Chase Goldman

2 minutes ago, Digalicious said:

The point of this thread was about how people can be misled in this hobby. Furthermore, I don't need to own a Manticore to know how a plotter works. Do you need to own a calculator to know that 1+1+2?

As far as your first paragraph goes, what was claimed was, "If the target ID is lets say 24, and the ID is not round on the ID map, it my experience its been can slaw. Slightly oval a pull tab".

If the target ID is 24 like he said, then TT would show a circle. It would not show something "not round" as he said. 

He then says that if the trace is slightly oval it's a pulltab. However, if the trace was slightly oval, that's just because the ID is a spread of 2 adjacent ID's, which can (and often does) occur on any target. It has nothing to do with a pulltab itself. In addition, if a pulltab has a single ID, then the trace would be round, not oval.

From my perspective, the point of this thread appeared to be more about you mocking others from afar who have misconceptions about the nuances of high end detecting gear without giving them the recourse to defend their position on a level playing field.  People are always going to have these misconceptions and will invariably pass them on to others who will either run with that flawed information or do the due diligence research to verify where truth lies.  Pointing that out here with your attitude is simply self serving and does nothing to help those who don't understand.  Not sure what you were hoping to accomplish here other than grandstanding about how you saved everyone from the horrors of misinformation.

It is also indeed painfully apparent you haven't swung a Manticore because you'd know that getting a single TID number is almost more the exception than the rule.   Seriously, though, the Manticore and Next Gen Equinox numbers often bounce around on isolated non-ferrous targets at depth.  Furthermore, the TT circle is not necessarily less "accurate" than the visual TID number.  In some respects it is actually a better, more informed and less filtered version of the processed target signal.  Almost a probability density plot of the most likely target IDs resulting from the variables that affect the final processed target ID number on each subsequent swing.  So idealizing to the perfect single-digit target signal is actually not reflective of the real world except when there is little doubt as to the nature of a no-brainer shallow or surface target.

Finally, I am going to extend to you the same courtesy you extended to the anonymous targets of your sarcasm and am locking this thread before you reply. I can see it is just going to devolve into one of "those" threads where you don't know when to put the shovel down while you dig a deeper hole with each reply and people just throw up their hands in frustration. You can take it up with me or Steve offline if you so wish.

1 hour ago, Digalicious said:

That is all completely wrong in more than one way. I replied to him with:

While you are fundamentally correct in your assertion regarding TT and target shape correlation, what the man is saying is not necessarily "completely" wrong.  While the TT doesn't actually show the shape of a target, the traces can show TID variability that occurs with non-symmetric targets, co-located targets, and seemingly "stable" TIDs can show smears and shapes other than a dot. The traces the man describes may very well align with his real life experience digging can slaw and pull tabs. 

Do you have actual field experience with the Manticore that contradicts the man's assertions and actual experiences regarding the correlation of his TT plots and target predictions?

Also, speaking as a site moderator and from past experience, no real good can come from documenting your interactions with others on  another MD site and quoting others who cannot defend themselves here and doing so with minimal context.  Even if the individuals and site go unnamed it can put Steve in an awkward position with the principles of the other site - doesn't take much detective work for people to figure out was is going on to have it boomerang back. 

So while it's worth it to continue to discuss the nuances of Manticore target trace in this thread, let's just take the high road and put a stop to airing your differences of opinion and drama with these unnamed people from your anonymous detecting site, if you don't mind. 

Thanks for understanding.

15 minutes ago, Chesroy said:

Yes Simon. Nox more stable in use but always feel that it also could do better.Shallow targets never an issue but depth never impresses in these conditions although very sensitive to very small targets cant fault that.

I tend to think ALL detectors suffer in plowed, aerated fields.  It's a known issue that going into a "fluffy" disc'd and aerated field your depth is just going to suffer even with a PI.  We have those conditions in the US too. 

Do you have a detector that does better than the Minelabs under those conditions?

1 hour ago, TampaBayBrad said:

Not much here for us strictly beach hunters who only hunt in beach modes. The red target ID #'s are nice but I was already viewing the red line above the ID's.

The dry sand ground balance....Dankowski says don't GB in dry sand set it to zero and turn tracking off, so I don't know what they have done with that.

I don't use the soft keys because I only hunt with 2 programs that I don't change settings within once I dialed them in:  a custom Beach Low Conductors or a custom Surf and Seawater. I stay in all metal all the time.

