Chase Goldman

Great move, Rob!

How many times have you swung the Equinox over a sweet sounding quarter coin tone only to discover it was an aluminum can? There are some tonal nuances a trained ear can tell the difference side-by-side in the ground, but it is even hard for a trained ear to tell the difference on widely scattered targets in a field or on the beach. And you certainly can’t get a good handle on the target footprint with the processed search mode tones. Pinpoint mode to the rescue. Since pinpoint is a non-motion mode (vs. normal detect mode which requires you to keep the coil in motion over the target to register a target tone), you can use it to quickly ascertain the relative size of shallower high visual or tone ID targets to give you an idea whether you are swinging over a coin sized object or potential junk with a much larger footprint such as a beer can or large falsing iron target (e,g., horseshoe.). This is accomplished by tracing over the target with pinpoint engaged. The larger objects will invoke the high pinpoint tone over a much larger footprint area than a smaller coin, ring, or button-sized target as the pinpoint tone rapidly drops off as the coil center crosses off the edge of the target footprint. This method becomes less effective for significantly deeper junk targets as the relative pinpoint signal strength "footprint" shrinks even with larger targets as their depth increases (you can simulate this by lifting the coil off the ground while tracing something like a beer can). You will probably dig the target anyway just to be sure, but at least this way your expectations are properly set such that you will be pleasantly surprised if it turns out to be a keeper rather than the other way around. I personally use pinpoint more for target tracing, when I am in doubt about the true nature of a good sounding target, rather than going to pinpoint mode for pinpointing, because I can pinpoint pretty effectively by wiggling off high probability coin-sized targets.

It is not properly showing the shipping availability status in the cart and I am not going to go through the checkout process to verify they are actually in stock and ready to ship. Saw this snafu before with Cabelas and the Equinox.

M. C. Lilly & Co. / Columbus, Ohio , manufactured military buttons from 1876 thru WW II. Agree, this looks early 1900's to WW II.

This a great topic with many lines of discussion. I like the stability of the compressed range and for me it is more about the audio anyway because the tonal nuances tell me more about the nature of a target than a number on a screen. So if we are talking single number VDI, I am ok with less is more. People fool themselves into thinking that a metal detector is a precision instrument. There are so many variables and variations in material properties that can result in disparate targets showing up with the same VID just as there are so many variables that can make almost identical targets show up with disparate VIDs. The detectorist needs to integrate the visual and the audible as well as how the target signal behaves when the coil is manipulated to make a dig decision. That being said, I am all for having the detector give me additional USEFUL visual information to enable a more reliable pre-recovery ID whether that is graphical imaging or even the 2-D target ID numbers (Ferrous/Conducitivity) used by ML FBS machines such as the eTrac and CTX. Perhaps a future Multi IQ based machine with the sophisticated ID and discrimination pattern features of these high end ML detectors will follow Vanquish.

Bingo. I'm guilty as charged.

For relic hunting I have seen some limited advantage to using the 55 khz/74 khz (9.5 inch elliptical HF coil) under certain conditions of extreme mineralization and iron. For me the 9" HF coil stays on my Deus 90% of the time. But for maximum flexibility for most types of detecting be it beach hunting, park hunting/coin shooting, relic hunting, or nugget hunting, the X35 excels. If I could have only two coils, it would be the 9" HF and the 11" X35. If I could have only 3 - I would add the 9.5x5" elliptical HF. If I could have only one "all around" coil, it would be the 9" X35.

