Chase Goldman

Agree re: bypass. Now I'm disappointed I can't get my hands on one. Lol.

No. As stated previously the non-linear audio amplification used in the GPZ distorts the signal and also raises the noise floor as you crank its output. So using the GPZ amp as a pre-amp to the booster in the low volume region of the GPZ audio amp where distortion and noise are minimized is preferred. Letting the equalization circuit of the booster color the signal to compensate for the audio response of the speaker or headphones being used and then also applying the cleaner low-distortion, low-noise audio amplification of the booster provides a cleaner, boosted signal that emulates the effect of increasing sensitivity when indeed you are actually only boosting the audio. Put simply, the booster amp is cleaner than the GPZ amp and provides variable equalization that is absent in the GPZ audio circuit.

The problem arises for Norm if he still wants to chain in the SP01 somewhere and get rid of the WM12. His friend was running with no booster which significantly uncomplicated life provided he finds a suitable GPZ mounting point for the Trond. In Norm’s case, he has 2 unattractive choices (provided he insists on continuing running wireless between the SP01 and his phones): 1) Plug the booster into the GPZ h/p Jack and the Trond on the output of the SP01. That configuration requires tricky mounting of both the SP01 and Trond somewhere on the GPZ and keeps the booster out of convenient reach. 2) plug one Trond into the GPZ h/p Jack and mount it on the GPZ. Rig up a Trond receiver plugged into the input of the SP01 and paired to the GPZ Trond and put a separate Trond transmitter on the output of the SP01 and chest mount that whole mess and pair the SP01 output Trond with his headphones. That whole thing becomes a BT pairing nightmare, though. Everything looks pretty ugly if you want to use the SP01 in the mix and insist on not plugging wired phones into the SP01 output. My recommendation is that if he wants to run with the SP01 chest mounted and the 800 phones, he sticks with his current WM12/BT setup, especially since it was working for him.

Dew this chart by Steve somewhat refutes that statement. You can also now add Simplex to that list which skews it even further towards the less expensive side. Of the 4 non-PI machines that come in higher priced than Nox, 2 are Dive Rated to 200+ feet submergence (including the Excal, of course). One is the now overpriced (from a features perspective) CTX which like the Nox is rated only to 10 feet. The remaining one is the MDT which is IP 68 rated (1.5M for 30 minutes) meaning it is basically designed to take an accidental dunking and survive. Frankly, I think the MDT is the more realistic rating that should also be applied to most of the 10 ft/3 meter depth rated machines, especially Nox, based on it's recent anecdotal water usage track record. MDT's price tag appears to primarily be a function of the fact it is coming from a small scale production outfit rather than it's features, environmental qualifications (watertightness) or build. That being said, I really do like build quality and it does have some unique features. I am still learning mine so I can't go live with an informed opinion of performance, just yet.

Whites have contracted folks to continue to provide repair support even after their demise as long as the repair parts hold out. Maybe Steve was being too subtle, who knows. But when the guy who runs this site takes the time to compile the Whites repair contact information in the provided link and hints at the design defect as being a beyond warranty repair item, that probably means there was a shot they would fix it free of charge (even outside the warranty period) other than perhaps shipping. Thought that might be a worthwhile phone inquiry at least. As they say, nothing ventured, nothing gained. In any event, hope it works out in your favor in the end and at least you can take advantage of being able to cannibalize parts from the dead unit and you apparently have the shop skills. Good luck and let us know how it works out.

I was referring to Norm's stated setup that he described in the original post on the thread. He later stated that he prefers wireless phones to being tethered by wired phones to the SPO1. I'll leave it to Norm to explain further, if needed.

Need a wireless receiver in there too prior to the SPO1. I only point that out (for others, I know you know this Simon) because if someone were to try to accomplish what you are doing with the Quest (which is comprised of both a transmitter and separate receiver) using a Trond or equivalent B/T transceivers vice the Quest or WM12, it will take both a transmitter and receiver B/T unit to accomplish that task. And it should work out for him, Norm, if he is able to find the right GPZ mounting point for the Trond transmitter to avoid the interference. I feed the audio output of my GPX battery/amp combo (mounted side saddle on the control box) directly into a Trond transmitter and use my Equinox equivalent wireless headphones to untether from the GPX.

