*CONSIDERING* a re-set! Opinions/advice welcome!

[mrssalvo]

Lynn, If you really are 99% in love with your set as is, I''d go ahead and have them remade in 3/4 eternity w/smaller melee etc..You may be one of the few of us that is even almost still 100% happy with their current set

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 4/30/2006 9:29:41 PM
Author: mrssalvo
Lynn, If you really are 99% in love with your set as is, I''d go ahead and have them remade in 3/4 eternity w/smaller melee etc..You may be one of the few of us that is even almost still 100% happy with their current set

Good advice. But somehow I am getting the feeling that you want more of a change?? What ever you decide I know it will be spectacular!! Plus I can''t wait for the pics. You Dem and Mara take the best pics on here I''ve ever seen.

 

[Lynn B]

Mrs. S,
Thanks for your post! You are always such a sweetie.

Lisa,
I think you hit the nail on the head. I know what works, and what doesn''t, and I think a little change *MIGHT* just keep me fat and happy for YEARS!!!

Lynn

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/30/2006 10:12:10 PM
Author: Lynn B
Mrs. S,
Thanks for your post! You are always such a sweetie.

Lisa,
I think you hit the nail on the head. I know what works, and what doesn''t, and I think a little change *MIGHT* just keep me fat and happy for YEARS!!!

Lynn

Lynn
no Lynn. not YEARS

a YEAR

maybe ...he,he

 

[Demelza]

Date: 4/30/2006 9:40:31 PM
Author: kaleigh

Date: 4/30/2006 9:29:41 PM

Author: mrssalvo

Lynn, If you really are 99% in love with your set as is, I'd go ahead and have them remade in 3/4 eternity w/smaller melee etc..You may be one of the few of us that is even almost still 100% happy with their current set

Good advice. But somehow I am getting the feeling that you want more of a change?? What ever you decide I know it will be spectacular!! Plus I can't wait for the pics. You Dem and Mara take the best pics on here I've ever seen.

Awww thanks for the copmliment, K. And Lynn is always complaining about her crappy camera. Imagine what she could do with a really great one, hehe.

I totally understand wanting to tweak your current set so that it's as close to perfect as humanly possible. It seems like you know what look you're going after and that that hasn't changed at all in the past couple of years. After living with this set for that period of time, however, you now know what really isn't working for you and have the chance to make it just right! I say, go for it!

I too am of the opinion that the new set absolutely has to be as sturdy as the current set. Otherwise, I'll think you'll regret making the change. At least that's how I would be and it sounds like you enjoy being able to wear your rings mostly all the time as well. I have more questions than answers, but perhaps an expert can help us out here. What I'm wondering is whether fishtail pave is inherently less secure than shared prong?? Also, does the size of the melee have anything to do with how secure they are once set? For instance, is micropave less secure than pave done with 2 or 3 pointers? My other question would be to WF: how often have they done the fishtail pave setting and have there been any problems? That's what I'd want to know, anyway, before making up my mind. If you can be reassured that there won't be any durability issue, it all comes down to visual preference and, for that, I'm afraid I'm useless. I like them both for different reasons. My only complaint with the look of shared prong is the side appearance. Sometimes they look like orthodontic braces to me. But other than that, it's a toss up!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 4/30/2006 10:30:26 PM
Author: Demelza

I too am of the opinion that the new set absolutely has to be as sturdy as the current set. Otherwise, I'll think you'll regret making the change. At least that's how I would be and it sounds like you enjoy being able to wear your rings mostly all the time as well. I have more questions than answers, but perhaps an expert can help us out here. What I'm wondering is whether fishtail pave is inherently less secure than shared prong?? Also, does the size of the melee have anything to do with how secure they are once set? For instance, is micropave less secure than pave done with 2 or 3 pointers? My other question would be to WF: how often have they done the fishtail pave setting and have there been any problems? That's what I'd want to know, anyway, before making up my mind. If you can be reassured that there won't be any durability issue, it all comes down to visual preference and, for that, I'm afraid I'm useless. I like them both for different reasons. My only complaint with the look of shared prong is the side appearance. Sometimes they look like orthodontic braces to me. But other than that, it's a toss up!

Good questions Demelza.

This method is just as secure as shared prong, particularly with 2 or 3 pointers. In general, micropave is less secure, as the metal is grooved to create tiny beads that hold the diamonds in place rather than prongs. Less metal = less security.

We've made pieces like this a handful of times. The first one was around a year and a half ago. There have been no problems reported.

