Advanced nutrients developed the first low frequency digital ballast

Vento

Vento

Well-Known Member
First of all i would like to say... I have no opinion on this thing ... No vested interest in selling them....And this is not an advert :)

I just wanted to bring to the attention of the forum this " New " bit of kit , And see what you guys think :)



ADVANCED NUTRIENTS DEVELOPED THE FIRST LOW FREQUENCY DIGITAL BALLAST AND WHY YOU SHOULD PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT THIS BREAKTHROUGH TECHNOLOGY CAN DO FOR YOU...


ON THE ONE HAND, digital ballasts offer more technological advances … BUT … because they only run at higher frequencies, many growers find they don’t get the performance they want from their lamps that were designed years ago to operate on low frequency magnetic ballasts … due to the high frequency characteristics of these new digital ballasts and the acoustic resonance created by the electronic ballasts most lamp manufacturers won’t approve operation of their lamps on an electronic ballast…
To try and solve this problem, some growers stick to using magnetic ballasts because they operate at lower frequencies, more closely matching lamp technology … BUT … then you’re forced to give up the conveniences of newer digital ballasts.
Well, thanks to Advanced Nutrients, you no longer have to compromise! They’ve developed the first Low Frequency Dimmable Digital Ballast on the market today that’s designed to eliminate these problems and give you the performance AND reliability you’re looking for.
Here’s just a few other reasons why it may be perfect for your growing needs too.


Lemme know what you think :)







The rest of the info can be found here http://advancednutrients.com/hydroponics/products/baddass_ballasts_low_frequency/baddass_ballasts_low_frequency_product_information.php



 
Vento

Vento

Well-Known Member
vh13 said:
Does this mean we can use CMH in a digital ballast now?
Click to expand...
Not sure , We might need to get a sparky in here to tell us , But if the CMH's can be used i would love to give them a try :)

Im reading a lot about old tech lamps not being compatable with new tech ballests ... so i wonder if this is the answer ?

Need somone with some insight to fill us in :)
 
tea tree

tea tree

Well-Known Member
I hate advanced nutrients. "wet betty" has pushed me over the top. it is a bottle of dish soap. that is it.
'
 
decrimCA

decrimCA

Active Member
Vento said:
First of all i would like to say... I have no opinion on this thing ... No vested interest in selling them....And this is not an advert :)

I just wanted to bring to the attention of the forum this " New " bit of kit , And see what you guys think :)



ADVANCED NUTRIENTS DEVELOPED THE FIRST LOW FREQUENCY DIGITAL BALLAST AND WHY YOU SHOULD PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT THIS BREAKTHROUGH TECHNOLOGY CAN DO FOR YOU...


ON THE ONE HAND, digital ballasts offer more technological advances … BUT … because they only run at higher frequencies, many growers find they don’t get the performance they want from their lamps that were designed years ago to operate on low frequency magnetic ballasts … due to the high frequency characteristics of these new digital ballasts and the acoustic resonance created by the electronic ballasts most lamp manufacturers won’t approve operation of their lamps on an electronic ballast…
To try and solve this problem, some growers stick to using magnetic ballasts because they operate at lower frequencies, more closely matching lamp technology … BUT … then you’re forced to give up the conveniences of newer digital ballasts.
Well, thanks to Advanced Nutrients, you no longer have to compromise! They’ve developed the first Low Frequency Dimmable Digital Ballast on the market today that’s designed to eliminate these problems and give you the performance AND reliability you’re looking for.
Here’s just a few other reasons why it may be perfect for your growing needs too.


Lemme know what you think :)







The rest of the info can be found here http://advancednutrients.com/hydroponics/products/baddass_ballasts_low_frequency/baddass_ballasts_low_frequency_product_information.php
Click to expand...
Huh, sounds good to me.

I just got the email from Advanced Nutrients too. These two things would make me interested in at least trying the ballasts out:

We're so confident in our new ballast that we've guaranteed it in two unique ways :::
1. Manufacturing and Workmanship: Your BaddAss Ballast is covered for all Manufacturing and Workmanship for 5 years. If your BaddAss Ballast falters due to workmanship or parts, return it immediately for a swift replacement, free of charge.
2. 6 Months Unconditional Guarantee: If you're not completely satisfied with it, for any reason, within the first six months of purchase, return it immediately for a complete refund of the purchase price.

I like guarantees.

That covers me a bit in case I'm an idiot with stuff. That happens.

Oh, Advanced Nutrients, something else for me to buy...can't wait to see how much bigger my grows can get.
 
legallyflying

legallyflying

Well-Known Member
I'm sure the lemmings will flock to this as well. Older magnetic outperforming newer digital ballasts? Says fucking who? More marketing bs from the kings of bs marketing.

I'm sure it's a fine ballast. Revolutionary new technology that is the best of both worlds and will increase yield, prevent nutrient toxicity and generate an electronic field that will kill spider mites? Probably not.

