Feeling sorry for Kessil after the latest BRS series

[MarsReefer]

The videos just present factual data, they don't make any direct recommendations. If what you took away from it was that Kessils don't work, then that is your interpretation of the data presented, not something they told you.

Every single light shown will grow coral under the right conditions. Ryan has stated multiple times in multiple videos that he would never sell something that he knew didn't work. If you want shimmer, or highlighting a certain area of your tank, or have a very deep tank, then kessils are great. However as a single solution light source for broad illumination they are not ideal.

The data is as useful as you make it.

There isn't anyone else out there doing the level of testing, experiments, and data gathering as BRS. These forums have been reccomending panel lights for years now as the best lighting solutions, but now that BRS does it its apparently wrong and only for profit? I don't get it. The data shows what it shows.

 

[rtparty]

It's funny that this discussion has popped up based on videos touting the AI Blade performance, while the AI Blade thread has turned into a discussion about problems with the color imbalances on the fixtures and their replacements. It seems like the higher performing brands have more problems whether it is the current issue with the Blades, burnt lenses, terrible apps, etc., while the lower performing Kessils don't seem to have as many issues. Granted, that could also be due to the popularity of each brand and maybe the rate of failure isn't actually that much different.

That’s because the number of Kessils dying around 2 years gets swept under the rug

 

[BeanAnimal]

Ryan has stated multiple times in multiple videos that he would never sell something that he knew didn't work.

Yet, they sell plenty of junk.

 

[MoshJosh]

So are we saying that BRS is flat out lying or intentionally manipulating the results to improve sales of their products?

I don't have a horse in the race either way, but. . . just asking.

 

[Gumbies R Us]

I had such a horrible experience with Kessil’s, they kept coloring and growing corals for me. No matter what I did, they just kept working!

Guess you are just going to have to get rid of them because they are working so well haha

 

[VanDalsenReef]

That’s because the number of Kessils dying around 2 years gets swept under the rug

I have some old 350's that still run when I try them. I honestly don't remember hearing about that. Shame

 

[rtparty]

I have some old 350's that still run when I try them. I honestly don't remember hearing about that. Shame

Like every brand, some last much longer. Every time I’ve seen the Kessil failures talked about it’s quickly hushed or brushed aside

 

[BeanAnimal]

So are we saying that BRS is flat out lying or intentionally manipulating the results to improve sales of their products?

I don't have a horse in the race either way, but. . . just asking.

I don't think anybody said that - and the lighting series was mostly data. However, they DO have a horse in the race. Their videos are not made because of their love of reefing, they are a branding and sales tool to help drive revenue and they have a vested interest to play nice with large partners. To argue any differently would be naive to reality.

 

[VanDalsenReef]

Like every brand, some last much longer. Every time I’ve seen the Kessil failures talked about it’s quickly hushed or brushed aside

Interesting. But yes it's every brand. I know a lot of people that hate the ecotech mp series because of the failures. Or that it costs so much and still fails blah blah. Not like saltwater ruins everything

 

[MoshJosh]

I don't think anybody said that - and the lighting series was mostly data. However, they DO have a horse in the race. Their videos are not made because of their love of reefing, they are a branding and sales tool to help drive revenue and they have a vested interest to play nice with large partners. To argue any differently would be naive to reality.

You say nobody said that, but your following statements seems contrary. If "playing nice" meant lying or misinterpreting data to make one company look better would BRS do that? You statement seems to imply they would. And we are back to my original questions? Are we saying that BRS is flat out lying or intentionally manipulating the results to improve sales of their products?

 

[rtparty]

I don't think anybody said that - and the lighting series was mostly data. However, they DO have a horse in the race. Their videos are not made because of their love of reefing, they are a branding and sales tool to help drive revenue and they have a vested interest to play nice with large partners. To argue any differently would be naive to reality.

