Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
flakmagnet

A Question About GPZ Audio Response

Recommended Posts

Ya Flak,  the gpz audio seems to be all over the place, especially in Difficult ground setting. Gold seems to give almost a confused grunt signal.  In Normal, I tend to hear a high low signal on all small targets ferrous or not.  At least that's what my ears hear.  I wonder if that was a misprint in the Minelab article?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jason, I have always appreciated the way you approach your detecting, dredging and prospecting...ever since you were on another forum. I agree with most of what you say which is part of why I asked the question in the first place. I hear some amazing sounds from the GPZ...(not so much from the GPX), and that got my curiosity going to research it a little..which is how I came across that MineLab quote. I don't think it was a misquote by ML either. 

The place I have been detecting is the closest to where I live (it's still a 285 mile round trip), and is loaded with shrapnel from a large number of AR-15 enthusiasts who, over the last five years, have decided that this detecting area is a fabulous shooting range - I don't think they have any idea there is also gold in the hillsides. The amount of weird metal particles strewn around is beyond awesome. As a result, I have been paying extremely careful attention to the varieties of sound the Zed produces. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way a signal sounds can have a lot to do with were the GB position ends up relative to the ground your working and the Gold mode and Ground Mode you are working in. A signal response in High Yield Difficult can sound a lot different in High Yield normal or any of the General modes.

Generally smaller targets go High/Low in High Yield and bigger more solid bits go Low/High. Shallow Steel objects will often go Low/High but will be a tight signal response due to distance from the coil. This all changes around somewhat if the timings are changed. Quiet often you can also receive a confused signal or as a friend of mine likes to describe them, a turkey gobble signal (maybe even Waltzing Matilda 🙂 ), this is where both channels respond equally and try to cancel each other out a little like noise cancelling does.

JP

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you JP, it makes sense as your posts usually do. But, in the future, I will be listening hard for the Waltzing Matilda sound because whatever makes that sound is gonna be ground-breaking. 

Thanks for all the replies, it's why I dare to come here with my questions, even the dumb ones. And just to be clear for any newcomers reading this, I have been detecting for over twenty-five years. I am curious and asking questions is vital to learning.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Flak I think I inadvertently implied you were a new guy. My second response was just addressed to the ether - anyone in general interested in reading or discussing it as I think it's an interesting topic. I know you've been swinging a coil since before I even knew what one was. 😃 I think your questions are good questions. And detecting in a field of AR bullets, casings, and fragments can definitely make one start asking a lot of questions, man been there.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again Jason...no, I didn't think you were implying anything. I have talked to you and seen your YouTube's where you specifically address newcomers trying to help them with what you have experienced first-hand the hard way and knew you were putting your findings out there for them. I admire your willingness to help.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jasong - Got a link to your youtube channel?  I am interested in learning and hearing more about your 80% techniques and methods used.  I am usually the pick a spot and grid guy so I find your method interesting and sound.  Definitely would like to know more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFON: I haven't addressed the 80% thing directly on my channel (USMiner), it was just some numbers I was randomly using or guessing at roughly to demonstrate a different way of looking at prospecting, and that there are cases where it pays to not dig it all. I'll grid and dig everything just like everyone else when the situation calls for it though. 

The way I look at it is kinda like the progression a lot of us went through when we first started running a sluice. At first we try to meticulously save every color, with tweezers if needed, maybe feed a little recirculator with a spoon for fear of one tiny speck going out the other end. And eventually you get to the point cleaning out your dredge 5 years later where you are tossing 100 colors out your pan back into the river because the time to clean them up is better spent doing something more productive. Of course it's not really exactly the same since you might miss a lunker somewhere when it comes to detecting nuggets, but it's a risk I am willing to take especially since I do eventually end up back gridding when times are lean.

