Parwise

[Hurricane Aquatics]

I really want to get one of these to try out. I don't expect perfection but hoping it is good enough to get a good sense on spectrum

It is. Here is my spectrum a few weeks ago. I have adjusted it some, but this will give you an idea.

 

[Dburr1014]

I really want to get one of these to try out. I don't expect perfection but hoping it is good enough to get a good sense on spectrum

BRS now has them in stock as other companies.
Mine will be here Tuesday.

 

[rtparty]

BRS now has them in stock as other companies.
Mine will be here Tuesday.

I am waiting to see if we get some better reviews on how accurate they are. If it says a light peaks at 447nm but it really peaks at 443nm, that isn't a big enough deal to worry about IMO. But if that light actually peaks at like 465nm and not 447nm, then it isn't worth it IMO

 

[Tony Thompson]

ITC is part of Aquatics Now, which is part of Seneye. They are based here in the UK.

The original Seneye Reef included a par sensor around £100

Then Seneye introduced the Spectra at around £700

The latest is the PARwise at around £220

My Apogee MQ5 series cost around £600

The instrument used for lab research can cost considerably more than all the above.

Choice really depends what one wants to use it for and available budget. Also important is what knowledge one has to utilise any information it provides.

Many people have success without using a PAR meter and with massive variation in spectrums.

Is there really a single optimum PAR or Spectrum across coral species?

My personal approach would be just get a general idea and then leave your lights alone. After all a lot of hobbyists just go for a aesthetic look to the lighting with a general approach to intensity, Typically its called a display tank.

Dialling in may be advantageous to coral farming of certain species from certain locals, but by how much? and what was the source location of the coral?

For research such as the excellent resources we have within the hobby with regards lighting, I understand the need for high spec test equipment.

There is a multitude of research papers on anthozoans spectrum and intensity. There are also other considerations such as water parameters that may influence the effects of lighting on the coral metabolism and pigmentation within an aquarium. Life and biology is often complicated and diverse.

Out of interest IME the seneye always recorded lower PAR levels than my apogee, especially with more proliferation in the blue spectrum.

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

I am waiting to see if we get some better reviews on how accurate they are. If it says a light peaks at 447nm but it really peaks at 443nm, that isn't a big enough deal to worry about IMO. But if that light actually peaks at like 465nm and not 447nm, then it isn't worth it IMO

I think that's correct above as I had MH and LED and my LED are adjusted mainly blue to add to the MH. That reading does change as you adjust the colors, but I doubt it is full spectrometer accurate for $299.

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

ITC is part of Aquatics Now, which is part of Seneye. They are based here in the UK.

The original Seneye Reef included a par sensor around £100

Then Seneye introduced the Spectra at around £700

The latest is the PARwise at around £220

My Apogee MQ5 series cost around £600

The instrument used for lab research can cost considerably more than all the above.

Choice really depends what one wants to use it for and available budget. Also important is what knowledge one has to utilise any information it provides.

Many people have success without using a PAR meter and with massive variation in spectrums.

Is there really a single optimum PAR or Spectrum across coral species?

My personal approach would be just get a general idea and then leave your lights alone. After all a lot of hobbyists just go for a aesthetic look to the lighting with a general approach to intensity, Typically its called a display tank.

Dialling in may be advantageous to coral farming of certain species from certain locals, but by how much? and what was the source location of the coral?

For research such as the excellent resources we have within the hobby with regards lighting, I understand the need for high spec test equipment.

There is a multitude of research papers on anthozoans spectrum and intensity. There are also other considerations such as water parameters that may influence the effects of lighting on the coral metabolism and pigmentation within an aquarium. Life and biology is often complicated and diverse.

Out of interest IME the seneye always recorded lower PAR levels than my apogee, especially with more proliferation in the blue spectrum.

Yes, in my testing, the PARwise read 100 PAR lower than the Apogee. Guess what? The Parwise is correct!

My Acropora are literally skyrocketing since adjusting using the PARwise. My water parameters are perfect and what I noticed was a large change in Alkalinity and Calcium uptake when I adjusted the PAR.

Is lighting 100% of a reef tank? No, just like icing isn't 100% of the cake. But a cake without icing is BLAH.... It takes everything being measured and correct in water, lighting, flow, nutrient control, etc.

If people want to see a video on the PARwise testing, I might be able to find time to make one in a couple of weeks.

 

[arcangelreef]

Yes, in my testing, the PARwise read 100 PAR lower than the Apogee. Guess what? The Parwise is correct!

My Acropora are literally skyrocketing since adjusting using the PARwise. My water parameters are perfect and what I noticed was a large change in Alkalinity and Calcium uptake when I adjusted the PAR.

