steveg

We are getting close, F350!

Steve

Production of parts for the first batch of Deus shafts is nearing completion. Some parts shipments have now arrived, and the rest are shipping over the course of the next week. I expect all parts to arrive by roughly Dec. 10, and then will be initiating the first production run of 32 shafts immediately thereafter.

At this point, all 32 shafts have been reserved by customers. As soon as the parts arrive, and have been inspected, I'll be ordering the next batch of parts, for the next production run. Expect the second batch of shafts to be ready to ship by roughly late January.

Thank you all for your patience. This has been a long/complex project, but I think the wait will be worth it, as I am very pleased with how everything has come together. This should prove to be a top-notch shaft that will improve upon the stock shaft immensely.

I will be contacting each customer as soon as parts arrive, for final confirmation of interest, and invoicing. Thanks to all of you who have offered suggestions/advice along the way, to my excellent field testers, and to all of my customers. The end to the long wait is now in sight... 🙂

Thanks!

Steve

4 hours ago, PSPR said:

Or have they narrowed the aluminum reject to be selective enough to let most gold items in?  I'm very interested in the Manticore ability with that.

Yesterday I was at a tot lot with the Legend and I pulled a bag full of aluminum foil and pull tabs out of that lot.  I would have preferred to be able to pass over much of that, if possible without great jewelry loss.

PSPR -- this is NOT going to happen.  Sorry to be a bearer of bad news.  Bottom line, any gold, that gives the same VDI as a pull tab or ring tab, CANNOT be "detected" while the aluminum is discriminated out.  If you notch out a VDI number, you will notch out ANYTHING that registers that VDI number, whether it is gold, or aluminum.  

Steve

On 11/25/2022 at 11:02 AM, Dancer said:

Leaving this Monday for the Florida Gulf on a 3 month Campaign.  Main gun the Tarsacci backed up with the Pirate Hunter Pro.    When I left late last March, the Beaches were just finished being Heavily Sanded.   The Low Tides last year were all during night time. This year I see their mostly during day light.  So there's that and hopefully the sand has found some bottom.      On a different topic, a friend told me he seen on the news that a $40,000 ring had been found by a Metal Detector hunter somewhere in Florida.   Anyone hear about this?

 

Good luck, Dancer.  I know that dewcon hunts exclusively with his MDT, on Florida beaches.  If you run into any issues, he may offer a wise word or two...

Steve

WalkInH2o, 

THANKS for the very kind words!  I appreciate that, and glad that I've been able to help a bit in giving some degree of better understanding of a 2D "smart screen," to those who have no CTX experience.

And THANK YOU for being a customer -- I appreciate you!

Steve

As for the announcement, could it be a GPX 6000+ maybe?  I know NOTHING about the 6000, but have heard some say the 6000 has some "issues," of some sort.  Just wondering if "second time around" means a "new/improved" version of something already released, like the 6000? 

Or possibly an Equinox 1000, that uses the "Manticore-design" for the lower rod, that is waterproof to 6 meters like the Manticore, and has a carbon-fiber shaft and arm cuff system like the Manticore?  In other words, it addresses all of the "complaints" people have, about the 600/800 (water intrusion failures, coil ear breakage, and wobbly shaft)?  Maybe priced at something like $1099 US?

YES, that idea, of a "new/improved" version of something, would also seem to sort of fit the Equinox >> Manticore as well, but personally, it seems to me that message is maybe a bit too "secretive" to be about the Manticore.  Since they already have announced the Manticore, sent Mark Lawrie around on that "world tour" to show off the "Beast," etc., and told us to expect the Manticore late 2022, this new announcement seems to me to be too "cryptic" to be referring to the Manticore...

Who knows.  Bottom line?  It's had its intended effect; it has us talking about it.  Which is precisely what marketing departments want, with such teases...  🙂

Steve

9 minutes ago, phrunt said:

not the backwards American method

😄 

Phrunt -- you made me laugh.  Which is good; I haven't been laughing enough lately!

😜

9 hours ago, Sinclair said:

Yes Steve, it's a conglomerate of many things there.. I've experimented with counterweights to compensate for the nose-heaviness, but it comes with other tradeoffs, which just weren't for me, as a very fast swinger. Hard for me to explain my thoughts at lenght in foreign language, but it's definitely easier to control the weight / downforce with an angled grip, vs 90 degree straight for example. You would need much more clamping force to keep your hand on a straight grip. If you look at the inside of your hand and close your fingers, it naturally forms an angle:

Now try to make that angle 90:

That puts a lot of stress to my hand + litte and ring finger lose the ability to close completely with full force.

