Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Regardless of how the other detectors performed against then Simplex, what you can take away from that video is on how far the bar has been raised now for entry or even mid level detectors, and on what features they should offer in their respective price bracket - netherlone on their more expensive models.

Features such as adjustable iron audio, ground balancing ability, upgradeable software, screen backlighting, wireless headphones, lithium batteries, fast reactivity, waterproofing and informative audio (vs beep & dig) may well be the new benchmark for any detector from entry level and upwards.  That's a pretty incredible list of features that is going to be hard to match, and may cause some real grief for those companies that have sat on their hands for way too long.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Goldpick said:

That's a pretty incredible list of features that is going to be hard to match, and may cause some real grief for those companies that have sat on their hands for way too long.

Well if it turns out to be a loss leader then things are going to be interesting about a year from now, and not just for other companies but for NokMak themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I've downplayed comparison videos, and this one has weaknesses, I will say they went to a lot of trouble both in burying the targets (in the mud) and trying to be fair.  As many of you, I didn't come away saying "there's a clear winner", but that alone is impressive.  Makro/Nokta's $255 (US) "introductory" detector would have been considered a 'flagship' by other companies not that long ago.

There seems to be a lot of comparison here between companies and their perceived intentions.  I'm as guilty as anyone on that front.  But standing back for a moment and looking at the big picture, rather than to denigrate the companies that are falling behind, I think we should instead be impressed with what Nokta/Makro has done in the few years they've been around.  The Racer was a good detector and they themselves have left that one in the dust with how many more recent products?  It seems like they have a new, better detector on the market a couple times per year!

I was dormant in my detecting during what appears to have been the heyday decade for innovation(?) of the 1990s (plus or minus).  I wonder if any of the players back then were as on-fire as we've seen with Nokta/Makro.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

I thought the Simplex came off looking pretty well myself. I appreciate people even taking the time they took to do this, shoot the video, and post it. All for free.

Agreed, and I was not as reasonable (gracious? kind?) in my comment as I should have been.  Let me try again.

Yes, the video posters DID do a lot of work to create the test conditions and perform the tests.  They were clearly more familiar with the Equinox and the Deus than they were with the Simplex. (Not surprising, since the Simplex is brand new.)  I appreciate all that and don't want to discourage others from performing similar tests.  Please, everyone, do more comparison tests!  Make videos!

However, I concluded they were a bit surprised the Simplex did as well as it did, and that the other two did not outperform it substantially, and, as a result, that caused them to ground balance and tweak the other two in order to make sure they could perform at their best. My point was simply that if they had also ground balanced and tweaked the Simplex, it might have done even better than it did.

And it did extremely well, straight out of the box, untweaked, by detectorists who were unfamiliar with it.  It appears that new users of the Simplex are likely to discover it's easy to find deep targets, at least in the type of ground these testers used.

That's good to know and it's a valuable contribution by these testers.  Thanks, guys!

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TallTom said:

My point was simply that if they had also ground balanced and tweaked the Simplex, it might have done even better than it did.

Point taken.  But as far as Simplex is concerned, GB is automatic on the Simplex and other than sensitivity there isn't that much to tweak performance wise, as that is the whole point of Simplex.  Keep it simple out of the box.  Turn on and go for the inexperienced detectorist yet give them great performance for 90% of all detecting situations.  So they in all liklihood could not eek much more performance out of the Simplex even if they tried to.  The user modes and settings really just change the way the targets sound to the user or add/remove iron disc.

"That's a digga, bah!"  :biggrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason for the shipping delay was to 1) add manual balance 2) Add another level of sensitivity 3) Add another level or two of EMI adjustment.  My question is - how will it do on wet salt beach?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect the Simplex will perform very close to the 14 kHz Kruzer. The Simplex+ is a great machine for what it offers at the price, but Nokta/Makro has not somehow magically changed what single frequency VLF detectors are capable of. This is mature, well proven technology that has changed little in the last 20 years except for how it is packaged.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to belabor the point about ground balancing, so I'll just quote from page 11 of the Simplex User Manual:

SIMPLEX+ is designed to work without ground balancing in Field and Park modes on most terrains. However, for experienced users and on highly mineralized grounds, ground balancing will bring extra depth and stability to the device.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Tom that the Simplex might have been tweaked for even better performance. That’s kind of the point to me really. I guess you are wanting it more clearly spelled out in the video that the Simplex is a competitive performer, whereas I’m seeing that anyway. It’s going head to head with detectors costing three times as much and that says a lot. Nobody even bothers with fair comparisons to detectors in its own price range since it so obviously outclasses those detectors.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine if Tesoro or FTP came out with a Simplex type unit 12 months ago? The forums would have been in meltdown

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

    • By TripleT
      I have a question regarding how the Equinox throttles back sensitivity when it encounters black sand.
      If I am running at 17 sensitivity on a salt water beach and detect over black sand; the machine throttles back sensitivity.   
      By how much does it do this? What would be the sensitivity when the black sand indicator is active at 17?
      This leads me to wonder. If running at 25 sensitivity and the machine encounters black sand, is it going to be a higher number than the previous scenario?
      I also realize, that at 25 the machine will probably throttle back sensitivity much sooner than at 17...
      Just curious, thanks!
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Nuggets found using Gold Mode, MF (multifrequency). Largest 9.8 grains, two smaller 0.6 grains each. Full report here.
       
