Replacing skimmer with chaeto?

jda said:
Three types of light took the N and P to zero in their study. They each had the same amount of food to build with - they were each limited in the same way. The ball from the most expensive light weighted more and was larger - true, but tricky and needs explaining. What was in this ball since they all got the same nutrients to build with? What was the difference? Water. That is all. ...but they either were not smart enough to know this (which I doubt) or they left it out since one solution can be purchased for $20 at home depot and another is a product that they sell. Infomercial. I have no venom... these "studies" cost money to make and they need to sell stuff to stay in business. I don't think that they lie, but people need to understand that these are not science. Is the tank away from this whole video different if they said that the Kessil Fuge light grew chaeto with more water in it?

Dr. Holmes-Farley had a nice post of skimmers and metals bound to organics which I wish that I saved a link of. It is true that total organics removed is about 1/3 in total, but these don't enter the N cycle in the same quantity since they have other things bound to them. Nearly all of them get skimmed out since they stick around to get cycled again and again. IIRC, this might have been in a article or thread about Kalk since Kalk is full of impurities that need dealt with. ...ask anybody who turned a skimmer on with copper medication - it all leaves the tank (even one without aragonite for the copper to bind to) in a few days, not just 30%.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the info.

What I learned most in the video was that a strong light on chaeto can increase pH. That goes along with the whole reverse daylight idea we've been taught about for years and years.

I also learned I could spend $20 on a grow light from Amazon and get far better results than a CFL from Home Depot. It actually showed me that the big expensive Kessil isn't needed.
 
jda said:
Three types of light took the N and P to zero in their study. They each had the same amount of food to build with - they were each limited in the same way. The ball from the most expensive light weighted more and was larger - true, but tricky and needs explaining. What was in this ball since they all got the same nutrients to build with? What was the difference? Water. That is all. ...but they either were not smart enough to know this (which I doubt) or they left it out since one solution can be purchased for $20 at home depot and another is a product that they sell. Infomercial. I have no venom... these "studies" cost money to make and they need to sell stuff to stay in business. I don't think that they lie, but people need to understand that these are not science. Is the tank away from this whole video different if they said that the Kessil Fuge light grew chaeto with more water in it?

Dr. Holmes-Farley had a nice post of skimmers and metals bound to organics which I wish that I saved a link of. It is true that total organics removed is about 1/3 in total, but these don't enter the N cycle in the same quantity since they have other things bound to them. Nearly all of them get skimmed out since they stick around to get cycled again and again. IIRC, this might have been in a article or thread about Kalk since Kalk is full of impurities that need dealt with. ...ask anybody who turned a skimmer on with copper medication - it all leaves the tank (even one without aragonite for the copper to bind to) in a few days, not just 30%.
Click to expand...

You need to chill out. They did use a $20 Amazon bulb... And they showed that it was significantly better than a standard bulb, almost as good as the Kessil. And if you don't understand that light intensity and spectrum can have different affects on how something grows, then you're in the wrong hobby my friend...
 
jda said:
Three types of light took the N and P to zero in their study. They each had the same amount of food to build with - they were each limited in the same way. The ball from the most expensive light weighted more and was larger - true, but tricky and needs explaining. What was in this ball since they all got the same nutrients to build with? What was the difference? Water. That is all. ...but they either were not smart enough to know this (which I doubt) or they left it out since one solution can be purchased for $20 at home depot and another is a product that they sell. Infomercial. I have no venom... these "studies" cost money to make and they need to sell stuff to stay in business. I don't think that they lie, but people need to understand that these are not science. Is the tank away from this whole video different if they said that the Kessil Fuge light grew chaeto with more water in it?

Dr. Holmes-Farley had a nice post of skimmers and metals bound to organics which I wish that I saved a link of. It is true that total organics removed is about 1/3 in total, but these don't enter the N cycle in the same quantity since they have other things bound to them. Nearly all of them get skimmed out since they stick around to get cycled again and again. IIRC, this might have been in a article or thread about Kalk since Kalk is full of impurities that need dealt with. ...ask anybody who turned a skimmer on with copper medication - it all leaves the tank (even one without aragonite for the copper to bind to) in a few days, not just 30%.
Click to expand...