This type of thread is a great aspect of PS: It reminds me of musicians coming together to debate the smallest nuances of a piece. To many people they would go unnoticed, but to those who have a passion for the subject the conversation can go on for days.

 

[Lynn B]

Hi John,

So nice to see you here. Thanks for chiming in!

I found your post to be very interesting and also very reassuring. Dem is so right - for me to be 100% thrilled with any new set it would need to be (at least) as "durable" and "low maintenence" as my old set, and I love knowing that the fishtail pave ring would be! I am SOOOOO LOVING that style.

Lynn

PS Note to everyone else - I have sent poor John on a mission

for all the specs on Shucash''s ring; once I get those, I''ll be sure to post them here! I sure wish Shucash himself would chime in with more info and more photos. Anyone know him???!

 

[Lynn B]

OK... I got an e-mail from John... here's the scoop:

'Shucash' pictured ring:

Custom platinum ring with 2.2mm shank and 4-prong claw head. 3/4
eternity: 24 x 1.7mm (2 point) diamonds. The center diamond pictured is
about .80 ct and the ring pictured is a size 5.

Interesting, huh? (I will attach the image again here so we don't have to keep scrolling back to page 1!

) I'm kind of surprised that the width of the band is 2.2mm, made with 2 pointers. My current set is about that width made with 3 pointers. I don't think I really see that much "additional metal", do you guys?

Anyway... imagine it with my 2.36 center stone!

(Where is Miss Ana PhotoShop Queen Deluxe when you need her?!!!)

 

[Sundial]

That''s a gorgeous ring Lynn! Would you get a matching wedding band if you went with that one?

 

[Kaleigh]

Ooooohhhh, I do like that!!! I do I do!!!

ETA: I haven't seen Ana on here today. I hope she can do her photoshop magic for you soon.

 

[headlight]

Oh, Lynn, I know you''ll hate me for saying this, but...
I like your current set better!!!
Don''t ask me why, I just do!
Does this have a matching band that goes with it? Would you be getting that, too?
Do you have a profile view of your current set? How about a photo on your hand?
Have you tried on an eternity style? Some people find them to be uncomfortable.
This is just my opinion which really doesn''t count for anything, but to my aging eyes, when I see an eternity in the micro-pave'', it all just sort of blends together and isn''t so noticeable -- when I see a mounting like yours, where there is only a specific number of stones -- offset by the smooth metal shank --it really stands out and makes a statement.
Also, in terms of the two rings not always "staying together", I think that is perfectly okay. I actually like that look, rather than the two lining up. To me, it adds "interest" and actually gives it more of an "authentic" or vintage appeal, as if they were your great-grandmother''s mountings.
Don''t get me wrong -- either way it will be lovely -- I mean, we are splitting hairs here between one beautiful mounting and another!

 

[Lynn B]

A matching wedding ring? Yes, definately! I am sooooo loving this style.

It is really speaking to me. It reminds me of a Michael B.

Do you guys think it is more dressier - or more casual - than my current set? (Or neither?!) Any opinions? (I'll attach a photo of the current set here for a quick comparison).

I do wonder about the head. I'm ridiculously picky about heads!

If I go custom, I have almost-endless options. Anyone have any suggestions? Does anyone know what the heads look like on the MB type rings? Any good close-up photos?

Thanks, all!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 5/1/2006 7:48:59 PM
Author: headlight
Oh, Lynn, I know you'll hate me for saying this, but...

I like your current set better!!!

Don't ask me why, I just do!

Does this have a matching band that goes with it? Would you be getting that, too?

Do you have a profile view of your current set? How about a photo on your hand?

Have you tried on an eternity style? Some people find them to be uncomfortable.

This is just my opinion which really doesn't count for anything, but to my aging eyes, when I see an eternity in the micro-pave', it all just sort of blends together and isn't so noticeable -- when I see a mounting like yours, where there is only a specific number of stones -- offset by the smooth metal shank --it really stands out and makes a statement.

Also, in terms of the two rings not always 'staying together', I think that is perfectly okay. I actually like that look, rather than the two lining up. To me, it adds 'interest' and actually gives it more of an 'authentic' or vintage appeal, as if they were your great-grandmother's mountings.

Don't get me wrong -- either way it will be lovely -- I mean, we are splitting hairs here between one beautiful mounting and another!

Awwwww, thank you for your honest opinions and feedback, I so appreciate it. And I understand what you are saying. Couple of things, though... I don't think this is considered micro pave, it would be made with 2 pointers. (Although John would be the better one to say for sure on that.) And it also isn't a full eternity, it's 3/4. However, I don't find eternity rings uncomfortable at all, and in fact, I love them. The only reason I would go 3/4 is because I am scared of resizing issues in the future.

