Jump to content

Chase Goldman

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


 Content Type 


Detector Prospector Magazine

Detector Database



Everything posted by Chase Goldman

  1. Yes. D2 appears to be at least as multi-purpose as the Equinox which is one of the most versatile machines ever fielded, apparently also without the Equinox water intrusion robustness questions and a huge ergonomic advantage with its light weight and form factor. Of course you are paying top dollar for all of that. My only question is how well is it going to do in hot dirt and whether it can hold up to repeated pounding in the waist to chest high breaking surf with its remote control mount design and clip-on antenna configuration. Legend appears to be the value alternative answer to Equinox but is still just a nearly complete work in progress with little publicly available, documented real world performance information.
  2. I don’t know how unless you have an adapter to convert the multi-pin din plug to a 1/8” phono plug. You could probably rig something up if you know the pin out on the bone phones.
  3. The way you stated this makes me think you missed the fact that Deus II is rated for 20 meters depth. Regardless, the Sea Hunter is indeed rated to 200 ft. and is a relatively powerful, value priced dig it all PI machine. HH
  4. Without adjustable recovery speed, you got what you got. Since you are really not going for depth in thick iron, you can try a smaller coil footprint to reduce the number of targets under the coil at any one time and you can lower sensitivity to reduce the detection “footprint” of ferrous targets (keeps them from overloading the machine with their typical high amplitude return signal) to see if non-ferrous pops out of the muck. Without recovery speed adjustment or multiple selectable single frequencies (not just frequency shift), your options are really limited. Right tool for the job…. I can make alternate machine recommendations if you are interested in that.
  5. What Andy said, above. When you are looking for depth in mineralized soil, plowed fields, mostly, then the GPX reigns supreme. Iron reject works for open field running where you have bullets and nails which depending on timing give a low tone response (but nails or bigger iron targets blank on the peak/valley of the audio response) and for nail heads and buttons or small lead which give a high tone response or warbled response, you can get some blanking as well. No, you don't want to run a GPX in thick iron patches like you woukd have at a stage stop or ghost down. And if the soil is not all that hot, no need to pull out a PI sledge hammer, when a VLF will do just fine. As Andy says a GPX PI (non-6000) will blank out, and you are not really trying to punch for depth in that situation, just trying to look between the iron for typically shallower, masked non-ferrous. That's a task for a fast vlf, preferably one that can handle mineralized dirt, Equinox, Tarsacci, and in some cases the original Deus are your best bets. Whites MXT, Fisher F75/Tek T2, and Garrett AT Gold are your next best bets.. Hoping Deus 2 and Legend bring something to the table in that regard. We'll find out...
  6. Do the bone phones have a proprietary multi-pin audio connector that only plugs into the remote multi-pin waterproof multi-purpose connector? If so, do you plan to carry the remote on your person so you can remain untethered to the detector stem/coil?
  7. You lost me. If a concentric averages that's really not much different than masking.
  8. Yes and no. It is more than just automation, Iron bias utilizes multifrequency data run through the iron bias algorithm to skew (bias) the baseline MF iron probability algorithm towards ferrous based on some unknown filtering and data manipulation. The 10 khz "trick" is a much cruder approach because it not only not automated but is only a singular frequency data point that will give less reliable results. Anyway, here is my take on the whole ridiculous SMF Iron Bias "controversy". First of all, the whole thing is kind of silly in the sense of the dramatic blow up. This is just perpetuated by by strong, highly visible personalities and I will say that Nokta perpetuates the drama by repeatedly addressing criticism so directly and defensively. It just feeds Nokta's detractors and is ill advised. Furthermore, the arguments used are really circular and non-sensical. Specifically, the argument that Iron Bias "masks" targets is just ridiculous. Iron bias NEVER prevents a signal from being heard by the detectorist, unless the detectorist chooses to fully discriminate the ferrous bin. If that detectorist chooses to primarily rely on discrimination, then that detectorist is going to miss a lot more than iffy ferrous/non-ferrous signals filtered by IB. The Nokta arguments fall flat as well, if you buy into the iron probability display with confidence and make dig decisions because of it, that is no different than reliance on iron bias. The real question is whether the information by either feature is reliable. My final take on IB is this: To be clear, IB appears to be continuously running in Multi-IQ modes at some level regardless of the setting - zero does not necessarily mean "off". The best way to utilize IB, should you choose to invoke it, is to interrogate the target with IB on whatever level you prefer and with IB at it's minimum setting or using single frequency. I really have no issues being in "search mode" with IB F2 at its default setting as a starting point in a field with scattered iron, the chances of co-located ferrous and non-ferrous targets being minimal. But if I want minimal filtering because of thick iron, I will search in F2=0 and then interrogate iffy signals with IB at the default or highest setting to see how it changes target response. Bottom line is this, for experienced detectorists, it simply makes sense to give people advanced setting options on a detector rather than presuming the detectorist may apply the setting incorrectly and setting up limited adjustment guardrails. For less experienced detectorists, simply make sure the default settings provide a good general purpose detector starting point to facilitate turn on and go detecting. Simple as that.
