I want LED's

I would not run any kind of UV LED. Even high-range UV-A is still damaging.

Talking to some locals who tried them, I found out that small amounts of UV help to bring out colors in some of the rarer sps, specifically red dragon. I will be seeing for myself soon, when some Semis come in for me to test. Like I said, a separate dimmer so you can tone it down. I would never use them at higher intensity like I would a royal blue or white LED
 
Talking to some locals who tried them, I found out that small amounts of UV help to bring out colors in some of the rarer sps, specifically red dragon. I will be seeing for myself soon, when some Semis come in for me to test. Like I said, a separate dimmer so you can tone it down. I would never use them at higher intensity like I would a royal blue or white LED
I do agree with this - a lot of the rarer SPS come from shallower waters with a lot of UV hitting them, so they have an extra thick 'clear coat' to protect and makes them stunning in coloration, but there are also a lot of corals that may not be able to handle the levels of UV needed to keep the colors in those rarer corals, and side-by-side may not do well. It's a fine line to walk, for sure, and I always recommend to stay away from them (as most people adding them don't know the reasoning behind it).
 
I'm about to step on a loooooot of toes here.


I'd expect no less from a vendor who only sells fixtures using cool white LEDs.

Without the additional red spectrum, not only does the tank just look anemic, but you start to lose non-fluorescent colors. That's great if all you want is that glow from your corals that have green fluorescent proteins, or a few reds that have red fluorescent proteins, but a lot of oranges, yellows, pinks just don't show up because that light simply isn't present for them to reflect.

Comparing any array containing only cool whites to an array based on Bridgelux BXRA or Rebel ES neutrals in the 4-5000k range will be absolutely no contest in color and depth while still retaining the same superior actinic response provided by royal blue LEDs.

As for their PAR value, the entire spectra of the white LED adds to the PAR value. PAR is next to useless as a metric because it simply the total quanity of light emitted - I can build an array that sends out 500 PAR at 24" yet will not grow coral, as the light will be solely composed of 530nm light, a spectra in which little to no photosynthetic activity occurs in corals.

A cool white LED does not emit as much photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) or photosynthetically usable radiation (PUR) as a royal blue LED does (within the same family, of course - comparing an XT-E cool white at 1000ma to a Bridgelux BXCE royal at 700ma, for instance, isn't a valid comparison), simply because a white LED is a royal blue LED with phosphors applied to it - so you wouldn't be able to a 1600mW royal blue chip, apply a phosphor, and still have 1600mW of output in the royal blue spectra.

Taking into account that a cool white array typically uses a 1:1 ratio of cool white to royal blue, and a neutral white array typically uses a 1:2 ratio of neutral white to royal blue, an array based on neutral white will have the same PAR using less total LEDs, or more PAR if using the same amount.


Now, to address your issues with colored LEDs.

chlorophyll.png


Note the massive spikes in red. Despite numerous tests that have been performed (like the ones you linked to earlier), deep red does not bleach coral, at least not in the quantities we DIY'ers recommend. If you blast a coral with too much light of any wavelength it will bleach, and in particular to a wavelength that the coral has no protection built up to.

Green is wholly unnecessary. All white LEDs contain far too much green as it is. What they are lacking is cyan, which is pretty essential in color rendition.

Now violet - this is the 'meat' of photosynthesis. You see that graph above, how it drops sharply after 430nm? If you load up a tank with royal blue chips at 455nm or higher, are you really hitting chlorophyll a, the primary driver of photosynthesis in almost all corals, hard? Nope. It takes violet LEDs to do that. Chlorophyll C1 and C2 are different and can effectively use that 450ish-nm light, no sweat. However, chlorophyll c is present at 1/10 the numbers of chlorophyll a. (note that chlorophyll b, whose primary photosynthetic peak is at 450nm, is not present in zooxanthellae)

Corals are subjected to immense amounts of violet light in the wild: Feature Article: Light in the Reef Aquaria — Advanced Aquarist | Aquarist Magazine and Blog So if violet is the primary driver of photosynthetic activity, why is it unnecessary again?


Am I saying that royal blue and cool white LEDs cannot grow coral? Absolutely not. That has been proven time and time again. Is it optimal for both color and growth? No.


Back to the subject of neutral whites. Some 'light' reading:
LED Aesthetics: What do you really think of your color? - Lighting Forum - Nano-Reef.com Forums

The 'Evil Cluster' revisited - Lighting Forum - Nano-Reef.com Forums

A quote from the OP of that thread, blasterman:


The people in those threads are partially (if not wholly) the driving force behind the LED arrays we have now.