Anyway, I don't know for sure, of course, but I don't really think that to a casual observer there would really be too awful much visual difference between the 2 sets. (Which, of course, brings up the whole, "Then are you sure you really want to do this afterall?" question... which is certainly logical and reasonable! But the answer is still a resounding, "Yes, please, sir!"

)

BTW, I'll attach a photo I took of the rings spinning, which is silly, I know -- but it drives me insane! If the rings aren't perfectly lined up, it looks like that on both sides!

 

[Mara]

my darling lynn...
i agree that when the diamonds are together and sparkling all together, you don't see the nuances and small details in the setting. aka that fishtail may not even be noticeable. is it REALLY worth it to spend what, 3k to get a slight difference??? just throwing that out there.

i think that set would be fabulous with your big stone, just like your current set is too! i dont know girl...its hard to imagine spending that kind of dough on a setting that is so similar to yours now. just a thought.

oh and re: the head thing, i agree with making the head a bit different than the typical 4 prong thang. i'm going 6 prong this time!

 

[Lynn B]

My dear Mara,

Thank you for the post! You are my sane voice of reason and I deeply appreciate it.

And believe me, so does my dear husband! Now SHUDDUPALREADY, will ya''??!

Seriously, if I go ahead with this, let''s talk *HEADS*. What would you choose for that style ring??? And photos... I need PHOTOS, please!!!

 

[mrssalvo]

Here''s the MB version..I''ll see if I can find a head on shot..

 

[mrssalvo]

Here''s an photoshop that ana did that i have saved. it shows a close up of the MB head..

 

[mrssalvo]

I don''t think we''ve posted slammie''s set here..

 

[headlight]

Well, I can definitely see how that would drive you crazy. It would make me nuts!
I know the "s" word was previously mentioned -- would you consider soldering the two together? It is my understanding that rings that are soldered can be un-soldered at a later date with no problem, so if that is the case you could try it and if you hated it then have them separated.
Do you ever wear them alone? If not, then you might not mind having them permanently fitted together.
Actually, the spinning thing brings me to a whole other issue -- the point that they spin to begin with. I think this is due to teh narrowness of your ring shanks combined with a large stone in a high mounting. Does the spinning -- in general -- bother you (aside from the fact that it then causes your diamond shanks to not line up)?
Do you have a "secret" ring change/upgrade plan for the future (come on -- you can tell us -- it is us, your PS friends -- your partners in crime -- we won''t tell!!!)? I ask because I''m thinking that if you did, try out the soldering thing for now, and then hold off and just do the big change down the road, rather than this interim change (if it is, in fact, an interim thing).
I have never been drawn to the 4 or 6 prong head that is mounted on top of the shank. I originally had my 3.29 in one of them (6 prong) and couldn''t get the stone re-set fast enough. I personally prefer head mountings that are integrated as part of the shank, i.e. basket style. This also lends itself better toward reduced ring spin because the whole ring composition is more balanced out and has a lower center of gravity (geez, I''m posing now as a physics professor!!!). Of course, the downside to all of this is that a band will not fit flush, so you either have to have them not flush or get one made custom to "fit", but then it can''t be worn alone (and even though they are "notched" to fit, once again they never stay in place unless you never breathe or move!!!). Personally, I have always liked bands that purposely do not fit flush, as it adds to its charm, IMO. Also, I am not one to wear a band with my e-ring, because two rings on one finger have always drove me crazy. Obviously, with a very narrow band, it feels a bit "lost" without another ring, so I don''t know if a basket type head will suit you.

 

[headlight]

Date: 5/1/2006 8:36:45 PM
Author: mrssalvo
I don''t think we''ve posted slammie''s set here..

Okay, Lynn, if you are set on making a change...
THIS IS IT!
This would totally justify -- in my "devil''s advocate" perspective -- making the change!
You are totally getting a complete new look here that "resembles" the genre of your current ring, but makes it worth your while (and $$$)!!!
Also, here is a basket mounting which I prefer, and you could even drop the head down a bit if you want it to be more low profile.
Would love to see a side view of the MB -- from the one photo, it looks like the head is nice and "compact". I think those MB settings are up there in $$$.

 

[Mara]

i gotta agree if you want the fishtail pave and a new head style, slammies is the ONLY WAY to go. i just love that ring...YUM. and the basket for the head, it''s just PERFECTION.

you could have toppers do it...they did hers. i know you said you have $$ with WF but i would probably have toppers recreate slammie''s set rather than having someone else try to replicate it. maybe WF can do the matching wedding band once the actual e-ring is done and they can match it exactly. not sure how much your credit is for.