  9. Iron reject. Noticeably missing from the GPX 6000. I would have been happy if ML would have just ported over the algorithm from the GPX 4500/4800/5000 intact (no improvements or other R&D needed). But alas, it was left off the 6K. So Nokta, here's a chance to grab not only prospectors but hot dirt relic detectorists (not an insignificant number of relic detectorists in the US who use the GPX/TDT/ATX machines) who are weary of the old GPX/ATX form factor and who ML chose to cut loose with the introduction of the 6000.
  10. FYI Deus 1 uses PCM audio...so I don't know what you are going on about. All modern detectors use digital to analog conversion to create audio, so there is always going to be some level of distortion from a digital source for the audio.
  11. Steve, I know the 4800 and 5000 uppers are the same and 99.9% sure the 4500 is the same as the 4800/5000. One of the keys is making sure you can enable the GPX pinpointer trigger/swing-support handle to fasten and lock securely onto the shaft. It tends to drift and rotate radially around the shaft with radial torque unless you overtighten the fastener which then puts undue stress on the fastening hardware. I can never seem to get it tight enough without fear I am overstepping the fastener. Seems to be a friction issue as the trigger handle clamp is designed to slide easily up and downside the shaft when loosened to adjust for your forearm length. That slipperyness also enables it to slide radially if you force it, even when clamped. Concerned how it will fare on polished CF. It could also just be an isolated issue with my rig.
  12. Atrex firmware updating is kinda cool, with wifi built in, you simply need to connect to a wifi network connected to the internet and it will navigate and download the firmware update automatically and install it like a phone.
  13. If you read the link I provided, you'd realize 45 and 50 khz doesn't really even give you a slght edge in performance. You'd really need to get it above 60 and then all you are really doing is bring perhaps some micro gold into the picture for perhaps some significant modifications to either the coil., sw, or hardware that might drive up cost and make it less attractive to the general purpose user. As well as eat into the sales of their existing specialized gold detector lineup. Not worth the trip from a business case perspective.
  14. Hope Mateo doesn't catch you wearing it down there, could be a bad scene.
  15. Think of Been awhile since I've done a Deus update so maybe I my memory was faulty. Regardless, think of it in terms of smart phone updates. How much change log information do you really get when Samsung forces an update of your phone? It's similarly high level and of course, there is the proprietary sw aspect as you previously mentioned as the code is not accessible.
  16. Yes see above. It's usually included in the firmware updater. May not be up to your standards as a sw game developer though. That summary is the typical info given out by detector manufacturers in general (i.e., ML, XP, Nokta). Sometimes you are considered lucky if you even get that from some manufacturers...
  17. They do typically provide change logs for the SW updates on its sites. They are included in the firmware upgrade application, which also usually allows you to also roll back to any previous stable release. I'll also mention it to Andy Sabisch who also has a direct line to Alain and is also writing the D2 handbook. FWIW - XP did release new manuals for the original Deus (and labeled them) for major software revs ( 3.x, 4.x, 5.x) that significantly impacted operation, performance, or added features that affected menu options or the user interface.
  18. No, you can only adjust discriminated "iron" volume separately from the non-ferrous multi-tones or pitch tone intensity. However, the pitch of each multitone is independently adjustable and there is a graphic equalizer which allows you to independently emphasize or de-emphasize low/med/high frequency tonal regions. You can also switch between PCM and square wave audio which also changes tonal quality.
  19. And frankly there was not much difference between 4 and 5 khz when ML added it to Equinox in ver 3.0, per se. Although small absolute changes in frequency at the low end can make a bigger difference in response (the 1khz change from 5 to 4 khz, would make more difference than at 1 khz change at 40 khz). What was interesting, about adding 4 khz was that it seemed to run a lot quieter than 5 khz. Primarily anecdotal, but if what folks were observing was more than just their imagination, then it could indicate ML was also potentially experimenting with a new signal processing or noise filtering algorithm. Great way to beta test a feature without much risk because the 4 lhz was perceived as a bonus add on. Of course it also added to the confusion regarding the frequency constituents of Multi-IQ because ML marketing conflated the 5 (now 6) single frequency options with the SMF frequency range with their infamous cloud diagram.
