Jump to content
Flowdog

Opinions On Equinox Detect Modes?

Recommended Posts

Edit Steve H - moved from this thread

It's been about 3 weeks since starting this new hobby (and asking my first newbie question.) I feel as if I have survived a 3-week full body and mind mugging. Nevertheless, I gotta say this about asking questions on this board: expect answers that put the ball in your court and that will require a complete and diligent research effort. BTW,  my Lake Tahoe 50th anniversary was lovely, but hunting was awkward. Private beach, snowing hard, limited time (that's why I am still married), but I managed to find one target - a 2011 zinc at the water's edge in Beach Mode 1 thanks to Gerry in Idaho's suggestion. First lesson: get permission. I was the only person on the beach due to the weather I guess. I felt that I was in a reverse fishbowl because all the cottages' windows were open and I felt the many eyes watching this fool attempting to look as if he knew what the hell he was doing "out there." I should have asked if the rules disallowed detecting on the beach. Never again. Just too uncomfortable. However, my first dig = coin. That equation would disintegrate over the next 3 weeks. No more coins in the next 50 digs. Sorry if this is too garrulous but I am truly infatuated and am getting to a question regarding the various Detect Modes and under what conditions to use them as hinted earlier in this post by Chase Goldman. Meanwhile, closer to home, I decided to detect in an iron graveyard. I dug an entire railroad rail. I had to squirm off the end because my pocket full of rare earth magnets had me pinned to the rail. Many spikes - vertical and horizontal. I actually lost more things than I found. Then going back to find the things I lost became a priority for a couple of days. That and trying to arrange my implements in a comfortable and easy-to-access way. I found my lost items and am fast approaching a carry system that works ok for me. I do not dig as many full-length rails, or spikes, or wire. I even found a small (silver) button in Gold 2 modified, a brass showerhead, spent bullet, and a copper clasp among the iron infestation. Meanwhile, I have read the above-suggested materials. This, of course, leads to more reading material. Mind expanding and numbing at once. Age-related dichotomy no doubt. So, getting to it, Chase (or anybody else) ... do I dare ask ... for YOUR overview of the 800's preset Detect Modes that may be an enhancement to the Manual description. Most importantly, I think what I really want to hear about is when detecting a new area (they are all new to me)  are there unobvious methods you use to pick a certain Mode over another? How do you analyze a location using Equinox as your guide? Some of Steve H's postings suggest how to tune/detune for gold hunting or even using Park 2 modified for hunting gold. His suggestions give me some feeling and insight into the flexibility of the various modes in crossing over from their labeled purposes as configured preset. Yes! It is time for me to STOP! And tune my hearing aid.

Image 3-28-19 at 12.01 PM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I almost always use Field 2 with 5 tones. No objective reason other than it suits my preferences for what I like to hear from the ground. More signals than Park 1, but I like that. A lot of them are trash or small items, but that's OK. I've learned what an old nickel sounds like (consistent 11/12 as I circle the target, and a small "hot spot" in pinpoint mode). I've done well with finding silver, even silver dimes on edge. I've learned to use tone, depth gauge, and pinpoint mode to gather data about a target. Field 2 just suits the way I like to hunt.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beach mode is not really for freshwater beaches.  It trades power (depth) for stability in wet salt beach conditions.  Though beach mode will work, it is not optimal at freshwater beaches and you should use the mode suited to your main target of interest, just as if you were land hunting.  This is how I stack up the modes for various situations and targets:

Park 1 or Field 1 for high conductive coins/targets (e.g., silver jewelry).

Park 2 or Field 2 for gold jewelry, nickels, brass and small targets and for hunting relicscwhich tend to be mid-conductors (brass and lead).

I use gold mode when detecting in highly mineralized ground because it tends to penetrate mineralized ground better but is linited in depth overall becsuse it is high frequency weighted and high frequency signals penetrate into the ground less than low frequency weighted dignals due to attenuation 

For salt beach hunting I use Beach 1 on dry wet sand and beach 2 in the surf.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SnohomishDigger said:

Field 2 just suits the way I like to hunt.

