Chromatography Forum

I also have no idea about any patent issue in between AB's QJet and Thermo's supposingly similiar design with the QJet.

I see that Wuwei have a few AB's system as well as a Thermo Vantage system? How is the performance in between the 5000 series and the Vantage system? Can you please let me know?

As mentioned to you all, I will be meeting some senior guys from ABI on the new product release ie 5500 series; if you all have any questions, do let me know. I will clarify the new release with them.

I heard from one of their senior application expert who tested the new 5500 that it's between 10-15 times more sensitive than a 4000 series and its a high resolution system similiar to a TOF system with high scan speed; not sure yet though. I will get more info for you all.

Cheers....

Hi all, I've had the meeting with the ABI expert and wow is the word for the new system !!!!

The technical specs are awesome and the real samples run are even better !!!!

As mentioned earlier, the sensitivity is way way much better; its approximately 10-15 times better than the 5000 and can go up until 50X depending on type of applications !!!

Also, the scan speed is super fast ie 20 000 scans per second; meaning you can get much more sensitivity and very good peak shape even at very low level of quantification; we are easily talking about 1-2fg on column !!!

With the super fast scan speed, the ABI is really talking about fast chromatography !!! They have shown us real data in comparison between WATERS supposingly UPLC with their MS/MS and the run time is about 30-40 mins for approximately 400MRM.

With the 5500 series, ABI has managed to run the application at about 7 min for > 1000 MRMs !!! Now, that is really fast chromatography !!!
With their sMRM, the ABI system can easily push 2500 MRMs !! And we are talking about very fast dwell time and pause time !!!

So, polarity switching of 50ms is no longer an issue here - when I questioned them about the higher than WATERS polarity switching time of 5ms, they showed me real data for doing the swithing and it was pretty impressive !! They ran 33 MRMs at negative mode and 78 positive MRMs all in one experiment !! I mean, how can I questioned now that they have shown me the real data run that it was 'that fast' !! Forget about WATERS 5ms polarity switching time with this real data !!!

The most impressive data of all is that this system has very HIGH RESOLUTION and I was shown that the 5500 series managed to get accurate mass results at lower than 10 ppm without the system even being calibrated !!!!!!!!!

And I have not even mentioned about the improvement in all the trap modes on sensitivity level as well as the MS3 impressive data !!!

I have asked them about the Vantage as mentioned by WuWei and well, the Vantage basically has sensitivity of 2X better than the 4000QTrap; it definitely cannot meet the 5000 series; let alone the 5500 series and I was shown some pretty impressive data; run by customers of them who has a Vantage system and compared with the 5500 series. They shown me not only signal to noise ration; but across the board ie accuracy as well as precision data and I can say that the Vantage is definitely lacking !!!

Also, the S-lens by Thermo is really different than the QJet 2 from ABI ; so I dont think there is any patent issue here.

As for Kostas's question on the qurved collision cell; basically, the design is really to improved space and make it easier to eliminate neutrals from the collison cell. Why is it faster? With the curved collision cell, the electronics ( ABI has a totally new electronic design for this new system ) can be positioned in such a way the axial gradient voltage increases significantly hence a much more 'steeper slope' to accelerates the ions !!!

I have asked them also on the mass range of jut 5 - 1000 m/z; well, this is limited due to a new design on the orifice that maximises ion transfer however lowering the mass range.

But since ABI positioned this new system as really a quantitation 'box', you cant really be asking for more; I accept the fact that we cant expect one system to do it all. This new system will be positioned for verifications and validations works for small or protein works ; as for discovery works, ABI will just let the works be done by the QStar, TOF-TOF systems etc.

In summary, I have been blown away by such performance from this new system by ABI; they kept emphasizing to me that they've pushed MS detection to another level - again ; and I must say that they just have done it again !!! I dont think any of the new systems; Xevo, Vantage or the 6460 even came close to such performance !!!

Now, I am really looking into this new system - hopefulyl, I will be able to get my hand on one by the end of this year !!!

P/S: The ABI guy told me that they are shipping 6 of this new system , so far and many more to come !!! Now; does that gives me more confident ?? You bet !!!!

a QQQ gives you less than 10ppm mass accuracy?

Do you really believe that? or Do you really believe ABI have the BOLD put this statament on its 5500 flyer or website?

Also, 1000MRM, 1us dwell time, 1us trans time (standard 5), 2s per point. Reality? peak hopping?

No offense, common sense

Hi Yangz, no worry, you dont offend me at all.

Because what I am trying to inform you guys here is that as in the presentation given to me just now, and the amount of data being shared with me, I am confident enough in the new system that they've launched.

Of course, I do not beleive that QQQ has a mass accuracy of less than 10 ppm but the data and works have been shared and its there for me to see !!!! With the high resolution capabilities of the system, I do not see why its not possible - in theory. Of course, the practicality side has been shown from the data being shared.

As for whether ABI has the BOLD to put this in the website or flyer, that is their issue. I am not particulary concern as what I am only concern is the system capabilities and its practicality and functionality in helping in my research and develoment works.

