Steve Herschbach

One thing that really irritates me on the majority of other forums is the censorship when it comes to linking to other forums. As if people are too stupid to figure out that other forums exist, which is insulting. More to the point it severely limits the ability to give people good information wherever it exists, which is my main goal on this forum. With this in mind I do actually request that if forum members see anything anywhere that may be of genuine interest to other forum members then please post about it and link to it. Do not copy from other websites and post here unless you are pretty sure that is ok. When in doubt I post a good excerpt and then reference the complete original, as is customary on the internet with news sites. The only real limitation is please stay on topic. Anyway, if you see a thread on another forum (or anywhere else for that matter) and think it is of exceptionally high quality as far as hard information goes then please let me and everyone else know. Thanks! P.S. Do remember that some forums cannot be seen unless a person is a member. No problem linking to them but you probably should do your best to describe what you are linking to and if it really is good enough for people to have to join to see it.

I am watching my author's page where currently every article link goes to the exact same article by somebody else! I guess when that gets fixed it will be a good sign. They are aware of the issue.

I have a theory - that is all it is. When chasing gold nuggets it is common for gold in mineralized ground to read ferrous. Many nugget detectors that feature ferrous disc either have it preset at a very conservative level or allow you to adjust it to be conservative. All this really means is you dig more ferrous to miss less gold. Or a detector can be set so the operator digs less junk, but then they miss some good targets. There is no magic solution here because the gold and ferrous ranges overlap. That's just the way it is. So all you can do is decide where you want to draw the line on a sliding scale. The Minelab X-Terra 705 Iron Mask function illustrates this very well: I am just guessing that 3.2 is aimed more at "normal" users. V4 was obviously designed to enhance the gold capability of the Deus. One big factor was expanding the ferrous range lower because previously anything that fell in that very low ferrous range could not be detected by 3.2 no matter what you did. There may be other changes that make V4 less prone to missing gold but more prone to identifying ferrous targets as non-ferrous. This may require different thinking as far as how disc settings are applied in V4. Gary Blackwell of XP has claimed in a recently posted XP instructional video about V4 software that older version 2 and 3.2 software "filters" were built into the Deep and Hot preset programs, respectively. Unfortunately he does not explain what that really means. However, person might start with the Hot program which supposedly employs 3.2 filtering and modify it to resemble whatever program you normally use and see how it compares on ferrous targets by flipping between the two.

Some comprehensive air tests of the V3i with D2 coil and 4" x 6" Shooter coil at different frequencies at Link deleted since Findmall Forum update broke all old links

And of course that could mean by July 31. Which could turn into August....

I've tried a few oddball things. The Gold Monster 1000 is a dedicated designed from the ground up gold prospecting machine. It can of course be pressed into service for other uses but like other ultrahot detectors it can actually be too sensitive to tiny items. That can be useful for hunting tot lots or a beach for micro jewelry but it does also mean every tiny bit of aluminum foil sings off loud and clear. If a person owned one and wanted to give it a go for other uses, no harm done, but in my opinion very few people would want to buy a Gold Monster 1000 for anything other than gold prospecting.

Just the typical trade off seen with any similar machines. The small coil "sees" less ground and so can be run at a slightly higher sensitivity level in bad ground, and with a more concentrated magnetic field. This in turn results in a bit hotter response to small gold than with the larger coil, but the difference is small. The large coil on the other hand does produce a larger magnetic field and so will reach a deeper on larger nuggets. Big coils not only "see" more ground but they see the unwanted targets in the ground that can confuse the detector, like trash items or hot rocks. By "seeing" a smaller volume small coils are less likely to see multiple targets at once, resulting in cleaner signals, plus better discrimination results when discrimination is employed. Obviously the big coil covers twice the ground while the smaller coil gets into tighter locations. Which you want to use just depends on the job at hand and since both come with the detector there is no need to force the choice. Rough rules of thumb - smaller gold or smaller areas to cover equals smaller coils. Larger gold, larger areas to cover equals larger coils.

There is little doubt you are correct about this Jason - the way you initially connect with the younger crowd is via social media. Forums I think tend to be for people who are already at it and looking for more and deeper information. Youtube videos if done right can be incredibly informative. The main problem from the business perspective is there are no simple answers these days. The media landscape has fractured to an amazing degree. Back in the day all you needed was a yellow page ad and maybe some newspaper or magazine ads. Radio was a step up, and TV too expensive for most. Now there are countless ways to reach people, who at the same time are more savvy at avoiding advertising. My wife and I prerecord anything on the tube that might have ads and just blast through them. On my truck radio when an ad comes on I just switch stations. For people like me - you can't reach me. I have to seek you out. And if I am looking to find out about something I know little about, I am probably going to Google it and follow the links. Too a large degree as far as I am concerned if I can't find your company or product on Google, you don't exist. Tough times for companies and all they can do is pursue every avenue they have the time and money to pursue as best they can. If I had advice for any company it would be to be sure their websites have all the information on their products any person would ever want to find and answer every email same day or next day at latest.