Tell the Hydras they "played nice" LOL

 

[Hugster78]

I will stick with my T5s and call it a day!! The flip flopping from brs is hilarious. Then all the upset comes out in this forum. BRS is only here to make money. Buy what makes you happy. Happy reefing

 

[A_Blind_Reefer]

I never intended to imply that the data presented is not factual, being misleading or flat out lies. I did find it interesting that xr30s and blades were near perfect in every way but the xr is a phenomenal light no doubt. Blades may be as well, I can’t judge anymore. Pucks in general and specifically kessil were presented as basically dated tech even when supplemented. Even with the old wives tale that Kessils par isn’t accurately measured by whatever sensor for whatever reason I feel that an 360x averaging 123 par and a 500x averaging 193 par over a 24 cube with a note below stating a positively high percentage of coverage for a mixed reef but basically zero coverage for sps dom is a pretty clear statement that a 360 or 500 alone is not suited for growing sps. Wether I agree or not is a separate point that I didn’t bring up. You have to admit that the data alone isn’t a glowing tribute to kessil. The commentary in the most recent video was pretty anti puck in general and specifically kessil if you read between the lines. Toward the end Ryan did state that there is nothing wrong with any of the lights and that they all grow coral but that we as consumers should be asking for better basically. My intention was to start a conversation about what others think better means for kessil. Status quo, change nothing, they’re perfect now and for all eternity…possibly going back to the drawing board and coming up with some new amazing technology…dying on the vine? Just thoughts and conversation. Not a my light is the best light and the only light for coral, or those are the worst lights on the planet and they should all be thrown in the trash party. Everyone’s experience is different and their own.

 

[Reefer Matt]

After power compacts, well even with power compacts, I have had Kessils. Although, always with pc or t5. So admittedly, I’m a fanboy of sorts. That said, I’m curious to hear if people think this BRS series will impact Kessils sales enough for them to go back to the drawing board for some out of the puck thinking, or move away from reef lighting altogether? Just starting a convo, not intended to be an argument starter. Thoughts?

BRS is part of Aperture Pet and Life. This includes Aqua Illumination, BRS, Neptune Systems, Ecotech Marine, and Leap (Reptile Stuff). As you can see, they are Kessil's competitor. Of course they will put Kessil down to sell you their products.

 

[Hooz]

If you think about it, the new AI Blade that they're raving about is just like a bunch of little Kessil clusters under a single lens/diffuser. IMO, Kessil could take their current technology and redesign fixtures and lenses and hit the ground running in this "new" world of reef tank lighting.

Personally, I've been beating the "wide blue band" thing for a few years now. Ever since I got in to the beta test for the @luxdium LED pucks for the older Prime and Hydra lights. I've also been on the "end-to-end" bandwagon, as I run more puck-style fixtures than I really "need" to on my tanks to minimize shadows. I'm of the mindset that as long as you can turn them down to meet PAR needs, then you can never have "too much" light on a tank.

I waited for the testing of the Blades with baited breath, because (on paper) it would be my perfect lighting solution, but they REALLY missed the mark in a few ways...

First, by forcing you to buy multiple lights to achieve the full, wide blue band instead of incorporating it all into a single fixture, allowing you to just add like fixtures to meet PAR needs and coverage goals. I understand if you're only using them as supplemental lighting it's not a huge deal. For those of us who would like to use them as primary lighting, it's not so great. I have an LPS/softie tank with a 36x10x12 display area (currently lit with three diffused Prime HDs with LUXEngine pucks). I could EASILY light it with a single Blade, but if I want that wide blue band, I HAVE to buy two Blades to get it.

Second, by not leveraging what we've learned about light spectrum and coral growth to improve on the LED "color" choices. Even with a multi-fixture Grow/Glow combo, did you see how they adjusted the channels to acheive the wide blue band? I think they actually had at least one of the blue channels set at or near 0. That's leaves a lot of your brand new, not inexpensive light potential on the table.

