Chase Goldman

Not so fast... Not necessarily a universal sentiment. I like the Equinox but of the two value machines, personally prefer the Simplex because, unlike the Vanquish, it is different than the Equinox which I already own. The case could be different for someone who doesn't already have an Equinox. Of course, neither are it's equal. Apples and oranges. [For clarity regarding the referenced quote above - Note that Steve is quoting "iffy signals" so I am referring to the iffy signals' quote which may or may not have anything to do with how Steve feels about Vanquish]

I can use the 10% sub discount to finally try out a counterweight perhaps...

Yes, I too remember like abenson a similar thing happened with Equinox showing up in Cabelas (and online) while many dealers still had waiting lists a mile long. One thing that deterred me from jumping on these deals while I was waiting "in line", besides loyalty to my primary detecting equipment dealer, was that Cabelas, as I am sure most of the other chain stores, were not honoring the Minelab veteran's discount of 15%, probably because they did not want to deal with the overhead required of providing the suitable proof of service that ML requires in order for the dealers to recoup the difference from ML. Glad I am not in any way invested in getting one of these as they are completely redundant to and bring nothing to the table vs. my Equinox (I have enough "backup" and "entry level" machines for my friends and family to borrow and since the coils are incompatible with Equinox, there is absolutely no motivation for me, personally, to even think about acquiring this machine). This is bringing back some suppressed bad memories from the Equinox roll out.

I know this doesn't help most Equinox users, but when iron gets really bad, I usually just switch over to my Deus (or the less expensive ORX which works just as well) and a smaller coil. This is is why I have been saying for months, that the two detectors compliment each other. I love them both and would not be without both in my truck for any detecting situation. But here are some iron site tips for Equinox/Vanquish users because they can still get the job done: Make sure any ground noise is cancelled out by properly ground balancing your detector for each mode you plan to use. You don't need ground noise (in all metal) pounding your head in addition to all the ferrous hits. You should check this over clean ground, obviously, but that is sometimes hard at thick iron sites. I like using the new F2 iron bias at or near the default setting of 6 (4 to 7 seems to be the sweet spot to preclude masking). Use whatever setting works best on Vanquish-suspect Vanquish uses the new F2-like iron bias filter. Iron bias set too high tends to mitigate the advantage of higher recovery speeds causing non ferrous masking, so it is a delicate balancing act to find the Goldilocks (just right) iron bias setting. Use a higher recovery speed setting if the target density is high. For Vanquish, this means coin mode. Unlike Equinox, Vanquish has basically one Multi IQ mode and the other "modes" (coin, relic, jewelry) are merely differentiated by default recovery speed, tone breakpoint, and discrimination settings. See this post for more info. Unless you are going to remove ALL the iron as you go (impractical for most detecting situations), try using a lower sensitivity to "sift" through the iron and look for shallower non-ferrous finds. The lower sensitivity helps keep the deeper, big iron and shallower iron from overloading and overwhelming the detector. It is counterintuitive and takes some discipline, but lowering sensitivity can be a powerful tool. The threshold feature will alert you to ferrous targets if you have ferrous discriminated out as it blanks when you pass the coil over discriminated iron targets. So if you are seeking out or seeking to avoid the iron patches, using threshold can be useful. Use the horseshoe button to interrogate high tone hits to see if there are iron tones mixed in. Problem is, it could be a single iron target or multiple mixed targets so... Use the pinpointer (not available on the V340) to ascertain whether you have multiple targets in the hole or a single target. And since pinpoint is a non-motion mode, you can trace the outline footprint of the target to tell whether you are swinging over a coin-sized object or a larger iron or aluminum target such as a can or actual horseshoe which can ring up high. If you have an Equinox 800, sometimes I find Gold mode to be useful in thick iron situations as either a primary search mode or something to quickly switch to to interrogate an iffy signal as the VCO-like audio can work similar to pinpoint in revealing target strength or multiple adjacent small targets (though you can't target footprint trace because it is a motion mode) with the added benefit of visual target ID. If target density is high, try using the smaller available coils (e g , 6 inch round for Equinox). Yes depth will be slightly less, but fewer targets under the coil simultaneously helps with reducing coil overload and you might be able to use a higher sensitivity and lower recovery speed. Note also, that if you use a different sized coil, your sweet spot iron bias settings might also change. Final tip, don't be afraid to wade into the iron patches. Since most low recovery speed detectors have trouble there, it is perhaps your best bet to find a shallower keeper that has been masked all these years. It takes patience and use/honing of the skills above plus you WILL be digging a lot of iron regardless (and getting it out of your way), but the reward for that can be huge. Even if you get a 99% probable iron signal the only way to know for sure is to dig it and see what else might be in that hole. Hope these help and give you some ideas how to attack an iron site with your Equinox/Vanquish.