While beeing far from perfect ergonomics wise, it made a hughe difference - at least for me. After analysing the Manticore's grip, I think they've changed it for a reason. They've also designed it to be a little bit conical, which better reflects the natural form of our hands, while the Nox's grip has a more or less consistent diameter.

Sinclair,

I do not doubt that, with experimentation, you would be able to find a "grip angle" that works best for you, specifically.  In other words, while you are not explicitly resolving the imbalance/nose-heaviness, you ARE finding an angle, for your wrist, where exerting the force to lift the coil causes you the least amount of distress.  SO, I get it, and I applaud you for working to find a solution to your issues.  I was not saying that there's no improvement to be found in changing grip angle, I was only saying that the ULTIMATE source of the issue, is the imbalance of the machine.  But, if you have tried counterweighting and don't like it, then this might be the best solution in your case.

Steve

Zincoln, some fantastic hunting in the iron, and it's nice to see you were rewarded with some fantastic results!

Steve

19 hours ago, mcjtom said:

I looked at CTX3030 manual trying to figure out what the 2D detecting screen shows, and I'm still not sure what the vertical scale 'ferrous characteristics' actually show.  It seems that its values increase from top to bottom (with the horizontal conductivity scale going traditionally from left to right).  So the way I understand it non-ferrous targets should show on top of the screen with the horizonal courser position showing the increasing conductivity (size in a way) from left to right.  Is that correct?

Is this convention the same in Manticore?  i.e. does the vertical scale have the same meaning, with the increasing ferrous component from top to bottom?  Somehow I was under the impression that in the Manticore screen the non-ferrous targets would display along the middle line, with those showing ferrous characteristics departing from it up and down, but I'm not sure if this is true.  

mcjtom --

The ferrous numbers on a CTX run from 0 to 35, along the "y-axis," with "0" at the top, and increasing to "35" at the bottom.  HOWEVER, unlike what might seem "logical," a non-ferrous target does NOT register near zero, for its ferrous number, on the CTX, but instead, will read roughly "12."  For whatever reason, Minelab chose to "normalize" the FE number of most non-ferrous targets to read "12."  So, a "good" target on a CTX will generally plot about 1/3 of the way down the screen, at 12 FE -- along what folks call the "12 line" (the horizontal line running left and right across the screen, at the "12" location on the y-axis). 

SO, "good" targets will generally NOT be at the "top" of the screen, as you thought.  Instead, since the FE number of "good" targets is "normalized" to "12" on the CTX, these targets (as noted above) will appear about 1/3 of the way down the screen, on or near the "12" line.   Meanwhile, typically, targets which appear well above the "12" line, near the top of the screen (i.e. ferrous numbers in the single digits), will generally be iron targets.  Silmiliarly, targets well below the "12" line (i.e. ferrous numbers in the upper teens, 20s, and 30s), will also generally be iron targets.

THEREFORE, things will not be entirely different on the Manticore.  Like on the CTX, targets registering near the top of the screen will generally be iron, and targets registering low on the screen will also generally be iron (dependent of course on the accuracy of the discrimination algorithms).  The "middle" of the screen, similar to the "12" line on the CTX, will be where "good" (non-ferrous) targets will usually register (again, depending upon the accuracy of the discrimination algorithms).

Now, on BOTH the CTX AND the Manticore, conductive numbers increase from left to right along the x-axis (as you noted).  This will be easier for most users to interpret.  Low CO numbers (and those with "non-ferrous" indication, thus plotting roughly "centered," from a top to bottom sense, AND near the left-hand side of the screen due to low CO number) will likely be foil-type targets, as one would expect, and high CO numbers (and those with "non-ferrous" indication, thus plotting roughly "centered," from a top to bottom sense, AND near the right-hand side of the screen due to high CO number), will be targets like big silver coins, etc. -- again, as would be expected.

Make sense?

Steve

14 hours ago, Sinclair said:

Yeah, I've used a printed gripstop before, but after an hour or so, I've tended to rest my thumb above the stop on the left side of the detector's case. The foam noodle gives you the advantage, that the machine floats in water 🙂

At first I wanted to build an adjustable adapter, but thats a little bit tricky, if you want to keep the grip as close to the stem as possible. So I came up with the idea of looking at other detectors' grips..

