Jump to content

Wedding bands recommendation


kevindd992002
 Share

Recommended Posts

Following the engagement ring discussion we had here, we are now looking into buying wedding bands and need help again. So based from research, here's what we know so far:

1. For her

- she wants either a half or 3/4 eternity ring in a prong (preferably shared prong) setting

- her engagement ring is a classic reverse tapered cathedral (1.5mm top width and 2.7mm bottom width) with a 0.903 ct. J/SI1/ideal round stone

- BGD recommended a band that is between 2.2 and 2.6mm wide. Is that a sound suggestion considering the e-ring is reverse tapered?

- do the melee stones need to be the same color, clarity, and cut as the center stone of the e-ring so as not to outshine it? I've been asking multiple vendors (BGD, WF, B2CJewels) already and it seems that they don't do this. Some can customize the size of the stones but not color, clarity, and cut. What size of melee stones would be preferable, 3pt or 5pt?

- she wants Platinum to match the e-rings Platinum

- so far, these are the choices she has:

  * https://www.b2cjewels.com/ladies-diamond-wedding-bands/draj1190/tapered-diamond-wedding-band-diamonds-14k-white-gold-1-2-cttw

  * https://www.b2cjewels.com/ladies-diamond-wedding-bands/drab8405/diamond-wedding-band-prong-settings-clean-lines-platinum-3-8-cttw

  * https://www.whiteflash.com/wedding-rings/diamonds-for-an-eternity-1-2-diamond-wedding-band-1384.htm#size=6

  * https://www.whiteflash.com/wedding-rings/diamonds-for-an-eternity-3-4-diamond-wedding-band-851.htm

  * https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond-jewelry/wedding-bands/diamond-eternity-bands/the-dream-3/4-eternity-5416

  * https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/dream-half-eternity-platinum-5392p

Any thoughts on those recommendations?

- because of the e-ring's setting, I was told that a 1mm spacer is needed so that the wedding band's metal will not be touching/damaging the e-ring's stone basket. Is this general consensus because of how low the e-ring stone is set?

 

2. For me:

-  I still don't have a specific design in mind. My fiancee wants one with a single diamond but I don't think I like diamonds in my ring. Even though I know this a personal choice, what are your comments about diamonds on men's bands?

- this is a pic that shows the comparison between 3mm and 4.5mm in my ring finger: https://www.pricescope.com/community/attachments/viber_image_2021-08-30_19-07-41-844-jpg.850180/ . People have been suggesting that I get a ring from 5mm to 6mm. Any comments?

- I have a ring sizer on hand I'm not sure of my size yet because my knuckle is bigger than the actual ring area of my finger. So if I try a size 6 ring, I can feel resistance on my knuckle when inserting the ring but it feels loose when it's already inserted all the way to the end. What is the right way to size my finger?

- I also want Platinum

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

do the melee stones need to be the same color, clarity, and cut as the center stone of the e-ring so as not to outshine it?

You are not going to "outshine" a 0.90 with 3 or 5 pointers in a band... but if they are very white (say F/G) it may create a bit of contrast with a J centre. I would really not worry about clarity, but I think that trying to get well cut melée is going to be your best bet to 'match' looks. From that point of view, going with BGD is probably a reasonable bet - although they won't cut melée or guarantee to match colour, they will have suppliers that they trust to provide good quality cut to match their own larger stones. The other option is to find someone (possibly local to you in the Philippines) who is willing to source match-colour melée and make it to fit both in terms of colour and mechanically with the other ring.

20 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

because of the e-ring's setting, I was told that a 1mm spacer is needed so that the wedding band's metal will not be touching/damaging the e-ring's stone basket. Is this general consensus because of how low the e-ring stone is set?

Without seeing the other ring "for real", I would trust BGD's word for that - just as I would trust them on the proportions; the tapering of the shank is probably another reason for 'wanting' a spacer.

23 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

What size of melee stones would be preferable, 3pt or 5pt?

Whatever she likes - personally, I'd rather go with the smaller stones as they make it easier to resize. Similarly with the various models - buy what she likes; the only one I'd advise against is the cheaper B2C model, as it doesn't seem to fit the 'prong set' requirement. Personally I'd rather have 1/2 than 3/4 (same reason - resizing).

