Garrett Apex - Patent Pending

[mh9162013]

15 hours ago, ☠ Cipher said:

Hats off to Garrett if they do. It came out of nowhere, but it would make me very happy. I've been itching for some, any American company to compete at this level. The only things that make me do a double take is 1. That it came so far out of left field with no prior indication that Garrett could do Multifrequency (it wouldn't be as surprising coming from First Texas say). 2. How blatantly similar it sounds to multi-IQ, right down to the specific frequencies. I am hoping it's all coincidence. I'm rooting for them for sure. 

Hmmmm, yeah, it definitely kinda makesya wunduh.

I don't think Garrett would cheat, so I'm guessing either:

1) A business arrangement between Minelab and Garrett

2) There are only so many efficient and practical ways to engineer a simultaneous multifrequency machine and the similarities are a scientific coincidence, kind of like the Space Shuttle and Buran. Perhaps the "juice" is in doing it efficiently, both from a financial and power consumption perspective.

[☠ Cipher]

17 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

Multi IQ and the individual selectable frequency options on Equinox (and probably Apex for that matter - but need to analyze the Apex to be sure) have nothing to do with each other despite Minelab's confusing/dumbed down marketing mumbo jumbo on Multi IQ conflating the two.  That has been proven through spectrum analysis.  It is interesting though that they are indeed using most of the same individual frequency selections for Apex as for Equinox 600/800.

Exactly what I'm alluding to in a prior post. The public is intentionally given the impression in marketing language and visuals that those specific individual frequencies are combined in multi-IQ. The spectral analysis does indicate this is not the case. Despite the analysis done by Carl and others the marketing version seems to persist in the mind of most of the public, particularly on social media. We know only because we frequent the forums where more scrutiny and analysis is done on all metal detecting subjects. I'd say those in the know on this represent a very small minority. A lawsuit would shine a light on it, and a lot of details that companies like to keep close to the vest. Garrett has been known to troll Minelab in the past as well, half in jest referring to the infinium as running 99 frequencies or something to that effect. Strategically they are very aware of the psychological component of detector sales when it comes to frequency. Here Garrett doesn't indicate, so far as I've seen that those specific frequencies are used in their version multi, but they are aware that that impression is out there for multi-IQ. 

[☠ Cipher]

I'm very excited though, not so much for this unit, but for what will inevitably flow from this. It says exciting things are ahead as far as what replaces the AT Series, a level closer to where I feel my current machines are playing at. It may seem silly to some, but American made is important to me. It was with a great deal of hesitation I switched over to Minelab and sampled others like Deus. But, now that I have, it's going to take an Equinox level machine and no less for me to switch back. I'm still happy as a lark with my V3i, but I also wanted an FBS machine for water and other tasks, so added a CTX-3030 w/17" coil last week (used at $1,100 I'm proud to say). It would take an CTX level machine to turn me back to US detectors on that level. Maybe we will finally get that, something as innovative as the GTI but in a current multi and/or single selectable format. This also puts a lot of pressure on Whites to do something more modern with a V3i-like platform, and First Texas to finally put something on the table. This is an exciting time, I just hope this doesn't get tied up in lawsuits and even delays that have plagued other units from other manufacturers. 

[Geotech]

10 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

They either violated Minelab’s patent, in which case the lawsuit hits soon, or they came up with a different version of their own... and would be smart to patent it.

I don't recall any patents specific to Multi-IQ. Multi-IQ is direct sampling which means everything worthwhile is done in the micro. It's probably better to not patent any of that because then you have to reveal it. I would be surprised if Garrett went straight to direct sampling multifrequency, that's quite a difficult jump. More likely, they used analog demods and that approach has been around a while. Ergo, I see no patent concerns for them.

[JohnnyRox]

Would doing it that way affect reactivity speed compared to the Equinox?  

