AUgie

Steve: I've been puzzled by the seeming quiet from White's re: new detectors, particularly on the PI front. Was the TDI it? Modest developments of Eric Foster's design and then nothing? For years? Didn't seem consistent with their history or the engineering talent they have there. Then Garrett and Minelab introduce a series of new detectors, and still nothing. Not being any kind of insider, or close to the industry, I'd be the last to know - but there HAD to be something going on that we'd eventually see. Maybe something that would bast owners of older White's VLF and PI machines off their death-grip on the old machines, and justify upgrading. At least something to compete with the inevitable new machines as their competitors leveraged their particular technical advantages. Those kind of advances don't come along very often, but we can hope. Good as the latest from Garret, First Texas and Minelab sound, I'm waiting to see if they have enough cost/benefit to justify an upgrade - by someone who can, e.g. find better uses for the money than a shiny new GPX 5000, however superior it may be in some situations. I'm sure not going to jump until I see what White's has to offer this generation (or if they plan to offer anything new at all). These patents show that they've not been idle, and give me hope that mid-range (affordable) White's detectors may be in the offing that will justify an upgrade, since their competitors haven't gotten me to jump yet. BTW, these detectors are described in analog terms, while digital detectors have been out for a good while now. Particularly in the PI's, digital signal processing seems to have come late. The way to REALLY combine the best of VLF and PI (frequency and time domain) detectors is with DSP. You see it all over in radio, with most of many modern radios being DSP. "Software Defined Radios" they are called. When are we going to see "Software Defined Detectors", with all the flexibility and signal processing power that implies (and all the cost savings!)? AUgie

Steve: Like others, I've been reading your Hawaiian detecting exploits for years, particularly with the Infinium. You make a good effort to "curb your enthusiasm", or at least take account of it - but the enthusiasm, and all the detail it highlights in your recounting, lets the detector show itself all the more fully. Thanks for an uninhibited and personal "review" where the detector really shines through. AUgie

Fred: "...free, free at last." Just the way I feel every time I put on my wireless headphones (long story follows!). I think that aftermarket wireless headphones are the biggest marketing miss in the entire detecting industry. They are technically easy (not like getting another couple inches of depth!), can work well, shouldn't be too expensive, and have a huge untapped market with nearly every detector of every brand out there. (We do see an occasional over-priced attempt.) The few that I know of are tied to a particular detector and are way too expensive to boot (but then, many headsets are too expensive - just open up a set and look what is inside, the quality of manufacture, etc.) But then, maybe it is just me. Maybe everyone else enjoys a too-short cord (Jimmy S. likes a short cord), with the phones pulling off their head as they attempt a recovery or to maneuver among the rocks. Or they prefer a nice loooong cord with plenty of room to work, and plenty more to get tangled in every bush, cactus, rock, tool and article of clothing within 5 yards. Or a nice STRONG STRETCHY curly-cord, the best of both worlds, tugging gently but insistently at their heads with every move they make. My revelation came when I discovered a now-discontinued Radio Shack wireless headset that a few people were using. I almost missed the boat, but managed to find a couple of pairs on deep clearance at a store not too far away, and some as-is returns on eBay (3 of 4 worked fine). With 5 working pairs and a spare of most parts, I put a transmitter on every prospecting detector (GM3, MXT, TDI). The transmitters are so small and light that they Velcro on and you can't tell they are there. Detecting is so pleasant headphones-wise, that I forget I've got them on - sometimes getting into the truck to leave with the phones still on. First the downsides, all related to the fact that these were made for music listening. The phones are too light, and don't always keep out background noise well enough as a consequence. Only a big problem on very (VERY) windy days (that guy detecting crab-wise facing perpendicular to the wind would be me!). Did I say downside(s)? I'm having trouble getting to two. OK, the tiny transmitters have built-in Li-Po batteries. They go a LONG time on a charge - still going at the end of a long day - but they'll die eventually and I'll have to crack open the cases and wire up an external battery. The headphones take 2 AAAs, and will run for days on a set (I'm cheap and use NiMHs). Finally, no separate L/R audio or "balance" control. On this battery issue: With a GPS, several detectors, flashlights, radios, emergency beacons, and a cell phone, there are batteries aplenty to charge/check/replace. These are just part of the pre-trip check-and-charge routine. Don't like batteries? "Electronic" prospecting may not be for you. Now the upsides: There is NO lag in the audio - a problem with bluetooth and similar wireless technologies, which drives detectorists crazy. The audio is loud, clear, stereo, and hi-fidelity (they were made for music). No detector seems to be bothered in any way by the RF, nor does the detector coil field affect the audio. Like I said before, adds no perceptible weight to the detector, and the yet the batteries last a LONG time (they use little power, at either end of the setup). I can't tell you the freedom in having no dangling/pulling/snagging cord. Anybody with one of the few detectors offering wireless phones will know what I mean. (Right Fred?) The old Radio Shack setup has its shortcomings, but shows that it is possible to do this: local wireless audio of high fidelity, no delay, low power use and light weight - which doesn't interfere in ANY way with any detector's operation, and vice-versa. Adding things like L/R audio control and thicker ear muffs is child's play. Replaceable batteries on the tiny transmitter not much harder. It actually occurred to me at the time to track down the Chinese manufacturer of these things and try to get them to do a redesign for the detector market and run up a batch that way. Too much trouble; too unlikely to be fruitful. There is NO technical obstacle to moderately priced, detector-independent, wireless detecting phones. The issue is getting it done on a scale that fits the detecting market, where the total unit sales isn't up there with, e.g., portable bluetooth speakers for the music crowd. The person who combines this proven technology with the correct packaging for detecting, and reasonable quality Chinese manufacturing, will make a mint. A few niches won't fall easily - particularly the very heavy (mostly PI) detectors that require a brace and a truss to carry, and are sometimes reminiscent of a WWII mine-detecting kit. One more cord connecting everything is just a pleasant distraction from the coil-heavy weight, chest or belt mounts, braces, etc., depending on the detector model. Those using most VLF and some of the better balanced or mounted PIs, will notice the freedom and be willing to pay for it. Meantime, I have my now long-discontinued Radio Shack wireless phones, which between spares and repairs, will likely last me as long as I'll have the need. AUgie