Chase Goldman

Like you said, you are still relatively new at this field so welcome to head scratching business decisions 101 in the world of metal detecting manufacturers. The only one making sense lately is Nokta.

I will see Debbie next week at a week long relic hunt and will hopefully get the chance to strike up a conversation with her on this topic and will let you all know what she says, but I suspect it will not contradict the email referenced above, unfortunately. Hope I'm wrong.

The 540 pro pack runs about $500 US. About the same price as I can pay for a gently used Equinox 600 or about $50 less than a new Equinox 600 acquired with typical dealer or veterans markdowns (which can likely also be applied to the 540 too, so not as strong an arguement there). Knowing what I know about the two machines, it is not quite a no brainer to go with the used 600 over the new 540, because you DO get two coils and wireless phones with the 540 Pro. But if I was savvy enough to know what two coils brings to the table (i.e, knowing I would only use the V8 coil under certain limited circumstances) and knowing I can get APTX LL phones for about the same price as a decent hand digger or less, I personally would opt for the ability to adust tone options to 2, 5, or 50 tones rather than being stuck at 5 tones, have the recovery speed adjustments of the Equinox, go with single frequency if the situation warrants, and not worry about the weather or beach waves with the fully watertight housing - i.e., things I could put to use on just about every outing. Looking at it from that perspective, I am not so sure the 540 is such a great value over all when you consider what features ML left off the 540 vs. the 600. Adding just a few more simple features tweaks to the 540 (high/low recovery speed, 2 or 3-tone option, 15 khz single frequency setting) while keeping it at the same 540 price point would completely change the value equation for Vanquish in a good way IMO, though it would still be a close call vs. used Equinox 600 but that extra coil might seal the deal, especially if I was looking for a decent backup to the Equinox 800. PS I felt the same way "Multi IQ for the masses" until I did this 540 analysis and it kind of surprised me. I think the 440 is the true Multi IQ for the masses machine but things start to get blurry enough in regards to true value when you bring the 540 into the equation and start bouncing it off the Equinox 600.

The chip enables the detector to confirm you have a compatble coil connected. ML makes a 6" round coil for the CTX too. They look similar and both can be connected to the detector, but if you hook the the incompatible CTX coil to the Equinox you will get an error code and the detector will not even boot into it's operational mode to let you attempt to use it. So a third party could conceivably make a perfectly electrically compatible coil for Equinox, but without that smart chip, the Equinox will throw an error code and not allow that coil to be used with the detector.

Man I know I would lose it in the bush if I did that.

Bet she finds gold before you do, that's the way it usually happens. Lol. Newbies always find better stuff than I do when I let them borrow my detectors. Ha Ha.

Agree a couple of simple, sensible, additions to the 540 (e.g., a few additional tone ID choices, a single frequency option (say 15 khz), and a high/low recovery speed switch) would change the whole Vanquish equation at basically no additional cost and open up the detector to more folks than those just looking an alternative to the Ace 400. They could have achieved their goal of simplicity and value while further opening up the Vanquish customer base. I wonder what research ML does (if any)? It would serve them well to better understand what features experienced users find helpful that at the same time would serve less experienced detectorists well without overwhelming them yet allowing them to grow in detector capability as their own skills grow. If they simply set out to deliver an Ace 400 with Multi IQ and wireless headphones, then “mission accomplished”, but what a huge missed opportunity. The 440 is a perfect Ace clone with multi IQ, but they fell short IMO with the 540 in providing a detector that was capable yet more affordable and simpler to operate than the Equinox 600. They should have put just a tad more distance between the 440 and 540, feature wise and even I might have seriously considred it as a backup rig (bah, who am I kidding, as even the 600 seems too limited for my taste) I really don’t need or desire a Vanquish, so why do I care? Because flawed decision making and missed opportunities by ML on Vanquish means fewer desirable accessory coil options today for the excellent Equinox (great design and execution) and a greater likelihood that the next generation Equinox or CTX won’t be as good as it could be tomorrow. And that is disappointing and avoidable.