I am not really looking for a new detector to add to my arsenal. I think my Deus, Equinox, and GPX cover the bases pretty well. I keep an MXT and F75 DST around mainly for nostalgic reasons (like a guitarist collects guitars) and because they were classic designs in their day with solid performance, features, design, and ergonomics bar none in the case of the F75. I laso keep my Tek Delta around because it was the detector with which I really learned how to detect and helped me form a passion for the hobby. Plus they all support concentric coils which are advantageous under certain conditions. So why was I still drawn to the two new low cost offerings by Makro and Minelab? There is always something refreshing about a stripped down, back to basics detector design that incorporates the latest tech and capabilities (e.g., Multi IQ for Vanquish, straight forward single frequency detecting with decent all metal capability, and a waterproof package for the Simplex). Why get another detector, when my main arsenal seemingly consists of detectors that should easily outperform either Vanquish or Simplex? The answer is simple, performance diversity. Hitting a site with a different detectors of diverse capabilities, features, performance usually pays of if you have the luxury of time and access. Last week, at several different types of CW relic sites in Virginia I was able to use the diverse capabilities of the three detectors I mentioned in the second sentence of my post and each delivered with keeper finds under the conditions to which they typically excel. The GPX penetrated deep into highly mineralized soils of those Virginia fields to snag a number of deep non-ferrous brass and lead targets including my first US Cavalry bit boss - a "bucket lister" for me. The Equinox with its Multi IQ capabilities and diverse modes (including gold mode) was able to ID and lock onto shallower no-ferrous targets in the mineralized muck of multiple non-ferrous and ferrous targets which enabled me to ultimately pull several non-ferrous keepers out of a single hole. And the Deus gave my tired arm a break while deftly navigating between huge chunks of big iron in pitch mode that enabled me to literally visualize the large target footprint of these big iron targets and as a result snagged some actual ferrous CW relics including stove leg and some antique door hinges and other unique ferrous keepers. So what does this have to do with Vanquish and Simplex? The Vanquish is a very capable entry level detector with some high-end features (Multi IQ) and a cool coil selection and neat stem design but, not surprisingly, very limited setting customization options and missing features that appropriately put in a couple of notches below the even the Equinox 600. Some of the missing features are quite frankly head scratching as far as I am concerned (e.g., not fully waterproof housing, lack of user firmware update capability, no single frequency mode option, and while the coil selection is compelling, those coils are not also compatible with Equinox - a missed opportunity IMO - confirmed with me in person by Debbie S of Minelab at last week's dig). Sometimes manufacturers tease higher end features into their new lower-end offerings that are otherwise not available in their mid or high level offerings. Other than the decent coil selection, there is no such situation here. The Equinox envelopes the Vanquish completely. Bottom line, the Vanquish is solid and provides "multifrequency for the masses" but brings nothing to the table for Equinox users. That is not slam, it is a fact and frankly is not unexpected. If the coils were cross compatible with Equinox, I might seriously consider picking up a Vanquish solely for the opportunity to use the coils on Equinox while getting a fairly decent emergency backup or grab n go machine in the process. But with the coils solely married to the less capable Vanquish and without the capability to wring the most out of them, it is a pass for me. The Simplex on the other hand is limited to single frequency and the emphasis is on solid basic performance and ease of use. Yet Nokta has packed it with some high end features such as fully waterproof, wireless ready (and cheaper than the wireless variant of the Vanquish), firmware updates (updates and bug fixes have already been released), and the promise of some decent accessory coils consistent with the Nokta track record on their other recent detector designs. So there are slight feature advantages that in the Simplex design that provide something a little more compelling in the "basics" than Vanquish, though Vanquish does have Multi IQ going for it. Since I do not own a Nokta or Makro detector, the Simplex provides the performance diversity that the Vanquish does not, IN MY CASE. This would not necessarily be true of those who might own a Kruzer, Anfibio or Impact. For those folks, the Simplex probably looks to them the same way the Vanquish looks to me or the typical Equinox owner. At this price point, the performance diversity is worth it. I get Nokta's signal processing which is lacking in my arsenal, a decent VCO all metal mode (which I prefer over the processed discrete tones of the Equinox in the non-gold modes) and the prospect of decent accessory coil choices with user upgrade-able firmware in a waterproof package. It is still entry level and fairly basic, but compelling to me from a performance diversity standpoint, nevertheless. Remember, this is only my opinion and is applicable to my particular situation based on the detectors I already own and the type of detecting I like to do (primarily CW and Colonial relic hunting). It should not be misconstrued as Simplex is better than Vanquish or that these detectors can outperform their more expensive and capable cousins. So do you find either the Simplex and/or Vanquish compelling even if you do own higher end detectors already? Discuss your thoughts below.

