Yea but what about the quality of led vs HID. As in the bud quality. Doesn't new tech led just lack in most instances that you've seen?
I think of two different genres of leds from what is implied. The older type leds when blurple was around and the new type leds that seem to be more about quantum boards, strips and cobs with ''white light''. I'd also put cmh in the new tech bracket too, although it isn't led. A while back it was way too expensive so it has only properly caught on with the average grower the last few year once the prices became justifiable. Prior to that I seen a single cmh se/fixture selling for around $1400.. a joke.
Everything I read on blurples and of that time frame was very bad so I am not talking about that type of led. Maybe some good leds of that time existed I don't know. So if I say led I refer to the new types, like cob and Qboards (unless somebody corrects me on that terminology).
The new tech do a good job. They don't have the depth of 1k hps but they have the spread so they can effectively cover a wider area with the same W while a 1k hps could not (although some of the Qboards are way too big and focus too much light, bad idea imo). If the difference in canopy style between hps/led isn't taken into account and catered for then you will reach a false conclusion that hps is vastly superior. I did also read a few things on qb boards alone not being the most optimal, but again I don't know how much of that was down to bad fixture size, growing style etc.. difficult to know since a lot of info is subjective. I have never seen anything bad written about cobs, but that isn't to say they are better than Qboards, I suspect it's those big Qboards that people are having issues with, not the small ones. But I could well be wrong.
The quality of the new tech is very good, some say better than hps due to environment being easier to control, some say the same. You should also factor in that the new lights don't degrade near as fast like cheap hps bulbs or lack of renewal of the hps bulbs (how many hps users do you think use expensive bulbs and change out on schedule?) so the new tech adds to consistent quality in that way, but admittedly that's a weaker argument point. Worse case at the least, the new led are just as good as hps in quality if done right. Peoples opinion of yield differ, but mostly down to applying hps growing style to led and comming up short, so it's a tricky road to go down for objectivity. If you only have a 4x4 space an argument can be made to use a 1k to maximise width length and also depth. But an argument could be made to use the 4x4 space as a 3x3 with over head led and then also use side lighting led to increase canopy surface area to suite leds strong point.
People suggest that cmh has the best spectrum (although lower efficiency than led) but also has uv, so in theory mixing new led with cmh will offer the best results, the cmh bulbs I ''guess'' will also add a little more depth than led. Unfortunately I've read that the level of uv cmh gives off is not enough for a significant quality increase. So the question for me is if the spectrum of cmh is good enough to justify using it over the losses in efficiency/spread you take over not using more of the new leds in place. Since some people do say the new leds lack in some way (personally I don't see it) having the cmh there is a safe bet, but also an irrational bias attachment. I'd still use a mix of cmh even it it is worse than using all leds, at-least to a point.
If you run the same strain it's difficult to notice any quality shifts in mixing cmh with new leds, although I'd say more frost but that could be bias wishes. However the difference between hps and the new leds is noticeable. As in, how much more often you end up cleaning scissors and more visible frost. That alone I suppose is not proof, but If you yield the same as hps yet have more resin then who would blame a person for drawing a conclusion from that.
I don't think hps is far behind if at all, but to get the most out of it in efficiency, yield and quality takes a hell of a lot of skill and effort (that includes considering things like vertical cage growing). Objectively on paper that's fine, but in reality, having to do all that isn't easy or even possible for a hell of a lot of growers. They will consistently do better with led as it's easier to keep plants happy.. so long as you don't treat the tech like hps.