I've changed the angle by 8° at the moment, that seems to be my sweetspot / middle of both angles on the manticore, because the grip has a slightly different form. Maybe I'll try 7°/6° later on for my personal peace 😄

I'm a real monk on ergonomics and headphones 😬

I will add one more thought here.  I am of the belief that while there may be a "sweet spot" in terms of grip/handle angle, that differs for each individual, I do think there's an "elephant in the room," here, that is a MUCH bigger issue, and that is, BALANCE.

It is my firm belief that the REAL issue causing folks wrist fatigue/discomfort, is the nose-heaviness of the Equinox (and most other modern detectors).  And here's why I say that.  If you take your wrist, and "cock it," back and forth, like you are loading, and then casting, a fishing pole, it becomes obvious that our wrist is "designed" such that it is "comfortable" at any number of positions.  At rest, with no "load" or "tension" on the wrist, it can sit comfortably at any number of different "angles."  The DISCOMFORT comes, largely, when the wrist is put under LOAD, or STRAIN, especially if that load or strain is sustained for a long period of time.  It is my contention, that the discomfort we feel in our wrists when detecting is PRIMARILY due to the imbalance -- and more specifically -- the "nose-heaviness" of the unit (and the resulting strain on our wrists).  

When swinging a detector, where a large percentage of the weight of the unit sits out at the end of a long "lever" (from a physics perspective), that coil is using "leverage" AGAINST us.  And with no compensating weight at the butt end of the shaft, to lift the coil FOR us, WE are having to do ALL of the work, to lift that coil.  And that work is being done, first and foremost, by our WRISTS.  But, simply LIFTING the coil, is not the issue.  We are ALL strong enough to lift the coil.  The issue is, KEEPING the coil lifted, and floating just above the ground, for hours at a time.  Doing so, places substantial stress, from a "repetitive motion" perspective, on our wrist.  The small muscles of the wrist are not intended to do such repetitive motion, under constant strain/tension.  AND SO, feeling fatigue or pain in the wrist is an absolutely normal, and I would say, expected, result, of swinging a nose-heavy machine -- where we are forced to exert enough CONSTANT force, for long periods of time, to keep the coil floating above the ground.  THAT, I believe strongly, is where the fatigue and discomfort come from.

That is NOT to say that, for any one individual, whose wrist is placed under such constant strain, that there may not be an "angle" that feels better, while other "angles" feel worse.  I am simply saying that I think grip/handle angle is a second-order issue, and a DISTANT second, at that.  I very strongly contend that the FIRST-order issue, is the strain put on our wrists by having to swing a nose-heavy machine, keeping the coil floating, for hours at a time.  And I further contend that with a perfectly balanced machine, in other words, requiring essentially ZERO exertion of the wrist (i.e. the wrist basically "at rest"), the fatigue and discomfort is eliminated.   And thus, I contend, if we were all swinging BALANCED detectors, all the talk about "grip angle" (which has been a topic of discussion for many years -- at LEAST back to when the Minelab Explorer handle angle was, apparently, slightly adjusted on the E-Trac, according to many users) would largely fade away.

So, I will say in conclusion that if you (Sinclair) are a "monk" on ergonomics, I would expect that this logic would make sense to you.  The Equinox (and most other modern machines) are ergonomically, shall I say, "far from ideal," to put it gently.  You simply can't design a machine that puts such a large percentage of the unit's weight out at the end of a long "lever," with no compensating weight at the other end of the machine, and not end up with an ergonomic mess...

Steve

21 hours ago, strick said:

It looks to be simular to the ctx...vertical (y axis) is ferrous and non ferrous...high and low stuff is in the ferrous ranges..if your in the mid zones your looking like non ferrous. The horizontal (x axis) is going to be the conductivity line....stuff on the left side less conductive...stuff on the right side more conductive. Small piece of aluminum on the left side  half dollar on the right side...  At least that’s how I’m seeing it in the videos. 

Strick 

Yep, spot on...

8 hours ago, strick said:

I would think the type and amount of  ferrous...in the target but this is speculation on my part...

Strick

Yep, basically...