Interesting. Do your hunts generally take place encountering essentially the same overall conditions targeting coins on most hunts? Or do you modify Field 2 settings to whatever extent away from FPs to tune your machine to your tone preferences in a given location no matter the environmental matrix you are working? If so, it would seem that sometimes Park 2 may barely need a change from preset while other times in very different conditions, you may end up very distant from preset to achieve what you want. Almost a different animal than Park 2 - yet still be Park 2? That would seem to blur some of the lines among Mode choices useable with 5 tones. I like simple but know that in no remote way do I have the skills to make one Detect Mode "rule them all." However, I may just give your method an honest effort. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chase. My first moved topic, so I apologize for trying to tie one of your previous quotes to this new topic for some continuity that I think is on point. My apologies to Steve as well if I am doing something I shouldn't. 

 

Prior topic quote: "One of the mantras I use to optimize Equinox setup is to stay as close to the defaults as I possibly can and to maximize the signal to noise ratio.  Avoid doing things that raise the noise floor along with signal sensitivity (like cranking sensitivity too high or lowering recovery speed too low as mentioned previously).

Let me know if you want to go into the different properties of the various modes (Park 1/2, Field 1/2,. Beach 1/2, etc.) and what conditions and targets they are optimized for."

3 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

"This is how I stack up the modes for various situations and targets:

Park 1 or Field 1 for high conductive coins/targets (e.g., silver jewelry).

Park 2 or Field 2 for gold jewelry, nickels, brass and small targets and for hunting relicscwhich tend to be mid-conductors (brass and lead).

I use gold mode when detecting in 'highly mineralized ground because it tends to penetrate mineralized ground better but is linited in depth overall becsuse it is high frequency weighted and high frequency signals penetrate into the ground less than low frequency weighted dignals due to attenuation ..."

8

Thanks for the guidelines. They are solid and consistent with the previous "CHEW ON THIS" voluminous reading suggestions you made for me a few weeks ago. ? That reading lead me, in part, to Steve's 2018 UK hunt blog and learned that his Mode and settings choices were a series of considered tradeoffs that very narrowly scored him a beautiful Celtic gold relic - a perfect example of his thought process while considering that the "no free lunch" realities may either come home to roost or fly the coop. Steve also "categorized" the Detect Modes almost in the same way you did - Multi-Q frequency weighting, then single frequency operation as an alternative. Based more on characteristics from Gold being hottest, Park and Field 2 - hot, P&F 1 tamer to Beach Modes - lowest frequency weightings. I may be off track yet again but it seems that the main difference in both of your site assessment approaches regarding Mode Selection and settings seems to be one of focus. Your method of Mode choice seems to be primarily target-dependent with subsequent setting adjustments for the environment; Steve's seems to emphasize choosing a Mode that first offsets to an extent possible quieting ferrous, ground, and other problem signal generators. Kind of a "tune it and the targets will come" method. Either way is logical, assumes good coil control practices, but leaves me wondering how to analyze a new area to hunt while still keeping settings as close to FP as possible as your mantra suggests? I may just be talking about two sides of the same coin!? If so just lay it on me!  Is there a substantive difference in your approaches? Soon I want to try to nugget shoot. So the GOLD Modes are clearly going to be a challenge to run as Steve suggests - counter mineralized conditions with essentially barely audible AM with no discrimination rejects as a perfect goal - if possible. If not, the no free lunch tab will be paid in losses but in keeping with your mantra of staying close to ideal as possible as my guide. But, staying clear of the goldfields for a few weeks, I want to learn closer to home. I'd like to continue relic and coin hunting in some very specific previously occupied sites. Those are my target priorities. The site conditions are unknown to me.  I just want to find a method that I can use to determine with the Equinox what information a site presents to inform which is the closest FP Mode and subsequent setting decisions in keeping with not straying unreasonably far from preset - if possible. Should I first swing the coil in All Metal to listen, then choose a Mode, then noise cancel and finally GB? Or pick Mode by target? In an orderly approach to site assessment, is there a "preferred order" to achieve max performance when tuning the gain, recovery, IB, threshold properties, etc.? The Iron infested site I have tackled really is bewildering in the sheer scope of possibilities (infinite?) to this rookie. It felt wonderful to locate and cross-confirm a solid 25 TID in that muddy mess and dig a small nonferrous button. However,  I like to harbor the hope that a machine-based methodology can be applied to a site assessment instead of unlimited random trials and errors over a protracted period while I slowly graduate from the school of hard knocks. If I was 50 years younger I suppose the tenor of my question would be very very different. Tick tock. I wish I could make a simple point and must apologize to anyone reading this for any agony caused by my lack of brevity. It is too new for me to be concise. HH to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

Beach mode is not really for freshwater beaches.  It trades power (depth) for stability in wet salt beach conditions.  Though beach mode will work, it is not optimal at freshwater beaches and you should use the mode suited to your main target of interest, just as if you were land hunting.  This is how I stack up the modes for various situations and targets:

Park 1 or Field 1 for high conductive coins/targets (e.g., silver jewelry).

