need a suggestion for a high end filter system

louiedapup · 10/09/2008, 12:55 PM

I have been looking to set up a fish only tank. I do not want to clutter the tank with alot of live rock. I was thinking of a few large coral skeletons and alot of room for a Humma Humma trigger and maybe a friend depending on the tank. I am looking for a top of the line filter system to go in a sump (or actually the sump) Need a skimmer and would like a nitrate filter. Does anyone have any suggestions for a really top of the line system that can make do without live rock. I really like the look of Schuran filter systems but cannot find a US retailer. Any other suggestions would be great

Michael · 10/09/2008, 01:00 PM

personally louie i think your making a mistake, live rock can look fantastic even in fish only aquaria, it benefits the whole system and looks natural, you can place it and still leave lots of swimming space, avoid filters imo, in saying that paul b uses a under gravel and his tank is 35 years old, still in saying that id avoid filters and use live rock and flow, whether fish only or reef

A sea K · 10/09/2008, 01:17 PM

Bubble King Supermarin 300 should do the trick.

The ultimate Supa Poopa Remova.

Playa-1 · 10/09/2008, 01:23 PM

I would think a better route to go would be to run a sump/fuge with the most or all of the liverock in the sump fuge. This would free up the space that your looking for and also allow you to be able to run a fuge with macro-algae. You can run a filter sock to help keep particulates to a minimum. You could add some type of a denitrator if it were necessary. I would expect this type of a setup to be relatively low maintenance. Changing out the filter sock a couple times per week would take a couple of minutes.

Since you wouldn't be concerned about the looks of it, You could get the least expensive liverock you could find. Probably $1 per pound.

Michael · 10/09/2008, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Playa-1
I would think a better route to go would be to run a sump/fuge with the most or all of the liverock in the sump fuge. This would free up the space that your looking for and also allow you to be able to run a fuge with macro-algae. You can run a filter sock to help keep particulates to a minimum. You could add some type of a denitrator if it were necessary. I would expect this type of a setup to be relatively low maintenance. Changing out the filter sock a couple times per week would take a couple of minutes.

Since you wouldn't be concerned about the looks of it, You could get the least expensive liverock you could find. Probably $1 per pound.

yep ur right, thats a good idea playa

louiedapup · 10/09/2008, 02:01 PM

Hmmm. I always understood the reason for the live rock was the nitrate removing function. Does live rock actually break down ammonia better than a large biowheel type of filter? If I then use the Denitrator to break down the nitrate then wouldn't that accomplish the same thing? or probably better? I am looing to keep a tank with the highest quality of water and basically no algea growth.

I was just at the Atlanta Aquarium (They said the largest in the world) They had some huge impressive displays and I saw their filtration systems and they had nothing to do with live rock. massive skimmer, boiler looking things and such (no idea really) but they had 3 Whale Sharks and maybe 5,000 other fish in the same main tank. So I know you don't need live rock. I am not trying to buck the system and want to make sure my tank is successful and thankful for all the suggestions.

I would really like to hear from someone that if you buy the right equipment can it do as good or better than live rock? I know alot of people who skip LR are doing it because it costs alot and they try subpar cheaper filters. I am thinking on spending alot more on my filtration system than the cost of live rock.

Thanks mucho

Michael · 10/09/2008, 02:07 PM

back in the eighties livestock was hard to keep alive, certain reefers with vast experience could and did succeed, but most of the normal everyday reefers had little success, since the discovery of live rock and flow its easier than ever to maintain salt water aquaria, hence my enthusiasm for live rock, im sure the alanta aquarium uses hundreds of gallons of fresh sea water every day to maintain their aquarium livestock, you may hear from some guys who do ok with out it(liverock) but unlikely to find anyone who does better without it than with it, still good luck

Mark · 10/09/2008, 02:17 PM

The tank with whale sharks is filtered the way it is due to scale. In a home fish tank, the scale is much smaller. If I were to set up a fish only tank with triggers(messy eaters), I would oversize my skimmer, and include a refugium/macroalgae sump. I would also use live rock as decoration and filtration. To be honest, I would set it up like a reef, but without the high-wattage lighting and reactors. If these fish are your pets, why not give them conditions that are clean enough for a reef?