As I understand it, stuff like rusted nails, etc. will be up top (I think), and big iron, like horseshoes, axe heads, etc., will be down low (I think).

Steve

6 hours ago, phrunt said:

They likely kicked the ball rolling in October on the headphones as if you see the agent report they authorized a company to act on their behalf on the 20th of October to get the FCC stuff going, the Cover letter was Dated 02 November to the FCC asking for them to withhold releasing manuals etc that they are about to give to the FCC, and the final reports by the testing company in China was likely submitted on 11/14/22.

The date the headphones were tested is

Date of receipt of test item Sep. 08, 2022
Date of test Sep. 08, 2022 to Oct. 13, 2022

But to me, this doesn't seem like a product going to be mass produced and released for sale in November 😞

I had my hopes up I'd have it for Christmas.

Keep in mind these Bluetooth LE chips haven't been out for long, they're timing the Manticore release if it does come out soon not long after the Bluetooth LE chip release.

If this Manticore release of information like saying they're hoping it is coming out Nov/Dec was just a tactic to slow sales of the Deus 2 by getting people to wait and see what the Manticore is like I'm going to be so annoyed, I hate stupid games like that, I want my Manticore and I want it now! 🙂

 

phrunt -- I'm guessing that's EXACTLY what Minelab did...i.e. tease the Manticore release so that some folks "on the fence" might hold onto their 1.5K for a little while...

As for the headphones/Bluetooth LE, am I reading this correctly that the headphones aren't proprietary AFTER ALL, and that as more headphones that are Bluetooth LE-capable hit the market, we'll likely have other, compatible options if the ML-105 won't do it for us?  

In any case, it certainly looks like, from the info you posted, that we SHOULD be able to get less expensive, non-branded versions off of AliExpress, as you noted...

Steve

8 hours ago, Cal_Cobra said:

My hunt buddy is an interesting fellow.   I've tried out a lot of detectors over the years, and he's seen which ones performed well and which ones did not.  He's been a hard core Explorer (XS and then 2) fan since I've known him, and I can't fault him for that as he's does great with it, even in the iron infested relic sites we love hunting.  He would routinely out hunt me when I was using my F75 LTD/LTD2, AT Pro, etc. a decade ago  But he really raised his eyebrows when I was heavily using the Racer/Racer2/Impact/Multi Kruzer as I was finally consistently keeping up, and even besting his finds (meaning total number of period conductors per hunt).  This continued and even improved when I started using the EQX800.  Still for some odd reason I couldn't get him off his Exp2.  The closest he came was when I orchestrated a group buy for the EQX800 (got them for $720 each when they were released!!!) he bought one, but he cashed in on the frenzy and dumped it on fleabay to make a quick buck when people were paying a premium over MSRP.   He talked himself out of it because in his mind it just couldn't perform in deep turf park hunting like an Exp2.  I know @stevegdispelled that, and had great success deep turf park hunting trashy parks.  Tom tried it a few times (believe he borrowed a couple) and did his best to talk himself out of getting one, despite all of his friends having great success with the Equinox he just couldn't break away from his trusty Dino2K Exp2. 

Fast forward to now, and even though he knows the Manticore is about to be released, he jumped on the XP D2 bandwagon and has one on order.  I asked him why on earth he didn't simply wait a couple of months to see how the Manticore shaked out, and he claimed one of his friends (that rarely even hunts anymore) go to the U.K. and that's the "cats meow" over there.  Okay, whatever, we don't hunt in the U.K. and I simply cannot fathom how a life long Explorer fanboy couldn't wait....now he wants to do all kinds of head to head tests when he gets his D2 and I get my Manticore....I think not 😏

This is really, really odd, Cal.  He's a tough nut to crack (and hard to understand...can't believe he bought a D2, after his disdain for the EQX (and now presumably, the Manticore?)

Steve

7 hours ago, Cal_Cobra said:

I have detecting friends that are hard core Minelab users and they've been very successful on the FBS machines in full tones, especially when sifting through trash and locating deep turf silver other machines walked over.  When I got the Equinox I was coming from three and four tone detectors, but forced myself to use full tones.  It took a while, but it really helped to sniff out deep silver and relics at sites others have missed.  Would those same targets be heard in the lower tone modes?  Perhaps, but once your ears muscle memory reconciles what the full tones convey, I feel there's enough extra intel that make the struggle worth mastering.

