Thoughts on this LED

And of course...

http://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=cut1867.
http://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=cut1866

Something like that with a few more leds on it would be nice until the market progresses at least.

There aren't enough products with the xp-e photo reds yet. I'm pretty sure that the top bin xp-e photo red is the highest efficiency 660nm led on the market atm. People in the LED section are looking for products with that, although i can understand that's probably a small segment of customers.

Why compare a cob running at 100% and a single die at 50%

Lets compare the sweet spots of both instead

There are more variables to cobs being spread out and point source then simply one penetrates and one dosen't.

A correctly powered cob of lower intensity than a single point but spread appropriately will have more even umoles across the canopy WITH penetration.

There is no one perfect solution really for all circumstances. Just pick your direction.

While the sun is a point source, it's so far away that the light hitting the earth is orthogonal (0 degree beam). That means it does not matter how far you are away from the sun, the beams will always be parallel to each other, and equal in intensity.

Spectrum KIng LED said:

A single light source like an HPS and like the SUN.

Click to expand...

thats breaking some laws of physics I believe...

Inverse something...

Don't get me wrong...i like strong point sources...but...I wouldn't expect a better performance than a spread out source.

Like 2 600w hids vs 1 1200w hid. You'd be crazy to bet on the individual source up against a more efficient source and light spread

This is why you're getting all the resistance. No you won't. Stop making such ridiculous claims. Your product is not multiple orders of magnitude better than our DIY cob builds. Nobody is going to believe that.

Spectrum KIng LED said:

. If I take 100pcs of CREE XBD or XPG or XTE single diodes and run 100 of them at 1 watt a pcs on a circuit board, i will 100000% outdo the COB.

Click to expand...

Where is Supra? I would like his input, as it seems he has been dong R & D for over a year.

just the fact you stated the cree cxa 3590 is a 100 lumen per watt light is a bit ridiculous. You can't even start a conversation with that kind of misinformation.

Not trying to be a dick..just sayin'.

Supes sitting back laughing at us....

To think I'd be wasting my time building stuff for a 100 l/w light....no sirree

First he was saying the problems with cobs is they're too close together.. now the problem with panel designs is it's too spread apart?

So... then back to cobs, right?

One thing to be clear

This is a public forum first

Not a business insider club

We are just sharing our experiences with you.

With all your collective experience and you came up with that? A bunch of white crees put on a metal pcb and inserted into an ez bake oven mounted to a large CPU heatsink?

And you have the nerve to come here insulting the area51, one of the only decent commercial builds (although prohibitively too expensive for many) as well as the collective experience of the DIY LED builders here?

Maybe you should have your PR guy come here to save face, before the area51 PR guy comes and slams your product, or one of the other DIY cob builders starts posting pictures of their arrays and results.

It helps to know what your biggest competitors are using.

Their website says their newest model is using:

TE Cool White XTEAWT-00-0000-000000H50 R5 + Cree XPE Red XPERED-L1-0000-00801 P3

A lot of regulars here are unsure whether they used 630nm to save money or for performance reasons.

I have never used the area51, but all the models have been thoroughly tested and documented here, except for the r+b ones.

I only picked area51 as an example because they use individual high quality cree emitters like yours.

It seems like the crux of your claim against COB is that the DIYer's claim to top performance is based upon datasheets lying. But, wouldn't the datasheets for individual chips lie to roughly the same extent?

It seems like there should be an objective way to compare your chips to their COBs. If not the datasheets for each, then why not PAR readings from your 340w and from a DIYer's similar COB?

I'm still not understanding the specifics why COBs are a "myth" while a densely-populated circle of chips is substantially different. I still don't understand how DIYers are so convinced they're experiencing the leading edge of energy/design efficiency -- while you're convinced it's a "myth." That kind of gap should be easily quantifiable. Could you guys take PAR (grid) readings from similar powered lights?

