Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Interesting concept , keep working with it  !

The spectrum analyzers I had would have just displayed the frequency that the speaker output has to the closest standard 1/3 octave centers.   May be different than the phone apps available thee days. I tried a couple of those.....didn't cut it , for my use.

Easier to just train the ears...IMO


  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2021 at 7:36 AM, rvpopeye said:

Easier to just train the ears...IMO

Easier to just train the ears on what???   The equinox signal is so processed what are you going to be able to tell the difference of in non-ferrous targets??? 

Link to post
Share on other sites


As has been mentioned some detectors are incorporating some form of this on screen , I remember one a few years back that had a separate screen from the display and it was very different in the type of information about a target was displayed... uhhhhhhhhhhh ,,,,Nocta ....Infibio ,,Infivio ?er something like that. I wonder what became of that ? Was a little pricey at $10K 

But not on an Equinox , even the 800   

"Train" by getting used to the tones your detector makes for different objects.    I realize that might be easier for musicians and also sometimes more than one thing will produce the same tones.  So my  "easier" may not be so easy for others....sorry , I spent most of my life surrounded by musicians so sometime I forget..more so as I get older too !!!! skuh kuh kuh kuh kuh kuh  

 I traveled almost every day and/or night back then and I remember that after so many miles of listening to my tires on the pavement that produced a note varying according to my speed  , eventually I didn't have to look at the speedometer , just go by the tone...even worked for shifting....maybe you've done that too ?

 What more information is learned by knowing the frequency # of that tone ?   I guess a number could be easier to remember but the ID #'s  on the detector correspond to the different tones already. (50 tones for 50 IDs)                                   ( I'm going through this too , my old detector only had one note ! (It was a  D , for dig  LOL       I started out in 5 tone last year and this year I'm going full monty 50 !) 

 There was a point in my career when  I was all about my tech tools and what they were telling me but I realized I wasn't paying enough attention to the show.... kinda applies to this...

I'm not saying El Nino77 (or anybody) should stop experimenting , maybe something yet to be discovered  I'm not thinking of !  Posting things like this get us all thinking out of the box which is a good thing.

Another thing I found out on the road ...no matter how much anybody knows ,on any subject ,  there is always more to learn .  Just sometimes you don't realize it till you get to that level......




  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

".... train the ears"

I think the important bit here is the S of ears. If the audio was seperated in a frequency-dependant way, there's likely to be more chance of picking out nuances. This could be done with the existing mono output and post-processing, though it would evidently be better if it was performed internally by the Eqx software.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx Pimento

I forgot (what'd I tell ya ?) Second part of midalake's question.

Telling the difference... Oh My Goshk !that's the bugger of the whole thing isn't it  !

Let's seeeeee , there's the dig it method ,,, 

Coming next in the EQX 1100 ? 

A built in audio frequency counter , 1Hz accuracy  , FFT on a chip. connected to a digital assistant AI , that tells you " 15 , target 2 inches , but that's a pulltab not a nickel , keep moving...)       "  7 , Target 16 inches ,RING  gold 18K 17 grams , 2 carat stone , real diamond , DIG  DIG DIG , bent nail 3 inches to the left and 1 inch above , and 2 empty ketchup packets 1 inch directly below target ") 

No dig teleporter upgrade model also available.....and included free on all units shipped to the mars colony..

Due to supply chain breakdown the nanobot injection target  ID system won't be out till the EQX 3000

Keep an eye out for a totally new model line releasing soon , The Dowser 9000 chip implant , complete with psychic connection to a genuine witch queen from New Orleans... you'll just know where to dig !


Now , if you'll all excuse me . I gotta get outta this camper and try to dig something,,,where did I put that heated shovel prototype ? 















  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I played with a app called spectrum (for iPhones) to look at detector speaker output from a pi machine, it would probably work better with the signal discrimination of a Nox.  Using a phone or mini-pad attached to a Nox would be a great way for a hearing impaired person to detect and be able to see what type of tones are being output from the detector.