That's what I was trying to say previously, multi and the single frequency settings are not exactly related and in multi you have a combination of multiple different frequencies (perhaps even including 15 khz, but ML has not divulged the exact frequency spectrum for each mode) not just the single frequency options provided. It is actually more complicated than that and thinking of Multi IQ as a combination of discrete frequencies like 5, 10, 15, 20, and 40 is probably not exactly right, but good enough for conceptual purposes. Glad Steve cleared that up for you.

You are telling a story and regardless what you find, just the adventure of getting there is interesting and the pics are great. Keep it up.

Steve needs to keep reminding me we are basically talking about adult toys, so whatever ML is up to shouldn’t result in a change in the dosage of my blood pressure meds. In other words, Go Nats!

It is this Apple-like walled garden approach to accessories and partitioned-off product lines that is driving me to ML’s competition in certain situations. For example, I would have gladly bought a V 340/440 or a V 540 Pro if that was the only way ML would have allowed me to get my hands on a V8, V10, or V12 coil provided they were compatible with Equinox. I could have justified the unneeded detector purchase based on the fairly low overall cost and could have relegated it to backup or newbie training duty. Without that coil compatibility incentive, I have absolutely no interest in Vanquish, otherwise. Simplex looks attractive to me because it is inexpensive, high value (high performance to cost ratio), is technically diverse from Equinox and Deus (my main units) so I can see scenarios where it could detect something my other units might miss, has compatibility with the Nokta accessory universe (wireless headphones and the Pulse Dive pinpointer), and I know Nokta is listening to its existing and prospective customers in regards to desired features and accessories. ML had an opportunity to make a sale on a detector that was quite literally useless to me and has missed its opportunity through close mindedness, arrogance, and/or greed or whatever. That is a potentially fatal flaw that will not necessarily be always overcome by fielding superior tech and innovation. If ML is going to go down the “we know better than you route”, they better keep innovating or they risk Nokta doing to them what Nokta and ML are about to do to Garrett.

Should have happened by now if it was going to happen.

Since the default Prospecting mode operating frequency setting is Multi (which likely includes 15 kHz in its spectrum profile, though weighted to the higher gold optimal frequencies for the reasons Steve and I described previously) AND you are not interested in single frequency, why do you keep asking about it? Just use multi which includes the whole spectrum and forget about the single frequency choices ML made. I have non prospecting reasons why Gold mode with the lower available single frequency settings (5, 10, 15 kHz) would be desirable. But for gold prospecting, I have no issue with ML selection of only 20 kHz and 40 kHz as the single frequency backups to the generally preferred and default setting of Multi IQ (multi frequency).

Yep, that the likely scenario.

Maybe ML believes their animated cartoon about Multi IQ and believes that Multi IQ will solve world hunger and can find ALL targets regardless of size or composition so it really doesn't matter what size coil you use. Lol. In all seriousness though, I suspect the Equinox with the 6" round would do just about as good as the Vanquish 540 with the V8 on small gold, but it would nice to have the 8" swing coverage of the V8. So yeah, the Vanquish should be no slouch on small gold with that coil.

Probably not...lol As posted on another forum, Debbie Smikoski a USA rep for Minelab, has responded via email to an Equinox user inquiring about V8 Equinox compatibility, that the V8 will definitely not be compatible with Equinox (he only asked about the V8). She also went so far as to say that while ML was aware of the user interest in a coil of that form factor for Equinox, there were presently no concrete plans to provide such a coil for Equinox but did not rule it out for the future. Soo, there you have it and I guess we'll see what happens. All, I can say is, "I coulda had a V8!" (Popular vegetable juice commercial humor)

ML made that decision for whatever reason. But like I said, nothing is stopping you from using 15 khz in the other modes to prospect for gold. There really is nothing magic about using Prospecting mode once you decide to go single frequency (the Gold modes the multi IQ profile is set up specifically for gold prospecting, but once you go to single all you are getting that is different from the other modes is the VCO audio and threshold). 600 users find plenty of small gold without access to a prospecting mode and with their units in Multi IQ in Park or Field modes (ideally Park 2 or Field 2) and at 15 khz which the upper limit of their single frequency selection. So knock yourself out with 15 khz in Field/Park modes (once you go single frequency, the Field/Park mode designations kind of no longer matter because they are really defined by the respective Multi IQ profiles reserved for those modes, otherwise you have all the same user settings available in those modes).