I did notice that I have to power down the detector sometimes when switching between wireless and wired headphone operation. I like wireless for dry and wet sand but need to plug-in the M-105's if I'm going deeper than waist deep water. Maybe that headphone connection stability improvement has something to do with that.

Well not all beach hunters reside in Florida like you and Tom and and aren’t perpetually blessed with the advantage of always working in “0” reference Florida dry sugar sand where this “update” has perhaps little usefulness. 

Ground balancing and tracking requires the presence of some level of mineralization to key off of.  So the detector ground balance algorithm works best when it can actually sense a change in mineralization level as the coil is pumped above (for auto and manual ground balance) or swept along the ground (for tracking ground balance).  Otherwise, you’ll just get a zero ground phase reading while pumping or unstable ground phase adjustments while tracking - which is just fine provided the dry sand ground phase is truly at or near zero.  Which is indeed the case for most beaches.

However, low magnetic mineralization dry sand at some beaches can still have a significant non-zero ground phase reference as a result of non-magnetic (I.e., non-black sand) mineral components.  But the auto ground balance algorithm may have trouble picking this up in low mineralization situations.  So I suspect ML has adjusted the dry sand ground balance algorithm to be sensitive to and to properly respond to changes in low mineralization levels so that a more precise ground balance point can be obtained on dry sand beaches that have a non-zero ground phase.  This enables the detector to run in horseshoe (i.e., No Discrimination) mode without experiencing non-zero ground phase “grunts”.  This update might also help those who utilize ground tracking to enable seamless, stable transitions between dry sand, to damp sand, to wet salt sand, and surf.

Granted not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but some outside of Florida and even in Florida might find it helpful.  

Sorry this is not an overly exciting update for you Florida beach hunters, but Manticore already seemed tailor made for the beach and I was not hearing beach hunters wanting for much more from Manticore out of the box.  Probably due to the fact that Tom D was so heavily involved in providing feedback to the designers in the early stages of design.

Is there something you really wish ML had addressed for the beach hunters in this first update that they did not provide, Brad?

1 hour ago, phrunt said:

It will be interesting what the headphone update does, I hadn't heard of anyone having connection problems or drop outs so they felt the need to change something on the headphones.

I’m really hoping it means they’ve received and incorporated an improved compatibility update to the Nordic BT LE SoC in both the Manticore transmitter and the phones that will make Nordic play nice with 3rd party BT LE LC3 compatible hardware, but that’s probably just wishful thinking on my part.

Fantastic video describing the features added with the update.  And a fantastic looking and comprehensive update to boot.  Regarding the wireless headphone firmware upgrade, I wonder if this affects cross-platform compatibility of the ML-105s with the Nox or X-Terra Pro and also whether a similar wireless connectivity enhancement update (as well as other features) are slated for the Nox 700/900.   Glad this is out there now.  Accessory coils can’t be far behind as I seem to recall that ML issued their first Nox update just prior to the 6” coil being released.

4 hours ago, phrunt said:

I haven't had a chance to test target ID stability yet as I'll have to go out and find some coins to see and it's night time and well below 0 outside so I'll wait 🙂

Note to Simon, even though the written description of the new Stabiliser filter setting alludes to improved TID stability, Brass Medic really only addressed the audio impacts of the new setting and was pretty adamant that the filter should only be engaged when detecting in environments subject to iron pollution and the resultant exposure to falsing iron (presumably because of other negative trade offs resulting from engaging the stabilizer, perhaps affecting audio or target ID responsiveness as is the case with most filters, and as also suspected by Clive @cjc above).  Therefore, this does not necessarily sound like a TID stability panacea for general usage.  Would like to know what you, Clive , or any other experienced Manticore users think about this once you’ve had a chance to take the new update out for some comprehensive trial runs.  Specifically, has TID stability, overall, been enhanced, or only when this Stabilizer filter is invoked?

Also a question for Manticore experts regarding the new “red” target ID feature, if this only works with the discrimination pattern suppressed (i.e., in horseshoe mode), what is keying the Manti to display the red numbers?  Is it the invoked, custom upper and lower Ferrous Limits pattern profile?

1 hour ago, Jeff McClendon said:

f they also want the ML85 wireless headphones that currently are the only wireless headphones that pair with the X-terra Pro

My OCD just prevents me from not pointing this out, but for accuracy sakes, the ML-105’s that come with the Manticore also pair with the X-Terra Pro, but as you say, both the ML-85’s and ML-105’s are basically unobtainium as standalone accessories right now, and when available, the ML-105’s price point as an accessory will likely be even worse than that anticipated for the ML-85’s.