For 1000 MRM or more; it has been proven by the release of their new software with the sMRM on the 4000 and 5000 series; so I do not see if there is any issues with the 5500 not capable of doing more. No a concern for me as well. I'm gonna have my hand on the new upgrade of Analyst 1.5 for my system; so I can definitely give you some feedback later on if it works - of course, I knew it works from the feedback that I have from other referrals. That's why I am having a copy as well.

It really sounds that Yang is quite sceptical on the performance of an ABI instrument. Just curious, are you a user as well?

And really, why I dont really see that its all marketing hype or such and quite confident in the new system capabilities:

1) In my personal view, ABI will not be so hyped out with their system if they're not up to the level. That is based on my own experience with the systems that I have from them.

2) As compared to Agilent's 6460 'hype', I would be rather sceptical with that because Agilent has yet to ship a 6460; as far as I know during the launching where else ABI has already had 6 of this new 5500 series being shipped.

3) As mentioned, do you really think that ABI will present something not 'achievable' to us as potential customers - I mentioned that I am seriously considering one, so, if the system is not performing as it claimed; trust me !!! I am gonna be the first to 'blast' them off - you bet I will created a fuss over here!!! ^^

I have had experienced with the Agilent 6410b, and Waters , so I knew what I am expecting over here ; just a note from the ABI boys before they left - food for thoughts from them.

' Why the others - Agilent, Thermo, Waters always positioned themselves against ABI and why not Agilent to Thermo or Waters to Thermo etc. Why on ABI? ' - end quote.

For me, it was quite a 'YEAH' in my mind, you know what I mean, for me, thinking about it, I've never heard of Agilent against Waters or Thermo against Waters etc so much as compared to against ABI from the other big 3; so it did ring some bell for me.

Just to share....cheers !!!

ken, Thanks for the message.

I might be one of the first few ever tried sMRM (Analyst 1.5) on API5000/4000 machines (it works very well, the best feature of Analyst 1.5). In past two years, I had the chance to operate almost every API system, from 2000, 3200QTrap. 4000, and 4000QTrap, to 5000. Of course I have had my hands on Micromass and Thermo too (no Agilent/PE/).

I am skeptical about the performance, not because I don't like ABI, but because, as a user, and a potential buyer, I want to understand a system in a "scientifical sound way", not from saleman's claims and very well tailored "selling demonstration".

When my local sales came up to me about the new 5500, the questions I asked, of course, sensitivity and speed. What I got is slightly (2-3 times) improvement in sensitivity and much more gain on speed, no mention of resolution (which is soley determined by the Qtechnology itself) at all.

Many thanks for Ken, you give us very detailed information for API 5500.

Yes, we have the same conclusion for TSQ Vantage and API 4000/ API 5000. Just like API 4000<TSQ Vantage<API 5000.

So API 5500 will more sensitivity than TSQ Vantage. I will waiting for API 5500.

For there's some trouble for Agilent's workstaion (Mass Hunter?) with Waston LIMS, so we couldn't order Agilent 6460.

Hi Yang, thanks for the reply. Wuwei, you're most welcome. Just wanted to share the latest news that I have.

Yang, what I got as you can see is quite some detailed information, to my point of view. The guy that came over to our side today is not solely a sales guy; he is one of the top application specialist from ABI; and trust me, I know him - he is a hand's on guy with the system.

Which is why he can shared with me the data that he has ran on the accurate mass claim, as well as data on the Vantage system etc. I am not sure if the sales guy that presented to you has really shown you the detailed info on the new system or quite well versed with the new systems and its technical details.

I did have a lot of detailed technical info about the new system from ABI to understand scientifically what the new system is all about; so that's why I am not doubting the new system capabilities.

Perhaps, you didnt get much info from the 'sales' talk the other day, I guess - no offense ^^ but I always wanted a hands-on expert to present and share with me and not just purely sales guy who sometimes; I think, really dont know much about their stuffs as well - like you mentioned, 2-3 times sensitivity? no mentioned on resolution etc?

Poor you, Yang, you must be quite 'bored' during the presentation rite? Let me make a wild guess; the sales person didnt do a lot of homework?

Sorry for being slightly 'sarcastic' here with the ABI sales guy....

Wuwei, are you going to get the 6460 if you can make the Waton LIMS work with the Agilent Mass Hunter? How comfortable are you with the Mass Hunter? I guess you must have known that Mass Hunter might has some issues as well when you're using it to optimise your samples, right?

I wont go for a 6460 ( now ) even if the Waston LIMS works because I didnt really hear any unit being ship yet ( I wont wanna be a white rabbit here ) and also, Agilent makes claim again that 6460 is better than the 5000; but then, we all know that they also claimed the 6410 is equivalent to the 4000, right? which of course, proven that it didnt matched the 3200; let alone the 4000.

