It's almost here! U113

[ppuff211]

First, thank you to everyone who discouraged me from changing my 3-stone engagement ring to a solitaire. I'm so glad I didn't change it, since I love that 3-stone

I ended up getting a 1.8ct ACA in the Vatche U113 setting, and requested that the prongs be made claw-style (but not too too pointy), vs the standard tabbed style. After a few weeks of waiting (and 2 delayed ship dates), it's finally on its way to me!

So excited, but here's the thing... I received the below 2 glamour shots, and almost wish I hadn't received these, because now I'm worried. Perhaps it's the photos' angle, or perhaps it's the up-close nature of this, but I can't stop thinking about how the ring doesn't look how I was expecting. The main part of the prongs look so straight and angular... Nothing like the swoopy, graceful lines I was expecting (from seeing profile-view photos of other people's U113). Does anyone else see this?

Obviously, I'll know for sure once I see the ring in person. Just wanted to get some thoughts in the meantime, since it may be a day or so before im able to pick it up from Fedex. And im doing everything I can not to feel disappointed that the ring didn't come out how i expected

 

[tyty333]

Congratulations! It looks lovely to me...from the angles the pictures are taken I dont see how you can tell that the
prongs are straight vs swoopy. Dont get worked up. Wait till you see it in person then decide.

 

[ppuff211]

Here it is no issues with the prongs. They are swoopy and very pretty.

I'm deciding whether or not to keep this, though, because the workmanship is not what I expected. The head seems a little off-center in the donut, and the prongs are also not perfectly centered (one side is rotated ever so slightly off center). The most recent shipping delay was apparently because "Vatche does not think the quality of the ring was 100% perfect to ship out" and I wonder if the things im noticing had anything to do with it, and perhaps it wasn't fixed completely. It's not that noticeable unless you inspect it up close, but I'm going to sit on it a while to see if it bothers me.

Sorry for the poor lighting -- I took these photos last night while watching a movie at home with the lights dimmed

 

[tyty333]

Are these things you can see without a loupe? If so, I think you should take some good up close pictures of what you are seeing
(head off center, slightly off centered prongs) and send it back. Have them fix it. You are paying too much to have it not be
symmetric.

I'm sorry you are having issues. I know you probably dont want to send it back but if these things are going to bother you and
you're going to feel ho-hum about your ring when you look at it, send it back.

Edit...can you post some more upclose pictures of what you are talking about?

 

[msop04]

I can see what you mean about the prongs... The U-113 is waaaaaay too expensive to be anything less than perfection. I'd send it back.

 

[ppuff211]

So I actually hadn't even thought to look at it through the loupe. Great idea. I took some photos (with and without a loupe) and will post them below in separate posts so you can see each example clearly.

First, here is the profile view where the head doesn't look centered. If you look at the upside down "V"s, the center V looks like it's too far to the right:

 

[ppuff211]

And here, if you look at the bottom prong, it looks ever so sightly shifted to the right. It isn't super noticeable, but it definitely isn't centered, which correlates to the upside down V that is also off-center.

 

[ppuff211]

And finally, here are photos of the donut. You can see that one side of the donut is smaller than the other. I think this is what I was seeing when I originally said that the head looks off-center in the donut. It's more that the donut itself is lopsided.

I'm hoping you pros can help advise me. Am I being too nitpicky? I'm not normally one to pick things apart like this, or to go back to vendors to bring up issues. But I just feel surprised at the level of quality... I was expecting more, especially reading so many great things on PS about both Vatche and WhiteFlash.

If I am being too anal, please let me know. would greatly appreciate your thoughts while I decide whether or not to reach out to WF about this.

 

[ppuff211]

Meanwhile, here is a side-by-side comparison of a PS-er's U113 on the left, and mine on the right. I don't remember her username here, but hope she doesn't mind my posting this photo--I follow her on Instagram because I love her ring so much Her ring is 2ct, and mine is 1.8ct (ACA, h color, size 5 on a size 4.75 finger) so I was kind of expecting mine to look somewhat similar to hers, eventhough mine is .2ct smaller).

 

[wildcat03]

Meanwhile, here is a side-by-side comparison of a PS-er's U113 on the left, and mine on the right. I don't remember her username here, but hope she doesn't mind my posting this photo--I follow her on Instagram because I love her ring so much Her ring is 2ct, and mine is 1.8ct (ACA, h color, size 5 on a size 4.75 finger) so I was kind of expecting mine to look somewhat similar to hers, eventhough mine is .2ct smaller).