So do you guys send out that PO with every order??? Cause any one can buy quality once and then use shit the rest of the way. Keep to your own product unless you can actually prove or show something unhonest by another company. Making accusations that are false and misleading is a great sales tactic...if your a shady piece of shit. Stay to some honest I make the best product business. Same goes with COBS...you havent made one fair or honest comparison yet. Just shifting situations so that you have the best conditions and the others are in the worse...apple to apple my friend...and you haven't shown anything close yet.

pct.cree.com
Go ahead and play with it. We run our diodes or COBs at a current that outperform any other light on the market. We are getting 136-155lm/w with 3K warm white COB...and pulling 1-1.5g/w consistently across many different grow styles and techniques. As well as test mono additions....but grow with the best perfomrers...so far pure WW. ...like you jumped on.

I have seen you guys at the maxyield shows...I run the apache booths...also make my own lights and grow with everything I support.
I have tested your light with QUANTUM METERS(li-core and apogee)...NOT an lux meter and your outer coverage performance is weak...you have a nice hot spot, but not more. And for a greenhouse I can see it working well. But you are not covering what you claim....seen it in person and showed your sales boys...they said it needs to be hung higher...not an excuse when it was already 36"+...that's above any indoor setup situation.

Do a PAR chart for us...actually show us what you are doing such a poor attempt in the video with that poor meter...OMG it lights up you hand...must be amazing numbers out there!!!

So is you light converting more than 45% of its wattage into light???

What current you drive you chips at...I'll be glad to break it down and show you exactly what your chips are producing in action and what the COBS you seems to be so jealous of do as well...or even a few other sing die options that would perform better than those xbd's...because they are a few.

Lets take the 4K cree spectrum that you use...and so do I for some lights...

And tested by digikey a well known authorized distributor...as well all already know...
XB-D(the one you use)- tested at 350ma(a low and efficient current, considering most in the industry are driving 650-700ma) and produced 109lm/w
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/XBDAWT-00-0000-00000HDE5/XBDAWT-00-0000-00000HDE5-ND/3747076
CXA3070(the one I use)- tested at 1.925a(higher than I run my lights, .7a-1.4a) and produced 125lm/w
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/CXA3070-0000-000N0HAD40H/CXA3070-0000-000N0HAD40H-ND/4929075


Now the product characterization tool says...
XB-D- P2 bin which you have @350ma and 85C should produce 112.3lm/w...higher than tested by digikey
CXA3070- AD bin which I have @1.90(closest thing to 1.925) 113.2lm/w...lower than tested by digikey
So the tool is actually favoring your chips.

You are so set on data sheets and product tools(which actually under performs the data sheet) being wrong...yet you are usngi the same chip manufacture...this is CREE vs CREE we are talking about. You clearly have an an account and can get whatever they make...as can anyone else in the world basically. So if my data is wrong so is yours.

BTW I do not work for apache or any other company...just a very well educated tester. But yes, I could professionally produce a cob light will out perform any light on the market, and probably for a price as competitive as anyone. But I am not here to do that...just a led user that knows what to look for in a top performing light....stuff others are doing better than you...stuff others are starting to do better than even AT. So I am asking and calling you out as a real user of both led's and hps(now old user), to show us a truly superior product. Otherwise my garage is a better manufacture of top performance lights.

We're waiting for the PAR grid chart.

Total light power output has nothing to do with the intensity at one spot.

We want to know the intensity at all angles.

We want to know the total power output.

Intensity is a load of bull. GG has made an intensity grid of his homebrew COB arrays. Send him a light so he can make one for yours.

Cobs have a 120 degree spread, so intensity would be lower for the same total power output with a more focused beam!

Spectrum KIng LED said:

I am baffled that people choose to believe something that is completely false and based off of claims with no data instead claims by people that sale grow lights they know very little about. The information on data sheets from manufactures is misleading because they tell you the lumens with a unction temperature of 25 degrees C. I can promise you there wont be one running that cool ever in a high wattage application.
I can go on for hours on this..

Click to expand...

It's not me being skeptical. I'm a graduated electrical engineer. I ran out of math courses to take in 2005. You claim 100000% better performance, yet you haven't even heard of the area51, one of the biggest names in LED grow lamps at the moment.

Believe me ,we're the pioneers. My best advice is to copy our designs.