[Jackpine]

11 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

Multi IQ and the individual selectable frequency options on Equinox (and probably Apex for that matter - but need to analyze the Apex to be sure) have nothing to do with each other despite Minelab's confusing/dumbed down marketing mumbo jumbo on Multi IQ conflating the two.  That has been proven through spectrum analysis.  It is interesting though that they are indeed using most of the same individual frequency selections for Apex as for Equinox 600/800.

Yeah,  Minelab does state though that they use the minimum number of frequencies to get the job done.  That begs the question, does Garrett's software make a substantial difference in performance by being able to use all freq's?  The proof as they say will be in the pudding.

Whether or not it will compete with the NOX, it one ups the Vanquish IMO by having a seperate Salt Balance mode.  ML flubbed on that one with the V.

[Steve Herschbach]

14 hours ago, Geotech said:

I don't recall any patents specific to Multi-IQ. Multi-IQ is direct sampling which means everything worthwhile is done in the micro. It's probably better to not patent any of that because then you have to reveal it. I would be surprised if Garrett went straight to direct sampling multifrequency, that's quite a difficult jump. More likely, they used analog demods and that approach has been around a while. Ergo, I see no patent concerns for them.

If anyone thought I was implying Garrett was violating a patent, that is certainly not my intent. Just the opposite, I was noting that there is a “Patent Pending” statement and the likely thing to deduce from that is Garrett has developed a method they think they can patent. And therefore not something in violation of a Minelab patent. Though the patent pending could also have nothing to do with multifrequency at all. Only Garrett knows for sure. Frankly, all I care about is how the detector performs, so did not anticipate my throwaway comment would trigger so much debate. I should have known better. I’m sure there will be reams of speculation on which method does what, frequencies in use, how the atoms rotate, etc. etc. 

Thank you for your thoughts on this Carl.

 

[Jeff McClendon]

4 hours ago, Jackpine said:

Whether or not it will compete with the NOX, it one ups the Vanquish IMO by having a seperate Salt Balance mode.  ML flubbed on that one with the V.

If it is true that the Vanquish is using a form of the Equinox Beach 1 mode for all of its modes, salt balance is automatically taken care of on the Vanquish. Where the Apex one ups the Vanquish big time is its user ground balance adjustment which is totally lacking on the Vanquish.

Jeff

[Geotech]

11 hours ago, JohnnyRox said:

Would doing it that way affect reactivity speed compared to the Equinox?  

Either way can achieve fast reactivity.

10 hours ago, phrunt said:

So you're indicating Multi-IQ is a better form of multi frequency than what you expect this Apex to be, or at least a harder version to achieve?

Harder, yes. Better, depends. Analog demodulation can perform as well as direct sampling. Direct sampling is mostly a way to reduce parts and make a smaller design, although it does allow demodulation with funny waveforms. No idea if the Eq does that.

2 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

If anyone thought I was implying Garrett was violating a patent, that is certainly not my intent.

No, it's just interesting speculation, especially considering Garrett chose the same frequencies. The Garrett patent could be a utility patent (technology) or a design patent (look & feel). They did both on their pinpointer, both in regards to the enclosure, but then never enforced those patents when clones started showing up. So I'm not sure why they would bother with a patent.

[Steve Herschbach]

Interesting though Carl that what it seem to be saying is that by filing patent you could be revealing important proprietary information, and that it may now be a better strategy to attempt to keep that information secret via technological means.

I do suspect one main difference between Apex and Equinox is that with Equinox there are various “mixes” or as Minelab says “weightings” of multifrequency employed. Park 1 and Field 1 use one mix, Park 2 and Field 2 a different mix. The two beach modes are either a third mix implemented two different ways, or two separate mixes. And then there is Gold Mode. Very much like having several different detectors in one. With Apex I suspect it is much simpler, just Multi and Multi Salt, with different secondary tuning and discrimination settings available, but only the two base modes plus single frequency options. Still a step up from Vanquish however, which appears to be wholly based on the Equinox Beach mode.