Chase Goldman

11 hours ago, CrainRacing said:

A side note for the update, the ground is a lot less noisy in some cases, so much so that it had me questioning if it was on. 
But the moment you bump the coil it makes a ruckus of noise.

What was your ground phase number?  I have seen the coil exhibit bump sensitivity if ground balancing results in a high ground phase number.  Posting mode, settings, and sensitivity information would help also.  Unlikely you got water into the coil and if you did it would  likely not be quiet at all (i.e., you would likly experience more than just bump sensitivity) and it would probably result in a coil failure fault code.

4 hours ago, Nuke em said:

I have windows 7 but that wouldn't work for me either . So i got my windows 10 laptop out and that worked fine.

Just bought another 800 as a spare and will have to update that too when i get around to it.

Nuke - Maybe you could do some A - B comparisons pre and post update comparidons on some test targets and let us know if you see a difference before you update that 2nd 800.

Even though I'm a hear it all 50 tones guy, if I do go to "multi" tones, then 3 tones just makes more sense to me than 5 tones (or 2 tones).

The non-ferrous, single target TID should be the same between the two coils.  But that is something I will check on when I do some before and after update tests on with both the 6" and 11" coils.

I will have to look into these reports of compressed mid-conductor TIDs now.  I will probably get a chance to do something next week at the beach.  If true, this is concerning.  I have not had a lot a run time on the new software other than to confirm that something has indeed changed on edge-on performance.  I was somewhat fearful, however, when I heard that ML was being responsive to addressing this outlier situation that something more mainstream might be adversely affected.  It is the nature of software, especially signal processing software, to be subject to unintended consequences of "fixes".  If there is really something to this, it would be unfortunate, because I am not really keen on rolling back to 1.5.0 and being subject to that annoying User Profile reset bug.  It would be nice to have the choice of rolling back to 1.5.0 performance but with the user interface tweaks of 1.7.5 intact.  On the flip side, fortunately, we are talking about pretty nuanced performance tweaks here.  In the grand scheme of things, it does not appear that the update in any way, shape, or form, makes the Equinox significantly worse for the wear.  Time will tell.  The good news is that ML is putting updates out there and if there is really a new problem introduced, they will likely address it.

3 hours ago, Muerte33 said:

UPDATE 3:45 p.m. Central

Got word from BTS support via email, and they said to try another USB-C cable.  I looked all over town, and just about gave up but when pumping gas, they had one at the checkout counter.  Worked the first time.  Of course I did the 1.08 update from BTS first (no Low Latency), then the secret one offered by sdbirder and voila.... + sign on Equinox 600 indicating APTX Low Latency Enabled!

I thought you would have figured that out by reading my post with the exact same experience.  Lol.  Glad you got it to work, finally.

5 hours ago, Jackpine said:

Regarding the sensitivity aspect for unmasking (not mentioned in the article) try this, run a threshold, notch out the predominate iron in a site and see just how much you are running in a null,  drop your sensitivity and note the difference.  It can be an eye opener.

Great tip, Tom.  I am going to have to try that.  I must admit, I do not "sift" (reduce sensitivity to umask non-ferrous in thick iron) as much as I should. 

Regarding iron bias, I try to avoid filtering that masks (even discrimination) because it ties up precious miliseconds of signal processing time, which effectively counters the recovery time advantage of this machine.  I like to hear what is in the ground and let the audio paint the picture in my brain.  In some cases, judicious use of disc helps to reduce signal blending and even down averaging and in "casual" coin shooting situations (i.e., a walk in the park) it's nice to give your brain and ears a break and let disc do its thing but, like you, I really have found no upside to invoking iron bias and, frankly, some significant downside as far as masking is concerned.

8 hours ago, randomman123 said:

i would suggest you to check these two guides to find best wireless earbuds these days, https://www.pollowers.com/best-wireless-earbuds/ and https://www.bestbuy.com/site/headphones/wireless-headphones/pcmcat331200050015.c?id=pcmcat331200050015

Welcome to the forum.  Great general purpose review links, unfortunately, these reviews are geared towards general wireless earbud usage and lack information in one key spec/parameter that probably matters most for detectorists.  Namely, whether the buds are APTX or APTX low latency which is extremely important as latency is perhaps even more important and noticeable to detecting as it is to those using wireless phones to watch video.  Bookmarked the links, nevertheless, thanks.

Yeah, wish we could use gold mode audio in wet salt sand, but that ain't happening.  Advantage of freshwater hunting.

