without the ER so this might be the way to go even if it is not as squared off as the Ering. Balance and proportion are critical so it sounds like a winner and you can wear it by itself.

Missy, I really appreciate your responding so many times It's really hard choice, in large part, because I had always thought that the ring would need to match in some way to look right, if that makes sense. So, even though I think I prefer the 2mm band, I've been second guessing myself because the micropave does give the illusion of matched shapes. I tried a wider version of the micropave band, but with larger stones and more metal, it loses the effect. Thank you so much for helping me think through everything - I think you are very right about balance and proportion - I imagine people would see that before they got hung up on it not exactly matching

 

[endless_summer]

I vote option 1! I actually prefer that it's not as squared off, I think it makes your set softer, it's very pretty and I find squareness of the second ring visually just a little too harsh with your e-ring (just my personal preference though). I agree with other comments that a 2mm band looks more substantial as a wedding ring. You will be wearing it, so go with your gut and the one you love. Love your e-ring BTW

Agnasia - Thank you so much! I really appreciate how well you've articulated your preference between the rings - I hadn't thought about it in the way you described the soft/harsh look of each band with my e-ring, but it's a really good & helpful observation. I'll definitely be trying them both on again before pulling the trigger, but I think you're right

 

[junebug17]

If you would like to wear the band by itself sometimes, then maybe 1 would be a better choice - and it certainly looks very pretty with your ering! You make a good point, from a distance the differences between the 2 styles won't really be noticeable.

 

[endless_summer]

If you would like to wear the band by itself sometimes, then maybe 1 would be a better choice - and it certainly looks very pretty with your ering! You make a good point, from a distance the differences between the 2 styles won't really be noticeable.

Thank you, Junebug - I appreciate it! I really just wanted to be sure that option 1 wouldn't look out of place with my e-ring, so if option 1 still looks pretty with it, notwithstanding its non-matchy matchiness, then I think it has a lot of ups going for it

 

[endless_summer]

Thank you all so much for your help with picking a band!

I really appreciate that you guys chimed in with such thoughtful feedback - you really helped me a great deal in picking between two beautiful options. We went with the 2mm shared prong, which FI preferred as well, and both of us are really happy with the choice

 

[Calliecake]

Great choice. I also voted for the band you chose.

 

[endless_summer]

Great choice. I also voted for the band you chose.

Thank you, Calliecake!

 

[endless_summer]

Update - I completely second guessed myself (e.g., freaked out) over the weekend wondering if I should have gone with a larger eternity/shared prong wedding band. Go figure after a week, the smaller band started looking really small to me in the pics - silly DSS. I called, and thankfully, the ring hadn't been completed, so I went back and tried on some larger bands!

What do you guys think of a band made with 3 pointers (pics below)? Here's the difference in size (to be exact, we re-measured) - the original shared prong had ~1.6/1.7mm stones (2 points) and came out to 1.9mm in width. The 3 point stones would be 2mm and create a ring that is 2.1mm in width. I really like that it is a little bit more substantial on its own, and since I'm used to the heft of a 4.2 (at it's widest) band, I could even flank it with two tiny (.8mm, so I glad I found one!) plain platinum bands and wear it on its own. I also like that the ring would turn out to half the width of my e-ring shank and the diamonds match up closer in width to the princess cuts in the channel, which leads me to think that it may be a more balanced look.

As a side note, I also tried on a ring with 1.8mm stones, but the difference between that and the 3 pointers visually was pretty minimal because they were set with fishtail prongs, e.g., each had 4 prong. If we moved forward with those, they would go into a shared prong because, while the fishtail has 4 prongs each, it is set a little higher, and while the shared prong on has 2 prongs each, they are slightly bigger, so there's less of a chance I'll harm in the course of daily wear.

If you guys think the 3 pointers are just too much and so not matching that it doesn't work, then the 1.8mm stones would be a great compromise. I just want to avoid wanting to bump up in size 6 months after the wedding, when I know that both FI and I are sentimental and would want to continue wearing the bands we were married in.

Any and all comments, especially the brutally honest ones if they're out there, are totally & completely welcome - and, as always, thank you guys soooo very much!

 

[junebug17]

I really like the band with the 3 point stones, it looks very pretty! I think you're right, it will work well as a stand alone ring, and I think the width of the band looks nice with your ring. A bit more substantial than the other one but doesn't take away from your ering. I think you should go for it if you like how it looks!

 

[glitterkitteh]

Definitely the 3 pointers. It looks more proportional to your e-ring and also, will look great on its own.

 

[lovemybling]

They all look lovely but I would pick the last band hands down, it looks great with your ring but you will like it alone as well.

believe me there are times it is nice just to wear a band.

 

[AVCadmirer]

I thought they were all very beautiful actually. But the 3 pointer wins it for me and I do love the fact it can be worn and look great on its own.

 

[endless_summer]

I really like the band with the 3 point stones, it looks very pretty! I think you're right, it will work well as a stand alone ring, and I think the width of the band looks nice with your ring. A bit more substantial than the other one but doesn't take away from your ering. I think you should go for it if you like how it looks!

Junebug, thank you so much - you touched on exactly what I wondering, which was whether the larger shared prong took away from or outdid my e-ring. The 3 pointers are much more substantial - it was amazing how much of a difference I could see between 2 pointers and 2.5 pointers, and even moreso between 2 pointers and 3 pointers

Definitely the 3 pointers. It looks more proportional to your e-ring and also, will look great on its own.

Glitterkitteh - I really appreciate it - your comment is what prompted me to see if I could still look at a slightly larger ring - I was afraid that the 2 pointer shared prong (while more proportional than the micropave and I would have loved wearing that ring too) might not be quite as well proportioned as a slightly larger sized shared prong. Wearing the 3 pointers on their own is a major bonus

They all look lovely but I would pick the last band hands down, it looks great with your ring but you will like it alone as well.

believe me there are times it is nice just to wear a band.

Lovemybling - I love how decisive you are! And, I totally agree with you - especially when it's summer time, it will be harder to wear 6mm, so I'll be grateful for the band-only option

I thought they were all very beautiful actually. But the 3 pointer wins it for me and I do love the fact it can be worn and look great on its own.

Paulav - thank you! I know I'm splitting hairs between all of the rings, and I would have been happy to wear any single one of them. I think that the 3 pointers might just be the best long term & most versatile choice if the larger ring doesn't look like just too much going on. It does look like a lot on my hand to me ring now, but I think once it's made both sized properly (it's too big in the pics) and set super low like the dainty option, I'll get used to it, and I know I wouldn't go larger (there's only so much width I can wear at one time)

 

[ame]

I like the original #2 actually. I like the width because it kind of echoes the width of the metal "channel" on either side of your diamond channels. I also like how the stones are set because they're more secure.

One thought would be a narrow channel set, since your shank is channel set. But if you don't want the same type of band, I understand that.

 

[Calliecake]

I'd choose the three pointer. It looks beautiful with your engagement ring and I think it would look very pretty all on its own. It's always nice to have a wedding band that looks great on its own for those times you don't want to wear your engagement ring.

 

[motownmama]

LOVE your ER!!! You don't want to use princess cuts for your WB?