I didnt mind using my 3500k for veg and bloom tbh and is more level between the two which is nice from other single spectrum lighting setups and has about the same reds as a 3000k If I remember right but has a lil more blue of course and really helps things out...Personally if u can only have 1 light for veg and bloom I would use a 3500k personally but that's just me ..
Yeah i don't disagree. There is benefits to either. In a perfect world I would (and this is only speculation) go veg at 4K then 3K for bloom and back to 4K for the last 2-3 weeks while they are packing on the weight. I believe a more blue spectrum in flower will really help make the buds tight. Then add UV and IR also but hey im getting carried away.
budget makes a "Red" spectrum series 2 board -- 260 watts or 460 watter check this red spec out !!- they have very good customer and can even make boards to your spect's
Which is why you enter scynce LED and you can do all those things and many many more .....Which is one of the reasons I'm going with them ..I can't wait to have a all scynce led grow hell's yesss
30-40W sq/ft. 50 if going to Co2. So yes more than enough.
Agreed, key words "compact growth" not "compact plants." Node spacing can be tighter under higher spectrum lights which I think is what you mean by compact growth (please correct me if Im wrong, not trying to put words in your mouth) but it doesn't mean the plants themselves are any smaller or more compact. In my experience plants grown under metal halide (which has a very blue leaning spectrum) are larger after the same amount of time compared to those I have vegged under hps or 3000k cobs. Of the three my smallest overall plants are those that go full cycle under the 3000k cobs.
I think there was a study done MH vs HPS and HPS wins in terms of overall growth. @MIMedGrower i think was the one that informed me about it in random conversation. What i was referring to as you said was node spacing not overall plants size. With a more blue spectrum the internode distance is shortened creating a more compact growth and a more red spectrum resulting in longer internode spacing.
Dude i started very skeptical about them but the more i dug the more I was impressed. Yes you lose efficiency because of the lenses but you also gain spectrum control and a much more even light distribution. I would say though 40w sq ft with them instead of the 30-40w with QB's/Cobs etc. only because of the lenses
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
My qb132 are v1 which has the 561c but they are bright as shit still and of course on a dimmer just a mean well a series for those is all I need
My mh to hps comparison may be a little skewed in favor of the mh for growth. The light fixture I used to use was an analog 1000w mh ballast that I ran with either a 1000w MH bulb or a 1000w MH to HPS conversion bulb. I know the conversion bulbs don't perform as well as the traditional ones and when I switched to a 600w hps ballast and bulb setup it performed just as well as the pair of 1000w bulbs in the mh ballast