+1

BRS is nothing more than a bunch of great salesmen. Not saying that it is good or bad, but always take what they present with a grain of salt and not blindly accept it as gospel. I bet they can sell a chest freezer to an eskimo.
 
Man, if you guys think BRS just pitches and sells in their videos, I'd hate for you to run into a real salesman.

Sure, they present items and talk them up but that hardly counts as a sales pitch to me. I do come from a sales heavy background between retail and phone sales though. Their "sales" pitch wouldn't make it one week in a true sales environment.
 
I think the videos/experiments that BRS does are useful; just take them with a grain of salt because they fail scientific rigor on most fronts. No better no worse than an experiment you or I might run.
 
no offense meant to salespeople.
just an age old adage, caveat emptor.

going back to original topic. one or the other or both will work if done right. so I guess all answers are correct.
 
rtparty said:
Man, if you guys think BRS just pitches and sells in their videos, I'd hate for you to run into a real salesman.

Sure, they present items and talk them up but that hardly counts as a sales pitch to me. I do come from a sales heavy background between retail and phone sales though. Their "sales" pitch wouldn't make it one week in a true sales environment.
Click to expand...

As a professional salesperson, I'd assume you're aware that there are multiple types of pitches, from the high pressure style you're talking about to a lower-pressure, more subtle approach disguised as an attempt at giving advice, which is what I think the person you quoted was clearly hinting at.
 
mcgyvr said:
Some interesting articles here..
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/rs/feature/index.php
going along with this default reading material..
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-08/rhf/index.php
Click to expand...

You should stop posting articles. If there is no video, nobody will bother to learn about it...especially if there is math and charts and stuff. :)

These are not salespeople. It would be better if they were - everybody understands them. They disguise themselves as your friends and tell you only part of the truth. I explained to a guy the other day that there is anoxic bacteria in the tank that converts NO3 to N gas - he sent me a PM offering thanks for something that he did not know in two years of reefing and literally asked me why BRS did not make a video about it. I wrote him back and said that patience and bacteria does not sell products and would probably do the exact opposite.

ktown - your skimmer and chaeto go after different things. Having Chaeto does not have any affect whatsoever on your skimmer. None. If you skimmer does not work, then it is for other reasons. Thanks for letting me know that I am in the wrong hobby, though.
 
If you see the info provided in BRS's videos as a sales pitch, that's truly on you.

I look at the info provided and make my own decisions. Of course, that isn't just for this hobby though. I tell every salesman I deal with it's their job to not screw up the deal, because I've already made my mind up.

So if you're easily persuaded or sold, I can see how some information can seem like a sales pitch.
 
The people who know the least are the ones most easily persuaded and sold... and they need the whole truth more than anybody else. It is all too easy to say this to somebody who knows what they are doing already and wash your hands clean while the unknowing don't learn any more about what they do not know.
 
rtparty said:
If you see the info provided in BRS's videos as a sales pitch, that's truly on you.

I look at the info provided and make my own decisions. Of course, that isn't just for this hobby though. I tell every salesman I deal with it's their job to not screw up the deal, because I've already made my mind up.

So if you're easily persuaded or sold, I can see how some information can seem like a sales pitch.
Click to expand...

I'm not taking sides with respect to BRS. I'm just pointing out that there are more than one type of sales pitch. In other words, just because an informational video doesn't fit the profile you've experienced in your career doesn't mean it's not a sales pitch. Some people get turned off by hard sells and pushy salesmen, hence some organizations take softer approaches and/or hide sales pitches inside informational sharing activities, like these videos.

In the end, BRS is a business. EVERYTHING they do, directly or indirectly, is a sales pitch. They're not sharing info because they're nice, they're doing it to help them stay in business. By getting people to buy things. Hence, it's a sales pitch.
 
d0ughb0y said:
no offense meant to salespeople.
just an age old adage, caveat emptor.
Click to expand...

Oh no, you can't just walk away from these crazy claims. Those BRS videos are extraordinarily useful and to claim they are a "sales" pitch in disguise is disingenuous at best. Did you even watch it? And are you guys implying that they *shouldn't* include the best available "fuge" light on the market in their FUGE test??? If anything, that video showed that the Kessil light *isn't* worth it -- as their results clearly demonstrated that a $20 plant bulb on Amazon works exceptionally well. Heck, even a clamp-on bulb worked extremely well.