I think I hit everything I wanted to, but I'm sure I missed something.
I agree with most of your statement. I tried nuetral whites and had decent results, but not as good as with cool whites and warm whites mixed, like I said, best of both worlds. Other than that, I agree with you on the violets, royal blues, and deep reds. I did some research recently, and the 590nm spectrum will excite the reds in some corals, so that is a big reason I like to incorporate warm whites, they are pretty heavy in the yellows and oranges. I tried it out with some pure 595nm, and it worked pretty well, but was a little too red looking overall, so the warm whites work nicely, unless, like the UV LEDs, the 595s are dimmed separately.
 
I do agree with this - a lot of the rarer SPS come from shallower waters with a lot of UV hitting them, so they have an extra thick 'clear coat' to protect and makes them stunning in coloration, but there are also a lot of corals that may not be able to handle the levels of UV needed to keep the colors in those rarer corals, and side-by-side may not do well. It's a fine line to walk, for sure, and I always recommend to stay away from them (as most people adding them don't know the reasoning behind it).

Exactly. I would not use them on 99% of tanks, but they are a good option to have for some reefers in low intensities, especially on high light sps tanks. not enough research to know 100% yet, but like I said, I will be trying it out.
 
I agree with most of your statement. I tried nuetral whites and had decent results, but not as good as with cool whites and warm whites mixed, like I said, best of both worlds. Other than that, I agree with you on the violets, royal blues, and deep reds. I did some research recently, and the 590nm spectrum will excite the reds in some corals, so that is a big reason I like to incorporate warm whites, they are pretty heavy in the yellows and oranges. I tried it out with some pure 595nm, and it worked pretty well, but was a little too red looking overall, so the warm whites work nicely, unless, like the UV LEDs, the 595s are dimmed separately.
The new Radion includes some amber LEDs (they call them yellow, but 590ish-nm is amber ;) ) and combined with their hyper red, true green, makes for a complex array - when they could just use warm/neutral whites and have better color without having a light show, though their optics do help to mitigate that slightly.

I will be testing the new Luxeon M from Philips in the next few weeks. It's a competitor for the XM-L, but with better (and more consistent) phosphors and also has a super-high-powered royal blue chip - the base bin is 4400mW of output at 11.4w of power. I'll have 5000k, royal blue, cool blue (to offset the lower wavelength that the royal blue Luxeons have), and craptons of violet in the array - no deep red or cyan this time. If the spectral curve of the 5000k chips matches what is in the datasheet, I should not need to supplement with any reds or cyan. :)
 
Exactly. I would not use them on 99% of tanks, but they are a good option to have for some reefers in low intensities, especially on high light sps tanks. not enough research to know 100% yet, but like I said, I will be trying it out.
Do keep us updated on that - I know of a lot of people that go to test something and then in a few months have gone off the radar without sharing their results. ;)
 
The new Radion includes some amber LEDs (they call them yellow, but 590ish-nm is amber ;) ) and combined with their hyper red, true green, makes for a complex array - when they could just use warm/neutral whites and have better color without having a light show, though their optics do help to mitigate that slightly.

I will be testing the new Luxeon M from Philips in the next few weeks. It's a competitor for the XM-L, but with better (and more consistent) phosphors and also has a super-high-powered royal blue chip - the base bin is 4400mW of output at 11.4w of power. I'll have 5000k, royal blue, cool blue (to offset the lower wavelength that the royal blue Luxeons have), and craptons of violet in the array - no deep red or cyan this time. If the spectral curve of the 5000k chips matches what is in the datasheet, I should not need to supplement with any reds or cyan. :)

Interesting.. curious, why are people going really heavy on violet recently? There is another thread over at nr (forgot who) that is super heavy on violet..

Also interested in some of the oddball colors like amber and such.. I saw that on the radion pro..

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Reef2Reef Aquarium Forum mobile app
 
Jedimasterben, Excellent post! You covered most of what I had planned to write and much more.