The image below is a screenshot of the output from Spectrum. It is pretty basic, but it displays  real-time frequency, timing and amplitude (dB).  It could do this with input from the detector to the phone of target and threshold signals (you would have to watch it real-time to see signal timing).

It looks nice and gives some information, however I don’t think the processed sound could be used for digital target recognition, there isn’t enough information for the processed audio signal to do that, but perhaps the raw digital unfiltered signal output could be useful for that- it may have smaller signal nuances that when compared to other known  target signal files may me used for this. The technology for doing this is used for Identifying bat species by their call signatures, but there is a lot more species specific information in a bat call including timing, frequency and harmonics.  Maybe detecting will go there one day, hopefully soon!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting! Being hearing impaired and wearing hearing aids, I once tried to find the kHz of the NOX tone breaks and use my audiology report which shows my hearing loss frequencies. Thinking hearing aids just approximate the “all sounds” young ears hear. Anyway, I gave up but this topic may have something. Cheers

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, GotAU? said:

it would probably work better with the signal discrimination of a Nox.

I see from your sidebar that you have an Eqx 800.  50 tones, swing the coil over a copper penny,...  Please.

So far you've just teased us.  We want to see the punchline!  Or is that for subscribers only?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if the Nox will pair Bluetooth to an iPhone?