For the same reason, I probably spend more time wandering around looking for specific types of dirt or specific geology or topography, or just for signs of old timers than I do swinging a coil when I'm prospecting, even if there is no trash around. Which is kinda taking the "don't dig everything" philosophy to the extreme and not even detecting at all now. Because while gold can certainly be anywhere, it seems to me that 80% of the time (random guess again) the better patches are somewhere close to an area that "looks right" to me so I just scout for them and pass over huge tracts of land that previously I would have spent weeks detecting. I probably miss a lot of 1 off nuggets or small patches, but I'm cool with that. Doesn't hurt that I actually like exploring and hitting rocks with hammers more than swinging a heavy coil all day too. :tongue:

That said, there does seem to be a point where someone just starting should dig everything no matter what, for a time. That's the only way to figure out what "looks right" in terms of what produces nuggets when they reach the point where it pays to stop digging everything and start covering more ground later.

*PS, if trying this approach I find it essential to keep all your tracks recorded on a GPS and a main database of them on Google Earth or similar. I recently lost a card that held a ton of my old tracks from 2008 to 2015 and it really made things difficult in places I had left incomplete to revisit later. Think of exploration like macro gridding. Find a place you are interested in with good geology then systematically cover it, maybe an area 25 miles square, the same way you'd cover a patch 100 meters square. Keeping GPS tracks is essential in my book. When you find a productive area you can also use your tracks to make sure you've not missed any tiny washes or other productive zones that are easy to miss on the ground.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jasong said:

That said, there does seem to be a point where someone just starting should dig everything no matter what, for a time. That's the only way to figure out what "looks right" in terms of what produces nuggets when they reach the point where it pays to stop digging everything and start covering more ground later.

*PS, if trying this approach I find it essential to keep all your tracks recorded on a GPS and a main database of them on Google Earth or similar. I recently lost a card that held a ton of my old tracks from 2008 to 2015 and it really made things difficult in places I had left incomplete to revisit later. Think of exploration like macro gridding. Find a place you are interested in with good geology then systematically cover it, maybe an area 25 miles square, the same way you'd cover a patch 100 meters square. Keeping GPS tracks is essential in my book. When you find a productive area you can also use your tracks to make sure you've not missed any tiny washes or other productive zones that are easy to miss on the ground.

Jason - I agree with you on both topics (dig everything and the gps).  My first couple years were hard.  I had no mentor and no knowledge of how to find gold.  So I dug everything .... when I put my coil on the ground.  And sometimes that just meant finding areas where the bullets were less likely to be, or where the overburden wasn't 3 feet deep.  And I would make sure to go to many different areas and study what the ground looked like on the various club claims.  Eventually, clues on geology and topography began to show themselves.  I started going away from club claims and finding more and more gold.  But still with a lot of dry spells in between.  So my third year or so I decided to start sharing information with a couple new friends and I learned new techniques I wasn't using in regards to getting more out of known gold washes, and I learned different styles of detecting, where you don't necessarily cover every inch of the wash because you're not really sure if there were gold nuggets there.  You are doing quick scanning and cherry picking.  At this point, the information was very useful to me as I had found gold and understood geology a little better.  Whereas if I had done this in the first place, I think don't think it would have been as helpful.  I now see the benefit of being able to quick scan washes and to be able to switch gears once gold is found. 

But the GPS is a much underutilized too.  I also store ALL tracks.  And being able to set up a game plan is a huge benefit that really keeps you focused when in the field.  I hit washes that you can see on google earth, but are out of sight when just walking around on treks.