I gotta say, the whole "gotta use Cree" thing is getting old. They make good emitters but so do a handful of other companies, they are simply NOT the end-all-and-be-all of LEDs. I used a mix of Cree, Philips and Epistar in the build for my 90 and the Luxeons run cooler than the XT-Es at the same current and similar Vf, while putting out essentially the same amount of light. I used both 440-450nm Luxeons and 450-465nm XT-Es to get a broader peak in this part of the spectrum, they are mixed together on the same strings, mounted in the same clusters, and I can assure you that there is nothing "better" about the XT-Es. IMHO, anyone who actually believes that Crees are "better than other brands" has either never tried anything else, or, they have Crees for sale.
Other pet peaves of mine:
UV/Violet: If it's over 400nm, it's violet, not UV. Period. I generally assume that any vendor selling "UV/Violet" doesn't understand what the terms actually mean. Violet is part of the visible spectrum, the name is a reference to it's color, we can see it. UV, or ultra violet, is not a color, it's not something that the human eye can interpret, we cant see it. It's called "ultra" because it includes the wavelengths "beyond" violet.
Green: As noted above, green is virtually useless in photosynthsis, yet people still insist on using it in their builds. Obviously they haven't checked the datasheet for their whites or they would have noticed that every white LED, be it cool, neutral or warm, has a significant percentage of it's output in this part of the spectrum. Think about this, if your whites are already putting out a ton of green light and it's of no use for photosynthesis, why would you add green LEDs?
PAR: the most over-rated measurement in aquarium lighting since the old watt-per-gallon rules. PAR measures ALL light over a given part of the spectrum, some of it useful, some of it useless. Without knowing which wavelengths are present, PAR is no better than watts, lumens, lux, etc. I've made that same point about building a fixture that has high PAR but can't support photosynthesis on another forum in the past, I've yet to have anyone take me up on trying to prove me wrong. Those toy (<$1000) PAR meters don't help things, their sensitivity falls off rapidly under 500nm. They simply can't accurately measure the most important wavelengths, yet they have no problem picking up light that is not beneficial.
Kelvin/color temperature: This is almost as useless as PAR. It's a way of defining how a number of different peaks will appear toy the human eye, It tells you nothing, nada, zero, zilch about what wavelengths are present. A given number could represent a mix of 420, 440 and 660nm light or it could be primarily in the 520-600mn range. Both would look the same to youe eye, one would grow coral, the other wouldn't. Anyone who picks LEDs based on color temperature, without checking the actual output of the emitter, is just guessing at what they are using.
Cool White: These are why people still doubt the value of LEDs in this hobby. A CW LED puts out mostly royal blue with a bit of green, yellow and a hint of orange to make it appear white-ish. Royal blue is great, but you can get it from your royal blue LEDs, so why use whites that are mostly royal blue as well. A neutral or warm white may put out less RB, but it will put out some red light as well, light that is beneficial to the occupants of your tank. CW may indeed put out more PAR, but NW and WW put out light is actually useful. If you don't think NW and WW look blue enough, use more violet and RB emitters and balance the color temperature to your liking.
CRI: Color rendering index is seldom seen in this hobby, for the life of me I can't figure out why. You'd think people would be interested in a way to measure how much a light source looks like natural sunlight. It's not like it's difficult to understand, the closer you get to 100, the more realistic your light will appear. I guess the marketing people forgot to mention this to the folks that were buying the <75CRI cool whites.

I hope my little rant hasn't bothered anyone, I'm just tired of seeing people ask for info and having others suggest building things that were obsolete 5 years ago. The old 1:1 RB/CW turned a lot of people off to LEDs due to it's odd look and mediocre results. Suggesting that using one brand or another will make a difference but not taking spectrum into account is what will turn people to LEDs for the next few years.
 
Interesting.. curious, why are people going really heavy on violet recently? There is another thread over at nr (forgot who) that is super heavy on violet..

Also interested in some of the oddball colors like amber and such.. I saw that on the radion pro..

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Reef2Reef Aquarium Forum mobile app
Are you talking about my thread on photosynthesis? Violet spectrum, specifically 430nm, is the main driving force to photosynthesis in corals, as that is the peak of chlorophyll a, and it drops off sharply after that. I'd say that if you matched the output in mW of violet LEDs to what we use with royal blue LEDs that you would get much more growth. It wouldn't look as good (since we can't see the violet light very well), but dang, would everything fluorescent just GLOW! ;)

There's an article on Advanced Aquarist where the amount of actual light of certain wavelengths was tested. Corals get up to 63 watts of radiance per square meter of 440-480nm light, and 55ish watts per square meter of 400-440nm light. A good number to shoot for in home aquaria is 45W/m2 of 400-440nm and 40W/m2 of 440-480nm, which equates to a crapton of violets that can be used without possibly reaching photoinhibition. The 430nm LEDs from LEDgroupbuy put out about 0.96 watts of radiance, so if your tank was a square meter, that amounts to about 47x violet LEDs. Quite a few, if I do say so myself. lol

As for the colors, they are really unnecessary as long as warmer whites are used in at least 50% of the fixture. neutral white, royal blue, cool blue, and violet are really all you need for a very colorful tank.
 