23 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

what are your comments about diamonds on men's bands?

Nothing wrong with them. I don't even wear a plain band... so I'm definitely the wrong person to ask.

23 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

People have been suggesting that I get a ring from 5mm to 6mm. Any comments?

Personally I wouldn't go thicker than the 4.5 you have on in the photo - but again it's what you like, not what other people like.

23 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

What is the right way to size my finger?

Unfortunately, the joint is often the thicker part of the finger - no way around it. You need to choose between discomfort at putting on/taking off the ring, and the discomfort of a loose ring. One option is a sizing band or sizing balls inside the ring, - my wife swears by them, but again not everybody likes the feeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, davidelevi said:
Quote

You are not going to "outshine" a 0.90 with 3 or 5 pointers in a band... but if they are very white (say F/G) it may create a bit of contrast with a J centre. I would really not worry about clarity, but I think that trying to get well cut melée is going to be your best bet to 'match' looks. From that point of view, going with BGD is probably a reasonable bet - although they won't cut melée or guarantee to match colour, they will have suppliers that they trust to provide good quality cut to match their own larger stones. The other option is to find someone (possibly local to you in the Philippines) who is willing to source match-colour melée and make it to fit both in terms of colour and mechanically with the other ring.

 

Most of them are F/G. BGD did say that all their melee stones are of that quality and they can't go lower but they told me that they have very good cuts in a way that will match the center stone. How does cut have effect to the color of the melee stones in trying to match the J centre? My relatives do know a few trusted jewelers that might be able to do this but I just don't trust the level of craftsmanship here, in general.

25 minutes ago, davidelevi said:
Quote

Without seeing the other ring "for real", I would trust BGD's word for that - just as I would trust them on the proportions; the tapering of the shank is probably another reason for 'wanting' a spacer.

Why would the tapering of the shank warrant using a spacer?

25 minutes ago, davidelevi said:
Quote

Whatever she likes - personally, I'd rather go with the smaller stones as they make it easier to resize. Similarly with the various models - buy what she likes; the only one I'd advise against is the cheaper B2C model, as it doesn't seem to fit the 'prong set' requirement. Personally I'd rather have 1/2 than 3/4 (same reason - resizing).

Won't she have any problems with the ring spinning over her finger if she goes with 1/2? Aren't those two B2C models also in a prong setting? I thought they are because they do have prongs over the top of the melee stones. She was the one who chose those B2C candidates but she prefers this over the other .

So what she really likes is the design of this Tiffany ring. This is that ring in her hand together with the e-ring:

viber_image_2021-08-30_19-07-31-381-jpg.

This Tiffany design is very similar to a third B2C model that I saw.

From the top view, they both look the same. From the side view, here are their profiles:

Tiffany:

s-l1600-71.jpg

B2C:

Zoomimg2_7825.gif

As you can see, they look the same. The only difference are those "gaps" that you see where the base of the stones are. The B2C model seems to have more gap that causes the stones to be set higher and my fiancee is concerned about that. What are your thoughts on this?

25 minutes ago, davidelevi said:

Unfortunately, the joint is often the thicker part of the finger - no way around it. You need to choose between discomfort at putting on/taking off the ring, and the discomfort of a loose ring. One option is a sizing band or sizing balls inside the ring, - my wife swears by them, but again not everybody likes the feeling.

Interesting. If I choose a better fitting ring over comfort at putting it on/taking it off, would there be any remote chance in the future that I won't be able to remove the ring because of a larger joint or something? I'm not even sure if this is a valid question but I thought I'd ask away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

How does cut have effect to the color of the melee stones in trying to match the J centre?

The same way that it affects cut for any other colour - well cut diamonds appear whiter, so I don't particularly buy that argument to say "they'll match the colour better". I do agree that if you've got a lot of sparkling stuff the colour tends to go by the wayside, though. 😁

3 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

Won't she have any problems with the ring spinning over her finger if she goes with 1/2?

There is that... but a properly sized ring shouldn't spin.