So, I think vatché changed the setting slightly in the last few years and I think some of that is what you are seeing. In addition, that ring looks like it may have tab prongs rather than claw prongs.

I do agree that your prongs look slightly off. And I think the "W" that you mention may be slightly off but it's hard to get a true perspective from the pictures. I will say this about the prongs. I am a big believer in choosing good vendors and letting them do what they do well. Vatché does tab prongs beautifully. I haven't seen many examples of their claw prongs and honestly haven't paid much attention to them, because in the end I wouldn't ask Vatché to do claw prongs for me - I'd pick a different vendor who had shown over and over again that they could do them beautifully.

 

[ppuff211]

So, I think vatché changed the setting slightly in the last few years and I think some of that is what you are seeing. In addition, that ring looks like it may have tab prongs rather than claw prongs.

I do agree that your prongs look slightly off. And I think the "W" that you mention may be slightly off but it's hard to get a true perspective from the pictures. I will say this about the prongs. I am a big believer in choosing good vendors and letting them do what they do well. Vatché does tab prongs beautifully. I haven't seen many examples of their claw prongs and honestly haven't paid much attention to them, because in the end I wouldn't ask Vatché to do claw prongs for me - I'd pick a different vendor who had shown over and over again that they could do them beautifully.

Thanks for your response, and for the thoughts about claw vs tab prongs. That's a good point. When requesting clawed prongs, I sent the vendor photos of the U113 with the type of prongs I wanted (found them from old threads on PS), but you are right. It probably would have been wiser (or at least less risky) if I had just stuck with the tabbed prongs that Vatche seems to do so well.

That's interesting Vatche changed the setting slightly in recent years. This is the first I've heard of that--do you know if there have been any threads or discussions about this on PS? Would love to hear if anyone else has had experience with this.

 

[ppuff211]

Just did a quick search and came across this photo. Interestingly, I think my Vatche ring looks more like the WF setting in this picture (in terms of shank shape--screenshot below). Not that I have a problem with it--but this photo helps me understand how the setting I received differs slightly from what I had in mind.

 

[wildcat03]

So, I think vatché changed the setting slightly in the last few years and I think some of that is what you are seeing. In addition, that ring looks like it may have tab prongs rather than claw prongs.

I do agree that your prongs look slightly off. And I think the "W" that you mention may be slightly off but it's hard to get a true perspective from the pictures. I will say this about the prongs. I am a big believer in choosing good vendors and letting them do what they do well. Vatché does tab prongs beautifully. I haven't seen many examples of their claw prongs and honestly haven't paid much attention to them, because in the end I wouldn't ask Vatché to do claw prongs for me - I'd pick a different vendor who had shown over and over again that they could do them beautifully.

Thanks for your response, and for the thoughts about claw vs tab prongs. That's a good point. When requesting clawed prongs, I sent the vendor photos of the U113 with the type of prongs I wanted (found them from old threads on PS), but you are right. It probably would have been wiser (or at least less risky) if I had just stuck with the tabbed prongs that Vatche seems to do so well.

That's interesting Vatche changed the setting slightly in recent years. This is the first I've heard of that--do you know if there have been any threads or discussions about this on PS? Would love to hear if anyone else has had experience with this.

To be honest, it wasn't something I'd ever been told, just something I'd noticed as I looked through threads. If I have a few minutes I can try to find the threads that made me realize this. My vatché u113 looks more like yours than the comparison you posted. I disagree that your setting looks more like the WF setting.

I do think you have some legitimate concerns re: your setting. I think you have a couple avenues - you could ask that it be redone by vatché based on the crooked donut, etc. and when doing so decide on tab prongs or claw prongs (I'd encourage tab for obvious reasons). You could ask for a full refund and take that money to a different vendor such as CVB (the Jovyn setting and if I recall correctly, her claw prongs are done beautifully) or Steven Kirsch (his claw prongs are unmatched as far as I'm concerned). I do think you should be happy with your setting and agree that the vatché setting is far too expensive to own and not love.