Alternatively, a plug in APTX-LL transmitter and compatible APTX-LL phones can probably be obtained for less than half of what ML will likely charge for the ML-85’s if one prefers a wireless configuration for their X-Terra Pro nugget slayer.

But yeah, the accessories will drive the price to the point where other detectors begin to become relevant considerations.

FWIW

Thanks for the reminder.  I was primarily talking apparel, pouch, pack, and outerwear color preferences.  As an electrical engineer and veteran working on military electronics systems designs for 40 years, I understand heat issues, especially as they relate to the detector electronics and the havoc that can be caused by dark colored control head covers in direct sunlight.  But you wouldn't necessarily know that based on the proliferation of third party black head covers being offered out there for Nox, etc.

1 hour ago, ColonelDan said:

Understand and I agree.  But when I tried the iron volume settings, it was dead silence as I swung over the masked target.

Ok.  With disc and no iron volume, silence but with notch you got something?  That’s an interesting nuance, I missed.  Like a partial unmasking?

5 minutes ago, ColonelDan said:

I've tried the iron volume at 0 and various levels of Discrimination too...no success.  Good luck at the beach.  I sincerely hope you find the magic solution!🤣

Dan - to be clear I wasn’t suggesting zero iron volume to “fix” the masking issue just in response to your comment regarding your preference for silent search wrt to iron being your motivation to go with Notch vice Disc.  Like I said, it’s really six one way, half a dozen the other.  Not sure it makes any practical difference with respect to your keeper count so just go with what works for you.  

38 minutes ago, JCR said:

I will suggest that the unmasking difference between the two programs has to do with how the SMF is weighted & processed. Even if you have the same max kHz setting,  the Sensitive program will favor the higher end of the spectrum as opposed to the General program.  Higher frequencies do not normally hit coins as hard but do hit ferrous harder than lower frequencies.  The 2D air test is not hard. The 3D in ground with 5" between  the 2 targets is hard for most any detector, even in mild soil.

I have experimented a good bit on at depth 3D masking. If ferrous trash, multi frequency is the way to go for sure. The lower weighted mix the better. There is also a sweet spot on reactivity/recovery and careful coil control is needed in interrogating a suspect target. I also find that being able to hear the iron and the higher conductor interact under the coil is helpful. TID will jumpy but not too wild.   Al trash and high mineralization is a whole other ballgame.

You may want to try using the lowest Max Freq possible on the Beach Sensitive(and General) and play with the Reactivity some more.

Let us know your results as this applies to all detectors and types of sites.

JC - Dan relayed to me in some more detailed offline discussions, that it happens with all three base beach programs (i.e., dive, beach, as well as beach sensitive) regardless of the Max F setting used for each (i.e., he used all three Max F settings with each of the three base beach programs) and that he was able to unmask with General and other land based base programs regardless of the Max F settings. Agree that it’s more than just about Max F in the way SMF target signals are processed, but it appears that the Beach programs in general are doing something noticeably different than the “land” programs with respect to target signal processing even with otherwise identical user setting setups (other than the salt sensitivity setting which is only present on the beach base programs - and adjustment of which across its entire range had no effect on this masking behavior).  Also, in another thread, he noted different target response behaviors (primarily associated with TID differences) between beach sensitive and beach with identical user settings (including Max F), so that is consistent with your assertion that the SMF profiles and signal processing algorithms are different between outwardly similar programs (e.g., beach and beach sensitive) that goes beyond the SMF Max F user setting.

9 hours ago, Doc said:

I'm not a big fan of traditional CAMO, but the digital CAMO I think is understated..  I selected it because in the gold bearing desert areas in the U.S. as well as the Outback you have some green vegetation, a lot of browns, beige and rusty color soil.  It has been very popular in the Gold Monster cover.  We have it in the drab solid green and the Digital camo and the Cam outsells the drab green about 20 to 1.

We can't do just one offs because our production runs are usually 1200 to 1500 of one style of cover.

Chase I might have missed this but what detector are you using?

Doc

Doc - I totally get that you can’t do one offs and I understand how the Digital Camo can work in the desert. I probably just need to see it first hand rather than deciding purely based on the prototype pic.  Really like the design of the control head cover and shade and the base pad. I have the Axiom and it took a cosmetic beating in some rough terrain and red clay mud and in the back of the truck bed with my other buddies’ gear, so the cover set makes sense to me functionally to protect my investment. There’s always fabric paint as an after sale option too.  Like I said, it’s not about style, I just generally avoid camo for practical reasons and stick to drab solids (gray, coyote, green, or black) or blaze orange outerwear if needed for safety.