Head to the LED section here, and let yourself become humbled by all the crappy cob designs yielding 1-1.5gpw.

Well then you suck at growing.

The results here have been staggering.

Spectrum KIng LED said:

I tried to many of those and had no success.

Click to expand...

This is what I don't understand. I'm not an LED expert like church and greengenes. But, I don't understand how concentrating a bunch of diode chips onto a 4" circle of metal is any different than a 3-4" COB thermal pasted onto a heatsink. From my very uneducated perspective, it looks like you're making your own COB.

I know some of the argument for COBs is easier assembly. But, the experts here play up energy efficiency. You seem to say your more difficult assembly is worth the efficiency gain, but it's not clear what that efficiency gain is. All you do to prove your efficiency is say the DIY COB(blers) are mislead by lying datasheets. But, if you use Cree diodes, and if Cree lies, then your diode's datasheets should lie too. Seems like we could compare datasheets and the lies would cancel each other out?

Or, a PAR grid? Greengenes and others have Apogee meters. Couldn't we quickly determine energy efficiency if you and he produced a grid? (You said you're expecting a grid from an independent lab. I guess you'll post that when you have it? Greengenes or others could compare to their lights?).



That's what puzzles me. Normally, I would expect this kind of evasive, teasing antagonism from the over-priced "secret sauce" brands like HydroGrowLED, Lush, Kind, GrowBlu. Those guys sell epi-whatever LEDs at the price of Cree. They have a reason for dissembling.

But, you're all about Cree, all about efficiency. You're speaking the same language as the experts here. But, you're baffled? I'm even more baffled because I'd think you guys should would have more common vocabulary.

You say people shouldn't denigrate your light, but isn't that what you're doing by calling COB performance a "myth?" You justify your opinion with years of experience making LEDs. But, these guys have been experimenting for years too.

Something's not right. If you didn't publish the LEDs you use I'd dismiss your rhetoric as just selling epi-whatevever LEDs for Cree prices (like the predatory brands mentioned above). There really would be a gulf between the two camps; your position would simply be to sell lights to people who don't understand (and don't care about) the underlying details. But, you're like the experts here, focusing on the underlying details, educating consumers about the underlying details, and concluding the COB guys are as wrong as the epi-whatever scammers.

That's what's puzzling to me. Your position doesn't leave a lot of room for misunderstanding. Either the COB guys here are completely wrong. Or, you're one of the most passive aggressive LED makers I've seen. It's good you use Cree and emphasize efficiency (unlike the epi-whatever scammers). But, I'm still trying to understand your absolute condemnation of COB performance as a "myth." You're either


Is there another choice? I don't see it. Your pronouncement isn't "we're all in the same ballpark." You've asserted self-contained diodes are *double* the performance.

Seems like there should be some way to objectively arrive at the truth. Either comparing datasheets (even if they "lie" they should be comparable)? Or, a PAR grid?

BTW: I'm the person who invited you to this thread. (I'm [email protected], if you don't believe me.). I'm looking forward to more information. PAR grid or sending a light to a respected party for a side-by-side grow?

Exactly. You nailed it. Your entire response was on point, but this one sentence is exactly the reason why I designed my recent panels the way I did. I used to use the vero 29 and it was too powerful, even at 1.4A (the test current is 2.1A). I had to keep it over a foot away from the canopy to keep it from burning. Some people prefer this "high profile" type of setup as it's closer to HPS which they're more familiar with.

Because of how uneven the light spread was of the 6 vero 29 array setup, I decided to use 12 vero 18 (3 of those panels I showed) instead.

Packing 400W of leds together in a 4 diameter circle would be insane for my design requirements, especially if they have lenses!! I'd suspect you'd have to keep that lamp very far away from the canopy in order to get a decent size spot... and to keep the canopy from catching fire.

My design is for low profile setups, and you need to basically cover the whole roof with cobs evenly (12 vero 18 at 700mA each covers a 2'x4' canopy evenly)

az2000 said:

At some point one of these guys would want to look like an all-star cramming self-contained diodes into a 4" space.

Click to expand...