Deus gold field has dedicated threshold tone with volume/level also, unless I'm missing something. The other ORX gold mode features listed are indeed missing from Deus gold field mode.

Is that because of the coil you have attached, because I would be using it anywhere there is iron whether open or tight spaces. The ORX is the superior machine in if iron infested and it makes a great open field running machine too with the right coil. I would do a quick scan of the property using whichever detector has the best swing coverage. Look for concentrations of good targets, concentrations of iron, concentrations of non-ferrous junk. Look at both the keepers and the trash you accumulate. Coin and relic concentrations (e.g., buttons, thimbles, buckles) should be exploited and carefully gridded, obviously But trash can also give you clues - horse tack, ferrous door handles, concentrations of nails, cooking pots, utensils and tools can also point you in directions you should focus on. Also, gather clues from the non-metallic finds such as plateware, china, glass, ceramics, etc. Look for areas where people may naturally gather, clotheslines, wash areas, high points. Humans are creatures of habit so think about where you might like to picnic, laze by a tree, or dry your clothes. Remove as much trash as possible to unmask deeper keepers. If you are in really thick iron situations, then consider lowering your sensitivity to reduce ferrous overload on the coil and see if some shallower non-ferrous keepers pop out of the muck. Hit the site with different detectors and different modes and different frequencies, if possible. Make sure when you re-scan an area you do it from a different direction of orientation. Some targets may not be visible until you turn 90 degrees and if you don't see it the first time you will never know unless you come at it from that other angle. Set your expectations accordingly. Old does not necessarily mean the property is brimming with coins or even keeper non-monetary targets. Folks may not necessarily be rich in property. Also, it is highly probable the site has been hit before by detectorists. Your ORX with its superior performance in iron and high recovery speed should help with masked targets that previous detectorists with slower machines might have missed. For ORX, I highly recommend you use discrimination (set between 7 to 10) WITH iron volume vice no discrimination to ID iron and non-ferrous. The discrimination is not just for filtering iron it also helps keep iron from down averaging non-ferrous target IDs. Hope this helps. Good luck, happy hunting, and enjoy your new site. Nothing as exciting as a fresh permission and the anticipation of great finds. Chase

Agree. I suspect the Vanquish is giving the ML engineers some breathing room to come up with that CTX Multi IQ variant (or whatever high-end VLF they choose to release in the coming years). It accomplishes two things, gets another iteration of Multi IQ out there and in the hands of users so ML can learn more about the tech through user field experience to better inform future higher end Multi IQ detector applications and it enables ML to take a stab at biting into the low-end/entry level detector market segment dominated by Garrett (Ace Series) and to a lesser extent FT (Bounty Hunter).

Steve will chime in too. Depends on whether you are talking ultimate detection depth or ID depth. What does that mean? The linked thread above discusses that with VLF technology dime sized targets can typically be reliably detected and positively identified at about 5 to 6 inches under most conditions perhaps deeper in really mild soil and much less in highly mineralized soil. Beyond that, the detector may know the target is there but can't ID it, ultimate depth. That ultimate depth (as well as ID depth) can be influenced by some of the variables listed below. There are many variables that affect depth including: transmit power, sensitivity, frequency, recovery speed, coil size, target composition, target size, target shape, target orientation, nearby "non-desired" targets (ferrous and non-ferrous), soil conditions, and the user interface that facilitates human brain decoding of the receive signal (typically the audio vice a target ID number or even graphical user interface). All of these things compete in differing ways and degrees to determine your ultimate depth capability. VLF technology has not progressed to create a significant improvement in ultimate depth in several years. But ultimate depth is not the only key. Multifrequency is a great technological advantage, though not necessarily because it creates more depth but because it allows exciting multiple targets that respond favorably to different frequencies with a single pass of the coil and enables effective balancing under salt or other unfavorable soil conditions (e.g., mineralization) which can improve ID depth. The other great innovation has been improvements in signal processing both in speed and ID accuracy through advanced microprocessor components and software algorithms allowing much greater detection separation between adjacent junk and desirable targets. What these technologies bring to the table is the ability to unmask shallower targets that are hiding amongst the muck of other junk targets or in difficult to manage mineralized or salt ground conditions that limit detector capability. Advanced signal processing technology also improves signal-to-noise ratio to enable faint targets, regardless of depth to be more readily picked up by the detectorist. The ultimate depth detection capability hasn't changed, but the ability to discern targets under difficult conditions has. Shallow targets that were previously masked are now becoming unmasked by advances in detector technology. Not sure there is more that can be wrung out of this technology now, so the battle ground is detector cost, weight, environmental ruggedness (waterproof detectors), and advances in the user interface (wireless, graphical user displays, simple menu navigation) and feature upgrades/bug fixes over the internet. Hence, Vanquish and Simplex and the mid-range cost breakthrough detectors like the Equinox and the Nokta Anfibio that preceded them.