Because frequencies above 15 khz hit harder on gold, so the are preferred for prospecting (if you choose not to use Gokd Multi). Nothing stops you from using any of the Park or Field modes in any of the single frequencies to prospect, all you lose is the VCO audio and true threshold of gold mode. Otherwise, you should be able to hit gold in those modes as well. Regardless, "2" mode Park or Field Multi (higher frequency weighted), 20, or 40 khz single are your best bets for prospecting other than Gold in Multi, 20, or 40.

The “millimeter” band wavelengths (strictly speaking frequencies 30 to 300 GHz) are what are touted fir 5G but in reality we are talking frequencies from 3 GHz (slightly higher than present 4G systems) to above 24 GHz for 5G. These higher frequencies in general are highly attenuated by gases and moisture in the air and this effect will become more pronounced as frequency increases. By design, the cell footprint for 5G is smaller than for previous generations but the higher frequencies enable more data throughout and ability to reuse frequencies in non-adjacent cells more readily. Bottom line is that the infrastructure for 5G requires more towers per sq. km so that means more opportunities to encounter a tower especially in urban and suburban areas and along major roadways. Other than that, it is hard to conclude whether the result will be more EMI because that depends on whether the detector considers the transmit frequency offensive from an EMI perspective. I don’t think you will necessarily see an increase in lower frequency cell towers whose voice and data frequencies may tend to cause more direct interference with modern detectors like the Equinox. So it is hard to predict with certainty the impact of the 5G rollout on EMI.

Nope, you are right, those are the basic principles for metal detecting. Another advantage of the 800 vs. the 600 is that you can do a "manual" noise cancel, where you step through the channel settings and choose the one you feel is the quietest. So, to recap re: noise 1. Avoid obvious sources of noise, if possible (transmission lines, cell towers, cell phones, etc.). 2. Noise cancel (can be done auto or manual (800 only), but is search mode specific) 3. Ground balance, as necessary. (Also mode specific). 4. Lower sensitivity as necessary to remove chatter. 5. If still experiencing noise, shift modes, if possible (don't forget to noise cancel for each selected mode) 6. If still noisy, try shifting to single frequency mode, and look for a quiet operating frequency. HTH

Dan, If you wouldn't mind shipping me your coins so I can independently verify your numbers, that would be greatly appreciated.

I never used the word "old" in my post, I know how sensitive you are.