 

[BeanAnimal]

You say nobody said that, but your following statements seems contrary. If "playing nice" meant lying or misinterpreting data to make one company look better would BRS do that? You statement seems to imply they would. And we are back to my original questions? Are we saying that BRS is flat out lying or intentionally manipulating the results to improve sales of their products?

What I said was very clear and you are being patently obtuse for the sake of argument. Put words in somebody else's mouth and argue with them. I offered my thoughts, and as you say... don't have a horse in this race. Have fun.

 

[A_Blind_Reefer]

If you think about it, the new AI Blade that they're raving about is just like a bunch of little Kessil clusters under a single lens/diffuser. IMO, Kessil could take their current technology and redesign fixtures and lenses and hit the ground running in this "new" world of reef tank lighting.

Personally, I've been beating the "wide blue band" thing for a few years now. Ever since I got in to the beta test for the @luxdium LED pucks for the older Prime and Hydra lights. I've also been on the "end-to-end" bandwagon, as I run more puck-style fixtures than I really "need" to on my tanks to minimize shadows. I'm of the mindset that as long as you can turn them down to meet PAR needs, then you can never have "too much" light on a tank.

I waited for the testing of the Blades with baited breath, because (on paper) it would be my perfect lighting solution, but they REALLY missed the mark in a few ways...

First, by forcing you to buy multiple lights to achieve the full, wide blue band instead of incorporating it all into a single fixture, allowing you to just add like fixtures to meet PAR needs and coverage goals. I understand if you're only using them as supplemental lighting it's not a huge deal. For those of us who would like to use them as primary lighting, it's not so great. I have an LPS/softie tank with a 36x10x12 display area (currently lit with three diffused Prime HDs with LUXEngine pucks). I could EASILY light it with a single Blade, but if I want that wide blue band, I HAVE to buy two Blades to get it.

Second, by not leveraging what we've learned about light spectrum and coral growth to improve on the LED "color" choices. Even with a multi-fixture Grow/Glow combo, did you see how they adjusted the channels to acheive the wide blue band? I think they actually had at least one of the blue channels set at or near 0. That's leaves a lot of your brand new, not inexpensive light potential on the table.

Great comment. I did notice the channel dimming of the blades and also that five over a 24 were needed, which ends up not being too cheap. More so when you get into larger tanks. I’m really curious to see where things go from here. Another thing I didn’t mention earlier was the commentary regarding bars and the 450nm band which is very common, not being very affective. Well, maybe not ineffective but that a broader spectrum is better. I agree with your idea of multiple arrays, although I’m sure that would be very spendy. My go to would be laser or plasma from the old sci-fi flicks! Ha.

 

[MoshJosh]

What I said was very clear and you are being patently obtuse for the sake of argument. Put words in somebody else's mouth and argue with them. I offered my thoughts, and as you say... don't have a horse in this race. Have fun.

I did not mean any offense, nor did I intend to put words in your mouth. I guess what I should have said is a lot of the statements I have read in this thread seem to imply dishonesty or propensity for dishonesty on BRS's part. That said, you are correct no one seems to be saying BRS is "lying". I guess my question should really be: Can the data be trusted even if the opinions are suspect? Do we think the data presented by BRS is valuable? Or is there reason to suspect the data is intentionally misleading?

 

[Spare time]

Tell the Hydras they "played nice" LOL

Their videos have repeatedly slammed the hydras even though their parents company makes them. They even have criticized their own products when they found something better and went back to the drawing board (particularly magnesium purity).

Ryan absolutely hates the hydra 64 lol

 

[VanDalsenReef]

I did not mean any offense, nor did I intend to put words in your mouth. I guess what I should have said is a lot of the statements I have read in this thread seem to imply dishonesty or propensity for dishonesty on BRS's part. That said, you are correct no one seems to be saying BRS is "lying". I guess my question should really be: Can the data be trusted even if the opinions are suspect? Do we think the data presented by BRS is valuable? Or is there reason to suspect the data is intentionally misleading?

I don't believe the data is wrong. Or misleading. I believe how they presented it or talked about it may have come off misleading to some.