Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

There's something off about LED bulbs

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 966 posts

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#661

Post by mjx0 »

jchw wrote: post #305
jghn wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big problem for me is, as a consumer, how do I know that brand X is producing quality bulbs that'll last a long time? I'm very happy to pay more for that. How does one sift through marketing to get to actual quality? And then how do I know that they stick with the high quality approach? What happens when a brand decides to rest on the laurels of their brand name and start slipping in lower quality parts?

Some bulbs will give you information on their CRI which ideally should be required to be labeled on the bulbs packaging the way calorie information is required on food packaging (but I don't think it is.) That will tell you roughly how good the quality of the light is by proxy of the spectrum of light it covers. On the other hand, there is no equivalent afaik for knowing how well the power supply is designed or how h…

bigclivedotcom, aka the Consumer Reports of electronics that catch on fire and/or perform miracles.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#662

Post by seanp2k2 »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #228
tomatotomato37 wrote: post #150

I hate how many of these things aren't limits of the technology but rather the result of cost optimization and general apathy towards the customer. We know how to mass-produce quality LEDs to the point entire TVs are made of the things. We know how to mass-produce rectifiers pretty much ever since diodes existed. We know how to cool mass-produced objects in compact spaces. But because we apparently can't have nice th…

You can go buy high CRI, high quality bulbs right now. Nothing is stopping you. Here is one common vendor: https://store.waveformlighting.com/collections/a19-bulbs/ The issue isn’t that MBAs have cost reduced bulbs for no reason. The issue is that 95% of consumers will only choose the cheap bulbs, period. As a result, that’s what gets produced at scale. > We know how to mass-produce quality LEDs to the point entire T…

The "VIVID" line by SORAA are also high-quality high-CRI LEDs with good cooling solutions, and they're available in things like MR16 GU10 for desk lamps with the "weird" bulbs with two little prongs. I got a cheap GU10 desk clamp lamp on Amazon and spent twice as much as the lamp itself (which came with a functional bulb) on the nicer bulb. The exact model was SM16GA-09-60D-930-03 if anyone is curious -- fabulous super-bright desk lamp that is very flood-y and covers a large area with a very small lamp head.

But yeah, explaining to normal folks that they need $30-$60 lightbulbs for every fixture in their home is basically a non-starter, but for me, I use this lamp every day and it should last a decade or more, so the value prop isn't bad, especially compared to spending $500 or so on something like a Humanscale "nice" desk lamp, which technically has much worse CRI and much lower output.

We recently built our home and went with WAC recessed lighting in all the main areas, which was about a $15k premium over just using what the contractor wanted to use, involved a lighting design company (that was also purchased the fixtures from), and took a dozen+ hours of our time and input, but I think it was worth it in the grand scheme of how much we spent. I personally can't stand hanging out at peoples houses where they have mismatched lights or just very poor lighting; it kills any interior design niceties and makes you really realize how much lighting affects the general feeling of indoor spaces.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#663

Post by [deleted] »

aardvarkr wrote: post #47
formerly_proven wrote: post #24

There's a lot wrong with LEDs in general and retrofit (E27 bulbs) in particular. In no particular order - LED emitters driven hard for cost reasons, age and fail quickly - Power supplies driven hard for cost reasons, age and fail quickly - Poor CRI and SSRI - Flickering - Dim-to-warm is uncommon - Poorly designed power supplies that age and fail quickly - The same light quality is vastly more expensive to achieve wit…

What’s an example of what you consider to be a high quality led? I’m pretty happy with everything that I have in my home but I’m curious what you’re talking about

[deleted]

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#664

Post by Tarball10 »

garaetjjte wrote: post #629
Tarball10 wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California's JA8 certification requires LED bulbs to meet specific criteria related to efficiency, lifespan, and light quality. - Efficiency >= 45 lumens per watt - CRI >= 90 - R9 Color Rendering value >= 50 - Rated life >= 15000 hours - Minimum dimming level - Flicker Theoretically if a bulb is listed as JA8 compliant (and the certification isn't fake) you know it at least meets these thresholds.

What does it mean to specify flicker in percents?

