Ballasts: Digital vs. Magnetic

[Hawk]

I recently got a visit from my cable company due to the interference created by a 1000w 2009 model Lumatek. The brand new switchable "superlumens" kind. The one that is supposed to be fixed... Rrrrrright.

Was told the noise coming from my house was affecting service in the neighborhood, and had to talk my way out of them coming to the house to check all the connections.

The ballast worked great, but after hearing all their BS about how they resolved the interference problem with the 1k models, and finding out the hard way that was not the case, I can only recommend my peers avoid them.

Problem instantly gone when I went back to my old magnetic ballast. Totally sure it was the cause of the issue. Now I will have to buy another magnetic when I do my upgrade, rather than use the new Lumatek as I had intended. 350 bucks down the drain, as I can't sell it with a clear conscience, and wouldn't get all my money back anyways since it has been used a couple of months.

Seriously, go magnetic and never wonder if you made the right choice. 5% additional efficiency or whatever it works out to is just not worth the security risk.

I take it there were no signs of interference you were able to observe?

 

[LolaGal]

I'm running both kinds right now, magnetic and digital.

Digital is quieter, cooler, I like the weight best of all. Digital is also brighter, more lumens from the same bulb.

I will keep running the magnetic ones, since I have them already, but plan on buying digital in the future.

 

[Mr. Bongjangles]

I take it there were no signs of interference you were able to observe?

I did notice my internet going out for a few minutes at a time, starting like 3-4 days before I heard from the cable people. Would only happen a couple times a night, and I assumed it was just trouble on the isp's end. I am still not 100% certain it was related, but it was abnormal, as I would usually need to reset the cable modem if the internet ever went out, but in this case it would be out and come back on its own. Given the timing and the abnormal nature of the problem, it would be a hell of a coincidence.

Wireless internet was OK at those same times. Don't really have anything else in the house subject to interference.

This was after a month or so of trouble-free running though.

I don't know if it was always making this interference and something changed on the cable network making it an issue, or if it began producing it suddenly after a month of use, but I don't see either case as acceptable.

 

[ashland]

yeah me too

yeah me too

Wow, this sums up my experience perfectly; my thoughts exactly

I think my digital balast is cooler and quiet , startup is much better faster

 

[PastorJ]

I agree

I agree

I think my digital balast is cooler and quiet , startup is much better faster

I had the same results & I swear I noticed a difference with the super lumans switch. could be just me.

 

[delta9nxs]

rf interference is a weird thing. i once installed a pa system in a church ( i worked for the company that sold it ) and we get a call the next sunday. the pa system was picking up cb radio traffic from the interstate about a mile away. some pretty choice language. we went out to check it and couldn't figure out how it was happening so the engineer had us rip out all the wires and rewire it using different lengths. it stopped. apparently one of the wires was acting as an antenna.

i use magnetic ballast, 10 different ones over the years and have never had one fail. i run hortilux and have never had a bulb failure by the time i replace them once a year.

i wouldn't mind checking out a digital but i'll wait till one of my magnetic ones breaks.

 

[SweetIndica2]

Your choice

More light, no noise, hardly any heat,

you can screw them to a wall

or noisy, lots of heat

needs a proper shelf or elaborate hanging etc

less light..

did i mention heat and noise?

i just like to add. do NOT buy Lumatek unless you enjoy replacing ballasts

iv only experience with the 1000's mind you....

Iv only got a few quantums and as of yet no problems but they are fairly new,

iv got lots of industrial electronics ballasts, they have been solid, though now the quantum's are out i would probably pay the few $ extra and get them purely for the guarantee

Peace

I have seen several tests/threads on here where people have come to the conclusion that Digital ballasts are not any more efficient than a magnetic ballasts, atleast not any noticeable difference. Infact, from what i remember some of the digital ballasts did the exact opposite. This was a few years ago, so i'm sure digital ballasts have improved but most of it is marketing bullshit. They can be slightly quieter and cooler, but the difference isn't that noticeable unless you are buying a cheap magnetic ballast. There is a big difference in quality between cheap magnetic ballasts and more expensive ones.

For now, i am fine with my Hydrofarm Powerhouse magnetic ballast (1000W). It's high quality, runs cool and quiet compared to most magnetic ballasts, and it came with a 10 year warranty which is the best i have found.

I will probably buy a few 600W E-Ballasts eventually, but for now i still think alot of the E-Ballasts have kinks that need to be worked out.

 

[Haps]

I can not answer your poll, as I do not qualify, because I would never spend money on a digital ballast. They are mostly fine, but have multiple failure scenarios, so I can not give them a reliable rating as a class of equipment.
H

 

[Kcar]

So my buddy works for the cable company and was over here one day.
I asked him to check for interference, and he was all to happy to oblige.
600 watt Lumatek (purple - no SuperLumens)

Anyway, no interference at all until he put his RF checker within 6 inches of the ballast. And minimal at that. It did go way up when actually touching the ballast.

So thats my take on that.

 

[Lazyman]

Digital ballasts, as they put out 10% more light with the same bulb/hoods and same power. Why waste lumens?