Couldn't agree more. 

Steve

Chase,

Thanks for the info.  So, it's not as simple as x,y coordinate pairs being plotted on an x,y coordinate system, with x and y representing two specific characteristics of the target.  It's quite a bit different, actually.  Hmm...

I don't like that idea, as -- for instance -- it's more like having to simply "memorize" that a "spiral shape" means "difficult to reject" items, and a "lower left to upper right" oval shape means "coin," without a more clear, direct, logical relationship between what is being plotted, and what it says about the target.  It seems "abstract," and harder to understand "linearly" or "logically," as compared to plotting an FE,CO coordinate pair...

In any case, thanks for the info!

Steve

rled (or anyone else) -- NOT to veer this thread off in the weeds, but I'm curious.  I know how the Manticore's x,y coordinate system/2-d screen will work (i.e. what the "x" and "y" values represent).  BUT -- I have no idea what is being displayed on the Deus 2's x,y graph.  Can you describe it for me, to satisfy my curiousity, if you know?  What do the x and y represent?

One reason I ask, is, I just learned last night that apparently the old White's signagraph was a plot of signal strength, and target ID (if I read the information correctly), which I found somewhat interesting.  Point being, clearly you could plot any number of things just by assigning different things as your x and y variables.  What is it, on a Deus, that is being represented?

Thanks!

Steve

14 minutes ago, PSPR said:

But I do think giving silly names to detectors you have no intention of buying is a bit childish.  Should we call the Deus II the Dump2?  LOL  (Just messing with ya)

PSPR -- don't take too much offense, LOL!  I am pretty sure there's no offense intended.  Alot of people don't like the "Manticore" name that Minelab came up with, so there was some "creativity," here on the forum, early on, kind of poking fun at what some see as a poor job of naming the machine.  Thus, bringing some levity to the situation, folks have come up with some equally poor names for the unit.  And these attempts at humor come both from those who ARE interested in the machine, and those who may not be.  That "trend" has sort of caught on, here, as a sort of "unique" thing on this specific forum.  Dreaming up a new, funny name is just an attempt at humor.  No offense intended; it's not even a poke at the machine itself, just a poke at what some perceive to be a poor choice, by Minelab's marketing department, for a name.

Steve

10 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

Yep.  I agree regarding "sounds round". 

But to that point, as long the target ID is stable, then you won't even get that indirect "size" differential indication between a coin and a larger diameter object like a non-ferrous mason jar lid, for example.  Not trying to be argumentative (we both are basically agreeing with each other) but I am just trying to illustrate to others that this whole hype regarding target trace directly showing the relative target size is likely a fallacy.  I think we both agree the target trace blob size is really revealing target id variability/uncertainty.

Regardless of whether target trace gives you direct or indirect target footprint information, to determine relative target "size" I often lift the coil to get see how soon the audio signal trails off or trace the target footprint using the built-in non-motion pinpointer feature - those can often give you a good relative footprint check (or at least tell you that you are not swinging over a coin sized object) for relatively shallow targets.

Chase --

Yep, agreed.  I highly, highly doubt there will be any way to differentiate a LARGE item with tight VDI, from a small item with an equally tight VDI, using the 2-D screen.  Because, as you said, all the trace is showing you, in reality, is a measure of VDI "spread" or "deviation."  

So yes, we'll still have to use whatever methods we currently do (lifting the coil, as you mention, which I also do all the time), or using pinpoint (which I also do all the time) to determine the size of the target's footprint.  

Very true.  We agree!  🙂

Steve

1 hour ago, Chase Goldman said:

Exactly.  I would also go further and say that it IS not related to the shape of the target at all but solely related to the variation (i.e., uncertainty) in the M-core's ability to discern a precise ID for the target.  It just so happens that large rusty objects are very likely to exhibit this behavior.

Chase --

We largely agree.  I say "indirectly," because, one thing of course that we all "listen for," when coin or ring hunting, and trying to discern "good targets" from "bad," is a "round" sound -- i.e. little variation in VDI, and thus tone.  And that same "round sound," which is related to little variation in VDI, translates to a "round" target trace.  So, there IS, I think, and "indirect" relationship, from the same perspective as when we are listening to a target and we say "it sounds round."  If it "sounds round," it will also "plot round" on the 2D screen.

That's all I am saying.  But -- yes -- otherwise, we totally agree.  It is an "indirect" relationship, at best.