Now, about that concentric for the Equinox....Lol. That would be a definite maybe from ML. I reckon. 

You win.  Congrats.  You should contact ML and have them quit calling it a monoloop.  Lol.

Nevermind - Steve aptly covered below why the terminology usage is hosed up.  Blame the marketing departments.  You know, the folks who aim to make ALL metal detecting technology obsolete.  Lol!

3 minutes ago, Alluminati said:

So your money is on the concentric then.

 

Well, closely spaced coaxial, yeah. Even though Garrett would call it mono and apparently so does ML?  Weird.

To catch folks up (who are still with us and haven't lit themselves on fire yet for the thread hijack), the ML Go Find specs Simon (Phrunt) linked several posts back, ML causes the these coils "Monoloop(s)".  Lol.

9 minutes ago, Alluminati said:

The GoFind looks like a concentric, or a DD turned 90°. Squarecentric. The support in the middle could be part of the coil.

The term mono is usually reserved for Pulse Induction, it's the only modern machine I am aware of that can use one because the TX and RX happen at different times.

Lol. Deja vu all over again.    We know it's not a mono because it's not a PI so we were speculating on what it could be because it looks like a two-winding "mono" as described in the Garrett tech document I quoted two posts back (but more accurately described as a square coaxial coil with the two windings co-located vs. separated as in a traditional concentric/coaxial).  I also considered that the supports were part of the coil, but a DD 90° sideways can't work because detectorists naturally swing side-to-side, so in that orientation it would be like taking a normal DD and pushing it back and forth like a rake.  Not very effective.  They coud be "squarecentric" as you put it but concentric/coaxial coils usually maintain symmetry by keeping the inner and outer coils a set distance from each other.  I am pretty sure they are just supports.  My money is on the co-located outer Tx/inner Rx windings (dubbed psuedo mono by Steve).

18 minutes ago, Alluminati said:

The GoFind isnt a pulse induction.

Um, exactly, that's why we are wondering why the coil looks like it does.  It does not look like a DD nor a concentric.  It looks like the pseudo mono thing discussed above.  In other words, it has to be dual windings but not in the traditional concentric coil configuration we are used to seeing.

I've seen kind of a mixed bag response to the depth meter improvements.  Some have said it is indeed improved and some have provided test evidence.  Others have reported no improvement or even degraded performance.  But yours is the most positive response I've seen. No one else has stated that they thought depth meter was accurate on coins other than the purported dime depth meter calibration reference.  Interesting.

Thanks, Steve.  In my statements regarding Mono coil variations having two coils, I was relying on information contained in the Garrett link I posted earlier in which Garrett states the following (emphasis added by me), 

"Mono

2 hours ago, cjc said:

Some great info.  For sure a bit more fidelity to be able to run the best features of B1, B2 and G2 would be nice but there it is.  The testing Im doing is to run B2 in its rawest form--2 Tone.  This makes up for the low weighting a bit so you have a stable deep, LOUD (key point--hate the weak 5 and 50 sounds-- underwater forget it) salt mode.  Maybe it's just were I hunt but B1 was just bad--a "bittyness" to the signal that is very hard to work with.  The "problem set" is to stablize it--depends how optimistic you are about smalll chains and earrings but a slightly higher bottom TB works.  Gold 2 is an amazing thing.  Also the machine at it's rawest--it's a showcase for just how well this machine processes.   Where you have steel diverse alloys or something too big it stutters--great ID--kind of like higher standard of what a clean signal consists of.  Kind of tells you the density of an object in a way that no other machine does. Great tool--now I go straight to the junk in fresh water.   The tradeoff I make is to run up at Disc 6+.  Ya ya, but it's worth it to have this nice high foil cut off--chains and earrings be dammed.  (never found a no pendant chain  in 40 years)  This is also where the stabiltiy comes from--targets are assigned on one side or the other.  (1 or 2 might accomplish the same thing) If I were somewere high end B2 would be the mode of choice anyhow as G2 would never tune for salt.   Also try running B2 in 2 Tone with the 2 at Pitch 20--seems to be a good range for hearing gold. 

cjc

Agree Clive - B2 for salt (will have to give 2 - tone a go sometime) and G (unlike the other modes I think (i.e., a theory we have on the forum)  Gold 1 and 2 are the same just with different settings) for freshwater.  Would like VCO as an audio choice for the non-gold modes.

A little off topic, what do you think about Field 1 - 2-Tone.  I really have no idea what to do with that mode.

