Wedding bands recommendation

[WDWDiamond]

Number 2 for her. Wider band for you (6mm).

 

[sprinklesparkles]

You mean the 0.24 carat channel one?

Yes.

 

[Snowdrop13]

Which band did she like best?? My choice would be the second one, definitely.

 

[tyty333]

I like the 2nd and 3rd band for her. If she ever plans to wear the band without her ering. I would go with the bigger band else
the smaller band looks really go with her stone.

I prefer wider bands for guys...probably at least 5mm, comfort fit. I like mixed metals or textures to add interest. I personally
would skip the diamonds, but that's me...you get what you like!

 

[kevindd992002]

#2, #3, and #4 are all from Tiffany. She's telling me she likes #3 best but it does look like it's outshining the e-ring a bit. Her e-ring's setting is the Tapered Cathedral Solitaire and its widest width (bottom) is 2.4mm but when I measured it using a caliper it came up 2.7mm. I'm trying to look for at least a 2.4mm band in BGD's website but I'm not seeing one. The widest one I see is 2.2mm so I'm still asking them if they have something that's at least as wide as the e-ring.

Ok, it's 5mm-6mm ring for me then. I'll see what I can find in terms of design.

 

[kevindd992002]

BGD suggested that since the e-ring is tapered (even though the bottom width is 2.7mm), their recommendation is to go with a wedding band that's between 2.2 and 2.6mm. What are your thoughts on this?

I'm also talking to WhiteFlash and came across this one:

"Elena" Diamond Wedding Band | 1367

Elena Diamond Wedding Band. A wedding band that perfectly complements the Elena engagement ring. | 1367

www.whiteflash.com

The e-ring's stone has J - SI1 color-clarity grades. Should the band have melee stones that more or less match the color and clarity of the e-ring's stone to make sure that the band won't outshine the e-ring? If so, I can probably work with WhiteFlash to see if they can use lesser quality melee stones to drive the price down as well.

 

[kevindd992002]

Other choices:

'Diamonds for an Eternity' Diamond Wedding Band | 851

Diamonds for an Eternity Diamond Wedding Band. A piece that promises love's eternity, adorned with diamonds. | 851

www.whiteflash.com

Benchmark Shared-Prong Diamond Wedding Ring - Whiteflash | 5104

Elevate your wedding with the Benchmark Shared-Prong Diamond Ring from Whiteflash. Shop now for a stunning and timeless piece. | 5104

www.whiteflash.com

Platinum Cathedral Pave Diamond Wedding Ring | 3679

Embrace elegance with the Platinum Cathedral Pave Diamond Wedding Ring. Discover this exquisite ring at Whiteflash and let your love story shine. | 3679

www.whiteflash.com

Let me know if you have any comments on these too.

 

[kevindd992002]

For the "Platinum Cathedral Pave Diamond" ring, I see that it's 3mm wide. Would that be too wide when coupled with the e-ring which is a reverse taped ring that has a top width of around 1.5mm (0.9mm in BGD's website) and a bottom width of 2.7mm (2.4mm in BGD's website)?

 

[dmack]

I generally agree with BGD’s advice about width. I have a tapered shank. Palm side, you can see the difference (2.2mm vs 1.5). But face up, the widths of the bands match at the edge of the finger, which I find cohesive. But then the band in my avatar is the same width as the e-ring’s max width and to me it’s less noticeable because it’s diamonds vs plain metal, so my eye doesn’t need it to be so matchy-matchy (if that makes sense).

 

[kevindd992002]

We got our wedding rings already. Hers has 11 x 0.05ct stones (2.35 diameter) in a 2.35mm band. Here's a pic. My fiancee thinks that we should've went with the next bigger stones (0.065ct) because it looks small in her finger. For me, the size of the stones is about right and compliments the e-ring well.



What do you guys think about the wedding ring size?

 

[tyty333]

I think its a beautiful set...a little bigger would have been fine too. I don't think either one would outshine her ering.
Congrats!

So, what did you end up with? Post pics if you can!

 

[kevindd992002]

Honestly, I'm kind of regretting not buying her the one with the slightly bigger (0.065ct) stones now. We could've just opted for 9 x 0.065ct which will end up about the same price anyway. Not sure why we didn't think of that. That would've put her ring at 2.5mm wide which I think would've been perfect. Does the current ring have any advantage over the bigger one?

Sure thing, here's a pic of the set:





Mine's a 5mm satin finish bevel-edged ring

 

[Bonfire]

It looks beautiful! I think the band is in perfect balance to her e-ring.

 

[kevindd992002]

It looks beautiful! I think the band is in perfect balance to her e-ring.

