Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, SteelPhase said:

🤣🤣  No throwing under buses 🤣

Unfortunately when I did the original label I used the word filter which in hindsight was a mistake. Basically its a type of compression but its advantageous to only compress a certain band of frequencies at any one time. Because people run their threshold tones at different frequencies, the optimum band of frequencies to compress will differ, hence the 3 'filter' settings.

'Optimum frequency band' was too big to put on label 🤣

I think that more precisely answers jasong's original question re the SP01 so that will be helpful info.  Anyway everyone, continue to enjoy the SP01 deep dive, despite minor misunderstandings it is great to have a forum where the actual device designer engages in technical discussions with the end users.

In the mean time, I hope Norm's buddy figures out a solution to the EMI problem.

Cheers.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  I think that some people on this post haven't read some of my posts correctly. I do not have any issues with EMI on my GPZ or my CTX with the set up I use. I have used the WM 12 and WM 10 since day one with headphones plugged to the one I was using. Then I added the booster with headphones out of booster. I have successfully used that combo for years. Then I added the Equinox 800 to the mix, the furnished wireless headphones failed, While I was waiting for them to be repaired or replaced I bought a replacement set that fit me more comfortably with much better sound quality with better volume. I was able to turn the volume down about eight points. II have used the Grey Ghosts, Black Widow, Koss and Sun Ray Pros. The new wireless headphones work so well for me and my particular hearing loss, I wanted to try them on my other detectors, the cost was minimal ($26.00 dollars) and it works great for me. The EMI issue was for my friend that doesn't use the WM 12 and plugged the Wireless TX, RX into the GPZ, I think the consensus is that it the location that he used to mount it.

 I love my GPZ, CTX, Equinox, booster and wireless headphones.

                                                                                              Norm

 P.S. a lot of good info on this post, thanks to all for sharing

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norm, I think people understand. The problem is me, I've hijacked your thread to discuss an issue I have been wondering about for a long time because it was a convenient place to discuss it, unfortunately complicating your original (and hopefully solved) question. 

Mostly because I'm too lazy to start my own threads, and when I see something tangentially related I tend to just start rambling about this and that. :laugh: Apologies.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, phrunt said:

I felt I had a similar experience on the GPX with it, lower GPX volume with the sP01 doing the volume seemed to work well for me.

Simon and Norm have brought up another 'point' about the sP01.  It is not just for the GPZ.  It puts 'shoulders' on targets for many detectors.  I'm sure some better than others.  I haven't used it with my Equinox yet or any other of my detectors other than the GPZ and I've had it about 1.5 years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, phrunt said:

I am betting it's a difficult situation for Steelphase, trying to explain what it does without revealing what it does.  Last thing he wants is the market being flooded by copycat products.

I agree. I was trying to not ask anything too specific or press the matter for that reason. I actually had a pretty good guess what the SP01 was doing already since I've heard one in the field. Which is in part why I am asking these questions.

Props to him for showing up and answering what he can. I don't want him to reveal trade secrets, but I do think it's good to understand what things do and when/how they should be used so I definitely will always be asking what products do and trying to understand them better for any product really, detecting or otherwise.

Like, if you have a turbocharger in your truck that is intentionally bypassed, then it's kinda pointless to spend a bunch of money on a 3rd party tuner to boost your HP when you could just hook up the turbo and achieve the same or better end result. I wanted to see how similar or dissimilar this situation is with the GPZ.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

I said filter in the context of "audio filter" which is part of what equalization does but in an active vice passive sense.  Feel free to deflect it all back on me because of my imprecise usage of terms.  Guess

Interesting thread indeed,

I’ve never been a booster user, possibly because I’ve spent a very large portion of my working life in Audio engineering, Speech processing for Speech recognition, voice biometric systems, and IP telephony voice recording.

The inventor/chief designer of Minelab Metal detectors, Mr Bruce Candy is one of the best designers of Audio Amplifiers on the Planet.

You can read all about the man here.

https://halcro.com/history/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, egixe4 said:

Interesting thread indeed,

I’ve never been a booster user, possibly because I’ve spent a very large portion of my working life in Audio engineering, Speech processing for Speech recognition, voice biometric systems, and IP telephony voice recording.

 

The inventor/chief designer of Minelab Metal detectors, Mr Bruce Candy is one of the best designers of Audio Amplifiers on the Planet.

 

You can read all about the man here.

 

https://halcro.com/history/

 

Interesting, thanks for that.  For the record, I don't use a booster either, but what I do know is that the right choice of headphones makes a huge difference in what I am hearing coming out of the GPX, that's why I was intrigued by the selectable 'Optimum frequency band' :rolleyes: settings on the SP01.  Sort of echoing Mitchel's statement above regarding it's use on detectors other than the GPZ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, normmcq said:

The new wireless headphones work so well for me and my particular hearing loss, I wanted to try them on my other detectors, the cost was minimal ($26.00 dollars) and it works great for me.

Norm, you probably said this somewhere along the line (lost in the deep discussions -- 7th page already), so could you post the name (and preferably a link) to these?  I'm always interested in a better solution if it's cost effective.  I shelved the Equinox's ML80's for a couple reasons, one being I didn't like the sound compared to other options I have already available.  Now you have me intrigued.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chase Goldman said:

For the record, I don't use a booster either,

Chase, when you try one, I'd be interested in reading your opinion. Especially as it relates
to a GPZ with an sP01.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...