Steve

3 hours ago, phrunt said:

I think you'd be surprised how useful Target Trace is, it's fantastic on the CTX and that's a decade old detector now so I can only hope they've improved it even further.  In my soils here Multi-IQ was brilliant for ID stability and depth and with them hinting the Manticore has some depth advantages and more stable ID's than the Nox I'm expecting really good things with it's version of Target Trace.

phrunt -- if you wrote this part in response to Chesroy's post, I agree with you, and was wanting to say some of the same things.  Chesroy, don't write it off, before you give it a chance.  First off, I'm not sure why having it there, even if you NEVER look at it, is a negative; you'll still have your "legacy" VDI number to look at, same as on your Equinox.  BUT, with that said, there is information available in target trace that -- while arguably "there," in the tones -- is easier sometimes to comprehend/interpret when you see it on a screen.  Give it a chance; I think you may be surprised.

3 hours ago, phrunt said:

If you are capable of using your Nox with 50 tones, you already have target trace, your brain just has to decipher it and some people are capable of doing that, for me I can't go past 5 tones so I benefit greatly from the visuals target trace provides. 🙂

This is true, to a large degree, but I want to add a nuance.  Phrunt, you already know this, as a CTX user, but many who have never used FBS do not. 

For years, the Minelab Explorer (FBS) was my detector of choice.  Like other FBS machines, every target detected by an Explorer would be assigned two numbers (mathematically, an x,y coordinate pair) -- an FE and a CO number.  So, along those lines, each target would likewise be assigned a place on the 2-D screen (mathematically, an x,y coordinate system).  IN GENERAL, on an Explorer, a U.S. milled coin hunter would be looking for targets with a LOW FE number, and a HIGH CO number.  There are some exceptions, but let's just go with that for illustration.  SO, in general, low FE number and high CO number was indicative of a coin-type target, while HIGH FE number and high CO number would be an iron target, like a nail.  SO -- for instance -- a dime would read roughly 03-29 on an Explorer, while a nail might ready 25-29.  

The reason I am explaining all of this, is as follows.  On an FBS machine, one could set up their tones to "cue off of," or "align with," EITHER the FE numbers, or the CO numbers.  Think about that for a minute.  We are ALL used to our tones "cuing off of" the "conductive" number, because that's essentially what we have, to some degree, on most machines.  Low tones (low conductive numbers) and high tones (high conductive numbers).  So, likewise, on an Explorer, one could use a tone profile called "conductive tones," and this was much like a "regular" machine -- the higher the CO number, the higher the conductor.  Meanwhile, though, one could alternatively use a tone profile called "ferrous tones."  Using THIS profile, a low ferrous number was assigned a high tone, while a higher ferrous number was assigned a lower tone.  SO -- if you were a coin hunter, running in "ferrous tones," you would still want to listen, generally, for "high tones" (which, using "ferrous tones," would mean that those high tones would be associated with a low FE number).   So, with either tonal profile -- conductive tones or ferrous tones -- a coin hunter would prefer to hear high tones, but with the nuance being that you'd either be deciphering CONDUCTIVE information, or FERROUS information.  There were some advantages to using ferrous tones, over conductive tones, but I won't get into that now.  What is important is to just wrap your mind around this, for the sake of what I'm working to illustrate.

So, if that makes sense, then one thing that is important to see, is this.  If you were running conductive tones, ALL of the "direct" information you would get from the tones (how high or how low the tone might be) was related ENTIRELY to the "conductivity" of the target.  In other words, you'd get NO "direct" information about the ferrous side of things, through your tones.  Now, I say "direct," because of course there would still be "nuance" in the tones, that might hint at something non-round, or even "irony," but that's more "indirect."  Directly, though, when running conductive tones, what you are hearing, tonally, is CONDUCTIVE information.  WHICH MEANS, then, that in order to get FERROUS information, you HAD TO LOOK AT THE SCREEN.  In doing so, you would THEN be given the FE information also -- either as a numerical readout, OR, on your 2-D screen.  And this is IMPORTANT to understand.  Because on the Explorer, simply LISTENING to the tones, was not giving you the "full picture," directly.  BUT -- visually, seeing the FE number, OR, alternatively, the POSITION of the target on the 2D screen (which thus includes the ferrous ID information), would give you much more information about the target.

