Updates and Opinions - Monster Prongs

[lesco]

Hi,

As you might remember, I posted a question a few days ago asking for your opinions regarding the thickness of the prongs on my upgrade e-ring. I really appreciate all of the help and opinions I have received regarding this process. I almost have my "dream ring" thanks to all of the feedback I have received. Thank you.

I thought I would drop a line (or two) to give you an update on the situation. Although I have not been able to meet with Mark @ ERD, we had a chance to speak today. Let me tell you, Mark''s customer service is EXCEPTIONAL. He listened to all of my concerns, did not question any of them and simply said, " We will tweak the ring to your liking". I was so happy to hear this. Based on prior experience with other jewelers ( not PS recommended), they basically want to dismiss all of your concerns and simply don''t want to hear it, cause they know better.

. I will hopefully meet with Mark tomorrow and we will get the final tweaking underway.

Now, I kinda had an "eureka" moment and decided to compare the tiff setting I have (my original e-ring) vs. ERD''s replica and I think the reason the prongs appear larger is that the diamond is set too low. In the tiff setting I can plainly see the girdle as I look through the gaps on the basket. I cannot see the girdle on the ERD''s one. So, I probably think that prongs were cut short and at their thickest part. Do you guys think this makes sense? I am thinking if the stone is set a bit higher, the prongs will hold the stone at their thinnest part. Any thoughts? I guess the ultimate goal is that the prongs face up thinner.

If you think the stone is not set too low, I will ask to thin out the prongs - I just don''t want to face any durability issues that might come with thinning the prongs. Some of you indicated that could be a problem later on. I know, this is a huge case of OCD over this setting

What is your choice?

#1 - Thin out prongs
#2 - Reset the stone a bit higher (medium) ala tiff setting provided
a-I''m right and the prongs were cut short.
b- If left longer they prongs will face up thinner!

Here is a pic and a link to the original thread for more
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/monster-prongs-yes-or-no.82397/

Thank you all,

Leslie

 

[Circe]

You mean the culet? It doesn''t look too low-set to me, but I tend to like them low-set (work with my hands a lot, less likely to knock it about and damage the girdle, and just like the look more, to be frank). I think thinning out the prongs will be the best solution ... adding metal to the prongs to "raise" the stone is pretty tricky, as I understand it, and might necessitate an entirely new head.

 

[lesco]

Date: 4/8/2008 2:41:45 AM
Author: Circe
You mean the culet? It doesn''t look too low-set to me, but I tend to like them low-set (work with my hands a lot, less likely to knock it about and damage the girdle, and just like the look more, to be frank). I think thinning out the prongs will be the best solution ... adding metal to the prongs to ''raise'' the stone is pretty tricky, as I understand it, and might necessitate an entirely new head.

Yes, I meant culet. Funny, I thought I had written cutlet.

I failed my diamond anatomy class.

Thank you for responding. I think at this point you are all sick and tired of me.... Oh! no, another post by lesco the squitzo.

To Ellen:
Thank you, I just saw your comment about the nice size increase. Yes, I am very happy with it.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 4/8/2008 8:15:11 AM
Author: lesco
To Ellen:
Thank you, I just saw your comment about the nice size increase. Yes, I am very happy with it.

You''re welcome!

As for the prongs, I think they''re just thicker than you want, I don''t think how low or high the setting is really matters. You could have thicker prongs on a really high setting, if you wanted.

I think before you do anything, you need to figure out which height you like better, and then go from there. It''s really a personal decision as to height.