Let us know how it goes. It is a completely different beast than that Deus so give it some time to click.

Part of the confusion is that we are talking two separate podcast interviews. He was basically silent on the topic on the RR podcast but addressed it on the AD podcast as mentioned above. Like I said, his statement is not inconsistent with how everyone else approaches updates on detectors. There are no set schedules for releases (though ML has settled into a late summer release routine it seems for Equinox). These are basically announced the day they suddenly appear on the site. The lone exception was XP who advertised new hardware and accompanying V 4 Deus software as imminent and then it didn't show up for nearly a year and a half. Then they botched the rollout by posting a corrupted/non-final version of the executable for download - doh. They never made that mistake again... ML was also mum on the capability for Vanquish, but as Simon points out we knew it was updateable as soon as the usb port was discovered in the battery compartment (Vanquish also doesn't advertise USB battery charging capability, either). So we never knew if ML was going to issue an update for Vanquish until they dropped the Iron Volume 1.1 update.

Yep, we established that Steve Moore actually said that it could be updated. See above. Re: Vanquish - Correct me if I am wrong, Simon, but as I recall, all people were saying is that ML (at the time) was not advertising the update feature capability like they did explicitly with the Equinox which was stange once the USB port was discovered in the battery compartment. Technically knowledgeable people were not saying it couldn't be updated, it just wasn't apparent that ML was going to choose to take advantage of the capability until they confirmed it by delivering that first firmware update to add the iron volume feature. Up to that point ML was mum on the subject. It was definitely a positive that ML demonstrated that they were willing to invest in firmware updates for the Vanquish series. Hope Garrett follows in their footsteps.

I think this is what people are recalling. It can be done - no plans to regularly do so. Probably not that far out of line with Nokta, XP, and ML if you think about it. But unlike those companies, Garrett is not choosing to market or hype it as a spec "feature" like those companies do, for whatever reason.

I would go with Field 2 and then hit it with another "complimentary" mode like Park 1 or Field 1 with the desired tone setup. Since you already hit it with Field 1, try Field 2 next time to see how it does.

My problem is that those plastic threaded mounts failed and cracked (probably as a result of getting jostled in the back of the truck during a cold weather snap that caused the plastic to become brittle), that was that. Had to send it in for repair/replacement under warranty. Recognizing the vulnerability, that was the last straw in string of mishaps with the Sport (having to also send it back to replace the buggy firmware, not knowing if the faceplate was susceptible to leakage, etc.) plus Equinox made it basically a dust collector/loaner unit, so I sold the unit as soon as I could after I got it back from Whites.

50 tones best clues you in to the TID variability of the target (you will get the flutey sounding tones). But you can always hear the "synchrony" of ferrous low tones in the ferrous bin along with a falsing high tone whether you are in two tones (Field 1 default), 5 tones (Park1 and Beach mode default) or 50 tones (Park 2 and Field 2) as long as you accept the ferrous bin or operate with the horseshoe button to accept all targets. BTW - curious on why you choose to go with Field 1 at your grist mill site? The various modes have sensitivities that bias towards certain target conductivities (even though they are all multi frequency modes). Park 1 and Field 1 are weighted to favor high conductive targets such as copper and silver and large targets that default to a high conductive target response due to their sheer mass of metal regardless of the specific conductivity. Park 2 and Field 2 are weighted to favor low and mid conductive targets such as gold jewelry, small targets, and typical brass and lead relics such as buttons and minie ball projectiles, nickels, and gold coins and small hammered silver coins. Unfortunately, modern aluminum trash also falls in this range. Use of pinpoint mode to "trace" the target footprint can give you a clue as to the size of the target under the coil. So a high falsing large iron target will trace a very large target footprint vs. a coin. Plus, you will get that telltale iron grunt in whatever search mode you are using along with the high false. HTH

Agreed. That's why its a head scratcher they didn't include it in the first place. The good news is that we now have verification that ML will support Vanquish with FW updates which holds a lot of promise for expanding the capabilities of the Vanquish line. User firmware updates is a feature notably and inexplicably missing with Apex.