You didn't previously say whether you conducted a noise cancel for each of the modes (each mode needs to be separately noise cancelled) or whether you ensured there were not other sources of non-EMI chatter such as proper ground balancing (the fact that your coil was stationary and still chattering probably rules this out, but nevertheless, thought I would mention it). You also didn't discuss your sensitivity settings or any possible mitigating actions you took like lowering sensitivity. EMI sources are not always obvious or visible even in rural settings. Unless there is absolutely nothing nearby I can make the Equinox chatter after a noise cancel simply by cranking sensitivity from the default of 20 (quiet) to 25 (chatter) and that is why I rarely every need or want to raise sensitivity more than a couple points above the default. More about resonate frequency EMI sources and why that is a tough nut to crack, below. As an electrical engineer involved in power electronic and small signal sensing equipment design including EMI mitigation and as a previously licensed amateur radio operator, I do understand this and where you are coming from and how an AM radio, for example, can be used to locate a noisy light florescent light fixture or spark gap (loose electrical power connector) as near field EMI. A metal detector is basically a near field induction balance machine vs. a radio transmitter/receiver. And even though the operating frequencies of interest lie in the EM VLF radio spectrum between approximately 5 and 50 khz in the case of the Equinox, that alone cannot be used to really ascertain the offending resonant EMI frequencies as it does not necessarily tell you the frequencies that both the front end signal processing circuit resonances or what the microprocessor noise susceptibilites are and the degree of self shielding used. Here's why: The mental model you should think of for a metal detector is a transformer rather than a radio transmitter/receiver. The target represents the core of the transformer and the transmit and receive coils represent the primary and secondary windings of the transformer, respectively. On the Equinox, however, unlike many other VLF induction balance detectors, the output is a spectrum of frequencies rather than a discrete frequency like most single frequency machines. The power vs. a radio transmitter is relatively small because the near field only has to penetrate some number of inches into the ground. The Equinox receive circuitry is designed to process inputs from a number of different frequencies and is basically looking for a tell-tale phase shift and magnitude from which it can infer the nature of the metallic target and display it's guess. Since the Equinox is a relatively wide spectrum transmitter and receiver it is highly susceptible to both generation of harmonics and interference from EM harmonics across a wide spectrum so it is difficult to pin down a single resonate frequency or group of frequencies that are the worst offenders, as you wanted. This EMI can enter via the "front" end with the coil effectively acting as an antenna. To mitigate this, ML has incorporated the noise cancel feature that selects the quietest spectrum "channel". Recognize, that this channel does not represent a single frequency but a spectrum of frequencies that appear to be least susceptible to local interference. Again, this is why it is difficult to give you specifics on the "resonant" frequency you discussed. Note that this is best suited to steady state interference sources such as other Equinoxes (BTW Equinoxes spew out so much EMI themselves that I have found that in contest hunt situations where many detectorists are co-located in a small hunt area, hunt masters are starting to ban operation of the Equinox in multi-frequency mode. Pulse Induction detectors which put out a broad spectrum pulse are already usually banned), constant noise from transmission lines or transformer boxes, or the continuous carrier wave (loose sense of the term) of a nearby transmitter (broadcast radio transmitter, WiFi Hot Spot, Cell Tower, electric fence or wireless dog fence, or cell phone) or fluorescent lights. Note that noise cancel needs to be performed separately for each search mode (as mentioned previously) as each search mode transmits a different frequency spectrum. If noise cancel is ineffective, you have eliminated ground noise feedback and chatter through a proper ground balance or mode selection (beach in the case of wet salt sand and water environments - some of the higher weighted frequency spectrum modes (e.g., Park 2, Field 2, and Gold) can be less susceptible), and you are concerned about having to turn sensitivity down too low (i.e., much less than 12 or so), then another alternative is to use the single frequency mode and to try to find the optimal quiet operating frequency. As I said previously, in general, the higher operating frequencies tend to be less susceptible to the most commonly encountered EMI while detecting. I cannot give you the definitive science as to why this is the case, but it is generally true. But there are always exceptions so situational testing of the lower operating frequencies (e.g., 5 khz and 10 khz on the Equinox) should be positively ruled out rather than assuming they are not going to work. Transient noise sources are much harder to deal with and the best you can usually do with that is turn down sensitivity as necessary or switch between modes or go to single frequency. The other issue is the microprocessor components within the control head and I think this is probably one of the most susceptible and is the one that is most susceptible to cell phones and nearby Equinoxes. Finally, to protect it's intellectual property, ML gives us very little information or specifics on the frequency spectrum used for each mode and how it generates that spectrum or even how many discrete frequencies and what frequencies are used to generate those spectrums, so we are basically in the dark from the get go. Some have hooked the Equinox up to O-scopes and spectrum analyzers but the results are far from conclusive and even if they were, may not actually tell us the susceptible resonant noise frequencies. Not a very satisfying answer as to the "resonate" problem frequencies question, but I hope this helps to explain why that answer is not so straight forward. HH

Sounds about right and as expected for gold of varying mass.

Chuck hope you noticed that this thread started in 2017 (i.e., before ML and Nokta started to their recent push to detector value and affordability) and until FlyFish posted the barely comprehensible patent like language above, had been dormant since then. But you make a good point. The fact is that no one is really innovating much on the VLF technology itself. Other than ML's evolution of simultaneous multifrequency detection and processing (and the other features that it enables regarding salt balance, sophisticated Fe discrimination, and ability to efficiently couple with a broader range of metals for a given search profile), no one else is doing much with VLFs other than making them cheaper, lighter, easier to operate, and improving how information is conveyed to the operator. Performance wise, we are at somewhat of a standstill. Unless someone makes a true breakthrough with a hybrid between VLF and PI, as Steve described at the top of the thread, there is really no reason to be paying more for a VLF.