Will be looking for the release announcement once you get inventory and will decide.

Thanks

57 minutes ago, ColonelDan said:

Neither Discrimination nor Notch made any difference with the masking issue.  Since no matter what we do anyway the masking will still be there, we just prefer silent search and not hearing the occasional iron.  If we can somehow overcome the masking one of these days, that would certainly be much preferred.   However, like you and I discussed, it seems this is a question better suited for an XP engineer to tackle.  😉

Gotcha.  If you want to go silent, you can also use disc but with iron volume set to zero.  Don’t think it matters much either way, though and notch doesn’t require the extra iron volume adjustment step.  Sometimes disc helps with ferrous down averaging which can help with unmasking, but as you observed, it doesn’t seem to matter or help with Beach sens.  I will have to experiment with notch vs. disc at the beach.

27 minutes ago, ColonelDan said:

We too have limited ferrous on our tourist beaches aside from ferrous bottle caps, which the bottle cap filter helps us avoid and tent stakes.  If we can't get this masking issued resolved, my hunting buddy and I will just play the odds and go with our custom Beach Sensitive program and hope for the best.  Notching out 0-10 does avoid many of the tent stakes and other occasional ferrous items that are few in number anyway.

So are you now using notch vice disc on your Beach Sensitive program?  Was the masking issue was less evident with notch vice disk?

1 hour ago, JCR said:

I am thinking that adding Selectable Single Frequency to the new Simplex line would not cost Nokta much if it only entails Software.

I feel certain Nokta is still monitoring this & other Forums. Surly they have at least considered doing this.

Well they certainly should if they want to now directly compete with X-Terra Pro.

51 minutes ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Target ID instability at least for me is present to various degrees using Deus 2, Nox 900 and to a lesser degree the Legend.

My experience mirrors your own regarding no one detector doing it all.  However, my experience diverges from yours in this respect.  Legend and Nox 900 do not have TID stability anywhere near that of the Deus 2 at depth in my experience - but that is primarily in mild soil, so my soil conditions are different than yours. I have corroborated my experience with D2 rock solid ID stability with at least two other DP members here.  If I am detecting in hot ground - then I am generally just pulling out my PI which is now the Axiom and also this is for relics (not natural gold).  If I am switching up from a PI under those circumstances , then it will be the Deus 2, but that is primarily because the D2 is always strapped to my back if I am using a PI, not because i have exhaustively proved it is deeper or more stable than the Legend or Nox 800/900 in hot soil. 

So I get where you are coming from on the Deus 2 and Legend comparison based on your specific environment and your objectives and don't refute your first hand observations.  My circumstances are just different and I have less A to B to C comparisons of Nox, D2 and Legend in hot soil.  I would like to do more experimentation and get more proficiency with Legend, but to be frank, my access to prime sites is limited and I need to make the most productive use of the few hours of access I do get, rather than running science experiments.  Bottom line, is that D2 is giving me that confidence right now, so I am just pulling it or the Axiom out even with access to the Nox's and Legend.

So it really comes down to whether Manticore with the right selection of coils brings anything more to the table than D2 (or Nox, or Legend) do for me right now.  Or whether I should instead focus solely on Legend proficiency, bypass Manticore, and let my old Nox 800 be the only viable ML backup-to-a-backup machine in my arsenal.  Right now, as far as the Beach goes, I could be happy with D2 or the Nox 800, could probably get to yes with the Legend, and have no doubt the Manticore could get it done and might be fun to boot.

Really need to have the Manticore small coil available to complete this assessment.

3 hours ago, TripleT said:

Sorry, I used a noun as a verb!🤐

Gotcha- btw what "new update" are you referring to?  Has one been announced or is it known to be in testing?  What's going to be in it?

On 6/6/2023 at 9:00 PM, Digalicious said:

Hello.

SMF means Simultaneous Multi Frequency.

SF means Single Frequency.

MF means Multi Frequency. MF is not SMF. MF is the ability to choose between various single frequencies.

The Vanquish series is SMF, but not MF.

Detectors such as the Deus II, Equinox, Legend, and Manticore are both SMF and MF.

4 hours ago, JCR said:

SSF would be the smart update for Nokta to do.

Speaking of SSF and detector frequency selection and mode capabilities….

