Chase Goldman

Can't speak for the BBS Excal, but ML makes it pretty clear that the beach modes on the Nox are biased towards targets that are registering in the lower frequencies of the multi IQ MF spectrum ("low frequency weighting") which makes sense from a salt stability standpoint and woud corroborate your personal experience that the Nox is not finding micro gold stuff that the MDT isn't because you are running at 6.5 and 9 to max salt stability. As Steve has said repeatedly and most recently here, you are just not going to find micro gold that is likely going to fall right in the salt cancellation range of detectors set up to run stable in high and variable salinity (e.g. salt surf) environments. In other words, what you are saying makes perfect sense. If one reads through your previous post too quickly, it can be misinterpreted (which I did at first), that you were stating the MDT only has 3 frequencies, but a careful read of it shows it is consistent with what you stated above.

I think that more precisely answers jasong's original question re the SP01 so that will be helpful info. Anyway everyone, continue to enjoy the SP01 deep dive, despite minor misunderstandings it is great to have a forum where the actual device designer engages in technical discussions with the end users. In the mean time, I hope Norm's buddy figures out a solution to the EMI problem. Cheers.

Agree in the sense that they matter if they are precisely defined in the context in which they are used. I did not say "noise filter", for example. I said filter in the context of "audio filter" which is part of what equalization does but in an active vice passive sense. Feel free to deflect it all back on me because of my imprecise usage of terms. Guess its time for me to take some of my own medicine. I'll leave tge thread so you can pummel my corpse now. Lol. Chase out.

My sincerest apologies, just trying to explain why your gizmo is different and superior to the GPZ circuit yet you throw me under the bus to the guy that is questioning the need for the SP01 in the first place for imprecise terminology usage. That makes sense. Won't make that mistake again. I admit I am just a dumb EE, not a "decent audio engineer". However, all those terms were being thrown about in the thread without being precisely defined and the terms are imprecise enough to have overlapping contexts (equalization is a type of filtering is it not?) So please tell me what is the precise and proper term for your filter that "squeezes broad signals in the vertical plane" so I can use the correct terminology without being scolded again. Cheers.

That's just semantics. Pat says in his own post that it "manipulates" the audio. Whether you call it equalization, filtering, or coloring those are all just imprecise terms for audio manipulation.

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.