Is lighting 100% of a reef tank? No, just like icing isn't 100% of the cake. But a cake without icing is BLAH.... It takes everything being measured and correct in water, lighting, flow, nutrient control, etc.

If people want to see a video on the PARwise testing, I might be able to find time to make one in a couple of weeks.

That’s a pretty big assumption to say the par wise is correct and the apogee is wrong.
All you really know is you increased your lighting and your coral responded positively. Maybe you were just under lighting your tank from the beginning and those numbers on the apogee are correct. Just not what your coral wanted or needed. This seems like a classic example of “chasing numbers”.

Maybe they’re both wrong and the true number is somewhere in the middle?

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

That’s a pretty big assumption to say the par wise is correct and the apogee is wrong.
All you really know is you increased your lighting and your coral responded positively. Maybe you were just under lighting your tank from the beginning and those numbers on the apogee are correct. Just not what your coral wanted or needed. This seems like a classic example of “chasing numbers”.

Maybe they’re both wrong and the true number is somewhere in the middle?

I guess BRS made that assumption too when they found the Apogee was off by more than 25% and more in their testing?

I never said that I know for a fact that the Parwise is 100% correct. If you read my previous postings you'll see that I state plainly that I'm not a lighting scientist and that's my opinion. I will say that it is a very educated opinion and I don't make those statements without knowledge to back it up.

I'm not a rookie either, with over 30 years of saltwater and reef experience. I don't think I was under lighting my tank using 2, 250w MH 14k de bulbs to begin with. I don't see that as remotely being under lit.

You could very well be correct that the numbers may be somewhere in the middle, anything is possible for sure. BRS tested the Seneye and the Apogee and found the Seneye to be the most accurate PAR measuring device outside of a $3000 device. So with my research and their research, I would say the PARwise is correct and very accurate.

Now, you might have an Apogee and be upset that I'm saying it's wrong. Well, then you and I are in the same boat, my friend. I paid $600.00 for that Apogee a little over a year ago and it's been used a total of about 5 times and always been in the box and taken very well care of. It's brand new! So he's, I'm upset too because I actually lost a lot of corals in another tank adjusting from that Apogee. I was scratching my head because everything else was perfect and they say the Apogee is a scientificly accurate measuring device.

My Apogee isn't off either, as I had someone that has access to multiple devices including the Apogee 510, test theirs and the Parwise. Same results.

I am just trying to steer people in the best direction for their best results. I represent neither company and nothing was provided to me. Take it for what you will and if your tank is doing well based on the Apogee, then fantastic! I wish you continued success and I would love to see your tank. Post some pics and welcome to Reef2Reef.

 

[Hooz]

It is. Here is my spectrum a few weeks ago. I have adjusted it some, but this will give you an idea.

Yes, in my testing, the PARwise read 100 PAR lower than the Apogee. Guess what? The Parwise is correct!

Man. You're making a LOT of assumptions. Not saying you're wrong necessarily, but "It is" and "the ParWise is correct" are two BIG statements considering you haven't verified with any other tools (or at least didn't say that you did).

I get it. You're happy with your purchase. That's cool. But saying the spectrometer is accurate without comparing it to a known, calibrated spectrometer is really reaching. And saying that it was correct in the PAR measurements where the accepted industry standard tool was NOT (and by such a large margin) is also quite speculative.

I'm not saying that it's NOT accurate, or that it's NOT a useful tool. But until I see it tested with more than anecdotes, I'll reserve my judgement.

 

[Hooz]

BRS tested the Seneye and the Apogee and found the Seneye to be the most accurate PAR measuring device outside of a $3000 device. So with my research and their research, I would say the PARwise is correct and very accurate.

I must've missed that one. Link?

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

I must've missed that one. Link?

 

[Tony Thompson]

Yes, in my testing, the PARwise read 100 PAR lower than the Apogee. Guess what? The Parwise is correct!

My Acropora are literally skyrocketing since adjusting using the PARwise. My water parameters are perfect and what I noticed was a large change in Alkalinity and Calcium uptake when I adjusted the PAR.

Is lighting 100% of a reef tank? No, just like icing isn't 100% of the cake. But a cake without icing is BLAH.... It takes everything being measured and correct in water, lighting, flow, nutrient control, etc.

If people want to see a video on the PARwise testing, I might be able to find time to make one in a couple of weeks.

How do you know the Pairwise is "correct" and by what standard do you compare?

What are "perfect" water parameters and again to what standards, if any exist, do you compare?

What is "correct" with regards flow and nutrient control?

By the way I don't like icing on a cake, I find it confuses the palette, often unnecessary and indulgent .