I understand what Derek is saying.  Iffy targets where some aspect of it said dig me and I have been rewarded as a result.  Problem is the cynics will say that is one step from essentially a dig it all machine which of course ups your gross finds rate, but lowers your keepers to trash ratio.  I do not disagree with what Derek is saying, but it is one of those things the naysayers can easily flip around and portray as a disadvantage.

1 hour ago, Mxt Sniper said:

I am sure you all have seen the Whites double Coil package that comes with the new 24K, a dd elliptical and a concentric. If whites can do it, I am sure minelab could if they desired. There is a lot more than meets the eye about the properties of a concentric on a VLF.

I have no doubts that ML has the technical ability to deliver a concentric (provided the Equinox is compatible, which is an unknown). All I am saying is that their track record especially on their latest detectors including a dedicated gold machine, indicates that they will not bother doing so.

Whites is pretty consistent about offering both DDs and Concentrics as accessory or stock coil options for practically all their machines.  Would be nice if competion from Whites on the 24K spurred ML to do the same, but so far there is no indication ML feels threatened by the new machine. Hope ML surprises us with a new coil announcement.

Interesting but I wouldn't use it vice a pinpointer for normal detecting recovery from just normal plugs.  Perhaps as Alluminati said for underwater work.  Otherwise, overkill one-trick-pony for the effort and cost and you have to figure out what to do with the extra coil cable because it isn't going to be instantly as short as shown (though you can cut it and reconnectorize it but then the coil can't be used on a conventional length Equinox).  Some other issues you have to deal with, the nipple on the head unit mount interferes with how far you can retract the coil stem into the upper rod, but I guess you could fashion a coil mount onto the end of the upper rod or fashion a new upper from scratch, but the upper OD needs to be maintained sufficient for the head unit to clamp onto unless you used a handlebar mount as an adapter for an upper rod with a different diameter.  But it does appear doable.

In the end, there are cheaper approaches to more sophisticated pinpointing.  You can use Detector Pro's PI Uniprobe already attached to a dual purpose headset for about $250-300, but then you don't get iron discrimination or tone ID which appears to be your objective.

The one situation for me where having a pinpointer on steroids or at least a short shaft VLF is when scanning the "tailings" pile and side walls of an excavated CW hut or pit for relics.  That dirt is usually inundated with square nails and ration can pieces from the deteriorated structure which makes using a traditional pinpointer an exercise in frustration.  To the rescue comes my wireless Deus.  Where I detect, I am typically using a GPX PI to punch deep through mineralized soil for CW relics, so I just carry the lightweight and compact wireless Deus strapped onto my day pack and use it as as the situation warrants.  If I am in a restricted swing situation (e,g., in a dug out pit) I can just wave the small HD elliptical coil around using the lower shaft and the light weight wireless back phones and can get tone ID and iron disc all day long.  Sure it's not cheap, but I already own one and do not have to make any modifications whatsoever to use it in this manner.  Used price is really coming down though due to the Equinox and the latest Deus coil release which is obsoleting the legacy Deus LF coils.  You can probably pick up a Deus Lite setup (coil, stem, wireless smart headphones) for less than $500 which would be less than a 600 at this point.

3 hours ago, phrunt said:

The most unusual thing is my Minelab Go-Find 40 has a 10" monoloop coil and it's a VLF.

Yeah.  I was wondering the same thing as monos are typically only seen on PI's.  Really technically curious why ML went there besides cost and the performance compromise  vs. a DD or conventional concentric/coaxial.  Also wonder if it isn't a dual wound monoloop (i.e., essentially a coaxial with both TX and Rx coils separate but co-located at the perimeter of the square loop).

2 hours ago, scoopjohnb said:

Allow me to enlighten my colleagues in discussion.

An Excal is an excellent wet beach hunter. However I’m not after an Nox 800 that is an Excal.

I’ve got an Excal!

That upper tide line when the tide is out can be worked with an 18 kHz Deus. You can get the machine stable enough it will hunt. All be it with very little depth. The 18 kHz picks up the small goodies.

Beach 1 has found me small gold and small targets an Excal has problems with.

I would like those same small gold and small targets, but with the audio of an Excal in pinpoint.

I really don’t need ID at the beach, it just a bonus. I just need to find 1 small dense target and then I simply grid that area. You are after thin gold rings with stones in. The bonus side of the ID is just that, You dig the ones you know,... you certainly dig the ones you don’t!

Were you ever able to get gold mode stable in the wet salt sand?

