Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'detector tech'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Metal Detecting & Gold Prospecting Forums
    • Detector Prospector Forum
    • Metal Detecting For Coins & Relics
    • Metal Detecting For Jewelry
    • Metal Detecting For Meteorites
    • Gold Panning, Sluicing, Dredging, Drywashing, Etc
    • Rocks, Minerals, Gems & Geology
    • Metal Detecting & Prospecting Classifieds
  • Archive - Closed To Active Posting
    • Forum News
    • Amazing Finds
    • Gold & Treasure News
    • Research
    • General Questions
    • Metal Detector Advice, Reviews, & Comparisons
    • Metal Detector Technology
    • Fisher Gold Bug Metal Detector
    • Fisher Gold Bug 2 Metal Detector
    • Garrett ATX Metal Detector
    • Makro Racer Metal Detector
    • Minelab GPZ 7000 Metal Detector
    • Minelab GPX Metal Detectors
    • Minelab SDC 2300 Metal Detector
    • Minelab SD & GP Metal Detectors
    • Nokta FORS Metal Detectors
    • White's MX Sport Metal Detector
    • White's TDI Metal Detectors
    • XP DEUS Metal Detector
    • Other Metal Detectors
    • Pinpointers, Headphones, Harnesses, Scoops, and Other Accessories
    • ATVs, Vehicles, Trailers, Campers
    • Alaska
    • Arizona
    • California
    • Nevada
    • Other States
    • Australia
    • Other Countries
    • Miscellaneous

Categories

  • Catalogs & Brochures
  • Owners Manuals
  • Minelab CTX 3030 Programs
  • Spreadsheets

Calendars

  • Calendar

Found 57 results

  1. I was looking at some old metal detector catalogs and got a chuckle out of these charts from the 1973 Garrett catalog. People get up in arms about advertising claims these days but get a look at these. To their credit they say "large metal objects" and do not define what that is (dump truck?) but we are talking 1973 BFO detectors here. I need to ditch my new detectors and get one of those old machines! Unfortunately depths were measured in inches then, not feet, on normal targets. The irony is the page is addressing "misleading advertising".
  2. A pretty fascinating set of photos posted over at http://md-hunter.com/homemade-metal-detector-amazing-photos/
  3. I am curious as to which machine you prefer for inland gold jewelry hunting and why. Always like learning about other peoples machines and methods. Thank you.
  4. What kind of HMI (human/machine interface) do you like in a metal detector? Asking for... a friend. CONTROLS- Knobs or buttons? One control per function or menu-based? If menu-based what kind of controls do you like to have at your fingertips? Examples of machines that, in your mind, "got it right" when it comes to controls AUDIO- Do you prefer beep and dig, or do you prefer machines that have "language" (i.e. multiple tones)? Any thoughts on Stereo Mixed Mode (like V3i - all metal in one ear, toneID in the other)? Iron ID - prefer a threshold NULL or a GRUNT? DISPLAY- What kind of info is essential for you to see? (personally I don't like screens, prefer to look at my surroundings) Thanks to any who share their thoughts on this. I know it depends on what kind of machine, but for the sake of this thread let's say it's some flavor of VLF that is geared towards prospecting.
  5. Over on the Geotec Forum, somebody (probably not a native speaker of English) posted a long rant on how all the folks over there were wasting their time trying to experiment with pulse induction detectors, that the future was with induction balance machines (or complex machines with IB coils such as the GPZ). Eric Foster (who is generally acknowledged as being the pioneer of bringing the PI concept out of the physics lab and into field use) tossed the BS flag. See below. Here is Erics input. After 50 years in PI there is no way I am goes to stop. PI is everywhere, airport security, underwater wreck hunting, gas and oil pipeline detection, tramp metal detection in mines and quarries, the best military and humanitarian mine detectors are PI. From what I see on this forum, there is a lot of very valuable and novel development work in PI being done by enthusiasts, outside of the largely secretive manufacturing establishments. Long may it continue.There is plenty of room on this forum for all technologies, so there is no basis to feel threatened. Maybe Funfinder just had a bad dream in which he was encircled by PI detectorists displaying all their finds. Even the Grim Reaper has swapped his scythe for a PI detector Eric. Having said that - are conventional PI detectors for nugget hunting in the same position as the Super Constellation or DC-7 - perfect piston driven airliners but a concept not capable of further development? ML's newest detector is a complex sort of hybrid and it uses IB searchcoils. Here is the link - the discussion runs to two pages now and is pretty interesting - including Carl Moreland (Carl NC) chiming in for more work on BFO's! http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?23511-Stop-building-PI-detectors!
