Jump to content

Did Minelab Multi-iq Obsolete Single Frequency?


Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, UT Dave said:

Indeed.  Business has always been a contact sport.  Perhaps more brutal today than ever before.  Social media has added so many new dimensions, many of which, are not particularly useful or appreciated by customers.

The availability of well done tech media is one dimension that we can all appreciate though.  As mentioned, I'm not going to pay much attention to anything else about the Legend for now, myself.  I want docs, manuals, white papers, video of OS nuts and bolts.

I like to root for the companies who's true north is delivering more value, quicker, and with better outcomes for their customers.  They deliver on that, I kind of don't care who's feelers they hurt or which competitors were forced to live in smaller houses in the process.  Those companies don't always win though.

At the price and feature set of the Legend, if it performs, it has the potential to actually grow this market - a rising tide lifting all boats and all that.  But it also has the potential to rip a hearty chunk out of the existing market - a necessity for growth in a market that is relatively stagnant in size.  

- DAA

THIS !! All the people boo hooing will be in line to get one at that price point. It will also force the hand of ML with their price structure. ML raised their price on the 800 and NM absolutely crushed that price point. The Legend doesn't have to be better, just equal to turn the fortunes in their favor. ML and their arrogant "obsolete" charge is foolish. Obsolete by definition means no longer produced or used. Many detectorist and their single frequency machines are still out there making great finds and having fun. Furthermore, single frequency detectors are still being made and sold. NM build quality is far and away superior to the Nox detectors. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I think they did make single frequency detectors obsolete, sure companies are still making and selling them because they have to, they don't have a range of multi frequency detectors to sell, we're at the cross over point now and it takes time.

Companies are playing catch up quickly trying to release their multi version, some may have more success with it than others but the shift has taken place.  Since the Nox Garrett has come out with one, XP has one and now Nokta has one.

They knew they had to have one to keep up with the market and they made it their flagship as that's what a multi frequency detector can be, it wasn't because customers asked for it like they say for the reason they did it, they'd did it because they'd lose customers without it as other manufacturers started to join Minelab and had to have it to stay relevant in the market.  Nokta is innovative and modern, no way would they be wanting to be left behind with Fisher.   It's happening with cars at the moment too with alternative fuel/power sources. 

Minelab won't be making any other single frequency detectors, they said so themselves, over time once the other brands multi frequency technology matures I'm sure they won't either.

People still drive Model T Fords, they're certainly obsolete, plenty of Antique cars on the road from every decade.  I doubt detectors like the Gold Bug 2 will ever go away until they all die, they're one of those single frequency detectors that has earned it's place as an antique that people will still want to swing.  A big benefit of a multi freaker for those that like single frequencies is you can use them too, an all in one detector.

With Nokta the big focus is often on price, I like that as everyone wants cheaper detectors but in reality performance matters the most, I'd rather pay more for better performance than cheaper for worse although here the Legend similar priced anyway, or more expensive.   So the Legend does have to be better or I don't need it, it may even come down to having a coil I want or aftermarket coil support from Nel/Detech that sways me as it very likely would. 

Some people make their buying decisions by price more than performance and they'll always attract these customers on a tight budget as evident by the Simplex, a lot of bang for the buck but not the best detector on the market by any means, a T2 in a modern housing with a few bells and whistles, a decent following of users though.

Minelab have had the freedom to set the prices of their detectors at whatever they wanted, look at their gold detectors, they've had no competition, it would be foolish to think they won't respond to competition to their Nox.  If they feel threatened they'll respond with cheaper pricing on the Nox or a newer better model, remember the Nokta is playing catch up to a 3-4 year old detector, Minelab might already be there on the next generation for all we know then let's see what happens and who buys what.

Most complaints about the Nox are build quality, certainly not performance.... fortunately for Minelab that's the easy thing to fix, performance is the difficult one.

I can't wait to see how the Legend goes performance wise, I really hope it's better than the Nox like claimed, exciting times for detector users, it's great to start to see some competition to Minelab and I truly hope Nokta sees the light and notices if they were to make a high performance PI gold prospecting detector not even needing to beat ML in performance, just a capable PI detector using their known build quality in a lighter housing they'd be able to shake that market up easily, not everyone can afford Minelab pricing so really have no option, Nokta can change that, a Nokta quality built QED style detector would be a hit.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, diggindaboot said:

ML and their arrogant "obsolete" charge is foolish. Obsolete by definition means no longer produced or used.