      OK, there has been a lot of speculation on Gold Mode, and with Equinox shipping out in the next couple weeks I can now offer the basics.
      Gold Mode is designed to help optimise the finding of very small items. That normally means small gold to most people, so it has been called Gold Mode.
      A question that has been asked a lot. Is Gold Mode a true threshold based all metal mode? Not as I would define it. 
      On many VLF detectors a true, raw, unfiltered response can be seen via some pinpoint modes. All metal non-motion response.
      Next would be a motion based "first derivative" all metal mode, that basically adds motion filtering to the raw pinpoint signal in an attempt to keep an even threshold while in motion. This mode has no discrimination capability at all and just signals targets. This is the classic "true" all metal mode used on early induction balance prospecting detectors. Next would be "second derivative" filtering that is the classic motion based discrimination we see on most detectors today.
      Then along came dual channel processing. Many detectors started layering a visual discrimination channel onto the all metal channel, creating detectors like the that have a visual target id while in audio all metal mode. The X-Terra also has what is called "Iron Mask" while in Prospect Mode, which apparently incorporates a ferrous reject into the channel or employs a layered parallel channel. I don't know the technicalities, just that the feature is there.
      Are these "true" all metal modes? Not by old school definitions. And so to me at least Gold Mode does not fit that particular definition. The threshold, while it exists, responds more to items that are nulling on masked items (which may include ground and some hot rocks) than to ground variations in the classic sense as would be expected of a pure all metal mode. However, the extra capability offered sure does not have me pining for a true threshold based all metal mode.
      Gold Mode can run at MF (multifrequency), or 20 kHz or 40 khz. It does fit the definition of being an all metal mode by not being able to employ target tone identifications as is available in all other modes. You have a single tone, but it is adjustable for pitch. You do however have full time on screen target id numbers displayed at all times so you do have visual discrimination ability, but Gold Mode goes one more step, and you can also block/mask/notch just like you can in other modes. This is particularly important for the very low numbers down around -9 and -8 as some ground and hot rock responses roll in around there. Blocking low end ground responses causes the threshold to null (assuming you have it set loud enough to hear it) and so the nulling effects can alert you to ground changes and a possible need to tweak the ground balance if you are running in manual.
      However, what makes Gold Mode different in my mind is the processing, and in particular the audio, which employs a VCO based boosted audio that conveys the target in a way that gives a fuller picture of target intensity. The other modes have the standard Minelab modulated "beep" that simply gets weaker or stronger depending on the size and depth of target. The Gold Mode VCO based "rising/falling" response is more akin to what is seen in machines that produce that "zippy" response on tiny targets.
      The bottom line is Gold Mode can provide stronger audio responses on tiny targets. The large coil is fighting this a bit as a smaller coil or an elliptical will provide even tighter, zippier responses.
      The Gold Mode is not an automatic magical solution; it is simply a mode processed in a different way that can be advantageous in some situations and not in others. I expect given how some of us are very particular about how machines sound and act that this will be a mode some people really love and others might hate. VCO tends to have that effect on people.
      To sum up, Gold Mode is optimized for tiny targets, the most obvious way being with a boosted VCO type response on tiny targets, but there may be more to it than that I am unaware of. It does have both volume and threshold controls and while it is monotone the pitch can be varied. There is full time on screen (LCD) target id information as will as the ability to individually mask responses, mostly intended for hot ground/hot rock/ferrous responses but it may be used on non-ferrous targets also.
      Anyway, for those who think this is a key issue for them between Equinox 600 and Equinox 800 I wanted to try and clarify this a bit while people are still in pre-order mode in case people want to rethink things. To me the Equinox 800 is something I have to have based on the audio and other advanced tuning options, and Gold Mode is just an excellent bonus. in other words, I would still get the Equinox 800 even if Gold Mode did not exist. That's just me however and for others that lean differently hopefully this helps you out.
      https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/7468-my-tips-on-nugget-detecting-with-the-minelab-equinox/
       
    • By Tometusns
      Does anyone have any advice on how to make the arm cuff wider.  I don't remember the orx being this tight. I don't have large forearms so I know there's guys having the same problem. Thanks!
    • By pdunc
      Having been in and out of detecting for the last 35 years, decided to get back into it after selling all my equipment 2 years ago.  Bought an Equinox 600 and plan on trying it out next week on the coast, the only unfrozen ground in my area. Really looking forward to getting used to it since it is quite different than my prior Fisher CZ-21. My plan for this season is to hit dry sand beaches, water shallows(since I don’t have waterproof headphones yet), school yards, parks, and old house foundations. I don’t plan on detecting deeper water for now, but towards the end of our short season here in Maine, I’ll give my detector a few good dunkings to see if it leaks. After reading some of this forums posts, I’m concerned about putting my season in jeopardy if it does leak. I would be interested in hearing from those of you who have NOT had problems detecting in say 5’ or so of water, especially fresh water. All my water hunting in the past has been in fresh water, not salt. Also, has ML corrected the problem with the “ears” of the coil breaking? From some of my reading here it seems to have been a problem.
       
       
       
       
    • By bklein
      I guess we can’t add videos to our posts?  Anyway, the default  setting FE and F2 is 2.  I set out a gold ring, old square I ron nail, and quarter. With FE or F2 set at defaults of 2, it seems to mask these targets.  Set to zero all is good.  (This is an EQ600). This seems to contradict the original videos that came out when the detector did.  Beach2 program.
×
×
  • Create New...