 

[ppuff211]

To be honest, it wasn't something I'd ever been told, just something I'd noticed as I looked through threads. If I have a few minutes I can try to find the threads that made me realize this. My vatché u113 looks more like yours than the comparison you posted. I disagree that your setting looks more like the WF setting.

I do think you have some legitimate concerns re: your setting. I think you have a couple avenues - you could ask that it be redone by vatché based on the crooked donut, etc. and when doing so decide on tab prongs or claw prongs (I'd encourage tab for obvious reasons). You could ask for a full refund and take that money to a different vendor such as CVB (the Jovyn setting and if I recall correctly, her claw prongs are done beautifully) or Steven Kirsch (his claw prongs are unmatched as far as I'm concerned). I do think you should be happy with your setting and agree that the vatché setting is far too expensive to own and not love.

Interesting - would love to see photos of your ring (just to ogle

I'm ok with having this newer look for my setting. It's really the prong asymmetry that bothers me. Seeing it kind of dampens my excitement for it. I think I'll reach out to the vendor and ask them to replace the setting (and to just do tabbed prongs like Vatche typically does). Maybe while I'm at it, I'll increase the size of the stone.

 

[m-2-b]

I would definitely contact your WF associate and express your concerns regarding your new setting (and possible upgrade ). Texas Leaguer is on these boards and may see your post as well.

I have the WF 6 prong version and they did do my claw prongs beautifully as can be seen here:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-4-7ct-whiteflash-aca-upgrade.222254/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-4-7ct-whiteflash-aca-upgrade.222254/[/URL]

 

[msop04]

OP, I don't know if you're set on claw prongs, but Caysie of CVB did a modified Jovyn for me with very petite tab prongs that I adore with the swoopiest basket ever! Just wanted to throw that out there, as I feel her work is pretty much perfection.

Here are some pics for reference:

My CVB Jovyn with petite tab prongs



WF with claw prongs


DK with softened claw prongs


Hope this helps!

 

[tyty333]

To be honest ppuff, I'm not really seeing it. i can see that the donut halves look off but not sure if the angle of the picture is
straight on. The prongs look like they are symmetrical to me. If you look at the bottom prong it is pointed at the corresponding
star facet that comes off the table. Maybe something else is off that is making the prongs look off? Not sure?

 

[ppuff211]

tyty- thanks for the honest feedback! I agree with you about the top-down view, although I think there is somethig about the bottom prong that is slightly off. It's just ever so slightly though, and does not really bother me. The asymmetrical v's & donut are the things that bother me most. I tried to take face-on photos but obviously it can be difficult to do when we're talking about very little details.

I appreciate your thoughts and am going to take all of this in to consideration, because I definitely don't want to be "that" pain in the you-know-what customer!

 

[ppuff211]

m2b & msop..... Such gorgeous rings! I came across both of your rings while doing my research to decide on what setting to get. And both of them have served as inspiration for how i would LOVE to for my ring to look

 

[diamondseeker2006]

You do have to realize that m2b and msop have 4+ and 3+ ct stones, and a 1.8 ct is just not going to look exactly the same because the head will be smaller.

I am being 100% honest, I think your ring looks fine. The prong placement is great, and I do not see that the head is not centered. I do not think the tiny difference in the doughnut is enough of an issue to even notice it in real life, but they probably could file down the wider side.

Rings should be examined with the eye, not a loupe, although I agree we had to see magnified pictures to try to see what you are saying. Many of us are OCD and that is a hard problem to have, because while we can pretty much buy perfectly cut diamonds to the eye, there almost is no such thing with settings. I really think your ring looks fine, but had I seen any questions from you at the outset, I would have recommended that you just go with the WF Tiffany repro like m2b has if you wanted claw prongs like they do. However, as I said, I think your prongs look great. I don't see a thing that would make me return that ring unless I wanted the doughnut evened up.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oops, I missed your comment about increasing the size of the stone!

I am going to say that if you were not happy with these prongs, I think you'll be less happy with the tab prongs. I don't think they can make the ring as perfect as you want, to be honest. I'd go with the WF version with their pretty claws and I would ask that the ring be cast in 900 plat 100 iridiuim which is different than their standard alloy but harder.

Are we sure the Vatche can be returned? Just wondering since you did change the prongs slightly.

 

[ppuff211]

Oops, I missed your comment about increasing the size of the stone!