  6. Tieing into what daniel TN is saying for the only drawbacks...that is why i made those two wishes(see below). I could use my Wish 1 V series(multifrequency) unit for most everything but really tough ground where i would want my wish 2 gold/relic unit. It's all about customer demand and numbers for these small manufacturers in the metal detecting space. I think often we the metal detector customers dont call the owners and let them know what is going on. Other causes call the owners, collect numbers online that show support, and gather money support online which always directs and causes change. Personally like many of you folks i get tired of waiting for the best machines to come out. Especially gold machines which can pay for themselves. I also get these companies are small and don't have infinite resources. But i think in the new online modern age WE can change that model. Like many folks today we can put up money for a kickstarter or indiegogo effort if white's would agree to such a crowd sourced development effort. Just like all other kickstarter/indiegogo cases those that invest larger amounts equal to the unit price get a free unit and more. For instance a 1000 investor/customers for each would be worth like... Wish 1 unit cost~2k-- available funding=2 million dollars Wish 2 unit cost-4k- available funding=4 million dollars I dont know if this the amount they need, less, or more to develop these units, it would depend on what White's said. But if minelab took 10 million for development of GPZ as folks are claiming online. i think 6 million dollars could get the job done quickly for whites on these two "wish" machines or something similar! And they would get out the top 2 machines price/function wise on the high end for all metal detectorists. Steve--maybe this is something you talk to White's on and co-lead with White's the online/partners effort for? Reminder of wishes... Wish 1---ultra-ultra rugged/water proof design(leupold like casing) for the V series. Shouldnt be too hard since leupold makes their stuff in newberg, oregon at 3D plastics not too far from whites electronics HQ. Want it to be chest mountable. Would love it if they could do what depar and xp are doing and add that fourth frequency for gold hunting! Then all of my gmt and mxsport coils could work on that unit. Wish 2--same type of cased design as wish 1. But i want a super high power--nautilus level voltage(44Volts) + TDI level current--multi channel pulse gold/relic detector. I want more power to punch deeper into rough ground! I would also like some type of auto ground tuning to check strength, phase and other properties. While asking for my holy grail i want it to optimize the channels/pulses/machine to reduce the effect of the ground and environment around the machine based on profiles i setup on the fly or ahead of time. Also how about some ultra light weight accessory coils to compete with mindlab's new GPZ coils! Miner john, Coiltech or Detech could build these for white's if they think they are too low volume to make themselves.
  7. https://blog.csiro.au/finding-gold-rush/ Not for us folks but maybe of interest.
  8. The following information is from an apparent leak from a First Texas distributor meeting? The link is posted at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/555-new-fisher-pulse-induction-multi-frequency-detectors/?p=10571 as part of the thread about upcoming Fisher products that have been circulating for a couple years. These leaks seem to jive with previous statements by Tom Mallory of First Texas. The main one of interest to the people on this forum would be a new CZX model aimed at gold prospecting. Here is the text from the posted screen shot: CZX - Fisher and Teknetics This machine is ground breaking technologyTurn on and go2 frequency - 9:1 ratioNo need to ground balance or adjust the detector to the environmentIt automatically senses the ground and makes changes accordingly.First detector birthed from this platform is a gold unit priced around $1000, but deeper than current VLF, this detector will also see through red dirt, and highly mineralized soil.From this platform other machines will develop. We intend to develop the CZX and MOSCA platforms to offer more machines in the $1000 to $2000 range than have ever been available.Target release 2016We have senior engineer Dave Johnson on this projectThe "Mosca" platform referred to is further described and apparently is aimed more at being a general purpose non-prospecting detector (coins, jewelry, relics). Again, here is the text from the posted screen shot: "Mosca" Fisher and Teknetics Waterproof up to 10' (3 meters)Wireless headphones - Waterproof loop and connectors for headphones2 frequency - 7:1 ratioHobby/Treasure Market - Great for Saltwater, Relic, CoinAuto Ground TrackingSingle Pod DesignLCD Pad, control buttons, 2 AA batteriesArm Pad in rearRetail target - $1200 - $2000Target release 2016We have dedicated engineers on this project OK, so a gold unit around $1000 that goes deeper than current VLF designs. I also have high hopes that knowing the proclivities of the engineer, Dave Johnson, that it will be relatively light and ergonomic. Dave also prefers simple and the design statements reflect that. We seriously need something that brings gold detector weights and prices back to earth and so hopefully this will be it. I have stated over and over again I would be very happy with ATX equivalent performance in a less expensive lightweight package. Garrett so far seems disinclined to make that unit but they have a year at least before it may be a moot point. The CZX would have to obsolete the White's TDI as it is aimed squarely at or below the same price point and unless it beats TDI performance would be dead on arrival. We will not have long to wait - 2016 is coming fast!