We've been through this at least a couple times in the neary 4 years since the ML Equinox was released.  (And actually they started that 'obsolete' claim at Detectival in September 2017, I think.)  You may want to dig deeper into the definition of 'obsolete' before getting too adamant.

Arrogant?  IMO, yes.  Pompous, no.  (The difference.)  Time will tell which, if either of these adjectives applies to recent claims by other manufacturers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GB_Amateur said:

We've been through this at least a couple times in the neary 4 years since the ML Equinox was released.  (And actually they started that 'obsolete' claim at Detectival in September 2017, I think.)  You may want to dig deeper into the definition of 'obsolete' before getting too adamant.

Arrogant?  IMO, yes.  Pompous, no.  (The difference.)  Time will tell which, if either of these adjectives applies to recent claims by other manufacturers.

obsolete
[ˌäbsəˈlēt]
 
ADJECTIVE
  1. no longer produced or used
     
    Time will tell which, if either of these adjectives applies to recent claims by other manufacturers. ML has been proven wrong. Only thing I need to dig deep is a hole for a treasure. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

obsolete
adjective
uk 
not in use any more, having been replaced by something newer and better or more fashionable:
 
Seems to fit for me.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, phrunt said:

I think they did make single frequency detectors obsolete, sure companies are still making and selling them because they have to, they don't have a range of multi frequency detectors to sell, we're at the cross over point now and it takes time.

 

SF detectors will never be obsolete in your lifetime. Deus is a single frequency detector. People are chompin at the bit to get a used one, once the fire sale begins. Forums represent a minute number of people who detect. Seasoned detectorist have detectors they will never part with because they may be good at doing just one thing. That one thing is enough to keep the detector where as an SMF might not work so well for them in that one application. So no. Minelab hasn't obsoleted anything. It was an arrogant claim. FTR, I have a Nox and use it for one specific application.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, phrunt said:
obsolete
adjective
uk 
not in use any more, having been replaced by something newer and better or more fashionable:
 
Seems to fit for me.

not in use any more, Appreciate you validating my point. 

Replaced: They replaced their own line of detectors but NOT everyone else's detectors.

Better: In some applications but not all. See Deus.

Fashionable: I mean yea you can color accent your Nox now. That's cool, I guess.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cherry-picking may work well in metal detecting but cherry-picking your definition to support your point while ignoring other definitions doesn't.

Many words have multiple meanings or at least variations which share some of the principles with others yet have their own subtle or not so subtle differences.

I see you are new here.  It might be appropriate for you to search back through the last four years of posts.  (Googling 'detectorprospector.com' and the word 'obsolete' will probably find the threads I've referred to.)  This isn't your typical social media site....

There is no initiation program for new members here but a bit of discretion and humility is always a good idea, at least until you've established yourself as someone worth paying attention to.

  • Like 5
  • Oh my! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Single core computers are good for word processing and lots of other tasks. They were eventually phased out by multiple core computers with multiple simultaneous co-processing units. Things move much slower in the metal detecting world, but in the end things evolve toward faster and more efficient processing of increasingly complex data. Evolution and natural selection apply to technology as well as anything. You’re seeing it unfold in single frequency vs multifrequency. There may always be specialty machines, but I doubt they will always be configured as they are now either, and in terms of all terrain do it all machines single frequency is looking backward. It’s a dead end. It’s obsolete. Selectable frequency, Multifrequency, mixed domain, and faster processing of more data from more sources is evolution. As people vote with their hands and their wallets natural selection is already taking place and we are evolving toward a more complex system better able to cope with the extreme ends of performance and giving more reliable data even under ordinary circumstances. As efficiency improves that complexity can be hidden away from the end user, but it is still operating and it makes a smarter system. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

Cherry-picking may work well in metal detecting but cherry-picking your definition to support your point while ignoring other definitions doesn't.

Many words have multiple meanings or at least variations which share some of the principles with others yet have their own subtle or not so subtle differences.

I see you are new here.  It might be appropriate for you to search back through the last four years of posts.  (Googling 'detectorprospector.com' and the word 'obsolete' will probably find the threads I've referred to.)  This isn't your typical social media site....

There is no initiation program for new members here but a bit of discretion and humility is always a good idea, at least until you've established yourself as someone worth paying attention to.

The definition hasn't changed and ML failed with their claim, which also hasn't changed. Nothing has been obsoleted. If you can prove they've obsoleted other detectors besides their own X-Terra and Go Find line, I may give your conclusion some consideration.  

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...