Cheers

Hi, Ken,
Agilent have released the optimization software for hoe to tune the compound especially for drug discovery. But we shall pay for it, that's vert pitty. Luckly, we get the demo version during software testing, that software have a database that could control all compound information that tuned by this software. Maybe you call call for the domo software form Agilent if possible.

Hi Ken,

I am willing to believe you that the 5500 is a great toy. But did your ABI-guy say anything about $$$?

Hi Thomas, they did mentioned to me that the price will be slightly more expensive than the 5000 series; it's quite worthy if that's the case with such improvement on the new system.

Most probably will be around 20-30K more expensive than the 5000 series; not exactly sure but will be around that range.

Hi Wuwei, perhaps I can follow your advise and get a demo version of the software. Thanks for the advise !!!

There are two things here I'm finding underwhelming.

(1) Mass limited to 1000Da. Do you really mean this? For many of us, the value of LC-MS is that it can do things too big for GC-MS.

(2) 10ppm mass accuracy. If it's that bad, it may as well be +/- 0.2Da. There will be so many possible empirical formulae within 10ppm of a typical mass that it would be utterly useless for de novo identification, and it probably won't allow very narrow selective windows for particular parents. There's also the issue of whether the resolving power matches the accuracy.

The price had better not be high, because otherwise those wanting to do thousands of MRMs might be better advised to get a proper high-res instrument and abandon MRM in favour of very narrow mass windows.

Hi LMH, I am not sure if you have read the previous posts and knew much more about the specification and capabilities.

Here is my reply:

1) As mentioned, the quantitation box ; which is the 5500 series launched from ABI is targeted at verification and validation purposes and not, for screening works. It has been researched that app. 0.3% peptides which usually have higher mass value; fall outside the 1000 amu range.

What is the solution? You can always use another MRM transition. However, I am still not yet the 'peptide' guy, so I have yet to know more about this. Its based on the studies by fellow researchers.

2) What was shared for the mass accuracy is between 0.7 ppm and 7.5 ppm mass error ; this is really very good accuracy for a system that was not calibrated prior to analysis, unlike real TOF system. Please bear in mind that this is only a QTrap system; a less than 10ppm mass error is really good; I guess most of us here would agree on it; unless you're comparing this system with the Orbitrap system.

The down side for Orbitrap is that its quite slow; so I wont want to think of the system as a direct comparison for this new system.

As for the MRMs, I am not sure if you have enough technical information' but most of us here ( I believed ^^ ), knew of the sMRM capabilities from ABI which can go up until 2500 MRMs, so I am not sure what you're trying to point here; perhaps you can elaborate more?

As for the de novo identification, if I am not mistaken, ABI has already published some works using the new system for such application - I have yet to get my copies though , but I am sure they have answered your 'question' on de novo identification with the technical paper that they have already published.

P/S: Just curious, do you happened to have an Orbitrap system or are you an Orbitrap user? Do share with us more over here of your 'underwhelming' views; perhaps we can learn more and have better discussion and more insights in the systems comparison. Thanks !!!

Ken, you sounds more like a saleman now

Are you a mass spectromist by training? LLOQ tells something other way.

If you really look into sMRM, you will tell it's just an auto-segmentation approach, so the claim up to 2500 MRMs makes no sense without a given "run time".

For example, if you have a 1000 min run, you may be able to have 25000 MRMs as long as the software allows to put in so many. If your run time is only 2 min, you can calcualte how many MRM you can have with 1ms (can be shorter than that? I don't know) dwell time and transition time, while maintaing acceptable number of points per peak.

Have a good weekend!

So Ken,

Is the 5500 10-15 times more sensitive than the 5000 or the 4000? You make both claims before. How many times is the 5500 more sensitive than the 5000?

Also what is the maximum amount of MRM transitions that the software allows to input, per segment and total (i.e. number of segments x number of maximum transitions per segment).

Also what is the minimum dwell time and pause time without loosing any sensitivity and what is the minimum the software allows you to input?

Hi Kostas, sorry for the late reply. Been bz with my works; so I havent had the time to check the forum.

The 5500 is app 10-15X more sensitive than the 4000 series and can go up to 50X sensitivity; depending on applications ( The technical spec from the ABI guy was based on comparison between the 4000QTrap and the 5500QTrap ).

According to them as well, the sMRM allows app. 2500 MRM ( there is no segments ie period, if that is what you mean ).

The min trap dwell time can be as low as 50uS to 2ms, if I am not mistaken since I dont have the tech data with me now.

Hi Yang, sorry if I sounds like a saleman; dont intend to sound so, perhaps I got too excited with the new release; guess that I might as well go back more to my R & D works....

Since you have more experience with the sMRM as you've been a user, perhaps you are more in depth than I do - I will only start to use the sMRM once I got my new software copy, but I understands what you mean by that - of course, the claim of 2500 MRM will be based on the type of applications and such, with short analysis time it will be more difficult to put in as much; but I have mentioned that they have shown data that enables app. 1024 MRM in a 7 min HPLC run.

Yea, I am a mass spectrometrist by training - although I am still learning and have much to learn from you all here

Cheers...