Necklace "upgrade"

Back in April I did a post about playing with octahedra that had a square shape, i.e. that had 2 sides, in front and back that were basically squares with a long edge forming a hypotenuse.  I showed this piece, with the colored tubes acting as the hypotenuses.  I liked the piece because of the color, and because I liked the squar-ish shapes, but over time I came to think it was just a bit boring.  My work tends to be pretty minimalist, and I like that clean, simple look, but sometimes it's hard to find the line between simple and boring.
  I kept looking at the piece, and finally decided it needed  a change.  I wanted to break up the symmetry just a bit.  Actually all I did was add 5 more octs to the red section in the middle, but I thought it made the necklace a lot more

interesting.  And I guess I was proved right because I sent it to a sort of trunk show that I participate in, and it sold the first day.
  With that piece gone, I'm working on another one using the square octs with colored aluminum hypotenuses.  If it works out I'll post it when it's finished.

Complexity v simplicity

I'm never sure when simple is too simple, or when adding a bit of complexity is an improvement.  Sometimes I throw something in in the middle of a repetitive sequence, just because I'm bored with the process, and that's usually a mistake.  This time I did something different.  I had finished my red and black tets necklace, which, I showed in an earlier post, and I liked it a lot.  Still, I thought it read as a very simple structure, and I thought I might add something so that it would show more complexity.  I added 5 extra tets to give the necklace a bit of "spikiness" instead of being a simple ring of tets. I think it was an improvement, but I'd love to know what others think, looking at the 2 together..