 

[iron code monke]

CMH bulbs only work with Magnetic ballasts. I have a Lumatek ballast, but if I had to choose again, I would pick magnetic + CMH.

 

[gonzo`]

I've just switched to digital ballasts and I don't see a reason not to buy them. They're a better technology.

Fact - The bulb reaches full brightness within minutes, compare this to a magnetic ballast.

Fact - They're extremely light compared to a magnetic ballast; they're silent and they emit virtually no heat.

Fact - There is less of a spike in the initial startup so you don't HAVE to use a contact relay with your timer.

Fact - The ballast's efficiency won't degrade over time like a mangetic one (i.e. using more and more electricity to power your bulb the older the magnetic ballast becomes). This is important because you're digital ballast is always going to be 100% efficient...

The RF interference is not an issue with mine. You can simply use a radio to check if there are any issues...

Go for the digital, forget about all the promises of more lumens blah blah... plants only care about PAR, not lumens. All you're buying is a more advanced and efficient piece technology.

Why not?

 

[GeorgeSmiley]

Which ballast did you get?

I've just switched to digital ballasts and I don't see a reason not to buy them. They're a better technology.

Fact - The bulb reaches full brightness within minutes, compare this to a magnetic ballast.

Fact - They're extremely light compared to a magnetic ballast; they're silent and they emit virtually no heat.

Fact - There is less of a spike in the initial startup so you don't HAVE to use a contact relay with your timer.

Fact - The ballast's efficiency won't degrade over time like a mangetic one (i.e. using more and more electricity to power your bulb the older the magnetic ballast becomes). This is important because you're digital ballast is always going to be 100% efficient...

The RF interference is not an issue with mine. You can simply use a radio to check if there are any issues...

Go for the digital, forget about all the promises of more lumens blah blah... plants only care about PAR, not lumens. All you're buying is a more advanced and efficient piece technology.

Why not?

 

[HossCartwright]

option C
I'd purchase a Galaxy Select-A-Watt for $325 shipped online at botanical! I've never tried one but they seem pretty badass. Last ballast you will ever need if it does what it says. 5 year warranty, why not?

 

[gonzo`]

To be honest what ballast I got is irrelevant. Just get a guarantee, the technology is all pretty much the same.

 

[YoungBud]

Ill buy digis in a year when there more perfected for now my 1000w mag Does the job like no other..

 

[Bush Dr]

I've tried a few digital ballasts over the last year, none have blown any bulbs, all run cool enough to handle, they light up in seconds without the drama of hearing the igniter go off with a loud noise and the plates in the ballast getting a thorough shaking as the first pulse surges through

I prefer the Quantum and most of the new Chinese Lightwave/HortiPro ballasts to the Lumatek, they have no 'overdrive' switch and are just solid industrial units, built like a tank (I'm clumsy so one has been dropped, had a mason jar dropped and smashed on it and had me stand on it, thinking it was the brick next to it)

Worst I had with magnetic ballasts was when the transformers finally gave out and shorted internally, two were burned so badly the cable had to be cut off both ends .......

Growell did a study and this is the result here the pdf showing costs increasing with a magnetics age are interesting

Good Growing
BD:joint

 

[Towlie1]

Mag all the way
In 2.5 years 3 out of 4 Lumacrap dead 2 600 and 1 400 cooked dont trust them any more. safety ? imo.
1 Mag same age and replaced dead lumacrap w mag. now am a happy camper.
The 1 400 lumacrap hasnt died yet now sits on a metal shelf away frow combustables.

I vote 3 times for mag but only 1 counts

 

[SweetIndica2]

I've just switched to digital ballasts and I don't see a reason not to buy them. They're a better technology.

Fact - The bulb reaches full brightness within minutes, compare this to a magnetic ballast.

Fact - They're extremely light compared to a magnetic ballast; they're silent and they emit virtually no heat.

Fact - There is less of a spike in the initial startup so you don't HAVE to use a contact relay with your timer.

Fact - The ballast's efficiency won't degrade over time like a mangetic one (i.e. using more and more electricity to power your bulb the older the magnetic ballast becomes). This is important because you're digital ballast is always going to be 100% efficient...

The RF interference is not an issue with mine. You can simply use a radio to check if there are any issues...

Go for the digital, forget about all the promises of more lumens blah blah... plants only care about PAR, not lumens. All you're buying is a more advanced and efficient piece technology.

Why not?

I agree with some of your points, but My Magnetic ballast reaches full brightness within a few minutes as well. And Digital Ballasts can't degrade? Do you have an article on that or something? I have never heard that, infact i remember alot of people were complaining that Digital Ballasts have short warranties because they are prone to malfunction and people were ending up with non-working ballasts only a few months after they bought them. My Magnetic came with a 10 year warranty, way longer than any Digital Ballast to my knowledge.

 

[NotaProfessor]

I own 2 Future-Brite digitals: a 1KW and a 400W. When I bought ballasts I wanted versatility, and although there are switchable mag ballasts available, these digitals were purchased for even less secondhand.

They work with both HPS and MH bulbs. Very quiet, very cool operation.

The only negative I can note is they seem to throw off a lot of RF interference, i.e. I can't listen to AM radio. Since I don't listen to AM it's no loss, really.