Compared how?

Very nice Bob! I have seen similar pontoon boats at Cabelas and Costco for $400 - $600 and thought they would be a heck of a good idea for a dredge platform. Are the floats a bladder in a protective shell or tough single layer models? Google "inflatable pontoon fishing boats"

Here are a couple more pictures of Mills Creek and this inflatable pontoon dredge on the creek. This was a very short lived experiment. I put it together and then after this outing decided that the advantages of being inflatable were not nearly as important to me as the durability of marlex. I had to worry about the pontoons being against a rock and vibrations from the dredge motor or movement from water action wearing away at the float fabric. This would be a great way to go for somebody flying remote in a small airplane or for some extreme back country backpacking expedition, but I decided right after this outing to sell the inflatable pontoons and go back to marlex.

You do need a subscription to access articles online but that's not the problem. They did a makeover of the ICMJ website and it looks real nice. But the search, links, and navigation are really messed up. The link in Fred's post is now broken, and all the old links on my website that point to the ICMJ website that I have checked are now broken. It may be the website navigation has been fundamentally changed and all old links have broken, which is a website disaster. Worse, I could not seem to get to this article using the search function or even manually navigating there. The links go to the wrong articles. I gave up and that's a bad sign. Hopefully they get it straightened out. I sent an email letting them know which was acknowledged.

You did a good job on it, and shooting video and posting it does take effort, so thank you!

It is a bit depressing digging a brown 1985 quarter thinking it is "new coinage" and then realizing it may have been in the ground for over 25 years!

Well, I think there are many opportunities worldwide for detector companies. I do unfortunately think we are at or maybe even a hair past the zenith in the U.S. The main reason may ironically be the great success detecting has enjoyed over the last 10-20 years. I have been doing this over 40 years now and I personally feel like I am in a "cleaning up the leftovers" phase. If you are after gold nuggets, silver coins, old relics, whatever, you face a depleting resource. The resource depletes faster than the technology improves, and it is just a fallacy to think that deeper always means more finds. We also face the problem of very slow but almost inevitable closure of detecting areas. One bad apple and another site closed. I have always counted on jewelry to keep me going as I get older and less able to roam the hills. Unlike most finds it is a renewable resource. Even there however sheer competition is having an impact, as well as the shift to tungsten, mood rings, and other jewelry fashioned from "non-precious" metals. A final unappreciated headwind may be the continued decline of true enthusiast dealers. Some of the growth in the industry was definitely driven by those face to face dealers who go to club meetings, sponsored events, and "made it happen". Somehow I doubt Amazon does anything to grow the hobby. I started detecting as a kid and just enjoyed finding stuff with a detector, and it was a long time before it was more than just a fun hobby for me. I am sure there are still kids who would try it and enjoy it just like I did. For most people after all it is just a hobby they either enjoy or do not. Add it all up and I am still sure detectors will continue to be sold but it is very hard for me to imagine it as a growth industry in the U.S. from here on out. Those seeking growth had better be addressing the global market.

The main thing I noted in the video besides good practices is that the soil is extremely moist. This is actually critical. Bone dry hard ground is tough to work in and plugging in dry ground is not a good idea as the chances the grass will die goes up dramatically. I try to do all my deeper detecting work in parks during whatever rainy season there is and just use the screwdriver / popping method during dry periods. I love the finds this guy is making in the following video, but frankly I am horrified that he is using a shovel in a park. I don't care that maybe the grass will heal - in this case that's not really the point. It's more about the idea of the wrong person seeing a guy digging pits in a park with a shovel. This it what closes parks to detecting. How not to do it...

I get those deep sweet signals out in the desert from time to time that sound exactly like a large deep nugget. They are ones that usually require I get the shovel, and every one so far has turned out to be a mineralized spot that finally just disperses out into a pile of hot lumps. The only thing good about them is they have been fairly rare for me, as I seem to have no solution but to dig them. I can indeed use settings that alleviate or eliminate them, but then I go crazy thinking that maybe I have talked myself out of digging that big nugget. So I dig them. There is a hot signal out there also that turns out to be this particular type of shattered rock. It is a hot rock, but they are always broken into shards, like they exploded underground. Weird.

How to do it...