And my point here in all of this wordiness IS -- I expect this to be very similar on the Manticore.  I am nearly sure there is no way on the Manticore to set the VDI to show both an FE and a CO number.  BUT -- this FE information WILL be there, on the 2D screen.  SO -- if you have the machine set such that the tones are tied to the conductive number (which I expect will be the default on the Manticore), there WILL be additional information -- i.e. FERROUS information -- that can be gleaned DIRECTLY, from a VISUAL perspective -- i.e. by looking at the location of the plot of the target on the 2D screen.  OF COURSE those of us who have used the Equinox have learned to "glean" information from the tones, and the tonal behavior, that indicate that even a high-toning target may likely be a nail, BUT, with the 2D screen, you will be able to see some of this visually, and more "directly."  Again, this is due to the fact that each target's FE characteristics can be seen clearly on the screen, based on where the target plot is located in 2-D space.  And with a big focus on the Manticore apparently being its IRON resolution, and presumably, iron ID accuracy, this should really prove to be beneficial -- as we'll have a grapical representation of whatever iron information the machine is able to convey.  YES, our ears will be hearing the usual hints and indications that a high-toning target, such as a "falsing nail," may be iron, but visually, seeing the machine's read of a target's FE characteristics DIRECTLY PLOTTED, on the 2D screen, should assist in determining more accurately whether the target is a "good" high tone, or is more likely to be a nail masquerading as a coin...

Steve

17 minutes ago, rled2005 said:

I never thought it would show shapes, it places the metallic properties in different places, but maybe that’s just a linear crossover from the sound differences. Which, if you’re like me with hearing issues(from the military), it is a nice visual addition, plus the vibration on handle! I couldn’t resist, so I pre-ordered one.

Yes, you are EXACTLY correct!  It's a LINEAR CROSSOVER from the sound differences.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the Manticore in any way.  I can't wait to get one, and I'm on a pre-order list as well.  And I agree with you that hearing something audibly, AND seeing it visually, is helpful, no doubt.  ESPECIALY for people who are "visual learners."  

So, this is in no way "bashing."  I'm just trying to set expectations; some people seem to be thinking...encouraged by marketing hype...that there's some "magic" in the Manticore that can plot the outline of the shape of the target for you.  AND THERE IS NOT.  

Steve

4 hours ago, Geordiedan said:

Not sure if this info has been shared yet, but taken from a post I've read elsewhere:

"2D ID Mapping
The CTX3030 from Minelab, is a highly-regarded coin and treasure detector, maintaining its status as a high-performance metal detector for 10-years now. And one of the features that made this machine so popular is its visual XY, 2D presentation of targets. The FeCo system, or Ferrous and Conductivity to the uninitiated visually plotted the two different attributes on display, allowing the detectorists to analyse and decide on what a target could be due to the plotting position of a target. Very cool! However, Minelab have taken this system and made it even more sophisticated. The Manticore has a new 2D mapping system which has a horizontal line running through its centre. Targets which are plotted along this central line are non ferrous and the further they stray from it above or below mean they contain a higher iron content. That covers the targets position along the y axis, and this leaves the left to right, or x position which then covers conductivity, with low conductors on the left and high conductors on the right.

But here’s where it reaches the next level, the shape of the indicator on the map also related to the target. A solid, concise object, like a coin will most likely be represented as a nice, clean dot on the screen, whereas a more erratic object will be represented as a more irregular shape. For example; a silver coin would show up along the centre line, as a tight dot, and towards the right side of the screen (due to its high conductivity), whereas a small iron nail would show up far from the centre line, as an irregular shape, and further towards the left of the screen (due to its lower conductivity). That’s a hell of a lot of information about a target before you even dig it. We will say though, it’s not going to be perfect every time, obviously environmental factors and target position will play a role in determining how precise signals are displayed."

 

Target Separation
Here’s something we have to tell you, as it blew our mind. Ensure you’ve read the above about 2D ID mapping to fully understand this bit.