Detecting manufacturers are all over the map on terminology conventions primarily to promote marketing “one upsmanship” and because there are no hard and fast rules on the definitions of single frequency and multiple frequency as they relate to classifying detectors.  The naming conventions just tend to confuse everyone.  Especially since the more popular and generally more capable and versatile detectors of late typically incorporate both simultaneous multifrequency (SMF) and single frequency (SF) mode capabilities, typically with the latter being “selectable” (hence “selectable single frequency” or “SSF”).   Using the term Multifrequency or MF to refer to a “type” or “class” of detector rather than a “mode” is just too ambiguous.  In my mind, MF is generally most associated with SMF detectors vice SF detectors that have the capability to select from multiple single frequencies, so I avoid it even when referring to SF detectors that have multiple selectable single frequency capabilities (e.g., Deus 1).  If you want to get even deeper into the weeds, you can argue about whether SMF detectors are actually  “simultaneous” MF or “sequential” MF.  So I try to limit use the term Multifrequency or Multi-Frequency or MF solely to referring to a detector’s operating mode.  All that being said, that didn’t stop Nokta from referring to some of their SSF only detectors as “Multi” (e.g., the Mukti Kruzer) - its all primarily marketing driven use of terminology that can cause the buyer who doesn’t understand or deep dive the specs to be confused and think they are getting more features than what they are actually getting.

Regardless, since there is no real standardization, the best you can do to avoid confusion, ambiguity and to keep people on the same page is to repeatedly define your terms as Digalicious did above to keep people on the same page or simply refer to the subject detector(s) directly by name or model number.

To keep it straight in my head, I look at the operating mode capabilities of detector to generally classify them as follows (examples of some of the most popular or notable recent models that fall into my categories provided - not an exhaustive list):

I consider both classes of detectors above as SF detectors in general as they only have SF mode capabilities and have no MF/SMF mode capability.

• Single Frequency - Simplex, most First Texas VLF detectors still in production, Garrett ACE and AT series (except Apex).
• Selectable Single Frequency - Deus 1, Multi Kruzer, Impact, Anfibio, Tarsacci MDT 8000, X-Terra Pro, Quest Q35, 

 I consider the detector classes below as SMF even if some of them have both SF and MF/SMF mode capabilities.

• Simultaneous Multi-Frequency (SMF only) - Vanquish, Excalibur II, CTX 3030
• Simultaneous Multi-Frequency (with Selectable Single Frequency (SSF) modes) - Nox, Apex, Deus 2, Legend, Manticore, Quest V60/80.

Note:  I am not aware of any SMF detectors that only have one single frequency mode. I wish Vanquish had at least one single frequency selection (as well as adjustable ground balance) as it would make a slightly more versatile value detector in the ML lineup.  Alternatively, if ML added a single SMF mode (e.g., Beach or Park) to the X-Terra Pro without significant impact to price point, that would basically make the Vanquish irrelevant and blur the line on value-priced SSF and SMF detectors while accomplishing the same thing.  But we are talking razor thin profit margins at the lower end and I would understand why ML or even Nokta are adverse to slicing up the low end further by adding features that drive profits down further and potentially shunt sales away from the higher end models.

But this is a Nokta Forum and the Topic specifically is Simplex…

5 hours ago, Johnnysalami1957 said:

If the Simplex ultra had selectable frequencies it would be worth looking at. Maybe a quick revamp will save it.

I was hoping that’s what this most recent quick revamp was going to do, but it looks like they just went with the 15 kHz frequency change, Bluetooth on the 2 higher end variants (which basically obsoletes the Nokta pulse dive as a compatible wireless pinpointer option) and the additional tone and mode options on the Simplex Ultra.  Now that they’ve set the price point for Ultra in the ballpark of Legend, doubt they will revamp it again for selectable frequencies as that will just drive the price up even closer to Legend so folks would probably just opt for Legend at that point IMO.  

8 minutes ago, TripleT said:

No it's not weird.  The new update will Manticore the competition.  Or I've totally misread the Equinox progression. 

Manticore the competition?

Sorry you lost me.  What am I missing?

Happy Father's Day Chuck!

1 hour ago, Jeff McClendon said:

I can't see disliking the Manticore anymore than I dislike the Equinox 900 at this point. 

Except you get to pay $500 more than Nox for the privilege of doing so, but dumping the D2 takes care of that cost gap and then some, I suppose.