  9. Perhaps of interest, a place to collect info of detectors from our past and their modifications. There were a few homegrown detectors about in the 80`s in OZ, their manufacturers no longer operating, perhaps also were others throughout the world, these were "the building blocks" of the sophisticated machines we use now. Some like the Goldseekers 12000 which lead to ML, and another that enjoyed some popularity was the Bridgewright. This photo is of a Bounty Hunter RB10 that has a added pot on the front near coil plug, I believe this modification may have come from not yet ML technicians back around 83-84, unfortunately I`ve lost the operator instructions which had a extra page explaining the use of this pot in GBing the detector.
  10. Announced it today – three tones graphic screen under $100
  11. Is such a thing possible? I think we still have a ways to go to get the optimum gold nugget detector. Why is it that 2 or even 3 detectors might be needed if you want to succeed? Well, you need discrimination on a lot of sites due to ferrous trash - as of today, that means you need a VLF. Unless you have a GPZ, you probably need both a GPX and an SDC to cover the spectrum of tiny shallow to deep large nuggets. VLF's can discriminate but mineralization kills their depth in many areas. GPX machines can do most of it, but don't discriminate (much) and force the operator to choose between several very different set-ups (Each with its own set of trade-offs) depending on conditions of ground and likely targets. SDC kills on small gold and is easy to use but can't discriminate and is depth limited. Even the GPZ, for all it's depth and versitility is not easy to master and costs many ounces of gold. Can a new technical approach give us a detector which deals with all these issues at once? What would this miracle detector have to do? Ease of use - It would have to be "turn on and go". Mineralization - it would have to deal,with the most highly mineralized ground - without use of adjustment and without danger of "tuning out" small targets. Sensitivity - It would have to have sensitivity to small gold at least equal to the best current VLF detectors. Depth - it doesn't have to equal the GPZ or even GPX in raw depth, but it would have to deliver more depth than the SDC - and equal the depth of the best VLF's - and do so in any ground. Will those of us who are over 60 ever see such a "Wunderwaffe"? ---- I have my hopes. What would you pay for such a machine?
  12. Here is a machine I have not heard of before: http://www.metaldetector.com/drs-ground-exper-metal-detector?awt_l=3I64Qc&awt_m=K4CvxdoyBVWfZf It looks interesting but does it really work? I haven't even heard of the company before. Anyone have any info on this? There are quite a few videos which I haven't watched yet - but will. Just thought I would throw it out there for discussion.
