What Makes Multi-iq So Good?

[mh9162013]

I keep hearing that a major advantage of the Equinox (and Vanquish) is that it allows users to make finds in locations that have already been pounded by earlier hunts.

I believe this, but I want to know "how" this is happening. Let's use a hypothetical to illustrate my question.

Let's say you have a park and  most detectorists are using the Compadre, Ace, F2, F75+, AT series...or some other single frequency VLF machine. But you've got the Vanquish or Equinox and you're able to make "great finds" that the other people are missing. How does this happen? 

Is your Multi-IQ machine able to see something that the machines can't? Or is it able to see it with a "better" signal (i.e. higher tone, louder tone, higher VDI number, etc.)?

In other words, is the non-Multi-IQ machine completely missing a target while the Equinox or Vanquish see it? Or do most machine see the target, but only the Multi-IQ machine sees it as a "diggable" target?

Alternatively, do all machine have roughly the same ability to see targets A, B, and C. But only the Multi-IQ machines can see targets D and E?

I'm just trying to conceptualize the term "better."

[Chase Goldman]

Better?  Well that's all relative.

The main advantage of Multi IQ (Equinox/Vanquish) or other simultaneous multi frequency detector schemes (e.g., BBS, FBS) in general is that it enables salt balancing without the need to lower sensitivity because it can get a salt reference from at least two frequencies.  This gives it better stability then single frequency machines on wet salt sand or surf at a given sensitivity lowering noise and increasing detection depth and the ability to ascertain a target ID at depth.  This effect also helps on mineralized soils, enabling the potential to resolve a target ID depth (a single frequency detector may be able to detect a target at the same depth as an Equinox is more likely to resolve a target ID whereas the other detector may display a ferrous tone or ID or no visual ID at all (just a tone)). 

The other advantage on land hunting is little more subtle but it  has to do with the fact that different targets react differently to magnetic fields generated at different frequencies.  In general, less-conductive targets like brass, lead, gold, and aluminum or very small targets of any conductivity tend to be more responsive (are more detectable) with higher frequency fields than lower frequencies.  Conversely, higher conductive targets like copper and silver and larger targets of any conductivity tend to be more responsive to lower frequencies.  The effect is subtle and variable and there is no absolutes as far as frequency cutoffs or ideal frequencies for specific targets are concerned.  Also, there is a lot of overlap and other variables such as the angle at which you approach the target, adjacent ferrous or non-ferrous junk target density, target orientation, ground conditions and effects (higher frequency fields tend to get attenuated more by the ground and cannot penetrate as deeply into the ground as lower frequency fields) all muddy up the equation.  And just because lower frequencies are more suited to high conductive targets and higher frequencies are more suited to low conductive targets doesn't mean that you won't see that seated dime if you are detecting at 40 khz or that brass Eagle button at 5 khz.

Since different targets that are borderline detectable at one frequency may become a no-brainer dig me signal at another frequency has been long known to detectorists.  It is a common technique to hit a site with one detector, then hit it again with another detector and invariably stuff is found in the field where someone swears they already swung their coil  This leads to the typically false conclusion that one detector is better than the other or someone is more skilled.  While it is true that detectorist skill/luck (e.g., swing coverage, coil control, ability to interpret machine tones, approach angle to the target) comes into play just as different detector characteristics (coils, recovery speeds, sensitivities, and discrimination settings) do, one thing that is often overlooked is the detector operating frequency difference between the two detectors.

With the advent of more commonly available multiple discrete frequencies on a single detector such as with the XP Deus, Nokta Multi Kruzer/Anfibio Multi/Impact, ML Xterra, Whites DFX, Tarsacci MDT, and even the Equinox as well as others, a lot of the variables above were taken out of the equation as detectorists discovered hitting or gridding a site with different detector frequency settings made "pounded" sites come alive again with finds that were barely detectable using other frequencies.

So what is the Simultaneous Multifrequency advantage, since a magnetic field with spectrum of frequencies are sent into the ground simultaneously, then you have a better chance of "illuminating" targets barely detectable at one frequency with a frequency that makes them more detectable.  Simple as that.  Combine that with the associated sophisticated signal processing software needed to pick out the various targets responding at different frequencies and that means you theoretically only have to grid that field with one mode setting instead of with multiple passes at different frequencies.

In reality it is not really that cut and dried, even frequency spectrums don't transmit every frequency and not all at the same field strength and in the case of the Equinox the  multi IQ search profiles are still divvied up by high frequency weighted and low frequency weighted spectrums.  Some might have better success gridding the field with different discrete single frequencies.  But at least Multi IQ gives you a fighting chance to find the high conductive targets and low conductive targets on a single pass better than a single pass with single frequency.

Multi IQ also facilitates some other performance enhancements on Equinox including a more forgiveness for a less then ideal ground balance (because the ground reference can be inferred and slightly compensated for from the ground response at the different transmit frequencies), more stable ground tracking, and iron bias compensation.  As a side benefit of sorts, the processing power required to do the signal processing of the Multi IQ target signals also makes the Equinox a fast detector with not only high recovery speeds but the ability to adjust those recovery speeds to suit the site conditions, in a sense trading detection depth for separation while balancing ground feedback.

Has Equinox rendered all other detectors "obsolete".  Not by a long shot.  But Multi IQ is still one hell of a detector technological advancement and I am excited to see where ML takes it in the future.  Vanquish is the result at the low end, would like to see if Multi IQ brings anything to the table on the high end as the successor the sophisticated discrimination and target ID features of the eTrac/CTX 3030 FBS machines.

HTH

 

PS If you are interested in a deeper dive you can look here for a ton of more info - The Equinox Forum Essential Information Compendium.  Specific posts on Multi IQ and Frequency are here and here.