After running an Equinox  in Beach 1 and pulling Deep, Deep mid conductive targets (mostly nickels unfortunately) in the wet salt sand and shallow water at the tide line, I will NEVER go back to a Deus in wet salt sand.  I would rather poke my eyes out with a shrimp fork.

I think a bunch of us are saying the same thing, it would be nice to have the option of using the Gold Mode VCO pitch audio in beach mode.

40 minutes ago, Alluminati said:

At first I was using the PP a quite bit to size objects, actually I still do. I like to hear that quick little response to know it's a coin size object.

That^

3 hours ago, Mxt Sniper said:

I have used a GB2 for yrs, with the little 3x6 concentric coil, it beats out any dd in that size range. Due to its success ratio no dd was ever built for the GB2.

I guess we'll see what ML comes up with. We don't even know if the Equinox is compatible with a concentric/coaxial (elliptical variant) coil much less if it will garner the same performance as on the Gold Bug 2.  My T2 was not compatible with concentric coils at all, that is why I ultimately opted for the F75.  I notice that ML does not offer concentrics for the CTX, E-Trac, or Gold Monster.  The XTERRA has a small 6" concentric but no elliptical coaxial coils, so based on ML's accessory coil track record, seems doubtful they will come out with one (especially looking at the specialized Gold Monster which has not received one to date), unfortunately.

2 hours ago, kiwijw said:

This is an interesting thread for me re the DD vs the concentric. With my Minelab PI's & our ground being so insanely mild, mono's were always my favourite coils to use. I love the edge sensitivity of the mono's for gold detecting. Especially the elliptical coils. Knowing the edge is so sensitive you can poke that edge up against rocks, bushes & into cracks & crevices & no gold is save. Not so much the case with a DD where you need to get that DD winding overlap more over the target. So for me the mono's rule. I too love the GB2's little sniper coil & that is the only concentric coil I have on a gold detector that I have given a lot of use to. My Whites MXT I believe is a concentric but I have not used that very much as I have better choices for gold detecting.

So me not being the sharpest tool in the shed, but would I be correct in thinking that a concentric wound coil is closer to edge sensitivity of a mono than a DD.? My reason for thinking this is when I went up a creek with Phrunt (Simon) to help him get his first detected gold with his gold monster by telling him where he should be concentrating waving his coil & why. Letting him go ahead of me & me following behind. I got a signal with my GB2 that certainly pulled me up. So I called Simon back to wave his 5" DD coil over it. He said he had poked his coil in there & got nothing. Really, I said. Listen to this.....He heard it & tried his again. Nothing. So I hacked away at the schist & the signal was still there but Simon couldn't get a peep out of it. He thought I was chasing a ghost so he buggered off & continued further up. It turned out to be a 1.5 gram flat, squashed but chunky bit of gold down on edge into the schist bedrock. My point being that Simons 5" DD coil on the gold monster didnt get the signal waving it flat over the bedrock & it is quite a bit fatter, on edge, than that lovely little sniper coil on the GB2 & he couldn't get it on edge down into the crevice as far as I could the GB2's. End result being he missed getting that signal & I believe it was due to the lack of close to edge sensitivity on the DD coil.

What I don't recall now, is that when I first got that signal that pulled me up, was it from waving that GB2 coil flat over the bedrock....or did I poke the edge of the coil down into the crevice???? Which I was able to poke a bit further than the little fatty GM DD coil. The 5" DD at 45 khz should get better depth than the GB2's 71. So waving the coil flat over that bedrock I would have thought the 5" round DD would have got the depth. Even more so when it is 5" & the GB2's is 3.5" wide. Is there something there in the difference between concentric vs DD??

I know this thread was about concentric for the Nox, so sorry for deviating, but interested in the concentric vs DD debate. for me...more for gold prospecting than coin & relic. Cheers.

Good luck out there

JW 

The mono coil edge sensitivity appears to exist due to the fact that a mono coil has either a separate transmit and receive windings in close proximity around the circumference of the coil or a single transmit and receive winding is used.  Concentric/coaxial coils have the transmit and receive windings spaced further apart with the receive winding being the smaller diameter inner coil.  So edge sensitivity is less likely with a concentric and it has better pinpointing ability and depth penetration in the absence of mineralization.  Edge sensitivity can and does exist on the receive winding half of a DD coil.  These are general facts for the different coils.  Can't comment on the specifics of your situation because I am unfamiliar the coils and detectors in question.