3 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

Why would the tapering of the shank warrant using a spacer?

Because it provides a 'straight' surface rather than letting the top of the band move (very little, but enough to scratch it).

3 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

Aren't those two B2C models also in a prong setting?

Zoomimg1_12914.gif

I wouldn't call this a "prong" setting. There seems to be a bead between every two diamonds, and something like a bezel holding the stone "on the side". This is from the "drab8405" type. I can't get the side-view to magnify, so I can't figure out if there is a bezel; if there isn't one, a single shared bead is IMHO a recipe for poor durability. 

3 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

The B2C model seems to have more gap that causes the stones to be set higher and my fiancee is concerned about that. What are your thoughts on this?

Thought #1: this is why I really don't like CAD renderings. I have no idea whether the thing will look like that in reality, with real stones, or not. 

Thought #2: this is also why you really need to see both rings... and how they sit next to each other.

4 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

would there be any remote chance in the future that I won't be able to remove the ring because of a larger joint or something?

It happens, but it's pretty rare. It usually happens if somebody's weight varies significantly, and/or they have some condition affecting the joints, like arthritis. "Normally", washing in cold water to reduce swelling and a bit of liquid soap do the trick!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, davidelevi said:

The same way that it affects cut for any other colour - well cut diamonds appear whiter, so I don't particularly buy that argument to say "they'll match the colour better". I do agree that if you've got a lot of sparkling stuff the colour tends to go by the wayside, though. 😁

I guess I don't have much choice then. The consensus seems to be that they use F/G melee stones for most of the rings I'm seeing.

Quote

There is that... but a properly sized ring shouldn't spin.

You're right. If I think of it, the e-ring goes by the same concept. If it's too loose, it'll also spin but for the size that I got her the ring just sits upright and perfect.

Quote

Because it provides a 'straight' surface rather than letting the top of the band move (very little, but enough to scratch it).

I can't visualize but would a 1mm spacer fix all these "worries"?

Quote

Zoomimg1_12914.gif

I wouldn't call this a "prong" setting. There seems to be a bead between every two diamonds, and something like a bezel holding the stone "on the side". This is from the "drab8405" type. I can't get the side-view to magnify, so I can't figure out if there is a bezel; if there isn't one, a single shared bead is IMHO a recipe for poor durability. 

I see what you mean. How about the DRAJ5190 model? Do you consider this a prong setting?

Quote

Thought #1: this is why I really don't like CAD renderings. I have no idea whether the thing will look like that in reality, with real stones, or not. 

Thought #2: this is also why you really need to see both rings... and how they sit next to each other.

I will have to ask B2C what they think about this. I won't be able to see the ring before the purchase so that's a risk I need to take. If they are set too high, will that be a problem even though a 1mm spacer will be used?

Edited by kevindd992002
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

would a 1mm spacer fix all these "worries"?

Maybe. Or maybe you'd need 2 mm. Or no spacer. The reason why I'm mentioning the 1 mm spacer is because (I assume - from what you said above) BGD has seen and tested their designs with that, and found it to work best. If you use a different design (and we are talking millimetres or fractions thereof, here, so the difference may not be all that visible without measuring, never mind in a CAD rendering), you may need a different sort of adjustment. For a while, we made curved bands to 'nestle' against the centre stone; some people liked that (and it definitely didn't spin!), but it was more expensive than going straight.

5 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

How about the DRAJ5190 model? Do you consider this a prong setting?

There are two shared beads - which is significantly better than one, but no "prong" (this is a bead raised from the base shank material - or at least it seems such - again, with a CAD rendering it is difficult to understand what they actually intend to do). The two that I would consider 'proper' prong settings are the Tiffany ring and - possibly - the first B2C rendering you posted (and the others you posted in your first post, except the B2C ones, all seem to have prongs).

I must say, having looked at all of them again, you can see something of what you pay for with Tiffany...

5 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

If they are set too high, will that be a problem even though a 1mm spacer will be used?

See above... I don't mean to be difficult, but you really do need to get the two rings next to each other, to decide what to adjust and how. Which is why - even though it's a bit more expensive - if risk-minimising, I would go with the BGD design: at least they have seen/designed both shanks, and can tell you what works.