Park 2 or Field 2 for gold jewelry, nickels, brass and small targets and for hunting relicscwhich tend to be mid-conductors (brass and lead).

I use gold mode when detecting in highly mineralized ground because it tends to penetrate mineralized ground better but is linited in depth overall becsuse it is high frequency weighted and high frequency signals penetrate into the ground less than low frequency weighted dignals due to attenuation 

For salt beach hunting I use Beach 1 on dry wet sand and beach 2 in the surf.

Um.

I may do a video on some buried targets (high conductors) and see if all you say above is true as far as EQX 800.  The part in question is how does gold modes (higher freq weighted) perform depth wise on higher conductors compared to say  park 1 and field 1 (lower freq weighted) ?

Btw, I can already say with 100 percent park 2 is deeper in my ground vs park 1, field 1, and field 2.   All nonferrous conductivity levels.  But don’t confuse this with the fact field 2 may indeed unmask some crippled nonferrous better than park 2.  I am just talking about raw depth.

The test I will do is freshly buried keeping plug as intact as possible.  Naturally the results could look skewed to some due to the freshly buried. I have compared targets (undisturbed) in the wild switching modes.  And believe it or not, this what I witnessed mirrors a great deal of actual freshly buried nonferrous target results.

I may do a video comparing modes in freshwater beach (inert sand) too comparing modes on deeper high conductive coin like USA clad dime and USA clad quarter.

I have done beach mode comparisons to park 2 mode in inert sand.  You are correct beach modes are engineered for salt water/sand hence depth loss in encountered using in inert sand.  This was documented here btw, not in a video though.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tnsharpshooter said:

I may do a video on some buried targets (high conductors) and see if all you say above is true as far as EQX 800.  The part in question is how does gold modes (higher freq weighted) perform depth wise on higher conductors compared to say  park 1 and field 1 (lower freq weighted) ?

David - remember, in that case I am talking highly mineralized ground.  Pegged magnetite meter stuff.  Plus the gold mode VCO audio is better at alerting the detectorist to all targets (in all metal) and target strength than tone id because much of the deeper non ferrous IDs as ferrous.  Of course there is no tone ID, but visual target ID was still usable at decent depths.

Regarding depth in general - Park 1 without iron  bias should be deepest on high conductors - that is just physics (frequency vs. depth) but the small actual raw depth differences between modes and the variability of all parameters not uner the detectorists control (mineralization, moisture, corrosion, target profile)  makes it possible to show practically any mode to be deepest under the right condition.  It is pointless to esyablish which mode is deepest, frankly.  In fact, for raw depth on high conductors in ideal conditions, any mode using 5 khz single frequency should be able to perform best.

Interested to see your test results.  In the mean time actual finds don't lie.  The .69 rammed minie and Parrot shell fragment in the pic below were recovered at 8 to 11 inches using gold mode at mineralized site in Virginia. 

20190327_053655.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

David - remember, in that case I am talking highly mineralized ground.  Pegged magnetite meter stuff.  Plus the gold mode VCO audio is better at alerting the detectorist to all targets (in all metal) and target strength than tone id because much of the deeper non ferrous IDs as ferrous.  Of course there is no tone ID, but visual target ID was still usable at decent depths.

Regarding depth in general - Park 1 without iron  bias should be deepest on high conductors - that is just physics (frequency vs. depth) but the small actual raw depth differences between modes and the variability of all parameters not uner the detectorists control (mineralization, moisture, corrosion, target profile)  makes it possible to show practically any mode to be deepest under the right condition.  It is pointless to esyablish which mode is deepest, frankly.  In fact, for raw depth on high conductors in ideal conditions, any mode using 5 khz single frequency should be able to perform best.