Hope you like the PARwise, it seems like a very affordable and capable bit of kit. Seneye are an excellent company I was a seneye dealer and found their standards of manufacture and customer service superb., I was once asked to be a beta tester for their KH seneye, but it never came to market.

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

Man. You're making a LOT of assumptions. Not saying you're wrong necessarily, but "It is" and "the ParWise is correct" are two BIG statements considering you haven't verified with any other tools (or at least didn't say that you did).

I get it. You're happy with your purchase. That's cool. But saying the spectrometer is accurate without comparing it to a known, calibrated spectrometer is really reaching. And saying that it was correct in the PAR measurements where the accepted industry standard tool was NOT (and by such a large margin) is also quite speculative.

I'm not saying that it's NOT accurate, or that it's NOT a useful tool. But until I see it tested with more than anecdotes, I'll reserve my judgement.

I never said the spectrometer was accurate. I said I think it's close enough for general use and it does change with adjustmebts of the LED . ITC made a post on this forum saying that if you wanted an individual light ray analysis, you need to buy their Spectra spectrometer unit.

On the PAR, yes, it's much more accurate than the Apogee and that has been proven even by BRS. Again, I didn't say it's 100% dead on.

I'm not "happy" about my purchase, I'm happy that I think I received a much more accurate PAR assessment.

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

How do you know the Pairwise is "correct" and by what standard do you compare?

What are "perfect" water parameters and again to what standards, if any exist, do you compare?

What is "correct" with regards flow and nutrient control?

By the way I don't like icing on a cake, I find it confuses the palette, often unnecessary and indulgent .

Hope you like the PARwise, it seems like a very affordable and capable bit of kit. Seneye are an excellent company I was a seneye dealer and found their standards of manufacture and customer service superb., I was once asked to be a beta tester for their KH seneye, but it never came to market.

Hey Tony, to each his own on the cake,

Perfect water parameters are what is perfect for results in each individual system. My parameters are producing excellent results.

First Pic is end of November 2022, second Pic is 3/15/2023. 3 1/2 months of growth. So my parameters are what everyone strives to get as far as PH etc. It's working for me and this is a brand new system that was started at mid October 2022, all new everything.

 

[arcangelreef]

I guess BRS made that assumption too when they found the Apogee was off by more than 25% and more in their testing?

I never said that I know for a fact that the Parwise is 100% correct. If you read my previous postings you'll see that I state plainly that I'm not a lighting scientist and that's my opinion. I will say that it is a very educated opinion and I don't make those statements without knowledge to back it up.

I'm not a rookie either, with over 30 years of saltwater and reef experience. I don't think I was under lighting my tank using 2, 250w MH 14k de bulbs to begin with. I don't see that as remotely being under lit.

You could very well be correct that the numbers may be somewhere in the middle, anything is possible for sure. BRS tested the Seneye and the Apogee and found the Seneye to be the most accurate PAR measuring device outside of a $3000 device. So with my research and their research, I would say the PARwise is correct and very accurate.

Now, you might have an Apogee and be upset that I'm saying it's wrong. Well, then you and I are in the same boat, my friend. I paid $600.00 for that Apogee a little over a year ago and it's been used a total of about 5 times and always been in the box and taken very well care of. It's brand new! So he's, I'm upset too because I actually lost a lot of corals in another tank adjusting from that Apogee. I was scratching my head because everything else was perfect and they say the Apogee is a scientificly accurate measuring device.

My Apogee isn't off either, as I had someone that has access to multiple devices including the Apogee 510, test theirs and the Parwise. Same results.

I am just trying to steer people in the best direction for their best results. I represent neither company and nothing was provided to me. Take it for what you will and if your tank is doing well based on the Apogee, then fantastic! I wish you continued success and I would love to see your tank. Post some pics and welcome to Reef2Reef.

I don’t own a par meter, lol. I tested my tank once to give me a rough idea of what my lighting setup was capable of and went from there. I adjust to the corals. Truthfully I haven’t messed with my
Lighting in a very long time. Too me the true numbers are irrelevant, all you really need is a general idea. If your apogee is actually that far off (100 par?) I feel like something is wrong with your meter. But I would be getting a 3rd unit to test both your current meters if one really wanted to narrow into what the true numbers are.

We know we can grow coral with a very broad spectrum of lighting. Plenty of successful examples out there with a whole gamut of different lighting spectrums and intensity levels. Hence my “chasing numbers” comment. The numbers aren’t really relevant. What’s important is how is the coral doing? You found that out yourself, regardless of whatever that meter says, you raised your lighting intensity and saw positive results. The number means nothing.

And clearly you were under lighting your tank, you said so yourself. You raised your lighting intensity and you saw positive results. Therefore you were under lighting your tank. ‍ I guess you could argue you weren’t under lighting, maybe just not fully lighting?