I'm of a similar mind.  To me the 900 looked great on paper, appearing to address all the known flaws of the 800, however, the introduction of TID stability issues associated with the 900 TID range change and continuing issues with EMI susceptibility have soured me on the 900.  Especially when I compare the 900 with the rock solid TIDs on the D2 and when I find that I can't calm the 900 down in fields where I don't even here a blip out of the D2.  Yes, I consider the anecdotal better target depth performance and improved EMI of the Manticore vs. the 900 and the additional features of the Manticore that can compensate for the TID stability issues (i.e., target trace and ferrous limits adjustments) compelling enough to dump the 900 for the Manticore.  But I am in no way shape or form selling the D2 to do so.  Especially with my athritis addled, aching right shoulder.

1 hour ago, Yatahaze323 said:

I'm guessing minelab was caught off guard with the Deus II release and got the manticore finished as quick as possible just to get it out and available to the public.  This probably involved focusing all programing efforts at that time on just the 11" coil and the current software version might not even support the other coils.

I'm betting that minelab will release the new coils at the same time that the new software update becomes available.

But somehow they had enough bandwidth to refresh the Nox, upgrade the Nox coil ear design,  release the 700/900, and also the X-Terra Pro shortly after that with two new coil form factors available upon release of the Xterra all right on the heels of the Manticore launch.  Sounds like they need to re-rack their priorities a little so they can deliver on their promises.  They announced the Manticore accessory coils the same day they announced Manticore.  I am sure people bought into the Manticore because of the promise of being able to get their hands on the advertised accessory coils presumably within a reasonable time frame.  It really almost comes off as a display of contempt for their customer base - i.e.,  prioritize the big money detectors over the small-change coils (though profit margins are likely bigger).  Reminds me of the lack of transparency that occurred in the wake of the Nox submergence failures...we never got a straight story or acknowledgement of a design or manufacturing flaw - just the bare minimum - honoring warranty repair, no questions asked and with no answers other than finger pointing at third-party shafts and accessories.  It's all pretty disappointing.

C'mon ML - show a little after sales respect for your customer base throw us a bone by getting those Manti coils on the street with some reasonable pricing.

Throw a Nox 900/Manticore wireless receiver out their too so we can have a little variety on untethered 3rd party audio gear.

... And word on the timing of any forthcoming firmware update would also be welcome.

Remind me again, the Tek Patriot is the clone of which 15-year-old Fisher detector design?  F70, right?

1 hour ago, Ridge Runner said:

Maybe we should ask do they know when the next shipment will be in .

 I believe out of stock and never had any is saying the same.

 Please let us know if they ever have them in stock. I’m willing to take one around the block a few times. Who knows it could be the best thing that ever happened to me.

 Chuck 

Chuck - are you following the gist of this thread? There is not going to be any next shipment or V80 stock in the US as Quest has decided not to sell them on US soil.

19 minutes ago, UKD2User said:

I've just read the FCC Filing for the MC and this document is interesting: https://fcc.report/FCC-ID/Z4C-0054/6366018

It suggests that ML want to keep secret - for the foreseeable future - four documents, three of which contain the word 'wireless' in their title.

I notice that the SoC device that ML are using for their wireless linkage can effectively be used to create 'open' or 'closed' wireless connections using protocols covered by the BT specs.  That is, they may have chosen to use BT, but in a proprietary - closed - way, which would make third-party devices fail to connect.  e.g. at its simplest, they may have built in some logic that says, "...if the manufacturer ID code of the devide trying to connect is not equal to "Minelab Pty" then fail..."

Great detective work.  I really hope you're wrong, but fear you're right.  I can live with this if ML puts out some kind of compatible, but affordable (I know, don't laugh) receiver (a la the Nox WM08) that facilitates untethered use of 3rd party wired phones/earbuds.  I really hate using a kludged up APTX LL dongle setup just so I can use wireless earbuds with my Nox 900.

On the other hand, I am not understanding why it is taking the consumer audio electronics manufacturers so long to get BT LE LC3 compatible audio devices on the market...

Hey, spout off somewhere else.  This forum is for ML and Manticore lovers only!  Not XP interlopers posing as ML malcontents just so they can get an XP mention over here...

It IS ridiculous, but believe it or not, ML are still just within the release window timeline of the Nox 6" coil release which didn't happen until 7 months after Nox release in Jan 2018 (i.e., July 2018).  If December 2022 counts as the Manticore release month, then they have until the end of June to release the small coil for ML accessory coil business as usual timeliness.  But, like you said, ML "business as usual" is just bad business or at least dumb business.  Maybe they should spend less time on litigation and more time on customer communication and coordinated product accessory releases.  SMH.