was set to vs was set at

Both "was set to" and "was set at" are correct phrases, but they are used in different contexts. "Was set to" is commonly used when referring to a specific value or state that something was adjusted to, while "was set at" is often used when indicating a fixed position or level. The choice between the two depends on the specific situation and what is being described.

Last updated: March 26, 2024 • 3467 views

was set to

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

This phrase is used when referring to a specific value or state that something was adjusted to. It indicates a change or adjustment to a particular setting or condition.

Examples:

The temperature was set to 75 degrees Fahrenheit.
The alarm was set to go off at 7 a.m.
The deadline was set to next Friday.
The device was set to silent mode.
The goal was set to increase sales by 20%.

Alternatives:

was adjusted to
was changed to
was fixed at
was established as
was designated as

was set at

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

This phrase is often used when indicating a fixed position or level. It is commonly used to describe a specific point or level that is established or defined.

Examples:

The price was set at $100.
The meeting was set at the conference room.
The speed limit was set at 55 miles per hour.
The interest rate was set at 3%.
The volume was set at maximum.

Show examples from the web [+]

The marginal interest rate was set at 5.36 %.
The deadline for reply was set at 25 July 2013.
The subscription price was set at EUR 0,66 per share.
However, the ICES advice for the 2007 TAC was set at 15,000 tonnes.
His bail was set at a million.
1.3 The EUSF budget for the 2002-2006 period was set at around EUR one billion per year.
His bail was set at half a million.
In this review report the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for kresoxim methyl was set at 0,4 mg/kg of body weight.
In this review report the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for spiroxamine was set at 0,025 mg/kg bw/day.
On the basis of the information available, this profit was set at around 10 %.
The annual quota was set at 6.593,479 points for 2004 with reductions of 5% successively in 2005 and 2006.
Lastly, in April 2006, following negotiations between the Council and the European Parliament, the definitive proposal was set at EUR 864316 million, or 1,048 % of GNI.
The financial framework for Fiscalis for the period from 2003 to 2007 was set at 67,3 million euro.
As indicated above, it was set at 33,5 % of the CIF Community frontier price, duty unpaid.
The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the products manufactured by Usha Martin Limited (UML) was set at 23,8 %.
The limit was set at 200 BSE cases per million adult animals in the population, for countries carrying out active surveillance.
In 2000, in the first year of the 2000-2005 period, its rateable value was set at GBP 493 million.
This rate was set at 9,5 % as it reflected a benchmarking with similar private operators in the trade.
Interest on this additional principal was set at 6 %, to be paid quarterly.
The interest rate applicable to the first main refinancing operation, offered in the form of a fixed rate tender, was set at a level of 3.0%.

Alternatives:

was established at
was defined as
was placed at
was positioned at
was located at

What Our Customers Are Saying

Our customers love us! We have an average rating of 4.79 stars based on 283,125 votes.
Also check out our 2,100+ reviews on TrustPilot (4.9).

"Thank you!"
Sachi Nakama July 2024
"I have literally been through chat, PI, claude, bard and bing and I got conflicting answers! Thank you! Human intelligence reigns!"
Retha July 2024
"Faster than AI"
CYNTHIA December 2023
"This was very helpful and I personally think this site is the best."
Kaden October 2023
"It was extremely thorough and very helpful!"
imperialelisa October 2023
"7 years without any disappointment. Always 100% satisfied. You guys are the best in the world at what you do. Thank you so much :)"
Zubair Alam October 2023
"In a world of text messages and online communication, this is great to have as a live tool. Thank you."
Selena October 2023
"Without textranch I would be stuck!"
宏祐 October 2023
"Accuracy and fast response. Personal comments from editor. Thank you."
Clh September 2023
"I wasn't aware of this service, it's fascinating and more reliable than standard IA tools available on the internet"
Arturo September 2023
"The fact that you can get reliable fast feedback on your texts."
Vinicius Antonio August 2023
"you guys are better than grammarly i'm being honest here"
ordinary July 2023
"OMG! This is really good than any other text correction tools I've used so far. Highly recommend this."
Vehan July 2023
"Very fast and accurate. thank you."
mojtaba July 2023
"I love this app because it's help to writing skills all of students ♥️"
Tarisini July 2023
"This was exactly the mistake I was looking for, the wording dind´t sound right at first. Better than grammarly!"
Ente July 2023
"The immediate help that I received was reassuring and very satisfactory. Thanks."
priiiyanshuu July 2023
"this helps A LOT for my studies."
kathnunez02 June 2023
"Woow!! I would never have expected such precision! Thank you soooo much!!"
Berta June 2023
"Real Time Editor and not AI. Many Thanks."
Priya June 2023
"The very first thing excites me about Textranch is how much your editors care."
sepideh June 2023
"The fact that texts are checked by human editors rather than by AI, etc. I appreciate this!"
Анна June 2023
"Feel welcome, immediate response, high quality feedback"
martin.roy June 2023
"This is the best app that I have ever seen"
Burulai May 2023

was set to vs was set at

was set to

was set at

Related Comparisons

What Our Customers Are Saying