Interested to see your test results.  In the mean time actual finds don't lie.  The .69 rammed minie and Parrot shell fragment in the pic below were recovered at 8 to 11 inches using gold mode at mineralized site in Virginia. 

20190327_053655.jpg

I know what you mean.  As far as how the lower freq is supposed to react.  We’ll see though in the video.  I could be mistaken but Calabash has even stated park 2 deepest mode in his ground.  When comparing the park and field modes.

Now Park 1 vs Park 2 for example a user will not hear some of the smaller burdensome nonferrous targets.  And Park 1 use will have less potential To blend ID of lower and higher conductive targets.  This is starting to split hairs but is true.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like field 2 over park 2 because of the way it sounds, I think the depth difference between the two is negligible.  Hunting with Calabash last month we hit the same field all afternoon and came up with 20+ flat buttons between us.  He has a clip of me recovering a flat button at 8+ inches with iron in the hole.  He was using Park 2 and I was using Field 2, pretty even results excrept he also snaggged a half reale, so of course took bragging rights. lol.

 

20190219_082356.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok.

We’ll see what the video(s) I do shows.

I posted a video just recently where field 2 would barely hit nonferrous target.  Park 2 better signal.

Now how much or what a person finds while 2 different folks hunt the same field may not paint true pic of actual detector ops - mode wise or really any setting.  As targets vary by actual detected scenario.

Case in point.

Two Nox 800 users could hunt same field.  And use the same exact setting and mode except one runs sensitivty at 24 and the other runs sensitivty at 19.  The person running 19 sens May find more finds.  The finds may not be deep.  Whereas the person running 24 sensitivty is finding deeper finds and it takes longer to recover.  So the person running 24 sens isn’t getting as much coil sweep time.  Hence they may have got over fewer targets by the end of the day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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
      I've been discussing qualities of Minelab lately (mostly in a negative light) and I decided to step back and ask myself why I use their Equinox 800 almost exclusively.  It's worth starting out by saying I'm an old coin hunter (where 'old' is meant to refer to 'coin', although it also applies to 'hunter' 😁) the majority of the time, and and native gold hunter when the opportunity presents itself (not often enough).  I've never detected near salt water and only occasionally (in shallow creeks) detected in water.  Relics and jewerly aren't ignored but they typically only show up when I'm coin hunting, as peripheral bonuses.
      I want to emphasize from the beginning that I'm not reviewing/comparing these two for all conditions or even conditions that might apply to the average detectorist.  This is all about me, well, about my conditions, particularly my hunting preferences/goals.  Although that may seem selfish/uninteresting/unapplicable to readers here, in the least it might get you thinking about how different detectors 'weigh in' for your type of detecting.  A Minelab GPX 5000 might be well worth the cost and backbreaking swings for someone, but if it doesn't fit your intended targets and locations then you wasted a couple thousand $ and may not even be maximizing your intended finds.
      I'll put some more caveats at the end, but basically I've broken this into three parts.  The first are some quantitative/qualitative properties that are easily measured/stated.  Next are the less quantifiable features/performances that mean the most to me.  3rd I list qualities that I determine are important but for which I don't see a significant advantage for either model based upon my usage.  And finally I'll mention some of the things which most comparisons emphasize but for which I don't because..., well, you can read the reasons I give then.
      For completeness, the Fisher F75 is a 13 kHz single frequency IB/VLF detector whose initial model was released 11-12 years ago.  Although I own the F75 limited (Black), I'm instead comparing the F75 plus since it has all the features I use at a lower price.  The Minelab Equinox, both a simultaneous multifrequency and selectable multifrquency (5 kHz to 40 kHz) was released early 2018 with two models which continue to be the only ones available.  The 800 model has more features.  That is the one I own and compare here.  One final clarification:  in the second section, '++' means a feature/performance which is very important to me, and '+' means important, but less so.  I emphasize 'to me'.  That is, it might be a small or meaningless difference to many but it matters a lot to me.