It usually reveals itself simply by switching to all metal (horseshoe button) where you will get an iron grunt along with the high tone.

So did Equinox. Didn't seem to hurt sales any.

Simon, Hope you can find at least one detector you can take along....

Entertaining. Digging their enthusiasm, would have thought ol' Sparky was just released, not almost 2 years before this video was made. My favorite quote: "So what did Garrett do with the AT Max to improve on perfection?" Oh brother.... Love the big boys' hype machines. All manufacturers are guilty of throwing around impressive sounding terminology and pseudo tech jargon. That's why I'm glad for sites like Steve's where the tech information is provided without bias by cutting through the hype so you can do the research yourself and make up your own mind.

The ORX and Deus remote volumes are the same. If I need to go without headphones I stick the remote in my shirt pocket so that I can hear it better otherwise, the volume is not sufficient for me if I leave the remote on the stem, especially for fainter signals.

To be really effective against EMI, I believe you also have to noise cancel when you go to single frequency because the mode specific Multi IQ noise cancel is N/A once you go to single. As I've posted before, once you go to single in Park 1/2 or Field 1/2, the Multi IQ mode designation loses meaning because the Multi IQ frequency profile and processing are no longer applicable and all, you are left with are the user adjustable settings of GB, tones options, and recovery speed defaults for that mode (i.e., Park 1 = Park 2 = Field 1 = Field 2 save for the user settings at any given single frequency). Update: I confirmed using another detector as a noise source that I could get a stable/quiet Park 1 in Multi configuration, but had to noise cancel again when I switched to Single. In fact, as expected, every single frequency was affected differently by the noise source and each could be quieted with different Noise cancel channels.

People ARE doing that, check this site out for plenty of DIY detector build info.

Good point.

Simon, Mike Hillis pointed this out to me. The only real difference between modes are the tone settings, discrimination breakpoints, and an internally selected (i.e., not user selectable other than the mode you select) mode specific recovery speed setting. In other words, it is like having your Equinox locked into a single Multi IQ profile (e.g., Park 1), with the only differentiation between modes being the discrimination breakpoints and recovery speed. Hence, no dedicated beach mode. Notice how the mode names are target focused (coin, relic, jewelry) on the Vanquish rather than site focused (park, field, beach) as on the Equinox? ML is eally trying to keep it simple in BOTH operation and capability. Another way to look at it is it is like a Multi IQ version of a single frequency machine (e.g., single frequency Simplex) vs. the Equinox being the multiple selectable frequency Anfibio. In other words their is a wider capabilty gulf between even the V540 and the Equinox 600 than I was originally anticipating. Regardless, even if my Equinox was locked in Park 1 mode for perpetuity, and I had settings limitations similar to the Vanquish, I could STILL do some damage at the parks, fields and beaches. The inexperienced or budget minded detectorist will still be be well equipoed with Vanquish, but already owning the Equinox, the Vanquish with all it's handcuffs holds zero interest for me, despite the coil selection. Simplex is my choice of these two capable budget machines which might not have been the case if I already owned an Anfibio or Multi Kruzer. The single Multi IQ profile "hint" is sort of more obviously "implied" in the Vanquish user guide mode descriptions.

Well, not exactly in all it’s glory, if Vanquish is limited to a single one-size-fits-all weighted Multi IQ profile and processing (a realization that was just pointed out me), it’s like having an Equinox locked in Park 1 mode plus less adjustments [not necessarily a bad thing, that would still be a killer detector] Though from that perspective, since Equinox only has at most 6 Multi IQ profiles, the Equinox is also not Multi IQ in all its glory either. I don’t even know what I’m talking about any more. ML has me so twisted around with their imprecise, pseudo engineering marketing double speak, I feel like one of those computers in the Original Star Trek that Captain Kirk is always making blow up as he uses human “illogic” to drive them into an infinite do loop. Anyway, back to testing my Simplex. Ahh the simple, refreshing serenity of a straight forward, stripped down, back to basics but capable single frequency detector. Without a bunch of relics magically popping out of the ground and without my detector stuck in a rock in the middle of some non-descript field waiting for the chosen Arthurian detectorist to release it for the benefit of all detecting mankind.

