LynnB - are you out there? I Need a Consultation with You!

[3shebabes]

LynnB -- if you are out there -- I need to quiz you about your Whiteflash settings (your current and your previous)...

First of all, let me say, the Legato head is so feminine and pretty and so unique! Nothing else like it out there! I just love your rings...!

Here's my situation: husband just purchased a 10 year anniversary upgrade stone and I am anxious to choose a setting, have it set and start wearing my beautiful new diamond. FYI, the stone he bought me is similar in scale to yours (RB, 2.86 carats, G SI1, AGSOOO - very pretty!

) But I am getting nowhere fast when it comes to settling on a setting. I know I want the eternity-style look for both the e-ring and the w-band. I have been looking at the Diamonds for an Eternity 3/4 bands -- but would have the Legato head instead of the standard head. I know that before you had your current Harmony set, you had either the shared prong or the Diamonds for an Eternity set. I can't recall which one -- but I wondered if you could tell me what made you want to switch settings again. Was it purely for looks that you wanted a change, or did you have comfort or rubbing issues with the two bands? Does your Harmony set sit fairly easily together? And is rubbing not a problem with that type of pave?

I absolutely love your Harmony set in the pictures and wish I could see it in person but I am nowhere near Whiteflash. But -- I guess I feel torn between the Harmony set and the super-blingy-ness of the Diamonds for an Eternity set but have heard from a few folks on P-scope that they wouldn't consider them durable if worn together due to rubbing issues.

Anyway, any insight you can give me between the two settings would be appreciated....

(or if there are others of you out there that have experienced "issues" (or maybe have NOT had problems with either type of WF setting and want to share your thoughts, please do!)

Thanks immensely, Lynn and everyone...

Alice (alias 3shebabes on P-scope!)

 

[Lynn B]

Oh, I''m here... but I can''t type out an appropriate response right now... but I will tonight!
Stay tuned!!!

 

[onedrop]

3Shebabes: I have the WF "Harmony" set, in platinum that is modeled on Lynn B''s set. Although when I got mine the "Harmony" setting didn''t exist. Maybe I can provide a little insight until Lynn has time to post. I''ve been wearing the engagement ring and wedding band together for the last 6 months and I haven''t seen any evidence that the bands or stones are rubbing together. I think this is due to the good construction of the rings. The sides of both rings are only metal and flat, therefore the only thing that would rubbing is metal. The stones are protected by the flat sides of the rings. After closer examinination, I also noticed that there is a tiny space between the rings when I wear them together. This was not intentional, but the space exists probably because I had the wedding band designed after we purchased the engagement ring, and I did not send the engagement ring back when the wedding band was in production.

I specifically asked WF about the potential rubbing issues when we were deciding on a setting because of what I read here on PS. They assured me that with the design we chose we''d have no problems and they were right. Just a note, we considered 3 pointers instead of 2 pointers which probably would have given off more sparkle, but we went with the 2 pointers instead. So if you are concerned about the "bling" factor, maybe consider 3 pointers?

Hopefully I helped a bit. Lynn does a much better job at describing things than I do, but I hope I gave at least a general idea.

 

[sevens one]

I''m no LynnB either
but here is a pic of her first setting
for reference

 

[3shebabes]

LynnB - I look forward to any tidbits of info you can share later...

SevensOne and onedrop -- thanks for your replies/info/advice and the picture of LynnB''s old set...

Here''s a question for any/all of you: what is the difference between the Diamonds for an eternity (3/4) setting and the WF shared prong setting. I know the diamonds for an eternity has diamonds that go further around the ring, but are the stones set any differently? I can''t tell from the picture... I assumed they were both shared prong, but am I mistaken?

 

[JohnQuixote]

They're both shared prong with the same size diamond. There is one small difference between the two; the ¾ eternity has openings under the culets of the diamonds. The full eternity does not, for purposes of stability.

 

[Lynn B]

Thanks, everyone! You guys can *speak* for me anyday!

Yep, everything above is correct. My first set, the shared prong, did NOT cause me any problems. It was a lovely, comfortable set, and the two rings did not scratch each other in the least. I had a reset for several reasons, mainly... 1) I wanted thinner bands and 2) the spinning between the two semi-eternity rings drove me CRAZEEEE! One ring would spin left and one would spin right, and I'd be seeing platinum at each end. I was always "lining them up"... and I didn't like that.

I ran across fishtail pave and fell in love. Knew I could go with smaller melee which would make the bands thinner, and I liked the idea of the shimmer/glimmer of the smaller stones, rather than the *sparkle* of the shared prong stones. (Allows the center stone to really POP, IMVHO.)

Also, I was getting a little tired of the side view of the shared prong rings (kinda started to remind me of orthodontic braces!) ... but ADORED the side view of the fishtail pave.

I LOVE eternity rings, but I am scared of the basically-no-resizing issue, so my new set is considered 90% eternity, with a small, discreet plain plat ("sizing area") on the bottom of each shank. Spinning is no longer an issue, YAY!

Also, the 2 rings do not scratch each other AT ALL, and they sit flush. I worked with WF (and my PS buds!) to first design the perfect scallop head, now called the Legato. I did notice that the head is different in the ring on WFs website; on the website it looks like it may be a peg head? That's not my favorite look. When we were planning my custom job, I specified an INTEGRATED head, I think it just looks better.
So... WF did a GREAT job, my new set is gorgeous; I have been wearing it happily for 16 months now, I get compliments on it daily -- and I have no regrets.