      I suspect many of you have noticed I haven't included such fundamental features as waterproof/submersible and multifrequency/single frequency.   The former is because it doesn't affect my hunting requirements.  The latter is a bit more complicated.  Rather than mentioning operating frequencies, I chose to emphasize the performance features.  I don't really care what frequency/frequencies are being used as long as the detector performs (or outperforms) in the categories that matter to me.  For example, simultaneous multifrequency improves the accuracy of the TID for deep/weak targets.  The Eqx 800 got a ++ there.
      It should be clear that in the center section, which IMO is the most important, the Eqx 800 clearly outperformed the F75.  My preference for the Eqx 800 as my primary and the F75 as my backup is thus justified.
      Update 1:  based upon some questions that follow in this thread, I will do more detailed depth test comparisons to clarify my claim that F75 has more raw depth.  I'll report those results in this thread as soon as I finish and will put another update on this post to call attention to it.
    • By Dances With Doves
      I was detecting about 8 years ago when someone walking on the beach handed me a earring they just picked up on the shoreline.That was the easiest gold  I ever got. This is the test target which is  .53  grams and 3/4 inches in diameter thin  hoop yellow 10k earring that I buried a little over 4'' with open clasp which is way more difficult.I tried the GMX with a 10 sens. and boost 2 with sat in middle setting and I  got a soft signal on the target and I could lift the coil and still get it in 1  direction but in other angles it was  a little weaker.It seems you need more coil control on this machine for tough targets with the sat.This test is a pass.
    • By Dances With Doves
      I took the 11inch coil off because it was on backwards   and  I finally  noticed it. I did good  with it on backwards.I put on the 6" coil and tested my tough targets.I tested the 5''   deep 18k yellow gold chain first in pk2 and it was  great.In  multi freq.   It hit the chain solid  with a great id of 1-2.Same mode  but in 20kz.I get a good hit with  mostly up average numbers where I would dig if I was chain  hunting.I put it in 40kz. and it hit better with better   sounding up average numbers.I then put  it in gold 2 mode and could run multi freq. up to 23 and it slammed it with great id numbers .I put it then in 20kz. and it hit it good with nice up average numbers.I put it in 40kz. and it slammed it with great up average sounding numbers.The 6inch coil is a winner on this target in many  different settings.I  will do a write up on the small  deep white gold ring next.The 6inch coil has it's place for  small gold.
    • By phrunt
      The screen protector with English language finally decided its going to lose it's stick and fall off ages ago so I salvaged the button description bit, but a couple of weeks ago it gave up too and kept falling off, once dirt gets under them it's all over.  I didn't want to buy a new pack as they're not easy to come by in NZ and I don't want anything but english anyway so I decided I'd look for an alternative option.  Even though I use my Nox constantly I still can't remember button functions 🙂 I need the writing under them. 
      I settled on this Nox Keypad Cover from the UK from a place called Detecting Innovations, it arrived pretty quick, a couple of weeks with free postage.

      It was simple to install, and has transparent bits where the buttons are like pinpoint and so on so they're protected too.  I left an older screen protective thing on, I should get around to replacing it as it has a couple of bubbles in it.  I have the Detect-Ed carbon black shaft so the pattern matches it.
      These vinyl stickers come in a range of colours, and for various detectors.   I noticed tonight they now do a Vanquish one, also in various colours, I've narrowed it down to two options, not sure which I'll get for my Vanquish.

      They're only a few dollars with free shipping so I can't go wrong really.  Where the button holes are is clear vinyl to protect the buttons.  I like them, good products for a cheap price.
    • By Desperado
      Is it possible to inadvertently program the Nox 800 over the Factory Preset(FP) mode.    
    • By JM2855
      All - wondering if any of you out there have any experience with using either of these detectors inside hardrock mines or on hardrock ore, veins, etc.  I recently purchased both of these detectors and I am interested in the discrimination on gold in an old hardrock mine area.  I have found that the Equinox will find arsenopyrite very nicely in samples, and I have found the GM does not respond at all to large chunks of pyrite in samples I have.  However I am interested in discrimination on gold in rock and veins where there are arsenopyrite, pyrite, large amounts of chalcopyrite, lead, zinc, etc.  Anyone with any experiece with the Equinox in prospecting mode sounding off on any of these minerals (besides gold)?  Anyone with experience with the GM 1000 on any of these minerals in Gold non-ferrous mode?  Since some of the veins have extensive pyrite, chalcopyrite and base metals, I was hoping I could discriminate gold from the other elements in some of the hardrock areas and tailings I've come across in my wanderings. Thanks in advance for sharing any thoughts around these detectors on minerals like that in hard rock and how they would likely respond to them.   
×
×
  • Create New...