Wow, a lot happened while I was on my soapbox, I hadn't thought it necessary to quote post #19...
Interesting.. curious, why are people going really heavy on violet recently? There is another thread over at nr (forgot who) that is super heavy on violet..
Go back and look at the spectrograph in post 19. Violet and RB alone would probably allow many corals to do quite well, probably better than RB/white. Violet is an important part of the spectrum and as availability of violet LEDs has grown, so has their use. My main fixture uses 10 violet LEDs out of 70 (66 and 4 moonlights), in hindsight, I wish I'd used more of them.
 
A very good post by you, as well! :)


CRI: Color rendering index is seldom seen in this hobby, for the life of me I can't figure out why. You'd think people would be interested in a way to measure how much a light source looks like natural sunlight. It's not like it's difficult to understand, the closer you get to 100, the more realistic your light will appear. I guess the marketing people forgot to mention this to the folks that were buying the <75CRI cool whites.
CRI doesn't really apply to what we use LEDs for. CRI is based on a blackbody radiator, so it really isn't helpful to us the way it would be to other scenarios where spectrum isn't as important.

That being said, if you can get a high CRI chip that has good spectrum, do it. The CRI on those cheap, generic LEDs used in the Chinese fixtures is probably much lower than 75. Even the Radion uses low-CRI chips. That's just what cool white LEDs are, and yet another reason they should be avoided.
 
Are you talking about my thread on photosynthesis? Violet spectrum, specifically 430nm, is the main driving force to photosynthesis in corals, as that is the peak of chlorophyll a, and it drops off sharply after that. I'd say that if you matched the output in mW of violet LEDs to what we use with royal blue LEDs that you would get much more growth. It wouldn't look as good (since we can't see the violet light very well), but dang, would everything fluorescent just GLOW! ;)

There's an article on Advanced Aquarist where the amount of actual light of certain wavelengths was tested. Corals get up to 63 watts of radiance per square meter of 440-480nm light, and 55ish watts per square meter of 400-440nm light. A good number to shoot for in home aquaria is 45W/m2 of 400-440nm and 40W/m2 of 440-480nm, which equates to a crapton of violets that can be used without possibly reaching photoinhibition. The 430nm LEDs from LEDgroupbuy put out about 0.96 watts of radiance, so if your tank was a square meter, that amounts to about 47x violet LEDs. Quite a few, if I do say so myself. lol

As for the colors, they are really unnecessary as long as warmer whites are used in at least 50% of the fixture. neutral white, royal blue, cool blue, and violet are really all you need for a very colorful tank.

No. The lighting forum at nr, a thread titled "new makersled build" by xerophyte.. tons of 403nm and 430nm.. and now you're talking about it. Just interesting. I think it will lead to a really dark tank but very healthy corals..

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Reef2Reef Aquarium Forum mobile app
 
Wow, a lot happened while I was on my soapbox, I hadn't thought it necessary to quote post #19...

Go back and look at the spectrograph in post 19. Violet and RB alone would probably allow many corals to do quite well, probably better than RB/white. Violet is an important part of the spectrum and as availability of violet LEDs has grown, so has their use. My main fixture uses 10 violet LEDs out of 70 (66 and 4 moonlights), in hindsight, I wish I'd used more of them.

And here is something I put together with some more data:
https://www.reef2reef.com/forums/eq...0170-lighting-spectra-photosynthesis-you.html
 
No. The lighting forum at nr, a thread titled "new makersled build" by xerophyte.. tons of 403nm and 430nm.. and now you're talking about it. Just interesting. I think it will lead to a really dark tank but very healthy corals..

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Reef2Reef Aquarium Forum mobile app
I was the one who designed his array. ;)

As long as white and blue LEDs are used, the tank won't be dark at all. LED light is additive, not subtractive, so the violet will add to the look very slightly, but won't dim anything down. That's why I always tell people to do their normal base of NW and RB and then add the violet on top of it.
 
Gotta stir the pot a bit.

The UV / Violet 410-420nm do bring out some pigments without any damage to plastic or skin. The problem with them is the best of the best cost effective ones are about as bright as a Government TSA Bag Screener.

The True UV <400nm also bring out some pigments but do not last as the wavelength degrades its own lens over a period of months. Some Chinese Vendors note this and offer longer lasting lenses but this is highly not recommended for any tank with acrylic or silicon. Eventually over years the UV will degrade the Tank.