They will thrive much more than in a conventional marine tank, and live for many years to thank you.

stingythingy45 · 10/09/2008, 02:23 PM

You could always go with a basement sump/refugium with the LR and a remote deep sand bed hidden in a fish room.Along with a nice oversized skimmer.

seapug · 10/09/2008, 03:28 PM

The Atlanta Aquarium has had some issues with it's large tanks. A couple of those whale sharks have even kicked the bucket. If you want a tank with minimal live rock, Playa 1 had a good suggestion. I'd still recommend some rocks in the tank as well. If nothing else, it will at least give the fish some sense of a natural setting and give them something to do. IMO, there's nothing worse than an empty tank with fish swimming in circles or pacing the glass like mental patients.

Bonneville08 · 10/09/2008, 07:36 PM

Hi Louie,
You've gotten a lot of good advice, and at the least I would suggest enough structure so that your fish feel secure. Other than that, a good wet/dry, protein skimmer, reactor with GFO, and a sulfur denitrator should do the trick for water quality along with water changes and detritus removal. I would also suggest using DI water for making seawater and for evaporative make up. These approaches are usually not considered kosher with reefers but are effective.
Good luck

Playa-1 · 10/09/2008, 09:58 PM

Hmmm. I always understood the reason for the live rock was the nitrate removing function. Does live rock actually break down ammonia better than a large biowheel type of filter? If I then use the Denitrator to break down the nitrate then wouldn't that accomplish the same thing? or probably better? I am looing to keep a tank with the highest quality of water and basically no algea growth.

The liverock is very porous and provides lots of surface area for bacteria to colonize. This bacteria that thrives on the liverock is very efficient at converting Ammonia to nitrites and then there will be other bacteria that breaks down the nitrites to nitrates. The nitrates will also be processed but not as efficiently. Regular water changes and macro-algae will help to physically export excess nitrates. If your bioload is such that the liverock, macro-algae and regular water changes are not keeping up with the nitrate load then you may consider adding a denitrator.

louiedapup · 10/10/2008, 07:18 AM

Thanks for all the advice. I do not have the ability to set up a sump/tank in another room. I will have a sump under the tank though of course.

Thanks for all the suggestions and I will play around with some ideas and let you all know how it goes.

rogergolf66 · 10/10/2008, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Playa-1
I would think a better route to go would be to run a sump/fuge with the most or all of the liverock in the sump fuge. This would free up the space that your looking for and also allow you to be able to run a fuge with macro-algae. You can run a filter sock to help keep particulates to a minimum. You could add some type of a denitrator if it were necessary. I would expect this type of a setup to be relatively low maintenance. Changing out the filter sock a couple times per week would take a couple of minutes.

Since you wouldn't be concerned about the looks of it, You could get the least expensive liverock you could find. Probably $1 per pound.

That is what I was going to say also. I would consider a RDSB instead of a nitrate filter.

Roger

10/09/2008, 12:55 PM	#1
louiedapup Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 17	need a suggestion for a high end filter system I have been looking to set up a fish only tank. I do not want to clutter the tank with alot of live rock. I was thinking of a few large coral skeletons and alot of room for a Humma Humma trigger and maybe a friend depending on the tank. I am looking for a top of the line filter system to go in a sump (or actually the sump) Need a skimmer and would like a nitrate filter. Does anyone have any suggestions for a really top of the line system that can make do without live rock. I really like the look of Schuran filter systems but cannot find a US retailer. Any other suggestions would be great