All great suggestions, and I will repeat a couple in my own list: Ferrous discrimination Salt mode Small coil More memory for tracks and find points Import/export function (XChange 2) Brighter screen Clock on screen with audio alarm set User button flips between at least two saved "programs" made up of any combination of settings

And that is indeed an exceptionally fine example of disseminated "invisible" gold. The GPZ really shows its magic on that stuff. Congratulations and thanks for posting!

I have yet to see a multi purpose VLF detector selling for over US$1000 that is any better than dedicated prospecting detectors selling for under US$1000. In fact the dedicated models so far have a history of being better prospecting machines for less money. The XP Deus version 3.2 coils are a good example. I saw nothing to convince me that they are any better for prospecting than a basic $499 Gold Bug detector. In fact I would rather have the Gold Bug. Same story with the White's V3i. Great on paper but the GMT or even MXT would be better gold prospecting choices. The Deus V4 update was very specifically aimed at improving its capabilities for gold prospecting. Early reports on this forum by Condor are promising. You will hear more after the elliptical coil is available as most people appear to be holding out for it. To be honest, I have doubts it will equal dedicated models but all it really has to do in my opinion is be "close enough". For many people the appeal of multi purpose is compelling as long as it does not cost too much and as long as they don't feel they are giving up too much of an edge to get that "do it all" versatility. Bottom line - too early, jury is out.

It does help if people have questions that the questions are specific. When I am asked what I think of the 48 kHz GMT vs 45 kHz GM1000 my immediate thought is they are both metal detectors with similar features and performance. I can go find gold with either. I have a GM1000 so I don't necessarily need a GMT. If I had a GMT I would not necessarily need a GM1000. Is the Gold Monster 1000 the new detector with new features that is so advanced it automatically obsoletes all detectors in its class? You no longer need look at or even think about any other VLF? I get the feeling that is what people would like to hear. Wouldn't it be nice if life were that easy! Sorry, no. In my opinion it is nice to have a "big gun" like a GPZ or GPX as a primary unit. It can also be good in addition to have a mid frequency (13-20 kHz) detector to deal with trashy ground and/or a higher frequency (30-80 kHz) unit for tiny or specimen gold. For people who can't afford or do not detect enough to need the big gun the mid or high frequency detector can be the primary unit. Mid frequency detectors are better "all around" units and so better for those wanting a general purpose machine. Higher frequency detectors are generally dedicated prospecting models and so a better choice for those wanting a detector purely for prospecting. Therefore in general for "prospecting only" a big gun or a high frequency unit can serve best either separately or together. Mid frequency offers more versatility (coins, relics, jewelry) for those who desire such things. When having multiple detectors the key is they should all be as different as possible. If you already have a big gun a second machine should specifically do something it can't do well. Therefore the idea of getting a mid frequency or high frequency detector. In the same way, if you already have a 30 - 80 kHz machine getting another one adds no real capability per se. Better then to get a mid frequency or a big gun. For people who have never had a high performance VLF looking at their very first one, I should hope the reviews point out the obvious advantages that the Gold Monster 1000 offers them, especially when operating in very difficult ground conditions.

I made fairly specific comparisons to the Gold Bug 2 in my previous posts on the subject. I do not have a GMT to compare to but performance should be comparable. Again I hope my previous posts would serve to enlighten people on the subject. It just as always will depend more on the ground conditions and operator than anything. This is a 45 kHz single frequency metal detector and no rules of physics have been broken. Anyone that is considering the various alternatives and unsure at this point what they want to do should just sit back and wait for more reports from more varied sources to roll in. It's not like I have the complete picture by any means. I did some marathon posting the last few days. The stage now belongs to JP and I am hoping to hear more from him while I take a short break for a couple days. First Impressions Thread - How Does The GM1000 Compare To Similar Models? Sensitivity Thread Including Notes On Gold Bug 2

Here it is! http://www.minelab.com/usa/go-minelabbing/treasure-talk/mastering-the-gold-monster-1000 "Savvy operators will be able to work the GM 1000 in surprisingly noisy ground once they come to terms with the methods I’ve described above. It takes practice but the effort is well worth it because these two Auto functions in combination with Zero threshold really does allow this detector to work in ground a VLF has no business working in - areas that I would consider to be MPS and MPF territory. In the quieter soils, Auto+ lifts the sensitivity to levels that surprised me, behaving like a much higher frequency machine Although not a ‘deep-punching’ machine like an SDC 2300, the GM 1000 still ‘holds its own’ on the shallow surface gold crumbs missed by the more powerful Minelab detectors."

Early days still. I was first person that Minelab let talk but more will be chiming in any minute. I still have not been able to make myself go to the trouble yet of stopping and shooting videos. Frankly, it's just extra work. I have good intentions but so far have not got around to it yet. Since no units are in the publics hands yet obviously nothing available there.