Don't you think it's too thin of a band relative to her fingers?

 

[tyty333]

Beautiful! Love the satin finish on your band!

 

[Lookinagain]

Don't you think it's too thin of a band relative to her fingers?

I don't think it is too thin at all. I think it looks well balanced and very pretty on her hand.

 

[Nymf]

I much prefer ring nr 3 for her; the 0.56 cttw

Congratulations!!!!!

 

[mrsctobe]

Honestly, I'm kind of regretting not buying her the one with the slightly bigger (0.065ct) stones now. We could've just opted for 9 x 0.065ct which will end up about the same price anyway. Not sure why we didn't think of that. That would've put her ring at 2.5mm wide which I think would've been perfect. Does the current ring have any advantage over the bigger one?

Sure thing, here's a pic of the set:





Mine's a 5mm satin finish bevel-edged ring

beautiful. i would actually recommend sticking to a smaller pave diamond band because itll make the center stone on her engagement ring pop and look bigger.

 

[Bonfire]

Don't you think it's too thin of a band relative to her fingers?

Personally I don’t think so, but if you’re not happy with it can you switch it?

 

[kevindd992002]

I much prefer ring nr 3 for her; the 0.56 cttw

Congratulations!!!!!

Yeah. The one we got is custom made by a local jeweler. The only difference between this and the Tiffany #3 in my earlier post, is that this one is 0.55cttw (vs 0.56cttw) and has more stones (11 vs. 7 in the Tiffany IIRC) which makes each stone in the Tiffany a bit bigger (probably 0.065ct ones).

beautiful. i would actually recommend sticking to a smaller pave diamond band because itll make the center stone on her engagement ring pop and look bigger.

This ring is a shared prong though. But yeah, that's what I told her but you know how it is when a girl has the mindset of "bigger stones, the better". I told her that since this is a wedding ring, it should build coherence with the e-ring.

Personally I don’t think so, but if you’re not happy with it can you switch it?

I asked but unfortunately they don't allow returns, since all the rings sold by the local jeweler are custom made. At this point, I'm more of just gathering different opinions and trying to convince my SO, lol. From the looks of it, more people (here and in other forums) say that it is well-balanced.

 

[Nymf]

Apologies I didn’t realise you had already purchased her ring, my husband ‘convinced’ me of a wedding ring (not the one I wanted and frankly I didn’t wear it all the time because I didn’t love it) and bought me the one I really wanted as a 1st anniversary gift- maybe that would be a nice idea?

 

[kevindd992002]

Apologies I didn’t realise you had already purchased her ring, my husband ‘convinced’ me of a wedding ring (not the one I wanted and frankly I didn’t wear it all the time because I didn’t love it) and bought me the one I really wanted as a 1st anniversary gift- maybe that would be a nice idea?

Well, ours is a different case. Me and my SO went to the local jeweler and discussed different options and tried different sample rings before we both finally decided on it. She absolutely wanted this design. I just don't know what got into her head that when we received the rings and fitted it the first time, she thought it was too small for her fingers and wanted bigger stones. If we were to do it over again, I would've suggested 9x0.065ct instead of 11x0.05ct. She had a hard requirement of half eternity when we were first looking at potential wedding rings, so 11 stones is the closest thing to that requirement.

 

[Nymf]

Ok clear

 

[MillieLou]

I think it looks beautiful and proportionate. I agree with you that if two rings are being worn together it's good to have then complement each other, which these do.

Also... what fraction of difference is there between 0.005 and 0.065 diamonds...? It can be easy to fixate on these things and lose perspective (believe me, we all know that...)

 

[kevindd992002]

I think it looks beautiful and proportionate. I agree with you that if two rings are being worn together it's good to have then complement each other, which these do.

Also... what fraction of difference is there between 0.005 and 0.065 diamonds...? It can be easy to fixate on these things and lose perspective (believe me, we all know that...)

Thanks for the comment.

Exactly my thoughts. A 0.005ct stone is around 2.35mm in diameter. A 0.065ct is 2.5mm. So that's roughly 6.4% bigger.

 

[WDWDiamond]

Thanks for the comment.

Exactly my thoughts. A 0.005ct stone is around 2.35mm in diameter. A 0.065ct is 2.5mm. So that's roughly 6.4% bigger.

This thread might be an interesting read.

What difference in size is visible to the eye?

How much difference in size is needed in MRB diamonds for an average eye to notice the difference? Does it change with the size of the diamonds? For example, are smaller increases in size more noticeable on smaller diamonds then they are on larger ones? I'm dreaming about two future projects...

www.pricescope.com

Personally, I think the band looks beautiful and balanced next to her engagement ring.