Using The Different Frequencies For Gold

[Lachie]

I was wondering if anyone has used the different frequencies to give a better idea as to whether to dig or not. Using a.0.5gm gold as a target, the nox 800 identified a target in gold  multi. I then switched to field 1 in 40khz and it detected the target. I then switched to 4khz and no noise. I have then tried this on an old nail, a tin lid, a lead sinker, a drink tab and all were identified as a target whereas the gold wasn't. Has anyone tried this or a variation using other combinations and had success. This is using the principle of the lower the frequency the less likely it will detect gold as an aid to finding it. . Cheers 

[CPT_GhostLight]

I think it has been well established that lower frequencies favor larger objects and higher conductors such as silver, and higher frequencies favor smaller objects and lower conductors such as gold. This is why single frequency gold VLF detectors are made in higher frequency models, usually 24 kHz and up.

 

[Lachie]

I know this is the case but is anyone using it as an aid to detecting  as only a multi can provide this ability. Cheers 

[Jeff McClendon]

Are you referring to using this technique for gold jewelry detecting or gold nugget detector prospecting?

 

I get that all of us who hunt for gold jewelry are looking for an advantage. When I am gold jewelry hunting with the Equinox, I use multi and I listen for very good sounding targets in the correct ID range. Just like coins in good shape, gold rings, pendants and other larger gold items that are not being effected by really high mineralization and depth, will sound similar to most USA coins with steady numbers and tones that sound fairly equal in either swing direction and with clearly defined edges to the tone. Aluminum objects can sound like that also but they usually have less defined edges during swings. They can sound elongated with no hard hit in the center of the tone and often have more than one target ID. It is hard to explain. I will say, practicing with US nickels can really train the ear for how clear and percussive they sound. Many of the gold rings I have found with the Equinox also had those sound characteristics.

Using single frequency for diagnostic purposes may work. However, depending on depth, mineralization and the frequency being used, the target IDs can be skewed quite a bit and if you have notches set in a discrimination pattern, they may no longer apply.....

[Lachie]

I was looking at gold nuggets. I will experiment more today and see if it has merit or a waste of time (fun). Cheers 

[Lachie]

I have just done some more tests, works OK with conductivity  by altering frequency and sensitivity but change in size of target defeats the idea . Oh well sell the detector and buy lottery tickets with the proceeds. 

[Jeff McClendon]

Using 20 or 40 kHz for gold nugget prospecting, yeah I have done it when EMI was really bad. Otherwise, at least in the high mineralization I hunt in, multi works way better especially on hot ground that is hard to ground balance. I have never tested this, but it is conceivable that using 40 kHz could up average some detectable small nuggets enough to keep them from being pulled down into the iron range by mineralization when using the Gold Modes. Using 4 kHz in one of the other modes........why?

[Lachie]

The object is to use a low frequency which has difficulty detecting as another aid to identifying  gold as small gold will not register whereas other metals do. For example in field 1 and 4khz and sensitivity at 10 all metals including aluminium which has a low conductivity register whereas gold does not. By the altering the sensitivity I am able to hear all other trash but not gold nuggets, thereby assisting in the decision making as to whether to dig or not. At sensitivity 10 small gold has stopped registering whereas trash ie. iron aluminium etc is still registering at sensitive 1 the lowest you can go. 

This would be suggesting that you dig. If the target is registering down to 1 then it would be trash or large gold. This is not foolproof but is just an aid to decision making. This is a reversal of the normal thought process when deciding . Cheers 

[geof_junk]

On the gold fields dig what you can.

Shallow target discrimination is a bad choice because the hole is easily to do. Deep target discrimination is a worst choice because most target will not register on them.

How do you think you would do at this location. The wife and I got a dozen or two  nuggets there but it was what got me on a really good patch within a mile or so. What you see is where we stopped. several hundred tiny bits of rusted junk was our limit.

 

[Jeff McClendon]

5 hours ago, Lachie said:

I have just done some more tests, works OK with conductivity  by altering frequency and sensitivity but change in size of target defeats the idea . Oh well sell the detector and buy lottery tickets with the proceeds. 

Like CPT_Ghostlight said and you discovered, changing frequency between high and low to sort of reverse discriminate sub gram gold will also discriminate similar weight AND sized low conductors like lead and brass.

I remember some of your earliest posts where you wanted some detector and settings suggestions for cherry picking surface to 6” deep gold. 
 

However a sub gram say .5 gram sized piece of aluminum or aluminum foil is a very big target as far as size. A beaver tail from a ring pull tab can be an easy target to detect using any frequency but a .5 gram gold nugget, .22 short shell casing or .5 gram piece of lead is a far smaller target and moderate iron mineralization may pull the target ID and audio response close to the bottom of the iron range. If you accept all target IDs and have your iron volume turned up a bit, you may still hear those small low conductor targets grunting like they are iron. 
 

So you could use your idea to try and identify small gold nuggets but you will still be digging plenty of similar sized and weight low conductor trash.