  13. Just curious as to whether a gold detector can detect through several inches of bedrock?
  14. Has anyone here ever made their own gold detector from scratch or a kit? Any recommendations?
  15. From the Codan news release at http://www.codan.com.au/Portals/0/investorpubs/22 AXS Announcement - Minelab awarded $6.7m contract.pdf (copy below): "Cooperating with NIITEK Inc., the HDD will combine Minelab’s new Multiple Frequency Continuous Wave metal detection technology and NIITEK’s advanced ground penetrating radar." 31 August 2016 MINELAB AWARDED CONTRACT TO DEVELOP NEW HANDHELD DEVICE DETECTOR FOR THE AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE FORCE Minelab Electronics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Codan Limited, has been awarded a $6.7m contract by the Department of Defence to develop a new Handheld Device Detector (HDD). The funding received under this contract is to further develop a dual sensor metal detector which incorporates ground penetrating radar. It will partially offset the development costs of the product, and the project is expected to be completed by 2018. The development of the HDD builds on Minelab's success in technology development and product innovation for use in military programmes. Codan is particularly pleased to be of service to the ADF and to provide an enhanced capability that currently does not exist. Once the HDD enters into service with the ADF, we are confident that other militaries will seek the same level of capability, broadening our market for countermine products. The contract supports Codan's stated strategy of growing its profitability by improving and broadening our product offerings while ensuring our value propositions remain relevant and leading-edge. Previous to this award, in March 2014, Minelab was selected by the Department of Defence's Rapid Prototype Development and Evaluation (RPDE) programme to receive $1.0m in funding to further integrate metal detection and ground penetration radar technologies into a lightweight and compact mechanical platform. In December 2014, RPDE provided an additional $1.3m in funding, and Minelab subsequently produced an advanced prototype of the HDD. Cooperating with NIITEK Inc., the HDD will combine Minelab's new Multiple Frequency Continuous Wave metal detection technology and NIITEK's advanced ground penetrating radar. The HDD was designed taking into account the comprehensive requirements of the ADF, supplemented with feedback from Army User Groups. It will include advanced detection technologies as well as new standards of compactness and ergonomics. On behalf of the Board Michael Barton Company Secretary MORE INFORMATION ON THE NIITEK/MINELAB GROUNDSHARK
  16. This one by Dave Johnson of First Texas. of course a patent isn't a product and not every PI detector has ground exclusion and can be useful for nugget hunting - but still. https://hobby-detecting.com/download/documents/FTH-0005-02-US US9366778.pdf
  17. Just thought I'd start a new topic to get some discussion going. There seems to be more detectors on the market then ever. Yes a lot are variations on the same thing, but there are a few unique models such as GPZ7000, SDC2300, Gold Racer, Deus, etc. So what detector in your mind doesn't exist? Could a certain manufacturer mangle together a few of their features/patents and build something unique? Just curious
  18. When I posted the video showing the Makro Gold Racer recovery speed using two nails and a gold ring, it caused me to reflect on the various internet nail tests. Nearly all employ modern round nails, when these items rarely present issues. The common VDI (visual discrimination scale) puts ferrous items at the low end of the scale, and items with progressively increasing conductivity higher on the scale. The problem is the size of items also matters. Small gold is low on the scale, and the larger the gold, the higher it reads on the scale. A silver quarter reads higher than a silver dime, etc. All manner of ferrous trash including medium and smaller nails fall where they should when using discrimination and are easily tuned out. The problem is large iron and steel items, and ferrous but non-magnetic materials like stainless steel. Steel plates, large bolts, broken large square nails, axe heads, hammer heads, broken pry bar and pick tips, etc. all tend to read as high conductive targets. Usually it is just the sheer size pushing it higher up the scale. Detectors also love things with holes, which makes for a perfect target by enabling and enhancing near perfect eddy currents, making items appear larger than they really are. Steel washers and nuts are a big problem in this regard, often reading as non-ferrous targets. Oddball shapes cause problems, particularly in flat sheet steel. Old rusted cans often separate into irregular shaped flat pieces, and roofing tin (plated steel) and other sheet steel items are my number one nemesis around old camp sites. Bottle caps present a similar issue in modern areas. These items produce complex "sparky" eddy currents with both ferrous and non-ferrous indications. Many thin flat steel items produce remarkably good gold nugget type signals in old camp areas. Two general tips. Concentric coils often handle ferrous trash better than DD coils. A DD coil is often the culprit when dealing with bottle caps where a concentric coil often makes them easy to identify. Another thing is to use full tones. Many ferrous items are producing both ferrous and non-ferrous tones. Blocking ferrous tones allows only the non-ferrous tone to be heard, giving a clear "dig me" signal. This was the real bane of single tone machines with a simple disc knob to eliminate ferrous objects. You still heard the non-ferrous portion of the signal. Multi tones allows you to hear the dual ferrous/non-ferrous reports from these troublesome items, helping eliminate most of them. Certain detectors can also show multiple target responses on screen at once, like the White's models featuring the SignaGraph (XLT, DFX, etc.) and CTX with target trace. These displays show target "smearing" that stands out differently from the clean VDI responses produced by most good items. A machine with a simple VDI numeric readout can only show you one number at a time and the on,y indication you might get is "dancing" numbers that refuse to lock on. Usually though the predominate response overrides and fakes you out. This is where a good high end visual display capable of putting all VDI response on screen simultaneously can really help out. I have been collecting these odd iron and steel items to practice with and to help me evaluate which machines might do best in ferrous trash. The main thing I wanted to note here is contrived internet videos with common round nails often present a misleading picture. Many machines do very well on nails yet fail miserably on flat steel.