> Light source in combination with specified control shall provide “reduced flicker operation” when tested at full light output as specified in JA10, where reduced flicker operation is defined as having percent amplitude modulation (percent flicker) less than 30 percent at frequencies less than 200Hz.

https://energycodeace.com/site/custom/public/reference-ace-2...

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#665

Post by pixiemaster »

fsckboy wrote: post #652
aimor wrote: post #633

Some people seem to have different memories than I do of what it was like buying lightbulbs before LEDs came out. I remember incandescents also having a variety of color quality, lifespan, and decorative options. I remember having the choice between bargain bin bulbs and luxurious options, making sure to outfit a room with a single brand so everything looked the same, realizing it's more difficult to read with this o…

I do have different memories than you about buying lightbulbs. I remember thinking 60-watt bulbs are frustratingly dim, 75 watt bulbs are a minimum, but what I really wanted every time was a 100 watt bulb, it just improves visual acuity tremendously. And my frustration with LED and flourescents, etc is that I can't find the equivalent of my good old 100 watt bulb; whatever the new rating systems are, it's all an excu…

i had a similar view, until i found COB LED stripes (with dimmers), with 20W per m (LED W, not equivalent, i have mounted a few of those 3-10m (!), and now can have dimmed 1% background lights and hospital style brightness as well.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#668

Post by gcr »

zajio1am wrote: post #509
jghn wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big problem for me is, as a consumer, how do I know that brand X is producing quality bulbs that'll last a long time? I'm very happy to pay more for that. How does one sift through marketing to get to actual quality? And then how do I know that they stick with the high quality approach? What happens when a brand decides to rest on the laurels of their brand name and start slipping in lower quality parts?

> The big problem for me is, as a consumer, how do I know that brand X is producing quality bulbs that'll last a long time? I'm very happy to pay more for that. How does one sift through marketing to get to actual quality? There is simple heuristic - all LED bulbs are bad. They generally have insufficient heatsink and unreplaceable PSU immediately next to LEDs. Better are LED tubes (with T12 interface, as a replaceme…

Technology Connections has a great video about exactly this! https://youtu.be/fsIFxyOLJXM?t=843

At the end of the day, the author recommends giving filament-style LED bulbs a try, where the emitter is built onto a thin filament away from the circuit housing so it's far away from the heat.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#669

Post by droopyEyelids »

xxs wrote: post #541
formerly_proven wrote: post #24

There's a lot wrong with LEDs in general and retrofit (E27 bulbs) in particular. In no particular order - LED emitters driven hard for cost reasons, age and fail quickly - Power supplies driven hard for cost reasons, age and fail quickly - Poor CRI and SSRI - Flickering - Dim-to-warm is uncommon - Poorly designed power supplies that age and fail quickly - The same light quality is vastly more expensive to achieve wit…

The same topic about LEDs has so many entries on HN in the recent years. I have posted about it a lot. To add to the list - low power factor (usually 50%). - cheap passives, caps/coils - terrible heat dissipation, e27/e14 are no good target, but see overdriven again - close to no input protection (see power supplies, again), so motors totally wreck them with their induction kickback OTOH, constant (not over)driven LE…

We're mostly on the same page, but there are some caveats to buying the heavier bulbs, even assuming the weight is all heat sink- because that won't matter if the heated air has no where to go!

An expensive bulb with a nice heat sink will fail just as quickly as a cheap one when you put it in a well-sealed can light or something else that traps all the hot air.

Re: There's something off about LED bulbs

#670

Post by lightedman »

Maursault wrote: post #631
xxs wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

incandescent light bulbs efficiency increases with their temperature/current. At low enough current they will last long enough but waste a lot energy as well. You can dim them, and provide a slow start to prevent the inrush current (which is like 10times more than nominal with tungsten resistance increasing due so high 2500K temps).

Thankfully, LED lighting will probably be gone within 20 years, while incandescent will be coming back more efficient than LED could dream. Already bumping up against theoretical maximum efficiency, LED lighting can't get any more efficient, and the better LED is at color rendition, the less efficient it is. But there are vast amounts of improvement available for incandescent lighting, and a group at MIT has already…

That incandescent cant reach the theoretical 40%, at the color temp/physical temp needed, the tungsten filament would melt.
Post reply on HN