 

[palzynski]

36 minutes ago, phrunt said:

...

The deeper targets on the Multi-IQ machines instead of getting wild numbers deviate a little, so a silver coin that should ring up 15 it will go 15, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 15, 14, 15, 16, 15, 15, 16, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 14, 15, 15, 15, 14, 16 so it's pretty obvious it's worth digging when it's showing very deep on the meter, it's averaging around 15 with it being the middle number.

You are lucky Phrunt because in the wood where I am currently detecting here , with an ID of 15 or 16 there are 99/100 chances that there is a schrapnell under my coil ...😄   However I prefer to dig for the remaining 1/100 chances that there is something else under it 😊..

Back to mh2162013's question , what I have found after hundreds ( thousands ? ) of hours detecting either with single freq machines like the Deus/Orx , Goldmaxx , T2 , etc … or multi like the Explorer XS , Eq 800 , Vanquish 540 is that the multifreqs are a little deeper on low to medium iron trashed areas. On high iron trashed areas with thousands of old nails , the ML multifreqs cant compete with single frequency machines like the Deus , ORX , Tesoro Lobo , T2 on the FA mode , …  It is just my opinion ..

This applies for Europe , in the US the high iron trashed areas are probably less frequent than over here .. Which could explain that multifreq detectors are more often used in the US than in Europe , again just my opinion...

 

 

[mh9162013]

3 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

The main advantage of Multi IQ (Equinox/Vanquish) or other simultaneous multi frequency detector schemes (e.g., BBS, FBS) in general is that it enables salt balancing without the need to lower sensitivity because it can get a salt reference from at least two frequencies.

So you think Multi-IQ's biggest advantage is better beach detecting?

[mh9162013]

6 minutes ago, palzynski said:

On high iron trashed areas with thousands of old nails , the ML multifreqs cant compete with single frequency machines like the Deus , ORX , Tesoro Lobo , T2 on the FA mode , …  It is just my opinion

Can you elaborate?

[mh9162013]

1 hour ago, phrunt said:

I will miss targets due to it's unstable ID's

See, this is what I was thinking might be the case here. Whether I'm using an Equinox 800 or AT Pro, I'm still gonna get a signal when I hit almost any target. However, the AT Pro is more likely to make it look "iffy" while the Equinox 800 is more likely to make it look "diggable."

If that's the case, then in theory, experience and skill with a particular machine can largely make up for the Multi-IQ advantage in certain situations.

Take PI machines in black sand or highly mineralized/salty ground and compare them to a single frequency VLF machine. There's no debate which you probably want to use, right? The PI machine will work (for the most part) and the VLF machine will be almost useless...or at least far disadvantaged. But it seems like when comparing the Multi-IQ to a single frequency VLF machine in a mild location, such as a park, the advantage is less obvious or less extreme.

[mh9162013]

1 hour ago, phrunt said:

you just can't dig 1000 holes.

In my quest to determine what makes an expensive detector "better" than a cheaper one, it seems like this is the primary advantage: more efficient digging. In other words, if someone was willing to dig it all, then they could be successful with almost any quality machine. It's only when people start picking and choosing whether to dig a signal or not, that the higher tech begins to shine.

I noticed this working in the real world. When you get down to brass tacks, the real difference between a professional and an amateur is efficiency. For example, I can can probably cook a gourmet dish as well as a professional chef. But the professional chef can create 8 dishes in 20 minutes while it takes me 4 hours to make just 1 dish.

[Chase Goldman]

42 minutes ago, mh9162013 said:

So you think Multi-IQ's biggest advantage is better beach detecting?

That is where you get the biggest separation from single frequency detectors IMO, the next is efficiency, you can cover the same patch of ground once with multifrequency, whereas it might take multiple passes at different frequencies to pull out the iffy, boderline targets in other frequencies.  You talk about skill being able to make up the difference by really knowing your detector.  Perhaps.  I believe that knowing your detector inside and out and overall experience are keys to detecting success (next to site selection as the biggest factor) with the tool itself further down on the list, becaue when it comes right down to it, detectors don't make a great detectorist just like the golf clubs don't make a golfer great.  Detectors, like golf clubs are all pretty similar in capability because they use the same basic physical principle to detect metal.   But wouldn't you rather have a tool that takes some of the skill or chance out of the equation, and takes you to the next level by giving you less iffy targets to deal with, leaving only the real tough ones that only your skill as a detectorist can resolve?

I am also a big believer in using a diverse array of tools.   The right tool for the job at hand.  I use a PI for relic hunting in super hot dirt, the versatile Equinox for relic, park, and beach hunting, and my Deus/Orx is probably my favorite because I know it so well, it is light, and it kills in thick iron.  So which is better?  The answer is simple, its the one I decide to pull out of the truck that morning.

[dogodog]

Chase wrote the best explanation on multi frequency I've ever seen. Basically what he's telling you is that there is no perfect detector for all hunting. It comes down to experience and knowing your machines. If there was one perfect detector, we would all be owning that detector and there would be nothing more to find. Everybody on this forum will tell you, including myself that we miss a lot of stuff. The more you hit a spot the more you find that out. Is it the detector or is it us? I'm banking on human error most times. There are a lot of great non multi detectors made, that in the right hands will find a lot. Multi freq. detectors just give you some better options for certain targets and soil conditions. I wouldn't get to wrapped up in the whole better not better thing . Every detector has it's place, and confidence in your detector plays a huge part.

Chase will definitely explain this better than me. He is very knowledgeable.

[mh9162013]

51 minutes ago, dogodog said:

I wouldn't get to wrapped up in the whole better not better thing

That's the whole point when choosing what detector to use. Also, it's nice to understand the why in any choice.