  19. Hi Steve Just wondering if there is any new news on the Fisher rumors that were being talked about 6 months or so ago. I.e. multi frequency units. Pi units, etc. Anyone feel free to chime in.
  20. What's in the ultimate gold detector? I got to see a little bit of everything on my trip from the heaviest, most complicated to the light and simple. I'm a novice, maybe because of that I like simple. Knobs instead of menus. Light. Powerful. Long battery life. For fancy stuff like GPS I can use my phone. Iron ID would be nice. What's your idea of the best gold detector?
  21. This is purely my perception but when I look at the market as a whole today there are only two companies that seem to produce machines that innovate - Minelab and XP with the Deus. Everyone else just keeps rehashing the 1990s over and over again. Take away single frequency VLF detectors and non-ground balancing PI detectors from current lineups and look at what is left to get the real picture. First Texas - Fisher CZ3D and CZ21, multi-frequency 5 kHz and 15 kHz Garrett - ATX, multi-period ground balancing PI Tesoro - Nothing White's - V3i & VX3, multi or selectable frequency 2.5, 7.5, and 22.5 kHz; Beachhunter ID, multi frequency 3 kHz and 15 kHz; TDI, single channel ground balancing PI XP - Deus, selectable frequency 4, 8, 12, and 18 kHz Minelab - GPZ 7000, Zero Voltage Technology GPX 5000, multi-period ground balancing PI with dual voltage technology GPX 4500, multi-period ground balancing PI with dual voltage technology SDC 2300, multi-period fast ground balancing PI Eureka Gold, selectable frequency 6.4, 20, and 60 kHz X-Terra 705, 505, 305 - selectable frequency 3, 7.5, and 18.75 kHz CTX 3030, multi-frequency E-TRAC, multi-frequency Safari, multi-frequency Excalibur, multi-frequency It is even worse when you consider that the First Texas and White's offerings are all over ten years old. You can sum new tech up in the last decade as Minelab, Garrett with the ATX, and XP with the Deus.
  22. Here is a photo with some gold nuggets from Alaska, Australia, and California that I tested recently to show how VDI (visual display indicator) numbers vary dramatically with size, shape, and purity. Metal detectors do not know what metal is being detected. The target id number is based first on the conductivity of the item and also by the size of the item. Low conductive targets have low numbers, but the larger they are the higher the numbers go. Silver is the best conductor with gold being moderately conductive by comparison. Small gold items read very low, in the foil range, but the larger the nugget, the higher the numbers will go. Oddly enough adding silver to gold causes the conductivity to drop dramatically instead of adding to it. Pure metals are far better conductors than alloys. That being the case the Alaska gold has much lower conductivity than the Aussie or California gold. I have always used a U.S. nickel as a surrogate for about a 1/4 ounce gold nugget, a flattened nugget of that weight being close to a nickel in physical size. Part of this little study is to show how close to reality or not that may be, or any test items like lead or aluminum. I do not have much in the way of “normal” metal detectors these days. The closest I have right now is a White’s DFX which reads a nickel as 22 VDI, dime 78, and quarter 84. The White's VDI range is close to being a standard, with negative numbers relating to ground minerals and ferrous items, positive number non-ferrous. The range is from -95 to +95 with non-ferrous items falling between 1 and 95. The photo shows tests I just did on a variety of gold nuggets from Alaska, Australia, and California. The Australia gold is the purest, probably around 95% or better. The California is around 90% plus. The Alaska gold is much lower purity, closer to 80 – 85% average. You can see the purity differences in the color - pure gold is a very rich gold color, less pure gold much paler in appearance. A few things become immediately obvious. Larger size means higher VDI numbers. However, purity appears to be even more important. Shape, thickness, and solidity all matter – skin effects? Smooth solid masses read much higher than nuggets with pitted surfaces. All weights are in grams except a couple larger nuggets which are Troy ounces (ozt). There are 15.43 grains to a gram. 31.103 grams per Troy ounce. In general in all three locales you can say that nuggets under 2 grams are going to read in the foil range. As nugget size increases however huge disparities are obvious due to purity, with all but the largest Alaska gold reading at much lower VDI ranges, and Australia gold very high numbers. There are some odd ones that prove the situation. The Alaska 29.82 gram nugget is just under one ounce, but VDI 21, almost an exact nickel reading. This is because this nugget is probably 75% - 80% gold. You can see the color difference compared to the Australian gold next to it. It also is deeply pitted. The 4.93 gram nugget directly under it is solid and smooth and about 85% pure and so has a VDI number double what you see in the much larger nugget. The Alaska 15.19 gram is round and solid but has quartz mixed with it, maybe 80% gold in metallic