Edited by davidelevi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, davidelevi said:

Maybe. Or maybe you'd need 2 mm. Or no spacer. The reason why I'm mentioning the 1 mm spacer is because (I assume - from what you said above) BGD has seen and tested their designs with that, and found it to work best. If you use a different design (and we are talking millimetres or fractions thereof, here, so the difference may not be all that visible without measuring, never mind in a CAD rendering), you may need a different sort of adjustment. For a while, we made curved bands to 'nestle' against the centre stone; some people liked that (and it definitely didn't spin!), but it was more expensive than going straight.

There are two shared beads - which is significantly better than one, but no "prong" (this is a bead raised from the base shank material - or at least it seems such - again, with a CAD rendering it is difficult to understand what they actually intend to do). The two that I would consider 'proper' prong settings are the Tiffany ring and - possibly - the first B2C rendering you posted (and the others you posted in your first post, except the B2C ones, all seem to have prongs).

I must say, having looked at all of them again, you can see something of what you pay for with Tiffany...

See above... I don't mean to be difficult, but you really do need to get the two rings next to each other, to decide what to adjust and how. Which is why - even though it's a bit more expensive - if risk-minimising, I would go with the BGD design: at least they have seen/designed both shanks, and can tell you what works.

Ok, gotcha. I'd have to check with B2C regarding that rendering that looks exactly like the Tiffany one. The prices and melee stones specs are (for the proper prong settings):

B2C - $1717 ($2020 less 15%), not sure if they have a better price for wire, 11 x F/G VS, 0.64 cttw

WF - $2182.5 wire price (no discount), 14 x F/G VS, 0.5 cttw

BGD - $2167.5 ($2550 less %15 for labor day only), not sure if they have a better price for wire, 11 x .05 F/G VS Brian Gavin Signature melee, 0.55 cttw

BGD also told me that they can use 3pt (instead of the default 5pt) stones but that will slash only around $100 off the price. Do you think that's worth it? Or just stick with the 5pt ones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So... it seems to me that there is no point in considering WF - if you spend more, you may as well go with BGD. Whether the $100 for 5 vs 3 pt are worth it, is a good question... I like the roundedness that comes with smaller stones, but nothing wrong with liking slightly larger ones too. Where I think I would spend the money is in getting BGD rather than B2C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, davidelevi said:

So... it seems to me that there is no point in considering WF - if you spend more, you may as well go with BGD. Whether the $100 for 5 vs 3 pt are worth it, is a good question... I like the roundedness that comes with smaller stones, but nothing wrong with liking slightly larger ones too. Where I think I would spend the money is in getting BGD rather than B2C.

Ok. I'm sure my fiancee would want the bigger stones. It's just how their girls' minds are wired :) Other than the fact that it would make more sense to go with BGD since I got the e-ring from them, what other things should I watch out about B2C? Are they a reliable vendor?

After I get a final decision with her band, I would need to concentrate on mine. I do see a couple of good designs in B2C that are more affordable than what BGD offers for men's bands. So I thought I'd ask if there are any negative things about them that I should watch out for. Feel free to PM me if this is something that can't be said publicly.

Also, if we go with a 1mm spacer between her e-ring and band, would it make sense to just go with the cheapest 14K white gold? Or will it matter if we also go with Platinum as her two rings are/will be Platinum?

Edited by kevindd992002
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

what other things should I watch out about B2C? Are they a reliable vendor?

They are an excellent vendor - but they are not a 'premium' one, including the metalwork they typically offer.

3 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

would it make sense to just go with the cheapest 14K white gold? Or will it matter if we also go with Platinum as her two rings are/will be Platinum?

The problem you are going to have is that rhodium plated white gold is going to look quite different from platinum, particularly as platinum 'ages' and patinates, while every time you re-plate the gold it is going to look 'as new'. If you don't mind having the two rings looking quite different, and having to re-plate the gold every now and then, then it's a pretty good place to save some money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got it. From the popular online vendors, which ones do you rank as "premium" ones?