10/09/2008, 01:00 PM	#2
Michael NTTH Rookie Help Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Gloucester, England,UK Posts: 7,808 Blog Entries: 6	personally louie i think your making a mistake, live rock can look fantastic even in fish only aquaria, it benefits the whole system and looks natural, you can place it and still leave lots of swimming space, avoid filters imo, in saying that paul b uses a under gravel and his tank is 35 years old, still in saying that id avoid filters and use live rock and flow, whether fish only or reef __________________ Don't be afraid to ask questions, we in the new to the hobby are here to help you [For My Tank Spec,Photo Album,Articles and website, click on my name] MY Very Kindest and Warmest Regards , MIKE Current Tank Info: I have a 92 gal Corner Tank, and way too many pieces of equipment to list really, (proud member of the reef central corner club)

10/09/2008, 01:17 PM	#3
A sea K Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Branford Fl Posts: 3,024	Bubble King Supermarin 300 should do the trick. The ultimate Supa Poopa Remova. __________________ I am not a pro so excuse me if I'm wrong. Current Tank Info: 30gal Deep Blue rimless 9/10/2014, 80gal Deep Blue rimless 40gal sump/refugium 9/11/16 LPS reef, 2 x Kessil A160 with a single Maxspect Razor, RO Prime 150INT skimmer, Sicce 3 return pump, Vortech MP40 and MP10

10/09/2008, 02:07 PM	#7
Michael NTTH Rookie Help Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Gloucester, England,UK Posts: 7,808 Blog Entries: 6	back in the eighties livestock was hard to keep alive, certain reefers with vast experience could and did succeed, but most of the normal everyday reefers had little success, since the discovery of live rock and flow its easier than ever to maintain salt water aquaria, hence my enthusiasm for live rock, im sure the alanta aquarium uses hundreds of gallons of fresh sea water every day to maintain their aquarium livestock, you may hear from some guys who do ok with out it(liverock) but unlikely to find anyone who does better without it than with it, still good luck __________________ Don't be afraid to ask questions, we in the new to the hobby are here to help you [For My Tank Spec,Photo Album,Articles and website, click on my name] MY Very Kindest and Warmest Regards , MIKE Current Tank Info: I have a 92 gal Corner Tank, and way too many pieces of equipment to list really, (proud member of the reef central corner club)

10/09/2008, 02:17 PM	#8
Mark Premium Member Join Date: Oct 1999 Location: Atlanta, GA, USA Posts: 4,542	The tank with whale sharks is filtered the way it is due to scale. In a home fish tank, the scale is much smaller. If I were to set up a fish only tank with triggers(messy eaters), I would oversize my skimmer, and include a refugium/macroalgae sump. I would also use live rock as decoration and filtration. To be honest, I would set it up like a reef, but without the high-wattage lighting and reactors. If these fish are your pets, why not give them conditions that are clean enough for a reef? They will thrive much more than in a conventional marine tank, and live for many years to thank you. __________________ -Mark TOTM March 2001 Current Tank Info: 225g stony reef, 38g softie

10/09/2008, 01:23 PM	#4
Playa-1 Moved On Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Laguna Niguel, CA Posts: 7,497	I would think a better route to go would be to run a sump/fuge with the most or all of the liverock in the sump fuge. This would free up the space that your looking for and also allow you to be able to run a fuge with macro-algae. You can run a filter sock to help keep particulates to a minimum. You could add some type of a denitrator if it were necessary. I would expect this type of a setup to be relatively low maintenance. Changing out the filter sock a couple times per week would take a couple of minutes. Since you wouldn't be concerned about the looks of it, You could get the least expensive liverock you could find. Probably $1 per pound.