portion, only 12 VDI. The 1.25 oz Alaska in lower right has a lot of quartz and metallic portion is maybe 75% gold, so only 28 VDI. But get big enough, and at 6.52 ounces, 85% gold, solid and smooth, you get a reading up in half dollar 90 VDI range. For California gold I am guessing that at about 3 grams you get a nickel reading but in Australia it might be closer to 1.5 grams, and in Alaska closer to ½ ounce. Bottom line? The nugget size to get a U.S. nickel reading is all over the map from roughly 3 grams to 15 grams but can go up to nearly an ounce for nuggets of low purity with included quartz and pitted surfaces. Saying a U.S. nickel is roughly equivalent to a 1/4 oz nugget can be true and is probably as close as you will get to some sort of average, but reality is the range of nuggets that have a VDI the same as a nickel is pretty surprising. The final zinger is that these are air tests. Ground minerals will change the numbers, typically pulling them down. The worse the ground mineralization, the lower the numbers will shift. There are a few lessons here. The first being that if you know nothing about the gold you are chasing you need to dig all targets or at a minimum all non-ferrous targets. However, if you do have a target id detector and get to know the gold in your location well, you can cherry pick with some degree of accuracy. The number one factor really is size because large nuggets are very rare. Certain areas despite wishful thinking simply do not produce large gold. If you know for a fact all the gold ever found in an area is in small gram size nuggets and even smaller, you can figure high VDI numbers are probably shell casings or some other undesired target. Further, in places like Alaska with low purity gold (not all of it - Alaska is a big place) then low VDI numbers will be the norm. The numbers speak for themselves however and you can draw whatever conclusions you want. I have to admit that while I know all this intellectually from years of detecting to see it laid out clearly in a simple photo really drives the lesson home. It took rounding up some Australia gold and California gold to really make it a good comparison.
  23. Meet The Metal Detectives - Inside Engineering at Minelab Electronics A new video showing Minelabs new engineering facility and meeting some of the people that work there. Check out the blurred portions obscuring secret product developments! Amazing engineering staff at Minelab - I consider myself fortunate to have communicated with and even met a few of the people that work there. A few more details about the making of the video at Minelab's Treasure Talk Blog
  24. I always have my ears perked up for something new in metal detectors and metal detecting technology. I confess to not being smart enough to really get deep into the technical side of it but I have a general layman's knowledge of the subject. A couple years ago Carl Moreland, the Engineering Manager for White's Electronics, was interviewed on a radio show. I tripped over a reference to the interview on another forum and checked it out. It is very long, and near the end Carl dropped a bombshell. At least I thought so, but it went unnoticed and uncommented on in the metal detecting online world. I thought about posting it on a forum back then but decided to wait and see what developed. Here is the applicable portion of the interview: Relic Roundup Radio Show, January 17, 2012, Interview with Carl Moreland, Engineering Manager, White’s Electronics http://en.1000mikes.com/app/archiveEntry.xhtml?archiveEntryId=260469 Transcript beginning at 50:57 mark: Carl Moreland - “I can mention one technology that we’re working on because the patent has already been published… or the application, not the patent hasn't gone through yet. We’re working on something called half sine technology, which has actually been around since the 1960’s in geophysical prospecting applications. This is where instead of transmitting a sinusoidal signal you actually just transmit half of the sine and you can do that at extremely high voltages and high ? rates and so on. It’s technically not pulse induction but it’s not VLF either and it is a time domain method. And with that we can get really good depth and we can even get target id information and do discrimination and so forth.” Can you see why I perked up at that? I am still amazed it did not get any notice at the time. Nothing happened for a long time. Then I got this PM from Rick Kempf recently: Sent 29 January 2014 - 09:04 AM Was looking for info on my new SD 2100 this AM when I sort of fell down a rabbit hole of old forum posts and emerged reading Whites new patent. About the first thing I noticed was that you were cited in "prior art". Here's what they cited: http://www.voy.com/76600/7/475.html The patent is here: http://www.google.com/patents/US20110316541 Is this something you knew about? Just wondering. Rick Kempf I told Rick, yeah, heard about that. It was the patent finally being granted from the application Carl mentions in the interview. It was fun getting a mention in a patent though I think it was just the examiner studying up on the subject and finding my old post helpful in simplifying the subject. For