Andyy

  • Like 4

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Skookum
      Alright, I know nobody really knows the answer to when there will be a GPZ successor.  Because of that, I'm just pinging for some opinions.  We are currently a VLF only family that's interested in a detector that reduces some of the hot rock music we listen to here in Arizona.  If you were in the market and didn't have a PI detector would you:  A) get a used GPZ for $4500-5000 or B) wait and see what comes out over the next one to several years (depending on what rumors you believe)?  And, a here's bonus follow up question.  Does anybody have a guess what happens to used GPZ prices after the next model appears?
    • By afreakofnature
      I would like to start a thread of peoples opinions on what they found between these two machines with various coils.  I love my SDC and have found my biggest and smallest gold with it (8”).  My GPZ has definitely gone deeper for gold (14”).  I am about even on the total count for each, weight a being different story.
      I understand that if you only have one detector then you want coil options, but if you got both I wonder what would be a better bang for your buck?  A 10” Xcoil at $1000 or a 11”Coiltek at $310.  Thats if they compare at depth and sensitivity.
      Norvic I would love for you to state your opinions here, you seem to have the most on thses just based on other posts.
    • By phoenix
      Clearly, with the huge amount of interest that is being shown in the after market coils for 7000, it`s obvious that there is a market out there for coils other than 14'' and 19".       I don`t take the 19" out much because I have had very little success with it and with my bad wrists it`s just too damn heavy, but Minelab did tell us in the early days of marketing the 7000 that they would be releasing a 11" coil down the track, and now there is another company that nobody has ever heard of making a huge range of coils that are lighter and have so far been very well received by the public.
      What`s going on Minelab?
    • By phoenix
      A couple of months ago I put out a call for the parts list for the WM12 because my original WM12 was taking forever to charge.          At the same time I bought the replacement battery, I also bought some heavier charging cables because I have about half a dozen devices that all use the same cable. I bought cables that were listed as suitable for external hard drives and they were about 6 bucks each. Because I kept changing cables on different devices I don`t even know now what cables came with the WM12.         Anyway, with the heavier charging cables my original WM12 now charges QUICKER than the newer WM12, so I don`t need to fit the battery.        Maybe, if your WM12 is getting sluggish charging, it may not be the battery, it may be the cable breaking down.   Just a thought.    Dave
       

    • By davsgold
      The battery is ok but, it maybe the speaker or some other connection.
      It has static at times and cuts in and out, even when it is clipped to the arm strap on the detector, I have narrowed it down to the WM12 as even when it has headphones plugged in it still does the same as when they are unplugged and with a booster and external speakers it does the same whether they are plugged in or not.
      Is there a way to check if it is just the WM12 speaker or something else inside it.
      It looks like the actual speaker is a replacement part? and would hopefully be cheaper than a whole new WM12
      Any ideas?
      So for now I am just plugging the booster and dual speakers into the back of the 7000 near the battery, but after getting used to being unteathered  by cables it is just a bit annoying when you put the machine down and go to retrieve the target. 
      cheers dave
    • By Jonathan Porter
      Hi Bill, Salt is always going to be a problem, especially if you want to also achieve depth. Deeper targets are slow responses, salt signal kills slow signal responses. My advice on salty areas is to try your most sensitive modes first and go down from there, in this instance it would be High Yield, then General then Xtra Deep Normal before I changed any of my other settings.
      Your Threshold is too low, stick to 27 especially if Audio Smoothing is in the Off position, I would also recommend using Semi Auto mode because Salt signal messes with the Ferrite Balance in Auto mode. 
      There is a huge difference in Salt signal if you go from Normal to Difficult, this also might have been a good option for you dependant on the ground in your area. A lot of people shy away from Difficult especially in quieter soils because there is a perceived depth reduction, however on Half ounce nuggets Difficult actually gives a better signal response than Normal does in any of the Normal modes (HY, Gen or XtraDeep). 
      Minelab introduced the Ground Smoothing mode in the last update, this mode was specifically designed for Salty ground conditions, essentially they are Motion filters so there is a depth reduction when you select either Patch or Salty mode so I tend to avoid them but it does smooth the machine out a lot.
      Finally, having a controlled swing speed helps immensely with Salt signals, try not to suddenly vertically lift the coil as this exacerbates the salt signal immensely. To confirm it is salt signal just lift the coil from detect height to abover your head, as the coil transitions from your waist height to shoulder height you should hear a moaning sound, the level of salt signal is determined by how loud this response is. The other way is to place the coil in the air out in front of you with the coil parallel to the ground then rotate the coil from left to right and listen to the audio response, the greater the noise the greater the salt levels. This will help you to decided how aggressive you need to be in reducing sensitivity via the Gold/Ground type Modes or the use of the Ground Smoothing filters.
      Hope this helps
      JP
       
×
×
  • Create New...