Now that Mike has opened my eyes with respect to ML’s simplistic functional descriptions, I now get it too. Digital CZ with the ability to auto ground compensate in the background (no manual ground balance control) and provide a visual control setting and target ID interface.

You are correct, sir. Will be putting it through its paces soon. Beach testing will have to wait though.

Mike, After doing a deeper dive into the user guide mode descriptions (kind of a misnomer considering how simplistic the guide actually is), I see exactly where you are coming from. Thanks for pointing that out. I can’t tell if ML just dumbed down the mode descriptions for inexperienced users or they are indeed just using a single multi frequency profile for all modes differentiated by disc, tone break, and underlying differences in recovery speed settings, but it certainly looks like the latter. If this is the case, Vanquish is even less sophisticated than I originally thought. Using a one-size-fits-all fixed multi frequency profile (say something equivalent to having your Equinox locked in at Park 1 or Beach 1 continuously) can actually be counter productive under certain circumstances and with certain targets could be worse from a depth performance standpoint than simply using a compromise multi-use single frequency such as 12 kHz (one of the reasons I really thought ML should have provided at least one single frequency setting for Vanquish). Stepping back, I know I’m over-stating the doom and gloom (after all, how could it be worse than a single frequency machine, in actuality), but I really wonder how stable it will be under extreme salt or mineralization conditions without having to really crank sensitivity down (or without internally making the response muted). [Anyone who has tried the Equinox in anything other than beach 2 mode on wet salt sand with black sand mixed in, knows what I am talking about]. I am sure ML tested the profile that would give good all around performance but does that mean you are boosting performance signifantly above single frequency or significantly below a situation specific ideal multi frequency profile. Probably doesn’t matter except in forum discussions because it should work for 90% plus detecting situations anyone in the target demo could encounter. I will also be very interested in actual field performance especially from those experienced folks thinking they are going to get 600-like performance on the cheap for bare bones prospecting or grab n go wet salt surf detecting using those tasty coils. Might be a tad disappointing. But I am sure there will be plenty of pleasant surprises and outstanding finds too once the user finds stories and pics start rolling in, just as with any detector. For the casual detectorist it will easily give hours of enjoyment (but so does the Go Find, quite frankly) and makes multi frequency accessible to all as the thread title states. Anyhoo, that seals it for me, no thanks. At the 540 Pro price point, I would move on up to the Equinox 600. But ML wasn’t targeting me anyway so I am sure it will be a smashing success with their target market segment. We’ll see how it does going up against the Simplex which is getting a little head start. I already placed my vote...

Nope. Some things never change!

You That IS falsing. You should try the new iron bias settings (F2) to see if that helps with your issue.

High tones not so much, mid-tones, yes. In your specific example, though, the tonal variation you showed might be telling me there are multiple targets and the ability to lock onto a slightly lower pitched 25 tone and a separate higher pitched 35 might tell me dime/half coin spill. If I can't audibly lock into either and it sounds really "flutey" but with the same variation in range > probable crown cap, though I would expect the audio to cross the tone bin breakpoint as well if a bottlecap and a little iron grunt off the edge if corroded. The 30-31 is just a no brainer dig me. You don't need 50 tones to tell you that. It just becomes really obvious in 50 tones vs. 5 tones. It works really well in the mid to low teens and ferrous range. Just is what I am used to. You can really hear the "rate of variation" better in 50 tones than 5 tones (+ display) and that rate of audio ID variation is an important clue as to whether you are talking probable junk or keepers or multiple targets in the hole. Kind of like a digital display where you just get numbers flashing vs. an analog meter where you can see a smooth transition or the needle jumping all over the place. Hard to describe. If I want a nice relaxing walk in the park or on the beach under non-challenging junk conditions and spread targets (i.e., low probability of masking) and am just digging clad or coin shooting or the occasional fat ring, 2, 3 or 5 tones is the way to go. But if I am trying to dig colonial buttons out of a bed of nails or have a severe crowncap situation - 50 tones.