As for my band, I like either a 5mm or 6mm. Though I'm gearing towards 6mm, I'm still not fully decided. My fiancee says a 5mm would look better for my slender fingers. What made you recommend not going above 4.5mm?

So far, here are my candidates:

Textured ones:

https://www.whiteflash.com/wedding-rings/mens-comfort-fit-wedding-band-with-spin-satin-finish-920.htm

https://www.whiteflash.com/wedding-rings/mens-comfort-fit-wedding-band-with-spin-satin-finish-920.htm

https://www.b2cjewels.com/men-gold-bands/GRST0298/platinum-6mm-comfort-fit-satin-finished-high-polished-round-edge-carved-design-band

https://www.b2cjewels.com/men-gold-bands/GRST0114/6mm-platinum-comfort-fit-satin-finished-with-high-polished-center-cut-carved-design-band

https://www.bluenile.com/brushed-inlay-wedding-ring-platinum_58200

https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond-jewelry/wedding-bands/classic-bands/men-s-satin-and-shiny-band-5496

With a single diamond:

https://www.b2cjewels.com/men-diamond-wedding-rings/DRAJ3645/classic-single-diamond-satin-finish-mens-diamond-ring-in-platinum-0-06-cttw-

https://www.jamesallen.com/wedding-rings/mens-diamond/platinum-6mm-beveled-bezel-set-diamond-wedding-ring-item-837

I'm kinda liking the satin finish on the rings to add to the style. Would there be any issues when going with a beveled edge design? I'm reading that it adds to the design and sleeky-ness of the ring.

I'm also reading that it'd be better to go with a slightly domed ring for comfort. Though I'm not seeing any slightly-domed rings that have a satin finish.

Edited by kevindd992002
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

which ones do you rank as "premium" ones?

For metalwork - "the usual suspects": Tiffany, Cartier and their likes (though I don't think the rest have a big online presence), and various 'craftsman' outlets. There is a broad mid-range including much of what is for sale through 'premium cut' vendors, and then there's the relatively cheap mass-market, including unbranded goods from Blue Nile, B2C, JA and others.

4 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

What made you recommend not going above 4.5mm?

Just the way in which the 4.5 mm seemed to suit your hand's proportions - bigger would look (in my personal opinion) 'forced' and a bit gaudy. Nothing objective - purely personal taste/observation, and there may well be "cultural norms" that we don't share/I'm not aware of.

4 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

Would there be any issues when going with a beveled edge design? I'm reading that it adds to the design and sleeky-ness of the ring.

I'm also reading that it'd be better to go with a slightly domed ring for comfort.

The only issues with a sharp bevel are: 1) if it is really sharp, it may be uncomfortable (the sharp edge - however angled - still sits between your fingers), and 2) knocks, dings and dents are more noticeable on a sharp, straight edge, particularly if it is mirror finished to create a contrast with the satin.

This said, I would really strongly recommend that you stop "reading about" and buy what makes you feel good, visually and to the touch. There is a lot to be said for gut (or finger) feeling - and a lot against "analysis paralysis". 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, davidelevi said:

For metalwork - "the usual suspects": Tiffany, Cartier and their likes (though I don't think the rest have a big online presence), and various 'craftsman' outlets. There is a broad mid-range including much of what is for sale through 'premium cut' vendors, and then there's the relatively cheap mass-market, including unbranded goods from Blue Nile, B2C, JA and others.

Ah, so the usual suspects do a good job with their metalwork. I thought their expensive just because of their name brand but has the same quality as vendors like WFand BGD. Is WF and BGD also down there with Blue Nile, B2C, JA, etc. as relative cheap market vendors?

2 hours ago, davidelevi said:

Just the way in which the 4.5 mm seemed to suit your hand's proportions - bigger would look (in my personal opinion) 'forced' and a bit gaudy. Nothing objective - purely personal taste/observation, and there may well be "cultural norms" that we don't share/I'm not aware of.

That's what my fiancee is saying too. If anything, I would go with 5mm at least as my personal preference. However, my choices are limited with that width. 6mm is the most common among the designs.