 

[headlight]

Date: 5/1/2006 8:48:14 PM
Author: Mara
i gotta agree if you want the fishtail pave and a new head style, slammies is the ONLY WAY to go. i just love that ring...YUM. and the basket for the head, it''s just PERFECTION.

you could have toppers do it...they did hers. i know you said you have $$ with WF but i would probably have toppers recreate slammie''s set rather than having someone else try to replicate it. maybe WF can do the matching wedding band once the actual e-ring is done and they can match it exactly. not sure how much your credit is for.

Ya know, if Lynn already has a credit w/ WF, I am certain they can replicate this -- it is just a basket but the crossbar is pave''.
It has me thinking -- Mara -- what about this head for your ring???

 

[Kaleigh]

The head on slammies ring is too die for love it. If you make the change ya got to do something different and this has everything you want. The fish tail and a super beautiful head.

 

[Mara]

headlight, trust me i thought about it but that would have to sit kind of on top of my peggy head so it would look funny and not nearly as fluid and beautiful as slammies...but i think that what we are doing for my head with WF will work out great for my existing ring. keeping fingers crossed!

if i had to go it all over again okay i think i would go for slammie''s slammin set. from the git go! that is definitely one of my all time faves.

 

[Lynn B]

You guys are so BAD you are GOOD!

Actually, I posted Slammie''s ring on page one of this post! It is a KILLER RING, to be sure, and I had considered it... but I really don''t want to get into the teeny-tiny little diamonds thing, like those on the head. Plus, isn''t her shank considered micro-pave, with stones smaller than 2 pointers?

I do like the idea of the head being more integrated INTO the ring, instead of just sitting on top like an aftr-thought... but I do want the two rings to sit flush, or at least CLOSE to flush. Yeah, I could live pretty happily with "close to flush" for a killer head.

And I wonder if a more integrated head DOES spin less? Hmmm, that''s interesting and makes sense to me.

No, I don''t like the "s" (solder) word

... I do wear the w-band alone sometimes, and even the e-ring once in awhile (alone), just for practicality or variety. But that was a good thought -- thanks!

And last of all, no... I have no other diamond plans for this year. No upgrade of center stone or studs... no necklace or bracelet plans... and believe me, I would tell you if I did!!! You all know that I do aspire to a 3+''er one day, but with prices growing every higher daily, I am beginning to wonder if maybe this 2.36 will be my always-and-forever diamond, after all!!!

 

[belle]

hehehehehehe....

can''t wait to see what lynn comes up with next!

 

[MissGotRocks]

OK, LynnB, you sound determined!

If you have a wedding band made too what will you do with your current set?

In answer to your question, I think the new ring looks more casual than your current set - maybe because each individual stone is smaller.

When a girl makes up her mind, there''s no stoppin'' her!!! I too really like your current set but that really isn''t the issue. You want a change and sounds like you''re gonna get one!

What if the new set spins too?

 

[headlight]

Date: 5/1/2006 9:54:29 PM
Author: MissGotRocks
OK, LynnB, you sound determined!

If you have a wedding band made too what will you do with your current set?

In answer to your question, I think the new ring looks more casual than your current set - maybe because each individual stone is smaller.

When a girl makes up her mind, there''s no stoppin'' her!!! I too really like your current set but that really isn''t the issue. You want a change and sounds like you''re gonna get one!

What if the new set spins too?

I don''t know what it is about your current set, but I do agree that for some reason your current set looks more "formal".

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 5/1/2006 9:54:29 PM
Author: MissGotRocks

What if the new set spins too?

I LOL at this... I could just hear the tiny little whisper-y just-have-to-get-it-out-there voice!

Well, I''ve already thought about that. Yeah, the e-ring might spin, but that big ol'' J can only go so far... and even then, it should still be all diamonds showing on top of my finger. The w-ring might spin, but with 3/4 eternity I''ll have some "lee-way"... the rings wouldn''t have to be *PEEEEERFECTLY* lined up with each other all the time, like they are now! SEE?!

Stay with me, here folks... I can justify almost anything! (It''s a gift!)

 

[mrssalvo]

so what you''re really saying is, the actually spinning doesn''t bother you, it''s the lack of seeing sparkle when the spinning occurs

makes total sense to me and I love slammies set too and think it would be an awesome change which would really make the whole project worth while.