Yep, I guess I misinterpreted what you were saying because the way you phrased it, it sounded like you were implying the Equinox was redundant to the CTX. Thanks for clarifying that. A few avid salt beach hunters here have praised the Tarsacci for its depth in wet salt sand and surf. Exceeding, Equinox on depth under similar conditions. Not sure the difference would be as great for FW situations.

The tone stability (or more accurately, lack of it) as it relates to iffy signal target ID in 50 tones is the advantage to me. Imagine variable ID within a tone bin, you can’t hear that in anything less than 50 tones unless it crosses the the tone break between bins and will only see it if you are looking at the display. To me that is an additional advantageous nuance or layer to tonality brought by 50 tones that is important for the type of relic hunting that I do and where I do it (super hot soil, typically). As I said previously, as far target ID audio is concerned for “non-iffy” targets, all I care about is low (ferrous), medium or high (non-ferrous), so I don’t need 50 tones in that respect and I know all that noise is is not everyone’s cup of tea. Totally agree and I often use this approach.

3030 and Equinox are just 2 completely different beasts so this statement kind of throws me. They perhaps compliment each other but there are a few things each does way better than the other. The Equinox, with its superior recovery speed would probably also do extremely well in the environment you just described vs. the 3030 and would probably be able to easily hold its own with the Tarsacci in this situation from what I know about the Tarsacci based on discussions here. But admittedly, I have no first hand experience with it so I could be wrong. Tarsacci looks to be a great machine with an innovative niche focus, but perhaps hampered in value because the limited production requires a pretty steep price point in order to recoup the R&D investment. That being said, I am all about using diverse vlf detector designs because even though the fundamental induction balance principle is used across the board, the different ways manufacturers choose to process signals and the variation in processing capabilities (e.g., recovery speed) and how the target information is filtered and conveyed audibly and visually to the detectorist. So despite the Equinox and CTX multi frequency implementation being different, they are both ML so I can see the attraction to trying out a different manufacturer’s machine, especially when they are trying to do it a little differently than the others. Regardless of all that, great finds! Congrats. Sounds like you worked hard for them and you seem to have a good handle on the Tarsacci.

Seth, I find the Deus audio to be more expressive and nuanced than Equinox but the Equinox audio gives pretty good information in its own right. I am extracting the audio "shape" information exactly as you describe to get target info, e.g. rise and fall times, duration, and whether the tone sounds hollow or full and tone "stability" in 50 tones which correlates directly with TID stability and can clue you in as to whether that mid or high tone is a likely keeper or likely junk (still need to dig it ito be 100% certain). The individual fundamental tone pitch just corresponds to individual low, medium, or high TID numbers and other than that I don't get much from tone fundamental pitch itself and in 50 tones you really can't differentiate individual IDs other than low, medium, or high without looking at the screen for the actual ID (anyone who says otherwise either has perfect pitch or is lying). What I am mainly looking for is the Equinox to lock in on a repeatable, desirable tone through appropriate coil manipulation (i.e., short wiggle over the target) and the high recovery speed of Equinox (or Deus) enables that over just about any other detector, including the AT Pro. I suspect the reasons we respectively give the audio nod to our other detectors (Deus in my case and AT Pro in yours) vs. Equinox is that we really learned what the audio was telling us with those detectors before Equinox arrived and so we are learning a similar but different detector language now with Equinox. I find the two detectors compliment each other in my case. In some situations the Deus will excel over Equinox and in other situations it is just the opposite. And as far as the audio is concerned, I now find myself able to seemlessly switch back and forth between the two detectors from an audio ID standpoint without thinking about it. Whereas, early on, it took some acclimation time when switching off between them to get used to the different audio response between Deus and Equinox. I guess I am fluent in at least two different detector languages now. Bilingual detecting, lol.

Agree with Seth, I am not quite sure what you are driving at regarding your "Selectable multi frequency on the Equinox, non selectable on the Vanquish" statement. They both have a number of search mode profiles that determine an optimal weighted Multi IQ frequency profile and target signal processing for the targets and environment of interest, there are just fewer choices on the Vanquish and they have different mode descriptors. In either case, you really have no selectable control over the actual transmit frequencies and signal processing used in the Multi IQ profiles as they are fixed in software for each mode (other than auto selection of the noise cancel channel which works the same on both detectors - with the exception that the 800 has manual noise cancel and Equinox had adjustable tones and recovery speeds). Can you elaborate? Thx.