2 hours ago, davidelevi said:

The only issues with a sharp bevel are: 1) if it is really sharp, it may be uncomfortable (the sharp edge - however angled - still sits between your fingers), and 2) knocks, dings and dents are more noticeable on a sharp, straight edge, particularly if it is mirror finished to create a contrast with the satin.

I see. So for the ultimate comfort fit (both in the ring finger and the adjacent fingers), would a slightly-domed comfort fit be the best choice?

2 hours ago, davidelevi said:

This said, I would really strongly recommend that you stop "reading about" and buy what makes you feel good, visually and to the touch. There is a lot to be said for gut (or finger) feeling - and a lot against "analysis paralysis". 😊

Yeah, I just couldn't stop reaearching, lol. But yeah, I take those with a grain of salt and still ask her ein the forums for professional opinion from people like you (thanks!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

Is WF and BGD also down there with Blue Nile, B2C, JA, etc. as relative cheap market vendors?

I would say they are 'in the middle' with their own brand/unbranded pieces.

6 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

for the ultimate comfort fit (both in the ring finger and the adjacent fingers), would a slightly-domed comfort fit be the best choice?

For the ultimate comfort fit, the best choice is what you find comfortable. Your hand is not 'the average hand' and what I or 10,000 other people find most comfortable, you may find less comfortable. 😁

6 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

That's what my fiancee is saying too. If anything, I would go with 5mm at least as my personal preference.

Well... given what I just wrote above, then go with a wider band - the only thing I would recommend is not to choose 'design' in preference to 'comfort': you'll be wearing the ring 24/7 for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, davidelevi said:

I would say they are 'in the middle' with their own brand/unbranded pieces.

So I gave some of the famous jewelers we have locally and it looks like they do have the designs that we want. I'm asking them quotes now. They have both the Tiffany/B2C shared prong designs and the BGD/WF designs. If you were just to look at the design difference (gap vs. no gap in the prong areas), would it make sense to consider the BGD/WF designs to be set lower? I mean, if that's the case, then I would think that is the better design. In BGD's website, it says that the top height is 1.8mm and that it sits very low on the finger.

The local jeweler also has these choices for the Tiffany design:

2mm wide using 3pt stones

2.5mm wide using 5pt stones

3mm wide using 10pt stones

I know you said earlier that a couple of 3pt. or 5pt. melee stones will not outshine the e-ring's 0.903ct center stone on, but will 10pt stones do? For the band's width, would a 2.5mm be safe bet if the real world measurements of the reversed tapered e-ring are 1.7mm top height and 2.7mm bottom height?

Quote

For the ultimate comfort fit, the best choice is what you find comfortable. Your hand is not 'the average hand' and what I or 10,000 other people find most comfortable, you may find less comfortable. 😁

Well... given what I just wrote above, then go with a wider band - the only thing I would recommend is not to choose 'design' in preference to 'comfort': you'll be wearing the ring 24/7 for a long time.

Ok, got it. I'll see what I can come up with, lol.

Edited by kevindd992002
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kevindd992002 said:

If you were just to look at the design difference (gap vs. no gap in the prong areas), would it make sense to consider the BGD/WF designs to be set lower?

It could be. It all depends on how the initial casting of the base is made - the more traditional fabrication used by Tiffany privileges 'less metal' and uses 'more labour' vs. the casting approach used by the others, but in theory both can be made very thin. Given a typical 5 pointer-diameter of 2.3 mm, 1.8 is pretty close to the depth of the stone (say 60-65%, averaging out around 1.45 mm). That doesn't leave much space between the bottom of the metalwork and the culet...

I'm measuring the distance on the Tiffany photo to be about 0.6 mm, considering those are larger stones (~8 points, with a diameter of ~2.7 mm and a depth of ~1.7 mm), so the difference in height vs 'the stone' is not huge - about the diameter of 3 human hairs side-by-side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, davidelevi said:

It could be. It all depends on how the initial casting of the base is made - the more traditional fabrication used by Tiffany privileges 'less metal' and uses 'more labour' vs. the casting approach used by the others, but in theory both can be made very thin. Given a typical 5 pointer-diameter of 2.3 mm, 1.8 is pretty close to the depth of the stone (say 60-65%, averaging out around 1.45 mm). That doesn't leave much space between the bottom of the metalwork and the culet...