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 GB_Amateur
      This is a topic relevant to every(?) form of detecting -- ground coverage.  I'll list several questions concerns I've had but any replies of course aren't limited to these, nor do they need to address  any of them.  Just tossing out some ideas to prompt further discussion.
      1) What methods and efforts do you apply to ensure full ground coverage in the cases where that is one of your goals?
      2) Is your sweep a straight line path or an arc?
      3) How long is your sweep?
      4) How much do you overlap consecutive sweeps in the direction you walk?
      5) How much do you overlap side-to-side swings when following parallel paths (e.g. when walking two side-by-side swaths in the same direction how much does the left end of one path overlap the right end of the next path or vice-versa)?
      6) Have you ever measured your coverage?  How well do detectors with GPS (e.g. Minelab GPZ-7000 and Minelab CTX-3030) monitor ground coverage to this detail?  Have you used other devices to measure ground coverage.  E.g. I can imagine a drone with camera could provide useful data.  Are there smartphones app that would help quantify coverage?
    • By nebulanoodle
      Just dreaming...
      What'dya think? Minelab technology going on the next moon mission?
      X6 must be space-worthy.
    • By AUgetter
      If this question has been addressed elsewhere, I apologize in advance and hope someone can give me a link for it.  I have noticed that other companies besides Minelab are coming out with PI detectors for less than $3K.  How do these detectors compare to the best Minelab detectors for Gold and also relic hunting?
    • By JCR
      On the Anfibio Multi (and I think Kruzer & others) there is a definite step in sensitivity between 39&40 Gain and again between 69&70 Gain. Is this a change in the Internal Threshold? In a way this would be the inverse of the way the F75 adjusts sensitivity according to Mike Hillis.  Regardless, it is a very good set up in difficult sites. Most NM users know about the difference in response speed between 89 & 90 Gain on 3DI. This is different. I had read about these steps in a forum post that quoted Alper of NM. I can't seem to find that post now that I want to re read it.
    • By jasong
      This is the most out of this world Minelab detector patent I've ever read. There is so much here, some very sci-fi like, I don't even know where to start. My takeaway is they seem to be positioning themselves for a drone based detector eventually (main details in this patent could be easily transferred to a drone based platform - IMU, GPS, magnetometer, heads up display, FPV, remote control, robotic/vehicle mount, etc) . That is 100% a guess. But in the meantime, there is some interesting, novel items in the pipeline that we might actually see on a machine in closer future?
      No clue if this is a coin machine or gold machine or if it's something they are actually working on right now or just trying to get control patents on such things for the future which may or may not arrive. One thing is for certain, Minelab is BUSY in the engineering department. A few of the highlights:
      Heads up display over glasses/head mounted display (aka augmented reality). Settings, target visualization, shading of detected/not detected areas (I asked for this specifically 5 or 6 years ago here, awesome to see it in a patent now). Plus a camera showing the coil (why would you need that if not operating remotely as from a drone?) The detector has a camera, IMU (accelerometer) and magnetometer to determine position with accuracy. The IMU tracks the position of the coil in real time in relation to both the ground and the target, and combined with the camera video feed will provide a "visual" of the target in the ground through the glasses/head display, as in form of a heat map which increases accuracy with each pass of a coil over the target. A GPS tracks the machine position to properly map the IMU/coil visual target data on the ground and let's a user see the mapping as they detect. This data is recorded for future historical use and can be shared.  Centimeter accuracy with the visual target heat mapping. Potential operators/users include entities other than humans such as "robots" and "an AI (artificial intelligence) using a metal detector" and this line: "The metal detector may be handheld, mounted on a robotic arm of a vehicle or a robot."  Wireless connectivity to computers and phones, transfer of files containing settings configurations from instructors or expert users Remote control of the metal detector through apps on laptops or phones Ability to upload maps, including detecting data, historic human activity, buildings, or other items that seem to indicate custom mapping capability Internet connectivity, potential control through the internet (again, why if not for a drone type device?) "Teamspeak" to other detecting members in the area wirelessly Visual/spatial discrimination Accurate depth measurement Synthesized audio mode, eliminating noise completely and allowing the detector to "recreate" a synthetic audio stream based on data from prior swings Delayed audio processing (enhanced audio) mode or real time audio mode, ability to seperate multiple close targets, reason for this I venture a guess why below ---> This patent actually seems to be describing a completely new method of RX in a detector. Which is actually similar in some ways to the wacky idea I had years ago of reducing EMI/ground noise by emulating a radio telescope array. But in this case they appear to be describing a fairly ingenuous method of doing something similar with only one coil by monitoring RX of the same target at different points in the swing (with the IMU tracking these points) and combining all those RX signals. In this way (and this is my guess, the patent doesn't explain this), you can form a sort of comparator, gradiometer, or interferometer to seperate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. If that's what they are doing, then I find it to be brilliant. If not, then I just gave them one hell of an idea to patent for the future. 
      That probably sounds like jibberish to non-engineers. But I want people to understand the brilliance in simple terms. Consider this: EMI is random. At any given point in your swing you'll get noise here, but not there. So if you compare two points in the same swing, you will hear noise one point but not the other point because the "zap" already ended. But you might hear a good target at both points in the swing since it's not random like EMI, it's always there in the ground. So, you can effectively eliminate EMI by comparing what signal is not there at two very close points in the swing, and keep the target since it's always there.
      Similarly, with ground, the ground changes as the alluvium changes since soil is inhomogeneous. But a target is still the target. So, a similar method can be applied to the ground.
      In theory, you could use ideas like this to essentially get rid of the Difficult type timings and keep your gains boosted high, and deal with EMI/ground in this way instead which does not require reducing sensitivity. A totally new, novel approach to RX in a metal detector. The audio processing is very slightly delayed because they are using that time to compare measurements at a few different coil positions before letting the audio processor signal that there is a target present. That's my guess. If that isn't what they are doing, then someone else should patent that and thank me for it later when Minelab buys it. Either way, they have something totally new in the RX department here. And the future of detecting looks bright and interesting to me still.
    • By WhiteRabbit
      Hello, now here’s an opener that might just get me banned on my first post!
      Bear with me, my intentions are pure :)
      Does anyone know if it would be possible to jam an MD signal? The reason I ask is to combat the evident problem we have in the UK with “nighthawks”, illegal detectorists.
      Over here, any landowner can grant permission for detecting on their land (with caveats, known historic sites are protected by law). What often happens is that such a permission is granted and a detectorist innocently sets about his / her business. Someone less scrupulous spots this person and assumes there may be something important there, so shows up at night with a couple of friends and the landowner awakens to a field / lawn full of holes, then bans metal detecting.
      Historic sites are also looted.
      Just an off the wall question, how tricky would it be to build a device to block this on a piece of land? Anyone any ideas?
  • Create New...