I am going to say that if you were not happy with these prongs, I think you'll be less happy with the tab prongs. I don't think they can make the ring as perfect as you want, to be honest. I'd go with the WF version with their pretty claws and I would ask that the ring be cast in 900 plat 100 iridiuim which is different than their standard alloy but harder.

Are we sure the Vatche can be returned? Just wondering since you did change the prongs slightly.

Thanks for your thoughts! I wouldn't be able to go to a 3 or 4 ct, but maybe something in the low 2's. I haven't spoken with anyone at WF yet (wanted to get your guys' thougts first to see if I'm being crazy about the prongs or not), but maybe I'll ask them to see what my options are re: returning or upgrading. I had this setting done in 900 plat/100 iridium and will also request this if I move forward with another ring.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

If you think you'd ever want larger, this is the time. Prices are low now, so I would go as large as your budget allows now rather than upgrading later with possibly higher prices. Good luck and let us know what you decide!!!

Oh, I just had one thought. I originally had a smaller diamond in my Vatche U 113 and had the head replaced when I got my current diamond. Vatche charges a few hundred to replace the head. So if you have to pay anything, it won't be a lot. In this case, I would definitely stick with the Vatche.

 

[ppuff211]

If you think you'd ever want larger, this is the time. Prices are low now, so I would go as large as your budget allows now rather than upgrading later with possibly higher prices. Good luck and let us know what you decide!!!

Oh, I just had one thought. I originally had a smaller diamond in my Vatche U 113 and had the head replaced when I got my current diamond. Vatche charges a few hundred to replace the head. So if you have to pay anything, it won't be a lot. In this case, I would definitely stick with the Vatche.

Oh-I didn't know it was possible to just replace the head. I will ask about that. thanks for the tip!

Looking past the little details, I'm enjoying the ring more. Just tried t on again and took some photos. It really is quite lovely. Will lee you posted re: possibly upgrading the size of the stone!

 

[MissGotRocks]

I would definitely contact WF about your ring. It is beautiful but there is no reason to try to learn to love the imperfections that you see. I am sure that both WF and Vatche want you to be happy with your ring.

Upgrading the stone - I like the way you think! Might as well kill two birds with one stone - lol! Going over the 2 carat mark might make all of the aggravation worth it to you.

Good luck and please keep us posted!

 

[Elepig]

I'm not seeing anything amiss with the center bottom prong...but...maybe the prong to the right of it is a little 'off' as it relates to the distance from the band and the prong above it?

I've got a four pronged ring and one of the prongs is slightly off like that. Since the diamond is firmly in place, I'm not going to mess with it.

 

[tyty333]

I'm not seeing anything amiss with the center bottom prong...but...maybe the prong to the right of it is a little 'off' as it relates to the distance from the band and the prong above it?

I've got a four pronged ring and one of the prongs is slightly off like that. Since the diamond is firmly in place, I'm not going to mess with it.

Agree, that the prongs to the left and right of the bottom prong dont look like they are the same distance from the bottom prong.
Again, it could be the angle of the picture and I cant tell anything from the facets because they are not clear in that area.

 

[ppuff211]

Thank you, everyone -- tyty, Elepig, MissGotRocks, DS, msop, m2b, wildcat.. You have all shared invaluable advice.

I've emailed Whiteflash and asked about (1) upgrading the stone from a 1.8 to a 2.2ct, (2) replacing the head, this time with standard tabbed prongs, (3) keeping the 900 plat/100irid combo, and (4) sizing the ring down a bit since it's loose on my finger.

Hopefully, I'll be back soon with some photos of my new "upgrade" (is it realy considered an upgrade if this original ring is brand new? )

Here are some more photos. I FINALLY had a chance to take it in to some natural lighting. The stone is beautiful. Don't mind the outgrown manicure.. Funny how being home with a baby and a toddler just sucks the time right from out under you

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Awesome!!!! Your diameter will be about the same as mine with a 2.2 ct stone, and I think it is a great size, obviously! I do like my tab prongs because I wanted a Tiffany repro and that is how they do them! Mine are very tiny in real life viewing. Avoid high magnification if you can!

 

[wildcat03]

Sorry for the delay in replying! My parents were in town this weekend and it was busy busy.


My tab prongs!


Side view. The pic is rotated and I can't get it to post the right way up, sorry!