I'm measuring the distance on the Tiffany photo to be about 0.6 mm, considering those are larger stones (~8 points, with a diameter of ~2.7 mm and a depth of ~1.7 mm), so the difference in height vs 'the stone' is not huge - about the diameter of 3 human hairs side-by-side.

Do those gaps in the Tiffany design have any purpose at all? In the WF/BGD design those gaps are closed off if you know what I mean.

Do you have any comments on my width question above? You might've missed my edit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, kevindd992002 said:

Do those gaps in the Tiffany design have any purpose at all?

Yes

2 hours ago, davidelevi said:

the more traditional fabrication used by Tiffany privileges 'less metal' and uses 'more labour' vs. the casting approach used by the others,

This not only uses less metal; it usually makes the mounting a closer fit for the stone (relatively unimportant for melée which are cut to uniform sizes).

32 minutes ago, kevindd992002 said:

Do you have any comments on my width question above? You might've missed my edit.

I did miss your edit. Couple of considerations:

1. The larger the stones in the band, the deeper they are, the taller the band.

2. At some point, you will get into the 'competition' with the centre stone. A 10 pointer is going to be around 3 mm, which is about half of the diameter of the 0.903. This means that 4 x 0.10 have as much surface area as the 0.90, and any colour and cut quality differences will become more easily visible.

5 hours ago, kevindd992002 said:

would a 2.5mm be safe bet if the real world measurements of the reversed tapered e-ring are 1.7mm top height and 2.7mm bottom height?

Maybe. It depends on a lot of stuff... the ring is a 3-D object, and things need to fit in all 3-D. A goldsmith really needs to see the ring in reality (or have the full 3D specs from a CAD file).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, davidelevi said:

Yes

This not only uses less metal; it usually makes the mounting a closer fit for the stone (relatively unimportant for melée which are cut to uniform sizes).

So technically, between the two designs (gap vs. no gap), is there really any performance/stability/reliability differences? Is less metal usually more preferable?

How does less metal relate to more labour with Tiffany? Does that mean that with less metal to work with, they can focus more on perfecting the craftsmanship or something?

12 minutes ago, davidelevi said:

I did miss your edit. Couple of considerations:

1. The larger the stones in the band, the deeper they are, the taller the band.

2. At some point, you will get into the 'competition' with the centre stone. A 10 pointer is going to be around 3 mm, which is about half of the diameter of the 0.903. This means that 4 x 0.10 have as much surface area as the 0.90, and any colour and cut quality differences will become more easily visible.

So it's a toss between the 3pt and 5pt then.

12 minutes ago, davidelevi said:

Maybe. It depends on a lot of stuff... the ring is a 3-D object, and things need to fit in all 3-D. A goldsmith really needs to see the ring in reality (or have the full 3D specs from a CAD file).

I'm asking BGD if they have a copy of the CAD they gave me but with dimension callouts. The ones they gave me before only had the actual ring itself which I found useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a fair amount of work in building and setting - unless you make the effort to design a CAD model (which is only worth doing if you have a significant volume), so a good jeweller in a relatively cheap country can be very competitive on these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

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?

 

viber_image_2021-11-24_18-14-58-125.jpg

Edited by kevindd992002
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, davidelevi said:

It looks pretty good and well balanced visually to me - but I'm not the one who's going to be wearing it 24/7... 😁

Yeah, I knew you were going to say that :) Because of her reaction, I kinda regret not getting her a ring with slightly bigger stones (0.065ct). I could've gotten just 9 x 0.065ct and ended up with about the same price anyway. That would've put the ring at 2.5mm wide. Not sure why I didn't think of that but I guess I was fixated on the number of stones (11) that would make it close to a half eternity.

On another note, I ended up with a 5mm satin finish bevel-edged ring which I love.

 

258883824_147506387614633_5319559375285291020_n.jpg

259017849_917513465799056_4005547991310607712_n.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...