Hopefully it doesn't come in part a and part b that you have to assemble before use. :)
 
J

jjz

Member
i owned a badass ballast for 9 month its cheap china knock off with a an sticker.. mine wont fire hps bulbs so the hydro store guy gave me new lumatek to make up for it and also the hydrostore owner will only carry an nutrients now because of the 16 out of the 20 ballast came back with a malfunction... hey big mike if your reading this fuck an send me my 100% refund on your chinease garbage!
 
mellokitty

mellokitty

Moderatrix of Journals
Vento said:
due to the high frequency characteristics of these new digital ballasts and the acoustic resonance created by the electronic ballasts most lamp manufacturers won’t approve operation of their lamps on an electronic ballast…
Click to expand...
this particular informational tidbit hasn't been pertinent in at least 3 years (ie before this ad was written) and AN know this; most lamp manufacturers (including hortilux, ushio and sylvania) have already addressed the issue.

yet another case of AN using outdated and/or misleading information to dupe the consumer dollar. BIG FUCKING surprise there. [/sarcasm]

not to mention, 2 of 3 hydro stores i know won't carry them -- too many defective returns right off the bat.
 
Phaeton

Phaeton

Active Member
I ran a 4000K CMH direct head to head with 4000K sunpulse. Absolutely no difference whatsoever. I bought my first digital ballast (phantom) just so I could run this test. I have 4 CMH's in my main room, the sunpulse is an exact digital replacement.

If this low frequency digital worked properly I could also run the MH's I use for HPS supplement. $20 HPS bulb + $20 MH bulb = $170 Hortilux blue bulb. The only drawback has been the coil and core ballasts. I use them anyway because the light combo grows so well, but digital would certainly simplify setup and cooling.
 
hugetom80s

hugetom80s

Well-Known Member
No one ever said that magnetic ballasts "outperformed" the digital ballasts. Those of us who've actually run both are aware that the high-frequency digital ballasts burn through bulbs much faster than a magnetic ballast does. That's the performance difference they're clearly talking about. And that's what makes a low-frequency digital ballast special: you get the benefit of digital without spending crap-tons on replacement bulbs or the expensive "digital" bulbs.

Phaeton: That crappy 400w made by GE doesn't even qualify as a ballast in my book. If I have to MacGyver it six ways to Sunday just to make it work as a grow ballast it's just not worth the money unless it's free. And 400w is a bit weak. On the one hand you've got a 1000w ballast clearly designed for the grow room, and on the other you've got something... weird.

I think that when Advanced Nutrients talks about their ballast being the first digital they're talking about the output anyway. All the earlier ones put out a sawtooth wave which is basically an analog signal. It's just made by digital circuitry is all. The Baddass outputs a square wave. That's significantly more time spent at maximum voltage which translates to a much higher light output for the same amount of energy.

So your typical digital ballast goes from an analog input to digital circuitry, and puts out a basically analog signal.

This one goes from analog input into digital circuitry and puts out a digital signal.

To me that qualifies it as the first true digital ballast.
 
Motherhugger

Motherhugger

Well-Known Member
Hmm, the way I heard it was that Hydrolux copied the AN technology because they saw just how major a development low frequency square wave ballasts were.

Sounds like jealousy to me.

According to the AN site: Proprietary Square Wave Technology modifies arc shape increasing the effective length and surface area of the arc to produce greater lumens so that lamps burn brighter and longer.

Now that's what ballasts should do, right?
 
hugetom80s

hugetom80s

Well-Known Member
I guess if you can't think of anything to say, just repeat what someone already said and ignore the fact that someone else already pointed out how it was wrong.

Those GE ballasts don't output a digital signal. They use digital electronics to put out the digital version of an analog signal (saw-wave).

The AN ballasts are actually putting out a digital signal - square wave - so if Advanced Nutrients wants to claim they made the first low frequency digital ballast they totally have the right to make that claim.

Uses digital electronics: Check.
Outputs square wave: Check.

That's significantly more "digital" than some cheap saw-wave ballast, and the square-wave is going to put out a significant power improvement simply by not gradually building up to peak voltage and then tapering off. All that time a square wave is building to peak it's putting out less power and it only spends a split second at the peak. That's a waste of power.

Not to mention GE doesn't make anything I would actually bother using to drive lights in my garden. Most of it doesn't even break 100w. Might as well stand there with a flashlight.
 
Motherhugger

Motherhugger

Well-Known Member
Motherhugger said:
Hmm, the way I heard it was that Hydrolux copied the AN technology because they saw just how major a development low frequency square wave ballasts were.

Sounds like jealousy to me.

According to the AN site: Proprietary Square Wave Technology modifies arc shape increasing the effective length and surface area of the arc to produce greater lumens so that lamps burn brighter and longer.

Now that's what ballasts should do, right?
Click to expand...
LOL, I am a douche.

Thankfully, I am still learning and can admit to my mistakes. Even the really dumb ones. I totally said the wrong thing when I was writing this and noticed it today. Hydrolux was the wrong name. That I get for being, um, out of my head a bit then.

It should be Hortilux, so yeah. Ooops.

 
B

bigwood247

Active Member
legallyflying said:
I'm sure the lemmings will flock to this as well. Older magnetic outperforming newer digital ballasts? Says fucking who? More marketing bs from the kings of bs marketing.

I'm sure it's a fine ballast. Revolutionary new technology that is the best of both worlds and will increase yield, prevent nutrient toxicity and generate an electronic field that will kill spider mites? Probably not.

Hopefully it doesn't come in part a and part b that you have to assemble before use. :)
Click to expand...
 
B

bigwood247

Active Member
Lol wow there is a lot more companies using a 2 part base nutes besides advanced sounds like u just have a hard on for advanced nutrients and not their ballests
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top