Gotcha. The thread you linked is good, just started reading it again. At the risk of repeating information there, transmit power does affect depth. But under certain conditions, like high mineralization, attempting to "punch through" with more power on a VLF just makes things worse (unlike a PI). There is also a consideration for how much power is needed to generate multiple transmit frequencies for simultaneous multi frequency detectors since that power has to be divided amongst the various transmit signals in the frequency domain (no free lunch), that is why the argument regarding number of simultaneous transmitted frequencies is kind of a double edged sword. The fewer you can get away with while elegantly accomplishing your goal of getting multiple different frequency components in the ground through various waveform manipulations (e.g., harmonics and sidebands) and receive signal processing methods the better vs. a brute force approach where 3, 4 or more waveforms of various frequencies are transmitted simultaneously.

Good point. Agree.

No, the voltage source (battery) for a VLF is regulated typically through a switched electronic dc/dc power supply to provide the appropriate fixed voltages to the electronics and transmit coil winding.

There are so many variables at play, it is always hard to come up with a definitive answer for that question. But at 12 khz, I think the Simplex will hold its own against the F75 or MXT under most conditions and with comparably sized coils. I just realized we turned this into a Simplex thread in the ML forum and are WAAAY OFF TOPIC. Nevertheless, I hope to have my Simplex in my hands in time to give it a go at my favorite site next weekend. We'll see how it does, provided I remain disciplined enough to break it out and not just stick with my Deus/Equinox hot hand machine since I don't get to this site often enough and must make the most of it in the few hours I am allowed to be there. #Excited to Just Dig Baby.

I know that stating the Simplex is on par with an F75 is perhaps a bit of a stretch, but only a bit and for 95% of situations, I suspect the Simplex can hold its own against an F75 user using similar coils. Don't sell the Simplex short. Phrunt somewhat debunked the first statement regarding the bells and whistles and the Simplex modes are not just "tone" options, they are signal processing mode options that go beyound the comparatively less sophisticated process modes on the F75 including the ability to go potentially deep AND fast. My F75 was lapped easily by the Equinox 600 and has not really seen the light of day since the 800 arrived at my door. I now have the opportunity to do so some A to B comparisons and if Nokta provides the adfitional accessory coils, as promised, I will lose the last remaining legitimate reason I keep my F75 around.

Multi frequency (Multi IQ) inherently provides the ability to do some "on-the-fly" ground compensation for both soil and salt beach wet sand. It is not as sophisticated as dedicated auto ground balance or ground tracking used on single frequency machines or even the Multi IQ-based Equinox. It is more like Multi IQ is very forgiving to a less than optimal default ground balance. As such, there is NO dedicated ground balance setting feature associated with the Vanquish as far as I can tell from the released detector information and user guide documentation. https://www.minelab.com/#product-download-category-files-305749

I don't know, I was really pretty happy with my Tek Delta and still own it. My Simplex should be here soon, too.