10/09/2008, 02:01 PM	#6
louiedapup Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 17	Hmmm. I always understood the reason for the live rock was the nitrate removing function. Does live rock actually break down ammonia better than a large biowheel type of filter? If I then use the Denitrator to break down the nitrate then wouldn't that accomplish the same thing? or probably better? I am looing to keep a tank with the highest quality of water and basically no algea growth. I was just at the Atlanta Aquarium (They said the largest in the world) They had some huge impressive displays and I saw their filtration systems and they had nothing to do with live rock. massive skimmer, boiler looking things and such (no idea really) but they had 3 Whale Sharks and maybe 5,000 other fish in the same main tank. So I know you don't need live rock. I am not trying to buck the system and want to make sure my tank is successful and thankful for all the suggestions. I would really like to hear from someone that if you buy the right equipment can it do as good or better than live rock? I know alot of people who skip LR are doing it because it costs alot and they try subpar cheaper filters. I am thinking on spending alot more on my filtration system than the cost of live rock. Thanks mucho

10/09/2008, 02:23 PM	#9
stingythingy45 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: MA Posts: 3,296	You could always go with a basement sump/refugium with the LR and a remote deep sand bed hidden in a fish room.Along with a nice oversized skimmer. __________________ Bob Current Tank Info: 90 gallon,mixed Reef,2-250 watt Optix 3 pendants(Phoenix 14K)2-54 watt T5 Super actnics ,ASM G-2 Gate/recirc mods,70 gal. basement sump,20L ref

10/09/2008, 03:28 PM	#10
seapug Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: 4980 ft. Posts: 7,954 Blog Entries: 1	The Atlanta Aquarium has had some issues with it's large tanks. A couple of those whale sharks have even kicked the bucket. If you want a tank with minimal live rock, Playa 1 had a good suggestion. I'd still recommend some rocks in the tank as well. If nothing else, it will at least give the fish some sense of a natural setting and give them something to do. IMO, there's nothing worse than an empty tank with fish swimming in circles or pacing the glass like mental patients. __________________ insert clever saying here. Current Tank Info: 200 gallon custom Marineland DD peninsular tank. LPS dominated mixed reef. Previous 90 gallon mixed reef TOTM April 2009.

10/09/2008, 07:36 PM	#11
Bonneville08 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Goodyear, AZ Posts: 513	Hi Louie, You've gotten a lot of good advice, and at the least I would suggest enough structure so that your fish feel secure. Other than that, a good wet/dry, protein skimmer, reactor with GFO, and a sulfur denitrator should do the trick for water quality along with water changes and detritus removal. I would also suggest using DI water for making seawater and for evaporative make up. These approaches are usually not considered kosher with reefers but are effective. Good luck __________________ Edge you mah cating myself Check out my gallery if you desire. Current Tank Info: 50 gallon mix of soft, LPS and SPS, two croceas, two maximas, a few fish, turf filter with skimmer, MH and PC lighting, chiller, Calcium Reactor and wave2k. Last edited by Bonneville08; 10/09/2008 at 07:50 PM.

10/09/2008, 09:58 PM	#12
Playa-1 Moved On Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Laguna Niguel, CA Posts: 7,497	Hmmm. I always understood the reason for the live rock was the nitrate removing function. Does live rock actually break down ammonia better than a large biowheel type of filter? If I then use the Denitrator to break down the nitrate then wouldn't that accomplish the same thing? or probably better? I am looing to keep a tank with the highest quality of water and basically no algea growth. The liverock is very porous and provides lots of surface area for bacteria to colonize. This bacteria that thrives on the liverock is very efficient at converting Ammonia to nitrites and then there will be other bacteria that breaks down the nitrites to nitrates. The nitrates will also be processed but not as efficiently. Regular water changes and macro-algae will help to physically export excess nitrates. If your bioload is such that the liverock, macro-algae and regular water changes are not keeping up with the nitrate load then you may consider adding a denitrator.

10/10/2008, 07:18 AM	#13
louiedapup Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 17	Thanks for all the advice. I do not have the ability to set up a sump/tank in another room. I will have a sump under the tank though of course. Thanks for all the suggestions and I will play around with some ideas and let you all know how it goes.