a long time the Holy Grail in metal detecting has been something that combines the target identification of an Induction Balance (IB or more commonly known as VLF) detector with depth of a Pulse Induction (PI) detector. There have been many promises and false starts over the years, and that was one reason I kept the radio interview mention quiet the last couple years. Frankly, I had half forgot about it until Rick brought the patent being granted to my attention. Notice the title: Hybrid Induction Balance/Pulse Induction Metal Detector A new hybrid metal detector combines induction balance and pulse induction technologies. Target signals are generated from a transmitted wave that has both induction balance and pulse current inducing characteristics and uses pertinent sampling of the receive data. Combining the two data sources provides eddy current target identification while excluding ground permeability and remanence obscuration. Is it time to sing Hallelujah? Well, there is a big gap in between getting a patent and bringing a detector to market. Many patents get filed and you never even see something directly related to the patent. Maybe it looked good on paper but does not pan out well in reality for numerous reasons. So just because White's was granted this patent does not mean something is around the corner. However, they have been working on it for over two years already obviously. And it has been some time since White's put something new out. I do not count remakes of the MXT etc as new. So I think there is reason to be hopeful we may see something one of these days. John Earle is one of the unsung heros in the industry. He had a hand in many of the best products at Compass Electronics before moving over to White's after Compass went under. To this day I have never used a VLF that goes any deeper than my old Compass Gold Scanner Pro. John was one of the brains involved in that, as well as the White's Goldmaster 3, regarded by many as being the pinnacle of the analog development of that model line. I was fortunate to have met John at the factory some years ago. He is listed as the inventor on the new patent. Half sine technology is also mentioned in an earlier patent filed by White's, again with John listed as inventor at http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7649356.pdf Looks like serious stuff brewing. Bruce Candy of Minelab makes mention of half sine technology in a patent application at http://patents.com/us-20130154649.html which makes me wonder about the new "Super Gold Detector" he is working on. But it is this most recent patent by White's that seems to put the finest point on it. Maybe the Holy Grail of detecting is soon to be a reality. The fact it is White's certainly gives me more hope than what we have seen in the past. Edit May 2015 - see also White's patent for Constant Current Metal Detector
  25. My recent experiences with new model metal detectors has convinced me of two things. First, I want every new model I might consider going forward to have built in wireless headphone capability. It eliminates the issues surrounding where to place a headphone connection on the metal detector itself, and also eliminates the possibility of a cord failure. Stress on the cord and eventual breakage is the number one reason headphones fail. Headphones, if included or optional, would be best if they had the ability to go wireless or use an optional cord, in case the headphone battery gives out in the middle of a hunt. Second, high end new models should have an ability to have the firmware updated at home by the owner. It has become nearly normal for there to be firmware updates, even multiple updates, in the first year after a new detector is released. I am not talking about getting new features for free, although that would be nice. I am talking about it becoming apparent that a bug exists or something was overlooked, requiring an update to the firmware. Nobody should have to go through time and expense to have to return a metal detector to the factory to get a firmware bug fix. There are just too many new detectors becoming available these days, and I decided I need to draw a line on certain features to help eliminate the majority that are just variations on what we already have. Right now the market is flooded with 13 - 19 kHz single frequency detectors and more arriving every month it seems. Yet models with built in wireless headphone capability are almost non-existent. Given that basic single frequency VLF tech is maxed out, it only stands to reason that manufacturers need to be looking hard at ergonomics and extra features like wireless capability to differentiate themselves from everyone else. It is after all the 21st century. Maybe I can't get my flying car yet, but asking for these two features in new detectors is not asking too much. My current core units: Garrett ATX - N/A Makro Gold Racer - Includes wireless headphone capability as an option Minelab CTX 3030 - Includes both wireless headphone and firmware update capability Minelab GPZ 7000 - Includes both wireless headphone and firmware update capability White's DFX - N/A XP Deus - Includes both wireless headphone and firmware update capability