I know your statement is tongue-in-cheek and a humorous jab grounded in some level of truth, but ML does not corner the market on delayed releases. The first (and last) detector I ever pre-paid/pre-ordered was the Nokta Impact. Ended up prying my $$ back from the dealer and cancelling my order when the promised March release languished into May. XP subsequent Deus promised (through official XP marketing material announcements) upgrade releases lingered for months and in one case for more than a year. A lot of hoopla months before the lukewarm Garrett AT series upgrade, the AT Max, finally came to market. The Whites MX Sport release debacle is painfully fresh in my mind. And how long have we been talking about the "imminent" release of the latest FT PI offering? Not defending ML, my only point being that all the leading manufacturers suffer from this issue and also have a track record for delays and those of us who anxiously await the next best thing in detectors are an impatient lot, which seems to make the wait that much worse. That being said, I am definitely not waiting for the the Vanquish to show up and other than the coil selection as an Equinox owner am not all that interested, but am really looking forward to getting my hands on the new Simplex (here soon, yes it was not an "Impact" situation, thankfully). My first Nokta machine that appears to be a great value-based compliment to my Deus/Equinox arsenal. Would like to bounce its performance off my venerable F75 and whites MXT, my only two remaining fixed single frequency machines.

Also, conductivity is not the only material electromagnetic related property the determines the degree of phase shift that is used to determine target ID, though it is probably the most dominant.

EMI Primer EMI can affect Equinox use one of three ways: It can enter via the coil (most common for high power EMI souces such as power lines or other detectors), via the control head (most common from cell phones or other near field sources) and finally via the wireless phones (rare but not impossible). First line of defense for continuous noise or nearby pinpointer or detector interference is a noise cancel. This is especially effective if the source is another Equinox. With the 800 you have the option of either auto or manual noise cancel. Try manual to select a quiet channel if auto is ineffective. Remember that noise cancel is mode specific because of the various mode dependent frequency profiles, so you have to do it separately for any mode you use during the session. Second line of defense is lower sensitivity. Lower gradually until the chatter just disappears. If you are uncomfortable with a significantly lowered sensitivity setting, then... Third line of defense is switch modes or switch to single frequency (higher single frequencies tend to be less EMI sensitive) and attempt to find a quiet option. Beach modes are the least sparky modes (Beach 2 least of all), followed by Park 1, Field 1, Field 2, Park 2, and finally the Gold modes. Lowering recovery speed can sometimes help but at the expense of potentially increasing ground noise, which could be overcome by increasing sweep speed and/or doing a ground balance. Switching to a less RF sensitive coil (i.e., smaller antenna) although that can backfire if the coil resonant frequency (determined by the coil dimensions not the detector operating frequency) happens to be close to the EMI frequency. Switching to the 6 inch coil will not work if the EMI is entering the detector via the contro head. If you are getting interference through the wireless phones, switch to the WM08 or plug your wired phones directly into the detector. HTH

After you have initially paired the phones and then have turned off the machine and phones., what sequence do you go through when you turn the machine on again? I usually turn on the phones then turn on the machine, let it go through its initialization process and wait for the phones to reconnect, it can take anywhere from a few seconds to up to 30 seconds for the previously paired phones to reconnect (and for subsequent reconnection sessions, you should not have to press the radio button again (putting the EQ in pairing mode) or put the phones in pairing mode after the initial successful pairing unless the machine has been reset or another set of phones have been paired). Try varying the sequence of turning the phones on first or the EQ on first to se which provides a more consistent and reliable re-connection sequence. Also, update to the latest firmware if you haven't already done so. I may be imagining things, but my phones seem to reconnect a little faster now. Also, make sure the bt phones are not attempting to pair with your cell phone or other nearby bt devices. If you still can't seem to reliably re-connect the phones after successful pairing, you should call ML. HTH.

Can you walk through the pairing procedure step by step for both the EQ and the phones. You are right that it shouldn't be that difficult, and it generally is not and I have used a number of different APTX LL brands to test with the EQ.