Craig Allison met Mark Lawrie, The Chief Engineer at Minelab and this demonstrated how good the Manticore is at target separation. Mark first showed us how the Manticore would communicate a hammered coin. He waived it left to right above the coil, and sure enough as described previously we saw a nice, tight dot, on the centre line of the Manticore display. What was really impressive however was when Mark added a second target into the mix. On the second demonstration Mark waived the hammered coin again, but also a large piece of lead with his other hand, both passing from left to right over the coil. We once again saw the hammered coin’s dot in the same place, but now saw a larger, messy splodge in the far-left corner of the screen. This easily illustrated that two targets were present, and that the Manticore is easily able to separate targets and reduce masking. This is a real game changer in terms of knowing when to dig, particularly in trashy sites like Roman settlements where lots of iron may be present and would therefore sometimes cause detectorists to doubt signals and decide not to dig.

 

The paragraph above, that I put in bolded, italicized, enlarged, red text, is -- in my opinion, marketing mumbo-jumbo.  While most of it is largely "true," you really have to read it carefully, as the truth is "in there," but "obfuscated."  The one thing that I believe is NOT true -- and it's why I say it's marketing nonsense, is the part that said, essentially, "while the CTX could plot targets, the Manticore 'takes it to the next level,' by giving the target SHAPE."  The implication there is that the Manticore is doing something that the CTX could not, and this is simply not true.

The bottom line, as I've said a million times, is that the target shape is only INDIRECTLY related to the target.  And I strongly believe that whatever the Manticore can do, in terms of "shape," is the same thing the CTX would do.  A good, round, consistently ID-ing target would show up as a small round blob, on the CTX 2-D screen, just as it will on the Manticore 2-D screen.  Likewise, an irony, elongated, bouncy ID-ing target would show up non-round, more like an elongated smear in many cases, ON EITHER UNIT.  So, THIS IS NOTHING NEW! 

That's not to say that the Manticore screen may not be higher-resolution, thus possibly allowing "tighter" circles to be drawn.  And also, of course, the more accurate the ID algorithms are on a unit, the more "small" and "round" a coin or ring will show up.  So, if the Manticore has a more "precise" ID algorithm than the CTX, then the shapes may be "prettier" on a round object (again, those "round" shapes being reflective of the very consistent, non-varying ID...such that plotting multiple snapshots of the x,y ID numbers on an x,y coordinate system would result in a very small/round "dot").

But, my point here is -- DO NOT BE FOOLED into thinking the Manticore is taking any sort of "reading" that would allow a "direct" plot of the outline of the shape of any given target.  The shape of the plot is DIRECTLY related only to the "bounce" or "change" in VDI (or lack thereof) at each sampling interval, and only INDIRECTLY related the shape of the object...

Steve

21 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

I sold my ML 80s almost immediately because I AM an orchestral musician and a classical music trained singer and those headphones had way too much bass and the mid and high tones had most of their brilliance removed. So those phones were very bottom heavy. I tried them on other audio sources with the supplied audio cable and they were the same......biased way towards the lower bass range and no way to adjust them enough even with my equalizer.......The WM08 module with any "normal" wired headphones or just plugging in a decently balanced set of wired headphones into the control pod made for a completely different audio experience for me. So did using the aftermarket BT headphones and earbuds that I purchased.

So it isn't BS longbow62. Some of us have very different and subjective hearing abilities and preferences. When I am nugget hunting I don't want muffled sound, I want bright and very immediate sound responses for those faint signals.

The ML 100s that come with the Minelab GPX 6000 have a much more balanced audio response. I have no complaint with those.

The Garrett Z-Lynk headphones are a bit bottom heavy but doable. I have never had an issue with my Z-Lynk headphones or transmitter timing out when being used with other non-Garrett detectors.

Wow.  Couldn't have said it better.  Every word. 

I too am very musically inclined, and I do have the beginnings of some hearing loss at certain frequencies.  But I would say EXACTLY what you said, Jeff -- very bottom-heavy, and the mid and high tones had no "brilliance" at all.  Perfectly put.

And, it is GREAT news to me, that you say the ML 100s that come with the 6000 are much more balanced, and you have no complaints.  Since we clearly hear things "similarly," and since it seems reasonable to conclude that these phones will be more similar to the ML 100s, my mind is eased a bit...

Thanks Jeff!

Steve

24 minutes ago, JCR said:

It should not matter what make of detector. That is the purpose of the Tx/Rex units. I did have to reposition the Tx unit on one of my detectors because I kept turning it on &off while transporting it.

JCR -- you are right; it SHOULD not matter.  But I know there were others who had this experience, and so I wasn't surprised when I did...

I wish I had known this; I would have done things differently.

Steve