If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask!

Lynn

 

[3shebabes]

Lynn and John,

Tnanks for your responses!

This setting business is driving me insane.Not being able to see & try on some of the rings I have been studying up on online is frustrating me. I want to love what I choose so badly -- so I feel stressed!

Lynn -- I was worried about the spinning issue caused by have the shared prong bands that do not have diamonds all the way around...and you confirmed that possibility for me. From the picture that was posted, it looks to me like your side diamonds just covered enough of the band to cover the top of your finger and not much more -- so obviously, as you found, if there''s any spinning, you''re going to see metal. Do you think doing the 3/4 Diamonds for an Eternity setting would be less of an issue? Or, from your experience, do you feel the nature of the shared prong bands makes them disengage from each other enough that they''ll be a constant bother due to spinning? I know you can''t say for sure, just wondering what your guess would be? Did your shared prong set sit nicely together when you "lined them up" ? In other words, not too much of a gap? Or did they "disengage" from each other two seconds after you "lined them up" again?

Sorry for all the tedious interrogating! I truly do love the look of your Harmony set...but I have just fallen for the over-the-top blinginess of the eternity style shared prong so badly! HOWEVER, funny thing that you should mention the side view. I had noticed the full-side-view angle of the shared prong rings looks "unfinished" in some way. Obviously, most of the time that isn''t the view you''ll see -- but you just wanna love your ring from every angle so badly!

Thanks Lynn! You should be quite proud to be the inspiration behind the Legato head''s design! It is obviously very popular on these forums!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

3shebabes, personally, I think too much bling on the bands may take away from your magnificent stone! But that is certainly your decision! The other option is to do as suggested before, and have the fishtail pave set made with slightly larger diamonds than Lynn''s. I think her bands are close to 2mm, so you could gain more size by increasing the size of the stones. Lynn, are your stones 2 points? If so, then 3 pointers or even 4 might give you a more significant bling factor without being too much.

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 10/5/2007 8:34:40 AM
Author: 3shebabes
Lynn and John,

Tnanks for your responses!

This setting business is driving me insane.Not being able to see & try on some of the rings I have been studying up on online is frustrating me. I want to love what I choose so badly -- so I feel stressed!

Lynn -- I was worried about the spinning issue caused by have the shared prong bands that do not have diamonds all the way around...and you confirmed that possibility for me. From the picture that was posted, it looks to me like your side diamonds just covered enough of the band to cover the top of your finger and not much more -- so obviously, as you found, if there''s any spinning, you''re going to see metal. Do you think doing the 3/4 Diamonds for an Eternity setting would be less of an issue? Or, from your experience, do you feel the nature of the shared prong bands makes them disengage from each other enough that they''ll be a constant bother due to spinning? I know you can''t say for sure, just wondering what your guess would be? Did your shared prong set sit nicely together when you ''lined them up'' ? In other words, not too much of a gap? Or did they ''disengage'' from each other two seconds after you ''lined them up'' again?

Sorry for all the tedious interrogating! I truly do love the look of your Harmony set...but I have just fallen for the over-the-top blinginess of the eternity style shared prong so badly! HOWEVER, funny thing that you should mention the side view. I had noticed the full-side-view angle of the shared prong rings looks ''unfinished'' in some way. Obviously, most of the time that isn''t the view you''ll see -- but you just wanna love your ring from every angle so badly!

Thanks Lynn! You should be quite proud to be the inspiration behind the Legato head''s design! It is obviously very popular on these forums!

Hi! No problem with the questions, I''m happy to answer.

My experience with the two shared prong rings was that they "nestled" together rather nicely... that was never a problem. (They would "separate" at times, of course (with skin showing between them), but I never really minded that, and besides, any two rings *of ANY style*, unless they are soldered together, of course, will do the same.)

The "problem" (using that term loosely! haha!) was the spinning, because yes, like you saw, my rings weren''t even really quite half eternity. Stones covered the tops of my finger only, so ANY movement meant spinning. So when I got my new set, I knew I wanted diamonds FARTHER around... and I asked for 90% eternity, because I was a little phobic

and thought 75% may not be enough!!!

Well, I have had both styles, and while I certainly will always like the shared prong style, I do prefer the more subtle shimmer (and the side view) of the fishtail pave. But both are beautiful... you can''t go wrong with either one!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 10/5/2007 5:48:52 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
3shebabes, personally, I think too much bling on the bands may take away from your magnificent stone! But that is certainly your decision! The other option is to do as suggested before, and have the fishtail pave set made with slightly larger diamonds than Lynn''s. I think her bands are close to 2mm, so you could gain more size by increasing the size of the stones. Lynn, are your stones 2 points? If so, then 3 pointers or even 4 might give you a more significant bling factor without being too much.

Good thinking, DS -- that could be a good "compromise" (larger melee). My stones are actually a little under 2 points... and yes, the finished bands are around 2mm. It would be interesting to see the fishtail pave with larger stones... 3 or 4 pointers. It would DEFINITELY change the "look", that''s for sure. Also... I wonder at what point it is no longer considered "pave"?!!!