And I understand what you’re doing, I just didn’t like definitiveness of your observation.

Yes, in my testing, the PARwise read 100 PAR lower than the Apogee. Guess what? The Parwise is correct!

My Acropora are literally skyrocketing since adjusting using the PARwise. My water parameters are perfect and what I noticed was a large change in Alkalinity and Calcium uptake when I adjusted the PAR.

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

I don’t own a par meter, lol. I tested my tank once to give me a rough idea of what my lighting setup was capable of and went from there. I adjust to the corals. Truthfully I haven’t messed with my
Lighting in a very long time. Too me the true numbers are irrelevant, all you really need is a general idea. If your apogee is actually that far off (100 par?) I feel like something is wrong with your meter. But I would be getting a 3rd unit to test both your current meters if one really wanted to narrow into what the true numbers are.

We know we can grow coral with a very broad spectrum of lighting. Plenty of successful examples out there with a whole gamut of different lighting spectrums and intensity levels. Hence my “chasing numbers” comment. The numbers aren’t really relevant. What’s important is how is the coral doing? You found that out yourself, regardless of whatever that meter says, you raised your lighting intensity and saw positive results. The number means nothing.

And clearly you were under lighting your tank, you said so yourself. You raised your lighting intensity and you saw positive results. Therefore you were under lighting your tank. ‍ I guess you could argue you weren’t under lighting, maybe just not fully lighting?

And I understand what you’re doing, I just didn’t like definitiveness of your observation.

No PAR meter and you are guessing at lighting? Ok, have a good day.....

 

[arcangelreef]

No PAR meter and you are guessing at lighting? Ok, have a good day.....

Guessing? No.. I think you’re grossly misunderstanding what I wrote. Or maybe I’m not good at explaining myself. But you have a good day too lol

 

[Dburr1014]

Well I'm happy with my purchase even though it won't be here until Tuesday. I know it's only a hobby grade par meter but it's going to be nice that I can also check Spectrum. Will it be perfect, no, but I'll be in the ballpark of where I should get some decent results. With the LED fixtures nowadays you can control all the different channels. It's going to be a good tool to be able to dial them in.

 

[AKLiving]

Do I want to ... owww, oooh, owwweee, .... too late, I poked the same hornet's nest. Although I didn't think there were hornet's nests around when I read the topic heading.

I have a PARwise meter and will hopefully be setting up my tank this next week and will try it out. I have already seen evidence that the numbers may be very different from Apogee but don't really care which is correct. I want to see that it is consistent. Someone on the PARwise FB page tested the lights I have and their numbers were significantly lower (200 or so if I remember) than numbers for the same lights published using a lab grade meter. People were buying new lights based on those numbers, not based on poor coral performance even though these lights in similar setups have been used a zillion times with excellent results. I don't have a degree in purparspectrolightmeterology and I think, from what I read, there are logical reasons for differing readings between 2 "good" meters. I don't have options where I live except to buy one or pay enough in shipping that I could buy one after a few times rental.
The way I am going to approach it, since I have seen people getting at least consistent numbers, is that it will give me my baseline, get me in the ballpark, and then help me make measurable adjustments.

More importantly, I came up with the first ever holder so my hands don't get wet and my legs sore from standing on tiptoes. Of course, someone had to come up with a fancy-smancy one that looks professionally made this week and post it on the PARwise forum. There goes my retirement income making $0.05 PVC holders.

 

[arcangelreef]

Do I want to ... owww, oooh, owwweee, .... too late, I poked the same hornet's nest. Although I didn't think there were hornet's nests around when I read the topic heading.

I have a PARwise meter and will hopefully be setting up my tank this next week and will try it out. I have already seen evidence that the numbers may be very different from Apogee but don't really care which is correct. I want to see that it is consistent. Someone on the PARwise FB page tested the lights I have and their numbers were significantly lower (200 or so if I remember) than numbers for the same lights published using a lab grade meter. People were buying new lights based on those numbers, not based on poor coral performance even though these lights in similar setups have been used a zillion times with excellent results. I don't have a degree in purparspectrolightmeterology and I think, from what I read, there are logical reasons for differing readings between 2 "good" meters. I don't have options where I live except to buy one or pay enough in shipping that I could buy one after a few times rental.
The way I am going to approach it, since I have seen people getting at least consistent numbers, is that it will give me my baseline, get me in the ballpark, and then help me make measurable adjustments.

More importantly, I came up with the first ever holder so my hands don't get wet and my legs sore from standing on tiptoes. Of course, someone had to come up with a fancy-smancy one that looks professionally made this week and post it on the PARwise forum. There goes my retirement income making $0.05 PVC holders.

this guy gets it