Happy for you Simon, but still doesn't excuse not providing what should be a standard entry level detector feature at this point. ML stands out as the only recent entry level detector without this feature. Doesn't keep the big box stores from selling this detector in regions like mine where neutral ground is the exception not the rule. So the newbie detectorist gets to roll the dice and find out whether he can actually use the AM button where he lives? Does that seem right?

This is why we can't have nice things.

The issue of Threshold blanking in AM or with no disc/notch was discussed in detail in this thread (Chuck, you chipped in with some input there too). Also includes a good summary and explanation of the different threshold type used in gold mode vs. the other modes. Great refresher on Equinox Threshold. Enjoy...

Actually, as abenson noted above, even at factory settings, depending on mode selected, the Equinox is faster than Apex (and by definition Vanquish). The key with Equinox is that you have direct control over recovery speed unlike Apex or Vanquish (though Vanquish does have slight recovery speed variability depending on which of the modes you select).

The Apex is NOT faster than the Equinox with the Equinox set at high recovery speed settings.

That's the point I was trying to make. Why deal with the headache of two wireless systems especially from chest to ear.

That something that ML can't even do at this point so of course Garrett can't either. Agreed. They did not do this, but Vanquish has flaws that ML should never have let out the door such as fixed GB and NO single frequency mode whatsoever, which could be beneficial under certain circumstances (I'd take that quiet 4 khz mode they just released for the Equinox at say anywhere from 10 khz to 14 khz). The former is a must have to provide site independent versatility, the latter is a nice to have. Neither machine meets my needs even as a bare bones backup machine in my local area. I think that if Nokta had released Simplex with multiple selectable frequencies at about the same price point, they would have a killer machine on their hands and that would have bought them more time to deliver MF. Of the three (Apex, Vanquish, Simplex) if I had to go with one as my value-based backup machine - it would probably be Simplex at this point. Except generating significant sales. Just goes to show you that you don't have to have much credibility to generate sales in this business. I bet the Ace series is still a moneymaker for Garrett and that just probably took a jump with the Apex release, otherwise Garrett wouldn't entertain the insanity if it were hurting sales, which it doesn't appear to be. Would really like to know the gross detector sales numbers between Garrett and ML in the US.

Yeah, but no one should be expecting a Porsche at that price, to be fair, so that should have been clear without any reviews. And even Garrett didn't try to pass it off as an AT level detector. So let's keep that in perspective while throwing the vegetables at it. Also, I have now seen two definite thumbs down reviews (one of those frankly showed ok real world hunt performance - but I get why the machine isn't bringing anything to the table for that detectorist) and one "meh" from D/P members reviewing the Apex. Not exactly a sample size you can hang your hat on. Again, cheapest multiple selectable frequency unit on the market. Not expecting much from the first gen Garrett multi vs. 4th+ gen multi from ML that resides in Vanquish. Multi in the Apex just gives it more salt beach stability then any of their other VLFs. I never expected it to outperform Vanquish in multi with its more advanced signal processing and iron bias algorithms. Still have not seen a lot of hunt videos of it being used in the various SF modes, especially 20 khz. At least it can be ground balanced, something the Vanquish has a lot of trouble handling in my soil, so I can only get away with an Equinox for most situations. Garrett definitely has work to do on advancing the multi signal processing and overall recovery speed, delivering true all metal (at least in SF) would be good and providing a little more sophistication and customizing in the tones departement when they roll out the Apex's higher end successor.

Obviously that works but if your WM12 and Booster are chest mounted not sure why you need it wireless from there to your H/P, just plug the phones into the booster and tuck the wire. Unless you are removing your harness or whatever you have the WM12 and Booster hooked to) you still remain untethered from the detector which is the main goal. The only logical reason to use B/T would be to get rid of the wonky reception of the WM12 altogether (GPZ>BlutetoothTransmitter (via H/P Jack) wireless to BT H/P). I must be missing something unless your goal is to keep the booster in play. In that case, you could hook the booster up to the H/P jack on the GPZ then hook the transmitter into the Booster jack. I think having to deal with two wireless systems simultaneously just sets you up for a multitude of issues ranging from propagation issues and latency delays, to having to deal with batteries in the WM unit, booster, AND the bluetooth transceiver. But if that works for you - don't fix what ain't broken, I suppose.

If you are enjoying the challenge, then that's all that matters. You might just stumble onto a combination of beast mode settings and that would be fun.