I don't mean to harp on you, but these posts sit around for a long time and for posterity I think it's important to debunk your wild claims (and jda's). 10 years from now, anyone that reads what you guys wrote in here and uses it to dismiss these videos is getting bad advice, straight up.
 
Any informational video published by a company that sells products will potentially be increasing or decreasing sales/improving company awareness and brand recognition/etc.. Intentional or not..Plain and simple..

No one here can state with facts if that is the greatest reason for their videos or not..
It would be silly to think they are solely doing that out of the goodness of their hearts though... The fact that their company name/logo,etc.. is used in that video is proof that there is some intentional sales pitch aspect to that..

Their videos while maybe not backed in 100% scientific facts on occasion are presented in a way that is not only educational on some level but also some what entertaining..
When you use entertainment along with education you reach the greatest audience..

Very few want to sit through a scientific article written for ones peers.. Most of them are very dry/boring,etc... as they are there to just state facts (or what they have perceived to be facts) and there is little "entertainment" in them..
Charts/math with little else are boring as can be to most..

The BRS videos are fine... There is a sales aspect to them just as there is an informational aspect to them..
Let it go people..
We all have opinions.. We are all guilty of stating opinions that are not 100% factual..

You might think your skimmer is useless if you have macro algae...
One might think you can't grow corals on LED..
Opinions... humans... welcome to life..
 
rtparty said:
How so?

They both do the same thing in the end: remove nutrients. I'd bet chaeto outperforms a skimmer in this regard even.

Problem with most systems is they don't run enough or large enough refugium sections.

Bulk Reef Supply has some awesome videos on chaeto. I recommend watching them
Click to expand...

my question is if that is your thoughts in the first place why even ask the question? They do different things you can not really compare them... yes they both remove waste but in different ways. That is like saying a Orange and a Pineapple are the same because they are both fruits.
Also most sumps actually have decent sized Refugium sections I know mine did take up at least 35-45% of my sump

Also how on earth do we go from the functions of Cheeto and Skimmers to sales pitches and Online tested with skewed result :lmao::lmao::lmao:

And no I do not mean to hate
 
Last edited:
Excessive dissolved organics are a potential problem in and of themselves in some systems. These systems are usually newer ones lacking a dense population of mature corals, sponges, and other organisms that consume dissolved organics. For example, IME, cyanobacteria and possibly dino's are often associated with elevated dissolved organic levels. These organisms can use the N & P bound in the organics and get out of hand quickly when the conditions are right... even when N&P testing shows low or even nonexistent levels.

I believe both a skimmer to limit the dissolved organic levels and some inorganic N & P binding using (turf or macro) algae are desirable. If forced to use only one I'd choose a quality skimmer unless the system was very mature.
 
ktownhero said:
Oh no, you can't just walk away from these crazy claims. Those BRS videos are extraordinarily useful and to claim they are a "sales" pitch in disguise is disingenuous at best. Did you even watch it? And are you guys implying that they *shouldn't* include the best available "fuge" light on the market in their FUGE test??? If anything, that video showed that the Kessil light *isn't* worth it -- as their results clearly demonstrated that a $20 plant bulb on Amazon works exceptionally well. Heck, even a clamp-on bulb worked extremely well.

I don't mean to harp on you, but these posts sit around for a long time and for posterity I think it's important to debunk your wild claims (and jda's). 10 years from now, anyone that reads what you guys wrote in here and uses it to dismiss these videos is getting bad advice, straight up.
Click to expand...

^^^ lmao

it works since you believed everything. lol.
 
BRS is becoming a true leader in our hobby and I think it upsets some who wish it to not be a big retail store doing so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sohal Tang Tim
Eshopps Nano Skimmer
Replies
0
Views
172
Sohal Tang Tim
Sohal Tang Tim
M
Aquascape Opinions on 55gal mixed reef
Replies
7
Views
273
Reefing102
Reefing102
F
Chaeto with low phospate
Replies
2
Views
372
Fraz__
F
J
LED fixture lighting help (replacing old T5 HO)
Replies
5
Views
186
griss
griss
C
New Protein Skimmer
Replies
6
Views
526
griss
griss
Back
Top