Manufacturers who use the Violet 410-420nm in their fixtures only include a couple for marketing then toss in a red or two and call it full spectrum. You would barely see the difference. The Exception is the Radion XR30 Pro which uses 8, 4-405nm & 4-410nm Semi Leds. These are still rather dim and will not appreciably affect growth but will make a slight difference in looks over a 24" foot print. I have 24 Semi LEDs on my 72" SPS and can document only a minor improvement in some SPS Colours.

As far as Reds there is documented research that too much Red aid in coral bleaching. Not to mention nuisance algae. Based on the research I've seen the Red Spectrum does not excite specific pigments. It only makes the corals look more red. Thus its the spice only needed to tweak the colour look of the tank.

Below 10 feet there is no Red. If your considering the Red 660nm to aid in growth I would only recommend this for algae scrubbers and growing "Tomato's" in ones Boulder Colorado basement..

As far as low PAR I've experimented with reduced PAR for a year with disappointing results. Low PAR (50-100) may work in high nutrient tanks but it only marginally grew some mushrooms in my grow out sump.

Bill
 
A very good post by you, as well! :)



CRI doesn't really apply to what we use LEDs for. CRI is based on a blackbody radiator, so it really isn't helpful to us the way it would be to other scenarios where spectrum isn't as important.

That being said, if you can get a high CRI chip that has good spectrum, do it. The CRI on those cheap, generic LEDs used in the Chinese fixtures is probably much lower than 75. Even the Radion uses low-CRI chips. That's just what cool white LEDs are, and yet another reason they should be avoided.
Thank you.
Blackbody radiator or not, I seem to be seeing an improvement. Maybe it's all in my head but I won't be going back to lower CRI emitters any time soon. I've really been impressed with the Luxeon LXW9-PW27, 2700K WW, 95CRI. It might not be the most efficient in terms of light per watt but they look great and they put out as much light at 700nm as they do at 450nm.
 
The UV / Violet 410-420nm do bring out some pigments without any damage to plastic or skin. The problem with them is the best of the best cost effective ones are about as bright as a Government TSA Bag Screener.
And? They aren't bright, but that's because our eyes cannot see the light they output. Our eyes are absolutely terrible at seeing blue light, which is why green and red LEDs stand out in an array sometimes. A violet LED will make a PAR meter light up, and once you correct for the margin of error, you'll see that they emit a ton of PUR, as it sits on the most photosynthetically active spectrum in photosynthesis.

Manufacturers who use the Violet 410-420nm in their fixtures only include a couple for marketing then toss in a red or two and call it full spectrum. You would barely see the difference. The Exception is the Radion XR30 Pro which uses 8, 4-405nm & 4-410nm Semi Leds. These are still rather dim and will not appreciably affect growth but will make a slight difference in looks over a 24" foot print. I have 24 Semi LEDs on my 72" SPS and can document only a minor improvement in some SPS Colours.
Again, it's not just about color. And just because they are SemiLEDs brand doesn't mean that they're all that. It depends on the bin, spectra, and radiance.

As far as Reds there is documented research that too much Red aid in coral bleaching. Not to mention nuisance algae. Based on the research I've seen the Red Spectrum does not excite specific pigments. It only makes the corals look more red. Thus its the spice only needed to tweak the colour look of the tank.
Have you actually looked at the 'experiment' performed where Dana Riddle killed part of a coral using a red LED placed 1/4" away from it? Of course it was going to bleach. Giving 100 micromols of PAR in solely 660nm will kill any coral that is not grown in shallow water in nature, and even then may still hurt it due to too much light.

Below 10 feet there is no Red. If your considering the Red 660nm to aid in growth I would only recommend this for algae scrubbers and growing "Tomato's" in ones Boulder Colorado basement..
It's actually 30 feet (10 meters). I have seen nothing to disprove that chlorophyll in corals is unable to absorb red light. Check out the PDF file in the first couple of paragraphs in this post: https://www.reef2reef.com/forums/eq...0170-lighting-spectra-photosynthesis-you.html

They actually tested the wavelengths absorbed by the zooxanthellae - they absorbed red no problem.

As far as low PAR I've experimented with reduced PAR for a year with disappointing results. Low PAR (50-100) may work in high nutrient tanks but it only marginally grew some mushrooms in my grow out sump.
Who said anything about low PAR?
 
Thank you.
Blackbody radiator or not, I seem to be seeing an improvement. Maybe it's all in my head but I won't be going back to lower CRI emitters any time soon. I've really been impressed with the Luxeon LXW9-PW27, 2700K WW, 95CRI. It might not be the most efficient in terms of light per watt but they look great and they put out as much light at 700nm as they do at 450nm.

Check out the LXR9-SW27 then. :)

www.philipslumileds.com/uploads/354/DS103-pdf
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top