  20. Billy, Here's what you do. Search this forum for any post by "Geotech". He actually posted in one of your threads. That's Carl Moreland. He is a design engineer who has worked for Whites and now works for First Texas. Suck up any nuggets you can from his posts.. Then hop on over to his site. If you ever want to build your own detector or just want to nerd out on the various technologies and scientific principles used for metal detecting (Faraday's law, induction balance, pulse induction) you can find the subject matter discussed in excruciating detail on the references pages and forum there. Finally, grab a paper or electronic copy of Carl's book, "Inside the Metal Detector", co-authored with George Overton. Among a host of other topics about metal detector principles and technology, they describe how operating frequency affects target detectability in depth. What you will find is there is no singular answer to the question you are seeking because the variables in play are simply too complex. I get the impression you are looking for the optimal frequency to detect a silver Roosevelt dime vs. the optimal frequency to detect an 1849 $1 Gold piece vs. the optimal frequency to detect a King George III Copper. The answer is a less than satisfying, "It depends". And the best you can really do is speak in generalities. For example, if you want to detect high conductors (e.g. silver coins) at depth go low in frequency (say 4khz), you want gold jewelry then 20 khz is a good neighborhood. Then you need to consider ground effects that tend to attenuate higher frequencies and EMI which tends to be more prevalent at lower frequencies and you find that metal detecting is not about finding the -3dB half-power reactive component sweet spot but is really about balancing and trading off all these competing effects to give you the best chance to detect your particular target of interest. HTH Ahh- Carl beat me to it. Thank you! I was wondering when you were going to chime in.
  21. It's hard to speculate on what the Minelab thought process or philosophy was in in weighting the modes. Not sure the "equal weighting" is actually all that useful or desirable to detectorists. At the end of the day, simultaneous multi-frequency's strength lies not in its ability to see multiple target types with a single pass (vs. hitting a site with several machines operating a different frequencies or hitting the site several times with a machine that can operate at different frequencies). It's strength lies in its ability to use the target's response when "lit up" at different frequencies to process a more accurate target ID and also to more effectively cancel the ground signal. So detector mode descriptions of weighting simply serves to help guide the detectorist in selecting a mode that is better optimized for the a specific range of targets of interest or specific site conditions (e.g., high conductive silver, mid-conductive relics, jewelry, natural gold in hot dirt, salt signal cancellation). Providing multiple weighted modes also enables the machine to be a versatile one stop shop. It's also important to realize that just because a simultaneous multi-frequency mode may be "weighted" to a specific target type, that does not mean that the detector is blind to targets that are not favored by the weighting algorithm. A low frequency weighted detector will "favor" high conductors but that doesn't mean it will be blind to gold jewelry. Certainly, even a weighted simultaneous multi-frequency machine gives you a wider target capture "aperture" than a single frequency machine. Even though Park 1 is touted as a low frequency weighted mode on Equinox, we have no idea of the actual weighting factors and I think it is still considered to be the Equinox general purpose simultaneous multi-frequency mode similar to the Deus 2 General mode (whose weighting is also a mystery). May just come down to semantics and naming conventions. The only way to know for sure is to get real world comparisons going out their with the users because neither company is going to reveal the specifics of their secret sauce signal processing weighting algorithms. The other thing to consider is that user adjustable settings and default settings of those user adjustable settings (discrimination, sensitivity, recovery speed, iron bias (if applicable), tone customizations also serve to differentiate SMF modes. But unlike the weighting algorithms with sort of define the SMF mode DNA, the user adjustable parameters, at least for Equinox and Deus, are more customizations to suit site conditions (separation in junk, mineralization levels) vs. optimizing for specific targets of interest. HTH.
  22. I think you tripped to something worth discussing with respect to some ambiguous wording in the warranty. I was not reacting because I thought that the reason XP had that clause was obvious. I was reacting specifically to your statement, With that statement, you just went straight to the presumption that a company that is fielding a dive rated detector is going to use that clause to weasel out of its responsibility to deliver a leak proof dive rated detector as advertised. Which is simply ludicrous because they would effectively be committing unrecoverable business suicide due to the loss of trust from their customer base. It's either a very cynical take on XP's motivations or nonsense. If you instead said, "Hey, I noticed this clause in the warranty regarding "leak induced corrosion of electronics. How does that make sense with a waterproof detector?" That's at least starting with giving XP the benefit of the doubt that they have some ambiguous language (probably recycled from the old Deus) that should probably be revisited by the company lawyers without presuming they are doing some bait and switch warranty bs on their customers. And would open a discussion of why those words were in the exceptions clause. Hope that explains my reaction.
  • Create New...