- Feb 7, 2017
- Reaction score
I'm really thinking you are right on about the test being inaccurate. I am at day 3 or 4 now of the ammonia levels not changing at all.I find the study of allowable start dates fascinating. It’s no longer about wait longer, people want a known safe start date and we have patterns on file to allow for that. The right degree of wait is the length of time it takes a particular approach to handle its fish's initial waste and ongoing feeding needs, that's the date we like to predict and inspect in follow ups. Nitrite has zero factoring in any start date analysis it's all about ammonia control in 2021+
I have never ever seen a seneye unit reflect what any titration kit shows, even after tan conversion. In 100% of comparative examples the titration kit causes alarm. a tuned seneye soothes alarm, that’s the disparity in today’s ammonia testing.
*chemists know to be skeptical of everything, seneye has no other testers to digitally proof it as accurate or not but I’d ask this: which tester reports ammonia nh3 levels found on natural reefs, and more accurately portrays what we actually see going on in reef tanks regarding fish health, water clarity, feeding behaviors etc (hallmarks of a cycled tank)
The red sea always reads .2 in our collections, the seneye reports .002 on a real reef tank and then Jon M moved the exact unit to a low surface area QT setup and it moves up to .02, an exacting match to the loss of surface area.
this is why I choose seneye as the best current reflector of cycling reference.
so long before anyone takes time to compare hach digital ammonia readings against seneye, seneye is the one directly reflecting all the context we can see for the readings. cant wait for final proofs on seneye one day.
to heck with Jake Paul, I want to see a seneye vs hach nh3 accuracy fight.